It's silent. A few questions? It's about to play. Yeah. It's great. It's the first time I've ever played. Yes. Well, we enjoyed it. Well, we really enjoyed it. It's just wonderful. It's great, honestly. You know what we think? It's like one of the psychiatrists. Really? See, I have been able to go inside. We miss you over the house now. I do, too. Mrs. Buck. I'll sit here. Well, very happy to be here. It was great. It was a great event. Nice to see you. You are the producer. I hope you enjoyed it. It was very much. It was wonderful. It was wonderful. It was fun. It was fun. We were gonna see you. It was a great experience. Congratulations. I love you. I'm happy to be here. I'm happy to be here. I'm happy to be here. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.  What's your name, sir? Your name, sir. Your name is, sir. Your name is, sir. Your name is, sir. Your name, sir. Your name is, sir. Your name is, sir. Mr. President, I'm well down on you. Your favorite president, and Jefferson Davis. Thank you. Hi, I'm Siseray. Hi. I'm Siseray. Just ask. And I'm Siseray. Any seas detection. I hope so. If we have a couple of years... So nice to see you. Hello, Siseray. Nice to see you. Thank you. I'm Siseray. Nice to see you. Nice to see you. Hi. This is Ray. Lord Lester. Nice to see you. Mr. President, it's very thrilling for a simple enlisted man to be the manager of the medicine. Nice to see you. Thank you. Nice to see you. Hi. You're the... Oh, yes. You were just great. Thank you very much. Yes. Thank you. Thank you. This is nice.  You know, I play the live for Mickey Realty. Oh, I'm talking. Thank you. This is Ray. Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you. It's great. Nice to meet you. It's great. Great. Joe Jordan. Yes, nice to meet you. Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you. Nice to meet you. Congratulations. Thank you so much. It's a great pleasure to be here. Thank you for the honor of the week. Thank you very much. Thank you so much for being here today. Nice to see you. Thank you. Nice to see you. We loved it. You're nice. But Mr. Reagan, I would be right. Yes, it's nice to see you. I have to tell you this, though. Yeah, it's nice to see you. Did it very well. Well, thank you. Probably, yeah. I'm not too happy to be excited. I do. Bob Rockwell, Mr. Reagan. All right, nice to see you. President, pleasure. You look very distinguished up there. Thank you. How do you do, Mr. Reagan John Corey? I'm a president. What's the name of the state? The state of New York. It's very nice. That's great. That's what I'm always... How do you do this? It's as we've seen it before, obviously. Always so good. Well, it's very kind of you to say something. Thank you very much. I enjoyed it. We loved it. Thank you. Well... Well... That's what I'm more interested in. It really is. Hello. Hi! Good to see you. I was just saying there was definitely a guy I'd never seen in my life. I'm going to get over it, because I don't want you to know about him. It doesn't make sense. But I'm not gonna figure out something... I would tell him just to do something good every night. Really? I'm so happy. It was great. It was great. It was great. It was definitely the best. Yeah, it was great. It was okay. It was okay. It was okay. It was a trial.


Hello. Hello? I need help. Are you okay? I can't understand. It's an emergency. Who is this? Hello? When a crisis happens, people urgently need information to make informed decisions. They also need to report their situation and request assistance. In such situations, traditional communications channels are often limited and crucial messages and life-saving information can be lost. IOM, the International Organization for Migration in partnership with Centric at Sheffield-Hollam University, introduces SCAN, a digital security communications platform that harnesses new media technology to provide real-time security updates for field staff and security officers worldwide as well as enhance situational awareness during a crisis. SCAN helps staff to Stay safe. Send your status and report a situation using photos, videos and audio messages enabling security teams to check on stranded staff members, stabilize injuries and move on to other urgent cases. Be aware of potential risks with reliable real-time news and advisories regarding relevant security situations and warnings. Clear your travels. SCAN's drip interface makes mandatory reporting of travel details easier. It also improves emergency response as officials compare your itinerary with your actual location. Feedback from field staff is used to improve response and provide timely headcounts during an incident. The SCAN dashboard creates a digital situation room in headquarters. 24-7 operations center and regional offices providing real-time security reports. The security team validates and responds to incoming information and alerts on the SCAN dashboard. Using this information, a fully detailed incident report can be created in minutes. Available in English, French, Spanish and Arabic, SCAN is currently being used by staff in over 153 countries, offering a secure lifeline for staff through their mobile devices.


I'd like to talk about the fun topic, essentially blockchain inspired protocols where game theory meets cryptography. This is joint work with Hilbert Chan, Kamin Chan, and Tianwen. Let me begin with the motivating example that comes from real life. This is not uncommon in cryptography community. You write a paper and you discover there's another concurrent work that has identical results. This has happened to me a couple times. In fact, it has, it happened to my first ever crypto paper in grad school, and then it happened again in 2013, and this time the two papers even have the same title. So both papers were submitted to your 14 and the PC recommended had merged. And here comes the real challenge. Who should go to the conference to present the merge paper. A strong ass solution to this problem is for me and Shafi was co-author on the other paper to deal it out. But we can do better. Why not run a coin toss protocol. In fact, this is what we actually did. Coin toss was first proposed in Blum's groundbreaking work in 1983. The way it works is the following. So in this example we are using a blockchain as a public bulletin board. First Shafi and I each select a random bit. We both commit to our bids. We open our commitments. And these are the open bids. We will compute the XR of the openings. And let's say Shafi prefers zero and I prefer one right so in this case the XR is one, and therefore I win. And, you know, this is also what actually happened. Our group. In fact, my former postdoc went and presented the paper. I may be somewhat concerned here because Shafi, you know, may be malicious and maybe she'll deviate from the protocol, because this is a commitment based protocol. The only possible deviation is essentially a party right you can open your commitment wrongly but that's the same as a party too. And it turns out in this case, it's not a big issue because if Shafi abards, we can say she just automatically forfeits and I'm going to win anyway. If she abards the outcome is defined to be one. Okay, so how do we decide how do we define a coin toss protocol. There are two requirements correctness is defined in the most natural manner. Basically if both parties are honest we want the outcome to be a random point. How do we define fairness. The standard line of work on multi party competition considers a very strange notion of fairness and I'll call this strong fairness in this talk. And fairness requires that even if Shafi abards, I would nonetheless output a completely unbiased coin. This is unfortunately known to be impossible in a two party setting, or in a multi party setting where half or more than half of the parties can be corrupt. And this was proven in the elegant paper by Cleave back in 1986. Now you may find this strange right since there's an impossibility how can blumps protocol work. The key observation is that blumps protocol actually achieves a strictly weaker notion of fairness and I'll call it game theoretic fairness. In the protocol we've seen. It's not like Shafi cannot bias the coin she can indeed bias the coin by aborting, but it'll just end up hurting herself and benefiting me. Eventually we are considering rational players who care about maximizing some utility function and game theoretic fairness requires that no matter what Shafi does, she cannot benefit herself or hurt me. This also means Shafi's best response is to play honestly and therefore honest behavior is an equilibrium. Since blumps protocol achieves think theoretic fairness in a two party setting, a very natural question is can we achieve game theoretic fairness in multi party coin toss to. So it may not be completely clear what multi what the formulation is I'll explain that in a little bit. When we first started working on this problem back in 2018, we were surprised to find that no work has considered this question. Actually the whole line of work on multi party competition considered the strong fairness notion, even though actually you know the first kind of paper blumps kind of in fact achieve game theoretic fairness. Before explaining our results. Let me mention that under some strong assumptions we can have some trivial immediate solution, and these are not the settings we are interested in. We have honest majority we can just use honest majority multi party competition with fairness and guarantee outputs. This can be accomplished in constant number of rounds. However, in decentralized blockchain settings on this majority is often not a reasonable assumption like let's say you have a smart contract and people are entering and you know playing with their pseudonyms. The pseudonyms are often cheap to make up right so it could be like 90% of the pseudonyms are controlled by