come on in we're gonna get started so this year has been got a little bit of feedback a little bit different on the organizing I kind of the metaphor I use I like metaphors so metaphor I used was like a greatest hits I wanted to get like all the hits back together some of our favorite sessions and speakers and bring it back and kind of see where everyone's at now and and you know and all the best greatest hits albums there's always the one new song and so that's Davey Davey's never speak spoken but she's awesome and she's gonna speak to us next so thank you for coming and being our our plus one reason to buy the album awesome well thank you so much Mike Mountain West has been a conference that's been on my wish list for a long time never worked out before this year and I'm just so happy to have been able to be a part of the very last Mountain West Ruby so I am from Portland Oregon our slogan is of course keep weird and I'm keeping it weird with the feedback and we have the smallest park in the world right here it's one of my favorites I've taken many people who visited Portland to this park it's in the middle of the street so you kind of have to like dodge cars to get there I think it's worthwhile we of course have Portlandia which is about 50% document testing testing okay so Portlandia mostly a documentary this of course is one of my favorite sections of Portlandia putting a bird on everything since 1999 I do my part to keep Portland weird this is my cat Kamaji he goes for walks he loves going for walks very gregarious he's also on Twitter not quite as famous as Gordy Puff though maybe one day I came by yesterday at the conference and I decided to wear contacts instead of glasses and had at least two or three people have no idea who I was so today I'm wearing my glasses so you can all remember me and yes that did make me feel like a superhero I work for GitHub I am an engineering manager for the team that works on the availability and performance of the rails app it also means that I have stickers lots of them so if anyone wants some stickers come find me afterwards there's a good cow one unfortunately we have retired all of our copyright infringing stickers so we won't get sued so no more of you know Zelda sticker or Rainbow Dash sticker I'm sorry I don't have any of them GitHub likes to stay in business and not get sued out of business okay so on to my actual talk so I title of this talk is orders of magnitude and the concept is that I'm gonna be talking about numbers big numbers and small numbers and a bunch of numbers in between and more importantly I'm gonna be talking about how our brain conceptualizes and processes numbers so number sense is the concept that certain animals have an innate conceptualization of numbers and counting and built directly into their brains and they don't have to learn about numbers it might not be surprising to think that animals such as elephants dolphins many of the great apes have number sense but it's also been shown the animals such as birds have number sense and even insects such as bees and ants show us the ability to be able to tell the differences between numbers and so what this usually means is that they can tell the difference between one of something versus two or something they can even tell the difference between three and four oftentimes it tends to break down at around five or six but then often times animals have the ability to differentiate between sets of numbers that have a bigger difference such as like eight versus twelve what you know we also might expect that humans have number sense right we like to think that we're pretty good at this whole counting thing but the science shows that we're not actually that much measurable be better than any of the other animals that we study tribes that haven't developed finger counting yet oftentimes have a very difficult time determining differences between numbers of above about four and that is you know kind of surprising so this brings us to you know one of the first misconceptions that we might have about our brains and how we process numbers which is that you know our brains don't actually inherently understand numbers beyond one through four so we are born with number sense but we must learn how to count so it's hard to imagine life before counting but learning to count was only really advantageous to humans once we started farming or herding or managing livestock that was kind of when you needed to figure out how many sheep you might have and so the we were using think we invented things called like finger counting tallying via stones notches on sticks or knots on rope to help us manage these numbers that were bigger than what we could understand ourselves so you know now that we we don't we don't have words for these numbers but we are able to keep track of our flock of sheep by keeping a pebble in our pockets for each one and before you think that this is like a really naive or simplistic way of managing numbers the Incas managed to keep track of a vast you know civilization based around you know vast numbers of numbers by using what was known as rope counting or keeping knots on string in order to keep track of the currency or the you know the values they were having to deal with within their civilization so once that we figured out that we needed to count then the next step was was determining that maybe we should have names for these number things it's easier to say I have eight sheep and saying I have this many sheep and piling out your little pile of rocks from your little pouch and initially many of the first number systems only had names for you know numbers such as one two and many tribes that exist today that still have only these numbers represented with words are the sand people of Namibia the various Aboriginal tribes in Australia and the Paraha tribe of the Amazon the next thing that we kind of see is having many different names for the number words so an example here is the Thimshian language which is a tribe up in British Columbia and they had completely different sets of names for numbers depending on what you were counting so if you're counting flat objects you'd be using a completely different value of three than if you were counting men I also particularly like that they had a whole different set for long objects and trees but then canoes were completely new this category so canoes were very important to them and before we start thinking that this is incredibly silly the English language has the history of this built into it directly so we can see here we have many different words for the number two and this is kind of a relic of even our own ancestors having this sort of thinking when dealing with numbers a brace is oftentimes used when you're like a brace of horses to run a cart that's one use of it so a paired set of animals so that brings us to our second lie that counting things is easy even coming up with the names for numbers is difficult and that the names that we use to count can vary wildly so abstract number counting is actually kind of a difficult thing to discover and counting takes mental energy so now that we have learned how to count and we have words to describe our numbers the next step is to create numeral systems we all of course are familiar with Roman numerals system which is an improved tallying counting system their main the main points of this one is it's positioned by value and then also has subtractive notation in that so that's one one advancement over pure stick tallying the main problem here is that it still takes a little bit of time to analyze what number is involved who can say what number shout it out 1928 but you have to do some counting and ordering in order to gather that up so that still takes a little bit of mental energy next we came up with the Arabic counting system and this one I was a little bit different because in this numeral system each number base gets a representational character and then we have positional notation where the sequence of digits themselves creates the number and we find this to be a lot easier to parse and understand what number we're coming up with once we had this positional notation system the concept of exponentiation followed quickly after now that the digits themselves have a place that place can itself be counted so here one of our the common ways we reference exponential notation here is by using a 10 to the power another way to reference this is with e notation where e rep completely replaces the 10 to the and from now on I'm gonna be using this notation mainly because it's shorter and I don't have to do the subscript which is kind of irritating to do in keynote so e from now on out so we also have discovered determined names for these different positions as well and of course we couldn't stick to just one naming condition we have multiple so still continuing on our trend of you're naming things multiple times when only one could do numbers of systems allow us to count bigger and bigger numbers and much smaller numbers as well but that brings us to another lie which is that naming these numbers does not necessarily mean that we understand them so to recap humans have number sense but that only helps us up to about number four counting is hard and naming doesn't equal understanding so how can we use this to apply to our day to day life right we're all programmers and so far I've just been telling you the history of numbers well one common way that we kind of all already do this inherently is to you know block out our web pages into different sections right it's a lot easier to understand a web page and navigate on it there's only three sections rather than 17 that keys into our inherent number sense to be able to determine the different sections so here I have you know a header a right column and then the main body another way we can help ourselves is to instead of having a table of numbers just graph it create a visual that allows you to understand the relationship between the numbers instead of having to scan through a table of numbers and try and parse that information that way it also helps impact some of our design philosophies the sort of the idea that each method should only have a certain number of lines within them that also keys back to this concept of number sense there's three items three things that this method is doing one after the other easy for our brains to immediately see that and understand that as opposed to if it was doing 15 things in order and this of course can apply to good testing behavior too I think that this also applies to sort of our object hierarchy it's a lot easier to understand the flow of what's happening where if you only have a certain small subset of classes to look at and if you can open them up in your editor all next to each other we want to try and avoid that class that Aaron showed us yesterday with 10,000 ancestors that's gonna be a little bit difficult to deal with and speaking of our dear friend tender love he said something yesterday that is really important when understanding this concept right a number is meaningless to me I need to know the class name and so that's you know again referencing that having something a name a text string to be able to understand rather than just referencing some random four five six eight digit number that's going to be a lot easier for all of us to understand so in order to talk about what really big and small numbers are first we need to create a baseline for our human experience and so I'm going to be doing this for both distance and time for the baseline of distance I'm going to be using the default value of one meter that's you know approximately the size of a human about how far you can reach within your space around you so if that's our baseline what's the smallest thing that a human can experience and then and that is about something about the width of a human hair and that's going to be e to the negative four and the biggest thing that we can experience is a mountain a mountain is something we can see in the distance but it's also something we can climb we can physically walk the entire breadth of it and understand how large that is