Hello everyone. Let me begin this morning by confirming that Canada and the United States have once again agreed to extend by 30 days the current measures in place along the border. This is an important decision that will keep people in both of our countries safe. This morning, I can confirm that Canada and the United States have heard about the tragic RCAF plane crash in Kamloops over the weekend. My thoughts and the thoughts of all Canadians are with the families of Captain Casey, Captain McDougal, and the entire Snowbirds team. This has been a very difficult few weeks for members of the Canadian Armed Forces. As we mourn, we remember Captain Casey as a proud Nova Scotian and an outstanding service woman, a journalist who turned her talents to the forces. She will be remembered not just for her professionalism, but for her sense of humour and for her kindness. As we honour her, we pay tribute to the bravery of all those who serve today. Our women and men in uniform are always there for us, serving overseas to defend the values we hold dear, working here at home to care for our seniors and lift our spirits with flyovers. So to everyone who so proudly wears the maple leaf, thank you.  Along the way of the tragic crash of a Royal Canadian RCAF plane that took place over the weekend, the Canadians are all over the place, with the family of Captain Casey, Captain McDougal, and the entire Snowbirds team. When we mourn the death of another heroine, we pay tribute to the courage of all those who serve our country. Every day, you make our pride. As we start to carefully and gradually reopen our economy, a lot of people will be wondering what that means for them.  To help them do that, we've extended the wage subsidy through the summer. This is about getting people back to work and giving businesses the confidence to reopen, rehire, and even grow. Because the way our economy will recover and the way our country will remain resilient and successful is by getting Canadians back to work. Many business owners are already benefiting from this program to rehire and maintain the crucial link between workplace and employee. To employers looking to start up again, please rehire your workers. Use the wage subsidy for their paycheck. That's what it's there for. And for businesses that still need help, today we're taking another step forward. Today I can announce that we are expanding the eligibility of the Canada Emergency Business Account. If you are the sole owner-operator of a business, if your business relies on contractors, or if you have a family-owned business and you pay employees through dividends, you will now qualify. For example, for a hair salon owner with stylists who rent chairs, for a local physiotherapist, for an independent gym owner with contracted trainers, this is for you. We'll have more details very soon about when you'll be able to apply. But we heard you when you said you needed a hand. That's why Minister Ng is also working on potential solutions to help business owners and entrepreneurs who operate through their personal bank account as opposed to a business account or have yet to file a tax return, such as newly created businesses. And as we announced last week, there's new funding for regional development agencies, too, which you can always contact if you still don't meet these expanded criteria.  And whether it's with the SEBA or the Expanded Wage Subsidy, we're in your corner. To help small companies to cover their expenses, we have to enlarge the number of emergency accounts for Canadian businesses. Already more than 600,000 small businesses have obtained almost 40,000 by the program's enterprise, but we know there are even more people who need help.  For example, if you have a hairdresser's salon or your stylist ludes fauteuils, if you're a physio who works at his office, or if you're the owner of a gym that works as a contractor, the program will be there for you. We work hard so that people keep their jobs or can return to work, and we do it by helping small companies that are so important in our communities to maintain their activities, because that's how Canada will be able to return in force. Of course, so that we can go through the crisis, we must also have enough medical equipment and protective equipment so that people can stay in good health and safety. This morning, I would therefore like to focus on the equipment for individual protection. During the last few weeks, we have doubled our inventory of surgical masks and facial protection visors. This week and in the coming weeks, hundreds of thousands of hospital jackets, glasses, facial protection visors and glasses will be delivered to the provinces and territories. We have also received a command from the United States, and because we want the equipment to be produced as much as possible, we continue to increase our production capacity. We now have 15 contracts across the country to make hospital jackets. By the way, we will begin to receive jackets from the Montreal company, Sam Lawson, until the end of the month. I want to end this morning with some good news, something we haven't had enough of lately. As of today, Canada now has its first university in the north. UConn College is becoming the new UConn University. And as a cornerstone for this step, our government has already provided $26 million for a new science building. To everyone who helped make this milestone happen, congratulations. Not just for students, but for all of us. This is truly something to celebrate. Young people have the power to change our country for the better, and it's up to us to make sure that no matter where they live, they have the tools to chase their dreams and succeed. Today, more than ever, we need their vision and their creativity, because that is our path forward.


The topic that we're discussing is unfair labour and some of the challenges of unfair labour and how we can help eradicate unfair labour as well. Unfair labour is clearly a very big issue across the Asia region. One thing that we know is that job creation and bringing people more work doesn't necessarily bring people out of poverty. And increasing work can sometimes put more people into poverty. The other thing that we know and that we support is that job migration is a good thing. One of the things that we know in this subject of unfair labour is that as people work in other countries and as jobs are created, these jobs have got to be good, fair jobs. People cannot be put in dangerous situations or in compromising situations that means that their life could be threatened. In eradicating unfair labour, business has a huge responsibility. Businesses have to understand that this is not just a good way of doing business, it's the way they have to do business. Businesses have to look at every single stage of the supply chain, not only maybe where they're getting products from, but how are those products or services acquired? Write down the whole chain and they have to really look closely at that. It's not just enough to have a corporate social responsibility strategy or to have a document or a process. They have to audit that and they have to continually measure that and they have to ask questions at every stage of the process. If they're uncertain or unsure as to whether labour has been procured in a safe and honest way, if they're unsure about that, they cannot buy or they cannot source in that way. Consumers also have a very important role to play. They, like business, have to closely look at where products that they're buying have come from. They have to investigate, they have to ask more questions. We live in the age of the internet where it's very easy to find out information. It's very easy to look at forums and discussion groups that may question where products have come from and may question how people that were producing those products, what sort of environment they worked in, were they in a safe environment or were they in something much, much worse, as worse as human trafficking?


The Declaration of Independence says all of us, every one of us, is endowed by our creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. What we are asking here is for nothing less than that, and nothing more. In my shoes and backbone and gray hairs, I feel the same sense of hard work and pushing that has gone into 13 long years of trying to move non-discrimination legislation. I stand before you as a very out, very proud gay man who can be fired in my own state when I fall in love. Every one of the 67 Pennsylvania counties, there are kids who are still scared. There is not a single statewide LGBT civil right in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, and we know that is wrong. We're the only state in the Northeast Quadrant that doesn't have comprehensive civil rights protections for every Pennsylvania. It means so much to so many people who are here, but also to so many people who are terrified in their home. This is your place. This is your home. This is all of our homes. This is an American demand. We're here today because there is a critical mass of support. We're joined by the governor. We're joined by members of the Senate. We are joined by a majority of the population of the Commonwealth in demanding full equality now and nothing less.


I'm going to cut the base first and then I'm going to cut the layers in all in one section. I'll bring your hair down. Kind of a key thing is body position. When I'm standing behind the mannequin I really want to make sure that this parting here and my shoulders here are parallel. I keep my eyes level to my section and then I hold the hair and I'll come through here and I'll cut my line just like that. What I'll have my client do is actually tilt her head forward. All right so I'm going to comb this up. We want this to be the air cut right so airy is the goal.  Start about mid-shaft here and I just start cutting in and I slide my hand as I cut. Once I have those airy layers in the hair cut I'll recomb. See all that hair flying everywhere and then I'll create a line about where I want that hair to be. So I'll decide the length that I want the top layer to be which is about there and then I'll drop that hair down and now I've got a ton of layers popping through the haircut and they're airy because they're not just uniform layers that we cut in there. I got this hair. Now the key of this part of the cut is to get the hair over top of the parting wherever they're parting the hair. If it's a side parting then you can go over top of the side parting. If it's a center parting you go over top of the center. Not here. See my hand go right over top right there of the section. Finger angle if I come straight up like this and I have this kind of a line in the haircut hair on this little front part right here that curves a little bit ends up being longer than the rest of the hair in this section. The shortest piece of this section is right back here and I don't want the shortest piece back there. I want them all to be uniform length or even have a little bit more extra length in the back end of this. I'm going to go a little more extreme on how I angle over top of the parting. I angle a little extra on the forehead. Same concept point cut and slide. So I'm sliding out and then I'll recomb and I'll draw a line with point cut. Then the final bit for the length I might even grab a little bit of a guide. Pull this all to the middle because I can see it. So now I got a little extra length here on the sides so I'll just comb it out and trim the length. FSE, precision scissor and using it the whole time. I honestly would even just kind of air dry it. Oh why wouldn't we? It's the air cut. Palmagell twirl around, two products in one, gel cream.


