Back and forth, left and right, yes, but no, ah, eh, eh, ha! Alright guys, welcome back to the channel. If you're new, my name is Bobby. Guys, finally we're going to react to some vegans again. Today we have Laura Marie and Teal Scott, formerly known as Teal Sworn. They're going to talk about veganism, but about spirituality as well. Indeed, they're going to talk about the so-called spiritual diet. Let's have a look. Hi Teal, so I'm glad to have you on this show today. First, we're going to start by introducing ourselves for the people who don't know me or don't know you or neither of us. So, I'm going to start by introducing myself briefly. My name is Laura Marie. Nice to meet you. I'm a health and lifestyle coach. Who isn't nowadays? Everybody is a life coach. My mission and my passion is to teach people how to transform from the inside out, how to become the best version of themselves, physically, mentally, emotionally and spiritually. Cute. As adorable and admirable this is, I'm truly wondering, why is everybody a lifestyle coach nowadays? What are your credentials? Have you achieved perfect peace, perfect spiritual alignment? What have you accomplished in your life? What are your credentials? How can you teach others? Most of those influences nowadays are miserable inside, but feel in the position that they can teach the world. Cute. And so today I am interviewing Teal Scott. Teal was born in 1984. She was born with a range of extracensory abilities, like Clara Williams, Clara Sons. Born with it, you sure? Sons and Clara Ogens. She has a very difficult story, because she was a health captive for 13 years in her childhood. And that's terrible. She has been sexually and mentally abused. As terrible as this is, it still explains a lot. I personally do not believe that she was born with those spiritual powers. I do believe that the trauma led her to believe that she has spiritual powers. She escaped at the age of 19, and now she helps people overcoming the most difficult situation in their lives and brings a positive message to the world and help people in their day to day. That's beautiful. Let's see how positive this message is. The first question I'm going to ask about the body is about the food we eat. We eat. We all know now that we are what we eat. And I would like to talk about plant-based diet, because we... Because we are plants. Talk more and more about how eating animal products is hurting our health. And I know that many people, depending on the country we live in, but it's sometimes cultural. And many people are afraid to take meat out of their diet, because they think... Yeah, many people still have common sense. They're going to like protein. They're going to like all the essential nutrients. And people say, yeah, but we've been eating meat for ages and since the beginning of time. So why it should be harmful? So what is your answer about this? Because you can see the energy, people's energy, you can see through the body. You can see health. This is something that you can observe within the so-called spiritual community, new age community. People become gods. People become gurus and they're elevated to idols. Now she says that Teal can see auras. She can see the energy. First and foremost, we do not know that. We cannot know for a fact what she can or cannot see. However, we are relying on an outside source, an external source that knows more than us. And now this source will tell us exactly what she or he sees or not. And then we should learn something of it. The kingdom of God is within. Stop looking outside. Problems in people. And so have you already noticed something different in somebody that's eating meat compared to somebody that's vegan or plant-based or reduced her consumption? Probably really, really bad vibes and low energy. Enough animal products. Low vibrations. The people who are eating a plant-based diet have a much higher frequency. A much lower frequency belongs to the people who eat animal-based proteins. They're much more a match to the third dimension, but also all of the illusion that goes along with the third dimensional reality. So that's just the spiritual level of what effect eating meat has. But it actually isn't true that we've been eating meat since the very beginning. Essentially, when we were living in areas of the globe that were more close to the equator, we didn't ever have to take the risk of chasing after something and eating it. Yes, absolutely true. Just go into all of those ancient caves and all you will find are paintings of broccolis and Buddha boats. First and foremost, I totally disagree that we all came from the equator, that we all came from Mama Africa. And then by distancing ourselves from our natural habitat, we became whiteies. Right? This is how it happened. I strongly disagree with that theory. But hey, even if we give her the benefit of the doubt and we assume that we all came from Africa, Africa is super dry. Nothing grows over there. People have always been hunting because they couldn't cultivate plants in that dry climate. A great example of this are the Maasai that practice the same traditions to this very day. Hunting would have been something you only did for survival because of the likelihood of you living through, especially with big game, living through hunting for red meat, something like that would be incredibly risky. You wouldn't... Yes, it would be incredibly risky. And as you said correctly, we did it for survival. Guess what else we did for