a single entity. So the real solution is essentially to assume the problem away. Suppose there's a trusted setup that can pass the coin for us, or maybe the trusted setup just pick some pseudorandom seed and whenever we need a coin we can stretch to see to get more pseudorandomness out of it. However, in a decentralized setting often, we don't want to trust any single entity. And moreover, we want the coin to be unpredictable unpredictable in advance. With this in mind, let's refine the problem. We are actually asking and assuming correct majority and no set up assumptions that is in the plain model. Can we achieve game theoretic fairness in multi party kind of us. If we establish visibility than the next question we may care about efficiency of these protocols. And in this talk will will particularly care about round complexity. So let me try to define the problem. More precisely, there are actually two formulations for game theoretic multi party coin toss. And they're both very natural. In the first formulation I want you to think of it as like binary roulette so every player bets on either zero one. And if their bet is the same as the outcome then they win. So imagine everyone will put down one ether to enter the game, and then all of the winners will divide the pot right so that can be the utility function. Now in the second formulation it's more like lottery, and it's the same as leader election so we have and players we want to elect the winner at random. And the winner will take the part of all bets. For this talk I'm going to focus on the second formulation. I just want to quickly mention that in a couple other papers we actually gave a complete characterization of the first definition essentially when it's feasible and when it's not feasible. So let's focus on the leader election definition. I want to reiterate the utility function here right as I said the winner takes off, but we can easily rescale the utility and just simply assume the winner has utility one. And everyone else has utility zero so this is the utility function we will assume for the rest of the talk. Blockchain has quite a lot of applications in blockchain settings. So imagine there's a smart contract, and it's looking for workers to provide verifiable competition service or provide, let's say, you know VDF service. And whoever provides service can earn rewards so that's why everyone's eager to enter their competing to become the leader. So before talking about our protocol let me first give you a simple folklore solution and then you have something concrete in mind. Okay so imagine we have these cryptographers in the room they're trying to elect the PC chair of the next crypto conference. And of course being PC chair is a lot of work but say everyone's eager to serve the community so they all want to get elected. So we're going to pair them up and every pair will run blums coin toss to elect the winner, the winner survives to the next round, and then the winners get paired up, and then they compete against each other using blums protocol until a final winner is elected. In general, you know you can do it in a tree like fashion and the whole protocol will complete in log and number of rounds. So you know it's actually interesting to see how to do it in better than log and rounds and that's what we are going to talk about later in the talk. One thing I want to mention is that if anyone apart, or maybe if anyone opens their commitment broadly right which is the same as a party, and you automatically forfeit, and you are kicked out. If you look at this tournament tree protocol it achieves a very strong notion of game theoretic specialist. It achieves the following two things. First, no coalition is able to increase its own utility, no matter how it deviates from the protocol. Because you know as I mentioned when you abort you automatically forfeit so it never makes sense for you to abort. We also want a second property that is no coalition can harm any honest individual. The second property is also important for example let's say I'm providing verifiable competition service to a smart contract in exchange for rewards. It may be in my interest to monopolize the ecosystem. Therefore, I may want to drive drive away the competition and make the smaller players go away. Even if in the short term it may cost me something to perform this attack. I'm still interested in harming you know smaller players. And if a coalition can harm individual players it'll create this incentive for small players to join the system. If a protocol satisfies these properties then honest behavior is an equilibrium right because if I joined the system and everyone else is behaving honestly, my best response is also to behave honestly. And this is true no matter what my goal is like I may be selfish and a profit seeking and maybe malicious and trying to harm others in an attempt to monopolize the ecosystem. I may be paranoid and just wanting to defend myself in the worst possible scenario, no matter what my goal is like I just shouldn't have incentive to deviate. Okay, so we know game theoretic fairness is possible for leader election in logon rounds. And this follows from the tournament tree protocol. Now the interesting question is, can we asymptotically improve the round complexity to you know something little old logon. Again, remember we are assuming corrupt majority and no setup. And also going forward, whenever I say fair I automatically mean game theoretic fair. Okay, so what's the first thing we got to try right I mean the most naive idea is to take the tournament tree protocol and compress it to two rounds right remember in the tournament tree protocol we have logon rounds. And every round you'll commit and you'll reveal but now let's just say we commit the coins for all rounds in one shot, and then we reveal other kinds in one shot, and then we computed the winner using the tree like fashion.  Well, not surprisingly, this naive approach is completely broken and that's why the problem is interesting. Let's say the attack let's say Shafi and Alizandro, they form a coalition. They have a definitive strategy of winning. And the way it works is they're going to each commit 00 and one one, respectively right so so there are two kinds, one coin corresponding to each round in the original protocol. And now they're going to wait till the other bracket opens their kind. At this moment they can choose one of them to apart and the other one will survive, and they can do so in a way that allows them to win definitively. So this brings us to our results. I'll talk about these results at a high level and then I'll go into details. We have good news and bad news right so the bad news is that if we restrict ourselves to protocols that are similar in structure to the tournament tree protocol, then logon rounds is the best you can do. So what do I mean by similar in structure to the tournament tree protocol. So in the tournament tree protocol right remember it works by commit and then immediately reveal you commit to something in the immediate next round you reveal and this repeats for logon times. So if we restrict ourselves to this commit and immediately reveal model, then you know, it's pretty hopeless and we have to suffer from logon rounds. I want you to think of this law upon as a sanity check in protocol design, rather than a deal breaker because who says we have to tie our hands like this. And the reason why we came up with this law bond is more because like initially we were trying protocols that are similar to tournament tree but you know soon enough we realize that this is kind of like a dead end. Okay. And, and this brings us to our main upper bound results right so we show that if you are willing to make a couple of relaxations that we can indeed overcomes logon barrier. So first we have to relax the fairness notion to approximate fairness. On this slide it says little old friend is I'll explain what that means in just a little bit. And second, you know, we cannot restrict ourselves to the commit and immediately reveal model right we now are willing to work with the standard cryptographic assumptions that we can use crypto in a general way. So in this talk, I only have time to talk about upper bound I don't have any time to show you the law about proof. So this result I first have to explain what is approximate fairness. And then I'll tell you what crypto we need and you know how the construction works. So first what do I mean by approximate fairness. It's similar to the notions we saw earlier but now allowing a small epsilon approximation factor. So protocol is said to be epsilon fair is the following two things. So, and I'm always going to assume that the players are polynomially bounded in terms of computation power. So first we want that no coalition can increase its expected utility by more than epsilon factor. Second, we want to make sure that no coalition. Up to one minus epsilon times ending size can reduce any honest individuals utility by more than epsilon. And so, you know, in our actual theorem, we can work with epsilon that's, let's say little of one. Before this talk I'm often going to use 1% for epsilon just for simplicity so this means you know the coalition can be as large as 99%. And we want to make sure the coalition cannot increase its own utility by more than 1% it cannot harm an honest individual by more than 1% and it's also important to note that this epsilon slack is a multiplicative notion. For example, let's look at the second notion that is you cannot harm others, no display. Normally if everyone plays honestly that any single individual utility is one over and in expectation. So with approximate fairness what we want is that no coalition up to 99% in size can reduce any individuals utility by 1% this means any honest individual should have utility at least one minus epsilon over and right