and that's about e to the four for time I am going to say that the baseline of human experience is about one hour you know one minute seems like way too short right like one hour we block our things into one hour or half hour time chunks that's a good experience like central experience of how we experience time and in that realm the smallest time that we can experience is the blink of an eye which again is about e to the negative four the biggest thing that we can experience is of course our own lifespan and that is about a hundred thousand hours or e to the five so this brings us to another lie that we have direct experience with very big and very small numbers you know you could see that the common thread with that was it that the our experience is from the width of a hair to a mountain or from the blink of an eye to a life span those are in the thousands two thousands range which in the grand scheme of things is not very big or small so humans long ago discovered that clear curved surfaces magnified and distorted light but we did not really understand the mathematics behind it for a while later that didn't stop us from carving lenses in order to try and magnify the world around us so this is the Nimrod lens which dates to about 750 BC and these lenses were have been discovered in areas such as ancient Assyria Egypt Greece and Babylon these lenses were barely more than crude magnifiers but they were kind of the first ways that humans were able to experience things beyond to what our naked eye would allow us optic theory was the study of how the light bends when going through mirrors and lenses and the law of refraction was required in order to really compute the shape of lenses that could drastically increase the availability of investigating the world around us so at about 1590 was when the first microscope microscope was invented and 1608 was when the telescope was invented and this of course allowed us to drastically expand our world beyond what we had previously been able to experience so let's go back to our baselines and see how much further we've expanded things since then when we're going smaller we were able to discover bacteria at e to the negative 6 the microprocessor memory cell right now is about e to the negative 8 the 14 nanometer resolution began shipping in 2014 the current smallest gate length of our processors is e to the negative 9 the size of a 16 nanometer processor and that's pretty fantastically small when you consider the atoms themselves are about e to the negative 10 and the electron is e to the negative 15 we're also able to explore things much bigger the moon is about e to the six the sun is e to the nine and sun is not even the biggest star that we've been able to study we have Rigel at e to the 11 and Beetlejuice at e 12 and because I studied astrophysics you're gonna get a quick lesson here so both the beetle juice here are and Rigel are in this constellation Orion here you can see Beetlejuice is the left shoulder of Orion Rigel is the right foot and then because the gods were kind to us they also put serious right here the brightest star in the sky so these are three of the brightest stars easily easily viewable it's also kind of cool to see both the red giant and the blue giant as you can see the colors here okay continuing on we've also been able to study things such as the pillars of creation e to the 16 these are interstellar gas and dust in the eagle mebula they are so named because this this massive gas is currently creating brand new stars and this of course is even tiny subset of a much larger consolation and collection of stars the leftmost pillar in this picture is about four light years in length so we can also expand our experience of time as well when we're going smaller we are able to determine that this a single synapse in our brain is about e to the negative seven in 1980 we created processors that at five megahertz which is about e to the negative 10 and our current 3.5 gigahertz processors are e to the negative 13 when looking at the bigger scale the current oldest known living thing on earth is a personal kong pine that's been alive for 5000 years or e to the 7 humanity itself has only been around for about 200,000 years or e to the 9 dinosaurs beat us out handily with their 100 million year lifespan or e to the 12th and so you know what is this telling us you know there's another big lie that we have been we have not been able to explore the world in you know this great depth for very very long this is only the last couple hundred years have we even been able to expand beyond the thousands and thousands so another thing that our brain is responsible for is to determine risk and estimate the odds of dangerous things clearly we have a desire to keep ourselves alive it's kind of important and therefore we need to determine what sorts of things are risks to our lives unfortunately we're not really good at this and tend to prioritize things that are immediate short-term risks rather than paying along paying attention to longer term risks here we we know what we have a very visceral reaction to the idea of being attacked by sharks or being bitten by snakes and yet we daily ride in cars or smoke cigarettes in the world of computing this we might think of this as is our concept around our nines right when we're talking about the availability of our software we like to couch it in how many nines we have referring to the number of nines past 90% of the availability of our website so we have one nine and that allows us about 36 and a half days per year downtime that's pretty easy I think all of us can meet that pretty well unless we're maybe government agencies so hopefully we're gonna start by by aiming for it the very minimum two nines which is still you know still 3.65 days per year down is kind of bad and she probably trying to do better than that so three nines three nines gets us to 8.76 hours of downtime in every year four nines 52.56 minutes five nines which you know is one of the biggest holy grails of services website services today that's only five just under five and a half minutes five and a quarter minutes a year down so what about nine nines anyone have an idea of how much downtime we'd be allowed if it was nine nines anyone want to throw something out it's gonna be 31.5 milliseconds otherwise known as 31 brain synapses in our brains that's how much time we would be allowed to be down we wanted to get to nine nines so this kind of brings us to another lie of course which is that our brains are good at calculating odds how many times have any of you heard any of these statements I think all of us have right and my answer to that one is no as the number of possible instances grows the chances of any of these things occurring are increased dramatically so we now have understanding the extremely large and small numbers are relatively new experiences to humanity as a whole and that our brains are really bad at calculating the odds of something occurring how many have you have experienced this sort of thing so now we're gonna talk about like you know what are the sort of edge cases here so this fellow Hubert Wolfstern is the man with one of the I think the according to Wikipedia the longest official name so he has one name for each letter of the alphabet but that only takes us to Zeus and then this is this guy's last name senior so thank you Germany do you think that your site can handle mr. Hubert trying to sign up which he can't because he already died but you know maybe he has another son junior and then of course we also have you know people like share who legally only have one name and celebrities aren't the only people that live following this category the royal family of both Japan and Thailand I think also traditionally only have one name so you know if the Emperor of Japan wants to sign up for your site maybe you should let him and then of course there are the people who suffer from dealing with their hyphenated names other funny unicode characters and then someday sometime soon maybe it's already happened there's gonna be some poor soul with an emoji character in their name so email is another common one in this in this realm right so we might understand like being able to parse and handle these types of emails with the plus sign as a filtering mechanism for Gmail or now that we have all sorts of ridiculous domain names that we can purchase but that's not only a part of it so this is an excerpt from the Wikipedia list of valid email addresses so you know do you think that you can write a regex that can correctly parse all of these I'm not going to try I would suggest you don't either and that's only you know this is not the end of what we have to deal with when we're dealing with edge cases and exceptions when it's also pretty important when you're adding protections for the explicit expectations that edge cases will be met by your software that includes using new texas to deal with possibly concurrent requests handling database transactions correctly so that you don't lose data or double save data and of course being able to correctly in Q and DQ background jobs it's also important when you're thinking about whether or not your test suite is really encompassing all of the cases that you need it to are you just testing the happy path deployments is your deployment process itself hindering your ability to get that next nine and when dealing with data bit migrations and you know are you your your customers data is gold to them are you tweeting with that level of respect to protect that information for them so human experience overall has increased drastically in the last hundred years we have moved from a realm of only experiencing things in the thousands two thousands range to expanding to the millions to millions billions to billions and trillions to trillions in order to write scalable code we must be developing for that millionth user billionth request and trillionth event and if you take away only one thing from this talk I would say that the edge case is the certainty don't think that that's something just because it's going to be very unlikely is not going to happen make sure that your software can accept that edge case and thank you very much that's a good question so how has an education in astrophysics affected my career one I was really really happy not to have to code in the programming languages that was popular in astrophysics so that was basically like Fortran so now like I think one of the the most interesting things about astrophysics was really learning about the ways that we as humans tried to just to learn about things beyond our own world when all you have to study is the photons kind of hitting the earth like how do you figure out what materials the Sun is made of or how far away things are being able to to try and figure out how to query that information from a very limited subset of data and being really creative about it is pretty amazing and I think that actually we do that a lot in programming as well you know we're dealing with with computers that are you know running on electricity right it can be incredibly hard to debug things that are going wrong in your servers when all you have possibly is a tiny stream of electrons flowing out of it how do we debug what's happening and understand what's happening within our computers with that limited amount of impression we have to be creative so the question is do you have a ways to try and calculate the risk of certain edge cases when you're programming and the answer to that is metrics record everything all the time if you don't have you know metrics on things when things are going right and when things are going wrong you don't have any way to do any sort of calculation or comparison or see when things things are happening poorly and that's something you know especially that github itself is very well known for and it still relies heavily on is storing information about every single thing that's happening at every layer of the stack and having something to create graphs again numbers are useless being able to see trends to see how things are changing even slightly week week over week