Studies like these showing that fruits can suppress the growth of cancer in a petri dish are all well and good, but we need to know if they can do the same thing within the human body. But it's considered unethical to withhold conventional cancer therapies, like surgery, chemo, radiation, to test out some fruit or vegetable. So what do you do? Well, one direction researchers have taken is to use combinatorial strategies. For example, adding phytonutrients from the spiced turmeric or green tea along with chemo therapy to see if that works better than chemo alone. Well, this gets complicated because chemo and radiation often work by killing cancer cells with free radicals, and so antioxidants, so though they may certainly reduce the toxicity of the treatment, there's a theoretical concern at least that it could reduce the efficacy of the treatment as well. Another way you can study the effects of plants on cancer is by testing dietary interventions on slow growing cancers like prostate cancer, which is how Orinish and colleagues were able to show their apparent reversal in cancer growth with a plant-based diet. He could only get away with that because these patients were in an early watch and wait stage of cancer. Or are there any other cancers like that? Asophageal cancer is not the cancer to get. Five-year survival is only about 13%, with most people dying within the first year of diagnosis. But the development of esophageal cancer is a multi-stage process, though.  But because of this well-defined stepwise progression of esophageal cancer, researchers jumped on it as a way to test the ability of berries, the healthiest fruits, to reverse the progression of cancer. A randomized phase two clinical trial of powdered strawberries in patients with precancerous lesions of the esophagus. Six months of eating one or two ounces of freeze-dried strawberries. That's like a pound of fresh strawberries a day, and the progression of disease was reversed in 80% of those in the high-dose strawberry treatment. At the beginning of the study, none had a normal esophagus. They either had mild or moderate precancerous disease, but by the end of the study, after all those strawberries, most lesions either regressed from moderate to mild or disappeared completely. Here's some representative before and after pictures. Give some strawberries, and many went from moderate disease to mild, or from mild to gone. By the end of the study, half of those in the high-dose of strawberries walked away disease-free. A drop of tumor markers before and after. Some new chemo drug? No, all because of just strawberries. Showing for the first time that dietary strawberries could significantly decrease the grade of patients precancerous esophageal lesions. Cellular proliferation before and after treatment with strawberries. Look at that, right? And what's the side effect?  Recent population studies also suggest that plant foods are protective against esophageal cancer, whereas diets with lots of meat and fat appear to double the odds of cancer. Lots of fruits and vegetables may cut one's odds of esophageal cancer in half. A diet rich in foods of animal origin, poor in foods containing vitamins and fiber, in other words, plant foods, may increase esophageal cancer risk. And now we know at least one plant that may even reverse the course of disease if caught early enough. The findings were heralded as groundbreaking and an editorial in the Journal of the American Association for Cancer Research. Given that the editorial was written by a pair of pharmacy professors, though, they of course concluded that the active components and molecular targets responsible for the efficacy of strawberries must be identified. Posing the question, is the best approach to just eat strawberries or can they make a strawberry-derived drug that works even better?


The missiles fired last night at us and our allies were paid for with the funds made available by the last administration. He blamed that behavior on the unfounded claim that the Obama-era nuclear agreement enabled Iran to build up its military arsenal. And in fact we should expect that some portion of that money would go to the Iranian military and could potentially be used for the kinds of bad behavior that we have seen in the region. Yesterday I did a video about the Democrat Party's Chuck Todd hyperventilating over Trump's accurate statement that Obama's Iran deal actually funded Iran's military. Part of the video was a clip of an interview with Susan Rice in 2016 where she admits that the money that was given to Iran would be used to fund their military. Was really elected on the hope that he would bring economic relief to the Iranian people. But yes it is real, it is possible and in fact we should expect that some portion of that money would go to the Iranian military and could potentially be used for the kinds of bad behavior that we have seen in the region.  CBS News is out there calling the claim unfounded and Susan Rice, Susan Rice actually called it a despicable lie. He blamed that behavior on the unfounded claim that the Obama-era nuclear agreement enabled Iran to build up its military arsenal. And there is backlash to this comment about his predecessor, former President Barack Obama. That's a reference to Iran's money that was unfrozen as a part of the Iran nuclear deal, a deal negotiated by former President Obama and ripped up by President Trump. Today a former top Obama official firing back. This is another series of despicable lies. Unbelievable, just more solid evidence that our press is untrustworthy. They'll blatantly lie and bury inconvenient history all in service of attaining power for Democrats. Unfounded claim that the Obama-era nuclear agreement enabled Iran to build up its military arsenal. We should expect that some portion of that money would go to the Iranian military. Unfounded claim. This is another series of despicable lies. In fact, we should expect that some portion of that money would go to the Iranian military and could potentially be used for the kinds of bad behavior that we have seen in the region. Unfounded claim. Just to let you all know, I have this clip of Susan Rice on my Twitter page. If you don't follow me, go over there and follow me and share this video clip. This is one of those times when they've really stepped in it and they've told a lie that's easily refutable. It's a great opportunity to show people who might not know any better that the media should not be trusted. How is it that some random dude on the internet is better at journalism than Wisha Zhang here? Oh, but she's not a journalist as we all know at this point. She's a DNC operative who's saying what she's told to say. She clearly did no actual research of her own because if she did, she would have easily have found this clip. She might also have found this clip of John Kerry admitting that the money would be used for military purposes. I think that some of it will end up in the hands of the IRGC or of other entities, some of which are labeled terrorists. To some degree, I'm not going to sit here and tell you that every component of that can be prevented. This is another series of despicable lies. Don't you just love how they're always guilty of what they're accusing others of?  Joe Biden was of course out there as well claiming that Trump lied. Instead of using his statement today to lay out a coherent strategy on Iran, Donald Trump used it to mislead the country on the Obama-Biden record. He's been president for three years, it's time he stops blaming President Obama for his failures. Are you f**king kidding me? That's Rich coming from the Obama administration who spent the entire eight years blaming Bush for their problems. As I pointed out yesterday, it was so prevalent in the Obama administration that he actually joked about it himself. We'll actually begin by building another edifice right next to the Bush Library. Can we show that please? CNN also did a fact check on Trump's statement but did not refute his claim that the money funded Iran's military. Instead, they claimed the dollar amount was incorrect. But also having to admit that it was originally Obama who put this number out there in the first place. Just another good reason to turn off your TV. The links they'll go to defend and protect Democrats is mind blowing, including rewriting history that's easily found through an internet search. It just shows what a low opinion they have of this country assuming that nobody's going to go and look this up. Or maybe they just figure they're going to convince half the country no matter what. They aren't called the drive-by media for nothing. Hey thanks for watching, please hit that like button, share and subscribe, head on over to my Twitter and follow me if you haven't and make sure to share that video of Susan Rice. We gotta get the word out on that. If you want to further support this channel, you can do so on Subscribestar, Patreon or just sending a donation on Paypal. As always, I appreciate it no matter how you decide to support this channel. Thanks for coming, keep coming back.


Alright, I think this is going to be a short video, thank God. There are many different ways of describing a protein molecule, and I don't know why this is taught to students, at least students at the beginning, but I'm only going to teach you one of the ways, because even that, I think, is a little bit of a waste, but I have to test you on a little bit of this. Usually the ways of describing a protein molecule are referred to as describing the primary structure of a protein molecule, and that is abbreviated with a number one and a little degree symbol that means primary, or describing the secondary structure of a protein molecule that's written with the number two and a degree symbol, tertiary structure and quaternary structure. Each of those phrases has a specific meaning. I am not going to expect you to know secondary, tertiary, or quaternary structure of protein molecules and what they mean. The only one that I want you to know is primary structure, and believe it or not, we have already talked about primary structure, we just haven't called it that. Primary structure is just a fancy way of saying the order that the amino acids are connected in in your protein molecule.  It's this one, and let me tell you the amino acid sequence. It's alanine connected to alanine connected to leucine, to isoleucine, to proline, to methionine, and I went on like that for about three hours and I described the entire molecule to you. What I am describing to you is the order that the amino acids are connected in. What I am describing to you is the primary structure of my protein molecule. That's all primary structure means. The question is why would you ever want to do this? Why would you ever want to describe the primary structure of a protein molecule? If I just talk about the order that the amino acids are connected in, it does not tell you the 3D shape of the protein. It just says this one comes first, that one comes second, and you know, you talk for a while and you reach the end. It doesn't tell you anything about the 3D shape of the protein. That sounds like it's a bad thing, but sometimes it's a good thing to not do that. Where it's useful is it's useful to describe where mutations take place or where changes in the sequence takes place. Let's say when you have a disease. So for example, this here is the primary structure of the protein molecule called hemoglobin beta. This is the protein molecule that's involved in sickle cell disease. And this is the primary structure. Every letter here is the one letter abbreviation for one of the amino acids. This is the end terminus. That's where the protein starts. This is the C terminus. That's where the protein ends. This does not tell you anything about the 3D shape, but that's actually an advantage here because it doesn't... There's nothing really complicated.   This is the amino acid that gets changed to a valine when people have sickle cell disease. So it's very clear to people when you show them the primary structure where certain changes take place. Oh, this takes place near the beginning, or I have a change that takes place over here. That's the whole purpose of primary structure is just to make it clear to people where the amino acids are from the front to the end, and maybe where certain changes take place. So I want you to know what primary structure means. So I want you to know what primary structure means. And that's the end of this video. Hopefully, show it.