so you can see this. Normalize it's a multiplicative notion and this kind of multiplicative notion is the most natural in many applications like for instance you could be playing some game repeatedly and in these cases the absolute value of the utility like doesn't mean very much so you know it's natural to like normalize the game. And use this multiplicative notion. Again, our philosophy here is to achieve incentive compatibility now we have this like tiny you know epsilon slack right so if you deviate maybe you're able to do just a little bit better. epsilon better, but the relative gain is so small like it's just not worth the trouble. Like if you deviate you can get caught are exposed. Okay. In this talk I'm going to stick with these simple notions I've mentioned but in our actual paper we actually define an even better solution concept card epsilon sequentially fair. So I will very briefly mention about this at the end of the talk. I've explained what is approximate fairness before I jump into our construction let me mention that our result is actually parameterize. So here are means the wrong complexity right so for for any are that's at least some constant times log log and we can achieve roughly speaking to to the minus our fairness. So one thing to observe is that as number of rounds are increases the slack or approximation factor will drop exponentially fast. So this is like a sharp curve. Okay, I'm going to next tell you how our construction works at a very high level we use a combination of extractors and honest majority, multiply the computation. So when you first see this you should be surprised because you know didn't I just tell me we are working with corrupt majority majority coalitions. So how can honest majority and PC be useful in the setting. And, but you'll see that in a little bit. Okay, so let's dive into the technical details of the construction our first start with the straw man, the straw man scheme actually relies on a random article. And it has a couple flaws but we are going to you know fix these couple flaws one by one and we can remove the random article at the end. And at the very end of the talk I'll quickly mention about the sequential fairness and then I'll conclude. So here's the blueprint that we have a large number of players and first we will, you know, this is a universe reduction tactic we will first sample a small committee that's poly logging size. And then we will run the tournament tree protocol, among the poly log size committee, and because you know the committee is poly logging size the tournament tree protocol will completing log log and rounds. So what remains to be answered is how do we do this committee election and we also want the committee election to complete in a small number of rounds. Okay, so let's see. First, here's a strong man approach this approach is actually inspired by proof of state protocols like snow white. Imagine each player posts a random bit to the blockchain, and the concatenation of all of these bits is fed into a random article, let's say sharp 56. And then outcome is used to elect a poly log size committee. So from now on, I will assume that if anyone supports them their bit is treated as a default bit zero. Let's think about what this protocol gives us. Imagine that the red, red players from a coalition. The coalition has some advantage over the honest players because they can wait until the honest players post their coins, they can look at honest coins, and then decide their own kinds. This means they can try different combinations of their own kinds. By making queries to the random article multiple times. And then they can pick a combination that helps itself the most. Recall that you know eventually we will elect a winner among the committee right. So if the coalition wants to, you know, get elected. What is to increase the representation in the committee like they should get as many seats as possible in the committee. So let's say this is the coalition's objective. Fortunately, we can prove that a coalition that controls any constant fraction of players cannot increase its representation on the committee, noticeably more than its fair share. For example, suppose the coalition controls 99%. Then in this case, you know the committee should also be roughly 99% red. And not too much more. So this means that any coalition that controls the constant fraction of the players cannot benefit itself, noticeably, and proving this is pretty straightforward. So what we can show you know for a single random article query using a standard turn up on basically the probability that the committee is bad is negligibly small. And here a bad committee means that it's more than 99.1% red. Okay now if the coalition is polynomially bounded, it can only make polynomially many random article queries so we can just take a union bound over this polynomial random article queries. And we can conclude basically except with negligible probability and the committee will be at most 99.1% red. Okay. So that was the good news but the scheme has a couple of flaws. The first problem is that a large coalition can actually harm a single individual. And here we are worried about a single individual being harmed. And if you want to harm an honest individual, you can do the same attack you can wait until the honest people post their coins, and then you can try different combinations of your own kinds and pick one that excludes this single individual. So intuitively, you know, what's the intuition here that it's easy for you to make sure a specific individual is either excluded or included, but if you want to harm an honest individual, you can do the same attack, you can wait until the honest people post their coins and exclude this single individual. So intuitively, you know, what's the intuition here that it's easy for you to make sure a specific individual is either excluded or included. But if you want to make sure that many honest people are excluded, or many red layers are included, then that's much harder.  And basically, a small coalition actually can benefit itself significantly. So at first sight, like you may be shocked, right, because you know, earlier I said, a large coalition cannot benefit itself noticeably but now I'm telling you a small coalition can benefit itself significantly. It seems really counterintuitive because you know it should somehow be easier to defend against the small coalition. But on the other hand, like if you think about it, we have a multiplicative notion of fairness right so for let's say a single individual is normal utility is like just one over and so even if it can increase its utility just by a tiny bit let's say I can increase by one over and I'm already doing twice better and that's significant by our definition because anything more than one plus epsilon is considered significant. In some sense it's actually, you know, in this case, and maybe the small coalition is actually harder to defend against. And again, it's the same kind of attack the small coalition can wait till honest people post their coins, and then try different combinations of their own kinds to increase their representation on the committee. We can fix these problems one by one and let's first begin with the, you know, the first problem and a large coalition can harm a single honest individual to fix this problem. Our observation is that if you want to exclude some individual from the committee, you have to know the identity of the victim. And so our idea is to make sure you know you don't know the identity of the victim. And how does this work. So let's say every player, they're not going to use their real identities in the committee selection, they're going to pick a virtual ID at random. So they know their virtual ID but other people don't. And now they can commit to their virtual ID. They can't upload but actually everyone's committing to its virtual ID separately. And we still run the same protocol. But the only difference here is that we are running this random article based committee selection on the virtual IDs instead. And only when we finish the virtual ID election. Do people open their virtual IDs and now we find the reverse mapping and we can know, you know, who actually lands in the committee. And then we just, you know, around the tournament tree among the committee and elect the final winner. So there is actually a small subtlety here. If you just do this it turns out it doesn't work and here's an attack like let's say the coalition doesn't know honest people's virtual IDs but they do know their own virtual IDs right so they can place all of their virtual IDs like they can pick their virtual ID, let's say every every coalition member picks the same virtual ID, and then they can pick their coins carefully to make sure that specific virtual ID is included in the committee. So this way, every red player can become part of the committee and that's bad. And then at this attack, we are going to modify the rule, just slightly we are going to say you know, you're, you're this virtual ID is only elected into the committee, if there's no collision with other virtual IDs. So if you are going to put your acts in one basket and then make sure that basket is elected. That's not going to work because it's just going to cause collision amongst yourselves. If you introduce this fix, it'll almost work except that you just have to make the virtual ID space a little bit larger to make the collision probability small enough. So I won't tell you the detail parameters here. But essentially with this modification. We can fix the first problem. And now we just have to focus on how to fix the second problem, a small coalition can benefit itself significantly. The problem. In fact, earlier, I already kind of gave away the solution right because I told you, you know, our solution involves the honest majority and to see, and here