or day or day is very important full set of logging or a statistical set of logging and that's so that's actually case by case there are certain areas where the storage requirements of full logging is not not feasible and so then you have to pick a percentage random percentage you know are you gonna log 10% of things that are happening or versus 100 so that's like again it's almost always case by case and what your particular storage requirements or abilities are a good question so that's the any you have a rule of thumb on balancing the cost of trying to manage the ever more increasingly rare edge cases as opposed to like the time that requires and again like all of that is based on each each project each company's particular use case what are the resources available and that's you know it's hard to give any particular answer right you want to be you want to be certain enough what was the phrase in Ernie's talk yesterday about the skyscrapers right you want to be relatively certain with the abilities that you have that that acceptably unlikely you want it to be acceptably unlikely that something like that's going to happen and that definition of acceptably might change depending on the size and scope of your project so question is do we use any process improvement tools like six sigma and no not really so the question is basically have I come across any resources that would help people play around with a relative scale to try and understand like the difference between million versus billion for example and no and I actually did spend some time trying to find something like that honestly like one of the resources that I've loved the most when kind of putting things into perspective like this is some XKCD comics I think that he's done a couple I think he did one on like currency and how much things were worth that was like really amazing and kind of bringing out the scale of those numbers so honestly maybe just XKCD I think that might be it thank you


Hi, I'm Zor. Welcome to Unizor Education. I would like to add one more interesting problem to combinatorics subject of this course. The whole course is presented on Unizor.com. I suggest you to watch the lecture from this website, because every lecture has a very good detailed explanation, notes. Plus, there are exams and some other stuff. So, the site is free, so I do recommend you to watch it from this website. Now, speaking about combinatorics, the most important part in combinatorics, I believe, is solving problems. Now, this is actually just yet another problem, but it has a very fancy name. It's called Wandermon's Identity. Now, sometimes it's presented like this. Okay, here is the identity. Basically, I wrote it for myself, so it doesn't really make sense. And now this is the proof. Now, just looking at identity, you don't really feel the combinatoric sense behind it. So, I would rather start from the meaning of that as an example of a practical problem. And basically, the solution to this would be actually the proof of the identity itself. And then I will offer another proof. Okay, so here is the problem. Let's consider you have a set of people of two different kinds. Let's say men and women or, I don't know, whatever, higher education and lower education. It doesn't really matter. So, you have M of, let's say, men and M of women. Now, your task is to create a subgroup which contains our participants. And the question is how many times, how many combinations you can create of our members of this group. Now, the obvious and very simple response is, well, we have M plus N people. It doesn't matter what kind of people we have. We have R, the capacity of the group which we have to select from it. And there is a direct answer, number of combinations from M plus N by R. And this is the answer. That's it. End of story. Now, on the other hand, you can approach this problem slightly in a more complex way. Namely, you can actually take into account that you have two different types of people. So, this group of R can contain zero men and R women. And there is a special number of groups of this type. This is what? This is number of combinations from N women by R. So, this is the number of these guys. Let me actually write it right near it. So, it will be C N by R. Now, another type of groups. When you have one man and R minus one women. The number of these groups is how many different selections of one man we can actually select from M men. It's C M by one, right? And how many different selections of R minus one women we can select from N women. It's this, right? Number of combinations from N by R minus one. Now, we can have two men and R minus two women, right? So, the number of combinations is this is number of times we can select two men out of M. And this is the number of times we can select R minus two women from N and we have to multiply because with each selection of this we can have each selection of them. Now, we can continue this process until R minus one and one would be C M R minus one times C N of one. And finally, R zero C M R C N zero. But I didn't put C M zero here. It's one, but just to be a uniform, right? Number of combinations from M by zero is still one, right? So, we don't have to take it into account. And now, my point is that you can summarize this and that would, well, it's supposed to give you exactly the same number as this one, right? We just count it differently. This is the direct count, regardless of the composition, and this is a count which does pay attention to the composition of the group between men and women, but we do actually select all the different kinds of composition. Zero men and R women, one man and R minus women, et cetera, up to R men and zero women. So, we have this type of numbers of groups of this particular type. So, if we will summarize them, we will get this. And this is the Van der Monde's identity. So, basically, I have just proven this identity by purely logically approaching this problem. And my personal understanding is that most likely this particular identity, which I can now express as this, C M plus N by R is equal to sum, and I will have index I from zero to R, C M by I, C N by R minus I. So, this is the sum of these expressed as a sigma notation. Well, that's it. That's the proof. This is the identity which we're talking about, the Van der Monde's identity. Again, very fancy name, but very simple explanation where it came from. And now, kind of elegant, I would say, maybe slightly unusual, other proof of the same identity. I just like it because it seems to be very elegant. Obviously, it was historically found or offered, I know, much later than this original one because the original is kind of a natural, simple. It goes exactly about a number of combinations. So, it's expressed in combinatorial terms. The combinatorial identity is expressed in combinatorial terms. Now, I'm going to use pure algebra. Now, 1 plus X to the power of M plus N is equal to 1 plus X to the power of M times 1 plus X to the power of N. Now, we will start from this obvious identity. I will also use the binomial, Newton's binomial of what is A plus B to the power of N. This is, as you remember, A to the power N, B to the power of 0 plus C from N. But I should actually put this coefficient before this as well. So, it's C and another thing is I probably shouldn't use N because N I'm using for other purposes. So, let's put K. K 0 A K B 0 plus C K 1 A K minus 1 B 1, etc. And the last couple of numbers, K minus 1 A to the power of 1 B to the K minus 1 plus C K K A 0 B K. Okay, this is Newton's binomial. And again, I hope that we all know this. If we don't, there is a special section in this course which basically proves this. Anyway, so I'm using this binomial formula for left and the right side, right? And I will use the sigma notation. Let me just replace this with sigma notation. It would be much more convenient for me. So, it's sigma I from 0 to K C K I A to the power of I B to the power of K minus I. Alright, so this is sigma I from 0 to M plus N C M plus N I times A is 1 and B is X. So, 1 to any power is 1. So, we're talking about only B which is X. So, it will be X to the power of M plus N minus I. Okay, equals 2. Here, I will do exactly the same with each one of them. The first one is sigma I from 0 to M. The number of combinations by I X to the power of M minus I times 1. Sorry, sigma I from 0 to N C N I and X to the power of N minus I. Okay. Now, let's just think about it. These are two polynomials which depend on X. The power of this polynomial, the maximum X is when I is equal to 0 which is M plus N. The power of this is M and the power of this is N and the product of two polynomials of M and N's power obviously is the polynomial of M plus N's power. So, that actually corresponds. Well, but not only that. Basically, each coefficient of this polynomial must be equal to the corresponding coefficient with X to the same power of this polynomial, right? Because it's true for any X. So, if two polynomials are equal to each other for any X, that means that each coefficient of these polynomials must be exactly the same or else. All right. So, let's just do the coefficient at one particular X namely X to the power of R. Now, what would be the coefficient X to the power of R on the left? Well, it would be, if this is equal to R, then I is equal to... Well, you know what? It would be probably much easier for me if I would do it slightly differently. You see, this is exactly the same but it starts with 0 which means this should start with 0. It's completely symmetrical. So, I will start with I here and I here and I here. Because what I wrote before was actually X plus 1, not 1 plus X. But it's exactly the same thing because the coefficients, the number of combinations is exactly symmetrical. So, M plus N minus I is the same as I. So, it's completely symmetrical but this would be easier for me to prove. Because now the coefficient at X to the power of R on the left is C M plus N by R, number of combinations. Now, let's think about what is the coefficient at X to the power of R on the right side? Well, this is a product of two sums. Now, this is a polynomial where the power goes from 1 to M and this is polynomial when the power goes from 1 to M. Now, whenever I have two polynomials, I'm basically having all the different possible products. So, if I have, let's say, certain number of members here and certain number of members here, then the total number of these elements would be the product. So, if I would like to have the power X to the power of R, I can take the element with X to the power of 0 here and X to the power of R there. Or I can take an element X to the power of 1 here and X to the power of R minus 1 here, etc. So, basically what I'm saying is that out of all the different combinations of coefficients this times this, I need only those coefficients which have a sum of powers equal to R, which is the coefficient at X0, which is Cm0 times coefficient of this by X to the power of R, plus coefficient at X to the first power times coefficient of X to the power R minus 1, etc. So, basically as you see, we will get, and the last one would be this, this. And they must be equal. So, which is basically another proof of the same Van der Monde's identity using the Newton's binomial formula, which is basically algebra. Anyway, personally I do like the first proof much better because it's very tangible, so to speak. This, you have to go back to the binomial formula for A plus B to some power, you have to apply it, and then you have to really think how the sum of different members are multiplied to each other, that it's all the different pairs of one member from here and one member from there. And these are sum of all members which give X to the power of R, and that's why we have this identity. Well, that's basically it. It's relatively simple thing, two different proofs of the same fancy named Van der Monde's identity. I do recommend you to go to the website and check the notes for this lecture. They are rather detailed, basically the same thing which I did here, but it'll be just one more repetition. That's it, thank you very much and good luck.


