Well, thank you for spending a little bit of lunchtime with me. I know everybody's here for the talk and not the food. Before I begin, if anybody wants slides or has follow-up questions, you want to pass this around. Just throw your email address on there, and I'll send everything out after the fact. So where'd Laurie go? Laurie, oh, I do have a thing. Let's do this guy. Thank you for having me. I'd like to start with a quote about MIT. And as Laurie said, I'm a classical political philosophy dude.  And it fascinates me how both are converging. And that's really the story we're going to talk about today, is where technology, where data, where people, where process are meeting to solve the problems of legislative data and law itself. So in 2011, the Guardian wrote, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology has led the world into the future for more than 150 years with scientific innovations. Its brainwaves keep the US a superpower.  Well, in my experience, my brief experience with civic media here, it's people like Ethan, it's people like Laurie, it's people like Nicole, Andrew, I don't know if Andrew's around here. Oh, hey, Andrew, it's right here. And you guys, thank you for having me and being fabulous and being part of this MIT community. Where I come in is from the government side. Everything, if you remember nothing else today, it's that the problems we face as citizens, as researchers as journalists on the outside of government with technology and access, are equal to and opposite the problems faced by people in government who have to do this stuff, who have to produce the information, who have to post things on the web. And as we'll see, fixing the problems we have as citizens getting from denied to open is a process of helping both inside and outside of government. And this beautiful artwork here, I have to credit to Alexis Ohanian. This is a skewed version of his book cover without their permission. That's part of the story we're gonna talk about today, is we're getting from the denied to the open with law and legislation, and sometimes without people's permission. And we'll discuss what that actually means for democracy today.  We're the Open Gut Foundation, a scrappy non-partisan nonprofit working to bring the best tools and ideas from the tech world into government, where it's sorely needed. This is our GitHub page. If you wanna fork us, my developers would love that. That's where you can find all of our code for what we're talking about today. We were born actually from inside Congress, as Lori mentioned. I worked for Congressman Darrell Issa in the Oversight Committee in the U.S. House, and we were born actually from a hack. So when the stop online piracy started, that whole SOPA-PIPA fight about a year and a half ago, Darrell was the first guy in the house to raise his hand and say, you know, this shall not pass. But it was really late in the game. We were just as surprised as people on the outside. We didn't have the lobbyist money. We didn't have the support. We didn't have the time. So what did we do? We walked into a room to try to hack the legislative process open with open source software. That was our first tool called Madison, which is what instigated the Open Gut Foundation. So Madison, I'll talk about that a little bit at the end. It was essentially a crowdsource legislative tool. We used to diagnose problems with SOPA so to get all the expertise, much of which is in this room, into the process, and also deliver an alternative, the right way, collaboratively on the internet, accountably where everyone can win and participate. This is what Madison looked like at the time. You can see it's pretty stripped down simple, but it opened up the legislative data, giving people a way to annotate, comment, ask questions, discuss, do something with that information. This is legislative process on the internet. It's ugly, but it works. So the problems we're all facing in government are pretty maddening. Just yesterday, a certain other Cambridge-based university that also likes Crimson released a study, pretty sobering one, that says more than 75%, yeah, more than 75% of young Americans are disengaged, and they don't care to become engaged, but you guys are engaged, and you're engaged in a really high-tech way. With the hacker ethos alive and well, and you guys here can convene these two people. This is my co-founder, Congressman Issa, and Ethan talking at the Civic Media Night Conference last year. You guys are bringing together left and right, science and civics. That's what this discussion, and that's what these problems all revolve around. And you, more than most people, know it's at stake. For those of you who don't know, this is Aaron Schwartz. The legal issues that he was facing, they're real. This is an academic. The things we're gonna talk about today, the problems of access, of equal protection of the law, the ability to participate, are far more than academic. It's real life. People go to jail, or worse, for putting this information on the internet. So what? You guys know technology. Well, it's all about people. So the technology only serves what we're trying to do here as a society. It means nothing if it isn't helping everyday people secure their rights in this country, and protect themselves from the powerful, and hold government accountable. Whether the powerful is a corporation or government, all we're doing is strengthening citizens' rights, participate, access information, and secure equal protection. Now everybody knows America is supposed to deliver the freedom to participate, the freedom to share ideas, the freedom to speak freely, assemble, petition your government. All of that depends on information, and communicating it. You cannot act unless you know. And our founding fathers knew that. They knew that everybody had to have the ability to access what government was doing if they were gonna be able to participate in it, and hold it accountable. Now back in the day, the best that they had were horses, and parchment paper. That was access to the law. Or if you could find your congressman and pigeonhole at some public house, that was about the best you could do. James Madison was right. The only guardian of true liberty in the United States is the advancement and diffusion of knowledge. Now what does that mean today? It means taking the Constitution, or law and legislation, that essentially still exists in a format, not a whole lot better than this, if it exists on the internet at all, and get it to this. And that's the story that we're gonna talk about today. Because if you don't have access to it, you can't be a citizen. Now think about that for a second. You cannot be a full-fledged citizen unless you are enjoying unfettered restriction free access to the stuff of government, which is the words, and the people who enforce those words. Our founders, frankly, would be horrified if they looked at this room, this building, all the whiz-bang, awesome stuff going on in here, and then looked at what government is doing. That's just not good enough. Paper, PDFs, and copyright restrictions. That's what we're dealing with. Those are the problems that we're facing today in the context of the law. So I would propose to you that the law is the most important data set in any community. If you think about it, everything else flows from there. Now who works with civic data on a daily basis? Anybody?  What do you access for government information? Not a lot, okay. Does anybody work with spending information, transit information? How would you find some spending information today? Cambridge Brothers is a big PDF file, which is only, right, it's printed paper scanned in, so you're still back as a part of it. So it's a little bit better, but it's still not there. So there's a technology aspect to that, and then there's a process aspect to that. There's also a people aspect to that. Now unfortunately, we cannot fork the human soul and change the human condition. So we'll be talking about, or I'll be talking about the tech and the process side of it. Let's begin with how people are doing it today.  You wanna know the leash laws. What do you do? You. What would you do? Yeah, if you wanted to find out what the dog leash laws were, what would you do? Probably Google it, right? It's almost everybody's first step in first research assistant. 100 lawyers. Yeah, it's very different. 100 lying lawyers. 100 lying lawyers.  And as we all know, if it doesn't show up on the first page, it ain't there sometimes. Any developers in the house?  How do you access the legal, how would you access the information?   I think this might be the first time in history. If you go to the law, this is the Massachusetts, the laws of our state. No APIs, no bulk download, can't access it. What if you're a lawyer or a legal support person? You're trying to do your job and serve clients. You've gotta go through all this paper and you're not actually able to serve as many people as you are. Those are our first users, by the way. Our people who just wanna serve more clients who can't afford legal assistance, they wanna be able to send a link. That's crazy, a link to the law that's applicable. They can't do that today. If you're a state lawmaker, the first thing that you do when a new issue comes up is you see what everybody else has been doing. You wanna see, hey, I'm in Massachusetts, what did they do in Maryland? What did they do in California? You can't do that because all the laws aren't in the same format and often aren't in the same place.  