Hello I welcome you all once again to my channel explore education. I am Dr. Rashmi Singh and this time Professor Department of Education at Ciskarna Girls really college University of Allahabad okay and this time I'm going to discuss with you a very important relevant up-to-date topic in education that is future knowledge in education or you can say technology of education okay and the lecture will be in bilingual mode and it is a topic of general interest as well as for your competitive examinations and your regular courses okay let's start first of all what is futureology? Futureology is the study of postulating possible probable and preferable future in the world views and myths that underline that means you can say that future knowledge is the science of future knowledge is the idea that we can postulate the possible possibility which is probable which is possible and which is preferable which we want preference which gives that future and the myth that is going on in it that this will happen in the future this will happen all these are the there is a debate as to whether this discipline is an art or science this is also the topic of debate that this discipline is futureology is discipline so it will tell about art or science so in general if we look at it in a simple way sorry it can be considered as a branch under the more general scope of the field of history we can read it in the general scope of the field of history futureology is both an art and a science that is, it is art and it is science if we say futureology, sometimes we say futurism so what futurism is an art if we consider it as art it attempts to do is to enrich the range of alternative to define a broader array of possibilities if we consider it as art it tries to enrich the range of alternatives that we have and if we consider it as science, what futurism is a science attempts to do is to explore systematically two decision points to relate interactions and to display those worlds of it which are made possible or probable from these key decisions look, the basic feature of science is that we are systematic, so we are scientific so if we consider it as science it helps us to understand the two decision points that we are in the state of conflict we are not able to understand that we have to choose it or choose it and here it is wrong so it helps us to explore systematically from key decisions, possible, probable so in this way, futureology is science and it is art future studies seek to understand what is likely to continue what is likely to change and what is global future studies help us to understand what is going to happen and what is possible, what is new, what is possible, what is going to happen look then what is futureology? sorry it is a process of forecasting and designing the future we can say this as well Sir Adel Pino told us at the time that futureology is to design or forecast the future we can either design the future we can make the future or we can make the future that this is going to happen and futureology encompasses the short range middle range and long range future and in this what will happen in the future, what will happen in the future in the middle range what will happen in the long range future all this covers futureology future-oriented education is important for all instructors not only those in the future there is no futureology because it helps everyone learn how to live in a complex and rapidly changing society but we all know that change is only one but today's change is so fast so it is not necessary that what is teaching and teaching the future is the same instructor, the same teacher talk about the future in his lecture all the teachers of the discipline in general we must talk about what are the things in the discipline in the future in the future then we hold hands for the future for the future for the future for the future of the future which is so fast and rapidly changing okay and the professor of UNESCO Marco Villenez says the empowering starting point is that the future always lies open ahead of us it is not fixed or inevitable destiny the future is not fixed it is not that it is written it will be the same we can change it, we can give it a shape we can be ready for it it is our own actions and decisions in the present that shape how the future will start in folding it is our own decision which will decide what future will take shape see how big it is okay and it is an interdisciplinary study of future which in the words of the great futurologist Wendell Bell Wendell Bell became a very big futurologist he said that it is an interdisciplinary study which involves sorry involves clarification and evaluation of values and goals as well as description of trends and it includes projections of alternative futures as well as explanations of existing routines of interdependence it means what will come in it will come in clarification will come in evaluation will come in evaluation will come in description what will come in it will come in projection of alternative futures apart from this what our existing routine is filled with its explanations will also come what is the future logic okay sorry if we see what are the broad objectives of future futurologists what are the three main objectives of future consciousness in people we can create this in people that you are ready for the future in the future this can happen so you are ready for it motivate them to develop future oriented behavioral skills in them and we motivate them we predict them within them future oriented skills behavioral, technical, pedagogical skills, development and to help the given society of people in thinking about the various kinds and possibilities of their future and the people of the society we can help them in thinking about the possibilities of their future and they are ready for it and future can be in three ways we will never think of the future possible probably it has more possibilities and preferred or preferable we want future unfold what is the role of education what is the role of education in future logic the role of education in the future society and also in the process of thinking about the future is unquestionable there is no doubt the first requirement is that the scientific and technological potentialities of the people have to be developed this is done technology is a legend our future it is scientific our first requirement is that through education the potentiality of the people develop the knowledge and technique atleast for a long time the role of education in the future society will be dynamic and not limited to one field of study and only one aspect of life it is a huge shield and it is not that the only side of life is the same all the sides are governed educators have visualized interdisciplinary approach in the field of education your NEP 2020 is also saying that your education is interdisciplinary because the future is oriented this policy is telling us how to be ready for the future education of the future cannot play its role effectively if it confines itself only to material aspect of life and ignores self-knowledge they are saying that till the time when the learning of the future can not perform its role well until the material aspect of life this is the material requirement of our daily life we will only look at the material we will ignore the human we will ignore the human so there is no importance of natural logic then OECD has also given a learning framework for 2020 what is OECD? Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development OECD Learning Framework what is 2030? this vision when we see it for the future we believe that this will happen in some underpinning principles for the future of education system for the future education system they have seen some rules that the face of an increasingly volatile you do not know when it will become volatile when it is the term of chemistry but it is used in this game volatile uncertain, uncertain it is a Jattil and MB was you do not know what is right or what is wrong MB is good there is no clarity education can make a difference education can make a difference as to whether people embrace the challenges they are confronted with and whether they are defeated by them this extremely volatile uncertain there is a Jattil education can make a difference that the challenge that the person is going to meet he will come up with and deal with him or he will be defeated he is a person he is a man and in an era characterized by a new explosion of scientific knowledge at a growing array of complex societal problems it is appropriate that curricula should continue to evolve perhaps in radical ways see this is the type of explosion of scientific knowledge this is the youth there is a growing array of complex societal problems there were no social issues because the social issues are a part of the culture so they are saying make a curricula that should evolve it should evolve, it should change it should be updated it should not be studied in 10 years it should continue to evolve it should evolve and perhaps in radical ways this is the type of explosion of scientific knowledge it should be done equally in curricula if we look at future trends in education whether the future is going on in education globalization of education digital native students there is a big gap in this digital natives and digital emigrants that is, the students are born in that age where technology and education is new students are called digital natives that is, they are the nation for digital youth and we, education is also a nation for it, it is an age sorry and advances in technology that is, new technology interdisciplinary learning we will talk about it and there are tools of assessment that have never been seen or heard defining desirable and preferred future before that, it is desirable future that is, we want our one-sixth future our preferred future we want the future to unfold itself then we have to define it and for that we have to be ready and predicting social and cultural damages caused by new educational conditions we can predict the damage that this kind of social and cultural can be destroyed it can be a mistake and we are ready for that and overview of future state of learning technology and its impact on educational and research activities are reviewing the educational institution strategies and goals we have to review our educational institution and strategy and we will have to review it we will have to reopen it see again, what is lacking and we need to be ready for that so that we can reach that goal and what is it? Improving the learning processes influenced by future research methods there are other methods of future research civic education in the age of everybody civic sense is very important and there is no civic sense in it there is no civic sense there is no civic sense then technical education character's talk problems of morality the rules change right? changes, the rules of morality are universal laws okay, technology and creativity we are creative with technology we don't need to be creative this is a necessary condition to do socially useful work if we are doing socially destructive work then we are using technology We have heard a lot about big data, big data, internet of things, data analytics, data things are going on. In today's world, data is the new oil. It is important for economic data. Cognitive neuroscience. Cognition comes from neuroscience. Which part of the brain is important for learning difficulty, learning disability. Which part of the brain is important for learning, which part of the brain is important for learning. This is the emerging field of interrelationship. And it's implications for education. The need for bold leadership in troubling times. We were looking towards our government and leaders. We needed bold leadership. Success in the 21st century, the education of head heart and head. We know that this is the 3-H, after which Gandhi Ji is called. Our 21st century success is also in this. It is important that the effectiveness of the cognitive and psychomotor of the brain. The effectiveness of the cognitive and the effectiveness of the head. That is the development of all dimensions. It tells for the future. That is how the future education is. Rebuilding professionalism through collectivism. You are talking a lot about cooperative learning. You won't work alone. You have to work with cooperation. You have to work with collectivism. You have to rebuild professionalism. Especially in the field of academic fraternity. And if we look at the implications of this. This matter is back again. There is little research on teaching futurology. There is little research on teaching futurology. There is little research on teaching futurology. There is little research on teaching futurology. Given that instructors with a future oriented perspective can encourage students to express constructive hope about controversial social problems. There are new controversial social problems. We can prepare children for them. We can prepare the students. And they can give constructive hope through education. Through futurology. Rather than denying problems. We accept that there is a problem. And future oriented education is important for all instructors. Not only those in the discipline of futurology. Because it helps everyone learn to live in a complex and rapidly changing society. This is repeated in the world of accelerating changes. Futurelogy in business education is a means to shape more desirable future. Future is possible, probable and preferable. So our desirable future is our preferable future. We can get it through education. We aspire to empower teachers and young people to develop 21st century skills and become lifelong learners. We want to empower teachers and young people in their desire to have 21st century skills and become lifelong learners. Conclusion is that needless to stress that since rapid social changes and technological changes are taking place in the world, it has now become absolutely necessary for every person in every country to start thinking about their futures very seriously. And to prepare themselves for the future shop that lies ahead. The word future shop is used in Alvin Toffler's book. He says that it does not require that we tell him that social changes are so rapid and technological changes are so rapid and happening all over the world. So it is necessary for every person in every country to start thinking about their futures and to prepare themselves for that so that we can escape from the future shop that is in Covid. We were not prepared for the online world. In fact, there were online things going on in the world. But we were not prepared for that. We were already prepared for that. We do not feel that the future shop has taken us away from Covid. Okay. And the great American futurologist Alvin Toffler points out that to survive, to award what we have done for the future shop, the individual must become indefinitely more adaptable and capable than ever before. That means that the person is indefinitely ready to be adaptable, capable, that means that as of today, he will not be able to work. He must search out totally new ways to anchor himself for all the old roots, religion, nation, community, family or profession are now shaking under the hurricane impact of the Accelerative First. Trust. Accelerative trust is the impact of the hurricane. Like the tsunami, like the storm, like the hail, like the hail, that is why our roots are being moved by the religion, nation, community, family, and profession. To save ourselves from the shock, we will definitely become more adaptable and capable. All right? So thank you all! You were very sure of it. Video has also ended. Thank you and don't forget to like and subscribe to my channel. It's good for me.


CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Romans, the things which have recently happened in your city, under obitius, and the things which are likewise being everywhere unreasonably done by the governors, have compelled me to frame this composition for your sakes, who are men of like passions, and brethren, though ye know it not, and though ye be unwilling to acknowledge it on account of your glorying in what you esteem dignities. For everywhere, whoever is corrected by father, or neighbor, or child, or friend, or brother, or husband, or wife, for a fault, for being hard to move, for loving pleasure, and being hard to urge to what is right, except those who have been persuaded that the unjust and intemperate shall be punished in eternal fire, but that the virtuous and those who lived like Christ shall dwell with God in a state that is free from suffering, we mean those who have become Christians, and the evil demons who hate us, and who keep such men as these subject to themselves, and serving them in the capacity of judges, incite them as rulers actuated by evil spirits to put us to death, but that the cause of all that has taken place under obitius might become quite plain to you, I will relate what has been done. CHAPTER II. Herbicius condemns the Christians to death. A certain woman lived with an intemperate husband, she herself too, having formerly been intemperate. But when she came to the knowledge of the teachings of Christ, she became sober-minded, and endeavored to persuade her husband likewise to be temperate, citing the teachings of Christ, and assuring him that there shall be punishment in eternal fire inflicted upon those who do not live temperately and conformably to right reason. But he, continuing in the same excesses, alienated his wife from him by his actions, for she, considering it wicked to live any longer as a wife with a husband who sought in every way means of indulging in pleasure contrary to the law of nature, and in violation of what is right, wished to be divorced from him. And when she was over persuaded by her friends, who advised her still to continue with him, in the idea that sometime or other her husband might give hope of amendment, she did violence to her own feeling and remained with him. But when her husband had gone into Alexandria, and was reported to be conducting himself worse than ever before, she, that she might not by continuing in matrimonial connection to him, and by sharing his table in his bed, become a partaker also in his wickedness and impieties, gave him what you call a bill of divorce, and was separated from him. But this noble husband of hers, while he ought to have been rejoicing that those actions which formerly she unhesitatingly committed with the servants and hirelings, when she delighted in drunkenness in every vice, she had now given up, and desired that he too could give up the same, when she had gone from him without his desire, brought an accusation against her, affirming that she was a Christian, and she presented a paper to thee, the Emperor, requesting that first she be permitted to arrange her affairs, and afterwards to make any defense against the accusation, when her affairs were set in order, and this you granted. And her quantum husband, since he was now no longer able to prosecute her, directed his assaults against a man, Petalmeas, whom Ubisius punished, and who had been her teacher in the Christian doctrines, and this he did in the following way. He persuaded a Centurion, who had cast Petalmeas into prison, and who was friendly to himself, to take Petalmeas and interrogate him on his sole point, whether he were a Christian. And Petalmeas, being a lover of truth, and not of a deceitful or false disposition, when he confessed himself to be a Christian, was bound by the Centurion, and for a long time punished in the prison, and at last, when the man came to Ubisius, he was asked this one question only, whether he was a Christian. And again, being conscious of his duty, and the nobility of it, through the teaching of Christ, he confessed his discipleship in the Divine Virtue. For he who denies anything, either denies it because he condemns the thing itself, or he shrinks from confession because he is conscious of his own unworthiness or alienation from it, neither of which cases is that of the true Christian. And when Ubisius ordered him to be led away to punishment, one Lucius, who was also himself a Christian, seeing the unreasonable judgment that had thus been given, said to Ubisius, what is the ground of this judgment? Why have you punished this man, not as an adulterer, nor fornicator, nor murderer, nor thief, nor robber, nor convicted of any crime at all? But who has only confessed that he is called by the name of Christian? This judgment of yours, O Ubisius, does not become the Emperor Pius, nor the philosopher, the son of Caesar, nor the sacred Senate. And he said nothing else and answered to Lucius than this, you also seemed to me to be such a one. And when Lucius answered most certainly I am, he again ordered him also to be led away, and he professed his thanks, knowing that he was delivered from such wicked rulers, and was going to the Father and King of the Heavens, and still a third having come forward was condemned to be punished. Chapter 3 Justin accuses Christians of ignorant prejudice against the Christians. I too therefore expect to be plotted against and fixed to the stake by some of those I have named or perhaps by Christians. That lover of bravado and boasting, for the man is not worthy of the name of philosopher who publicly bears witness against us in matters which he does not understand, saying that the Christians are atheists and empires, and doing so to win favor with the deluded mob and to please them. For if he assails us without having read the teachings of Christ, he is thoroughly depraved and far worse than the illiterate, who often refrain from discussing or bearing false witness about matters they do not understand. Or if he has read them and does not understand the majesty that is in them, or understanding it, acts thus that he may not be suspected of being such a Christian. He is far more base and thoroughly depraved, being conquered by illiberal and unreasonable opinion and fear. For I would have you to know that I proposed to him certain questions on this subject and interrogated him, and found most convincingly that he, in truth, knows nothing, and to prove that I speak the truth, I am ready, if these disputations have not been reported to you, to conduct them again in your presence.   Or if he is acquainted with them, but, through fear of those who might hear him, does not dare to speak out, like Socrates, he proves himself, as I said before, no philosopher, but an opinionated man. At least he does not regard that socratic and most admirable saying, but a man must in no wise be honoured before the truth. But it is impossible for a cynic, who makes indifference his end, to know any good but indifference.  We have been taught that God did not make the world aimlessly, but for the sake of the human race. And we have before stated that he takes pleasure in those who imitate his properties, and is displeased with those that embrace what is worthless either in word or deed. If then, we all kill ourselves, we shall become the cause, as far as in us lies, why no one should be born, or instructed in the divine doctrines, or even why the human race should not exist. And we shall, if we so act, be ourselves acting in opposition to the will of God, but when we are examined we make no denial, because we are not conscious of any evil, but counted in pious not to speak the truth in all things, which also we know is pleasing to God, and because we are also now very desirous to deliver you from an unjust prejudice. HOW THE ANGELS TRANSGRESSED But if this idea take possession of someone, that if we acknowledge God is our helper, we should not, as we say, be oppressed and persecuted by the wicked, this too I will solve. God when He had made the whole earth, and subjugated things earthly to man, and arranged the heavenly elements for the increase of fruit and rotation of the seasons, and appointed this divine law, for these things also He evidently made for man, committed the care of men and of all things under heaven to angels, whom He appointed over them. But the angels transgressed this appointment, and were captivated by love of women, and begat children, who are those that are called demons. And besides, they afterwards subdued the human race to themselves, partly by magical writings, and partly by fears and the punishments they occasioned, and partly by teaching them to offer sacrifices, and incense, and libations, of which things they stood in need after they were enslaved by lustful passions. And among men they sowed murderers, wars, adulteries, intemperate deeds, and all wickedness. Wents also the poets and mythologists, not knowing that it was the angels and those demons who had been begotten by them, that did these things to men and women, and cities and nations, which they related, ascribed them to God Himself, and to those who were accounted to be His very offspring, and to the offspring of those who were called His brothers, Neptune and Pluto, and to the children again of these their offspring. For whatever name each of the angels had given to Himself and His children, by that name they called them. Chapter 6 Names of God and of Christ, Their Meaning and Power But to the Father of all who is unbegotten there is no name given, for by whatever name He be called, He has as His elder the person who gives Him the name. But these words, Father and God and Creator and Lord and Master, are not names, but appellations derived from