istent basis throughout the regular season, and did well in the postseason as well against tougher competition. I like that. Lakers trying to thread that needle, that thread the needle of trying to get a little younger, but then still trying to keep a championship window open for LeBron. We'll see. We got Nick Chubb, dual relic and autograph for LeBron. That's for Chris. It's to 100, Chris. And Cleveland, this is for you. Taking off LeBron. Next box, got a die cut. It's Hoops. It's Josh Giddy. One out of 49. That's awesome. Nice Josh Giddy autograph from 2223. Crown Royal basketball. OKC, Jason K on the board. Nice, Jason. All right, four more to go. Another PSA 10. Football. It's Michael Pittman, Jr. from Select. Nice blue prism. 29 out of 175. Who's got the blue horseshoes? It's Chris. A little color match there, too, with the color of the team. Always cool to see that. I don't think it does anything on the secondary market, but it's just visually cool aesthetically. All right, next one is Alex Bregman, 30 out of 49. Jersey and autograph from 3 and 2 baseball. Chris with the Astros. Then we got some Drake London. Nice, Donner's Optic football. Great Iron Kings insert. 12 out of 25 for the Dirty Birds. Chris with the Falcons. And the final one. Good luck, everybody. We've got another break in the store at jaskyscasebreaks.com. Some full spots available. A couple fillers to try to win your way in as well. The final one is going to be baseball. And it's going to be Paul Goldschmidt, 89 out of 90 from tier one baseball, like the stitch design in the corners there. That's from 2018, tier one baseball. That Diamondbacks edition. And that'll be for Chris. Nice. I feel like he should have knocked out an MVP with the Diamondbacks at one point as well. All right, there you go, gang. Very nice break. It's also a wax party break. So let's give away an invite. Let's gather everybody's names. Let's go back to the list. Let's gather everybody's names. 1 through 30. And let's roll it and randomize it. There were no cell sheet hits in this case? Well, let me do this really quick. I don't think they're guaranteed to have a cell sheet hit in every case. There's some cell sheet worthy hits in this case, though. That's for sure. All right, so snake eyes for the wax party invite. One and two. Easy. And name on top is going to be Chris. No doubt about it. He's got the odds on his side. But that's from a filler break as well. So there you go, ladies and gentlemen. I'm Joe for jasmizcasebreaks.com. Thanks for watching. Thanks for breaking with us. I'll see you next time for the next one. Bye-bye. Yeah, I guess there wasn't. All right, so there you go, gang. Let me upload this video, print out all these labels. I've got to fix that window as well. That's as good as it's going to get for now. All right, I can. Once those full spots all out, then I'll cancel a filler and add another eight spots back in and cancel a filler, as we usually do. All's name into the list, yes, perfect. All right, there you go. That's the way to do it. Chris picks up 14, which allows us to cancel a filler, add eight spots back in, and we can officially make, where is that? We can officially make break, officially make this, which Nick P bought a few spots in. We can officially make that the last filler. We can do another one of these tonight. What would you call that? That's not a gazebo, right? What is that? That is a gazebo. No, it's a carnation. No, it's a catelion. There is a word for that. Now that's in the bottom. Chris grabs the last eight spots in the break and the rest of the spots in the filler. But Nick P still stands in your way. All right, now before I start this, let me take this off the site. Let's keep this open here. And let's load up another one of these. And same deal, we'll sell 14 spots outright, and we'll plan for two fillers. That's a good Louis Armstrong from Teddy. All right, so the next... Wait, where's the case? Did I not put that in draft mode? That would help if I take it out of draft mode. All right, so there's break nine right there. Now let's do this. Great, I'm even done yet. I gotta craft the container. The label in the containers, space, another trash bag. Patrick already grabs a spot in the next filler break. Yeah, that was a good break, right, Carl? It was a special break. Hi everyone, Joe for Jasperyscasebreaks.com. Yeah, with another series one baseball hangar box break, which will unlock another multi-sport madness break. This is madness. Big thanks to Chris and Nick. Nick standing in the way of Carl Chris's efforts to get all the spots. Let's see what happens. We gotta do the break first. Four and a five, nine times. And we'll do a different dice roll for the giveaway part at the end. Four and a five, nine times for names and teams. Two, three, four, five, six, nine. And then nine times for the teams here. All right, first half, second half, and let's print and rip. All right, thanks everyone, or thanks to the both of you for making this happen. Now, the important part here, who's gonna win those spots? Let's gather everybody's names, new dice, new list, and let's roll it and randomize it. Three and a two, five times. Good luck, one, two, three, four, and five. Now from nine on down, it's gonna be sad times. Only the top eight can get in. I think Nick had three spots and I already see his three names there, so I think it's all gonna be Carl. It is. Carl had the, or Chris had the odds on his side. There you go, Chris Carl. We'll see you in the next video for the break. Jaspy'scasebreaks.com. All right, congrats. And so now the next break is gonna be a personal for Carl because he has all the spots. And automatically gets the wax party invite, boom. You have an idea, oh boy, Rex's idea for Hollywood. He should take the previous moves and AI them with the actors who were originally supposed to be in them, but use the real actors to play them. So for example, Ice Cube was on Rogan and said Adam Sand was supposed to be to start, are we there yet? So put out Adam Sand. That's exactly what Hollywood doesn't want happening, Rex. So Rex basically wants the death of Hollywood. Good job, Rex, you've just killed the movie industry. And at that point, why not just replace actors? I mean, we've got a whole log of actors banked, right? I mean, this would be perfect for you, Rex. Once all your 90s favorite stars die, they'll just keep replacing them and putting them in new movies using artificial intelligence. No, don't need Adam Sand to write silly movies anymore once he's dead. We've got enough Adam Sandler to create a new Adam Sandler movie. Oh, make Adam Sandler do it, oh, I see, I see, I see. Still terrible, still awful idea, Rex. Well, I mean, that's, I suppose there'd be some academic interest in what a movie would be like if one character replaces another character and what different acting choices they would be. I suppose that'd be interesting if it was like Casablanca if we used like someone other than Ingrid Bergman, but you're talking about, you're talking about, are we there yet? I mean, I don't know if it'd be worth that. All right, let me go grab these cases. We'll put it on the channel that Rex will only subscribe to. All right, CKH, ready or not, here we go. Hi, everyone, Joe for jaspyscasebrakes.com, come at you with another dual case break of Jaspy's multi-sport madness, a little collaboration we did with Hit Parade. 20 total boxes, an example of what you could see in some of these cases. Got 20 cases total. And big thanks to Carl Chris, bought all the spots straight up, won all the spots in the giveaway break, that series one hanger box, and automatically gets the wax party. Invite, congrats, dual case break. Let's see what you're gonna get. So Rex with another one of his brilliant ideas for Hollywood says that he would love to see a movie, so he wants to see old movies be remade with cast with actors that were supposed to be in that movie. So for example, Michael Madsen was supposed to play Vincent in Pulp Fiction instead of Travolta. So he'd like to see a version, same exact thing, but except Madsen making acting choices in Travolta. I think that sounds terrible. Like somehow Michael Madsen is gonna make acting choices that are gonna be different or unique enough that warrants an entire, George Pickens, PSA 10, Red Mosaic. I mean, it's not like Michael Madsen, no offense to Michael Madsen. Michael Madsen is not like, he's like Ray Fiennes, or Daniel Day Lewis, actually I'd rather see that. I'd rather see like a really good actor, in a really bad movie, and then, well, not in Pulp Fiction, but let's put like Daniel Day Lewis and replace somebody in a bad movie and then see if that makes any better. Yeah, terrible idea, Carl agrees with me. It's a terrible idea from Rex, but he loves the PSA 10 Pickens though, just to clarify. Thanks Carl. We got Hakeem the Dream of Lajuan, but even then, that'd only be interesting academically. And really, that would just be something funny for like a YouTube bit, where you would interview Daniel Day Lewis and say, hey, do a scene in this terrible movie. Give him the original script and then have him do it. I'd wanna see like five minutes of it. I don't think I can do the whole movie. It's like, we'll get the point after a couple scenes, one scene. Here's Daniel Jones, PSA 10, 2019, Panini Prison Football, he got paid.  