is where we use the honest majority and to see the idea is that And, you know, players don't choose their own virtual IDs right. So the reason that a coalition can help itself is because every player knows their own virtual ID. Okay, so in order to make sure people don't know even their own virtual IDs, we will have every player pick a random on mass virtual ID but this is not a final virtual ID. And to get to a final virtual ID, you have to apply another masking permutation. The masking permutation will be chosen using honest majority NPC. So if the coalition is small, let's say less than one percent. And then, you know, the honest majority MPC has privacy right so the coalition has no idea what this masking permutation is and therefore it doesn't have any idea what its own virtual IDs are. And so that's the idea. And the question is, what happens with large coalitions. So for large coalitions the honest majority MPC is completely broken it doesn't have any security. But that doesn't matter because we can get fairness from like the first part of the construction or the argument we saw earlier. Earlier we showed that, you know, a large coalition cannot benefit itself noticeably. And that same argument still applies here even with the new modifications. Okay, so when we combine these ideas we can fix both of these flaws and the resulting scheme should work. And the only problem that remains is we still have a random article and we want to get rid of it. At a high level we want to replace the random article with a combinatorial objects called a sampler and this is kind of equivalent to like a seeded extractor. It's not just so simple as it turns out we'll have to introduce some other changes to the protocol to make it work. One thing to keep in mind is that earlier, our proof relied on the fact that the coalition can only make polynomially many random queries. But once we replace the random article with a sampler will have to make a combinatorial argument instead like without any regard to the player's computational balance. Unfortunately for this talk I actually won't have time to tell you how to get rid of the random article in details. So let me just skip to the end. Okay. And at a high level, in order to replace the random article with a sampler, we actually need to adopt a two phase committee election strategy. So first, we run a single iteration of fighters like a spin protocol to elect what's called a preliminary committee. We're not running the parliamentary protocol among the preliminary committee. So the preliminary committee will then run a protocol just like the random article based protocol we saw to elect the final committee but of course now we want to replace random article with a sampler. And finally, we'll run parliamentary among the final committee to elect the final leader. So I'm going to ask you to read the paper for the details of the scheme, as well as the proofs. Before I conclude I want to say, you know, I mentioned about sequential fairness rights. I'm just going to say a few words. At a high level, epsilon fairness which is the notion we saw requires that a priori before the protocol starts, the coalition has little incentive to deviate. We see that with some small but non-negligible probability, let's say epsilon over two probability. Some bad event happens, let's say you know with small probability Alice deals Bob's secret key. And if this bad event happens right conditioned on the bad event happened. And Alice does have incentive to deviate because in that case, he maybe she can just steal Bob's bitcoins. But because this bad event happens with let's say only epsilon over two probability that a priori Alice actually doesn't have a noticeable incentive to deviate. So if we just use the current epsilon fairness notion like it would sometimes fail to rule out undesirable protocols like this. And that's why we think epsilon sequential fairness is a better solution concept for approximate fairness. And speaking, the sequential notion requires that, except with negligible probability at no point in the protocol, should you have noticeable incentive to deviate. Okay, so I'll just leave it at this. Please read the paper for the details. And what's interesting here is that this actually shows like even how to define approximate game theoretic fairness is non-trivial and requires careful considerations. Okay, finally, I want to conclude by saying that you know game theory needs crypto is much needed in decentralized blockchain applications, just like most blockchain ideas in this space actually industry is you know ahead of research. In many cases, it's like it's not even clear how to model things are how to formulate the problem. And I personally think you know this is an exciting area that needs new scientific foundations, and also it needs like interdisciplinary research. Thank you very much.


In this study, researchers used a new technique called clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats, CISPR, associated, CAS, systems to induce targeted mutations in Medaka fish embryos. They found that the technique was highly effective and could be used to target any sequence adjacent to a specific nucleotide sequence known as a protospacer adjacent motif, PAM. Additionally, they discovered that reducing the dose of the SGRNA, single guide RNA, molecule could reduce the number of off-target mutations. This article was authored by Satoshi Ansai and Masato Kenoshita.


Shannon shark been keeping it real than the motherfucker, but yeah I wish he'd just drink a little bit of water before he started yelling Who is Shannon shark the nigga who'd be on first take with skip Bayless, bro?  But I believe this At least in one room one concrete flow one room one concrete flow Eat the back I'm disappointed in Ray Lewis skip last year Ray. You said you could never protect the flag this year you're kneeling on both knees. What are you doing Ray Ray? Ray Ray down there on both knees Beijing tripping all in has got them


Last year, we played the USDA Parasite game. This year, we can play the fecal bacteria game. Thanks to the Centers for Disease Control, which will test retail meat to see how much fecal matter contamination they can find. First up, salmonella, a fecal pathogen that can trigger something called Ryder's syndrome, where you come down with salmonella food poisoning once, and you can end up with chronic debilitating arthritis for the rest of your life, and all sorts of other grisly consequences. Where's salmonella found the most? Chicken, turkey, beef, or pork? I would have guessed chicken, but no. Turkey was nearly twice as risky in the latest annual survey in terms of salmonella contamination. But what percentages are we talking about? Who thinks greater than 50% of turkey has salmonella in it, or is it less than 50%? Thankfully, less than 50%, only about 1 in 7 retail packages of poultry has the potential to permanently cripple us better odds than Russia who let. Seriously, though, why are American consumers placed at such high risk? Earlier this year, in a meat industry trade publication, an article was published on how countries in Europe boast extremely low salmonella rates. They've gotten salmonella contamination in poultry as low as 2%. How do they do it? While countries like Sweden still find some salmonella-positive flocks, the difference is that it is illegal there to sell salmonella-positive chicken. What a concept. It's illegal to sell a product that could kill or cripple our children. So why don't we do that? Banning infected poultry is a hard-handed policy. An Alabama poultry science professor explains, the fact is that it's too expensive not to sell salmonella-positive chicken. Can you imagine a toy manufacturer saying, we'd love to pull unsafe toys from the market, but such a large percentage of our toys are hazardous that it would be too expensive for us? Next up, campylobacter, a fecal-pathogen that can trigger something called Guillain-Barre syndrome, where you come down with campylobacter food poisoning once, and you can end up paralyzed on a ventilator. You're not in a coma, you're awake, but so completely paralyzed, you can't even breathe on your own. I've seen about a dozen patients with Guillain-Barre. It's like straight out of a buried alive horror movie. Where's campylobacter found the most? Chicken, turkey, beef, or pork? No contest. The chicken breast doesn't seem to be in red meat at all. But is it more than half of the chicken in stores these days, or less than half? Well, it was just under 50%. Still, with a virtual elimination of polio, the most common cause of neuromuscular paralysis in the United States now comes from eating chicken. And finally, E. coli, a general indicator of how much fecal matter is left on or in the meat. Chicken, turkey, beef, or pork? Turkey to another surprise finish, but is it more than 50% or less? More than 90%, 9 out of 10 packages of ground turkey. 9 out of 10 chicken breasts are packaged with poop, essentially, and most ground beef in the country has manure in it as well, although less than half of pork chops are contaminated with hog feces.


Northwest Technical College declared June 14th as a child care and education day to show opportunities in child care and child education. Perspective students heard from current students who shared their experiences in the program. Students can earn an associate of applied science and also two certificate programs. Opportunities are endless with the possibility of securing a job as a NANI paraprofessional or head start teacher. There are more job openings than we have graduates.  And I think that's something that's important for prospective students, whether they be someone in high school, new graduate or even someone who is looking for a career change. If you've enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland Public Television.