His good deeds and functions, and His Son, who alone is properly called Son, the Word, who also was with Him and was begotten before the works, when at first He created and arranged all things by Him, is called Christ in reference to His being anointed, and God's ordering all things through Him. This name itself also containing an unknown significance, as also the appellation God is not a name, but an opinion implanted in the nature of man of a thing that can hardly be explained, but Jesus, His name as man and Savior, has also significance, for He was made man also, as we before said, having been conceived according to the will of God the Father, for the sake of believing men, and for the destruction of the demons. And now you can learn this from what is under your own observation, for numberless demoniacs throughout the whole world and in your city, many of our Christian men exercising them in the name of Jesus Christ, who was crucified under Pontius Pilate, have healed and do heal, rendering helpless and driving the possessing devils out of the man, though they could not be cured by all the other exorcists, and those who use incantations and drugs. Chapter 7 The Word Preserved for the Sake of Christians Man's Responsibility Wherefore God delays causing the confusion and destruction of the whole world by which the wicked angels and demons and men shall cease to exist because of the seed of the Christians, who know that they are the cause of preservation in nature, since if it were not so, it would not have been possible for you to do these things, and to be impelled by evil spirits, but the fire of judgment would descend and utterly dissolve all things, even as formerly the flood left no one but him only with his family, who is by us called Noah, and by you Ducalion, from whom again such vast numbers have sprung, some of them evil and others good. For so we say, that there will be the conflagration, but not as the stoics, according to their doctrine of all things being changed into one another, which seems most degrading, but neither do we affirm that it is by fate that men do what they do, or suffer what they suffer, but that each man by free choice acts rightly or sins, and that it is by the influence of the wicked demons that earnest men, such as Socrates and the like, suffer persecution, and are in bauds, while Sarnadopoulos, Epicurus, and the like, seem to be blessed in abundance and glory, the stoics not observing this, maintain that all things take place according to the necessity of fate, but since God in the beginning made the race of angels and men with free will, they will justly suffer in eternal fire the punishment of whatever sins they have committed, and this is the nature of all that is made, to be capable of vice and virtue, for neither would any of them be praiseworthy unless there were power to turn to both virtue and vice, and this also is shown by those men everywhere who have made laws and philosophized according to right reason by their prescribing to do some things and refrain from others. Even the stoic philosophers in their doctrine of morals steadily honor the same things, so that it is evident that they are not very felicitous in what they say about principles and incorporeal things, for if they say that human actions come to pass by fate, they will maintain either that God is nothing else than the things which are ever turning and altering and dissolving into the same things, and will appear to have had a comprehension only of things that are destructible and to have looked on God himself as emerging both in part and in whole in every wickedness, or that neither vice nor virtue is anything, which is contrary to every sound idea, reason, and sense. CHAPTER VIII. All have been hated in whom the word has dwelt, and those of the stoic school, since so far as their moral teaching went, they were admirable, as were also the poets in some particulars, on account of the seed of reason the Lagos implanted in every race of men, where we know hated and put to death. Heraclitus, for instance, and among those of our own time Mussonius and others, for as we intimated the devils have always effected that all those who anyhow live a reasonable and earnest life and shun vice be hated, and it is nothing wonderful if the devils are proved to cause those to be much worse hated, who live not according to a part only of the word diffused among men, but by the knowledge and contemplation of the whole word which is Christ, and they, having been shut up in eternal fire, shall suffer their punishment and penalty, for if they are even now overthrown by men through the name of Jesus Christ, this is an intimation of the punishment in eternal fire which is to be inflicted on themselves and those who serve them, for thus did both all the prophets foretell and our own teacher, Jesus, teach. CHAPTER IX. ETERNAL PUNISHMENT NOT A MEER THREAT. And that no one may say what is said by those who are deemed philosophers, that our assertions, that the wicked are punished in eternal fire are big words and bugbears, and that we wish men to live virtuously through fear, and not because such a life is good and pleasant, I will briefly reply to this, that if this be not so, God does not exist. Or if he exists, he cares not for men, and neither virtue nor vice is anything, and, as we said before, law givers unjustly punish those who transgress good commandments. But since these are not unjust, and their Father teaches them by the word to do the same things as himself, they who agree with them are not unjust. And if one object that the laws of men are diverse, and say that with some one thing is considered good, another evil, while with others what seemed bad to the former is esteemed good, and what seemed good is esteemed bad, let him listen to what we say to this. We know that the wicked angels appointed laws conformable to their own wickedness, in which the men who are like them delight. And the right reason, when he came, proved that not all opinions nor all doctrines are good, but that some are evil, while others are good. Wherefore I will declare the same and similar things to such men as these, and, if need be, they shall be spoken of more at large, but at present I return to the subject. CHAPTER TEN Christ Compared With Socrates Our doctrines then appear to be greater than all human teaching, because Christ, who appeared for our sakes, became the whole rational being, both body and reason and soul. For whatever either law givers or philosophers uttered well, they elaborated by finding and contemplating some part of the word. But since they did not know the whole of the word which is Christ, they often contradicted themselves. And those who by human birth were more ancient than Christ, when they attempted to consider and prove things by reason, were brought before the tribunals as impious persons and busybodies. And Socrates, who was more zealous in this direction than all of them, was accused of the very same crimes as ourselves. For they said that he was introducing new divinities, and had not considered those to be gods whom the state recognized. But he cast out from the state both Homer and the rest of the poets, and taught men to reject the wicked demons and those who did the things which the poets related, and he exhorted them to become acquainted with the God who was to them unknown by means of the investigation of reason, saying, That it is neither easy to find the father and maker of all, nor, having found him, is it safe to declare him at all. But these things our Christ did through his own power, for no one trusted in Socrates, so as to die for this doctrine, but in Christ, who is partially known even by Socrates, for he was and is the word who is in every man, and who foretold the things that were to come to pass through the prophets, and in his own person when he was made of like passions, and taught these things, not only philosophers and scholars believed, but also artisans and people entirely uneducated, despising both glory and fear, and death, since he is a power of the ineffable father, not the mere instrument of human reason. But neither should we be put to death, nor would wicked men and devils be more powerful than we, were not death a debt due by every man that is born. Wherefore we give thanks when we pay this debt, and we judge it right and opportune to tell here, for the sake of questions and those who rave as he does, what is related by Hercules, says Xenophon, coming to a place where three ways met, found virtue and vice, who appeared to him in the form of women, vice in a luxurious dress, and with a seductive expression rendered blooming by such ornaments, and her eyes of a quickly melting tenderness, said to Hercules that if he would follow her, she would always enable him to pass his life in pleasure, and adorned with the most graceful ornaments, such as were then upon her own person, and virtue, who is of squalid look and dress, said, but if you obey me, you shall adorn yourself not with ornament, nor beauty that passes away and perishes, but with everlasting and precious graces, and we are persuaded that everyone who flees those things that seem to be good, and follow hard after what are reckoned difficult and strange enters into blessedness, for vice, one by imitation of what is incorruptible, for what is really incorruptible she neither has nor can produce, she has thrown around her own actions as a disguise, the properties of virtue, and qualities which are really excellent, leads captive earthly-minded men attaching to virtue her own evil properties, but those who understood the excellences which belong to that which is real, are also uncorrupt in virtue, and this every sensible person ought to think both of Christians