Hey everybody, it's DJ V and welcome to my channel. It most obviously is another unboxing I'm here with a very special Package that has arrived from my bryo fest sale. This is something that I purchased for myself Oh my gosh, this is probably a dead giveaway. Yes, this package came from Kylie Parks This is the Jolie print. I followed this artist Victoria Scotty for a very long time on Instagram actually and it's funny that Kylie kind of latched on to her She does really cool art. So then we have a business car Kylie Park and this is for truly which it says in the corner Whoa you get a Holographic Jolie stickers a thank-you card sculpting artist Kylie and then you're supposed to assign it as the finished work artist What color you painted the horse and this is for truly Covered in packing pinnets She's huge True Clyde stale through and through shire not Clyde stale shire So a good example of this would be to storm watch is really truly a traditional But she's quite a bit bigger than him if we compare her to this guy She's quite a bit bigger like in her face and everything. She's huge She's hollow cast so she's not very heavy at all, which is nice.  It makes me want to sculpt and figure out how to sculpt her stuff is just so nice I don't I don't understand it. I don't get it so I need to study it and make my own but she's even got like all the hoof detailing here and she's got the utter detailing and The body isn't particularly smooth. It has quite a bit of lump Lump and bump through it, but that's kind of a style choice and there's a lot of texture happening It's very fleshy. She's so perfect. She is large and in charge. I'm going to name her Marge Thank you so much for watching. This is so exciting


So in Vermont, we have just been given the news that we can if we're vaccinated the inside and outside spaces without masks, which has been met with much jubilation and even though a large percentage of the people in the state have been vaccinated. There are still people that are afraid and concerned about getting the vaccination and I wonder what you would say to encourage them to go ahead and get the vaccination. Right, you know, one of the things I know is that fear that the antidote to fear is information. So I would encourage them to seek out sources that can give them the best information possible. So if they go to fight infectious disease.org can find a plethora of information because what we know is that this pandemic is not over. Now Vermont, you guys have done a fantastic job. I mean your case counselor low your your positivity rate I think it's like 1% the best in the entire nation which is fantastic. But what we do know is that this pandemic is not over. And one thing COVID-19 has shown us is that we have to be concerned about what happens globally because what happens globally can literally impact what happens on our street level. And at this stage we're still having the United States 30,000 cases of COVID-19 being diagnosed today. We're still unfortunately still bearing about 500 people a day. And the longer this virus is allowed to pass from person to person. We know that the chances of having mutant strains develop is there, which can weaken our overall ability to fight this thing off even with our vaccines. Now currently our vaccines are holding up. They're doing a great job against the Indian variant, South African variant, the Brazilian variant, UK variant. But we know that if we allow this to continue that might be tested. And so the way that we get back to normalcy that we really can't open up our nation or schools getting back to seeing family and friends is reaching that level of her immunity. And yeah, and outsmarting and outpacing the virus. Well, what about the people that are worried about the side effects of the vaccine? Right. What we know at this point is literally 40% of the United States has been fully vaccinated, which means that's literally 130 million Americans. And then you take that and you multiply by factors when we think about the global population of persons. The safety profile of this vaccine has been tremendous. But when you think about comparing again risk benefit of do I get vaccinated or do I risk getting COVID-19 infection? What we know is that COVID-19 infections on all fronts are more dangerous for your body. It's not only in terms of death. And I think we need to really highlight the fact that people get kind of obsessed with the death count and say, oh, less people are dying. But what we know is that people who survived COVID-19, the people in my ICU who we now given long transplants, they aren't included in that number of people who died, right? They are included in the number of people who survived, but their lives are forever changed for those young people that are now suffering strokes because of COVID-19 infections. They've lived, but their life is forever changed. We see that even children as young as elementary school age, their studies that are showing that 30% of them who've had COVID-19 are having long, holler symptoms of where they're having difficulty breathing down. They have been learning disabilities because they have difficulty concentrating.  Those people who've lost their taste and smell, that means the virus literally impacted their brain cells. And what does that do to the longevity of life? So it's not only the consequence of dying we have to consider. It's the collateral damage that's left in the wake of COVID-19 infection. Do you see that young children are going to be vaccinated? I know that we're starting now with the 12-year-olds, but are we going to be going younger and younger to get the whole population covered? Yes, we're starting to literally consider with these vaccination trials. By September, we're hoping to have some results that we can go down as young as two years old and up to really protect our kids. And again, it's because of this notion that we know that death is not the only consequence. Yes, fortunately, most of our children have made it through this pandemic and not lost their lives. Although we do know that we bury weak old babies related to COVID-19, which is completely unfortunate. But we know that our children, they still get infected, right? And again, what does that inflammatory process do when we have this inflamed heart or these inflamed lungs? What does that do to the longevity of their lives? When we're seeing these signs and symptoms of an elementary school aged kid, will their bodies perform on the level of when they're 30 years old, will their bodies resemble that of a 60 or 70 year old person? We don't know. And to put them at risk of having that scarring of their brains because they lost taste and smell, will that make them be more prone to Alzheimer's or Parkinson's disease when they're 40 years old instead of 60 or 70 years old? It's not worth the risk, especially when we can just vaccinate them. Yeah, it seems like there will be a very long tail on this pandemic, even though, you know, many people are happy and relieved that they're vaccinated and it's over, but clearly it's not. Right. I mean, and the tail is not only in terms of health crisis. We know it's also cause of financial devastation, right? And when we're looking at the population of persons that are currently hospitalized, for instance, currently nationwide, 36% of all hospital admissions, whether that's heart attack strokes or COVID or pregnancy, right? 36% are COVID patients less than 50 years old. And think about that demographic of persons. Those are parents with young kids still at home, depending on them to go to work to provide a house for them to live in. And I say to that demographic of persons, you don't have to get sick to the point of hospitalization or needing a ventilator or being in my ICU or dying from COVID-19 because we have a vaccine from you now that can literally prevent those severe forms of COVID-19 infection. So really consider it. If you're weighing your risk-benefit ratio, go to fightinfectionsdisease.org. There's a wealth of information there for you to truly go through the data and see what's the best options for not only me, but my entire family. And Dr. Hilton, what do you see as the implications of places like India or other parts of the world where the pandemic is clearly raging? What are the implications in the United States? Oh, it's huge. What we know, I think this pandemic has shown us just how tightly knit we are as a global community. What happens in India has now found its way onto our shores. And that's not only again in terms of health, but also economic stability. We can look back in history and go back to 1918 and how the 1918 pandemic, which ended in 1920, how did that influence the Great Depression that started in 1929? The time spacing of that is important to recognize. And the same thing has to potentially happen with COVID-19. And that's why we have to think outside of just what happens within our community block, but also globally in terms of economic stability. We have to say, if we are not sharing the wealth of these vaccines, how does what happened in India or China are the fact that only one or two percent of Japan is vaccinated at this point? The impact of what's happening in Brazil where we have a massive death occurring today related to COVID-19 infections. How does that keep us, right? How do we lean on each other in that regard? So, vaccinating as many of us as possible, sharing that wealth across this globe, that's the way we actually move forward for not only our generation, but generations to come.  