Their type inference we're gonna go over. I believe it's homework three question. That right? Okay, cool. Okay, so we know We have this fun. We have a definition of a function f takes in three parameters a b and c And we say if b of a then return c of a otherwise return c of b Okay, so the first thing we know so the question asks us for the type of f And so we know the type of f is a function that takes in a type of a a type of b a type of c and Return some function type t1. We don't know what it is. We'll call it t1 Okay, so if we draw our abstract syntax tree right here. We have a function definition We're just defining a function a b see and it has an if statement and the if condition is a call and The other thing is be the right one is a and then if this succeeds Then we have a call where the left is c Right is a and then else. We have a call left is c right is b That correct Yeah, if you verify it on the homework, just make sure we don't start solving the wrong problem. Okay Great. Yeah. Okay, so we've looked at this right. We've written it out here So we know this function f is definitely a function that takes in a t a t b Tc and returns a t1. So then what do we know about this node? Has to be t1 exactly Right, okay So we have an if statement So what do we know about the the constraints of the parent and the children of an if statement? Exactly the left one is a Boolean, right? This is the condition But the other ones have to be t1 exactly, right? So that's what we talked about today in class, right? So here so we're checking a condition and if it's true, we're gonna go down this path It's false. We're gonna go in this path. So those whatever path we take us to return the same value. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense Okay question so far pretty easy okay Here we have a function invocation so What do we know from this function invocation about the constraints of its parents and its children? The left is the function and the right is the parameters exactly so this we can see has the type t a and So this means B must be a function that takes in how many parameters And what's the type of that parameter? And what is this function return? Right, which makes sense when we look at it here So we know that B because it's used in as a function invocation in an if statement that Whatever it takes in as type ta that has to return a boolean Right, so B is a function that takes in a type ta and returns a boolean perfect Okay, then we go down this first branch. So in here we have another call Instruction Right, so this does exactly the same thing right so we just apply exactly we did over here over here So we know that this note so we know that this is a type ta so we know that this node of C Takes in one parameter of type ta and returns what? Which makes sense so right still we don't know what t1 is but we know that hey Whatever c is it better return a t1 so it better return. Whatever this thing returns So otherwise this thing's not gonna type check and that thing that it returns is going to be the return value of f Okay final call So we know here. This is TB and here we have What does this call say? Okay, so we haven't been giving track We probably should but we couldn't do this out of the fact. It's not a big deal. So we have ta TB TC and we have t1 Okay, so we know here that CB is a Function that takes in ta and returns a bully, right? Here we have ta is a ta here we have TC is a function that takes in a ta and Returns a t1 It's fine, right? Traits here ta is a ta great Here we now see that TC is Is a function that takes in a TB and returns a type t1 so Now we have to satisfy Now you have to satisfy these constraints, right? So type C So we need to say okay. How can we how can we make these the same? Right, so they're the same they're both functions which is good because otherwise We don't have a type error right if this was an array and this was a function then we'd say okay This is definitely an error So we say okay for this to be the same well the return values have to be the same t1 fine We already have that so now we have the additional constraint that TB is equal to ta right Okay, so then TB. Ah, yeah, so that's to take in a B and B is here. Okay, good. Okay, so type of B Takes in a type of a okay, so we have TB is equal to ta Which basically says ta is Function that takes in a ta and returns a Boolean And that does not type check because you'd have to infinitely replace this and you could never Well, we have an infinite rule if we do it more than once I mean, why would it be any different if you had a TB basically and you had a circular reference in TV Why would ta ta be different than a ta to TD were TD refer back to ta did that make sense? So you mean I'm going yeah, I'm thinking of Structural equivalence Right like a that's what I I see so wise. Yeah. Yes, I'm like that and a right TV why On the simple level why is that different than what we're running into over here with the circular reference? Ah because the type system can't I the type system can't express this So it could be that they're structurally equivalent But that the Hindi Milner type inference can't infer that these types are the same so there's There's a difference there because these are recursively defined Hindley Milner Will say I can't create a type for this which makes sense because this just like so It wouldn't treat it just like that. Why wouldn't I mean why wouldn't I guess treat it just like that? Because it doesn't have any additional information like the compiler would so here's the difference So you can actually do this Yeah, so here's the difference you can the problem is you can do it in a real language with pointers But not with actual structures because you can't build this array Right, you can't ever build this finite array of arrays of arrays of arrays of arrays of arrays of right It's an infinite array, but if you had a T letters E and F pointer to TF had to support at least the TD TA That way and that was supposed to be implementing your program. Yeah It was implementing and it supported it Oh Because I think this is a limitation of the actual language you're using and I yes on that when the hook when that Yes, so the language the project three language specifically doesn't allow Like I don't think you can create types like this. I did no no no because all you all you have is You have basic types, but there's no arrays or arrays for today. Okay, so change it to instead of array of TD is equal to TA and TA is equal to TA. Yes. Yes. Yes, so it will support that So, yeah, so that's actually the thing right so even in Hindley-Millner that does support this Because this is a constraint So that's the thing here. It's a constraint the constraint is TD is equal to TA. Okay, great I know that they're the same and here you're saying TA is constrained to be the same as TD Great, that doesn't conflict with anything. I know previously. I still know they're the same type The problem is trying to say TA is the same type as an array of TA's Right here. You can never satisfy this constraint So you couldn't say TA is equal to TA You could also say that you can say TA is equal to TA, right? We do that all the time. We say here This is TA. This is TA I mean depending on how it did so this is a constraint you can satisfy. Okay, right? You can say okay TA is equal to TA Done how does that never from TA is equal to the function call with TA So these are the same whereas You're defining an infinite type here like this type you're constructing it recursively So if you were to expand that out, you can't ever expand that out But here there's no expansion, right? You're not creating a new type You're saying that hey type TD is another name for type A and vice versa I think I just mentioned like in the textbook too if you run into that situation It's supposed to be an error or a type of smash or the other ways you define it that way Yes, that was the thing for this right it was a type error I was getting there and I was like, oh my gosh, did I mess everything up? I can remember which all was which so I Yeah, because if you can never create arrays or Pointers or structures then all you have is basic types. So then it's Type equivalence is a lot easier exactly So you never are going to get into this situation because you're can't you can't really construct new types in that language You can just give the new types different names and you can specify constraints on those types So you can say that like hey types DNA are the same and types and D are the same But you can only ever say that those are one of the basic types at some point Exactly right dig deeper to see if there's a Deeper If you had something on the program like x is an a right x is type a yeah, then you have y is type a Right Because you're saying well and then later on in the program you have x is equal to y So you're basically saying the constraint that type a is equal to type a that's the constraint that you're satisfied But you're just looking up by comparing the types This is the type construction exactly because you need to deconstruct these functions in order So say okay for this type to be equal to something else that means whatever's inside of it The parameters have to be structurally equivalent and the return value has to be structurally equivalent And because you can never satisfy that property here because it keeps Going forever the type there would we Mean do something similar Should we like for example for a question such as this We consider mostly stuff to study for is like if else. Ah, yeah, you should study the stuff that we talked about I wouldn't throw you to look like a ball. Okay to throw you a brand new thing here and define the semantics I didn't know if you would you throw anything like a while? No, if we didn't talk about walloops, then no We'll get into a lot of stuff the lambda calculus is actually very similar to that Or midterm questions, right wait, I'll stop this here. Let's see if there's more stuff