and of the athletes, and of those who did what the poets relate of the so-called gods, concluding as much from our contempt of death even when it could be escaped. CHAPTER XII Christians proved innocent by their contempt of death, for I myself too, when I was delighting in the doctrines of Plato, and heard the Christians slandered, and saw them fearless of death, and of all other things which are counted fearful, perceived that it was impossible that they could be living in wickedness and pleasure, for what sensual or intemperate man, or who that counts it good to feast on human flesh, could welcome death that he might be deprived of his enjoyments, and would not rather continue always the present life, and attempt to escape the observation of the rulers, and much less would he denounce himself when the consequences would be death. This also the wicked demons have now caused to be done by evil men, for having put some to death on account of the accusations falsely brought against us, they also dragged to the torture our domestics, either children or weak women, and by dreadful torments forced them to admit those fabulous actions which they themselves openly perpetrate, about which we are the less concerned, because none of these actions are really ours, and we have the unbegotten and unaffable God as witness, both of our thoughts and deeds. For why did we not even publicly profess that these were the things which we esteemed good, and prove that these are the divine philosophy, saying that the mysteries of Saturn are performed when we slay a man, and that when we drink our fill of blood, as it is said we do, we are doing what you do before that idol you honor, and on which you sprinkle the blood not only of irrational animals, but also of men, making a libation of the blood of the slain by the hand of the most illustrious and noble man among you, and imitating Jupiter and the other gods in sodomy and shameless intercourse with women, might we not bring as our apology the writings of Epicurus and the poets? But because we persuade men to avoid such instruction, and all who practice them and imitate such examples, as now in this discourse we have striven to persuade you, we are assailed in every kind of way. But we are not concerned, since we know that God is a just observer of all, but would that even now someone would mount a lofty rostrum and shout with a loud voice, be ashamed, be ashamed, ye who charge the guiltless with those deeds which yourselves openly could commit, and ascribe things which apply to yourselves and to your gods, to those who have not even the slightest sympathy with them, be ye converted, become wise. CHAPTER XIII. HOW THE WORLD HAS BEEN IN ALL MAN For I myself, when I discovered the vile wicked disguise which the evil spirits had thrown around the divine doctrines of the Christians, to turn aside others from joining them, laughed both at those who framed these falsehoods, and at the disguise itself, and at popular opinion, and I confess that I both boast and with all my strength strive to be found a Christian, not because the teachings of Plato are different from those of Christ, but because they are not in all respects similar, as neither are those of the others, stoics and poets and historians. For each man spoke well in proportion to the share he had of this chromatic word, seeing what was related to it. But they who contradict themselves on the more important points appear not to have possessed the heavenly wisdom, and the knowledge which cannot be spoken against. Whatever things were rightly said among all men are the property of us Christians. For next to God we worship and love the Word, who is from the unbegotten and ineffable God, since also he became man for our sakes, that becoming a partaker of our sufferings he might also bring us healing. For all the writers were able to see realities darkly through the sewing of the implanted Word that was in them. For the seed and imitation impacted according to capacity is one thing, and quite another is the thing itself of which there is the participation and imitation according to the grace which is from him. Chapter 14. Justin prays that this appeal be published. And we therefore pray you to publish this little book, appending what you think right, that our opinions may be known to others, and that these persons may have a fair chalice of being freed from erroneous notions and ignorance of good, who by their own fault are become subject to punishment. That so these things may be published to man, because it is in the nature of man to know good and evil, and by their condemning us, whom they do not understand, for actions which they say are wicked, and by delighting in the gods who did such things, and even now require similar actions for men, and by inflicting on us death or bonds, or some other such punishment, as if we were guilty of these things, they condemn themselves, so that there is no need of other judges. Chapter 15. Conclusion. And I despise the wicked and deceitful doctrine of Simon of my own nation, and if you give this little book, your authority, we will expose him before all that if possible they may be converted. For this and alone did we compose this treaties, and our doctrines are not shameful, according to a sober judgment, but are indeed more lofty than all human philosophy, and if not so, they are at least unlike the doctrines of the Sotodists, and Philadians, and dancers, and Epicureans, and such other teachings of the poets, which all are allowed to acquaint themselves with both as acted and as written. And henceforth we shall be silent, having done as much as we could, and having added the prayer that all men everywhere may be counted worthy of the truth, and would that you also, in a manner becoming piety and philosophy, would for your own sakes judge justly. End of section 2, chapters 8 through 15, recording by M. White. The Second Apology by St. Justin Martyr, translated by Alexander Roberts at all.


If you are here today I would like to speak about a case and please be sure to sign in Mr. Cook. We have a very good condition now for the remaining consumption. This is dash 223 dash 0 for pending annexation. Annex dash 223 dash 0 to turn street. Request recommendation on the assignment on land use classification of transitions for pending annexation. Case 4, S plan dash 2023 dash 007, 1.4 acres, major subdivision preliminary plan review. Case 5, S plan dash 22.62 acres, Atlas Road and Greenland Road. Request preliminary potential subdivision. The property case 6, 3 dash 0 to Trinity Drive. Request recommendation to reason property from all those institutional districts. Case 7, S plan dash 2023 dash 009, 6.0.6 acres, S plan to turn recommendation on the assignment on land use classification. Next step started for pending annexation. Request recommendation to reason property from all those institutional districts. Case 8, S plan dash 2023 dash 009, 6.0.6 acres, S plan to turn mentioned sounds. Case 8, S plan dash 2023 dash 009, 6.0.6, S plan to turn recommendation on the assignment on land use classification.


Item number SCP-389. Object Class. Safe. Special Containment Procedures. SCP-389 requires no exceptional containment. When not in use, it is stored on a shelf in the Office of Dr. at sight due to the site's proximity to the sea. Description. SCP-389 is a green glass bottle, approximately 45 cm in length. There are no markings or other distinguishing features on it. SCP-389 appears highly resistant to damage, having been dropped or knocked from its shelf multiple times with no fractures, chips, or other damage. Analysis of the material it is made of show it to be identical to normal glass. Object was discovered on data expunged, in the possession of a 15-year-old girl named R. She shared the history of the object as she knew it, which was. She discovered it on the beach approximately six years ago. On a whim, she composed a note, placed it inside SCP-389, and threw the object into the sea. Several days later she returned to find SCP-389 washed up on shore with a reply enclosed. She had been corresponding with another person this way ever since this discovery. Upon testing, it was discovered that this phenomenon appears to work with any note, and after being cast into the sea, would return at high tide the following day, containing a letter. A test consisting of sending the bottle without a note ended with the discovery of the still empty bottle the next day. Messages received are written in English and appear to have been produced with a mechanical typewriter. The composer of the letters seems loath to reveal any personal details beyond her name, Gedrill, and sex. Any questions about or requests for her geographic location are ignored. Gedrill will describe the area surrounding her home, wildlife, food, culture, customs, and apparently anything not relating specifically to herself readily and in detail when possible. Though her knowledge of many things is limited, many of the things described are unusual. Among them are trees that uproot themselves and migrate, and the life cycle of insects physically resembling coxinellidae, colloquially known as ladybugs, which at one point includes multiple larval members of the species gathering, spontaneously liquefying into a single mass, then reforming again as adults. Tracking devices sent along with SCP-389, regardless of whether they are contained within it or simply affixed to its outside, invariably fail after SCP-389 is beyond approximately 100 meters from the shore. All other attempts to track SCP-389 have likewise resulted in failure. Lesson complete. If you missed the previous orientation, go watch SCP-388, Ultimate Frisbee, right now. Or for the complete course, watch this playlist.