survival? Everything. We survived. This is what humans did. Now we are living in a society where we don't have to take care of our daily survival because we live in flats, we have electricity, we have running water, etc, etc, etc. But every aspect of life back then was survival. Only do that if you needed to. Yes. So what you... Which we needed to. Find is that when we were very first the beginning of our species, we were eating nuts, plants, roots, things like that that were very easily acquired and didn't take us risking our lives to do. Okay, wrong. Yet again, my lady, roots back in those days have you ever seen wild roots? Wild roots wouldn't have delivered enough energy. We started cultivating roots way, way later. We started hybridizing those and we started breeding them in a way that they became sweeter and bigger. Then finally we are able to use those roots, aka potatoes, tubers, etc. as the valid energy source prior in nature in the wild. This was completely impossible. And the same goes of course for nuts. Do you think they had fields and fields of nuts with which they could have sustained themselves?  At best they would have found a handful of nuts every few months or so and obviously nobody in the wild would start eating those seeds. They would plant those seeds in order to grow a tree. Nuts are seeds. No normal human being would have started eating nuts on mass and trying to sustain themselves with them. Crazy. But it's only when we started moving into the areas on the globe and all of the climate started shifting that it became a real thing, a survival. Absolutely fake. Absolutely not true. Pseudo signs to this very day, the tribes in Africa or any other tropical paradise of yours, people are still hunting. People still eat predominantly animal foods. Those people are still the healthiest. At which it was sort of worth surviving to risk our own lives hunting for something. So we evolved into being omnivorous. It wasn't like we started that way. Again, even if you believe mainstream scientists and you believe in evolution just as it's taught, the Darwinist perspective, all right, let's give you the benefit of the doubt. The question is, how did we evolve into omnivores? Even if you believe that our ancestors were some sort of forgiverous apes, all right, then they evolved into humans due to eating meat. Yet again, I do not subscribe to that idea, but if this is your idea, your ideology, you subscribe to evolution, then you must praise the meat. Because what this means is that we evolved out of monkeys into humans by hunting. And now you want to further evolve by reversing that process? That is really important because obviously, if we look at the beginning, our origins, what is most natural for a human being to eat is plant-based material, which we see. Again, how is it the most natural thing to eat? Have you seen babies eating and loving meat? Have you seen babies eating vegetables? They hate it. See, reflected all throughout the body. We don't have canines that can rip through flesh. So we're not like those carnivores. I beg to differ. The carnivores that come to this planet and can just go out and like tear into a deal. Yeah, that is why most of us are very disgusted when we see blood and dead animals.  The reality of things is this is nothing but twisted pseudoscience yet again.  No worries whatsoever. However, if you look at herbivores, you can clearly see that they have multiple stomachs in order to ferment that fiber. We do not have that. We do not have multiple guts to ferment our food and extract some sort of nutrition out of it. This is why we are not herbivores. Very, very simple. And so you say- No nail? Yeah. So you say it was a- No nails because you cut your nails? Survival thing. It's something we did because when we didn't have anything else to eat. And then we kept doing it during the- So wait a second. We had nothing else to eat, but the same time somehow, magically, we are supposed to eat plants because plants were abundantly available. But now all of a sudden they weren't? Yes, it became a prize. Human beings are all about achievement. Yes. And when the achievement became the hunt, suddenly the meat became more special than the other things which were available to us. Sure. And it's not because it is more nutritious, right? So people go after an activity that you described as very, very dangerous. They go and try to hunt an animal and risk possible death. And then all they harness is basically a banana, right? Just the equivalent of any other fruit or vegetable. This is what they got off the animal. Of course, this is wrong. They got bone marrow. They got the organs. They got the meat. They got the blood. They got milk in some instances, etc., etc. Those foods were prized because they were nutritionally dense. And of course, because they were perfectly suited for the human body.  And so that sort of specialness is what was bred into the meat-based diet. In most cultures around the globe, meat is a novelty item. It's not the base of the person's diet. Yes, exactly. Again, those cave paintings didn't show what we've been eating, right?  