Hello everyone, this is Amy Perrier, Access Services Manager at the Carnegie Mellon University Libraries. And today I am going to go over with you all how to request scans of items found within the library's print collection. So to start, we're going to want to go to the library homepage so that's library.cmu.edu. We're going to click here on Books and More and we're going to search the library catalog. I'm going to go ahead and I'm going to type in a title here. This particular title because my daughter is super into video games and can talk endlessly about skins. So we're going to click on that search for that and then from our results we're going to find what it is that we're looking for. We're going to click on that title and it's going to pull up the full item record. So now if you scroll down a little ways you see here it says please sign in to check if there are any request options. Here we're going to want to sign in and you're going to log in using your Andrew ID. All right, he's going to pull up your request options and you'll see we have two request options you can request either the physical copy, or you can request scanning so of course for the purpose of this video we're going to request scanning. Click on that, and then it's going to bring up our request form. Now for this particular service to stay within fair use guidelines, we can scan no more than 10% of an item. Anything above and beyond that you can request via our controlled digital scan lending form, but for this particular service, no more than 10%. Now when filling out this form it's important to be as specific as possible to fill in as many of these fields as you can. So if you're unsure of a chapter's title or author's name for most items you can scroll down to the contents view that list so you'll see here under contents we have our list of chapter titles and author names. So for the purpose of this request I'm going to select chapter one here which is apparently the pipeline costume for games by Gavin rich. Okay, I'm going to type in that chapter title here. I don't know what a pipeline costume is, but that's all right. Maybe once I make this request and read that chapter I'll know. So that's by Gavin rich. So we filled out our information so as much as we have. I'm going to go ahead and I'm going to submit that scanning request. And that's it. Scan requests generally take about 24 hours to fill and we will email you upon completion of that request. And that's it. If you have any questions or want to provide us with any feedback, please do connect with us via homepage from our ask a link. And thanks for watching and I hope everyone I hope you all have a great day. Thanks again. Bye.


Hi, this is Dr. Don. I'm back with part two of that problem out of chapter nine on a two-way ANOVA, a two by two factorial experiment with two observations, which is recall, which means this is an ANOVA with replication. If you recall, we used that crunch after we rearranged the data and did the two-way analysis of variance and got our ANOVA table and our MEANS table to answer the first part of the question. Here is the ANOVA table and here are the answers we needed for that. As we scroll down into part C, it says, test to determine whether the MEANS differ at alpha .05. Does the test support your visual interpretation? And you recall, visually we saw that there was a difference between MEANS, but there was not an interaction and the null and alternative for this test is there are no differences, the no difference null as usual, and at least two MEANS differ for the alternative. Now the way that we're doing this in this particular problem is a little bit backwards. If you think about it, look over here on our ANOVA. If we've got a significant p-value here and a significant p-value there, both less than .05, even though the interaction is not significant, the p-value there which jives with the graph where the two lines intersect, we know that we've got something significant going over here. So we don't really need this test to see if the overall ANOVA is significant. It will be. But let's get them the answers they need. They want to know the test statistic, f sub t, and they want to know the p-value. So to get that, StatCrunch doesn't give it to us, we're going to have to get in to Excel. So let me show you the Excel. Here's the calculator. I'll have this available so that you can download from my website. The way it's set up is just to use the equations that would calculate this f sub t, our test value, test statistic of f, and then the p-value associated with that, the two answers we need, and there's some formulas that you have to use to get there. The way I set it up, I've got a ANOVA blank up here, and the blue cells are the things that I need to copy into. And it works for both the StatCrunch version of ANOVA as well as the Excel data analytics ANOVA that I'll show you in another video to copy into these blue box. The critical cells are these that I've got highlighted there, the mean square cells for the sample, your row variable, B, your column variable, your interaction, and then the error. Those four values are the critical things we need for this question C. If we go back over here into StatCrunch, there's not an easy way to get this information down. The way that I found that works for me is to just take my cursor and highlight that part that I need, use CTRL C to copy it, then I'm just going to go someplace in my Excel here and then right click and then paste. And you can see that we get a very small version of that. I'm going to go ahead and highlight this, make it a little bit bigger so you can see, go back up to 11, so we can see those values there. Now the values that we need, we'll eventually need to use all of those. Looking at these, A, B, interaction, I've already got those. The degrees of freedom just happened to be the same, so I don't have to change those this time. My sum of the squares, I'm going to copy the first four there, CTRL C, and paste those there. I'm going to get the final version of my total, CTRL C, paste it there, and then I'm going to get my mean squares. These are really the most critical part, CTRL C, paste them there, and then I'm going to get my F values and my P values, CTRL C, and paste them there. And we'll use these things for the answers that are to come. Now the only else you need to do is to go into the second part of the blue cells, enter your alpha value, which is .05 in this case, our K, which is the number of treatments, or our A factor was two, remember that, our column factor, our blocks was two, and the number of replications we had, remember we had two observations per treatment, so r is equal to two. Enter those values, and then all of the yellow cells downstream propagate, and down at the bottom it will check to see if P is left in alpha in this case. Some problems we'll ask for the critical values, so I've given you that as well as the P value, and in both of those, in this case, say reject the null, because either the F test value is in the rejection region, or P is less than alpha. Well, let's go back and check. Here's our answer, 22.414 and .006. So I'm going to pause and go back into my stat, okay, we're in my stat lab again, and here's our part C, the test statistic 22.414, which is the answer that the calculator gives you, the P value, .006, gives you that answer there. So let's scroll on down, does the test support your visual interpretation? Yes. We reject the null, down here we reject the null. There is sufficient evidence that at least two of the treatments, in other words, we reject the null, that means the alternative, which is at least two of the treatments differ at alpha, .05, which agrees with the graphs that we plotted. Parts D and E are similar, it's asking us to make a determination whether or not the main effects and the interaction in the experiment were significant, and it goes through the same process, asking you to get the null and alternative, I'm not going to spend time on that, you can do that, I'm going to show you how we get the statistics they need. First it says, find the test statistic for the interaction. And here we look in our ANOVA output, there's our interaction row, we read across there, the test statistic is .156 rounding, and the probability as we said before is .713. So that's the answer to that part. We're going to scroll down here into E and it asks about the two treatment effects, and the first one it says what about the effect of factor A, and factor A if we look here in our row, factor A, and the F statistic is 48.728, and the p-value is .002, which matches their answer there. The next part asks about factor B, and we get the answer there, the F statistic for factor B, which is our column blocking variable, 18.358 and .0128. So that's how you get the statistics you need, the rest of the questions, I think you know the logic of how to say whether or not the p-value tells you to reject or fail to reject the null. So I hope this helps you see how to get the statistics part of this long problem.


Name a movie that describes your content journey in 2022. I would say Yeh Jawani Hai Diwani because I think that was one of the movies that really inspired me to actually go out there and do the things that you really love and it's also like the excitement of the unknown if you don't really know whether it's going to work out or not but it's more of the journey that I'm experiencing rather than the destination so I think that was something that I took a chance with with my content and Yeh Jawani Hai Diwani fits perfectly.