Who is breaking the law where and where do we need work? You can't do that today. If you're an academic researcher, by the way, this is MIT students back in 1957 doing research, very different than today. You can't find it online. Same thing with journalists. Same thing with business owners. Business owners, entrepreneurs. They're hit with far more law than most of us are. Everything you see in this picture has a technical code. Grab your chair. That thing you are sitting on is covered by dozens and dozens and dozens of technical codes. Where do you find those? Most of them are not on the internet or if they are, they're copyrighted and you could be put in jail or worse for trying to access them just to do your job. So all the problems we've been discussing here as far as accessing the law and legislation involve discoverability problems, jargon, expertise, you don't know what the words say, cost and time and money, design problems, data formatting, it seems daunting, right? There's a lot of stuff that's wrong here with the way that government information, particularly law and legislation is accessible today. But we got it. We can do this. Everybody in this room has a skill that's applicable to solving this problem. So what I'm gonna turn to next is how this stuff is actually made. So this is where the government side of my background comes into play a little bit. Understanding how this stuff is actually produced by the folks inside of municipal, state and federal governments is absolutely vital to figuring out how to solve it. All right, Schoolhouse Rocks, who remembers this stuff? How is a bill made? Well, what is the bill? What is the law? It's actually not what you would think. Most of us think the law or legislation is this, right? You've got a section, you've got words on a page. This is, I think these are one of the gambling ordinances. I know it's been a hot topic up here recently. This is it. It's actually not this. This is just a snapshot of whatever the law happens to be right now. Every word on this page, every sentence is actually a mosaic. It's the sum total of all of the changes made to that law since the state started or since the country started or since the Magna Carta was signed. Whatever the first document is, that original program, each word is the sum total of all of these little pictures. All right, so now that we know what the law actually is, it is the sum total of all the little changes, all the little forks made over history to what is the source code of the community. So that's the sort of template that I like to use to explain it to myself. This is the source code. Just like any program needs that to run, any community needs the law or it can't function. So how is it made? Where does it start? It starts with a problem. Now the problem I'd like to use today is gambling, right? The problem, let's say you don't have convenient enough casino options. You can't go to Foxwoods, can't go to wherever. My grandmother used to go to Foxwoods all the time. So Massachusetts had a real world problem. There are not enough casinos in Massachusetts. The first thing that you do when there is that real world problem is you gotta figure out where the law is applicable. Where in that massive hundreds of pages of PDFs is gambling referred to? I just did a quick search on the page. This is only one of four, but these are many, many, many, many places. So you have to identify where those are. This is what it looks like in the Mosaic sense. Now if you remember, the people who are doing this have the same crappy technology and tools that we do. So they have to do that massive process often by hand and they need a hell of a lot of help. Boston can't do it by itself. America can't do it by itself. So they hire who? They hire outside vendors who do this for a living. Vendors like American Legal, Lexis Nexus, Westlaw are hired by almost every, or at least in my experience every, state, city, county, federal government to simply help them produce the law to know where that one word has been referenced over time, how that one word has evolved over time to marshal all of that information that a legislator would need to write a bill to fix that problem. Then the legislators do their thing. We're all familiar with how that happens. And then it goes back to the people who produce the law. So it goes back to the clerks and it goes back to the vendors. This is a simple compiler, but that's exactly what they're doing. They are compiling all of those little changes to the law that happens in a bill and getting it into the right format so that it fits in this. It's translating a bill to the code. That's called codification. Hit Keynote, there we go. So they compile it into the law itself. And how are they doing that? Well, they're doing it with the same tools as I've said over and over that we're faced with on the outside. They're doing it in PDFs. They're doing it in Word. They're doing it on crappy, outdated technology with procurement rules all on top of it. Fixing this requires this. And this is the hardest thing I've found and we've found in our experience to actually own and mean is you gotta have a little sympathy for the devil.  The law sucks online today.  You gotta have sympathy for the people who are doing it. They're citizens too. And they wanna do their jobs better. In most cases, we're assuming the best. So fixing it requires a little bit of sympathy for the devil. They're doing it in paper. They're doing it with an army of lawyers. This is Atticus Finch. They're actually doing it with a lot of them. In Chicago alone, there are 17 lawyers from vendors who keep the code updated and publish it four times a year. You need those people to do all that work. And it's expensive. States and cities are paying hundreds of thousands if not millions of dollars a year to keep this document updated. It's essentially a track changes operation. You need all that people to do it. Well, you need most of them. You need that old domain expertise. You need to know how to translate a bill into code, into the law. That takes money, that takes time. And that's where we come in. So now I get to talk about the technology. The State Decoded. Has anybody heard of the State Decoded? Checked it out. What do you know about it?  The State Decoded is just a way to put your code online. It's a really nice pathway for doing so. Great people put together. There we go. Super easy to use. The State Decoded, ta-da. So all of the problems that we were talking about before, the tech and the process, not the people, we're trying to address here. Now this started, this whole open source project, started in Virginia with a genius civic hacker named Waldo Jacob. He was frustrated, just like we were, at his inability to get the laws for his own state. So he said, screw it, I'm doing it. Embrace that hacker ethos and started building this for Virginia. The Knight Foundation, who generously funds us, generously funds the Civic Media Center and also funded Waldo. Took it up to a level where we could come in and start scaling it. So Waldo did Virginia. Now we're taking it to citizen states around the country. So this is the beautiful front end and the end result for accessing the law. Where does it start? So how does this actually happen? Well, we start with the code. Could be in a PDF, could be in a text file, could be in an RTF. You have to start with the data that they're giving us. Middle steps, PDFs, RTFs, TXT files. Then we parse that into XML. Boom, decoded law. Crazy things like the ability to send a link, the ability to search, the ability to plug into an API and bulk downloads, the ability to update almost instantaneously. All of the things that we know we need to be full citizens today, given all the technology and the tools we have, that's what we're working on here. And it's starting to spread a little bit. Starting in Virginia, Sunshine Statutes is Florida, Maryland, Baltimore, San Francisco, Philly, Chicago. These are the ones in process. We've got about 15,000 left to go because our goal is to get the entire corpus of law in the United States into the same open data format on the internet without any restrictions that you can do anything you want with. So that's producing open law in legislation in the 21st century. I wanted to give you a quick overview of the production problems, which you may or may not have been familiar with, because that explains why it sucks so much on the outside and give you a little bit of a look at the technology that we're using to change that. And we're changing it from the outside. Sometimes governments like San Francisco hire us to do that.  Sometimes it's scraped with all the legal implications that that has. That's what we're doing today. So I'd like to, I guess, open it up for questions. See where we go next. All right, yeah, I'm Ian Contra, I'm curious. Very interesting, I'm sure it's a good idea. I'm a little uncomfortable with the language that law is the source code of society. I don't know, I mean, I think I'm a little worried about the idea that once there's transparency, then that sort of then that equals access or that equals sort of everyone then has a similar ability to take advantage of the law. I mean, I think copyright is a perfect example of how suing, you know, rich Hollywood studios, suing college students is completely unfair, dynamic. And even though the college student is right, to win the case would cost a quarter of a million dollars or whatever. And I was thinking of your slide there where it's the woman in the legal aid office, you know, trying to explain the law.  And so I guess I'm curious, and maybe it's beyond your purview and you can't do everything I realized, but I'm curious to what extent there's thinking about that connection between law and community action or the things that community needs. And I also, I disagree with the idea that, you know, the casino law starts with a problem of not accessing casino, I don't know. I mean, it's a little too short a history there of what's, and even really lacks, it sounds a little naive in terms of what a casino does to a community too, right? I mean, that's the other thing is that, so I guess that's my question is to what extent is this project thinking about how to actually enable people who aren't expensive law firms and aren't well-connected lobbyists and legislators to be able to make use of this stuff, you know? And it seems to me that there's some of these laws are gonna be real helpful to some people. And a lot of them, they're just, they're not about us. They're not about our daily life. And so is that kind of, I think it was a kind of social API, right? It's not computer to computer, but it's like, how do you connect the law to what society actually needs? And I think that's part of the frustration of government, not just that it's not searchable, but that even if it is, it doesn't really seem to be tackling the problems around us. So I'm wondering, do you think about that at all, or is there, or are you integrating with some other kinds of groups to do that? Absolutely. First off, next time I use a better example, what I was trying to get across there is that, how does it start, right? No one introduces a bill for no reason. No one tries to