For sure. You know, there's a difference between vaccine hesitant and vaccine curious. And there are many of us who haven't been vaccinated yet that just truly want more information they can trust. So if you go to fightinfectiousdisease.org, there's a plethora of information that explains exactly what is COVID-19, what new things have we learned about it? What are the vaccine options that there can be afforded to you that you can ask those questions for your primary care physician to make that best decision? So again, go to fightinfectiousdisease.org, find all your information there. That sounds good. And then just a last question. For those of us who have been vaccinated, for example, I've got the J&J. There's a sort of percentage, like 65% effective. I don't think that that's actually the word. Do I have to worry about catching COVID? I mean, I understand I won't get as sick, but are my chances of getting the virus greater than someone who got Pfizer, for example? Right. And at this point, you know, especially with the Johnson & Johnson, when they were going through their clinical trial, you have to remember it was spatially, time-wise, different than when Pfizer and Moderna were going through their trials, right? Because I got my Pfizer vaccine December the 15th. I was the first person at the University of Virginia to be vaccinated. Those clinical trials were underway before we had the South African variant, before we had the Brazilian variant. And Johnson & Johnson literally went to those areas to say, let me conduct my clinical trial right where these mutants are actually happening. And so I hope you do trust that the Johnson & Johnson is going to serve you well. But regardless of which vaccine we have, what we know is that does it prevent, if I've been vaccinated since December, I can still go to work. And one of my patients who has COVID-19 can cough in my face. It allows this virus to get inside of my body. Now the difference though, is that because my body has these antibodies circulating because I've been vaccinated, then immediately when it recognizes this virus has entered within my cells, it can begin to attack that virus to rid my body. So instead of the virus being able to replicate and overwhelm my body system, it's quenched, right? And so when I go home even, now I'm home and I'm talking to my family members. Because my immune system is keeping that viral load really low, the likelihood of me infecting my family members is also reduced, right? So that's the beauty about vaccinations. It not only protects me, but it protects everyone I love and I'm around. And do you see that we're going to need to have boosters for these, or is that really yet to be determined? It's yet to be determined. I mean, the promising thing is that Pfizer-Francis really says six months data that showed it was still 91% effective, right? As far as preventing the severe signs and symptoms of COVID-19. So the hope is that it will be for a long-lasting vaccination, but we have booster shots for other vaccines that we have to take. Technus is being a great example where you have to get a booster shot. And it's okay. We will meet it where we have to. But the biggest point is that the less people that get the uptake of the vaccine, the more likely the more people will be infected with COVID-19 to develop these mutant viruses that will make me push us to happen to have a booster shot or changing our vaccine in some kind of way. So the best way that we can actually reduce the likelihood that our vaccines don't work is by actually getting vaccinated and preventing these mutants from being able to develop in the first place. Well, Dr. Ebony Hilton, I want to thank you so much for joining us today and also your leadership in helping the community understand what's going on and being a leader in your own organization at the University of Virginia. Thank you so much. Thank you. Have a great one. Great to see you. Bye-bye.


If you don't ask, you won't receive. You say, well, Cody, dude, that's super broad and it is very broad because it's true in a lot of different aspects of life. If you don't ask for the sale, then what? You will not receive it. If you don't ask when they're giving you a rebuttal, when you don't, if you don't ask to over, if you don't have a rebuttal, when they're giving you an objection, if you don't ask to overcome it, you will not receive it. If you don't ask for referral at the end of the sale, you will not receive it. If you're saying an appointment, trying to set an appointment and you pause and guess what? You don't ask for the time. You will not receive it, okay? Also, if you're in the middle of a tele-sale and you don't ask what they currently have, who their beneficiary is gonna be, if they solve value in this, what they would like to cover and if they would like to see if they can get qualified and what their first name, their middle name is, their full legal name is, guess what? You will not receive it, all aspects of life. Your agency, you have a manager, an upline. When you don't ask for help, guess what? You will not receive it. If and when you're struggling and you don't learn and seek out opportunities and want to get better, guess what? You will not receive it. If you're really struggling and you don't have a coach or a mentor in your life, you won't receive it. And what I mean by receive it is freaking success. That's why I've created success society so that we can sprint to success together. I want to be your coach. I want to be your mentor. Without recruiting you, I do not recruit. Guess what I do? I help insurance agents, whether it be through training or marketing. That's what we do here. Whether it's through 8% Nation, putting on a grand conference with 2000 agents in Vegas or whatever the freak it is, right? It doesn't matter. But if you do not seek help in any way from a prospect, from a mentor, from a coach, from an upline, from a sale, from a tele-sale, I don't care what it is, you will not receive it. Most people fail because the people that succeed, we'll say this way, the people that succeed, they do things that unsuccessful people are unwilling to do, which means they ask for sales. They ask for stuff when they want it. They ask for help. They're not ashamed and afraid to have a coach or a mentor that takes them to the next level. I have a way of challenging people, getting you to another level, keeping you from thinking so small and giving you ideas that you have never heard of before. That's why the agents that are in my success society absolutely love it. If you wanna be a part of my success society or you at least have a question about it or you're curious about it, email me personally. Cody at CodyAskins.com because if you don't ask for help, if you don't try to get to another level, guess what, you will not receive it.  You don't ask for somebody's hand in marriage, guess what, you will not receive it. I don't care, I mean, most people forget to ask. People that are in control, they ask questions. They ask, they stay in control. They wanna get it done. They're focused, they're determined, they're consistent, they're reliable because they wanna sprint to success. They don't wanna take 30 years to drag it out and hope they become successful because they weren't any good, they just didn't quit. Instead, I want to sprint to success together. Again, we created success society to help you succeed. And if you're not gonna help you need, we can do it without recruiting you. So email me, Cody at CodyAskins.com, I'd love to be the help. Think about the things in your life, referrals, cells, appointment setting, objections, closing, building value, fact-finding, relationships, warming up, cooling down, presenting, all these other things. If you're not getting what you need out of those, it's probably because you're not asking. You're not taking control. You're not assuming. You're not agreeing. You're not doing everything you can to get the answers that you deserve. You deserve answers. You deserve to make a sale every time you talk to somebody. You deserve to get referrals. But if you don't ask, guess what? You don't deserve it. And you will now receive it.  And they're wanting to think about it, use the no-call-back-close and ask and get aggressive and put pressure on them. And guess what? If you do, you will receive it.  The bigger the sale, the more you back off. The bigger the sale, instead, the bigger the sale, the more aggressive I get. The bigger the sale, the more pressure I put on. The bigger the sale, the more I freaking want it. Because what happened is, when I was a new agent and I had a chance to grab $1,000 a month's sale, $100,000 single premium sale, all these other sales in my first few years, I thought it's a big sale, so it's a big decision. It may not be big to them. Just because it's like, don't sell with your own wallet. Just because it's big to me, doesn't mean it's big to them. $42 could be big to someone that has no money. 1,200 a month could be small to someone that has a lot of money. So instead, I started thinking about, I need to like, chill out. The bigger it is, the more I need to think about it. The bigger it is, the more I need to think about it. The bigger it is, the less likely they want to do it right now. The bigger it is, the more time they need. The bigger it is, the more information they need. The bigger it is, the more you should get it right freaking now. Because what I've learned is, it doesn't matter. They don't need to think about it. They're talking to you because they need it, want it and can afford it. And so the bigger it is, the more I should ask. Because the bigger it is, the more I should receive it immediately. So think about it, in all aspects of your business, what are things that you're doing or not doing that you should be doing? Because if you start to ask and you start to think about that, the more likely you are to actually receive it. If you don't ask, you won't receive it. And that is in all aspects of life, especially the insurance industry.