Another one is Reggie Jackson. Nice, from Top Sterling. What year? 2007 Top Sterling. I was like, this is not a recent edition of Top Sterling. Nine out of 10. How cool he looks with the shades. Nice. Mr. October. All right, next one. We got some football. We got some Rondale Moore, 37 out of 99, three color patch, an autograph from NT. We got a graded one. We got graded baseball. It is Jonathan India, PSA 10, from 2021 Tops Update. Where's playing some good baseball? Are they still playing good baseball? They were playing good baseball. They won like 11, 12 in a row, just a week or so ago. Another PSA 10. Love racking up the PSA 10s. We got a PSA 10, Charles Barkley from Prison Basketball from 2019 Prison Basketball, Silver Prison. Are they beat the Padres today, all right? So I guess they're still winning. And let's see what we got here, Carl. Another graded card, PSA 9. Oh, what is this? Whoa, from 1997 Fleer Ultra, Ken Griffey Jr., Home Run Kings, PSA 9. That's pretty awesome. I have no idea what this is worth on a secondary market, but that looks cool. Oh, it was the Pirates that swept the Padres? I don't know who to believe at this point. I'll look it up later. All right, then we've got nice from Noir Basketball, 70 out of 75, two color patch, an autograph, Brandon Ingram, Lakers edition. And the final one, it is Aaron Gordon Rookie, Aaron Gordon. Dual Relic and Encart Autograph, 133 out of 149, and a world champion. Nice RPA. All right, but wait, Carl Chris, there's more. All right, another 10 boxes, 20 total. Another dual case break, load it up on jaspyscasebreaks.com, so check it out. And then we got Dave Winfield, 23 out of 27, Winfield winner. Next up is Jazz Chisholm, nice three color patch, an autograph, 22 out of 149. He recently came off the IL and has been hitting well since. Was that the MLB the show curse? He was on the cover of that video game, right? Is there a curse there? Like the Madden curse? PSA 10. We got a PSA 10, Devante Adam Snakeskin. Love the Snakeskin parallel. Who are my favorite funny men in Hollywood? I suppose a lot of funny men in Hollywood. Oh, this is nice. Rated Rookie, Shock Parallel, SGA, Shay Gildes Alexander. I think the Clippers regret trading him. Just killing it with OKC. Nice PSA 10. Carl, Chris, CKH. Next is a book, Rookie Playbook Jersey Autographs. And that is Traylin Burke's Titans. 90 out of 249, let's take a look here. I know how to open, how do I open these? There we go. Trouble there for a second. Nice. Jersey and Autograph. Bill Hader's pretty funny. I'm a Bill Hader fan. He's a funny guy. He's a fun guy. Will Ferrell, he's a fun guy. But probably, Larry David I think probably would be, would be up there for me for funny men. We got John Mechie, the third. Rookie Auto to 149. Wow, Jason pulled you a Jamal Crawford at a select? One of one? Nice, like a, what was, do you remember what the level was? Was it court size, premier, concourse?  Pretty cool though. Always nice to get one of ones. Got a PSA 10. Got a PSA 10. Steph Curry, speaking of select basketball. This is 2021 select. Steph, blue shimmer. Nice. All right, three more to go. I think we got more hoops with an autograph. It's CJ McCollum, dual relic and autograph. 25 out of 49 from Panini one and one basketball. Second to last one. Good luck, Chris. So far, so good. Let's see what we end up with. We're gonna close with the final two hits. Second to last hit is a graded car, PSA nine. It's football. It is championship ticket auto. 36 out of 49. Romandre Stevenson. Rookie auto. Not a graded card in this one. All right, and the last one, 20th and final box. Thanks for making it happen, appreciate it. All right, we're gonna end up with another graded card. PSA 10 did not see the sport though. PSA 10 baseball? PSA 10 baseball? How about a PSA 10 rookie Julio Rodriguez? 2022 Tops Chrome update, pink wave, Julio Rodriguez. PSA 10, nice. Not even on the cell sheet. Some surprises in these cases, ladies and gentlemen. There you go. Nice way to finish it, Carl. Thank you very much. Carl Chris, CKH, appreciate you and all of your support of Jaspies. We'll see you next time for the next break. Congrats on that wax party invite too. You automatically get it. Thanks, we'll see you next time for the next break. Bye-bye. You're welcome, sir. Thank you. We appreciate it. All right, make sure I got your name in there. There you go. Break number eight, perfect. Shipping teams, I love this too, Carl. They don't have to sort any of this out. We're gonna pack it up carefully, really nice and send it off to you. Simple as that. That was break seven. Let's upload. Actually, we need to upload that series 115 box. That uploaded, public publish. Let's upload this break here. I won't monetize it, Carl. Although YouTube might put their own ads on there, but from our perspective and watch as much as you want to, no monetization. I have not listened to Neil DeGrasse Tyson's Star Talk. I may have caught some episodes, but I don't actively listen to it. Yeah, I mean, it's a lot of complex physics stuff that you'll often get into. It's not easy for even the smartest of people, Rex. A podcast that I have been getting into, though, is the Joe Pompe show. I check it out. So it's about the business of sports. He'll talk about the financials beyond the Tour de France, how athlete insurance plans actually work. Some of it's kind of obvious stuff. It's like how brands leverage formula to make billions. The athletes one's kind of obvious too. But it's, I don't know. They're only like 15 to 30 minutes long. And it's like a nice, I don't know, what's the good way to put it? It's kind of like the first paragraph of like a Wikipedia page, but explained really well. He's a good host. You know, so a lot of stuff I think if you follow sports pretty closely, I think you're gonna kind of know like, you know, most of this sort of stuff. But it's kind of cool to kind of hear it condensed into a nice little podcast. There's also, I forgot the name of the podcast, but there's also a sports lawyer, sports law podcast. I think that Joe Pomp had this person as a guest. This other person has a sports legal side of things podcast, which has been pretty interesting. To me anyway, if you're interested in the law and as Joe Justice, I do like the law, especially as it pertains to sports, which is a lot more fun than the law as it pertains to other non-sports stuff, real-world stuff, boring. As it relates to sports, interesting. That's right Rex, it's really crazy to realize that because the earth's continuously growing, but the universe's continuing growing, always chasing the past when setting, absolutely. The best way to time travel is just look at the stars. Rex, because it takes tens of millions of light years for that light to even get to us, what we're seeing is something in the past. It's kind of crazy to think about. Like that star could already be dead and blown up into a supernova, something we will not see for another tens and tens of millions of years. The thing about his podcast though, I mean, Neil deGrasse Tyson is so... He's always out there, like taking interviews and talking and all that sort of stuff. In words of time, ages ago, before he was what he was, when he was just a random dude on PBS, I've seen a lot of his content and I've heard a lot of his lectures on YouTube and read his books. The stuff he talks about nowadays is pretty much the same as what he's talked about before. And usually people aren't smart enough to ask him unique, new and unique questions. So he just ends up re-answering in different ways a lot of the questions that he's been asked before. And I don't know, in terms of the world of physics, there hasn't really been a lot of, has there been a lot of any crazy breakthrough stuff? Is he even researching anymore? I think he's just a public figure now. Is he still publishing anymore? Doing any research? I don't think he is. I mean, he's obviously done a lot for science, but he's actually physicist boots on the ground. I don't think so. You know, it's interesting. You know, to craft Tyson is fine. Kip Thorne. Look into his stuff, Rex.  A lot of fun stuff there. A lot of gravitational physics and astrophysics. He helped write a, he helped write a interstellar. Or he's a big consultant for interstellar. Yeah, I mean, he's earned it. You know, being such a public figure, I feel like he's earned it. I'm sure talking about physics is a lot more fun than teaching at a university. What he's doing probably makes him a lot more money. And it's easier for him to just go interview another physicist who's actually working on something. But Neil deGrasse Tyson, obviously, is gonna understand it.  That's, you know, that's in a more easily digestible way, which I think is his amazing talent. But yeah, he's got a good book. The book on how he started writing sort of the, it's kind of like a half, like, half how interstellar was made and a half physics behind interstellar. So if you want interstellar book, oh, the science of interstellar is what it is. Yeah, that's a pretty good one. Oh, I was gonna move these two towards the top of the baseball section. I actually want the 190 box mixer stuff ahead of it. So let's slide this down here. Let's slide the filler down right over there. So remember, ladies and gentlemen, the next, so in terms of the hip parade, Jaspie's collab, the Multisport Madness, there's only two more breaks at that break nine and break 10. So only four cases left. I really even thought about it just didn't go in. So, you know, I can say nothing but positive. It's wonderful. Okay, the separate guys, how are you now? It's such an amazing opportunity. This is something I've been able to say for so long. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. It's been a while. I'm sorry. I'm sorry. It's so nice of you to hold me. I'm sorry. It's not a big deal. I'm sorry. We're not alone. It's a big deal to me. There was a mess at the time. Uh-oh. I didn't expect you to do that. Alright, I'm gonna watch Teddy do some Immaculate soccer on Instagram. Be right back.  