And now, great moments in unintended consequences. Part one, tree decree. The year 2019. The problem? Mexico needs trees. The solution? The Sewing Life Project. A $3.4 billion program that pays farmers to plant fruit and timber trees on barren land. Not only will this help spruce up the environment, but it will fight poverty and inequality by paying the farmers to maintain the new trees. Sounds like a great idea, with the best of intentions. What could possibly go wrong? It turns out poor farmers need money. And since standing trees didn't qualify for the program, the system incentivized farmers to cut down mature trees to make way for new ones. In one village, two-thirds of the program's participants chopped down forests to get that cash. One study found the program caused the deforestation of more than 280 square miles. But you know what they say about the best-laid plants. Part two, pay care. The year? 1998. The problem? Technically, this was a research study, but private daycare centers in Israel are tired of parents arriving late. The solution? Fine, tardy parents, a small fee for every late pickup. Sounds like a great idea, with the best of intentions. What could possibly go wrong? It turns out money isn't the only incentive, and a fine is just a price. To the surprise of the researchers, late arrivals more than doubled. The penalty, it seemed, allowed parents to ease their conscience. The shameful apology that once burdened them shifted to a simpler, legitimate cash transaction. One they were happy to pay, because honestly ask any new parent what they wouldn't pay for an extra 10 minutes of free time. Part three, loophole lunch. The year? 1896. The problem? Alcohol is ruining the moral fiber of New York. The solution? The reigns law, a bevy of rules that made it harder to open or operate drinking establishments, including a ban on the sale of alcohol on Sundays, except for hotel and lodging houses that serve drinks with complimentary meals. I mean, wealthy New Yorkers tend to dine out at ritzy hotels when their servants have the day off, so no need to ruffle their rich upstanding virtuous feathers. It's those poor people that are ruining everything. So yeah, stick it to them. Sounds like a terrible idea, with puritanical intentions. What could possibly go wrong? It turns out people like drinking. Even on Sundays, the ban was wildly unpopular. Almost immediately reigns law hotels were born. Basements and addicts were converted into barely furnished rooms and proprietors made deals with neighboring lodging houses. In Brooklyn, the number of registered hotels went from 13 to 800 after six months. Prostitutes and unmarried couples found the new rooms especially convenient. To fulfill the law's food requirement, bar staff invented the Reigns Sandwich, an easy, simple meal that would be served with a patron's drink, but not consumed. The frequently inedible sandwich would be whisked away in seconds and quickly paired with the next order. It was not uncommon for the same sandwich to be reused for weeks. Yum. Food for naught. Great moments and unintended consequences. Good intentions, bad results. Do you know a great moment and unintended consequences? Put it in the comments. We might steal it. I mean, borrow it.


Bartosz Marzlik off the inside here. Matizegar needs points here. He's on 7. Danny King goes off gate 3 and wide. I think he's quitted himself pretty well after a tough start tonight and Greg Hancock goes off the outside in Yellows. There you go and gate 2. He needs a big ride. Here we go. He's number 19. Marzlik's made a good gate there. Now Kanzegar moved the switch up the inside. What can Hancock do? He's at the back at the moment. Danny King comes through into second. Danny King is going wide and he loves doing that. Danny King comes through to the lead. What a ride from the British Wildcard. That's what he's all about, Danny King. The battle with the man in red here, Bartosz Marzlik. This would be a moment that Danny King will remember for the rest of his life. Marzlik second and Zegar has come through. It's a third ahead of Greg Hancock. It's a bit like buses, isn't it? You have to wait all day to see one and then suddenly two come along at the same time. But I may have given the commentator's curse. King and Marzlik having a fabulous race out in front. Hancock's out in the back, but Danny King can he hang on? Marzlik coming on hard in second place. Down to the line. Let's listen to the crowd. The race is the Wildcard. Look what it means to him. He's celebrating like he's won the British title again. Well done, Danny King. The Principality Stadium solitude. What a ride he was as well. He had to fight for that tooth for now, right to the checkered flag. King comes up with a storm. He was right there in the first corner. I was chatting with somebody earlier today and I thought if Danny could win a race this evening, it would be a great achievement. And he's pulled it off in fine style and in a terrifically competitive race. He loves riding in the dirt on the outside. We saw that in Manchester when he won the British Championship. The dirt was there for him in heat 19. He allows the bike to get in the dirt, wheels in line and shows great class and speed because Marzlik puts him under massive pressure. Just a little bit. Yeah. And King is over it. Yeah, exactly. And we're seeing it here, you know, like Marzlik's enjoying a good night of speed where the poles are in actual fact, but Danny King pulls it off and quite rightly he celebrates in style. So congratulations to Danny King. That's made it all worthwhile tonight. He's enjoyed that one. You'll never forget that, will he? Richie Hawkins alongside him, his big pal. And it's a shame that the meeting didn't start on his third ride. Exactly, because he'd be in the hunt for the win, innit?


In the age of exploration, navigators set out to discover the world. They sailed the oceans, charted trade routes and mapped so-called discovered lands, some of which, it turns out, they made up. There was no one to question these white European sea captains. Their word was not to be doubted. If you're sailing for the British Admiralty and you come back and say, I spot an island, it goes on the map. Fast forward to the 21st century, and now climate change is wiping places off the map. In the South Pacific, entire islands and historic ways of life are disappearing. There's this particular fish that they like to eat, that they like to catch off the coast of their island, but they're no longer able to do that in Honiara. And now they have to buy like tinned fish. I'm Ann Strainchamps. Today, on to the best of our knowledge, off the map.


ve got is what I see on YouTube. And if I disagree, if I disagree, wouldn't it be good if I can talk to you? Hey, what do you mean by this? Or hey, I didn't like what you said. Fine. But I can't do that if we don't have a conversation. And our conversation, our conversation took place, ladies and gentlemen, offline. We didn't come, we didn't, hey, let's, let's, let's get on YouTube and have this, have yourself. No, we talked offline first and say, you know, this might be beneficial for the body to see. So Marcus, brother, I'll let you say some words before we go. But thank you so much, man, for showing up. I really do appreciate that. I enjoyed it. I, I got honest truth. I enjoyed it. I respect you, man of God. I know you're a real man of God.  You're going to heaven, you know, whether you agree on everything or not. And I, the only thing I would like to say, you know, just give me grace, guys. The God honest truth is before I leave, I'm going to get on my knees and I'm going to pray. And I'm going to say, Lord, is there anything that I failed to see or that, you know, I just couldn't see. And I'm going to ask God to show me.  Well, that was one of the points why I wanted to come on here. Maybe consider that, you know, especially with me clarifying what I've always believed, like, for example, that Jesus is God thing, maybe you just took some information and you ran with it, right? Instead of, you know, studying or researching for yourself, like, I've always pretty much for the most part, you know, believed and said some of the similar things, some things have changed. But don't put it past the point where it's like, well, maybe you listen to somebody say something about me and they took what I said out of context. That's possible too.  He's going to hold me accountable for every video that I put on YouTube. He's going to hold me accountable for every message that I preach over here at the church. And so pray for me. That's that's all I could say, whether you like me, whether you think I'm this or that pray for me. And my heart is that I just wish we could come together, give the people Jesus, plant that seed. And I believe that if we do that and people have a genuine encounter with the Word and the presence of God and this crazy world that we're living in, my goal is to set them on the path to study and just seek God for themselves. Because at the end of the day, you know, myself, the man of God here, we're all going to have to stand before God and nobody else is going to be there. You know, and so that's kind of how I look at it. I always tell people, pray about everything that I say. Anybody who watches me on YouTube, they know every video I say, look, don't take my word for it. Don't put me on a pedestal. I'm not perfect. I'm still learning. I'm still growing, but you got to seek God for yourself. If you don't agree, seek God for yourself. And that's just my heart, man of God. So I appreciate you. I honor you. I thank you for having me on here. And I thank you just for being so kind. I'm even getting a little teary eyed. I know that's a little extra. I could be emotional at times.   You know what I'm saying? But the way you handled it, you handled it with grace. And I just really respect that. And I really appreciate that. And it means a lot to me. And I want to, I want to say that to you. And I'm definitely going to pray about everything that we talked about and just continue to pray for me, man, of God, you know, that I grow and I just want God to be pleased at the end of the day. People might think I'm just saying stuff to say stuff, but that's really my heart.  So, amen. We're going to pray on our way out all together.   We don't do. I'm kidding. I'm kidding. I'm kidding. Listen, I know, I know what he's saying. I have had people threaten me. I had one guy said he wants to do.  I was shooting shots back at him, but I shouldn't do that. But, but, but the humble way is to, that stuff gets you after a while. Sometimes folks say some stuff and it's easy to kind of respond back or whatever. But how he, how he did this guys, this was amazing. So this is for, for me. This is for Marcus. This is for everybody that we've disagreed with and disagree with me and so forth. This is for all of us. Lord God, we just thank you. God, we all have a past. We all are messed up. The beauty about our salvation is that you didn't come to say folks that don't mess up. You came to say folks that mess up and no, they mess up. You came to say folks with a past. You came to say folks that are from a broken home. You come to say folks that have broken some homes.   So how dare we say that nobody is above forgiveness, reconciliation, that no one is allowed to be wrong, that no one can think differently than us. God, all we know is one thing that matters and that is we have Christ. If you are led by the spirit of God, meaning that you place your faith in Christ, then you've told us that we are the sons and daughters of God. And that's all that matters. The other things that's growing in the knowledge of the Lord, that's important. Help us to do so Lord in a godly fashion. If someone were to reach out or we were to reach out, we pray that that humble spirit will be reciprocated. So God, have your way in us, in this live stream, in the subsequent videos, in churches, in our homes, Lord God. Have your way in the body. We pray this in Jesus' name. Amen. Guys, I look forward to seeing you guys later. I've got some homework to go do. I look forward to even going back and reading you guys' comments and the live stream chats, which I do sometime. I'm going to do that today. So anyway, guys, I love you so much. In the meantime, go find somebody to hug, to bless. If they don't know the Lord Jesus, go preach the gospel to somebody in Jesus' name. Amen. Amen.