Hi, I'm Zor. Welcome to a new Zor education. We are continuing talking about statistical regression, about linear statistical regression, and I would like to consider one very practical problem. It just came to my mind. It doesn't mean that this is like a real problem, which people are facing. But I needed some statistics, so I found some statistics and decided maybe there was some correlation which might lead actually to some linear regression. Well, let me just tell you in advance. It was an unsuccessful attempt, which means that my linear regression can actually be constructed, but the validity of this particular formula which can, which relates to variables which I was, which I have found, which I will be talking about. So validity is basically zero because the error is too big. However, I think it has some educational value in any case. So I'm going to present it right now to you. I would actually suggest you to go to Unisor.com to watch this particular lecture and also to read the notes for every lecture. Well, in this particular case, I have the problem explained in more detail. So that's probably very useful. In addition, Unisor.com allows you to basically establish the educational process with enrolling in certain classes, taking exams, etc. And it's free. So anyway, so let's go into this particular problem and let me explain what kind of statistics I have found and how I'm going to use these data. So what I have found was information about how many miles total were traveled in United States during a particular year, actually every year from something 1920s up until 2014. And how many accident fatalities have actually been happening during these times. Now, my initial thought was that, well, obviously the automobile industry was developing. In 1920s, it was really a very small number of cars and the mileage which they have covered during the year was very small. Well, this is actually for an entire decade. Now, as the industry developed, obviously, number of cars and number of miles traveled increased, which, in my view, was supposed to increase the number of fatalities on the roads. And as we see, these are increasing numbers. So first of all, I have combined every 10 years together and got the sum. So from 1925 to 34, actually the raw data and the reference to the raw data is in notes on the website to this lecture. So I have combined raw data into decades. So I have 10 years, number of miles traveled and number of fatalities, which is actually a lot. So as we see, it's increasing. And my thought was that there is some kind of linear regression, which might actually be observed here. So let me just tell you, again, in the beginning, that it's not really entirely true, because as we see, the miles are increasing. Now, fatalities are increasing up to this decade from 65 to 74. And starting from 75, it's decreasing. Now, obviously, it distorts the linear relationship between these two numbers. Now, why it's decreasing, while the number of miles increasing? Well, I think it's related to certain safety devices, which were probably started around 1975, like seatbelts and airbags. Obviously, this decrees the number of fatalities. And as the number of these devices filled up more and more, all the new cars, as you see, the number of fatalities going down. So that distorts my linear regression model from some kind of logical standpoint. However, being a stubborn person, I decided, okay, let's just investigate if there is any kind of linear dependency. And what's the error? If error is not really very big, then it still makes sense. Well, obviously, again, I felt that it doesn't really make much sense. So the error will be very large, primarily because of this, because it goes down. However, I might actually suggest you as an exercise to do this only on these data from 1925 to 74. And that's where you might actually observe a linear regression with a relatively small error. But I have decided to do it entirely, again, for educational purposes. And what I am trying to establish is some kind of a dependency, which looks like this. Where y is number, a random variable, which is number of fatalities, x is mileage covered, and epsilon is some kind of error, the deviation of this number from this. So my purpose is to establish a, to establish b based on whatever the data I have, and then using these, find out the error and analyze, statistically analyze this error. Now, I assumed when I was deriving all these formulas in the previous lectures that epsilon is a normally distributed random variable with, and that's very important, the mathematical expectation of zero. Well, that's why we have this b as a constant. And some standard deviation, which we have to establish after a and b are established, and since we know the real data, observed data for x and y, after we know b, a and b, we can establish the data for epsilon and find sample deviation. All right, so that's the plan. Now, I can refer you back to previous lectures where I have basically derived the formula. I'm going to use it right now that a is sigma xi, yi divided by sigma xi square, where i from 1 to n, i from 1 to n. Now, what is xi and yi in this particular case? It's not these guys. x and y. It's these guys centered around their mathematical expectation. So, x, y, xi is equal to lowercase xi minus average of all x's, and yi is equal to yi minus average, observed average of all y's. So, x with the bar on the top is average of these. xi is each individual one, and the difference is just a new value which is a new random variable with mathematical expectation zero. And same thing with y. Now, these two numbers are actually averages. So, this is x and this is y with the bar. So, by subtracting, we have new variables, capital X, I, and capital Y, I. And obviously, the average of these minus this is equal to zero, and the average of these minus this is also equals to zero. That's why we have centralised the values. Now, with these centralised values, I can calculate A. And this is my result. Now, as long as I know A, I can calculate the B. Because if I will take average of these guys, now, we have agreed that this is zero. Epsilon is an arrow which has mathematical expectation of zero and some standard variation. So, that's exactly why we put this constant B. And now, we can find constant B, which is equal to average of these minus average of these, right? And I have calculated it. This is B. Okay. So, this minus three times this is equal to this. Now, I know A and B. And now, I can actually have the values for Epsilon I. It's equal to Y I minus A X I. Y I minus, and minus B, sorry. Minus A X Y, A times this. So, this minus three point whatever times this, and minus 343,000 whatever. Now, if my calculations are correct, then the sum of all Epsilon I should be approximately equal to zero, right? Because that's that's how we calculated from the very beginning. And it is. Actually, I have calculated this. I mean, if I will add all the Epsilon's calculated like this, I did it on a spreadsheet actually. The result is something like minus one or something like this. Very, very small number relative to these big numbers. But the problem is this. So, when I calculated based on these values, when I have calculated Sigma Epsilon, well, minus zero, so So, just this. This is variation. And took a square root of it. It was 68,508. Now, Is it good or bad? Well, it's terrible. Why? Because we are trying to evaluate the value of Y. The values of Y I as I have explained, it's these guys, right? Average is 3,389,000 something. Now, if my standard deviation is 68,000, if I would like to predict the value with a two Sigma interval to the left and to the right. So, this is my average, right? Now, two Sigma to the left, it's minus one hundred and like thirty-five thousand. So, it goes to, what, two fifty or something like this, thousand. And one thirty to the right. So, that would be like more than four hundred. So, I have a range like from two hundred and fifty thousand to four hundred thousand. This is too big a range, obviously. I mean, the whole range is, what, like half of this. Now, which means that my estimate is, well, at least, well, like fifty percent incorrect. That's definitely wrong. If this is something like a couple of percentage points relative to this, then it's okay. So, you have a certain average and then you have certain deviation from this average, which is no, no, no, no bigger than five percent, let's say. Then it makes some sense. But if deviation is like fifty percent, that's absolutely not good. In any case, but my point was that this is just an exercise in how to do the calculations. And let me just repeat again what I did. First, I centralized all my x values using their average. So, I subtracted from each value the average. Some of them will be negative, some of them will be positive. Then I did exactly the same with y, my dependent variable. So, this is independent variable, mileage. This is dependent variable. And again, I centralized it. And then I used the formula, which I have already wiped out from the board, the formula which gives me the coefficient A. Now, knowing coefficient A, I can actually calculate the B using these averages, obviously, right? Because if you average this, this, and this, epsilon will be averaged to zero. So, you'll have just an equation where you can resolve it for B, knowing A and x and y averages. So, knowing A and B, now you can calculate the real value of your arrow. So, your regression, which is A x plus B, per axis this value. And knowing A and B, like this and this, are approximating y. And by differencing between y and A x plus B, you have a sample data for epsilon for your arrow. And using these epsilon data for arrow, you can calculate its average and standard deviation. Average, because of our calculations, should be close to zero, and it was. But then you have to basically evaluate how big your deviation is. So, that's the short plan of how to attack this problem of linear regression between two different variables. Now, as you understand, we had a problem here. The problem is that I did not take into account the technological progress, the safety devices which have been introduced into the car. So, maybe, maybe, if I will use instead of one variable, independent variable, x. But three variables, like number of airbag-equipped cars and number of seatbelt-equipped cars. Well, maybe, I'm not sure about seatbelt-equipped, equipped, they were always equipped. But at some point, there was actually a legislation in the United States that you have to really wear the seatbelts if you are driving. A mandatory legislation was mandatory. So, maybe, at that time, again, somehow I should actually take into account. So, if I will take into account more independent variable, definitely the number of airbags installed, then my approximation, also linear, it would be, let's say, a1x1 plus a2x2 plus maybe a3x3, if it's seatbelts involved, plus some constant b. In this case, my approximation might be better and my arrow will be smaller. But this multibarriant analysis regression is much more complex and I really don't want to complicate your life even more than it is right now. So, this is basically something which people are studying whenever they're specializing in statistics. For you, again, my purpose was just to explain, in the simplest case, when one dependent and one independent variable are involved in this supposedly observed relationship and then how to calculate it through such a relationship. And, again, this is a hypothesis. There is a hypothesis and we checked it by basically analyzing the arrow. The hypothesis may be wrong in the very beginning, so maybe it's supposed to be somehow different equation. Maybe it's x square with and or some two in the power of x or something like this. Who knows what kind of real dependency is. Linear is just the easiest one and it makes sense to check if it makes sense, right? So, we check, we have the calculations and we check this standard deviation of my arrow. If it's reasonable, then you can use it. Now, how can you use it? Most likely it's used for the purpose of forecasting because you know that at a certain point you see how this mileage is increasing. It obviously depends on the number of cars which are manufactured and this is the planned number, planned in advance. So, basically you understand how many cars will be sold and that's how you can evaluate for the next year what will be the total mileage, again, approximately. And that would allow you to calculate in this particular case an unfortunate accidents with fatalities. Well, that's it. In many other cases it has much more practical usage, these type of calculations, but the procedure is exactly the same. Well, that's it for today. I might actually recommend you to go to the raw data for each year instead of summarizing by decade, but only for the period up to 1975. Then you might actually find a more precise linear regression between number of fatalities and number of miles traveled during the year, because at that point we did not have really so much safety equipment installed into the car, primarily airbags. Well, okay, that's it for today and if you will engage in this analysis of regression in the early days of the automobile industry up until 1975, let's say, I'll be more than happy if you send it to me. I will be more than happy to put it on the website with proper attribution. That's it. Thanks very much and good luck.