And you can really consider it a primary industrial country when people eat a lot of meat because that is a novelty item. But what we're missing, basically, is the fact that even though it's a novelty item, it's not something that we are even designed to eat. Novelty item, novelty item, novelty item. Wrong, wrong, and wrong again. Novelty items are plants and vegetables in general that we started cultivating. Those new potatoes, those new carrots, all of those plants have been cultivated by humans. Those are novelty items. And of course, needless to say, all of that processed junk, all of those new packaged foods, those are novelty items. Meat is the most ancient food that you can find. People who suggest that meat is the best source of protein don't understand the nature of how meat is digested within the system. A human being doesn't have a high enough acid level in their stomach like most carnivores in order to digest animal protein. Yes, exactly. All right, let's test this hypothesis. I googled human pH level of the stomach. What we can see is the normal volume of the stomach fluid is 20 to 100 milliliters and the pH is acidic 1.5 to 3.5. This is the human stomach. Now let's have a look at dog stomachs. The pH of the gastric fluids and fasting dogs fluctuated with a range of 2.7 to 8.3. Now, if you don't know anything about science, about pH levels, etc., etc., let me enlighten you. The more is not more acidic, but the lesser the level, the more acidic it gets. So 2.7 in this case is more basal and less acidic. 1.5 is more acidic, which makes the human the perfect carnivore.  If you were going to eat a good source of protein that's a vegan-based protein, something like a head of broccoli, you would be digesting 80 to 90% of that. This is amazing. So probably Teal was browsing the internet too much and checked many of those vegan memes where you can see that broccoli has more protein than steak, what they don't tell you of course is that those numbers are terribly twisted. Steak has around about 25 to 30 grams of protein per 100 grams. Broccoli has somewhere around 6 to 8. So if we go from grams, they cannot compete already. And of course they do not tell you that the biological value of broccoli is super low in comparison to steak or any other meat. And of course meat such as red meat has tons of zinc and B12, creatine, et cetera, et cetera. It's no comparison whatsoever. Even mainstream scientists, yet again, even though I don't want to appear to authority, agree that you won't build muscle with broccoli. Of that plant.  Right. This is why bodybuilders eat rice and chicken. They should simply eat rice and broccoli. They would make much better gains. Exactly. Your body will take all of the protein in from the broccoli and not much in from the chicken. Again, this is terribly twisted. This is absolutely demonic what you see here. Everything is upside down in the New Age perspective. We all know that plants come with a ton of fiber. Most of the plant matter is being excreted. This is why vegans have to run to the toilet that much. It is very, very simple. It is indigestible, insoluble, fiber. This is why you run to the toilet. This is why you excret it. However, if you would ever dare to try a carnival diet, you would see that there is very, very little excrement.  No, that is not the truth. Actually, fiber makes you constipated and meat is being almost fully absorbed. Again, yes. Yes, master. For all the people that are unsure if it's the same, like plant-based protein are equal to animal protein, you are telling us that this fear should be removed because and even... Yes, absolutely. Yes, this is true. Even though every single study will show you that meat protein is better absorbed. Yes, I know. The vegans are screaming already. If you combine the plants, then you will have enough protein. Yes, it is true. If you combine certain plants, the biological value of the protein is higher. However, with that, you're consuming more calories again. And of course, you're consuming more carbohydrates. Again, more overall food weight, more overall fiber. You are bloated, you are depressed, more overall anti-nutrients, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. This is unbelievable that it's 2021 and people still don't understand this. Meanwhile, you could simply eat a steak. It's protein are higher and more nutritious than animal protein. More nutritious. How? Without creatinine, without B12, without vitamin D3? How more nutritious? Much. And... Very much. Okay, there are people who say we should eat living food and not dead food. You know, animals are dead.  Animals are dead.  Do you understand that that is the most living food? Think about it logically. If you would have an organ transplant, right, we have that in modern medicine. You take a living kidney and you try to transplant that. The only reason why it works is because that organ is still alive. If that organ would have been dead, it couldn't have been transplanted. So as you can see, sashimi, steak tata, capacho, all raw living foods. It's something we can keep in our minds to remind us. You know, this is like living food, so it's good for us and it's dead food. It shouldn't be eaten. If you cook plants to the ground, all you have is dead food. Try to roast and cook seeds and then plant them into the soil and wait for the tree to flourish. I think that the higher energy level you have in any food, the more aliveness there is. Obviously the more vital force you're going to be absorbing into your body. Because obviously to be a living food, it has to hold a higher frequency than those foods which we could consider dead, which are all of our processed foods. And again, if you subscribe to that idea of higher frequencies, higher vibrational fields, all right. Then you must admit that raw living flesh has the highest frequency. It should be, yes. And