But just to remind you, that one good idea with teens computing their best experiences together, maximizing both human ingenuity and potential technology can change the world. For the 2016 meeting of CGI University held at UC Berkeley on April 1st through 3rd, former President Bill Clinton and daughter Chelsea Clinton convened more than 1,200 students from around the world as well as top-notch global leaders to discuss and develop innovative solutions to pressing global challenges. This three-day meeting consisted of an opening plenary session, a day of collaborative discussions, and concluded with a community service project. Antonio Grayson, a senior majoring in political science, has committed to develop a restorative justice student leadership program in an effort to create a more inclusive campus climate. He is one of 150 Berkeley commitment makers who are selected to be a part of the event. I had a really positive experience. I think the idea of having all of these different students from around the world coming together who are really passionate about these sort of issues, it does get understandably a little cheesy sometimes where you have all these big people coming and telling you, you're the future of the generation. But a lot of times you can let that sit and do something with that because it is cool to be in those spaces where people are actually passionate about doing something. Other Berkeley commitment makers included Neurisa Nance, a graduate student researcher who developed Ombres Verdaderos, a project dedicated to implementing a domestic violence prevention program to increase women's safety and awareness in Colombia. As part of the event, she had the opportunity to attend collaborative discussions incorporating diverse panelists. Being able to see panelists that are from all different walks of life experiencing all different kinds of...involved in all different kinds of movements all saying the same core tenets and beliefs really drove home for me that these are important and I should really continue to hold them as core beliefs. Although Neurisa is appreciative of being selected, she is skeptical of CGIU's capability to implement a long-lasting relationship with each participant. One should be necessarily critical about the role that events like this can play in promoting real change. I think that they're important. I think it's important to start dialogues. But I think that if there isn't an emphasis made on follow-up and on, you know, continuing conversations past this event, then the event doesn't really serve a purpose. Previous Berkeley CGIU commitment makers include Jacqueline Wen, who is now carrying out graduate work at the School of Optometry. In 2013, her team began developing Energent, a company committed to converting the energy from cook stoves into electricity for households in developing regions. As Jacqueline continues to develop Energent, she's grateful for the inspiration and connections she gained at CGIU in past years. Oh my gosh, it's like a liquid fountain of inspiration.  And then you realize that you can't just do it just by going to these things. You actually have to get hands on and you have to actually do your research, connect with people and things like that. And I think the major thing you get at CGIU is not only the inspiration, because a lot of people have hesitation about starting these things that seem big and monstrous, but it's about meeting people and about networking. It's fun and you don't realize who you get to know and who they know and who can help you with whatever you're trying to do. Students such as Antonio and Arisa are, or are soon to be, making a real difference in the world. Having already engaged in CGIU the past two years, Jacqueline reminds 2016 commitment makers to never give up. Part of things come with the best rewards, you know. It's rewarding because you really kept yourself at it and really made it happen, but it's also rewarding because if it wasn't challenging then everybody could do it, you know. So yeah, just don't give up, just keep going. I want my peers to continue growing, continue, and get to the point where they feel comfortable with their identity, comfortable to saying I'm undocumented and unafraid.


R thinkers recent launched a new strategy and the Library of Transforming in a key cross cutting theme of our strategy with infrastructure and theme is the new open and so, when you think about the intersection between the new strategy and the theme of conference you get over on infrastructure and if you get to open infrastructure then it becomes obvious that there's only one person that you have to invite to talk to you at this conference. ac mae'n Caelin Thani, gallwn y dyma, y dyma yw'r iawn, y dyma yw'r ddiweddol, y dyma hwnnw i'r cyflwyno. Caelin hwnnw'n gweithio'r bywyd ym wych meddwl, ac mae'n gweithio'r ffordd o'r llwyddiadau ac ym ddechrau, ac mae'r bywyd yn gwneud yr hynny'n gweithio'r cyfeirio'r cyflwyno, ac mae'n gweithio'r cyflwyno, ac mae'n gweithio'r cyfeirio'r cyflwno. Mozilla, i'r weithio'r weithio ac oherwydd. But it's been over the last couple of years that Cailin has really become involved in invest in open infrastructure. And we want to take this opportunity to get it to the conference to talk to us about some of those issues. So I'm going to hand it straight over to Cailin. So for today, I really wanted to not only build on the comments that David has said in terms of the strategy and the intersection around infrastructure, the roles of libraries, and also the work that we can bring forward together as we look at moving forward initiatives that are not only looking at transforming that relationship, which I know is a strong theme in the ROUK strategy, but also in terms of our own role in that ecosystem. So this is going to be not only a little bit of a look at the broader landscape and how things have evolved as we've talked about infrastructure, but also some of the issues that we see from our perspective at IOI or invest in open infrastructure and where we see some opportunities for change with a provocation for you all at the end. So infrastructure is having a bit of a moment is starting off in this organization, it is a very long, long title for the organization's name which is why we abbreviate IOI, but also never before in the past two years have I seen more conversations using and looking to infrastructure as a force for good and also an enabler for change, as we've seen. This has covered quite an array of different activities from philanthropies, including the Siegel Endowment, pivoting their entire funding portfolio to fueling infrastructure in the physical and the digital and in sort of the capacity building spaces, national governments not only here in the US where I'm based, but also in terms of open science plans like the French National Open Science Plan which they just recently issued their second French plan for open science, different funding calls for infrastructures on national and international sort of ways, but also in terms of infrastructure institutes cropping up within certain institutions, and also nonprofit programs. Other sorts of funding programs including efforts in Germany such as the sovereign tech fund looking at digital infrastructure in a slightly different sphere, as well as industry plays right when we launched invest in open infrastructure there were also conversations coming out of more of the open source technology space outside of higher education about open infrastructure foundation and what those services look like for bringing industry players that have been involved with groups like open stack and others to the four. Also, we saw, as of this past November at the 41st session of UNESCO the General Conference, the UNESCO recommendation on open science come out quite loudly about infrastructure and open infrastructure being a mechanism for change and also a, you know, a mechanism that needed to be included as we started to think about broader holistic change and furthering research and equity in the broader space. This was ratified by 193 Member States as part of that UNESCO General Conference and complements not only recommendations on science and scientific research dating back to 2017. It builds on strategies around open access. It builds on open educational resourcing recommendations of the past as well. And, you know, looking here at, you know, this being also not just talking about infrastructure as a need for investment but being quite specific about infrastructure needing to be community led, not for profit, other sorts of mechanisms, other sorts of attributes that we think are really important and I'll get into a little bit of why. But as we talk about infrastructure in these multiple dimensions, you know, one of the questions that we pause and think about at IOIs, are we actually talking about the same thing? When we talk about digital infrastructure, does that align with what we mean in the connotations around open? Does public mean for all or is that public with a slightly different definition and to what extent are we thinking of extending that to different communities? Does infrastructure include software and tools? Where are those lines? Are we talking about the underlying systems that help, you know, operate behind the scenes? What about the social dimension and capacity building training but also labor in terms of the infrastructure there and the dependencies? And also who gets to decide for these different initiatives, funding programs and infrastructure development? Who gets to, you know, set those boundaries for where we are looking at alignment? As we look at defining infrastructure and for the sake of this talk, we think of it as a systems protocols and software that research and scholarship rely on. And that rely on we've, we really want to sort of underscore here, you know, thinking of infrastructure if you think of the roads and bridges sort of analogy for infrastructure that you notice when they are not operating or when they are removed. Thinking of, again, that dependency and that reliance in this space to help differentiate when we start talking about tools and software versus other sorts of open infrastructure services of noticing and having a disruption when those are removed. But also thinking of some additional connotations and attributes as we think of open infrastructure, building on a number of examples that exist in the space and work done by many of our sort of supporting organizations and others in the field, including Spark, CORE and others. So thinking of openness ingrained at the operational and design level, the solution should be open source, the content and data should be openly licensed, having things like transparent pricing where possible, clear governance and guidance how decisions are made. But also thinking of that as as infrastructures and enabler for delivering collective benefits. So, being making sure it's maximally accessible for equitable participation, adoption and usage with minimal if not no restrictions, and and governed by community needs that it's not just efficient to have it be open source and available for someone else to use. But we need to also think about what it looks like for that to be a bidirectional relationship with the communities that are served to help be involved in that process. And then finally facilitating the creation and dissemination of open knowledge. This is very specific for IOIs remit in terms of open infrastructure to fuel research and scholarship. Others have broader remits and looking at digital equity broadband connectivity but for the sake of our conversations, thinking of this work around open knowledge and thinking about how infrastructure can be contributing and also supporting our aims of, again, moving forward research and scholarship with, you know, access at the forefront of that work. And then we think about the broader ecosystem that we exist in and, you know, I like to kind of frame this as the ecosystem being sick. And really when we talk about some of the broader issues that are plaguing the ecosystem currently that we're working to help move forward change in really taking a moment to recognize that, you know, that current system for scholarly research and knowledge production is really geared towards commoditization. It's cost prohibitive. It's expensive for others to participate in. We're seeing in many cases many of the big for-profit well-resourced players capitalizing on open access and open data in various ways that are crowding out other entities in the space. It privileges the well-resourced and it also caters more to seeing higher education as a business than higher education as a place for idea generation, knowledge production, and also learning. This, in my view, is devaluing and underserving our global research and scholarly