I'm Liza Mundy. I'm the head of New America's Bread-Winning and Caregiving Program, which is our fancy name for our work family program. We are very happy to have with us from Los Angeles, Salita Reynolds, who is the general manager of the Los Angeles Department of Transportation. We're going to talk about a topic that is very near and dear to the heart of every working parent, which is how you get from place A to place B to place C in the course of a single day, which is something that we all have to do. And in cities, there are particular challenges, but I think there are also really innovative and wonderful opportunities that are changing the lives of people and changing the face of cities. Salita is also on the advisory board of WTS International, which is an organization of female transportation planners that seeks to nurture women in leadership roles and drive more women into what is a very male-dominated field. And these women are producing a lot of the innovative solutions to work family and transportation challenges and literally changing the face of cities around the United States. Just to elaborate a little bit on your bio, Salita is, as head of the Department of Transportation, she's responsible for managing over 6,500 miles of streets, that's 6,500 miles of streets, 26 million trips on dash buses, 35,000 parking meters, and the most advanced traffic signal system in the country with 4,500 traffic lights. She's responsible for implementing Great Streets for Los Angeles, which is a plan to reduce traffic deaths, double the number of people riding bites, and expand access to transportation choices for Angelenos and the region. We're really glad that you're here. We hope that you left somebody in charge. I have a few people. OK, good. So LA is still moving today. Traffic signal's still on. OK, that's great. Traffic is still in Los Angeles. Everybody relax. Great. So as I said, as a working parent who lives in the suburbs and works in the city, just the daily logistics of getting around is a subject that is very near and dear to my heart, also now as the parent of teenagers who have been learning to drive. It's a subject near and dear to my heart. And whenever I think about sort of cities and work family logistics, my memory is drawn actually to the morning of September 11, 2001, I had two young children who were both in different schools, one in preschool, one in elementary school. My husband that morning had already left for his job in national security. He was already in a vault in DC. When I had dropped my son off at preschool and heard over the radio what was happening, and it was not clear really at that point what was happening, there was a lot of confusion and panic, obviously. And I didn't know whether to pick up my kids or whether they should shelter in place, whether I should go to work, I worked for a newspaper, this was news. But I knew that I didn't want to have a tunnel, a metro tunnel or a bridge in between myself and my children on a day like 9-11. So I made the choice to pick up my kids, to take them to my house, to let my boss know that I was going to try to work from home at a time when it wasn't that common to do so. I knew I wasn't going to see my spouse for a long time that day. I had friends who were already in DC, and I tried to reach them to say I could pick up their children from school. They were already walking across the Key Bridge to try to get back to Arlington to their kids. Meanwhile, our neighbors had very young children in daycare in the Pentagon. They were both employed by the Pentagon but did not work in the Pentagon. So they were also separated from their children.  But I think that day just sort of cast into relief the really fragile system that we all have, the sort of day-to-day challenges where you're going to be physically separated from your children, from your partner if you have one, and your children are also probably physically separated from each other if there's a couple years between them. And so it just cast into relief the challenges that we all face every day at the same time now as the parent of teenagers learning how to drive. I have seen a lot of changes in cities that we're going to talk about today. So it seems even a very different environment than it was 14 or 15 years ago. So I thought I would, the first question I would ask is that I'm not one of the people who believes that the world will automatically be better if women are running it, although it would be great to have more women running more parts of it. But as we get more women in charge of major transportation systems in cities, how do things change, if at all? And let's say you're a working parent and when you moved to Los Angeles you had to make a decision about where you were going to live and how your work day was going to unfold. Yeah, and before I get to that, just a word about disasters and what they teach us about transportation. A while ago, a few years ago, Washington, D.C. had an earthquake, and as somebody who's lived for the last 17 years on the West Coast in San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Seattle, we all felt for you, but also had a little chuckle at your expense, and that at the time. Okay, the bottles rattled on the shelves. Never forget, hashtag never forget. The thing that was fascinating to me is that Washington, D.C. had just launched capital bike share not long before that. And that was the day where there was a single biggest sort of spike in use for bike sharing. You could see bike share sort of struggling along and then on that day it just went to the heavens. So it told us a lot about what kind of safety nets exist when major disasters strike and they are not always the things that come front of mind. And when I tell my emergency preparedness guys that we got to get bike share because earthquake, they look at me kind of cross-eyed. But to answer your original question, Mayor Garcetti just released, Eric Garcetti in Los Angeles just released the first of three reports on the status of women and girls in Los Angeles. And one of the pieces of that was about women in leadership and government, in particular currently there is only one woman on the Los Angeles City Council. And the mayor has made it a point to try and rectify that in the leadership roles and particularly in non-traditional departments. So there's a woman who manages the Department of Water and Power, Department of Transportation. He has appointed about 50% of the general managers and commissioners, he's appointed have been women. So I think that we have yet to see what kind of results will come from that kind of intentional placement of women in leadership roles. But what I will say is that in the last five or 10 years there has been a complete sea change in transportation in particular, how we think about incorporating public health, injury prevention, the childhood obesity epidemic, economic development into transportation. Sort of most notably in New York, under the leadership of Jeanette Sadek Khan, who was a commissioner of transportation under Mayor Bloomberg. She really changed the game and changed the playbook that we use to design streets. And really what she did was to create the kind of environment where women in particular and children sort of and older adults, people eight to 80, would feel more comfortable getting on a bike and would be safer, measurably safer walking. The current commissioner, Polly Trottenberg, has carried that into a strong focus on Vision Zero, which is sort of a radical goal to get to zero traffic deaths in a very short amount of time. Because in a lot of our cities now we have more people dying, trying to get around town than we do from sort of homicides and gang and gun violence, but we consider that a normal price of getting around town. So I think that what you see in some of these cities where women have sort of taken on leadership roles is a greater emphasis on safety, a very different approach to the design of the streets and how space is allocated and who the streets are for, who they are there to serve. And then to your question about moving to Los Angeles because I'm in transportation, the very first thing I thought is that I wanna live within a 20 minute transit commute of where I was gonna work. I wanted to live in a neighborhood with an excellent walk score, so I wanted to live in a place where myself and my two kids and my husband would be able to walk. What is a walk score exactly? Walk score is this really easy to understand tool that allows you to put in your address and then it gives you a score of zero to 100 and it's based on the number of destinations you could easily reach on foot.  So I wanted a good walk score, I wanted a 20 minute transit commute and I wanted reasonably acceptable public schools, which is in Los Angeles that narrows you down to about three neighborhoods depending on where you work. So it was a way first a very practical way to sort of narrow down a very large city, but also a recognition that we asked the transportation system to do a lot of heavy lifting. We asked the transportation system to sort of account for the fact that we have a jobs housing mismatch, that we have a lack of affordable housing near where people work, that we don't have strong quality, free public education that is universally sort of accessible to folks. And so the transportation system has to bear the burden of all of those policy pieces. So I think about that a lot in my commute and also when I talk to people because I'm frequently asked to fix traffic in Los Angeles and I sort of feel like, well let's fix wages and affordable housing and then we can work on it. And then people can live anywhere, everybody can live close to where they work because every school system is desirable and every neighborhood is desirable. And there's enough housing for people to live where they want to live. I thought journalists had to field a lot of complaints and criticism about their work and I'm afraid I had not thought about the plight of the transportation plan. Spends their time in government. Right, right, right, of course. So, and let's talk a little bit more about the changes that have taken place, the revolution that's taken place in cities because when I look around at DC and I look at the bike lanes and I look at the changes and I'm really happy to see all of those changes. I don't really think of them as, I think of them as changes that are mostly for the benefit, I would say of millennials actually. I think of them as being for the benefit of single people and I have actually said to my 16 year old son, you know, why don't you bike? Why don't you use the metro system? You don't necessarily need to get your license. In fact, I didn't even have to say that to him. You know, the way that we were all, you know, at the DMV when we were 16 to get our license, he didn't get his license for about a year because he didn't feel the need to. But in what way are these revolutionary changes of benefit to working families, if at all? So that's not just your son, that's actually a strong trend across