Alright gang. Joe Pizzle what's going on? Oh I see. Yeah Rex is gonna try to sweet talk the randomizer. Alright well I'm gonna sign off. Joe Pizzle I'm about to sign off. First of all hi. How are you? Glad back in Arizona safe and sound. We saw Joe Pizzle last week. Last Wednesday I think it was. We got to spend a little bit of time with Joe Pizzle. He visited a little quick little vacay to Southern California. A little beach time. A little jazzy time. So it was good to it was good to see him. It was also good because he actually has been to before this shop he was he has also visited the old shop Rodano Beach and also brought the wife and kid and it was crazy because the A the kid you know was maybe at Joe Pizzle's kneecaps before and now she's like at like his his chest level she so she sprouted up and and Joe also got to see like the change between like the small shop and the larger shop and right and in our and you know just the larger staff than what you saw before it was just it was just us and like just me and Jason and maybe like one of the sorters or maybe only maybe had one sortership or person but but yeah now he's gotten to see the the growth and you're part of that Joe you're part of you're part of us helping helping the business get to where we need to be oh yeah Tyler knows the area we were in Rodondo Beach Tyler we were at the you know where the post office is in Rodondo Beach we're just right down the street from there right on Catalina somewhere are we that far down no we're not that far down are we this little bit up oh yeah here so you know where you'll you you you've probably driven by this building right here this green building so our shop used to be like one of these doors right there I think we were right next to wherever that ECG construction was some of you may remember that one time when some truck lost control and slammed into that pole right there and knocked it over and knocked out power across the street I remember that these were the old days ladies and gentlemen these were the old days you know and then I would be and one of us at the end of the night we we didn't have a regular postal pickup because we didn't have enough to ship out so we take we drive it to the post office drop stuff off there we had the Jersey Mike's ride around the cross actually kind of close to like the Whole Foods was right around the corner that was nice yeah by that tie place but yeah the tie place is around the corner that's pretty good that's place still there nice should get some tie food there sometimes yeah but now we're further up north next to the Trader Joe's well Tyler knows where it is but in a larger and bigger location oh Teddy's doing a soccer TV my help all right see it Tyler have a good one and everybody else have a good one as well hopefully my back feels a little bit better tomorrow I went I went to play golf here on Friday and then I went to play golf it that's not satellite photos not done it went to play golf there and my body is not used to playing this much golf and tweaked my lower back but hopefully I'll put some heat on it I'll roll it out with the old foam roller things you know see what see it see how I feel tomorrow because I want to play more golf ASAP I think Rex mentioned I had money I money on your pops some icy hot back there I could I don't have icy hot I have this stuff at home I suppose I should get you rid of this got some bio freeze I feel like that's temporary though I also have one of those this is when I think I was also doing some sort of strenuous activity and jammed up my back I also have a one of those copper fit waistband thingies that actually helps believe it or not be surprised at how well that stuff works just having some compression I could play golf at that though did I upload the other hip parade it's Carl's hip parade right yeah break it Chris Carl all right that's done all right gang Rex have a great night be cord says bio freeze what your chiropractor uses I think I have a gel and like the roll-on version of that I suppose I could pop that on my back a little bit all right so chiropractor approved usually whenever my back jams up like this it takes a couple days I should be fine within a couple days let's stretch it out pretty well you know give it some good stretching you know when I take a shower in the morning I have some hot water blast on my my back loosen that up stretch it out a little bit maybe some bio freeze pop that bio freeze on there I also to be cords there's I've got the fourth of July off I want to you know I gotta try to play some more golf then you know this is jamming up my my golf game but thank you I'll see you guys tomorrow the cords Omnibot he was in the other chat to twitch and you to pre-sure biographies with a spray on every footballer I isn't I don't think it's bio freeze but I think it is some sort of freeze thing it's like when they cramp up and they're they're they're grabbing their their calves and I don't know if anyone has a calf cramp you know how bad that feels I know footballers soccer players get like you know get like a bad rap for diving or you know overexaggering injuries which is true but when they cramp up that's a real injury that sucks or anyone at like who's like woken up at night with a calf cramp imagine like sprinting at full speed down a football pitch and then that happens you know I think they use something different though I think it's almost like I don't know if it's bio freeze but I think it's supposed to be cold maybe that's for cuts maybe that's for injury no I think it's for cramps to like someone gets like a Charlie horse or something in their thigh or something I think it's like I don't want to say it's not like dry ice or it's not like liquid nitrogen or anything like that like in Terminator but it's something cold they spray all that on there and it's almost like a cold and like an antiseptic or something like that or some sort of topical analgesic that that both cools and helps you forget about it and then you just run through it until afterwards I'll bet like in the locker room they're like they're crumpled on the floor again trying to get to the trainer's table to get that cramp and that lactic acid knocked out and to you know pound some some Gator aids to try to rehydrate anyway well that's that's the latest episode of Dr. Joe Jaspi MD also a sports sports trainer physical therapist for entertainment purposes only obviously not a doctor but there'll be more of that tomorrow boys and girls I don't know if it's Michael back from Europe I don't know who's it that the earliest schedule might be a little weird this week just because of the 4th of July I think after the 4th of July I'll be out of town for a little for a few days but anyhow that schedule might be a little weird this week but that's our usual so there might be someone in early if not I'll be here at 3 o'clock Pacific 6 o'clock Eastern and we'll do this silliness all over again thanks everybody we'll see you tomorrow have a great night bye bye


In this video, we will discuss how to solve exponential equations by hand. You also can solve them using your graph on your calculator, but I will not discuss that method in this video. So to solve exponential equations, remember that the inverse to an exponential equation is a logarithm. So just starting with a very basic example here. Here we have an exponent with base six. So the inverse to an exponential equation of base six will be a logarithm of base six. So what we want to do to solve this is take the log base six of each side of the equation. And what happens here is because they have the same base, these cancel out the logarithm base six and the base six of the exponent. So all we're left with on the left side of the equation is x and on the right side of the equation we get log base six of 3589. And remember the change of base theorem allows us to evaluate that by taking the log of what's inside of the logarithm divided by the log of the base. And in this case today we will just round to three decimal places for all of these examples. And so the solution here would be x equals 4.568. Let's look at a slightly more difficult example here. So in this example you'll notice we still have an exponential equation, but this time it doesn't start out isolated. So your first step to solving exponential equations is that you want to isolate the exponent. Here I would first add 14 to each side of the equation. And then what you need to make sure of is you can't multiply that four and two together because the four is not raised to the exponent. So next we'll divide each side of the equation by four. And we have the expression two to the x plus three is equal to 4.2. Now that the exponent is isolated now we can solve by taking the log of each side. Because the base of the exponent is two we'll do the log base two of each side of the equation. And on the left the log base two and the two of the exponential cancel out. So we just are left here with x plus three. And then on the right log base two of 4.2 we can evaluate using our change of base theorem. So we end up with x plus three is equal to 2.07. And the final step is just to solve like we would normally solve for x. So if we subtract three from each side of the equation our final answer would be x is equal to negative 0.93. Final example here that we have to do a little bit differently than the others is this expression seven to the x equals four to the 2x minus one. So here we can't just take the log base seven or log base four of each side because they have different bases. So instead you can choose any base that you want to and just take the log of each side. So what I'm going to do here is I'm just going to do the natural log because I know I have something on my calculator that will do that for me. And what I'm going to use here is the power property. So recall that the power property makes it so that the exponents to an expression can drop down in front of the logarithm. So here it doesn't matter that these are different numbers inside of the logarithm but what we can do is drop the exponent in front so that we then have multiplication. So on the left it becomes x times the natural log of seven and on the right it becomes two minus x times the natural log of four. And don't let those natural logs confuse you because the natural log of seven and the natural log of four are just numbers. So I'm going to just type it in here or write it in as a number just to help you see it a little bit better. The rounding might cause it to be off a little bit but natural log of seven is about 1.946 and the natural log of four, I'm going to put it in front here, is about 1.386. So this now is just a standard linear equation to solve. We can distribute the 1.386 on the right and then we'll be able to solve for x. So what I would do next to solve here is just subtract to move all of the x's to one side of the equation and I end up with negative 0.826x equals negative 1.386 and so the final step will be to divide. My final answer in this case is 1.68 is about what it rounds to.


So when things change overnight, and we often refer to this as the new reality, it's this VUCA world that we live in. A lot of people think about really how does your strategy design change, but it's an interesting question to say, well how should the strategy delivery capabilities also change? My concern about so much of strategy design is that it excludes too much of the organization, and it should be a more highly engaged process so that you don't have this stark line between design and execution. If you approach it in that way, then you resist the problem that often happens in a time of crisis, which is that strategy should become a less engaged process and a more top-down directive process.