For more videos on people's struggles, please subscribe to our YouTube channel. Hello and welcome to People's Dispatch. Today, we're joined by Vijay Prashat, Director of the Tricontinental Institute of Social Research. Over the past few weeks, Vijay, along with Du Xiaojong and Veyanju have written a series of articles detailing China's response to the COVID-19 pandemic. These articles also examined certain accusations that have been made against China, including that China was later informing the rest of the world about the disease, that the Chinese bungled in deliberately suppressed information about the disease, and also that China's lockdown was some top-down authoritarian move. We'll be talking to Vijay about these articles and these accusations. You can read these articles at People's Dispatch, as well as the booklet that is going to be published by Tricontinental soon. Thank you so much, Vijay, for talking to us. Before going into the articles themselves, these articles are very current because right now we saw Donald Trump recently decide to withdraw funding from the WHO pending what he calls an investigation. And this seems a continuation of a series of allegations against China to begin with, and which he also covered, and a sort of narrative that is being built that at some level China was responsible for this and maybe deserves to be punished. So how do you see the response to that? Well, you know, some of this is entirely a factual question and I'd like to go through some of the factual claims because I think these are important. But before getting there, I think it's important to say that the World Health Organization has been playing a very important role not only with regard to COVID-19, but you'll remember with regard to all the previous avian flues that have been escalating in the last 20 years, including the SARS epidemic in 2002-2003. The WHO has played a very important role in West Africa, in Ebola. I think it played a very crucial role with Zika and the very fact that in the middle of a global pandemic, the United States government has basically used its contribution to the WHO as a kind of hostage saying they won't give this money if the WHO doesn't do XYZ. I think this is disgraceful.  I'm actually quite surprised that countries like Brazil, where the Zika was, you know, so debilatory countries in West Africa, India and so on, haven't come out publicly to defend the WHO against the US allegations and against the withdrawal of money. I think the entire world needs to come out and say, well, if the US doesn't want to provide the funds, that's one thing. But they should not be able to hold such an important international institution hostage. I think that's really quite shameful. Just to come back to what you said earlier, it needs to be said that these accusations appear odd. Here's China, which was struck by a mysterious virus in December, struggled to find out what this virus was, eventually was able to contain it to some extent. I mean, let's not lose the fact that we need to be very vigilant. Here's China doing all kinds of things and I'll come back to that, I'm sure. Meanwhile, we had the United States, India, the United Kingdom, most of Europe sitting on their hands.  And now that they are caught in the middle of a catastrophic attack on their societies through this virus, they blame China. I find this particularly deceitful. It's a kind of transference. So what are the key accusations? In fact, you can call it maybe the key accusation is that China was what do you call slow in one, detecting the crisis and two in informing other countries about it. Now, there has been some media reports in the West about how for instance, Donald Trump himself was informed in January. So there's been at least some maybe pushback from say some of the liberal sections in the Western media. But there seems to be almost a consensus that China itself bungled the first few weeks of this. So one interesting thing in your articles is that you actually drawn a complete chronology of what to play. So could you just take us a bit to that process? Yeah, I mean, firstly, everybody admits that when the first patients came to Wuhan hospitals in December, nobody knew what was going on.  They called it unknown pneumonia. They didn't know what was happening. It is a novel coronavirus. It's not something that was well established. This meant that the early warning systems were not functioning as well as they should. When it's a plague, for in case of plague, it's very easy to input what's happening and the protocols are there. Here it was not clear what it was. That's the first thing. Secondly, on the 31st of December, long before the January period, which I'm going to come to, the Chinese CDC informed, that is the center of disease control, informed US CDC. In fact, the head of the US CDC was on vacation. And he told the New York Times later that I missed most of my holiday, I was on the phone with the Chinese. Then the head of Chinese CDC calls him up personally. And when the head of Chinese CDC is telling the head of US CDC, he starts to cry. He says, this is a terrible ailment. Now this is between the 31st of December and the 3rd of January. I mean, at the turn of the year, China has informed the United States, informed the WHO. On the 15th of April, shamefully, the Associated Press ran a story with the headline, and I'm going to read it, China failed to warn public of coronavirus threat for days. And this is what they say. They say that there was a delay from January 14th to January 20th. They say a six day delay. Now, let's look at the facts. I mean, because this is not a this is not a joke, you know, this is something you need to really understand what happened. The virus was slowly being understood. Now they say from the 14th to the 20th, the six day delay took place. On January 13th, the day before the Associated Press erroneously says China basically didn't say anything. They said 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20. These six days, seven days, when they said they didn't do anything. The previous day, January 13th, the National Health Commission of China instructed Wuhan City to begin temperature checks. That happens on the day before the Associated Press says China suppressed everything. And then on the 17th of January, the National Health Commission sent inspection teams around the country. But most importantly, on the 14th of January, see the Associated Press says from January 14th to January 20th, China suppressed everything. Look, on the 14th of January, the day after they instructed Wuhan City to begin temperature checks, the National Health Commission's Health in National Teleconference that alerted the entire Chinese bureaucracy and apparatus about the novel coronavirus. And they said, prepare for a public health emergency. I'm confused now. It's in the public record that the Chinese administration, Chinese government publicly said they prepare for a national health emergency. I'm confused. This was on January 14th. The Associated Press gets away with the story that says from the 14th to the 20th, they suppressed the story. I don't get it. I seriously don't understand what they're doing. We detail the steps that the government took from the 13th, 14th, 15th onwards. The days when the Associated Press with no independent reporting suggests that nothing was done. I find that extraordinary that an organization of the caliber of the Associated Press has essentially provided propaganda rather than journalism. Right. And it's also interesting in a sense because what a lot of these narratives seem to forget like you pointed out is that one, this was a completely unknown disease and it was impossible to make the kind of, right now, test and quarantine seems, it's so ingrained in all of us that it seems very basic. But at that point of time, the possibility that doctors and medical professionals were not really sure what to do is something that is completely, you know, ignored by the press. That's point number one. And point number two, the fact somehow also narrative seems to indicate that there was no real reporting mechanism, that it is all the work of some brave whistleblowers, you know, who completely and that the Chinese system was there was no system in place at all seems to be the kind of narrative that's being pushed. I mean, look, here's what we found when we looked at the facts of the case, you know, there's a doctor in the Hubei Provincial Integrated Hospital. Her name is Dr. Zhang Zhijian. She's the Director of Respiratory and Critical Medicine. On the 26th of December, she saw an elderly couple. She was flummoxed by what she was seeing. She also did a CT scan of their son. She found round glass opacity in the lungs. That was an indicator something is