Everybody forced here up in 2023 Cosmic Chrome Baseball six-box half case number 33 random teams find the results any type of eight sports cards calm Let's go ahead and get started Don't forget about Trevor Lawrence What you mean? I don't say anything about Trevor Lawrence. Oh For oh, it's not a rookie quarterbacks in the AFC South. Yeah, there might be some Trevor Lawrence and some decent Trevor Lawrence in the elite Harris Piguero, O'Neal Cruz Anybody do anything fun today or just kind of chillin Harper judge bets I'm gonna roll die for all the triples. They'll go one two three four five six unless there's a majority on the card Goes one we'll go left side on all the triples unless there's a majority And that there's like a gold or better will random it instead if we need to Josh Jung Harris That was Harris Acunia and Riley gold Manoa for the blue Jays You know Jays number to 50 You slept in Vaughan Sean I did the opposite Fractured to grom for the Rangers. I pretty much just came in to break for Sam while he was in the meeting A tiny launch in orbit next time Sean's he like I I sorry I forgot Call me Guerrero stars in the night Stevers Casas Soto Nucleus still in cease white socks Gunner base devours Blue Moon Jeremy Pena 1099 Astros Well Rangers blown it again got an Alvarez extra threshold talent for the Mets Next is a refractor Nate Lowe for the Rangers Need some better stuff in this box here Tanya extra threshold talent Harper bets and trout Harvard vets judge Goldschmidt For seven three strikeouts career against this guy Taco fractor we got a taco fractor right Aqua you Darvish 2199 Padres We got a taco fractor it's taco time Taco Monday, baby Max Muncie Dodgers. It's taco time It's taco time four or five for the Dodgers First one I've seen Dodgers Dodgers and Leah are congrats Leah taco time.  Oh devours got on base Stars in the night Yoshida Red Sox he advanced on a wild pitch Or no, we just stole Base running devours is a menace Jazz Chisholm Got stowers Taco taco got nucleus Mazataki Yoshida rookie for the Red Sox, you know Sean had Taco Bell a few minutes ago So he really brought the energy for the taco the taco fractor It Sheetah blue moon bregman astros the 99 half the Astros infield and blue moon parallels Harris devours Kossus Best corner infielders of any team ever Fractor Nesta Cortez Yankees Yeah Sunday got Vargas exactly what that means probably do Monday fun day for a mixer or something Saturday A rod Carol so you probably get a paid day as well And what a double what a double double you boom Yoshida all those other suckers just got to go without getting Got launched an orbit Jordan Walker for the Cardinals Tristan Kossus What a man what a massive win for you honestly, yeah Gunner Henderson Gold rookie auto Extra-terrestrial talent 22 of 50 Mangorang taco time It's modelo time. I wish it was modelo time Congrats the Baltimore Anthony P Donate Mama Mia I'll be like Chris Pratt. It's a me Mario Mama Mia Boom Chris Pratt as Mario. Where's my where's my 30 mil Where's my 30 mil? Come on JT Geez that dude is Deversus faster now Vaughn. What is this? What is this? He looks faster. I was not that was on a strong throw, but Guys got some wheels morale rookie green spaced us to 75 going 2d Cubs Come on Kossus Shohei Otani Mercury planetary pursuits Angels in on the action Breaks on fire refractor Louise Robert White Sox. Yeah, dude Devers stole second He tagged up from second to third on like just a regular Straightaway center like not even deep. Oh Boy, oh, don't look at chat Sean I Anderson aqua Salvador Perez Royals number two one ninety nine Your sheet extra threshold talent show some restraint Steve Nucleus Vladdie jr. Blue jays refractor rookie Garrett Mitchell Brewers.  I'm thinking of no Should have kept Kiermeyer He would have caught it standing up and throwing the guy out at home Nucleus a beuler for the Dodgers Devers basically created that that run on his own. I'm convinced. Yeah now.  That is insane. That's pretty that is insane break Random spot of a lifetime right here Anthony P with the O's Anthony yeah, that is ridiculous What is going on? We have two boxes left Yentos gunner refractor Alec Boma Phillies Matt McClain. Let's get it right. Yeah, I'm down. I'm down to pull some Rockies action here Ezekiel Durand super fracter.  I'm taking my my masatake Yoshida The masa mash a lot of Red Sox fans there Aqua equinox Dylan cease white Sox to 199 Corbin color Ali Delacruz Riki the year Corbin Carol got Kodai Senga Corbin Carol buy a lot actually Work your factor is waters for the Royals Ruchman base It's Red Sox record this year Steve you got a year. Yeah, you got a smartphone none. Yeah planetary pursuits Aaron judge Uranus. I Was hoping to get to judge Uranus Yeah Now congrats to the Yankees judge Uranus That Corbin Carol extraterrestrial talent Nucleus Brandon Lau for the rays refractor rookie Valdez Red Sox It's been an insane break. This has been a bananas 75 is it keep Ryan Hayes auto for the Pirates Pirates are the nice one. I don't know Steve I can never tell with you Steve's just out out here being crazy all the time Steve come on man, just do it Harper and there's a double for Trevor story. This guy Kittredge is getting About the head around the order got a green Edwin Diaz for the Mets out of 75 100% Vaughan 100% Last box half case number 33 You got elite football at seven to go everybody divisions case Got nine to go on prism draft and star was sold out only two breaks up tonight prism draft and elite football Oh, it's a late in sports cards of gmail.com. I will write down the password for you. Can you have the taco factor? I Mean, I'm not gonna give it to you Steve Nucleus Brett Bady rookie for the Mets Steve after all the shenanigans you pull you think that See that that would happen To 199 Max Maya rookie for the Marlins Downs Acunia Rutschman rickier factor Cabrera Yankees Gunner Remar's there's like seven mags over here. I just stopped putting them on card stands Taco factor the taco factor Muncie is a lot rarer and honestly anything else we pulled here.  All right We had Aqua Max Meyer to 199 Aqua Dylan Cease Polanco Perez Darvish to 99 was Bregman and Pena 75 Diaz and morale gold of 50 Manoa green auto to 75 Brian Hayes pirates Mercury Otani angels judge Uranus Yankees Gold Gunner Henderson action threshold talent auto to 50 Gold star clusters rutschman and Henderson to 50 for the Orioles black Eclipse rookie to 10 supernova Gunner Henderson black to 10 and taco time's taco factor Max Muncie 4 or 5 Visit tops comm slash taco factor for more information more information on what? That does it for the half case. That was a half case. We're on to the next one


Welcome to Hawaii, the state of clean energy. I'm your host, Megan Russell. Our underwriter is the Hawaii Energy Policy Forum, a program of the Hawaii Natural Energy Institute. I'm pleased to welcome our guest, Mitch Yuen, HNEI Hydrogen Systems Program Manager. Today we're going to talk story about hydrogen infrastructure, build it, and they will come. Mitch, welcome to the show. We are today are going to talk to you about why hydrogen infrastructure is so important to helping us meet Hawaii's clean energy goals. Well, thanks, Megan. It's really great to be here and the other receiving end as the guest rather than the host. So far away. All right. So in general, what is the status of hydrogen vehicles in the state? So let's pull up the first slide. So basically the real message is that hydrogen vehicles have arrived. You can buy almost any kind of a hydrogen vehicle these days from a bus, a full paratransit, even a class eight tractor trailer type truck. Of course, a whole bunch of different really cool cars, baggage tow tractors at airports, heavy medium duty delivery vans, like for FedEx, heavy duty garbage trucks, and the list goes on. So the bottom line is we have the vehicles. That's awesome. Why don't we have more of them? Well, let's have a look at slide two. So the challenge is it's the infrastructure. So how do we fuel them? Like I personally would have my own hydrogen car if I knew where to fuel it. Right now, we only have one public fueling station in Hawaii. That's at Servco on Oahu. And they have a fairly small hydrogen production station so they can cope with the fumarize that they lease out, but they don't have the capacity to fuel a lot of cars. So it's the infrastructure that we have to put in place to be able to fuel vehicles and build it and they will come. Perfect. So I understand HNEI has a hydrogen infrastructure program. Can you tell us more about that? Yeah, I'd be happy to do it. Let's look at the next slide, slide three, I believe. So yeah, so we've been running this program for many, many years. And what we decided to do was actually focus a lot on the infrastructure. And we're doing that to support the introduction of fuel cell electric bus fleets for public transportation. There's a lot of reasons for doing that. First of all, for public outreach and support. And after all, the taxpayers at the moment are paying for this infrastructure. And so instead of having gasoline or, sorry, hydrogen stations for fairly wealthy people with nice cars, with buses, everybody, it doesn't matter what your situation is, you can actually get on the bus, experience the bus itself, it's quiet, no diesel fumes and get familiar with the hydrogen and get comfortable with it. And like in England, I have