change the law for no reason. They need something to start it, and it's something in real life. Yeah, but people would say, so that's obviously good too. They say, well, why do we have a law saying don't kill people? Well, people, before there were laws, people knew it was a bad idea to kill people, it seems to me, and that's true of a lot of laws. It seems to me that a lot of sort of, it always occurs to me that the politicians are almost the last ones to get, that there's a sort of, tends to be a sea change in society and culture, and then it catches up. And then it's the battle of who's got power in society and copyrights per person. So what's the example of that distortion of how the corporations over what people would actually think is fair for copyright? So anyway, yeah. To your question about what are you doing to get this to the people that need it, that's about where we spend half of our time. So getting all of the data up to a place where you can actually do something with it and figure out how it matters to you, how it matters to you, what you're using it for, what a business is using for, what a legislator is using it for. Those are the use cases that I spelled out there. And at risk of drowning on too long, I didn't go into the ways that that connect on the other side. That's the research we're doing now. And those are the users that we're connecting to and building around with. So our workflow is sort of responsive. So we get it up to a level. We get it out into the hands of users. It's kind of the lean startup methodology, I guess. And then see what comes back and build around that. And as I said, the first users in most of the cities that we've released this in are the people that just need volume. They need technology to make their jobs more efficient so that they can serve more people or serve the same number of clients with less time and headaches. I have no idea where that's gonna go. That's the bleeding edge. I mean, we're covered in blood there. Just because up to today, you have not been able to do that. No one was walking around with this saying, what part of this do you like? What part of this do you need? Now we can do that on the internet in a way that you can actually measure it and track and then respond and build around. If we have this conversation this time next year, that's what I wanna be talking about. You? Yeah, we needed a question about how are you gonna represent and visualize the loud and how do you think about that? And what about that? All the annotations bring work something like that or command system or social interactions? Visualization is super powerful and it's something that is built in in a very small sense. We just have sort of word cloud type visualizations built in. As we get more and more legal codes up, the possibilities for visualizations and comparisons get a lot bigger. That's the use case for a legislator on the state and municipal level. What are the guys next door doing? How did that work? What's the state next door doing? How did that work? That's what can be powered by this. We're not there yet. And as far as the production side, so half of us I started off saying why we were born with this Madison tool, Madison is gonna sit on top of this and allow you to actually draft legislation or edit, create legislation on top of the legal code to make that whole process more seamless. So we're cutting out a lot of the steps here just with the state decoded to get the law from zero to 60 or updated. Well, then how do you, the next step is the process by which that is made. Madison 2.0 is under development right now. You can check it out on our GitHub page. We're gonna do Maryland in January, the state of Maryland. And then we're doing the federal government at the end of January, early February. But we have our 1.1 versions up now if you wanna check them out. It's marilland.opengovfoundation.org and madison.opengovfoundation.org. It's stripped down bare bones, but you'll get a sense of it. So the fair to say that after the federal and state level that this is in the U.S. school and we're getting that legislative release for people that they're exploring, I think particularly at the federal level for the Care Act or so is absolutely not correct. I can't imagine the person being engaged with those laws as someone outside of government doing the things that those laws, just because they're plain taxed or something like that. Definitely, in terms of U.S. laws, I can see that that would be a problem. Because otherwise, you don't have the power to just see what other people are doing and what they're doing with the law. So being able to search that really clearly and to turn it over, this is helpful. But for this, at the top level of government, who do you think is in the most use of the law? The most use of the law, Madison or state to code?  Broadly, we define our user testing as a group on the inside of government mirrored by a group on the outside.  And that was what we started to hack with Madison, but it's bringing all of that input in to make it more useful and satisfying to both people on the phone line, so to speak, or on the webpage. We built Madison so we could get folks like you to share what is wrong with SOPA in a way that we could actually make use of. So people were tweeting at us, people were sending emails, people were calling. All of that is divorced from the actual bill itself, the actual work that we're doing, and the people that are doing that work have their nose on the bill, not on the line with the constituent. So it's bringing that input, tagging it on the bill. That makes the whole process far more satisfactory to those on the outside. So something I didn't talk about yet is our user research, it's not just laptops, how do you, you know, UI UX research, it's how do you present this? How do you introduce this to people? What do they actually want? They're not satisfied with what they get today, but what they're not satisfied is they feel when they call that that means nothing, or that you send an email and no one reads it. Okay, those are technology things we can solve. If you're a congressman and you're reading down comments on a bill or a staff member is and you open it, you can send that constituent an automatic read receipt, which nine times out of 10 is all that person wants just to know that it was read by somebody. Those are, so that's where the technology problem sort of starts to get up to the people problem and we're never gonna solve the people problem unless the good lord comes down again and says, woof, open everything. But what can we strip away on the technology side to make that work? It's half the goal. Half the goal. So part of that is about okay, so if we make this billable, or master the principle of Open API is not as simple as it's got to be. So here's an example of a transit play. So as more and more cities start to open transit data, you have lots of private developers making apps, bringing paid, you access that data in different formats. And many times the best apps and the being paid apps. It's a very small sort of daily life example that's asked a much larger question, which is I wanna push you to think a little bit more about the possibility of, if you don't put certain safeguards in place, but so for example, as people build web services and open them and allow people to build on top of them, that's why we have the AGP out. So we're saying, well, we're making things open, but in many cases what ends up happening is the best implementation comes along as a private service that's paid and right there you start cutting out, it's classed, right? So by opening data, we're paradoxically making it more available to people who already have more resources. And so the question is, are there, are there social or technical or legal constraints that we might put on our open systems that would ensure that they remain open and accessible to as many people as possible? How are you having that debated? That's a fantastic question. Are we having that debate? I would, you know, our partners in crime and sort of our foundation, I don't think we are, in that, you know, I'll pull up here, our disclaimer, let's see, this is, we got at the bottom. All content is of course owned by its authors, the municipal code charter and all rules on this website are owned by the citizens of San Francisco and consequently they are not governed by copyright, so do whatever you want with it. The information on this website does not constitute legal device. It's all open, do whatever you want with it, whether that's paid or unpaid. It's a thorny question. We try to go as far as we can to ensure that this is open and available to everybody. That's why there's an application layer on top of that data stream that we're trying to make more and more and more and more useful. And that's where I think where Walder started this was to get at that exact question.  