you know it. Yes, yes. Lumped in that one as well. This is of course, if we go down this route of spirituality or cultism, we can go back in time and observe the Aztecs or the Mayans. This is what they did. They ripped out the living heart of humans and sacrificed it to their gods. This is where this is headed. If you truly would believe in higher vibration, higher frequencies, you would be eating raw animals and drinking raw blood. And what would you say to the people who say that plants are also alive and if we kill plants, it's the same as killing animals. And we always hear this stuff. The carrot suffers also and people that are defending this. What is your answer? They have an argument. Any time you take life, no matter what that life is, you're essentially killing yourself. And ultimately, human beings are going to evolve to a place where we no longer have the need to take our vital force from something else. But yet again, isn't that strange? I thought we evolved into human beings because we started eating flesh. Now we're going to further evolve by not doing that, which made us human in the first place. Yeah. Right now, not many of us on this planet are able to maintain positive thought to such a degree that we can utilize our own source stream as a source of energy. There's been a very few people on the globe. There are some, but there have been very few people.  Yet again, positive thought. If you keep your thoughts positive, then nothing has to suffer any longer.  If you go deep, deep within and you try to find God, the Kingdom of God, all you will find is that there is true stillness within you. This is not about emotions. This is not about lovey-dovey positivity, higher vibration. This is about pure awareness. Yes, ladies. I dabbled in spirituality myself. Oh, should I dare to say that I even had plant medicine experiences, countless of them.  The more you know. Let's face facts. It is, of course, ridiculous to assume that if you have enough positive thoughts, enough manifestation power, then you will be able to live off Prana, off Mami Earth, just of air and love. This is nothing but a cry for love, but not the real love, not the love of God, which is absolutely still, which is not an emotion.  We are singing kumbaya around the fire, holding hands. This is not how this works, not from a physical nor a spiritual perspective. On the globe that are capable of maintaining that kind of mentality that is a necessity if you're going to live off of pure, vital Prana, life force energy. But here's this argument as to why plants would be... Breathe in that Guras Prana, baby. ...better than eating animals. The more animal-based life forms, basically, they are the kind of life forms which are intense creators. They're not as allowing as plants. That's why they come down manifested with an internal nervous system. The second that you have an internal nervous system, which is a byproduct of a desire to survive, you are resistant to death. So what you'll notice when you kill something with a central nervous system is that there's an extreme amount of resistance and fear in the moment of death. You don't see that with plants. It's literally I'm here, I'm gone. So what you're putting... So you want to become exactly that. ...into your body. Well, I should say the suffering that we experience on this planet is a result of resistance. So the animal that resists the most suffers the most when it comes to death. Anything with a central nervous system will suffer a great deal in death. Half truths yet again. I agree that if you resist, you will suffer. Absolutely. If you resist the will of God, you will suffer ultimately. If you resist the easiness of things, you will suffer ultimately. The easiness of things is, of course, that we are incarnated. We are born in the flesh. And this flesh body has, of course, its own rule set. And so does this earth, this reality, this fallen realm. Call it what you will.  And humans eat animals, too. The longer you fight this fact, the longer you resist, the longer you will suffer. Also, I think it has also a relationship with the fact that plants don't have a nervous system. I mean, exactly. Yes, you think? You know, they don't have feelings. Do they have feelings? Yes. I mean, yeah. I've seen a video where the plants were singing. People have made a machine, which was able to record plants, and they were able to sing for an audience and do concerts. It was amazing. Did they plan concerts? That's amazing. I want to see that. It's so beautiful when we eat plants. Also, how can we have this in our minds? Guilt doesn't benefit anybody. Like, is it normal that we eat plants? I would think that contributing to suffering really should be something which we're all steering away from. So we're not looking to come down here to this planet and create no contrast for anything in existence. We're looking to create the least amount of contrast that we can. Absolutely arbitrary yet again. We are here to create the least amount of contrast. Why? Why are we here to create the least amount of contrast?  You are here to let the inspiration flow, etc., etc. So which one is it? Of course, the new age is not a concise dogma. You have many different perspectives. But once you start poking holes into it, you will see that it crumbles. It has no firm ground to stand on.  