there, deferring, getting their driver's licenses, they own fewer vehicles. And even younger adults as they come into cities because it's impossible to get a job which is an undergraduate degree anymore, you have to have a master's which means you come into the workforce usually under crushing debt. So you literally cannot afford a car which is a really expensive, expensive extra thing. You know, I also think about older adults. You know, older adults that would like to and are going to want to age in place and we have done absolutely nothing to prepare for that. We have not clustered services. We have not built places where people can be car light or car free that meet them where they are. And then when I think about working families in particular, I don't so much think about the commute because that is a really complex thing to overcome requires heavy investment in really expensive infrastructure. But I think a lot about giving families the opportunity to unplug and spend time with each other and work physical activity into their normal daily lives. And the way that we've designed sort of biking and walking infrastructure in this country for the last 50 years has not accommodated that. So, you know, there's some great information about what women in particular want. You know, when you look at who bikes in America and American cities, it's usually three or four to one men to women. You just, we are not, there are not a lot of women out. Is it a heels thing? I mean, is it? It's not, because when you go to, we can go, I'll get on a bike share bike after this. When you look at Scandinavian countries, Northern European countries, it is exactly the opposite. Right. And women in those countries drive the transportation decisions, just like women in this country do. So, you know, there is, and why is that? Well, I think it, part of it is cultural, clearly. But I think it begins and ends with the infrastructure.    It all has to happen in a car because the perception of safety is so important for women in particular. And that is why that separation that gets built into sort of more progressive or sort of 21st century bike infrastructure has resulted in a dramatic increase in the number of women biking in those cities and in those places where it exists. So if you have physical curbs that separate the bike lane from the, you're more likely to get women in those lanes. It can be a physical curb, it can be a plastic bollard, it can be a lane of a row of parked cars where you flip-flop the parking and the bike lane so the bike lane is adjacent to the sidewalk. There is a huge toolbox that's available. The trouble is that in built out cities our most valuable sort of piece of, our most valuable thing is space. Space is at a premium and to give space to something you must take it from something else because we are no longer in the business of widening our roads and decking our freeways and I hope we're not gonna be in that business. But that's sort of where we are. And so saving lives and achieving these other goals comes at a cost. And that cost is typically, those battles are fought and won and lost at the local neighborhood level. And it's interesting, just sort of the change in philosophy about sort of who is served by our transportation networks and who should be prioritized. The idea that the most vulnerable are the people who should be served, that we should be thinking about children and the elderly or families. That really is a novel concept, right? I mean, who, what was the thinking 40 or 50 years ago about who was served by our transportation networks? Well, I think that we had this sort of, the dream of the automobile tied into a lot of core American values about independence and freedom and Los Angeles in particular is a city that is built around the automobile. And the idea was, initially when sort of automobiles replaced the cable car systems that we had in a lot of our cities, there was this dream of sort of perfect separation. So you could see it in sort of, World's Fair exhibits and things like that, that there would be vehicles and then there would be a totally separate set of infrastructure for people walking in more vulnerable users. That never came to pass. Right, elevated. You got it. And you'll see little bits and pieces of it. You know, pedestrian crossovers that nobody uses. You see groups of people just like taking their lives in their hands and like running across these crazy streets. Right, Roslyn, Tyson. Yeah, I mean, even on the strip in Las Vegas, you know, I'll go there and you'll see the people, you know, the tourists will use the escalators and the over crossings, but the people who work at those places every day are running across the strip down below because they don't want to take the time and the trouble to go over because it's not efficient if you're on foot. So I think that there was, that was the idea that you should be able to go wherever you want, whenever you want, as fast as you want. And the safety thinking was around things like seatbelts, airbags, the design of the vehicle, and that the system design was designed to account for driver error, which actually had the unintended outcome of creating a system that was very easy to drive very fast, wide lanes, big sloping curves. We think about freeway design. What we found is that gives us exactly the opposite outcome of safety when it comes to safety and in particular, when you look at the people who are involved in, people who are severely injured or die in crashes, older adults and children are overrepresented. In fact, half of the people in Los Angeles who died in pedestrian crashes last year were older adults because they are much less likely to be able to overcome a significant injury. And these crashes have real costs. They have the immaterial costs to our families, to our communities, to our cities, but they also have actual costs because about 75% of the healthcare costs that come out of those crashes are borne by Medicare and Medicaid. So these are societal costs and they're hidden that are a direct outcome of the way we've designed our system. And I know that you're referring to them as crashes and not as accidents, right? Because there's a philosophy behind that, right? There is. So the idea is, you know, accidents are sort of the prevalent word and the idea is, well, it's an accident. Couldn't have been prevented. Nothing we could have done about it. It's just acceptable. That's just the way it is. The state of the practice in transportation for the last 10 years has been to call them crashes or collisions because they are preventable and language really, really matters.  It was just an accident. I'll be like, no, it was a crash. Actually, right? That was an accident. You're good. I'll allow it. You know, I was struck reading a Q&A with you though that you talk about, again, part of this philosophy of changing the way we think about who is served by our transportation network, that it's your job to slow people down, right? So for the sake of children and the elderly, but as a sort of a working parent who has had to run from work to the car to drive my kids to, I don't know, a play or wherever they have to be, things move pretty slowly as it is, right? But sort of in the wrong situation.  And I had to change that behavior. So it's hard, right? Because often we are too slow and we're all overwhelmed and living, trying to get from point A to point B. So how do you strike that balance of slowing people down in situations where they should be going slowly, but enabling them to move fast enough that they're not crazed? So I think there's a cultural piece there. You know, I describe sort of the driving culture along the West Coast, because I've lived in Seattle and spent a lot of time in Vancouver, in Portland. And up there, Seattle drivers are the most chill drivers. If you need to get over at the last minute on the freeway, they will wave you over. Oh, sure, get on over, I'm in no hurry. Because I'm very practical and I left a full hour before I needed to get to my destination. So I am not in a hurry. And there are a lot of narrow streets in Seattle where only one car can go and drivers literally have to collaborate to make it work. I have to look you in the eye, you have to look me in the eye. I have to pull over because we're not gonna play chicken and let you buy and then we both wave at each other, right?  No, you go, no, you go and they're ordering takeout and trying to out collide each other. When you get down to the Bay Area, things start to change a little bit.  Once you get down to Los Angeles, things are different. People are aggressive. I don't have the exact number, but something like about a quarter of the system is down at any given time because of crashes because people have been involved in crashes. And so major parts of the freeway system closed on any given commute day, right? When I think I've done a lot of work in schools over the years, the Safe Routes to School movement, it's very well established in this country, great, it's wealth, it's funding, has survived multiple transportation bills because it's something people really understand and care about, but a school is like a special event twice a day. And the very parents who are telling you because they are public witnesses to a million near hidden misses every day, you have got to do something about this, you have got to slow people down are exactly the ones, when I give the principal a radar gun, are exactly the ones that are speeding down the street and making illegal use and the same thing happens in neighborhoods.  