It doesn't mean anything, it's useless without an application layer, and what they give you is a government website with all of the problems of design and process that we've discussed. How does that get better? Part of it is what we're doing, part of it is what you're doing, but I think part of it is coming from paid services. You know, that's a big debate that's starting to rage within the open government community. I'm sure you've heard some of it. It sort of feels weird to sell some of this stuff or to be in a free world and then actually want to go make a business out of it. That's how innovation happens in a lot of ways. How can we benefit from that without closing people off? That's secondarily why we're embracing open-source software so that when some good idea comes into us or we come up with a good idea, it's available to everybody to build off and modify. I know that probably hasn't answered your question totally, but I don't think you can ensure that there's nobody walling off access completely at some point down the production pipeline or the access pipeline. This is available under conditions that what's done with it is in a paid service. So I'm not saying you should do that, I'm just saying it's a debate worth having. Yeah, it is a debate worth having. And it's a debate that's very much underway right now. Yeah, but there's such a broader question. One sort of narrative for the rise of open government with the pressure from groups like the foundation and others, other would be technologies that could make this an open-source solution for possible. And I don't most can either of those in any sense in the work of the New San Francisco to play into both. I just wanted to bring up another narrative which I'm seeing mostly in the UK right now, but I'd be interested to know if you've seen in San Francisco in the US, which is openness essentially coming as a result of the client. So two municipal governments, one, Barnett in London, famously last year published the graph of doom in which they potentially projected how they were not going to be able to provide any services other than urgent adult care and childcare after at least 2015. And as a result, Barnett having been a big advocate of outsourcing of government services, I started talking about open government in a very radical way. So, well, because we have no money, then we need to get people involved. And just last week I noticed that Solihull, which is in the Weissman once in England, talked about switching to a social council model, which is what it called, which again was a kind of radical openness getting citizens involved. So again, it was coming from this position of weakness. So because we have no money and because government is essentially in decline, that's why we should be open. I'm just curious as to whether you see much evidence of that in the US and whether openness coming from this perceived position of weakness kind of affects the openness that we get. I think you are seeing that in the US. It's the world that government lives in today and government people live in today. When I was talking about sympathy for the devil, I can swear up and down that the folks who are doing this, which they had a little bit more money to do it better, they don't. They're having to do more with less. And they don't know what more to be doing with that less or that less money, if that makes sense. That's where we come in, frankly. That's why this exists. That's why this is a thing. If our success for us is kicking the keys over to San Francisco, kicking the keys to the federal government, kicking the keys, Madison goes to the House of Representatives. That's what they should be doing, but they can't. Okay, there are two ways to address that, right? Oh, let's suck it up for a little bit longer or can we hack something ourselves and then just put it out there and maybe give it to government, maybe sell it to government, maybe give it to citizens or sell it to citizens. I don't think it negatively impacts the success of those endeavors. I actually think it helps them. If someone comes to you and say I can't solve this myself, it's a very humbling experience and to have government or elected officials actually go to you and say, I don't know a whole lot about online piracy. Can you help me write this bill? I don't know a lot about the ITC or international copyright law. I know some, I know enough to get a framework of what I wanna do down and work with those vendors to figure out where it's addressed in the US code, but I don't know the right solution. That's why you held in the analog world hearings with witnesses to bring in all that knowledge and that expertise to help government do its job. That's not good enough anymore because you have four people at a witness table. With the internet, you can extend that witness table infinitely in both directions. And I think that more people are at the outset willing to come and sit at that infinite witness table, whether it's through Madison or State Decoded or any other tool. If government or their elected officials take that humbling, and I hope not humiliating, first step of raising their hand and saying, I can't do this and I don't know. People who, I mean, thanks for the, I'm working with the World Wide Web Console which is enhancing or trying to leave the web to its potential, but this is really a spot where it does not yet happen the way it could be. But wouldn't it be useful to link it to actual cases like to situation where you had questions of whether the law is applicable or not? Because what you actually want is that people can access, let's say a database or your application and then, for example, they ask you about, do I have to leave the dog or not? I would probably ask someone who has a dog because I assume that he already informed himself about what's right and what's wrong. So, but that's two clicks away from where I want to get it. And while you want to enhance the law as a citizen of the state, you want to know if this law is still, I mean, appropriate to my current situation of it's made some 100 years ago and nobody asks the system. So, no. Actually, no one's following that. You can't get it wrong. At least why is it? Because that's what you want to know when you let your people, your court and everything, you want to make them enhance the law. But unless you don't know, you cannot choose from the right people. So this is something that I clearly see in you. Is what? Like creating openness, transparency. Yeah, I think what you're thinking about is sort of the next step. Because you're talking about, first of all, a lot of these things in their own, the words that they're written in aren't available. But you're saying, how many people find all the different things that these are linked to and the situations, you know, there'll be some way to react to that information. But I think that getting it up there, it's not even, it's not even, I mean, I was, I was thinking too about you. I'm just really interested in that, the source code, and how you're rightful if you want to follow it. And how you incorporate, you know, whether that letter extends to all the common law, that is the cases that interpret the laws. I mean, I realize that, again, that's often the future. You're dealing with something that's not even up there at all in a lot of states. But that would be sort of similar, you know, beyond the letter of the law, where does it fly? And how has it been applied? And is it one of those laws that people just don't pay any attention to? Like, I like this idea of an index, maybe, if people could add their current situation, or their case, to what is written in the law, you can create a landscape of, let's say, the thousand articles that are being used mostly during all day life, and then maybe how two or three more articles are linked to each other. And then you can see, okay, this is something that is really useful for people. So we have to work on that. And then maybe there's something that won't be used like in a hundred years. So an index will be the right thing for the first thing. These are court decisions here. This is Virginia, this is Waldo's, sort of the first and the most mature. Is that in the code using San Francisco? Does it have a future where you can put in a waiver to mention the court decisions? It does, we haven't put the data in yet. But yeah, that's next for us in all of those instances. We're facing the issue of scale with a hardy band of developers, and as far as getting all of the data formats, and just getting the actual data. They're not allowed. It's sometimes a work of weeks, months, all that stuff, yeah. But you're right, the court decisions are applicable. It's built to hold legislation, right? It's built to hold regulation. All of that is revolving around, whether it's changing or interpreting, this, the actual law itself. Well, yeah, and the beauty of the framework though, and the growing future list, is if you just get that data and get it to the right format the first time, then you unlock the possibilities, which makes it a hell of a lot easier to get it the second time and the third time, and that's the kicking of the keys over to government, eventually, where they say, wow, this is ridiculously useful and way better than what we have.  Exactly. They're just as frustrating as you are. Speaking of something you work for, did that work for you? Yeah, well, that was the point I was trying to make, is that the stuff we face is mirrored on the inside. Yeah. In every case. Now, as far as changing it to your original question, I'm sorry, I didn't get your name, Felix. To your question about the inline sort of editability or responding to it as you're using it, that's here. So to not blow people's minds, a comment on the bottom is a lot more familiar and comfortable to most of the folks that we're dealing with on the inside than Madison is. The notion you can edit everything, comment on everything, track changes on everything, and then make it all go away because you're not actually changing that underlying text is very hard to get across unless you see it. So we start with the comments. And we've already got one that's being changed. You're the first people outside of the government to see this and it's a draft piece of legislation out of San Francisco. So somebody came onto the San Francisco website to look up sanfranciscocode.org just to find what the rules on bikes were. And they found something that legislators missed. It was out of date, but it was buried in the housing code. If you own an apartment or own a house in San Francisco with a parking spot, you are only allowed under current law to park a motor vehicle there. You can't park your bike in your parking space. That's crazy.  Can't we do something about this? That's very easy once it's identified, but no one has the ability to sort through all that crap. One of the things I wanna do with this first lighthouse program of cities is just do a dumb law cleanup. And that's something anybody can do, right? We've been on the internet. All the dumb laws in Boston, many of which can be apocryphal.  