Yes. Part of the expansion of this universe is a byproduct of suffering. And so really what I think the spiritual path is about or a healthy life path is about committing to decreasing suffering to the extent where you don't add to your own suffering. Yes, and causing the least amount of suffering. I think that's the punch. Yes, but why? Yet again, it hasn't been defined why suffering equals bad. Quite the opposite. It has been acknowledged that life is suffering to a certain extent. Now, all of a sudden, we should start minimizing that suffering. Why? People need to realize that what that means for you changes over the course of your life. So maybe right now it will cause me suffering to cut out meat entirely, but it won't cause me suffering. So yet again, it is all about the ego. Right now, what do I want? If I cut out the meat, then I experience more suffering. But at the same time, I want to reduce suffering in the external world. It's neither here nor there. What is the basis for reducing this suffering? It might feel better to cut out red meat, just eat white meat. So those are the kinds of decisions you make, and then pretty soon you'll wind up on a path where the level of contrast you're creating for the Earth just keeps decreasing and decreasing and decreasing and decreasing, and you don't have to kill yourself to do it. Guilt on top of a death does nothing but add suffering. At least she admits that veganism kills you. Right, so suffering, which is why the Native Americans were the ones that had it right, or these primal cultures where they saw themselves as intimately connected to the food they were eating, and so if they did make... Again, back and forth, left and right, yes, but no, ah, ha, ha! As you just described, the Native Americans were eating meat. They were eating a meat-based diet. Everybody that studied those people knows exactly they were eating meat. Why weren't the Native Americans vegans?  Yes. And so there's some level of universal compensation for the suffering that occurred. Universal compensation. So if I rape a child and I feel good whilst doing that and I'm grateful, then it is all right. As you can see, it is a slippery slope. This new age is nothing but demonic. It's not what we're seeing in the industrialized world and that's a major reason why you don't want to eat meat today. I know. Well, these animals are treated like hell and we do not have gratitude for them. Their meat is thrown out in thousands of pounds. Yeah. And how? And I disagree personally with factory farms as well. However, no argument for giganism has been made. For the people that are highly sensitive, for example, myself, and I'm sure many...  Of course, you are highly sensitive. Leave the hunting and butchering to the men. People because right now lots of videos are circulating all over the internet about the food industry, how they treat animals and sometimes when you...  This is why most vegans are female. They see earthlings and go vegan right away. Highly emotional. This, I think it's very good because you are shocked and this is what happened to me. I was so shocked that it stuck between you. Very good. Yes, you've been traumatized. Very good.  Fantastic. Right away about six months ago and now I'm teaching people how to do the same. Six months ago, I've been traumatized and now I'm teaching people to do the same. And I'm interested in how... I've been in a period six months ago where I was really, really feeling horrible about this and I was feeling sick myself. Thinking about the suffering of animals and how... What can we tell ourselves? How can we... Because I've had two reactions. The first one was becoming really sad, really angry towards humans. Emotional. And how can you do that? And how is it possible? How can a person do that? And I know there are things that are even worse on humans. But this is... We're talking about food right now. And... But also it gave me the willingness to do something for it. You know this anger? I learned to transform it and to transform it into strange. And to promise myself I would do something and I would make everything possible to spread this message. And so I turned the anger into strange and I feel in the vegan... Anger is never a right motivator. Community, there is a problem because... Never. Some people that are vegan are angry towards what's happening. Oh, some people, yes. It's happening but then they keep this anger and they become angry people themselves. Do you see what I mean? And then they scream at people who eat meat and they become angry people. And so the message is not spread. The message of compassion is in love, it's not spread. Because ultimately it's not a message of love but it is a message of anger, of frustration, of emotion. I think the best thing to do is to work on compassion and in and of ourselves towards those that don't live on this same kind of path. We... On our path, on our little high horse. To give people permission to learn for themselves. Oh, give those people permission. And maybe they'll learn from our message and they'll learn from something else. But it's like we have to allow people that level of freedom and free will to trust them with their own lives. So if somebody else says, you know what, red meat's good for me and it's what I want right now, then let them do it and let them learn from it. Because ultimately if it is more an alignment for someone to be off of red meat and they're constantly committed to being in alignment, which is where the natural process of life takes you. Anyways, it keeps running you up against blockages so that you can deal with them and improve your vibratory rate. If