a friend who lived in England for a while, they had hydrogen buses and they'd always wait for the hydrogen bus to show up instead of the smelly old diesel bus. And they just liked everything about it, the ride, no smells and it was so quiet, it was almost like a stealth vehicle. And so the general public will then start getting familiar with hydrogen and they're gonna like it. That's what I predict, they're gonna really like it. And if they like it, then they're gonna talk to the political class and they're gonna get political support because politicians react to the taxpayers and eventually, I mean, they're, they need to get reelected and so if they do something unpopular, they're not gonna get reelected. So it's a great way to provide public outreach and introduce the technology. The other part of the program, of course, is the hydrogen has to be cost competitive for it as a transportation fuel. Right now it's not, frankly, but for my program, it's not meant to be necessarily economic at this point in time. We're gonna work on that and look at how we can produce hydrogen cheaper than what we can get for it now. But this is a de-risking program, it's to show that the systems work to get familiar with it and over time, we can look at how we reduce the cost of the hydrogen. And of course, we wanna increase the use of renewable energy sources, particularly on the big island where they have geothermal, wind, PV and really important, a lot of municipal waste that's all now consolidated on the west side of the island. And Riley Sado and the county are looking at that as a source for making hydrogen and we think it'll be quite competitive. This is utility scale, this is not lab scale in a laboratory at a university on a bench. This is big stuff, it's big equipment and it takes a lot of big money to get it done. And we also wanna leverage industrial benefits, i.e jobs for Hawaii. So right now, when we buy a bus, we export our money to the mainland and somebody on the mainland builds the bus and they ship it to Hawaii. So why not build a kit? And I've talked to a bus company over there, they're willing to provide a kit and we assemble it in Hawaii rough back of the envelope calculation. About 75% of the money we spent for the bus would stay in our local economy. So what's wrong with that? Plus the people assembling it, they're gonna become more familiar with the technology. So it's gonna be like workforce development and it's gonna introduce a whole new industry for Hawaii. And finally, we wanna transfer the lessons learned to the neighbor islands. I mean, Hawaii always wanted to start on the big island. If you look at the legislation for the hydrogen economy, they said start on the big island first, that's because it's big and has lots of renewable energy. And then once we get it nailed down here, then we can export the know-how and show how to the neighbor islands, including Oahu. Long answer, but that's it. Oh, great answer. That's awesome information. This sounds like a really exciting program. So one of the things you talked about a lot were these buses. So why the focus on these heavier duty vehicles right now? Okay, let's have the next slide up. So first of all, it's really good capital utilization. So, you know, instead of fueling one or two cars a day or two or three cars a day, we're fueling a whole fleet of vehicles all at one time. And so that means that your capital or your hydrogen station is working all the time and it's not just sitting around collecting dust and wasting that money. Secondly, it's really important to build the hydrogen demand quickly by that. I mean, we want to generate a lot of hydrogen. The more hydrogen we need the better because at some point in time, private industry will say, hey, I can make money here. As Richard Ha always says, you know, farmers farm when farmers make money and it's the same with private industry for people who run gasoline stations right now, they'll invest in a station when they figure out that they can make money. Right now they can't because it's so new and that's why we're using taxpayers' dollars. But we want to get the, you know, free the taxpayers off as soon as possible by getting enough hydrogen so that there's enough flow through for people to make money at it. I'd also like to point out a real advantage of hydrogen is you can fuel these vehicles very quickly. The bus is quite quickly. So one dispenser actually can support about 20 buses and I have a little diagram further on in our presentation which illustrates that. But you may ask, well, what about the light duty guys?  I mean, we can still let them have access to the fueling station which is what AC Transit in California has done this. They have a pump dispenser outside the main gate to allow early adopters to come and fuel their vehicles and that helps increase the hydrogen demand which is going to help everybody and get us to the point where business can take over and actually make money at it. And it also leverages all that taxpayers' money that went into building the infrastructure.  So we just have to put the procedures and policies in place to allow that to happen. That's exciting. So talking about fueling these cars, HNEI has a hydrogen station. Could you tell us more about that and where it's located right now? Yeah, let's have the next slide up. It just happened to have a slide that illustrates that. So here you see a map of the big island and basically our first hydrogen station on the big island is at the Nell Hall facility, the Natural Energy Laboratory Authority. And it's right beside the Kona Airport as you fly into Kona, you'll probably see it. You'll see a bunch of parabolic mirrors and things like that, but they have a large aquaculture operation going there. So we set up there. It's the Natural Energy Lab after all and this is a great place for us to do it. It was really great working with Nell Hall.  We wouldn't be where we are if it wasn't for them. So the idea is we do production, we call it centralized production and distributed dispensing, just like a refinery where the oil comes in and crude oil comes in and refine it and then they spread it out with trucks and we're doing the same thing. So we'll have a dispenser at our site at Nell Hall, but we're also planning to put in a second dispensing facilities, you can see on the right hand side over Hilo where Mass Transit, MTA is Mass Transit Agency and who run the Helion bus. They have their main facility there right now. So we're planning to put in a hydrogen dispensing system there and we will transport hydrogen. They're using hydrogen transport trailers. I have some pictures later on the following slide and that's just hauled by a truck across the island to the other side, drag and drop.  So that's the basic project and how it works. So let's talk about pictures. Do you have a picture of what this station looks like or can you tell us about it, more about it? I do, I plan for this. So if we can have up the next slide. So this is a rendering, a 3D rendering done by our tech over there, Aaron McCall. He's awesome using SketchUp. So if he's listening to this, well done Aaron, but this shows the basic layout. So of course dominated by a 40 foot shipping container right at the front end on the lower level of that picture and that houses an electrolyzer that makes 65 kilograms of hydrogen per day, IE in 24 hours. And on the left is compressed by a pretty big compressor. And then on the right, we have a computer control system because this is totally automated. You don't have to have anybody there. The driver just has to attach the dispensing hose to the bus and he hits the computer screen and the computer takes over. The reason we do that is to the extent possible we want to keep people out of the loop because the less people involved the safer it is because most accidents are caused by people making mistakes. And by putting in really good software and thinking all the possible things that could go wrong we kind of designed that out of the loop. And so on the left you'll see there's a little blue unit there. That's the dispenser. I have a picture of it further on and it's covered by a canopy to keep the sun off the screen as much as possible. And then on the upper right there's our three tube trailers that we have. Each trailer carries a hundred kilograms of hydrogen. That's equivalent to a hundred gallons of gasoline.  And then all the electric supply is on a concrete block wall on the other side. So that's the basic layout. And if we go to the next slide that's what it looks like in real life. Funnily enough it looks just like the 3D rendering. And all the lines everything goes under that slab. It's all undergrounded so that people can't run into it and break it. You'll see there's the orange and white crash barriers. That's in case some nutcase decides he wants to smash into it with a car. So that stops that. So when we do our HAZOP analysis we look at all the kind of eventualities that could take place. So that's kind of how it looks today. And the NAND construction did all the concrete work and they did a fantastic job I must say. And it was managed by NELHA staff. Alex Leonard was the project manager to put in all the site work. And he did a fabulous job. That's exciting. That looks awesome. And you're right. Like the 3D rendering. So congrats. So you talked about some of the maybe safe issues that come with dispensing hydrogen. Can you tell us more about how the hydrogen is dispensed to the bus? And then two about how it's stored before it's dispensed. Yeah, so let's flip up the next slide. So there you see here's a picture of the dispenser. And you'll notice it looks like a regular gasoline dispenser funnily enough. And it carries out all the same functions. But it's got a computer operated touchscreen right in the middle.  