Well, there are things like that. And they're not supposed to be in there. And people actually can get ticketed or worse if you break those laws. And oftentimes, the first time you find out about it is when you get the cuffs or the ticket. Okay, when you're looking that stuff up, it's a very, very small step. And a familiar one to say, what the heck, can we do something about this? And what we're finding is that when you just do that flag it, flag of it, people will do something about it. Yeah, technology can do that. It's very, that's a very, exactly, that's the plan. So that was in, that was, you've struck upon the way. You know, the technology part actually here is not that hard. It's the process part, which is really, really, really hard and sticky. You're saying, don't give petroleum storage facilities that are located within half a mile of something or the second population density. Further complicating this, they weren't just trying to pass a law. It was a labor-based assessment. It was a practice of why there's a culture thing. Now, once you had access to the environmental activists who were doing this, they could walk you through this, with what it would mean. So I knew online what to talk. I explained that in some sort of, under some of the work you were explaining, or Google Maps explains about it to my friends, how do you begin to find that? The second kind of feeling factor was that, this ended up being a battle between the governor and the legislature. So we got into the whole, how a bill becomes a law. And I realized, I was really ignorant about how, why not in vetoes, and pocket vetoes, and whatever else the governor can do, there's some end and big risk for it. And in turn, a part of the bill, and I still don't know what that means, except like, it isn't an advocate, but it is a veto for something. Are you doing any part about how you explode that sort of, of course, the discovery problem of, this is really about ethanol cranes, this is what the law is. And secondly, the sort of meta, the meta process of how a bill becomes a law, describing what's next for this legislation to occur. Well, there's a lot of sticky wickets there, to put it lightly. Throughout what you just described though, there are a number of things that are technology and process that can be made more efficient, more discoverable, more useful. The advocacy part, whether it's right or wrong to send an ethanol train this here, or whether it's right or wrong for the governor to be able to do whatever he wants and all that jazz, that's the people side of it. But how can we arm those people, whether it's citizens, environmental activists, the governor of the state legislators, everybody, reporters like you, how can we arm them to be talking about that, the environmental regulation, whether or not it fits Massachusetts and the state's needs today, instead of arguing about how stupid it is that the governor can find something in a bill that I can't as a reporter, or the army of lawyers is on one side and I don't have one. That's really what I think we can achieve is leveling that playing field. So Waldo has a great term, where he talks about the state decoded. It's got all the niceties of modern website design and the expensive tools that lawyers use. That's really what this is.  The Madison side of it and the annotation side of it is gathering all of that feedback in a useful format. So an environmental group is saying, call your congressman and tell him, vote no on the ethanol train through my neighborhood act. That's made ridiculously useful if they can just go onto the bill itself and say, I like this or I don't or fix this or ignore that, this is good. What you're describing there, like Obamacare is like the thing I always use in my head. I would have given a kidney to have tools like this on that bill because the dirty secret is that both parties agreed on the vast majority of the bill. I use 70% thereabouts, that's what congressman Issa would always reference. About 70% of it you could agree on, but you couldn't figure out what the hell that 70% was and break that out in like past bipartisan healthcare reform. That would be amazing. There's no way to do it. Maybe, that's one of the regulations that's coming in later. One more question. Oh, one more question. Could you two? Okay, two. Two more questions. Mm-hmm. Something that area of software engineers who are like once we have all this open we can start refactoring the law. I'm like, I wasn't in the IRS and stuff like that. There's program that's going to be seen here. So I'm just kind of curious what the reception's been or what happens when you have people in the same room coming from these different sides of the spectrum. It's all over the place. There's a lot of opposition, as you can imagine. And it's not, there's a little bit of a lack of utility. I don't understand what the heck this does. Almost everybody that we encounter, you just show them a webpage and type in dog laws on san franciscoco.org. Get thousands of references or all of the references to those terms versus the Lexis Nexus where you get a tenth of that versus the city websites PDFs where you get maybe a hundredth of that. They're like, oh God, this is better, let's do it. There are entrenched people, as we all know too well, who are against this just in principle. They don't want to make it easy for you to discover the law. They make a lot of money out of you not discovering the law. We assume the best in all people and all institutions, at least at the outset, until we're proven again and again otherwise. But there is a lot of that. And so that hasn't stopped us though. I would say we do get feedback positive and negative all the time. We do get opposition all the time. But so what, we're doing it anyway. Right on. I think it's staffed with the local projects and the state projects we're doing. They're looking at a local code on housing code or something else. And they're also looking at housing incentives that have been put into some other law or something in the state level, federal level. And the work we're doing to expose a lot of insight and intelligence in the process of view or on any of those issues. I could see how this could become a collaborative document, the same way you could have it, although they're quite likely to end up buster cussing. They're the same thing about the Google Docs code. That's not that much to count. So there's two small questions. First is, spent a lot of time parsing large XML documents. And they are the main makers of large XML documents. Maybe even the makers of large XML documents over and above government. And I'm not convinced that XML can ever be a schoolbook. It's fine. Everyone uses XML as what it is.  But I almost wonder if there's something at the nexus between what you're doing, what Google is doing, and what Wolfram Alba is doing. And the way that data is stored and how CD comes to mind for a piece of blogs and just alternatives to XML that could make the way to store the data a little bit more intelligent or at least a little easier. APIs are fine when you make the APIs fine. But in the end, the way that data lives at its lowest level can make a difference to how the APIs structure and how the program works. And I think it's why textbooks prevents people from so long, and it's why law is what it is. Absolutely, thank you. The follow up point was that obviously the end conclusion is we want to Google for Sol's questions. How does line item we don't want Wolfram Alba to be answered? Well, obviously it works this way. Here's all the documents, laws, and other things that relate to it that aren't necessarily just the products of law, but are like a larger system of organizing municipal data. You're right, XML is not the answer. That is very much a middle step or a way point. It was the data format when Waldo started that was easiest just to get open. It's not perfect. There's XML and there's JSON going on a little bit here, which is, it's an improvement. There's gotta be a better way. No one has actually done this before, though. No one has sat down and said, gee, we actually have the ability today to have all of the laws in the same data format, all in the same database. What is the ideal way to do that? We would love help from Google. We would love help from Wolfram Alba, and I don't just mean us, I mean the whole community. That's what they do. They don't do the people side. They don't do the PDF to whatever. They've actually told us, if you find that answer, tell us, we'd love to know. They have their, in a lot of ways, their best minds are working on rocket ships and Google Glasses and talking computers. I don't know what it is. They're not working on this. We would love to get everything to that level. If it's at XML, maybe we can make it attractive and say, gee, we've got, I would say, the most valuable data set in the United States here. Can we do something with it? Can we make it better? Something to watch over the next year, to this point, is Waldo J. Quiff, again, is stepping away from the state to code it as we're starting to scale it and grow it. He's setting up an open data institute in the U.S. This is one of those exact things, questions that hasn't been possible to ask yet, but it is, it's starting to emerge. I mean, I don't know what the answer is, though. I would connect with him and stay in touch. Like I said, we got seven. We're gonna have another 10 or so over the next month. That's a lot, that's a big corpus of data all in the same format that hasn't been there before. What do you do with it? I don't know. How do we get a new city in, by the way? How do we get a new city in? Wow. We sometimes just do it and go to them and say, hey, look what we did. Sometimes we have like a city of San Francisco who looked at Baltimore. So Baltimore was the first city to get this done and we did it in collaboration. We pitched San Francisco months and months and months ago, they were very busy. So Baltimore was first and then San Francisco called Baltimore and said, that's awesome, how do we do it? And that's another way in. Chicago, we just did it and put it up there and hoped no one yelled at us. Actually, they embraced us. That's not systematic and that's not scalable. That's what we want to get all 15,000, acquire them, we'll leave it at that and just do it all in one big push or tranche or whatever you want to call it so that we can build that full library. Doing it one by one is for us not scalable but for you guys it is. So Boston isn't done, Massachusetts isn't done. We can help somebody here do that, Cambridge isn't done. But we can't do it all ourselves. I wish we could. Anybody have a billion dollars they want to give us so we can map it all along? Well thank you, Laurie. Thank you for all your questions. Discussing this is a challenge as you can see because there are so many moving pieces and I appreciate you bearing with me and asking good questions to help us get this story better. If there's an email list, if you want to get in touch with me or with our developers, come up, grab me. We're at found open Gov on Twitter and have a great rest of the day. Thank you. Thank you.