communities and perpetuating a system that rewards exclusion, prestige, and also walled gardens. At the beginning of the pandemic we often referred back to this quote from Naomi Klein, who's known for popularizing the concept of disaster capitalism. Of, you know, this crisis like earlier ones could well be the catalyst to shower aid on the wealthiest interests in society, including those most responsible for our current vulnerabilities. And thinking of how that has come to play in the ecosystem that we currently operate in. Again, where there are not only pushes for more open access to materials, open publication agreements, big deals, transformative agreements, et cetera, but also where that is still exacerbating underlying problems. Some of those include when we talk about the broader mergers and acquisitions in the space. When we think of clare of it buying pro quest, you know, thinking of in one case, where that might be bringing sort of efficiencies or, you know, helping to, you know, consolidate certain entities. Where that starts to veer into some concerns are where that is really limiting the amount of choice that, you know, those that are looking to embed certain services in the library and information space, where that either locks into certain pricing where that takes away opportunities for other competition, where that creates an end to end platform for data from kindergarten and primary school all the way to postgraduate, where that starts to take out the choice and create these sort of data pipelines. We also are very sort of well-versed in some of the other pieces of ownership when we look at groups such as, you know, not just clare of it, but also Elsevier and thinking of the various entities that are owned and part of the broader portfolio for Elsevier and Relics, its parent company, and where that starts to veer into areas where data is being potentially shared across these various platforms, and also where there might be a crowding out of other players and transparency and concerns. We're talking about data from usage in specific research tools, and also from scholarly publication, then also feeding into the metrics that then are brought back to determine promotion and tenure and livelihood, and also progression in the broader scientific arena. That becomes problematic in our opinion and thinking of where we need to start differentiating so that there is choice in the market as well. Additionally, especially as we've seen this huge shift to virtual, especially over the past two years, not saying these issues didn't exist prior, we've seen in terms of our relationship with technology additional privacy and security issues. Bill Fitzgerald, who's a privacy expert at consumer reports, has said, you know, privacy has been getting short change in the education space for years before COVID. What's happening now with everyone having first hand experience with software at a level they never have is that areas that have been ignored are getting attention quickly. And also from Chase Waker, who is on our community oversight group for IOI, talking about some of the issues that have been involved with some of the proctoring software and software that monitors students and how that affects and exacerbates issues around equality and also violates student privacy. I'm going to talk about the role that institutions and also libraries have of serving and stewarding relationships with researchers and students and how technology can affect directly that by, you know, bringing some of these issues to the forefront. Taking it one step further, also thinking about again examining our relationship with some of the tools and services and why we're advocating for open infrastructure for a number of reasons is also examining who the services that we're relying on and we are purchasing in terms of providing services to our institutions, who they also do business with. And so this is work also by a member of our community oversight group, Sarah Lambden, who's a professor of law and former librarian herself at CUNY Law School here in New York City, about who's done extensive work looking at relics and also the relationship with groups such as Lexus Nexus, Westlaw, etc. About these corporations are no longer the publishers that librarians are used to dealing with, but referring to these groups as data barons, who in many cases have relationships with groups that are actually jeopardizing the safety of student populations by getting into long standing contracts with, you know, border patrol with policing with other sorts of surveillance. And where we need to start drawing a line and being an exerting a critical eye about how much we want to continue to exacerbate the profit margins of these organizations. And so with that, you know, I firmly believe that we need open infrastructure, not only as an alternative to these mechanisms, but also as an equalizer and as an enabler. The examples that I just gave about some of the broader issues illustrates that infrastructure is not neutral. Our relationships to technology are not neutral and participation in open knowledge, be it on Wikipedia or be it in your library is not a passive or an apolitical act. And it's something that I view that we share sort of collective responsibility to help bring that sort of critical eye about how this impacts not only our own lives and those that we work with but also the groups that we aim to serve in our communities. And so I would say we need to reexamine our fundamental baseline assumptions that all tech platforms are inherently good or that service is, you know, at a level of just ensuring that resources are provided. And really look at the underlying components and a deeper holistic view about what that means in terms of freedoms and opportunity. So for IOI at our approach, we came into being about two years ago and I joined full time IOI existed as a coalition. Prior to that was a number of individuals who had been long champion, not only open infrastructure investment from libraries, including the 2.5% proposal. Other organizations on the advocacy side funding organizations to come together to look at what we could do to not only increase the adoption of open infrastructure and the viability of open infrastructure and open source solutions. But also think about the sustainability and the funding that goes into that and resourcing. And so for IOI we, we conduct research to increase our understanding of the current landscape. We also craft resources and investment guidance to help others assess, build and make investment decisions about open infrastructure. In addition to that, in addition to the research and resource creation, we also pilot solutions and help coordinate stakeholders to put that into practice and to think about where we can actually help move that forward into action and coordinating a shared agenda for investing in open infrastructure across the sector. Back in 2020 through 2021, as part of our sort of founding, especially as we saw not only the pandemic, but also the economic crisis and collapse as well as racial and social justice crises coming to the fore. We commissioned and worked on a piece of research called the Future Open Scholarship where we had over 125 participants across the globe, over 18 countries represented participating to look at where they viewed areas that needed additional sort of insight into looking at collective and shared solutions around shared infrastructure and the broader implications that they faced in terms of loss of funding, budgeting challenges, but also in terms of technology issues as well. Some of the key points of friction that were surfaced in many of those cases by library leaders was thinking about, you know, the time invested in making some of these decisions versus time that's available and balancing the immediacy of needing to have a solution that could be rolled out to help meet specific needs. Either articulated by the broader department, by the, you know, shift in terms of how folks are working, whether it's virtual or in person, and thinking also the longer lead times often associated with building out custom solutions around open infrastructure. Also, what came up as the prioritization concerns about the near term gain versus long term investments, thinking of, you know, what we need to potentially move forward now and we've heard from many institutions that things like learning management solutions, as well as, you know, some of the proctoring software really serving a near term issue for many of these institutions versus looking at longer term concerns that might have surfaced through that work. Whose values get applied. This came up in a piece of work of looking at some of the values and principles based documentation that exist in many cases, led by members of the library community and scholarly communication communities about how we can best align our values in terms of purchasing decisions in terms of technology decisions in terms of programmatic decisions, but also recognizing where that applies and where that might get outweighed depending on the values of your institution, the immediate priorities, budget constraints, budget, budget owners, developers, whether you're operating across a consortia or a society. This notion of local first development of really needing to prioritize those needs for the institution versus potentially for a broader collaborative if you're looking at a solution that might be shared across a number of different institutions, staffing and labor concerns, technology that often in choices at favor usual suspects and bigger players in terms of who tends to get the resourcing and whether or not those solutions are best fit for the ecosystem. Resourcing trade offs and also this perceived resource scarcity of, you know, the effects of viewing either kind of membership and consortial support, which, you know, usually has its own constraints for many of the underlying open infrastructure services that we've examined and studied, or looking at grant support and what are the kind of different models that might exist to get us out of that element of thinking of those two as the core means of supporting technology maintenance and adoption to think through means that might help us scale or create different sort of opportunities to engage with that technology and adopt it in a more reliable fashion. And so one of the things we've been working on starting this last fall was really thinking about where we could start to alleviate some of the information asymmetries, but also some of the pain points we heard from individuals that were looking for support in terms of making these decisions. And the amount of time that normally went into examining on all the different levels, you know, whether or not one solution versus another would better suit the needs for an institution. You know, with the idea of can we start to provide information that could help provide a baseline for those conversations that would allow for transparency for us to have a deeper, a deeper sort of dialogue about this. And so our aims with looking at the costs and characteristics of open infrastructure were really to also help foster a greater understanding of these services and cultivated deeper awareness of how services were provided. We had an initial prototype, which I'll share a little bit more about as a means of standardizing the key pieces of information that we're looking to scale out over the next few months. And also in consultation with not only library and consortia leaders but also funders to think about what are their needs and how did decisions get made in those environments. Where can we help support and alleviate and reduce not only duplication of the effort but time spent. And so our catalog of open infrastructure services, we released this in the beginning of this year in January. You can find it and I'll make the slides available but if you go to invest in open on our research page and go to catalog and investigate it yourself. It began with 10 projects that we involved in not only extensive sort of interviews with project leads, but also extensive public audits of information to start to provide, you know, additional information, not only in terms of how these groups kind of aligned with some of the common values that we saw across principles shared with various library associations, and also with institutions, but also examining other elements that might help in terms of providing additional insight for making decisions about their finances, about their assets and liabilities, things that you would find in terms of doing a deeper sort of financial analysis to go backwards. On the public data side, we also did an extensive audit of not only the provider and the funder websites, annual reports, if they're established in the United States, publicly