wrong. She was extremely concerned about what was happening. She went and reported it to the Vice President of the hospital, you know, and within 24 hours, the Vice President of the hospital has told the Center for Disease Control of that province. This is on the 26th and 27th of December. They see something, they've reported it. Then it goes up. I mean, Hubei province starts to see more people on the 28th and 29th of December. By the way, this is long before the Associated Press claims that there was suppression between the 14th of January and the 20th of January. This doctor, Dr. Zhang, she reports the case. It goes through the official channels to Beijing. WHO is reported. It turns out that another doctor in her WeChat account talked to some friends and so on. She was reprimanded by the hospital for going outside the channels. But you see, the reprimand to her, to the doctor who is talking to her friends comes after Beijing has already been informed. So I don't get how this is a suppression story. You see, it's many things and the Chinese government has to deal with many situations. They have to go back. They have to do an after action study. Could we have handled this better? I mean, there's a lot of things that are going to happen. But if you look at the facts of the case, there is no evidence of direct willful suppression by the government and certainly not between January 14th and January 20th. I mean, it strikes me that the Associated Press with no reporting. I mean, most of our material we use is from the public domain. We've interviewed people. I interviewed lots of people. But most of it is in the public domain. It's basically at the National Health Commission's website where they posted, you know, their circulars and so on, which were for public distribution. How can you suppress something when you have it on a public website? Absolutely. Yeah. And another key aspect again is say, once the news of the disease did go out, then the favorite narrative of especially the West was that China could do this because it was an authoritarian state. It is one monolith of somebody at the top giving an order and a lot of millions of drones following it. So one of the interesting aspects of the article was the amount of community participation in the diversity of initiatives and efforts that actually helped beat this. And it's in some senses, this service to the people of China when this kind of a narrative is portrayed that, you know, this is we in the West are democratic. We can't do this. They were, you know, drones. So can we talk a bit about those community initiatives as well? I mean, the one thing is this divide between the authoritarian state and the democratic state is singularly unhelpful to understand what's happening. I mean, the way I would put it is that in practice, the Chinese state demonstrated that it had a public service mandate. That's what it demonstrates here. I mean, I'm not making an ideological claim. What the, let's say the US state demonstrated the British state is a great deal of callousness of the state towards the public. You know, when you don't prepare, you show that you're callous towards the social crisis coming. The Indian state, it demonstrated utter callousness. So there is an efficient state. There's a callous state. This is a much better way to characterize what happened. Now in China, for instance, it's not just the government doing things. As you rightly said, there were neighborhood committees. You know, we looked at, for instance, the decentralization of action. So in neighborhood committees, you had every neighborhood committee go out to temperature checks and so on. That's great. In Chengdu, which is in Sichuan province, 440,000 people volunteered to form teams to do a range of things, you know, from checking temperature to going out and just publicizing health regulations and so on. 440,000 people volunteered. They were volunteers streaming into Wuhan. You know, they were not being brought there by the government. The Communist Party in China has 90 million members. You know, millions of members went into Wuhan. Communist Party doctors, you must have seen the video of the doctors and medical professionals removing their masks. If you look closely, they were wearing a little Communist Party badge, almost all of them. You know, the fact is they volunteered because they said it is a matter of service to the people and so on. These are ethics and values that you cannot cover over by saying, well, they are authoritarian. I think that's exactly as you rightly said, it is a disservice to public action in these countries. Right. And another key question which you sort of end the article with and which I wanted to probe a bit further was the issue that why China has been very successful in containing the spread. Most of the cases now are imported cases. But nonetheless, there is a concern that there could be a second wave of infection. It's a concern that's there across the world. So what kind of steps slash vigilance are the medical professionals you talk to, the people you talk to basically thinking of considering that this might happen? Well, the first thing is that most avian flus demonstrate that they get a second wave. There is actually a great deal of evidence of secondary waves of infection and so on. Vaccines take a long time to be produced. They have to be tested. There has to be human trials. What they're doing in China is they're trying their best to just hold it down. I mean, if you come from abroad, it's two weeks in quarantine before you can go out. You're in a special quarantine hotel and so on. They're being very vigorous. A lot of the new cases have come from the Russia-China border and this is a concern because that's a very large border. There are lots of families that straddle both sides of the border. It's going to be hard to control and close it. But they're doing temperature checks at the border. They're very concerned about people coming in and bringing a second wave of infection. So, you know, let's not lie to people as the media sometimes does and say, well, the panacea is a vaccine. It's not so simple. These are very complicated things and it's going to take a lot of time, which is why vigilance is the order of the day and which is why the world economy is going to have a hard time as global trade contracts, as a consequence of this sort of closed-in move that we're in the middle of. And finally, China does have a challenge right now in addition to, of course, the economic impact in addition to the health aspects, as you mentioned. There is now definitely the challenge of, say, countering this narrative that is widespread. So, how do you think the Chinese are probably looking at countering this? There have been, of course, gestures of solidarity of concrete aid. But what about this narrative itself? I mean, I don't know if it's going to be easy. There's a residual anti-Chinese sentiment which has been there for a long time, sort of anti-synophobic racism, has been there for a long time. I think this plays right into it. The very first article I ever published was about the cholera that left India in 1817 and struck Europe in 1832. That was known as the Asiatic cholera. It was compared in Europe to the Mongols invading Europe. I mean, there's a very old tradition of trying to say that people in Asia produce disease and people in Europe, you know, have to confront or deal with these Asiatic diseases. I think this is a very old problem and we should face up to that. I don't think it's going to be easy for the Chinese government. I mean, we've produced a three-part factual assessment. I hope people read it. But, you know, I know I'm cognizant of the fact that people will say, well, your stooge is for this or stooge is for that. They just won't want to deal with the facts.  Right. Thank you so much, Yuzia, for talking to us. Thanks a lot. That's all we have time for today. Keep watching People's Dispatch.


I love virtual consults. Hi, I'm Dr. Jared Johnson. I just had three virtual consults in the last hour. Crazy, I know, but think of having three emergency calls on your cell phone answering those. I took care of those patients better than I would have if I would have gotten a call. I got a photo, I got information of the problem, and I was able to answer all three without having an in-person interaction and also address the problem and probably save myself some chair time and also increase my production. I love virtual consults. They're great for when you're at home and want to spend time with your family and be available for your patients. I also love them because when I'm on vacation, I don't have to worry about being available. I'm available most of the time and it only takes me a minute to respond. So what do you think?