All right, thanks for staying with us now today is American diabetes a lot today is observed annually on the fourth Tuesday of March it is aimed at raising awareness about the risk and symptoms associated with diabetes amongst the American people now diabetes occur when the body's Blood glucose level is too high This is caused by deficiency in the insulin produced by the body Which is the hormone that lets glucose enter cells and be used as energy? Diabetes is a big deal especially in the US and if you check is it direct was it called Impact or direct consequence of their lifestyle and the kinds of food that they eat. They're really heavy on Yes, processed food things that have heavy sugar and all of that. So is it direct so when you see, you know I remember the first time I went to Texas We say one order Was it burger or something? NJ I Looked at the book. I was looking at me. I was like this big So what I now looks around is at the restaurant Me and my sister Everybody in fact there was someone that was actually, you know, this our chair double it in two It was on a wheelchair.  It's a big obesity Diabetes and all of that is a big issue So no wonder that, you know, they have a day just to keep on putting people at alert But the good thing about social media that has happened and I think is really helping if you go online Like maybe because of the people I follow There's hardly any day that I don't like my timeline doesn't doesn't feed me on healthy greens healthy days and all of that So people are actually Churning out a lot of contents, you know, that is helping people make better decisions healthier decisions and all of that because Really, you have just this one life. You have this one body and you must take care of it Yeah, if you want to say something yes, totally and the you know, we have had Issues with people who have had diabetes Some people think that oh if you have diabetes, you're going to actually if you are just around you're just about to keep the bucket Basically, but you know, people have been living Healthy lives with diabetes and they have been able to also tell people about it and cause some sort of awareness That is not a death warrant So when we see people with diabetes, it's not like they are They are about to die But we should look at it from the perspective that we need to know our own Sugar level. Yeah level. Yes for us to be able to know what we're supposed to take in So it's not only about healthy living or healthy eating But we should also go for checkups and know what we what our sugar level is Back to back or us as often as possible to be able to decipher Absolutely Absolutely. All right, so quickly. Let's run through our news. Mary. Let me go with you first So my news is basically about the fire that happened at a section of Balogu market today in Lagos And this is like the third fire this this year I don't know that start some people are saying is the evil part of the market that's catching fire So I don't know if that's still on their policy theory Propaganda, you know, but this is very sad Wow Wow So now two things that always come up in my head when I see things like this Why do we still have clusters of buildings? That's number one number two these people that own this markets Have they really looked into Insurance policies, you know and start to take up some of these things for their goods They may not be able to recover everything, but at least they will not be completely in the loss. What do you think? Do they insure do they pay attention to insurance some of them would but a lot I think a great deal of them wouldn't and This is coming from the point of either wanting to save money for the business always thinking that you know Such a thing wouldn't happen So you don't plan for it.  You're not going to be able to scare the people So you have to do this work with the people there Yes, so Because it's like it's a very busy market and again, it's like it's not become a norm Like oh, okay one fire one shop they catch fire for that site You know, I just think people in that market should really pay attention to and I think the fire So the legal state fire service should also pay attention. You have a market So when you have a market, you have this things happen, you know, it's a it's a populated area and there's a business area It's too condensed. Well, I'm saying can we That's the thing they can't clear it out. How we have to Engie markets are beyond all of these things We have to until they are able to build a market that would just like the Yaba market when they build the Shopping the show So this can be possible too. Yeah, but it would take a lot But you have to you have to I know that we have this is too much when I like that market is suffocated I can't even stand that market. It's not organized. If you go to trade fair, it's very organized Yeah, but you have there, you know to let that let's let's create a new plan for that market I think we can't keep having fires all the time to take up, you know, that's what we're looking forward to that situations Like this will bring up some questions. Absolutely. Yeah, it was your story NJ Your story So I I don't know if they can pull up the video. So my story is about the The Nashville incidents that happened A few days ago, I think it was even on the 27th, which was what yesterday Yes, this happened yesterday. So There's a lady called Audrey Hallett 28 years And there's a video, you know circulating social media Of a heavily armed 28-year-old woman, Audrey Hallett I hope I'm pronouncing that well making her way into Kristen Covenant school in Nashville on Monday She was armed with two assault rifles and a handgun She entered the school from the side door Before opening fire Killing six persons The Nashville police shared the video on its twitter page with a caption active shooter Audrey Elizabeth Hallett drove to Covenant church school in her Honda fits parked and shot her way through the building She was armed with two assault rifles and a nine millimeter pistol She's a formal pupil of the school and was later shot by the police So you can see in the video that she shot her way and this was during While school was in session And thereby, you know this incident resulted in the death of Some individuals including the Nashville police Officers and you know this shooting thing happening in the u.s Has become almost like the fires in Nigeria has become Regular thing is almost like a norm now someone gets in a bad mood Or something happens See it's hard for the u.s To be able to curb this issue on you know gun violence and everything because in some states in the u.s They are allowed is you have the permission to carry a gun Licensed gun and in some states they are not but that's the thing So you have it in for example in Nigeria you have a law in Lagos and you don't have a law that binds in Ogun states it means that someone Someone who has a License to carry a weapon in Lagos can decide to go with his weapon into Ogun state even though he's unlawful So you are leaving as a gap that cannot be filled and based on that That's the reason why there are so many of these incidences so many areas in the u.s A kid has an issue at home goes to school or you know, he's been Maybe you know So it's it's a very sad story and it's one that It scares me the most. It's scary. We know where the kidnapper zone is You know this one you can to think that your children can actually go to school and not come back It's it's quite scary. It's a scary situation Um, um, you see your story, please Yes, just to you know Also brought her something she said Um about you know, you said something about children going to school and not coming back home We had about I think our three nine-year-olds. We actually killed in that um Shoot out so it's um, it's disheartening for the parents and also of course disheartening to know that um The children went to school and they didn't come back home because of somebody's I wouldn't call it irresponsibility, but it's um It's heartbreaking basically So my story back to nigeria is on nlc the nigeria labor congress, of course Suspense strike plan strike over naira's custody What we call scarcity? Oops, I won't come from me now Is the scarcity of naira um This was um, this the situation was supposed to happen Tomorrow, which is a friday sort of wednesday between the ninth of match And the plan nation wise strike was slated to commence tomorrow, but It has been called off by the nlc chairperson and the It was his name Femi pala nasan was also in support of this and the decision of the nlc is to go on strike and Over the cbs naira policy or design redesign of the naira policy So my question here is not the fact that nlc is going on strike currently or plans to go on strike My my question here is Where was nlc when we had the challenge of the Naira's incident when it was at the peak of it Where was nlc when a woman was trying to play spider woman to get into a band to get 5,000 naira for to feed her family Where was nlc when people were going to the hospital and they didn't have cash To give to them at the hospital and they were turned back and for that so reason Some people died as a result of it. Where was nlc when people were at the banking hall crying lamenting Looking for a change to get something just to get small money To you know and going nude to get money to feed their family So where was nlc that's my question And it's so disheartening that now that we're almost at the end of the Problem that was caused by the cbn We had the nlc coming out and back on strike That's practically medicine after death for me That's very sad Very very salient questions Okay, my story is in the spirit of anger management There's one person that can never be angry When I saw it I said please I did a few good story for today Our governor of ocean states at the molla delique. It was cooling our minister for interior I was teaching him how to dance, you know at the unveiling of the elacia passport office in ocean state You know the good thing about this man. He just finds a way to stay in the news He's up there to focus on what they were to do the immigration passport office I think he was teaching the minister for interior say guy, this is how you dance it. It's not the other way You know No, but I just you just you just don't you you you cannot not but love the man because it just makes me happy all the time It's all in the spirit of anger management. I decided you know what this is a good So even if you're having Your body is boiling. Just go go go senator. I didn't want to All the anger will just disappear. Feel good. Feel good moment. Yeah, feel good, right? So I think they Launched the passport office in ocean state and of course again the man had to dance So there's this is cheers to many more dancing because as long as they are commissioning different projects, you know And all of that he would always, you know, you know dance and be excited about the project So congratulations to them. I'm having a passport office in oceans in Elisha. It's actually very good again because Some of these passports locations, especially in Lagos will consider congested So the more we have, you know, people don't have to travel. So people don't people don't have to travel all the way All right, so we will take a break when we come back as I mentioned earlier want to discuss anger management See me smiling today. That's part of the plan