available information that they file with the Internal Revenue Service, surveys and interviews with these service providers and also evidence from documented practices. If you look on the catalog site, you can also get a better understanding as to what we sort of cited as evidence which we've taken a screenshot here so looking at whether or not a technology is reliable, thinking through you know is their technical user documentation. Do they have an open code repository do they have an open data statement in terms of trustworthy organizations, how is their governance described equitable and inclusive services what does it look like to have transparent pricing cost for those organizations, detailed there and so looking at those specific examples for our first version of this release. And some of the key questions that we asked through this process and are continuing to learn from, which we would also invite your feedback on our you know what key information do decision makers like yourself, look forward to guide investment, you know what's missing and what surfaced in this work that may not be obvious to the broader community that feels important to share. And some of the questions and observations do we start to notice have these been reported before, why or why not, and really starting to pair not only the values and principles based frame, but also with some of the financial analysis and eventually looking at areas where we can maybe surface additional recommendations surface additional sort of elements where we could flag risk, or other sorts of funding and sustainability recommendations as well. As we think about this and the work that we're doing moving forward, that's sort of one example of the sort of services we're looking to build out, as we also build out broader strategies to move this work forward. We talk at IOI about how we think about prioritizing open infrastructure needs and for whom. We're talking about favoring, you know, equitable access and supporting equitable access and participation for whom becomes a very important question and aspect of that conversation. And we think about shared infrastructure, many of the conversations, including some of the early conversations around IOI favor well resource Western institutions and scholars and established players in the space. I love these inequities when we talk about not only operating and with the inequities and some of the challenges that exist within higher education that might exist when we talk about open source, which has its own sort of bias in elements at play there. And also when we talk about financing and investing in thinking about what that looks like in terms of countering our shared community values and being really explicit about what voices are missing from that situation that we need to seek and involve in the dialogue when we talk about service. And so I mentioned at the beginning of the ecosystem is sick. One thing that we also are working to help move forward at IOI is also shifting our mindset from the sort of deficit thinking to one that's more what we refer to as asset framing, and there's been a number of things written about asset framing about thinking more about what we're looking to enable than what we don't have. And so when we think about what we're looking to enable, you know, we talk about what that future could look like versus what sort of services we currently have that we feel like we need to sustain, or that we need to move forward. And having the freedom to be able to say, okay, we talk about frictionless exchange of information. And I know that there's been extensive work, you know, through the pandemic and otherwise to have interlibrary loan systems, especially as research libraries UK and just we're negotiating the recent Elsevier deal, thinking about affordable access to tools, services and resources and what does affordability look like, not just in terms of is it free but also what sort of labor and resourcing is needed when you think about, you know, the group that you have at IT or in your department needing to spin up a certain service and what that development time looks like and what all what some of those broader sort of maintenance and startup costs look like that may not necessarily be advertised in terms of bringing the service on. A commitment to freely and openly sharing research output with minimal restriction and I know that much of this is also articulated in the RLU case strategy moving forward. And investment in open community led and community owned infrastructures wherever possible services that are aligned with the priorities of those that it is serving, not profit. I'm thinking about sustainable funding and resource models that we can use to help support this broader vision, even if it starts to challenge the way in which we've thought about these issues in the past. I'm a firm believer that we can't solve problems with the same thinking that we use to create them. This is something that we often use to help challenge our baseline assumptions of who should be part of these conversations, where we need to start sharing from areas outside of our usual comfort zones and where we can start to apply these elements to think of not only open knowledge production as a utility, but also as a core element that should be resource, not only by institutions but by others as well. And so in terms in summary of, you know, what we're working to build towards, you know, more aspirational side again thinking about what we would like to enable you thinking about collective power through trusted peer networks, like Research Libraries UK, where you have, you know, access to the shared experiences, you know, from one another to help increase efficiency, accountability, negotiation power, empowering institutional leaders like yourself to take a more active role in directing pricing and setting the terms for vendors and for service providers and I think there's some great examples of work that's been done so far in terms of thinking about where you can shift those power dynamics, and allowing the power influence on budgets to again apply a critical lens to the groups that you choose to support, both at your institutional level or in your department as well as across the Research Libraries in the UK and beyond, in ways that help shift from the chronic underfunding of these solutions to line with your values in a really visceral way. In many cases, you have power over is where your budget and where your money goes, and also increasing the amount of funding and diversity of those investing in open infrastructure. I don't believe this should just be carried by institutions or by library budgets, but it should be called for in a much bigger way to help build a healthy, resilient, sustainable future for research and scholarship. I think open research and access to knowledge requires open infrastructure. We talk about equitable and accessible participation and knowledge production and dissemination. That requires that our infrastructure is similarly designed, and that we really anchor that in community values and governance. That also means a deliberate shift from the reliance from players that are misaligned with core values of the community, transparency and also collective responsibility. There are more resources here, so I'm going to go back one here, which I'll make this available for others. We've worked to document as much of this as we can, and we are very much looking forward to this being the start of our broader conversation. So thank you very much, and I'll turn it back over to David. Thank you, Cairyn, so much for what it was a very rich and very thoughtful presentation. I've been busy making notes and trying to sort of areas that I wanted to pick up on, one that I would just pick up on as a little throwaway. Way back in 2014, we had keynotes from YSG, who was Elseviers chairman, and he showed a very similar workflow across the publication flow of the research cycle slide that you did, but he had a slightly different view as to whether it was a welcome or an unwelcome one. One of the things that struck me on the points of friction slide was around issues of time and capacity, and it sort of raised issues around thinking and our thinking space. The big players take a lot of resources, but they also take a lot of time, and so you mentioned the Elsevier negotiation, the Elsevier negotiation was a big resource intensive activity for the sector. I saw a feeling that we sometimes don't make enough time for some of these other alternatives, and I'm wondering if you have any good advice on that, things that we might be able to carve out some time and attention to some of these other activities. It's a great question, and there are so many different inspiring examples where we've heard from different librarians where they've taken values and principles-based frames, and I think the University of California has a really interesting example that's sort of buried in their documentation. I think it's called the Star Framework, where they look at a rubric for making decisions on the library side, which is phenomenal, and I've seen that others have worked to apply that to their budgets and their decision making processes. But it does take a significant amount of effort, which is not always afforded, right, in terms of examining these opportunities, and we've heard from heads of societies that have wanted to transfer away from enterprise software to open solutions that may not necessarily exist yet. So you think of big societies and the meeting software and the abstracts that get shared as part of that as a main form of scholarship, but needing something robust enough to deal with tens of thousands of individuals and really not having sort of a one-to-one solution. And that is where, you know, some of the work that we are doing, and we're going to be ramping up the catalogue to help provide a baseline to, you know, at least address some of those baseline information needs. And also to bring in additional sources of feedback to say, okay, what else would be useful so that it can alleviate some of that time pressure so that there can be more focus on, you know, moving the case making through at various levels. I think also the other question there, there's two elements that come to mind in terms of the time needed to in many cases build or implement some of these solutions. And that's something that I think we do need to figure out, and I don't know necessarily how much of this is on IOI or versus co-work meeting with other partners. But how would some of these solutions we can really shorten that time or incentivize institutions to recognize that by investing in this across a number of different institutions where there is collective gain, that there might be ways of helping to, you know, again, resource that development so that it can shorten the time scale. Because the number of times that we heard it through the work, especially with we're doing this in the pandemic, I mean, this was like may in June of 2020, when we're having these interviews, conducting these interviews of, you know, I would love to have an open solution. I don't have six to 12 months to, you know, build this out. Right. And we hear that time and time again. And so that's where our team is starting to think through like where can we be creative and collectively start to think about other means of synthesizing movement in the system that takes that burden off of the library directors and in their supporting staff. That's really helpful. Thank you. Stuart Dempsey has asked a geopolitical question. The for whom, and the idea that, you know, we're living in a world that particularly over the past two weeks, but perhaps you could argue more over the past five years or so is becoming nations are becoming slightly more insular. There's a more nationalistic view, and perhaps some aspects of international collaboration have become less in favor. At the moment, hey, is there a, is there a tension there between nations who are becoming more insular and inward looking and some of this global open infrastructure that we're trying to trying to create. Yeah, it's a great question. I think that there's a lot of learning that can be done. I know big step forward in terms of the UNESCO open science recommendation being so declarative around open infrastructure at the core and also seeing that already are trying to start to be echoed in other national plans, but also in terms of the mechanisms for implementing those recommendations that is, I think, still something that's being worked out. My, like my hope is that that nationalistic view, if there's an ability to even align similar elements and I do think that a lot of it does come down to the economics, to be honest with you, in terms of what will help unfortunately, you know, competitive