So it's all like I said before it's totally computer controlled. We call it a cascade fill. That's just the way they fill a hydrogen car. You use different pressures of hydrogen and you equalize it going from low pressure to high pressure. That's all done automatically with air operated valves that are controlled by the computer. It's unattended as I said before, we have UV and IR and that's ultraviolet and infrared flame detectors which are looking down at where the fueling is taking place. So in case something happens that it's all that's all connected into a safety shutdown system and fire alarm system. And the ESP is emergency shutdown. It's just, you'll see it at gasoline stations too. If something happens all you have to do is hit the button that shuts the whole station down and then we have fire alarms spread around throughout the units throughout the site and they give off either a siren so you can hear it and or a flashing strobe and a flashing strobe light. So if we go to the next slide here's a picture of our hydrogen transport trailers. I call them smart trailers because they're computer controlled at once again with these air operated valves. And on the right is a boost pump system because when you haul the trailer to Hilo and are using it to fill the bus you only get half the hydrogen out because of the way it equalizes. So that's not very efficient because you got to haul a trailer back that's half full. So we challenged our supplier power tech labs out of Canada that say we've got to do better than that. So they worked on a design and they developed the boost pump system. So it's always sucking hydrogen from most tank and keeping the pressure up as high as it can go. So we can get almost about 90% of the hydrogen out of it which is really good. And it's like reduces your transport costs by about 50% which is a huge deal. When you think it costs about $400 or $500 to ship a trailer from one side of the island to the other that's pretty expensive to do it. And if we can save half of that, that's a huge saving. So hats off to power tech and the system has been built, it's ready to go. As soon as we have our designs completed over at the Kielosai we'll be installing that system. Meanwhile, here, I call it, say here at Nelha we use these trailers as well to fill buses at the Nelha site. We don't have any ground mounted storage. So that's about all I can get out of that slide. That's exciting. So you mentioned that you have fueled buses yet. Do you have photo proof of this? Yes, I do. If you haul up the next slide you'll see our first hydrogen bus, 21 passenger bus was just delivered to Nelha on the 23rd of March. So what's that about? Two weeks ago maybe. And we did our first fueling on the 24th.  And the amazing thing is that everything worked. All this underground cabling and pipe work and valves and fittings and sensors and wires, it all worked. Which is what I was staying awake at night, stressing out about, well, you know, we do all this. It's all underground under the six inch slab of concrete. We had to repair something. I can't see us having a jackhammer all up. So that was a big event for all of us. That was a Miller time event. Yeah, congratulations on a successful first pump. So do you have a workforce in training to help out with future pumps? Yeah, we've developed some workforce training. I mean, this is a potential speed bump to making faster progress. I think it's something that people leave till the end. You know, they start a project and they look at all the equipment and get that all running. But then the question is, well, who's gonna operate it? You know, well, you have to have people that are trained up on it to operate the thing. And so we've been developing this for quite a long time. Aaron and I have been developing safety manuals, operational manuals for like two or three years. And what we did recently, now we're producing slide decks because it's kind of hard for people to read one of these big manuals. And so we're pulling out the highlights. And we're starting a workforce development program. We had our first session on Monday this week where we had the senior people from Robert Savoy attend for a train the trainers session. And some of the things we have to overcome is first of all, there's fear out there on safety, you know, a lot of people are concerned about hygiene safety. So we have to address that, train them up on hygiene safety, how to operate safely. They're also, you know, this is high voltage because it's an electric drive. So they have to become familiar with that. And right now this is all new stuff. So we have a pretty, you know, detailed both the hygiene safety course and then an operator's course. And then of course there's a lot of concern about job security because, you know, that's right now it's a diesel fleet and you have diesel mechanics and people who are trained to work on the diesels and they're saying, well, gee, you know, when you get these electric vehicles, what's going to happen for me? So we've got to help them make that transition over from what they're doing now so that they can continue to have their jobs and provide the services they do with this kind of a vehicle. And that should not be difficult. That's actually pretty, most actually mechanics like the electric vehicles because it's cleaner, that's pretty easy overall. You know, they don't have to get into the details of like overhauling a fuel cell or anything like that. A lot of it's a repair by replacement. And so I like to make the point. I think there's a real mistake some people are making is like we're not training academics here. You know, and I think for example, in the U.S.D., we gave a contract to EPRI and they had a lot of universities involved in it. And they went, I think, looking at their first report, I was disappointed that it seemed to be more focused on the academics rather than the blue collar workers, the guys that actually, you know, have to do, you know, wrench and hand or screwdrivers. I mean, the guys that actually do the work. So I think we need to do a better job for our blue collar workers. And that's the course we're doing right now is hands-on. This is exactly what you have to know with little check-off lists of, you know, what the procedures are. And it's not, we're not training PhDs and we're not training master's students or BSCs.  That's exciting. It sounds like you're providing a lot of good opportunities for people who maybe might need to transition in the future to these alternative energy sources. So who knows for that? So. Let's throw out the next slide. So I said earlier in my pitch today that, you know, one dispenser can fuel 20 buses or 20, in this case, 22 buses. So when we're doing one of these diagrams, I looked at it and I said, wow, you know, if you calculate the amount of time it takes to fuel a bus, which is about 10 minutes, you know, over a six-hour period when, you know, the buses are back at the barn.  I said, well, that's 20 or 22 buses. And you can say the word, but you don't quite understand what it means. And still you see the picture. So the top picture is what the dispenser would look like. You see a little tube trailer there.  Of course, it would take more than one tube trailer to fill up all those buses. We'd have to have a very large supply of hydrogen. But the point is, is that one dispenser can fuel 22 buses over a six to seven hour period. And so that saves a lot of money because you don't have to have an individual charger. If it was a battery electric bus, each chart bus would have to have their own dedicated charger and all the wiring and the power required to run that charger, whereas we can do it just like fueling your car and it's kind of like a drop-in solution. So we need to be looking at that as part of the overall cost and how easy it is to fuel that number of buses. That's a lot of buses sitting there for one little dispenser, like we have. No kidding. Well, we're coming to an end of the show. Do you have any final thoughts you'd like to share with the audience on this exciting program?  This is all great stuff, but at the end of the line, I mean, the buses are great and the cars are great, but it's the infrastructure.  We need to build it as fast as possible because if we build it, they will come. I mean, that's what's stopping me from buying my own hydrogen car is I don't know where I can fill it. And so we need fueling stations for cars, trucks, buses, the whole gamut and the faster we do it, the quicker we'll get it done and the quicker we can meet the state's objectives of becoming a fossil fuel-free decarbonized economy by 2035, 2045. I mean, I think personally it's gonna take longer than that, but whatever, I mean, we gotta get after it and stop talking and start doing. We've proven that can be done. There's no magic back here. You can see the hydrogen station.  Right on. Well, we'll have to leave it there. You've been watching Hawaii, The State of Clean Energy on Think Tech, Hawaii. Today we've been talking story about Hawaii's hydrogen infrastructure and why it's so important in contributing to Hawaii's 100% clean energy goals. Thanks to our viewers for tuning in. I'm Megan Russell. We'll be back in two weeks with another edition of Hawaii, The State of Clean Energy. Aloha. Thank you so much for watching Think Tech Hawaii. If you like what we do, please like us and click the subscribe button on YouTube and the follow button on Vimeo. You can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and LinkedIn and donate to us at thinktechhawaii.com. Mahalo.