All right, so the name of this panel is the Artemis Accords and the Moon Agreement, Living in Harmony. If you look at the stage, you see four space lawyers total and one scientist, but the panel will not be deep and involved with international space law, although we are going to allude to it. So Living in Harmony on the Moon and comparing the Moon Agreement and Artemis Accords with me first to my immediate left is Dr. Antonino Salmeri, the director of the Lunar Policy Platform and the co-chair of the Space Generation Advisory Council. Antonino, thank you for joining me. To his left is Emily Pierce, who is the attorney advisor for Oceans, International, Environmental, and Scientific Affairs, Office of the Legal Advisor Department at State. Often you will see her at Copas. Emily, thank you for joining me today. To her left is Gustavo Medina Tango, who is the scientist, who is from the autonomous University of Mexico. And we'll point out later, but I think it's worth noting here, is that he is also in that ISAC, the International Space Exploration Coordination Group, serving as a science expert. And really, we can ask him questions, particular to scientific opportunities on the Moon. And thank you for joining us this afternoon. To his left is my Gold Chief Growth Officer at Redwire. Amongst, if you look at his biography, a wide variety of other places that he's been at, whether it's NASA, or Maxar, or even before that was Bigelow. So Mike, thank you also for joining us. It's great to have a look at around at this panel and seeing old friends and new friends. So first, I want to turn to Antonino, Dr. Salmeri. I want you to talk about, we've heard about the scientific opportunities on the Moon and commercial opportunities on the Moon. But you can talk about that, but in the context of the precedent-setting value that it has and the fact that we're going to go and do these things, what great importance are they? And then, a little bit about the governance framework. So the floor is yours. Thank you. Thanks, Chris. And thanks for having me at this panel. It's such a pleasure coming back to the Summit on Sustainability at Securewall Foundation with a very easy question to answer, guys, about precedent-setting on the Moon and then what is the governance framework for governing this precedent. I will start by saying that we're going to have this 106 or more payloads that were mentioned in the panel before coming to the Moon, not just in the next decade, but if all goes well in the next three years, by 2026, with a number of international countries joining. Among the precedents that we need to look at are the first commercial landing on the lunar surface and ice-space got really close to that. But next year, there's going to be other attempts from them. But this year already, there might be attempts from intuitive machines that will try to be that company. Then we're going to have the first commercial recovery of space resources contracted by NASA. We're going to have then additional activities with the development of commercial telecommunications satellites on the Moon to ensure that we have a constellation, as, again, intuitive machines calls it. And then later on, we might have the first persistent infrastructure with the development and deployment of power systems, landing pads, and so on and so forth. In addition to that, if everything goes well, we will talk about very positive precedents. But if we don't coordinate enough in advance, we might also have the first accident on the Moon. We might have the first case of harmful interference. And later on, we may have the first conflict and so on for their additional geopolitical complications on the Moon. So how do we make sure that we establish the right type of precedents on the Moon? It's a question that we need to answer today. We have this unique window of opportunity in which we know that certain activities will happen on the Moon. We have an understanding of how they will be. And we can be deliberate about what kind of precedents we want to set on the Moon. And I think the question becomes, who gets to decide that? Who gets to establish these precedents? And how do we make sure that we line them up in the right way, making sure that they build on each other and they are consistent with international space law? And to this end, there is already some activities going on at the international level in the committee on the peace for users about space. We have a working group on space resources that was kicked off two years ago and this year started to discuss the organization of an international conference that will take place next year. And the goal of the working group on space resources is to develop in five years principles, an initial set of principles for ensuring that safe, sustainable, peaceful, and rational conduct of space resource activities. And I think that working group is an excellent opportunity to start think about not just space resources themselves, but something also related to that, because space resources will not just happen magically on the Moon. We will not teleport mining instruments. We will need to lend them. We will need to ensure that there is communication, that they are powered, that everything we mine is stored and eventually processed and transported back. All these activities are connected to space resources and they have to be considered holistically as part of a broader framework that we need to keep in mind. KOPOS will play a central role into that, but as we all know, there are also programs that are already planning to go to the Moon and the Artemis Accords are an example of how do you try to implement the principles of the outer space treaty, which we know will apply to the Moon because they are meant to govern every space activity. But the question is how and what kind of implications they have. Just give you one example. The outer space treaty is a treaty on principle. So in itself, it doesn't give you specific guidance on how to conduct activities. So we have the freedom to use and explore celestial bodies, but we also have the prohibition of appropriating them. We have the freedom, actually the free access to all areas of celestial bodies, but we also have the right to establish stations and installations. And we know that all of that will have to be conducted with due regard to the corresponding interest of others. So how do we take these principles, balance them against each other, and then apply them to create concrete rules on how much you can stay, how long you can stay on the Moon, how much resources you can take, and so on and so forth. So the Artemis Accords are a regional, or I would say we call it sometimes in international law, minilateral approach to solving these questions by a group of countries that are doing activities together and they want to make sure that they are guided by the same principles. Then on top of that, it will be the discussion in copus, but I think I want to emphasize the importance of below that level, below state to state interaction in the Artemis Accords or in copus, the importance of developing Norse behavior and understanding what is the role that commercial actors and civil society will play in developing these norms because not everything can be decided at the international level, not should it be. So we need to think about why we have principles in the Artemis Accords on the Confliction and while there will be discussions among states on how to ensure this deconfliction, what an operator will do on the Moon if it has an issue of overlapping activities with another operator perhaps from another country and how these two will be able to communicate with each other to solve these problems and how do we ensure that their activities are predictable. I think those are the questions we need to answer and that's why we need synergies, not just at the multilateral but also at the multi-stakeholder level. And I'll close by saying one final thing which is the importance of being deliberate. I think this is something that at the Lunar Policy Platform and broader at the Open Lunar Foundation we value significantly. We have a responsibility also towards future generation and in my capacity also as co-chair of SGC and particularly mindful of that because we have a blank page on the Moon, literally a blank page. And so whether we want to draw a beautiful picture in it or we just wanna have different shades of color that are uncoordinated, that is the question that it's in front of us and so we can take steps and make sure that we get the picture and I think so far we have the opportunity and the resources to do it. Now it's just a question of how far are we willing to go to make sure that happens. I like it fair enough. And you're alluding to this idea, the sentiment, this notion that there may be conflict, normative conflict, rule-based conflict between outer space treaty, moon agreement, outer space treaty or let's say moon agreement, Artemis Accords. I wouldn't say that there will be normative conflicts but they could be diverging interpretations because these principles are generally enough so that they can be interpreted in a variety of different ways. And if there is no boundary as to how far you can push your interpretation of the outer space treaty, then it is very likely that different countries, different interpreters will come up with different interpretation, different solutions. And if you then operationalize them, you may have conflict at the end but I don't think it's an inevitable result. I think eventually groups like the space resources working group or even Artemis are meant so that states can find those boundaries to then maneuver inside and have their own interpretation of the outer space treaty. So we don't have to agree on everything but we need to understand where do we draw the line at the broader general level and then we need processes for solving potential disputes that may come later. So again boundaries and then we interpret within the boundaries and if we disagree on something we know how to handle that disagreement. I think those are the two things we're missing now and we must develop in the next five years. Oh great, okay, great, thank you. So I asked that question about Moon Agreement Outer Space Treaty. In the Hoover app, you can vote. I put a poll up there. I'm gonna close the poll. The poll will be closed around 3.30 asking your, you know, I wanna get the opinions of the audience whether there actually is real kind of conflict between Artemis Accords and Moon Agreement or whether it's, you think differently. So please go on the app and fill in that. Next I wanna turn to Emily. First I wanna talk and a very pointed question. What values would the US like to see develop on the Moon and then a follow up after that? But please go ahead. Yeah, sure. I think it should come as no surprise to folks in the room that the values the United States wants to see develop on the Moon but also throughout all of outer space are the values that are reflected in the Artemis Accords. And, you know, the Artemis Accords developed because the United States and several international partners had near term plans to engage in lunar exploration and there was an urgent practical need as Antonino alluded to, to start to get countries on the same page regarding operational implementation of several key obligations of the outer space treaty. And that's why our initial conversations were focused on among those partners. And the first signatories to the Accords all have two common traits. They're already contributing to the Artemis program or have expressed an explicit desire to participate. And two, they share a vision for safe, transparent, peaceful, and prosperous future in space for all humanity to enjoy. But now we have about 25 signatories which I think is maybe less than one country shy of being about a fourth of all copious members. And they reflect a diversity of states, states that are space-faring, space that are emerging space-faring states, and states that as a Rwandan representative stated at a side event in copious last week said that they would like to place themselves on the value chain for access to outer space. So states that want a seat at the table to help develop what the rules are going to be. So those values reflected in the Artemis Accords, in my view, are three. First, the beneficial and sustainable use of outer space for all humankind. Second, the promotion of operational safety and