advantage and you know incentives that move beyond some of the broader altruism or funding mandates in various sorts of ways that that will help serve as a means of moving things forward. In terms of the broader geopolitical component I do think that there is usually a very human characteristic of not wanting to feel that the scholars of your country are being underrepresented. And where that can help, you know, move some of the work forward but I do think that, you know, Stuart has brought up some very, some very prescient issues that do need to be delicately addressed. If we can move on to questions from, from Yvonne, and it ties in with something I thought that I was having about values and the perhaps potential tension that might be in the values between the library and other parts of the institution and and Yvonne's question is around, you know, what do you do if you have a conservative IT department who believe in buy don't build. That's another great question. And I mean we saw this also across even within different library departments of like smaller teams, moving up levels of hierarchy, also working across with other groups, especially if you're looking at some of the shared infrastructure that is often supported not just in sort of the libraries or with the chancellers in that space but also across research and IT. I do think that there are some interesting examples in terms of that buy verse build and the level of service that are being played out right now. One example that comes to mind is to I to see, not saying that they're, you know, looking to be sort of bought and brought in but they are modeling a values aligned service provider and not for profit service provider for Jupiter notebooks and computational support. Right. And so this is a group that has been involved in developing many of these tools around Jupiter notebook Jupiter book and looking at creating sort of that computing infrastructure to provide in a very transparent way elements of developing and maintaining and serving those communities in a very values line visceral sort of means and so I am hopeful that we will start seeing more of that, as well as additional usability built into some of these either groups that are building out these tools themselves or other mechanisms that can help with supporting that again, are also making sure that that money gets reinvested into the community I think there's a number of examples like I think of for example the repository space for science and at my are they might contribute to the open source development of a tool services service provider to help address some of the challenges in terms of implementation, but also in terms of, you know, contributing back more I think that there's still some areas for optimization. I will say to Evans question to be slightly cheeky, one of the anecdotes that I heard from again during the pandemic where budget constraints became really, really sort of gridlocked. We heard from group that was looking to justify to its IT department, the investment of I want to say it was $20,000 that they normally support one of the repository services as sponsors and was finding that that was even getting stuck in this sort of quagmire of questioning with this diverse build sort of mentality and the person used as a justification, the amount of money that is spent supporting Microsoft 365 and Google accounts for every person on campus, and the conversation ended. So, you know, in terms of thinking through like where we can help to surface some of that I know that that is not like a catch all solution, but we are very aware of those challenges and I think learning more about how we can move forward and think through the efficiencies for that IT department as well, and incorporate them in the conversation think about those incentives. That's work that we're interested in taking on. And I guess part of that is to do with making, making some of these services move from being seen as being sort of nice to have almost like a charitable, you know, I've got a little bit of money left over my budget, I, you know, I want to support something because it allows my values through to a key part of an infrastructure for supporting academics and I think you can, you know, if I think about some of the things like archive and such like which are, you know, are essential for physics but maybe seen by some institutions as being well I don't actually have to support it because somebody else. But I'll tell you this much people would notice if archive or bio archive or met archive got bought by elsewhere. Right. They would be up at arms about it, or even by the chance like a burg initiative where I know invest significantly in bio archive and met archive. And so in terms of those forms of at risk infrastructure I think what you're touching on to is something that we're thinking about in terms of slightly different mechanisms for supporting these these efforts and also again thinking about looking to enable and who can help serve those needs, knowing that some of these organizations will fluctuate. But for example, if you thought of the investment that has gone into ensuring that institutions have wireless access like we think of you as a states, plugging into edgirome internet to, Jean, you know, some of these sorts of groups that exist. For providing those levels of services, if it was financially insignificant in terms of, you know, having broader collective aims to have a foundational set of open infrastructure services made available to every place of higher learning in the UK by participating in a broader scheme, it would shift the conversation, right. If it became sort of a no brainer in terms of, you know, not needing to have the initial sort of like the additional sort of case making but every institution has the same set of building blocks might not solve all your problems but at least gets a foundation. So like those are some of the things that we're thinking about of, you know, what can help move beyond this sort of piecemeal one service at a time mechanism to really thinking about the infrastructure and how it relates to one another as well. I guess that would go towards some of the coordination issues. I mean, I guess there's always going to be a danger that popular services may attract sufficient money, you know, overly sufficient money to survive and then other services that could be of value you may not, you know, for whatever reason if they if they haven't, if they're not fashionable, if they're not seen as being essential, they may not thriving quite the same way. So there's a potential coordination problem there, I guess in supporting them. Yeah, and I'll be even more explicit about that, you know, it's if there is an attention game and money begets money, right. You know, if you've got an established funding record we've been, you know, privileged in terms of having this in terms of name recognition, but we also recognize and this is where we're also looking at how funding across a number of the major players has been allocated where it's concentrated and where there are gaps in terms of doing a gap analysis in that sort of way. One of the other key elements in which we're building forward because we're looking at examples such as how water and sanitation infrastructure has been funded and the recommendations from the OECD and thinking of knowledge also as sort of a utility. How can we think of frames in that sort of way. But one of the two of the groups that are sort of interrelated give well and open philanthropy in the US that focus on different sort of issues are not in the higher education space. They're also radically transparent and really anchored in evidence based grant making and philanthropy. Some of the really fascinating ways in which they approach this is they think of the causes and then who can help address those causes, right, so that it's not here are the 15 projects that we need to ensure that we sustain. But being allowing for there to be a critical understanding of those projects may change. There may be groups that don't exist yet. Where can we have that conversation and ensure that you know as we start looking at the needs and starting there versus starting with the services that you know yes do need additional resourcing, but at the end of the day at least for IOI our aims are ensuring access and participation to research, not just supporting open infrastructure projects of a certain. I think that we've we've exhausted people. The comments coming from Claire about whether or not you see companies increasingly making their tools and services open for some companies. I do. I do think that there is. I mean, we are when you know this goes back David 16 17 years ago when I started in this space. You know there were a lot of questions around the advantages to having tools and services be made open and also in terms of business models you know we could point to groups like Mozilla and Netscape and Firefox and things like that. And other sorts of examples in the open source space and you know the free software and open source movement think we've seen more examples now about how that can be a real boon, not just in terms of the development and innovation and what have, but in terms of trust, like in terms of really being, you know for. Ensuring that there is understanding, I will also say that in terms of companies increasingly making their tools and services open. There are also some really interesting examples. Which I did not get into in this about for profit entities that are dedicating and committing to exits to community instead of like your usual like startup exit in terms of investment about transferring power and also, you know revenue back to the share, like the shareholders as the communities that are being. Served. And so there's an interesting experiments that are happening as well as more understanding about how open can also exist in a way that helps again make for better experiences also furthering mission aligned aims that we haven't seen before. It's interesting. I'm being actually cynical I'm wondering what's in it for the large organizations that are funding in that way and making you know making those startups back into the community but. Yeah, some are mission aligned investors to be honest with you that are not looking for things to be paid off in this sort of entity, or like in the sort of short turnaround investment. We've had deep conversations about even the way that we think of return on investment being like a three to five year game, like if we're really looking at redistribution if we're really looking at a regenerative sort of means of moving the ecosystem forward like we need to think I'm much longer time spans and that needs to be okay, like in that getting stuck in sort of the bros. So that's a broader structure that we associate with how the services get supported. Yeah, that's brilliant. Well, thank you so much. I mean it does really, you know, as I say it. We put infrastructure into our into a new strategy. I think you've given us a great launch pad for how we think about that about some of the things that we might be able to do within our UK and some of the things that we might be able to do in collaboration with with yourself and other organizations around the world. So thank you so much for that.


What's up guys? Welcome back to our totally brand new show, YouTube Hot Trends. Now the idea about the show is to not show you guys the latest videos that are trending, in this way giving you a decision whether to make these kind of videos in the future. And the first video which is trending and you guys won't believe this, it is to get your grandmother high. Well thanks for that request but yeah guys believe it or not the trending video right now is old ladies getting high. The next one it's a game video of G2A and more likely the glitches of G2A. So you know guys what you guys do to Xboxes and everything else? Get crack king! Yeah! The police are investigating me and I'm here watching. I gained a lot of weight and I hired the wrong professionals to do my eyebrows. Right on the next one it comes from Team Lotus. And right guys to replicate this one is kind of simple or you basically need a truck and a lotus. Get that truck to ramp, get the Lotus to go right under it and you set.  This brings us to the end of today's show. I hope you guys enjoyed this format brought to you by the bo-bo-o-ldie brothers. If you like what you're doing tell us in the comments below. Thanks for watching guys, leave a like, leave a sub and rock on. Bye! And we will grow together as a family because this is the freedom family. You are part of it, we are all part of it and we're all growing together. So grow with us and partner with freedom. That play now button right there on the video bar is all you need to click to get started.