I want you to get everybody into a bike so that there's no more traffic for me. So there's a real sort of fundamental cultural change that we have to get to and it exists in pockets in this country. So I don't think it's out of our reach and there are great models for culture change and transportation. You think about when I was growing up, you didn't wear seat belts, there weren't, I wasn't in a booster seat until I was in the front seat when I was three, four, maybe. And that's not the way we do it anymore and that's not acceptable. So I think that we can get to that place and speed is important because it is a huge predictor of how severe or fatal an outcome is gonna be on a street. And that is related to the amount of things you can pay attention to if you're going, say, 25 miles an hour versus 30, 40, 50, your field of vision just really collapses. And so it's not that speed itself is bad and the arrival, I think, of things like connected and driverless vehicles in our cities will have a huge sort of major seismic shift. You're observing things have changed a lot in the last five years. We are right on the cusp of things changing more than they've changed in the last, I'll say 100, 125 years with the arrival of different kinds of vehicles and also with the arrival of services and technology and sort of the intersection of transportation and technology that I think will really change the way that we think about transportation and we think about getting around. That's great. And we need to make sure, obviously, that there's not the same thing as a digital divide in which only sort of middle class and upper class families are being served by the transportation system. And I know we're just about out of time, but could you point to innovations or cities or places that have done a particularly good job of serving lower income communities or people who are working part-time jobs and have to get around from one place to another and struggle to find a good quality child care center and any sort of policy solution or place that you would cite? Yeah, I'll say two things. One is the federal government has long had in place a funding stream called Jobs Access Reverse Commute Money that cities have used to try and help specifically lower income folks and lower income communities make that reverse commute. They may not be needing to go into the job center. They may be going out to provide care or to provide services out in the suburbs. And that funding stream has had some moderate success, but it's really, it's very difficult to provide a sort of time sensitive and time respectful reverse commute affordable option. I think the arrival of things like, I mean you're starting to see the beginning of it with things like Uber, Lyft, companies like Bridge, moving towards a service-based model and not a vehicle-based model of how to get around. With the arrival of connected and maybe driverless vehicles, I'm hoping that that trend continues. But what I hear when I talk to people all the way from the federal government, federal level on down to the state is that the market will figure it out. Don't worry about it, government people, the market will figure it out. Market's not gonna figure it out, right? Because on one hand you have auto manufacturers who are keenly interested in restoring the model of individual vehicle ownership. What they are trying to create is basically a home entertainment system on wheels because consumers are not interested in the motor underneath anymore. They care about how connected the vehicle is. Can you get wifi? Is there a TV screen right in front of me while I'm driving, et cetera. And so that's where they're trying to go. Then you have companies that are sort of inching into the space like Google, Apple that are first of all not accustomed to making products that kill people. And so they are much more safety sensitive. And second of all, not in it to sell cars. In it to create really interesting solutions to city problems. And so I think that sort of for two reasons government needs to be involved. One is to help continue the shift away from individual auto ownership for a whole host of reasons. Sustainability, public health, et cetera. But also because we don't want people to be left behind. When you think about bike sharing and car sharing and all these services, they are not well used in lower income neighborhoods. And part of that is about money. But there's also a cultural barrier there that we don't understand enough about yet. And that is where I think government needs to be involved in making sure that the number of jobs you can get to within 60 minutes in a car is dramatically, dramatically higher than on public transit. And so as these sort of service based models come into cities we need to make sure that everybody has access to those same sort of same services. Right, right. So I think we're just, we are I think out of town out of time, if you could just talk for 30 seconds about how the transportation community reacted to the presidential inauguration as we were talking about in the green room I think that would be eliminating. So if you live in DC, which is I love cities and DC is a fantastic city, you've noticed probably that there's been a different approach to bike infrastructure. When New York sort of changed the playbook for design it unleashed this huge latent demand and now there's over 200 in the US of these kind of protected bike ways. And DC was right on their heels and built this bike way down Pennsylvania Avenue. And in the transportation community we're all like, wow, look at that, it's amazing. And we were very excited. But then to see it during the inauguration because we had heard that maybe they might have to black out the street and they weren't gonna show it. But there it was in all of its glory. I have to tell you, it was just like the Twitter sphere in sort of super nerdy transportation circles just went nuts. And of course the sort of bike advocacy folks in the US also were just, I mean that picture of the president first lady holding hands and walking and a bike lane was there. It just, it felt like we had arrived. That's great. So it was, yeah, it was a big deal. That's great. Well thank you, thank you so much for coming to the US. Thank you.


Hello and welcome to this video. I am Daniel and today I will show you the process of setting up a custom SPI display in TouchFX. By the end of this tutorial you have the expertise to create your own project from scratch using the TouchFX package. Here is our agenda for today. We are going to start with a brief introduction of the implementation. After that I will create a project from scratch showing how to set the necessary peripherals and import the TouchFX package. After finalizing this step I will include the display drivers and playmen then in the TouchFX package and finally the video will be concluded with a screen creation to be shown in the display. To follow this tutorial we need to have installed the STM32QBID, STM32QBG4, the XNUCLEO TouchFX expansion package and the TouchFX designer tool. You can find all the download links in the video description below. Don't worry if you haven't installed all these tools in your computer yet because if you just have the STM32QBID, the STM32QBG4 will be automatically downloaded when you created your first project for the STM32QBG4 microcontroller and also you can directly install the XNUCLEO TouchFX from the STM32QBID as I will show step by step in this tutorial. We will also add a link to access the project that will be created in this tutorial in the video description as well as the TouchFX wick that contains a lot of information about this package. For this tutorial I will be using the XNUCLEO GFX 01 M1 with a display which has 240 pixels by 320 pixels. The display corner mode will be set as RGB 565 which uses 16 bits for each pixel color. In the microcontroller side I will be using a NUCLEO board which has an STM32G4 microcontroller to control the display and to establish a communication between these two components an SPI bus will be used. Here are the necessary hardware to establish a communication between the display model and the STM32. First we need three pins for the SPI communication then the end reset pin of the display will be connected to the GPIO output allocated on the port A pin 1 of the microcontroller then the chip select pin will be connected to another GPIO output at PB5 the data command select pin will be connected to another GPIO output at PB3 and the turning effect pin will be connected into line 0 external interrupt of the microcontroller. Here I've already created a blank project for the STM32 G4 microcontroller and the first thing we need to do is to go to clock configuration tab to change the H clock frequency to 128 megahertz. This value was selected because it's a multiple of 32 that will be used in the SPI communication. After typing the value in the field just press enter and let the software to calculate everything for us to achieve the desired clock frequency. Now that everything was calculated we can back to the pinout and configuration tab and here under the connectivity group we have the SPI peripheral. We will enable that in the transmit only master and here in the configurations we need to change the data size of the package to 8 bits then change the per-scaler to 4 to achieve a 32 megabits per second of bulge rate. Here in the GPIO settings I will hold the shift button to select the both pins to change its configuration at same time. Here in GPIO mode I will select alternate function push pull I will enable the pull down and the output speed I will set as high. Now everything of the SPI is set. Let's go to system car and DMA to enable a channel for the SPI transmissions. Here the only thing that we need to change is the data width to the half-word to transmit 16 bytes at a time over the SPI. Now we need to set the GPIOs to control the data flow of our application. Let's start with the pb3 which is a GPIO output. Here I will set the user label as gsp underscore dcx. The next pin is the pb5 which will be also a GPIO output and its user label will be gsp underscore ncs. Next the PA0 will be set as line 0 external interrupt and its user label will be set as gsp underscore te. Finally the PA1 will be a GPIO output and its user label as gsp underscore nreset. Now we need to change these GPIO settings going to the GPIO tab under the system car group. Here in the PA0 we need to change the mode to external interrupt mode rising falling edge. For the PA1 we need to enable the pull up and change the output speed to very high. In the pb3 the output level will be high we need to enable the pull up and the output speed very high. And finally for the pb5 the output high pull up and also very high in the output speed. Finally I will go to the NVIC tab to enable the line 0 external interrupt. Then that all the peripherals of our project are set. Now we can go under the midwars group and select the xcubetagefx package. Each we will open the software packs component selector which we need to select the version of the cube touch effects that we want to use and enable that for our application. Now back to the IDE we can select the xcubetagefx package again and check the box to enable this package in our project. Note that the CRC peripheral is needed for this application so we can just enable that under the computing group. Now we need to back to the middle menu to set some configurations of the touch effects package. First in the interface let's select the custom interface. In the frame buffer pixel format let's add to the RGB 565. In the IDE is the 240 pixels and in height will be 320 pixels. In frame buffer strategy I will select the partial buffer because I'm using only the internal hand memory of the microcontroller and it hasn't the enough space to allocate an entire frame buffer for the application. In the number of blocks I will add three and I will increase the block size to 90600 and finally I will enable the partial frame buffer for v-sync. In this application we need to know what line of the display is being updated by the display controller. For that I will use the timer six to estimate what line is being updated. A better explanation of this functionality will be presented later in this video. Doing that all the needed peripherals are set and we can click in this button to generate the code. And that's all that I wanted to show you in this first video part. Thank you very much for watching with you here and hope to see you in the second part of this video for the coding part of the TouchFX implementation.