the reduction of uncertainty. And third, even though you said we weren't gonna talk a lot about international law, as an international lawyer, I can't go without saying the third value is the promotion of international law and multilateralism. So first, the Accords principles promote sustainable and beneficial use of outer space for all humankind. When I speak with people, friends, family, co-workers, other members of copious about the promise of outer space, there's a general sense that countries and humans around the world benefit enormously from the applications and the scientific discoveries of the use of outer space, including space-based services, telecommunication services, GPS, you all know the list goes on. And many people, except for maybe the scientists in the room, many people cannot even fathom what's going to come next, but they know that they don't wanna be left out. So there's also a general sense that whatever we're doing in outer space, scientific discovery, use of outer space needs to be done in a way, a sustainable way so that humanity at a future time, a future when all of us in this room are no longer here, humanity can still continue to benefit. So the Accords principles promote the value of sustainable and beneficial uses of outer space, so if signatories affirm that they will give due consideration to the 2019 LTS guidelines, the signatories are committed to planning for the mitigation of orbital debris. They recognize that interoperability and common exploration infrastructure and systems are important. They reduce resource intensive redundancies. The Accords recognize that space resource use can provide support for sustainable operations. If we can manufacture fuel from water on the moon, we can reduce the need for costly transportation of these resources from Earth. And importantly, signatories are committed to the open sharing of scientific data, helping to ensure that we're bringing the scientific benefits of our civil lunar exploration to others on Earth. Second, the Accords promote increased safety of operations and reduction of uncertainty. I don't need to tell people in this room that space operations are dangerous and risks can be difficult to assess and sometimes even difficult to predict. And in several places, the Accords reflect the signatories believe that information sharing is a linchpin, whether it's through the LPP or discussions among Artemis Accord signatories or at Copious, information sharing is a linchpin to dealing with that reality. And third, the Accords promote respect for international law and multilateralism. The Accords are at their core based in our international obligations under the Outer Space Treaty and other applicable international instruments. They take important steps forward by providing a framework to help us implement those obligations on the moon, to provide guidance to help us navigate how to ensure free access on celestial bodies and free exploration and use of outer space while also meeting our obligations related to due regard, harmful interference, non-appropriation. So, and there are many instances in the Accords where signatories recognize the importance of multilateral forums like Copious where at least the three of us just were for a couple of weeks and commit to engaging in multilateral efforts to further outer space governments. There are the Outer Space Treaty and Copious are referenced at least 13 times in the six pages and it's the preamble we're preserving human heritage, space resources, the space resources working group in the legal subcommittee is a key part of that and deconfliction. The Accords are an attempt to create some basic starting points among the 25 signatories and others who we hope will join us and then we can inform our positions at Copious to foster that broader dialogue in the multilateral forums. Great, thank you so much. You know, let me return to something you just said that if I heard this right, the Accords reference the Outer Space Treaty numerous times, is that what you were saying? 13 times. 13 times in the Outer Space Treaty. Okay, so as a follow-up question, when you think about things and opportunities that we would like to do on the moon, projects, missions we'd like to do on the moon, some of them are overwhelmingly scientific in nature. Some of them may be commercial in nature. And as was alluded to in that last panel, there's national prestige value in performing firsts and accomplishing firsts on the moon, not necessarily commercial or scientific. How can we order and prioritize them? And is there something that, you know, the Artemis Accords or the US approach will set a precedent or primacy for one of those activities or do you think that they can be balanced? Well, as we're looking towards a post-ISS reality, commercial actors, I think the approach we're taking is that commercial actors can provide services to, from in Outer Space, that maybe the United States government may not be best placed to provide any longer. And the commercial provision of these services allows the United States government to focus its resources, its financial resources, its human resources on its scientific exploration missions, including those missions, as Holly shared with us earlier, are importantly built on international cooperation with our international partners. And through this approach, we don't have to necessarily choose, we can prioritize scientific opportunity while also promoting industry growth. And under the Accords, the United States and other signatories have to flow our Accords commitments down to our contractors and other parties that are acting on our behalf. So we're able to disseminate those best practices and principles among the actors that are working for the Artemis program. So we can help to broaden the applicability of the Accords principles, but also broaden the actors that are adhering to them. So, but this is just the beginning and not all activity on the moon is going to be civil exploration with government contracting. So more complex questions are rapidly coming down the pipeline and we need to keep the multi-stakeholder dialogue open. Exactly. So you're saying there isn't just strict categories. That's a purely commercial activity. That's a purely scientific activity, but they're intermixed. Correct. Excellent. Thank you for that. Thank you, Gustavo. I want to hear what near-term governance and coordination issues are seen as crucial for Mexico as an emerging lunar actor. Look, I would stay where she mentioned about the difficulties for the general public and that's all over the world to understand the problems in the moon and what will be done in the moon. I think most million four people around the world can understand if they have a cell phone or they watch Netflix, that space debris around the earth is a problem. But it's not so easy to convey to a larger public what is the problem of having debris around the moon. Even worse, to convey what is the problem of having debris on the surface of the moon or to have radio noise or seismic noise in the moon in these pristine environments, even if they are covered with dust, they are pristine from the scientific point of view, or also the problem of mechanical activity that will make dust levitate larger distances and for long times on the moon. And there will be a great problem for all these things that can be done there. So, but this has to be convey somehow and this is everywhere in the world, I will come back to that because the moon is a very special place and not only as a hub to go into Mars and the rest of the inner system and the asteroids that will come later for sure in decades to come. But immediately there from the scientific point of view, the moon is a very special place. Yeah. Think that the moon for example doesn't have an atmosphere. If it doesn't have an atmosphere, you can have huge telescopes without interference of the atmosphere. You don't have an ionosphere, therefore you can put large radio telescopes or arrays of radio telescope anywhere in the surface of the moon to study cosmology, to study the darkest ages of the universe which we cannot do from the ground. You have radio silence regions on the far side of the moon where you can for example study the 21 centimeter line of hydrogen where you can see the first stars and be a complement to the Jane Webb Space Telescope that cannot be done otherwise. But you also have another precious things. You have cryogenic for free. You can go to a bottom of a crater and have 30 kelvin for free and darkness. So you can do experiments with centeroferometers, with photon counters, et cetera. You also have vacuum for free, a better vacuum than the LHC but you have there for free in huge volumes. This means that you can do really interesting science, science that it would be extremely expensive or that you really cannot do in other places or for example also you don't have tights in the moon because there are no oceans obviously. Therefore you can observe certain frequencies of oscillation that you cannot observe neither in the earth nor with orbital observatories for example for gravitational waves. And you can do them at the bottom of craters where you have already cryogenic and vacuum and everything. These are unique opportunities. So this has to be protected. But I would say not protected in the sense of living the moon as a playground for science. That's impossible, it's impractical. Even because the kind of science that we'll have is large science. Large science means large infrastructure over large areas with very complex instrumentation that you cannot transport completely from earth. So you will have to build on site. And if you have to build on site, you need in situ research utilization. This means you will need industry and commercial ventures even to produce science. And of course you will need it to produce the starships that will go to the inner solar system. So what you have to find is some equilibrium between all these factors because all these activities have to go on and are relevant. But science can also be a very interesting factor and we have already examples of that today in the world. For example, the particle physics experiments which are international in nature because they go to $15,000 million euros or things like that. So you have to have international collaborations. To have these international collaborations for doing sciences have a lot of benefits. First, you can produce with these huge international collaborations a tissue of communication that goes beyond borders, not beyond borders of countries, beyond borders of geopolitical blocks because science is really global. And then you can have a bottleneck process. Instead of going to UN and UNOS and then come back and try to talk with the government, you can talk among scientists. And scientists have access to the government. Astrologers did that for a long time, millennia. So that's a way really I think to do this communication. And also it can solve another problem. A very important problem is that you really need consensus but global consensus is not just US, the European Union and Canada. It has to be the world. And science allows you to lower the threshold of entrance to space activity so that emerging countries can go and do science. They already do in different large particle physics projects. The same can be done in space. And then you will achieve a lot of your objectives naturally. Of course it's not the solution for everything but certainly it's a base to do a sustainable development of the moon to allow for international cooperation beyond your political problems because you will have them. If you have to do in situ research utilization, there are resources that are limited. Pick up water that you have said to use to do fuel. Water is a limited resource on the moon. It is extremely expensive. You can put the price. If I want to put one liter of water on the moon, it costs $1.5 million today. So it's an expensive resource. You have water there. Probably at the bottom of craters in the South Pole you may have three billion tons of water. It looks like a large number. But it's a lake. And it's a lake forever on the moon. And it's just that lake. So it's unavoidable that you will have artemism on one side pumping water and you will have probably other blocks, geopolitical blocks, trying to pump water from the same hole at the same time. And interfering among each other. So you will have problems that can be