Okay, I was actually really tempted to just be like, dude, let's do skull holes, skull holes, skull holes in class and just punt on this attempt at a video walkthrough. Then I thought at least doing the walkthrough, we can at least get the basics and then actually identifying these things can happen during lab. At least you'll have an idea of what is traveling through these holes, where you would expect to find them. Just know that I've been sitting here for approximately, oh, 30 minutes, trying to place things in holes and see, like, can you see my orange hot cleaner? And can you see my green hot cleaner? And you can't even see doodly-do, which doesn't mean that I'm not going to try to show it to you because I can't help it, but it just means that if you feel like, oh, I can't see any of that, just listen to the relationships that I'm talking about and know that you, when you have a skull in your hand, you're going to be able to see those things that I'm talking about even if you can't see them now. So take good notes on this section because I am going to walk you through all of it. I'm going to start with the holes that we've identified in the temporal bone. So if you go to your lab, this is how I'm organizing it. I'm just going to start at the temporal bone and I'm going to do every foramen that is highlighted from here on out. And I think there's one foramen that I have not done.  No, no, no. We shall add it in so that you do have to know it. We're in temporal bone land and our first hole is very difficult to see on our picture, but very easy to see in reality. It's the internal acoustic meadis, internal acoustic meadis, internal auditory meadis, or internal auditory canal. Really? Your book calls it internal acoustic meadis. I called it internal auditory canal somewhere and internal auditory meadis somewhere else. Yeah, that's why now I need some fun because you get to like learn 30 names for every structure because there just isn't enough right now for you to do. Now, I believe that this right there, oops, that little thing that I just put a dot on, that is, I'm going to change the color of my pen. We're going to go for like something red. Maybe that'll work. This spot is the internal acoustic meadis or whatever you want to call it. You can't stick your probe actually through it. It's found in the rocky bumpy region. Take these guys out. It's found in the bumpy region of the temporal bone and it makes sense, right? Because what was inside that really hard, rocky part of the temporal bone? Your inner ear, like all your ear parts are embedded in that skull bone. And so, yeah, it has to be well protected and yeah, we got to have a way to get stuff in and out. So your cranial nerve 8, the auditory nerve, travels through the inner internal acoustic meadis. Your external acoustic meadis, we don't have any, there I go, we don't have any cranial nerves that are passing through there. We don't have anything passing through there except for ear wax when you go, that's about all we're going to say about that. The stylo-mastoid foramen, we already kind of talked about this one. It's between the styloid process and the mastoid process and it's right here. You can kind of see it and here's the styloid process and here's the mastoid process and that's where my little stylo-mastoid foramen is.  Okay, the next one, the carotid canal is going to take a little bit of explanation and I think I'm going to do the carotid canal and the jugular foramen kind of together because you can see the carotid canal nicely. I'm going to change to a new color. Carotid canal is right there and you can see that really clearly and you're like, yeah, of course, that's awesome. And are you ready for this? The jugular foramen is actually between the temporal bone and the occipital bone and so looking at it from this perspective, you're like really they look like the exact same hole or they're right next to each other. It's really hard to tell the difference. So the thing that I'm going to tell you is that if you find the hole, it's a really nice hole. It's actually kind of medial from the styloid process. So that's a nice little landmark to help you out and it looks like, okay, so I just stuck my pin in it or whatever that thing is. It's a really nice clean round hole. It's a little bit, it looks like it's a little bit hidden. I don't know, can you even see that? I told you that I couldn't help it. I was going to try to show you anyway, even though not only am I spatially challenged, but everything in the video is backwards, really. Now, okay, so every time I move one way, it's like, no, it shows me going the other way, crap. And I'm so spatially challenged that I haven't figured it out yet after two years of recording lectures. Really? Okay, there we are. So I want you to see where we came out on the top. If we look at it through the other direction, I'm trying to make it clear for you. Can you see it? Do you agree that? I just went out of my eye hole. That ain't cool, man. That ain't cool. How's that? Check out how my, when I go in the carotid canal, I am moving, like my pipe cleaner is going to go anterior. Does that work for you? All right, now I'm going to take another pipe cleaner. This one's green.  And that's okay. I'm used to being hated. I teach anatomy. So look, here's a hole and I'm going in. I'm going in that hole. I really am. Okay, now tell me true. Does it look like I'm going into the exact same hole? It totally does. I hope that maybe you can see. Okay, there's a tiny bit of a difference there. But I'm going to show you where the difference is. They're easy to confuse until you actually put them in and look from the top side. The green one went into the jugular framing. The orange and the yellow are in the carotid canals. But check it out from this side. The green and the orange look like they're going into the exact same hole. I find now on our quiz, you can definitely, I will have pipe cleaners in skull holes. And you are highly encouraged to pick up that skull hole.  And then take a look. Like where does it actually come out and how's that whole thing working? And fiddle with it so that you can see. Just don't take the whatever this thing pipe cleaner. Don't take it out. But I think that on something like this, you have to look at it from both sides to be able to appreciate the difference. All right, carotid comes out anterior. Jugular comes in posterior. And the jugular framing is included, I think, in my occipital bone page or section. But it's actually between the occipital bone and the temporal bone. And that's another little clue that I think is helpful. So this right here is my jugular, I should probably change that color too. That's my jugular framing. You can see that it's like between them. And so you probably are thinking, well, where did the carotid canal go? And they don't show you the carotid canal from here. But it's going to come out like somewhere up here. It's just going to be kind of hidden up there. So that's cool. Jugular framing. Now, this was carotid canal. This was jugular framing. And from the backside looks super clear, super similar. But here comes jugular framing. Here comes carotid canal comes up like this. Even though they're coming, oh shoot, I made it green. Exactly what I was doing there. Like that. On the anterior or whatever that is, inside surface. They're both going in here. They're coming out in this direction. So in windy land, that means that the carotid canal is coming out toward the anterior part. The jugular framing is coming out toward the posterior part. That made perfect sense. So let's go to, oh, first let's list all the things that come out the jugular framing. There's three of them. And it's nice. Are you ready? One of them is glossopharyngeal. That's cranial nerve number nine.  