that's the case then it's really not, it doesn't need to be arched or like job. The universe is doing a good job of helping people line up with the next logical step. Who is the universe for them? It might not be that being off of meat is the next logical step for someone. Or it might be. But if that's the most in alignment, then inevitably that's where they're going to end up. So either they end up here today or then they get some chronic disorder way down the road and they have to get off of meat because of that. And just a sneaky little laugh there, right? Look how happy she is. They're going to get a chronicle disorder, some sort of sickness. If they don't want to listen to us, then they're going to learn another way. A message of peace and love and compassion. And that would be all right as well. It's just that we got to cultivate the compassion towards the people who don't understand things at the same level. Otherwise, we've just done nothing but become like full radical religious people that we have an issue with. Those people who think that we have the right way and then everyone else understands. So they have an issue with religious people. That's quite amazing. Why do you have an issue with that, right? If you're so spiritually enlightened, if you truly know the truth, why would you have an issue with religious people? Why would you have an issue with anybody that has a different opinion or perspective than you? Wouldn't you cherish different opinions? Needs to conform. What's causing most of this suffering on the street is a desire for harmony. When it's causing hurt to somebody else, it's hard to be compassionate. It's very hard. I know. I'm not wheezing this mood. Like sometimes I'll see a news article and I'll be dancing around the house saying, I give up. I literally give up.  That's what I am sometimes. Nice, nice. There you can see that this woman has been traumatized. Absolutely. This just confirms my assumption. As mentioned, she suffered a lot of childhood trauma and she didn't overcome that anger. Her face is still ridden with anger. She fake smiles. Yes, I love him. I love more compassion. But in reality, she wants to kill people. She wants those people to suffer because those people didn't get the message, the right message, the truth. What is the truth to reduce suffering? What is the truth that we are the universe? Tell us, give us a concise understanding. But there is no such thing. This is all about becoming the best version of ourselves, becoming more compassionate, doing more for ourselves, more self-love. It is a pipe dream. It leads straight to hell.   Jesus said, if somebody hits you, point to the other cheek. But those people still want to get the revenge. They want to kill people because they are still boiling. They are angry, angry people. They are radiating hate. Not true love. True love is not lovey-dovey. True love doesn't care about your feelings. True love is not about eating vegetables or meat. True love just is. It is real. It is in the moment. And I'm sure we could do it in real life if it was to defend our people. And so I've realized I should not become like the murderer. Yes. And so it's hard work. It's hard work. Some people make a difference between meat and fish, for example. So is it the same for fish? Is it a year or she in suffering? Fish actually do in general suffer less than animals do. Because they live in the water. The water is pure source energy. It's like if you looked at manifested things on this planet, nothing vibrates at a more similar level to source energy itself than water. So most often the animals that have the... So you measure the source energy level and then you measure the water level. But let's assume I am swimming in the water and then I'm getting eaten by a shark. Do I suffer less? Highest vibration live in water-based animals. And because they live in that allowing atmosphere in pure source energy to such a degree, they don't resist death as much either. So it's like plants resisted the least. Ocean-based creatures, second to that, land-based creatures the very most. And birds, where are they? I think birds are probably right above fish, right below land-based animals. So my next question is about animals within themselves. So why do they eat each other? Oh my God. So essentially, part of the contrast down here on planet Earth is the contrast of survival. That's the whole idea of the ego. So that's why the predator and prey are a vibrational match. They're both running and running after with an attitude of survival. So when they come... So they are created for each other, you could say. Could it be that animals are created for humans to eat? Down into the experience of that which is animal, part of what they opt into is that level of contrast. But they are on the same path as we are. Eventually, the necessity is not going to be there. And when you compare animal... So the necessity for the lion won't be there any longer. How will the lion evolve out of it? And didn't the lion already evolve into a lion by eating meat? Questions over questions. Most humans, you can't even... I mean, it really is not much of a comparison because you will never meet a lion that kills for the sake of killing or kills for the sake of having meat. Because not hungry is not going to do anything. That's the difference.  