Okay, so let's prepare for a little bit of a ramble shall we I want to talk today about Privacy now if you've followed the channel for any amount of time You'll know that I'm not the biggest privacy person out there like for the most part I don't talk about privacy very much on the channel at all Even when it comes to how that privacy plays with false software and all that stuff like a lot of people a lot of Foss advocates tout that privacy is one of the main reasons why you should use open-source software And I've never been that guy, you know for me open-source software means other things like Freedom to do what I want with it and the ability to tweak it. However, I want, you know Those kind of things not necessarily those applications are the most private because for the most part Privacy just isn't that important to me at least when it comes to my data and there are several reasons for this So let's just explain some of the reasons why I feel the way I do about privacy for my main job I'm an editor for a historical magazine and that's not always the case I was a writer for the same historical magazine. I've been promoted since but for the most part all the writing and editing that I do now Unfortunately has to be done in Google Docs, which means that I have a Google account and I've been using Gmail for Since it was in beta. I mean it's been a long time since I've been using Gmail So I'm a big user unfortunately of Google services. I used Android for a long time So when it comes to privacy The way I feel about it mostly some comes down to the fact that I think that that ship has sailed Like I'm pretty sure Google already knows everything about me So protecting myself from that seems like shutting the barn door after the horses have already gone out of the barn So that's one of the reasons why I feel the way I do about privacy So the question remains is should you care about privacy and the answer to that question is I think yes And the reason why I say that isn't because I necessarily think that you should stop using Google services I know a lot of open source advocates say never use a Google service and in an ideal world Sure, stop using Google services use next cloud use duck duck go whatever open source slash Privacy respecting service that you want to use I think that that's a great plan for those of you can do it But I also think that those people who preach that and get upset when other people say never used that I have to use Google I think that those people are a little bit naive because a lot of people who have jobs can't avoid Google they just can't you know same thing like With Microsoft a lot of people work in companies that use Microsoft and they have to use things like Edge and SharePoint and all this stuff that you have to use in order to do business, you know, so often times Avoiding the major evil corporations out there is just impossible for example I mean a big example is Mobile technology like if you want to use a mobile phone these days You're going to end up using a phone that is developed by a company that's probably not gonna respect your privacy It's just a sad truth. You're either gonna use an Apple device or you're gonna use one based on Android Now there are other options out there. There are but they're not mainstream They all have their flaws if you want a really good experience one that deals well with maybe your corporate Infrastructure or whatever you're gonna have to use the main, you know, two of the main the two main Operating systems and that's going to cause You to compromise on your privacy So I really do think that the people who preach about privacy sometimes don't take into account the reality of life that sometimes you just can't avoid using Google or Microsoft or Apple or whatever and That's kind of where I'm at is that I just can't avoid it, right? and because I can't avoid it I oftentimes find myself just using Google to search things because Whether you like it or not Google is the best search engine It just is they have the most data. They stole it from all of us down and they know how to use it Not only to make their advertisements, but to make good search results and they do a good job on that I've tried using duck duck go for my search engine It's not great like half the time I end up going back to Google and doing the search over again It's basically a waste of time. That doesn't mean duck duck go can't deliver good search results But it's not as good as Google. I've tried brave search same problems there So it's not as if I haven't tried to do those things, but maybe if I had Maybe if I was in a position to never use Google again and could try to you know Actually care about privacy then I would suffer through duck duck go more But because I have to use Google anyways I figure I might as well just use the Google search and get good search results so Those are my views on privacy for everyone else if you can't avoid Google you probably should there are good options out there They're not as good as what Google offers sadly in a lot of cases now I think things like next next cloud are close and duck duck go is a is it it's fine You'll probably still end up using Google sometimes, but for most people eventually you'll find what you're searching for and The thing about it is is that you should care about your privacy as much as you are able to But you have to be realistic and realize that in some cases You're just not going to be able to not use the Services that aren't respecting of your privacy is just sometimes you're not going to be able to do that Whether that's because of work or whatever So what's the bottom line the bot? I think at the end of the day Privacy does matter but not in that it is The be all end all of everything but more that what really matters when it comes to privacy is that you're aware of What's going on like as long as you know that by using Google services yourself? You're basically giving them your data as long as you are consenting party in that transaction You are okay, right as long as you are Someone who is fully aware of the transaction that is taking place between you and whatever service you're using then that is an Appropriate thing to do. It's when you are it's when the service takes things from you that you aren't aware of that It becomes a problem. So things like the whole audacity thing like when they were trying to enable telemetry and stuff like that it came across as shady not necessarily because telemetry is bad, but because they were moving from a Situation where they weren't taking any data to a situation where they were looks like they were going to take a whole bunch of data You know and that seemed a little shady. So my thoughts are that as long as you are in a Responsible internet user and you you understand that everything you do online Usually comes with some sort of transaction between you and the website you're visiting that's usually the case and as long as you're aware of that And what that transaction entails and you consent to that transaction you are are fine that's why open-source software is so good because Not this that open-source software is necessarily the most private I don't agree with that a lot of open-source projects collect telemetry like Ubuntu and KDE they all collect telemetry You have to turn it on and whatever but they all do this kind of stuff, right? So open-source software doesn't necessarily equate to Private it just doesn't but what open-source software does is it allows you to Have a transparency layer between you and that other end of the the transaction Whereas that that transparency layer doesn't really exist between you and Google or me and Google You know, I don't really know exactly not only what data are they taking but also what they do with that data I mean, we have a pretty good idea But we don't know that they're not doing something even more nefarious than what we expect they're doing, you know Whereas with open-source software if they are going to Take data from you, which is usually an opt-in process There's still going to be some level of transparency towards what they're doing with that data And that's where open-source software shines. So I think for a new year's resolution I'm going to try to cut out as much google from my life as I can Unfortunately, as I said at the beginning of the video for work, I'm not going to be able to do that But as I was rambling on I think you probably got this the sense of that a lot of times I just fell into using google because I already used google Like the whole horse analogy like I've already given them all this data So I might as well just continue to use google because it's the best and I think that that mentality is Not great, right? It's it's something that I need to fix about myself. So In the new year, I'm switching all of my search engines to duck duck go Or brave I haven't decided yet. It's going to be one of those two It's going to depend on which one pisses me off less I guess and I'm also going to start using next cloud as much as possible because maybe If I can get used to next cloud I can prompt my employer to switch to next cloud. That'd be kind of cool I doubt that that's going to happen, but you never know. So This was kind of a a long rambly video to talk to Talk a little bit about my new user resolution in terms of trying to become a little bit more private and We'll see how it goes I will probably make some videos throughout the year because I know that I I want to do a browser comparison Video between like duck duck go google and brave and see how they do Because I talked to a lot of duck duck go users and they're like, oh, duck duck goes great It's fantastic. What are you talking about?  Maybe I have an obsession or an addiction or something to google Maybe that's the possibility and it's just me. I don't know. Anyway, so that is it for this video Is like I said, it was a rambly video. It's just the nature of this video So that's just the way it goes You can follow me on twitter at the linuxcast You can leave a comment in the comment section below if you have thoughts on privacy and Foss software and all that kind of stuff You can support me on patreon at patreon.com slash linuxcast before I go I would like to take a moment to thank my current patrons Today devon chris east coast web gen 2 is fun to patrick l primus marcus magland jacks m tool steve cyber guy linux garic Mitchell art center carbon dated shawnd jeremy Merrick camp jox really j dogs the bsd's rock peter a and crucible. Thanks everybody for watching. I'll see you next time


Nigerians have been called upon to use the window provided by the extension of the consignor's voter registration and get the permanent voter's card. Jeff George said it is the only authority with which they effect the change they expect at the next political dispensation. He commended the determination and zeal displayed so far by a majority of Nigerians at ensuring they obtain their pvc's. The power to effect positively on the governance of this nation requires this card. Depends absolutely on this card. And if you think he doesn't concern you then don't complain if things are not working well. We have an opportunity now to right the wrongs, to put ourselves, do an in-depth analysis and vote your conscience. If we don't do that we are consigned to a perpetual quiet after election. Jeff George called on PDP members to close ranks and walk full the success of the party in the far coming polls. In our own party too I want to appeal to the managers of the party that they need to move out now before the full blown campaign. There are complaints, genuine complaints all over the whole country within the party and we must be deceiving ourselves if we say all is well and there is no political party that doesn't have one issue or the other. Before we start the campaign I will appeal the managers, the board of trustees of our party and the other committed members of our party to please move out within the echelons of the party and close ranks. So you get notified about fresh news updates.