And so you're really close to the brainstem here. It makes sense that the people going through the jugular framing are going to be bigger numbered cranial nerves. And indeed, it's number nine. So if you remember that it's hypoglossal coming through the jugular framing, then it's easy because it's nine, 10, and 11. And 10 was vagus, so gigantic, fantastic vagus is going to come through that hole. When you look at the jugular framing, you're going to be like, that thing's huge. It's huge, especially compared to the carotid canal. And that's because there's a lot of stuff coming through there and the fact that not only the jugular vein, but three cranial nerves and vagus, one of them, like, vagus does everything. So that thing's got huge. We should try to dissect out vagus, hypoglossal, vagus, and number 11, which is accessory. Oh, lovely accessories. And they all come out the jugular framing. I'm going to tell you everything else that came out of everywhere else so far. The other hole in the occipital bone is the hypoglossal canal. And who comes out of that one? Yeah, hypoglossal nerve. Fantastic. So you guys are ready for the quiz already. Now, hypoglossal is you're going to find hypoglossal on the inner surface of foramen magnum. And in fact, almost on the, like, find the occipital condyles and then go inside and there's hypoglossal canal. And so I could stick a little pipe cleaner through hypoglossal canal even though you... And look at this. Isn't that cool? There it goes. And you can see how I actually, I took my... Oxypital condyle and then I want to go this way there. And there's a little tiny hole in there and I've got a pipe cleaner going through but I'm going to pull pipe cleaner out. Do you see my little hole? You know you do. And the hypoglossal nerve goes through that. Flip that page over. Now let's look at our sphenoid bone. Here's sphenoid and we've got some stuff going on here. I can't remember if I said this when I was practicing or if I've already said it to you, but there actually is a hole in the sphenoid bone that we're going to add.  It's called the superior, superior orbital really, really, visure, visure. Who says we shouldn't write in cursive anymore? That does not say visure. The superior orbital fissure, there's a whole bunch of stuff that comes out of there like 92 cranial nerves. It's crazy. And I don't know if you can see the superior orbital fissure but if you look into the eyes of a skull, into the absent eye holes of a skull, you will see a crack down the back. Seriously, this is awful. Okay, there's my crack. I'm going to stick an orange pipe cleaner through the crack. And it's long. It's a fissure. It's not a hole. It's not a foramen. But, okay, I don't know if you can even see that. But there's also, if you look closely in my orbit, there's a hole.  And the crack is the superior orbital fissure. The crack is the superior orbital fissure. And the hole is the optic foramen.  The optic nerve, cranial nerve number two. Are you ready for who goes through the superior orbital fissure? Let's do this. Cranial nerve three, ocular motor. What does ocular motor do? Controls eyeball movements. Dude, how about we throw all of our eyeball moving cranial nerves through the superior orbital fissure? That's a good plan. So cranial nerve three, which is ocular motor. Cranial nerve four, which is trochlear. And cranial nerve six, I'm throwing this one over here because I'm going to do another one. Cranial nerve six, which is abducens. That also goes through superior orbital fissure. And then part of cranial nerve number five. Which part? That's right, my friends. The ophthalmic branch of trigeminal. So not all of cranial nerve five goes through the superior orbital fissure. Just the ophthalmic branch, which again, that makes perfect sense because that's going in and doing stuff in your face. How are you? So we've gotten three, four, five, part of five and six through the sphenoid bone. We've got more in the sphenoid bone. Ready? Okay. We have a good little buddy right here. And oh dear, that's it right there. There's one, and here's the other. This one is actually probably the easiest of all of them because it's an oval-shaped hole and it's ovale. Now we used to have to know this hole as well, which is spinosome. So we had, and this one up here is rotundum. Rotundum ovale spinosome. And I put those together as Ross because I played volleyball with a girl named Ross and she had her mouth open all the time she was our setter. And whenever she did anything, her mouth was open and it makes me think of, oh, foramen. And so Ross helps me remember the foramina. Thanks, Ross. We don't have to know the S, but that's okay. We do have to know rotundum and I'm going to tell you who goes through rotundum. Ah, nice. We did cranial nerve. We did the trigeminal, the ophthalmic branch. Well, through rotundum comes the maxillary branch. And through ovale comes the mandibular branch, right? Yes. That's nice. That's nice and clean and organized. And we take care of all of our trigeminal branches with the sphenoid bone. All right, I'm feeling happy. I'm feeling happy because guess what? The easiest one is last. The last one is the cribriform foramina that are found, seriously, in the ethmoid plate of, in the ethmoid bone in the cribriform plate. And that's where cranial nerve number one, all those little olfactory twangers come twangering through there. I can't believe we just did that whole thing. I wonder how long that section was, like five hours, maybe.  Whoa, skull and cranial nerves in one day. That's a lot of stuff. So come Tuesday ready to rock and roll. See ya. Bye-bye.


What's up everyone take down here welcome back to another video today is another mystery pack video from eBay and I absolutely love getting this I think this one here is the one that is $15 plus a little bit for shipping so a total of $20 and you get them in the packs and each pack is labeled. So I'm going to start off with the random packs. And see what we get I've got from the seller before and I've gotten great things from him. So hopefully I continue that trend and that will make me want to buy more from him in the future. Swap first Jordan Ebley victory base a Rob Stauber base. Don't think I have that that's a nice one for my goalie PC. I'll take it. Mario Lemieux. This is candidate day card or national hockey card day card for Canada. I'll take it I know I don't have that and I have a small PC of him. Daniel Alpherson NHL rookies 95 96 from tops. That is cool. I'm going to have to look up see if that's his rookie card from that year or one of them. So I know I have one of his rookie cards so that is awesome my opinion I'll put these two here since I like them the most. And also a marquee rookie for Matt's. Climby I'm not familiar who this player is I'm not even sure what year this card is. Oh nine 10. So for the random packs. I did get two cards that I like so that to me is a win. Next I'm going to be doing the pack slash bonus. So the bonus card is the NHL aces for an Ottawa Senators play Alex Andre. Diago. I'm not familiar with him but that looks nice. That's going to be a nice one for my Ottawa Senators PC. Next is this pack of Parkhurst 94 95. Let's see what we get here. Okay these ones here are slightly sticking together but not like some of the other packs from the early 90s that I usually gets. So we have Perrier 7 Lee butchering that name I don't know it. Murray Zeus. I'm not going to even try to say the last name that's a nice card I like that one. Bill Ranford. That's nice one I have a few of his cards. Joey. Not even going to pronounce it if I can't pronounce it. I'm not even going to bother Bob Roberts. A Scots. Melon B. This one here flipped around on me that is Bobby Hollick. Thomas Sandstrom. Mark. Tenorty. And we have a rookie standout for Jeff Chance. Not too bad I'm not really caring for them but they're still pretty okay. I know they're not ones I have. Next is his pack for Jersey or Sierra Leone number and inserts or parallels. Let's see what we get. This is a nice one. Shining Stars for Patrick Kane. I have a small PC and I know I do not have this card. A Joe Sackic Monumental Moments MVP card still but it's for Joe Sackic and I know I don't have that card. So that's a nice one for me for my small PC. Surgey Plotznikov. A foil marky rookie card. I'm going to have to look up the value of this. I think I may just keep it. And the last card I am so happy. I'm going to take this one and I still have one pack left. This one here is a Logan Brown Ultimate Rookie Card Jersey pack numbered out of $299. I absolutely love the Ottawa Senators. I say it every time. This seller here surprisingly before I got a great Ottawa Senators card this one here is another one from him. So I'm going to order again from this guy in the future. I have one more card left but to get a numbered card $299 for Logan Brown. A team that I love, a player that I like and a Jersey card. I will absolutely take that all day. Let me reorganize these for seconds. And the last one here already rips the top off. So you already know that it is a graded card or an autograph card. Send a little sleeve here. I think it's going to be an autograph this time. Ooh, I will take this. An autograph card for Raden Bunk. Again, an Ottawa Senators player. I absolutely love the Ottawa Senators. I don't even think I told this seller that I love the Ottawa Senators. It was just random in the mystery pack that I got it. So this is awesome here. I'm not sure what this is valued at. I'm going to look it up. I like that it's in a hard sleeve. I love this. I like that it's the gold version which I hopefully that's a little bit more value. I'm not getting rid of this. I'm keeping this. I love Ottawa Senators cards. I don't get too many autographed ones and especially from which year is this? See if it'll tell me here. Looks like 1998. So that's an old autograph. So that looks awesome. In my opinion, I really like that. So was this box worth it for almost $20 with I believe there's a little bit for tax and shipping. I think it was a $15 box, but of course shipping and tax. So it was around $20. In my opinion, was it worth it? Absolutely. I got Daniel Alfredson card. Rookie to add to my collection. A Mario Lemieux jersey card for Ottawa Senators. Joe Sackik, Patrick Kane, which are all going in my small PCs of them. And also an autograph card from the 90s for an Ottawa Senators player, which I am so blown away with. So yes, to me this was 100% worth it. I plan on ordering more again from him in the future. Because like you can tell, especially in the last video and this one, I get great stuff from him and he puts great stuff in his mystery packs. So I hope you guys enjoyed this video. I'm going to leave this here. Please take care. Peace.