done by legislation but also perhaps can be resolved by dialogue around science and international cooperation at that level. Excellent. Sounds like you're pretty optimistic though. I mean I think it's so important to continue to stress and clarify to folks that the moon is a place, is a laboratory, is a location where it's only some of the most pristine places to do science or the only places to do science or the best places to do science including like learning about the history of the universe and stuff like that. That's so critical to continue to stress to people. So we see that it is a scientific laboratory in addition to all those other opportunities that we have. Thank you for that. We'll return to you in a bit. I wanna turn to Mike. Mike, first I'm gonna ask you a very pointed question because we have you on camera. This is being recorded. And it is, were the Artemis Accords intended to contradict or undermine the moon agreement? And the moon agreement's idea that outer space, including the moon, is somehow the common heritage or property of all humankind. To answer that, please, for those in the audience who don't know, give your history with the Artemis Accords. Briefly though, I mean. So, the briefly is the problem. Before I get to the Artemis Accords, I think we may have lost Holly, but I just wanna say where we talk a lot about the Artemis Accords and you know, I like talking about the Artemis Accords as the only topic that would get this third generation Red Sox fan to a city that hosts the New York Yankees. But we don't talk nearly enough candidly about the gateway agreements, the binding agreements that established the gateway. We should not take for granted that that happened or that these things occur. We were fortunate to stand on the shoulders of giants who negotiated the ISS when we established gateway agreements, but those gateway agreements were not easy to occur, is where most of my gray hair comes from. And the fact that we got Japan, Canada, the countries of ESA, it's all signed off on what is the cornerstone of global cooperation that then enables the international aspects of the Artemis Accords is extremely important. And I just wanna thank all those countries that participated, the officials that were there that allowed us to get there with gateway because we do not talk enough about the importance of that. And I will say too, the technology is being developed for gateway that at Redwire we're building the rollout solar rays for the gateway that you saw on the charts and we just did the rollout solar rays. The fifth wing was just deployed on the international space station. So it's terrific to see that technology manifest that will then take the moon. Relative to where the Accords came from, as you may have heard me say before, when it comes to beyond low earth orbit human spaceflight, failure at NASA wasn't just an option, it was a certainty in my entire lifetime, not a single beyond Leo human spaceflight program had ever been able to sustain itself to fruition. As you can see, I'm not that young. So there were a couple of things missing. One was bipartisanship. Obviously you need strong bipartisan buy-in to achieve sustainability for any program in the United States. And kudos to my former boss, Jim Bridenstine, and then many others who came afterwards in the current administration, Pam Melroy, Senator Nelson, Bahavia Law. Jim said, I will work on that bipartisanship. And Jim, who was a Republican, spent more time talking to Democrats than he did to Republicans to get that bipartisan support. The second aspect was for it to be truly international, that if you contrast what occurs in Leo with the International Space Station, that has been the foundation of global human spaceflight, with what was occurring beyond Leo, there was a stark chasm of difference. And Jim and others said, part of the reason for that is the first word, international. So in order for the Artemis program to sustain itself, it had to be international by nature to be able to continue. And it was the right thing to do in terms of globally, that one of the beauties of space, I like it as a Star Trek band, is it forces humanity to come together as one. They're on Republicans, space, Democrats, even Americans, et cetera. We come together as humans to take on the incredible challenge of space. That's where the accords came from. And kudos again to many people in the room, our friends in Luxembourg, our friends at the UK Space Agency, Mexico, everyone who contributed to make this dream of the accords reality. Relative to the Moon Agreement, I'm so grateful to Secure World Foundation for giving us this forum to answer this question. Explicitly and strongly, the answer is of course they can live in harmony. That we explicitly crafted the accords to ensure that nations that were signatories to the Moon Agreement could also sign the accords. The accords were about finding common ground, bringing countries together. And if we leaned into issues that were diverged, it would have defeated the very purpose and nature of what we were trying to accomplish with the accords. So this was explicitly considered. The language of the accords was designed to avoid the conflict. And that's why it's so frustrating to me when I read articles about how can Australia, for example, which was a founding member of the accords, sign both. The reason that they can sign both is that the accords were designed to create the Big Tent. They were designed to bring everyone together. Now that's a great strength of the accords. It is also a weakness to the extent that there are issues that the accords have yet to resolve and won't resolve relative to what do you do with the resources once they've been collected? Should there be an international sharing regime? Because of a divergence in the international community on those issues, the accords did not come to a conclusion on that topic. And therefore we've left plenty of work to do, unfortunately, for Emily and Antonio and the legal subcommittee at COPEWIS to figure those issues out. The accords are a beginning of a conversation, not an ending. And I very much appreciate the articulate description of the accords that both Antonio and Emily have given that they are to implement the Outer Space Treaty, that you can't take the Outer Space Treaty, give it to NASA HEO and say, do this. You have to go a level below. Again, the safety zones are actually a wonderful example of that. The Outer Space Treaty says, avoid harmful interference. Well, how are you going to do that? Transparency, say where you are, tell the United Nations where you are, be public what you're doing, and then communicate with other countries that will enter zones so you can avoid harmful interference per the treaty. I will say that the accords go a step further, well, in a couple of ways, such as the full free and open release of scientific information, which is very important. It is also an example of something that you wouldn't levy necessarily on the private sector. So there are differences there. But I think one of the other exciting aspects of the accords is for the first time, there's an actual repercussion to violating the Outer Space Treaty. I love the Outer Space Treaty, over 50, 60 years old. Doesn't look a day over 35, right? Like it's an extraordinary treaty. It was an extraordinary thing. It's the spine of international space law, but one of the flaws is no repercussions to violations, no repercussions to pulling out. For the first time, the accords say that there will be a repercussion, that you cannot participate in the Artemis program if you are going to violate the Outer Space Treaty. I'm very proud that we put some teeth for the first time into the treaty. And I'll just conclude this question with referencing something that Antonio said, conflict, because I think he laid out a path where if we are not intentional, if we are not proactive in establishing these norms of behavior, conflict is the inevitable result. And the accords at their heart are, were and are an attempt to avoid conflict before it occurs. And the accords aren't the only solution. Other countries may have other ways to implement the Outer Space Treaty, but it's important that we all try and strive and move forward. And while the journey of Artemis is to the moon and Mars, if we follow the accords and norms of behavior, the destination will be peace and prosperity. Thank you, Mike. Thank you for that. I want to shift gears a little bit and still ask you a question about regulation of the commercial sector on the moon. And is there a way to balance some of those issues that we just heard about, about balancing commercial interests versus scientific interests, national prestige interests? How should the commercial sector, the lunar commercial sector be governed and regulated? Well, first, we actually need a regime to do so. And everyone take a sip of coffee because I'm about to talk about Article 6 of the Outer Space Treaty, everyone's favorite article of the Outer Space Treaty, which if you've lived a life good enough where you're not familiar with Article 6, Article 6 requires the authorization and continuing supervision of private sector activities by their governments. And currently in the United States, we don't have explicit authority for an agency to have responsibility for implementing oversight over many commercial activities. We're still meeting our Article 6 obligations, but it's being done on a largely ad hoc basis by FAA or by commerce or even by FCC in some instances. And what we need to create this balance is a system. And that system should be transparent. That system should look at a balance, not be tipped too far one way or the other because the where of false dichotomies. I hear far too often, is it government or is it private sector? Is it science or is it human spaceflight? The answer is always all of the above. We're always stronger when we're coming together. So we need a regime that acknowledges that. We need a regime unlike export control where you are innocent until proven guilty. We need one that can move forward with alacrity, at the speed of commercials so that you have hard deadlines if the government doesn't respond. We need to know why the decisions are made. So again, a transparent process that includes by the way classified information if the company has personnel that can be viewed classified information. And then finally, self-certification that private sector companies are really the experts in terms of what's occurring. We do this in export control that the company should be saying what they're going to do. That needs to be reviewed, approved by the government. And if there's a change to that, then the company will get back to the government, let them know. That's how supervision should be implemented in a fashion that will allow for robust commercial growth, robust international growth, not something that will deter nations from operating in America or elsewhere because we're not alone when it comes to development. We want to see the free world develop. We want to see not only our astronauts and our machines, but our values of freedom, diversity, quality go to space. And that's why I hope that if we lean into this and we can get Article 6 figured out, we can have a future that is far more Star Trek and far less Star Wars. I'd like to thank you so much. So one way to compare Moon Agreement and Artemis Accords, Moon Agreement negotiated at Copas. It's an international agreement. Artemis Accords led by a state and a set of states largely outside of Copas. Is that a problem that's gonna be, is that a real problem with the fact that people could object to it just on the procedural grounds? And I'm gonna go to Emily first, but certainly the other folks will be invited. No, I don't think that they can object to it on procedural grounds. I think that there was a real practical need for states that were, have near term plans to go to the Moon to work together to figure out how they were gonna implement their obligations under the Outer Space Treaty. There isn't a lot of, while some of these activities aren't going to be taking place for a few years, there wasn't really a lot of, there isn't really a lot of time to figure out those operational aspects. And so there was an urgent need to work together with those partners. There was a, and I feel a little bit bad that you don't have to take my word for it. There are many other signatories, of the original