Hello and welcome back to The Craft Box. My name is Brennan. Today we're on episode 26 of the Pirate 101, Musketeer Walkthrough. We are in Santa Polio Skyway today for the start of the episode. It's quite small, very unused. We don't come here for much, but yeah, so we're just heading off to the town hall of Santa Polio, which is just here at last, trying to skip these battles. Should really turn off clouds and make navigating this area so much easier. Hello, where's House Go? So we're going to be speaking to Professor Diaz to start with... There we go, sweet. So last episode, we tried to look for the map. We saved Mary with a clock and tried to look for the map except it was gone and there were just scorpions there. But yeah, and then we were told to come here. El Toro? Enemy of all oppressors? Defender of the innocent? El Toro is as mysterious as he is cunning. Whose face is behind the mask? It could be you, it could be me, no one can say. So I cannot tell you where or how to find El Toro, but there is one who might help. Talk to Freyja Kluk at the church. No, we do not want no sadquist. OK, let's go talk to Freyja Kluk. Greetings, my child, and peace be with you. You seek El Toro? Oh, if only you'd been here yesterday.  El Toro is more than a man, more than a mask. He is a legend. From the time of my grandfather, the humble village of Santa Pollo has had a protector. Banditos and corrupt governors, thieves and brigands, even the dreadpiled Captain Blood, all have learned to fear the sword of El Toro. Cunning as a fox, silent as this snake, strong as the bull whose name his bears, El Toro has never been beaten and never wavered in his mission. He moves like a shadow at midnight, strikes without warning, fights with the strength of ten men and then vanishes like the wind. El Toro's greatest weapon is mystery. He could be anyone, he could be anywhere. No one knows what lies beneath El Toro's mask. How can you fight what you cannot see? Sadly, Santa Pollo still needs El Toro. Santa Rana's endless taxes sap the strength of our people. The Banditos run riots in our streets, or the Frogger rallies do nothing. I fear a storm is coming and even El Toro will be hard pressed to endure it. And so you see, Traveller, it is no ordinary man you seek. I do not know how to find El Toro, but there is one man who can help you. Talk to Don Rodrigo, whose via overlooks Santa Pollo. He has helped El Toro many times and knows him better than anyone. Oh, Kiroki, Don Rodrigo. Yes, I am, in fact. He may not reply, El Toro, as many enemies would lure him to his doom with false cries for help. If you want to win El Toro's trust, help the people of Santa Pollo as he does. Go speak to Estella Castillo, she is a pillar of the village. I wish you luck, Traveller. I will say this, times are so troubled, I think El Toro cannot be far away. Okie dokie, let us go down to the Santa Bird because I feel it's a bit quiet. That's a bigger iPhone, I don't know. Who knows? Ok, let's go talk to this lady here. I can begin peeking up the pieces, the banditodes. They're struck in the night without warning. All night they're rampage smashing things and beating any who dare to fight back. El Toro! Prove most of them away, but I fear some of the villains may still be hiding in Santa Pollo. We're even afraid to set foot inside the church. Can you go in and make sure it's safe? This is 10 Friar Club. Okie dokie, let's go into the church then. Look at this place. The banditodes are gone, but the chapel looks like a typhoon in it. And there, cut into that flag, the huge letter T. It must be the mark of El Toro. Well, that's the end of the church that we see. No more church ever. A great letter T. That is the mark of El Toro. He must have dealt with those vile banditodes. We will start cleaning up the church at once, but there is so much more to put right. Could you talk to my good friend Hector? His need is dire. Okie dokie, let's go talk to Hector. Hector. My sugar, my precious sugar! The monsters have taken it all! What am I to do? Don Gutierrez's lovely daughters to be married tomorrow, but the banditodes have destroyed my bakery and stolen all my sugar. How can I bake the cake? How will I endure the shame of it? You. You can get my sugar back. Hunt down banditode ships. Bring me back my sugar and strike a blow for the people of Santa Pollo. Okie dokie, I will be back after I have defeated and collected them. Okie dokie, last battle. Let's see how this goes. We're going to do exactly the same line up. I'm trying to say where she can put you there and I'm looking down the front. I'm going to, well, not quite exactly the same because there's spikes in the way, but that's cool. And boomer comes up there. Yes. Ok. Nice. Dangerous trees. Ok. Nice. Get a hit. And we are going to do you on those ones. He's like, dead. Sweet. It's always good to get a squash buck first because he does a lot of damage. No. Don't block. That's cheeky. Blocking is bad, yes. Ok. He's nearly dead. Ok. I'm going to hit him. We can hit him. You can go for him. You can go for him as well. Done. Nice. Boop. Boop. Boop. Nice. Let me get her. That's always good. Boom. 105. Nice. We're just going to hurt with two of our guys. You can do it as well, Rumba. Sweet. Didn't need Rumba. Ok. Good. Easy peesies. Hopefully we have it all now. Please? Yes? Yes? Yes. Yes, we do. Ok. Let's go back. Why is... Ok, there we go. Let's go back. Hit door is up here. There's my sugar. You have... But I fear you must save the wedding too. Don Gutierrez needs you. Can you help him as you helped me? Ok. Let's talk to him. You know what to do. The Banditos ruined my daughter's wedding. Yay, level 20. Youngster, I reckon there's a thing or two you're ready to learn. Stop by if you're not too busy. Our troubles have no end. Ruring my daughter's wedding was not enough. The Banditos took her captive. Will you help? The last of the Banditos are hiding in the Cantina. Deal with them and take back Serena, my daughter. Okie dokie. Let's quickly go and see what our trainer's going to give us. And then I think we will end our episode. Exactly in the same place as we ended last episode. Hashtag no variation. That's fine though. So yeah, that was good. That was kind of a short episode, but I just need to get a few of these recorded because I'm going away soon. And I need to get something recorded before I go away otherwise you're going to have no videos for like another two months. And that's not good. By the time you've got some more training, youngster, we'll make a musketeer review yet. Ok, Acura is always nice. That one's cool. Sweet. So that is all we have time for today. Thank you for watching. In between episodes I will be getting new gear to look new to her. So yeah, thank you for watching. And remember, craft outside the box. Goodbye.


Hi, everyone. Happy Thursday, my Friday, and introducing our Wax Party promo day. We got a huge promo going on here, giving away a lot of Wax. Check out the big list of boxes. Check out how you can win basically anything with that in the title Wax Party and the party face in the title. That's a break that's eligible for you to win some Wax, some boxes. So check out the details. There are some great party favors here at this party. One box break of Immaculate Basketball. That's a pretty popular one.  Congrats again to the winners of spots right here. All teams are in. Let's roll it and randomize that list for both lists four and one five times. Giveaway part will be a second dice roll at the end of the break. One, two, three, four, and a one. Final time. After five, we got Ryan down to Joseph. Four and a one five times for the teams. One, two, three, four, and a fifth and final time. We got the clip show down to the Pels.  It's sort by team. And you can trade if you want to while you're considering trade. We're going to pop open this fresh case of Immaculate Hoops. And let's see which box we're going to do. So there's five boxes here. I'm going to number those boxes. One, two, three, four, and five. You can see right up there. One, two, three, four, and five. We're going to select a guy. Select the Flamingo logo right there. And we'll go one, two, three, four, five. If I roll a six, we'll roll again. Three. So middle box. Another one box break is in the store. And we'll work through this case right here. All right. I'm going to pause the video. When we come back, we're going to see if there's any trades. Then we will have the break stick around. We will be right back. All right. Welcome back, everybody. There was tons of trade chatter. I've never seen so much trade chatter in my entire life. But ultimately no deals were done here on Thursday the 13th. Random team break number one. Big thanks everybody for getting in once again. Congrats again to the winners of spots. Let's see what we got. Relax, guys. You didn't have to wait that long. All right. We got Gordon Hayward. 67 out of 99 for Charlotte. That's going to be for Brandon Hall. The lights are great, right? That cabinet needed lights. We got Bojan Bogdanovich, 34 out of 99 for the jazz. That'll be for Stephen Kendrick. We've got, oh, a randomizer. Wow. Triple relic, Lamello Ball, Anthony Edwards, James Wiseman, 47 out of 49. So one happy person, two sad people. Charlotte, Brandon Hall. Eric Timberwolves and John Golden State Warriors. For the Atlanta Hawks, Cam Reddish, one out of 25. I think he just got traded today, didn't he? To the Knicks maybe? It's an interesting deal. That'll go to Jose and Atlanta. 31 out of 49 for Kundo Campazo for Denver. That'll be for Brian Frank and the Nuggets. And the last hit here is Isaiah Thomas, 13 out of 15. Three-color relic, on-card autograph for the Pistons. Detroit, Eric Hay with the Pistons. Classic. There you go. Quick one-box break. Now a randomizer to make one person happy and another person sad, and we'll use the same dice roll for the giveaway as well. So first, let's go back to random.org. There's a new list. We've got Charlotte, Charlotte, Minnesota, and Golden State Warriors. And then everyone has a shot at the Wax Party spots. Let's grab everybody's names and get them in here. Let's roll it and randomize names and teams two out of four, six times. So team on top after six will get that triple relic. Two, three, four, five, and sixth and final time. After six, Minnesota is the happy person. That's Eric with the Timberwolves. 47 out of 49. All right. Now who's going to win those big promo spots right here? It's top two after six. Good luck. One, two, three, four, five, and sixth and final time. After six, so from three on down, it's sad times. But thanks everyone for giving it a shot. We'll get them next time. Top two, happy times. Four, Dustin and Samuel. Congrats to the both of you.  I don't know if I called your number in this break, but you are part of the promo and you're going to be randomized some acts. So check out the details on jaspeaskasebrakes.com. I'll see you next time for the next break. Bye-bye.