aid signatories who I think would tell you the same thing, but I encourage everybody to reach out to them that there was a real negotiation over the text. And there are going to be opportunities to bring our experiences and what we've learned from implementing the accords to the multilateral discussions. As Antonino said, we have to be deliberate. These are step-by-step processes to international lawmaking. And as a lawyer who doesn't have a scientific background, I think that Gustavo probably doesn't want me drafting law for what's going on in the Moon when we don't yet know how those activities are scientifically going to work. There haven't been any scientific use cases that have been demonstrated. We need to see how these things are working, learn from those initial activities, and we need to feed that information into the rulemaking and lawmaking process. Lawyers, and I don't like being categorical, but I think most good lawyers would not want to draft rules for space resources utilization, for example, in a vacuum. I just wanna add, why nobody questions the fact that the IGA for the ISS was negotiated outside COCOS? Why is that not a problem? And the Artemis, of course, are a problem. The reality is that both documents in the Gateway Agreement that Mike mentioned before, they govern specific programs among like-minded countries. So it makes sense that they develop their rules for their own program in their own framework. They don't have to be necessarily negotiated in COCOS. The goal of the Moon Agreement was totally different than the goal of the Artemis Accords, or of the ISS-AGA, or of the Gateway Agreement. That's why they are negotiated in two different places through different methodologies. Okay, so you're seeing activity happen at a variety of different fora, and there's work at COCOS on space resources, and yet there's also like Artemis agreements done outside of COCOS, any comment on that, and where is it best to take these discussions? It's a tough question. I think the best way is to approach this in a multi-level, multi-layer fashion. So each body has its own competence and responsibility. So COCOS, obviously, is the leading body for international space law, which essentially means the interpretation and implementation of the outer space treaty, and that has processes that last a very long time. We talk about 10 years to negotiate the long-term sustainability guidelines. It will take five years for the principles of the space resources working group, and perhaps other five to then try and expand them into becoming a framework. And so COCOS has that role of discussing the high-level questions that relate directly to the international space law, and then we need layers below that will discuss what do we do in the meantime? Countries come to a consensus. Last week we were in Vienna, and we saw countries failing to have consensus on a title for discussing dark and white skies. After two years of negotiations and two full days of discussion, that didn't work. So we have to be prepared for the fact that COCOS may not even agree on these things, but we still need to push the activities forward in a way that it's peaceful and cooperative. So that's why Artemis accords, and perhaps the ILRS, you know, let's not forget China is working on an international lunar research station. They want partners to come, and they have already acknowledged the need to have rules for that. They already have it in their Guide for Partnership. They will develop something similar to the Artemis Accords, and so those will be the levels for countries to come together and make sure that their program work. And then, like I said below, we need a place for civil society discussions and companies discussion, also in harmony with all this, with what is done at the above levels. And I often get the question, what if China developed something similar to the Artemis Accords? My answer is that's what success looks like. You ask the question, you know, should we have done the Artemis Accords differently or done it at Copa was any country that is conducting activities on the moon or plants conducting activities on the moon that either isn't part of the Accord's discussion or isn't talking about how they're going to implement their obligations to the Outer Space Treaty are remiss and will ultimately undermine the Outer Space Treaty. That the Accords are the operationalization of the Outer Space Treaty. It must be done if we're going to avoid that conflict and succeed with being on the moon. And I just really appreciate what Anita said because no one asked why did you do the IGA not through Copa was, why didn't you do the gateway agreements through Copa was? Where we go depends on what you want to achieve. So if we're looking to achieve a global consensus on space resources, Copa was absolutely the appropriate forum to do that. If we're looking to ensure that as we move forward on the Artemis program that we do so in a fashion that upholds the Outer Space Treaty, the Registration Convention, the Agreement on the Rescue of Astronauts and other vital values such as full free and open scientific information honoring heritage. Well, you have to operationalize that via the program that you're working on. Never forget the first word Artemis chords is Artemis. So I think that's a false criticism when it comes to Accords that stems from a misunderstanding of what the Accords are. And if you read the Accords and please do, they're a page turner and it's relatively, it's wonderfully written. I love how it ends. And it's relatively short. And as Emily has mentioned, 13 references to Copa was, I appreciate. Outer Space Treaty. Exactly, Outer Space Treaty, sorry. And I just want to mention what again, emphasize what Emily said that good regulations come from good experience. We should not try and overly regulate when we don't know what's going to be required. And that's what the Accords say that they reference time and time again. Let's take the experiences from trying to implement the Outer Space Treaty and then take those experiences to Copa. Have the conversation there. And ours won't be alone. China can come forward with their own. And then let's have a global conversation about what we can all do together. Excellent, thank you. So everyone seems to want to talk about space resources and divide up and see how we're gonna govern space resources. But Gustavo, everything that you were talking about before, are there more pressing urgent issues besides dividing up and settling, getting the regime for space resources? It seems as though there's a lot of other issues that we need to think about. I think there is a pressing issue. And I come back to your first question. What is important for Mexico and emerging country? And it is the fact that I think we all recognize, at least intellectually, that there has to be dialogue and international dialogue and cooperation. Nevertheless, this morning, there was a poll here in which people, which are here, 59 persons voted, which is a large percentage of all this group of people that think that international cooperation and participation is important. Well, they voted that, I couldn't vote, but they voted that the countries that should have a say are those who have satellites. There was not a single vote for those who have not. You know, I am an Argentinian. I lived and worked in Brazil. I am now based in Mexico. This reminds me of mistakes that as a civilization, we have produced a hundred years ago and of which with whose consequences we are still living today as poverty, as military conflicts, et cetera, yes? So we can do better. Actually, Lieutenant General Shaw said also this morning that we have a chance to do things better now. And this is important because we are not building now for this generation because whenever we put a little bit of trash in the moon, there is no biosphere to the graded. There is no plate tectonics to put it under the moon. It will be there until either we collect it or we regulate it or until micrometeorize in the next billion years, destroy it and make it dust. So we have to think of this future. And I remind you that I know for what I know of history, there is no geopolitical situation that have survived more than a thousand years. And even then the examples are very few. So things change. So those who don't have satellites today will have them tomorrow. And they will have to live with the consequences of whatever we are doing and the decisions we are making today. And there I come to something that is important for Mexico, for example. It is the fact that we can use regional institutions like regional space agencies also to open the doors to dialogue, to include emerging countries. An example of that, for example, the Latin American and Caribbean space agency that is being strongly promoted by Mexico that has already 21 signatories and has passed already by almost 11 Congresses. So it's at the point of starting operation. So that's an example. Probably the African space agency will also be an example of places which can open the door to countries that perhaps today don't have the knowledge to sit at the table, but have intelligence and have a view of the future and the future they want for them and their children. And they can create this space of discussion to bring everybody at the table. Because for me, success is not when we have a lot of different kinds of accords in different geopolitical blocks, is when we have everybody somehow talking together and arriving to consensus, especially to something so important because there are other places that are equivalent to the moon, really in the solar system, but too far away, yeah? Douglas Adams already said how large is the universe. So keep that in mind. The moon is nearby, it's special. And really it's not an environment that is self-prepared to restitute itself as it's our biosphere. So that would be the note I'd like to say. Thank you. Just want to say that Gustavo is not a lawyer, but he described what you regard under Article 9 of the Outer Space Treaty should mean in practice. Being mindful of the fact that space-faring nations are not the only nations and that whatever we're gonna do on the moon we have to keep in mind the corresponding interest of others and the moon agreement would add the interest of future generations. And so I think having that type of approach to inclusive governance, to inclusive discussions and to a forward-thinking holistic approach is what we need to have in practice for implementing what is a legal obligation on the Article 9 of the Outer Space Treaty. Excellent, thank you for that. I see that our time is almost up. If there's any further last-minute burning comments that you have to get across, especially if it's about what I was trying to get about lunar priorities, lunar governance priorities, if any hot pursuits or thoughts on that. I guess I would say two things if I can remember them. I think that in terms of lunar priorities, science, as my colleague really eloquently suggested to me yesterday, science and commercial activities are not mutually exclusive. Lunar science is interested in resource mapping on the moon and commercial payloads that are expanding the opportunities for scientific research on the moon. So we have scientific activity that accelerates our commercial industry and vice versa. So I think that they're not mutually exclusive. In terms of the priorities for lunar governance, I really think, at least from my perspective, we need to take it step by step and the first step is learning from the scientists, the industry, other stakeholders about what the activities are that are being planned so that as a lawyer, we can inform ourselves and inform the conversation about how to develop the initial set of recommended principles and other governance instruments. So let's learn from the scientists and science and commerce are mutually beneficial. Excellent, thank you for that. And at that, I'll give you 10 seconds. 10 seconds. The accords again are a beginning, not an ending. And we need to do similar relative to national security operations in space and for commercial because the accords did not cover that. There's a lot of opportunities for trouble in both of those areas. I hope we can build similar coalitions of the willing to move forward with norms of behavior that will lead to a peaceful future. All right, thank you so much. And at that, let's give a round of applause to my panel. Thank you.