We don't need it. Right, so the lion just kills for what exactly? For food, I assume. And we kill just for the taste, not for food? Yep. Just for barbecue? So what you'll notice is if an animal doesn't need the food that is around it, it won't eat it. That is actually not true. There have been sightings of wolf pecks going on absolute rampages through the forest just to establish dominance. They just go and kill everything in the woods just to establish dominance, just to show power. And it seems just out of sheer fun. What is your explanation for that? You won't find basically the more that the animal kingdom comes into alignment with eating other things, the more the species that are here, carnivores, basically will cease to exist, essentially. When we rise to the place where... Exactly. And this is why you have transhumanists nowadays planning on eradicating carnivores. But this won't happen through natural evolution. How could it? There is no possibility for it. Lions would stay. Lions, zebras would stay. Zebras and get eaten. Very, very simple. And this is why your transhumanist overlords are planning on a great reset where we all will be super compassionate and loving and eat plant-based. But how is that to be achieved if we desire meat so much? Easy by all of those meat replacements. First the plant-based meats and then the next step is of course the lab-grown meat. But because this isn't enough to pervert this creation, God's creation, we're gonna infuse carnivores with microchips in order to make them herbivorous. This is where this is going. Of course, it is a humongous ego game. This doesn't come from God. This is not the true love where you just let it be. Quite the opposite. You are interfering with creation and you are trying to twist it, to change it, to pervert it, to literally make herbivores out of carnivores. Very, very sick. We are no longer in a victim consciousness when we all rise species alike to a level where there is no more hunt for survival. We've got... Yes, but who can be in a victim consciousness? Only humans that can articulate that. Animals are not in victim consciousness. Animals just are animals. The gazelle is grazing and the next thing you know, it gets eaten. This is the natural order of things. There is no victim mentality. Nobody is screaming justice for gazelles and zebra lives matter. We moved out of the space of the ego. Carnivores literally will not be a species which is manifested because that will not be the next logical step within the universe. That is hilarious. So if we humans further evolve, then out of a sudden, the lions won't have an ego anymore. Do you realize that animals act out of instinct and not out of ego? So we're going to tell a really sad story about that. We're going to say, oh my gosh, all of the carnivores have disappeared the saddest thing in the entire universe when really it's just that they're not a match to the new expansion of their Earth time-space reality. So when there are species that are in extension, it's not necessarily a bad thing. No, it's not a bad thing at all. Just get rid of all of those tigers and lions and replace it with cows. No, that is bad as well because of cow farts, right? Get rid of all the animals and stay in your mega cities. That is way better. Sad thing. Have a reason for planetary evolution. Okay. Planetary evolution. Oh, we're going to get resistant on that one. What about Derry? Is that? She's so fake without knowing it. Is that okay to...? Not the French girl. She's just innocent. Still eat a little bit of dairy if it's organic, if it's, you know... If you feel compelled towards it, then yes. What we would always want to do is... So as long as you feel compelled to anything, the answer is simply yes.  It doesn't matter. The vibrational field justifies everything.  Doctrine of the Devils. Trust people's internal knowing about themselves. What I have noticed, interestingly enough, is that humans deal differently on an energetic level, at least, with goat cheese than they do with cow cheese or cow milk. Yes, absolutely, right? Grass-fed cows or grass-fed goats, the vibration is higher off the goat cheese. So I've watched that, which is quite interesting. In general, when it comes to dairy, milk products are designed for one thing, and that's the young of that particular species. So it's not... Good luck convincing a French girl of not eating cheese. I tried. Something that is really good for us. But if you feel compelled towards it, there's ways to avoid the super-dangerous types of dairy. Super-dangerous. Obviously, going from a cow product to a goat product, if those goats are treated with no suffering, no hormones, none of those kinds of... Why? Why exactly? Why? In a sense, yes. Eggs are another interesting one. Yes. Look how excited and happy they get when they talk about eggs and milk. Just accept that it's your species-specific diet. It is created by God. It is supposed to be this way, and it is good. Human beings actually do quite well with eggs. Eggs would have been something which was very much so in our original diet. This is the raw vegan's cheat meal anyways. We all know that people like John Rose are obsessing over raw eggs. All of them sneak in raw eggs into their raw vegan diet. Because of the fact that it would have been... We wouldn't have been risking death to get them. It would have been easy. Either the ground-nesting birds, we would have just stumbled upon the nests and eaten it like that, or else... Okay, so now all of a sudden it justifies it because we didn't risk death.  So how does that not apply to milk? We don't risk anything. How does that not apply to farm animals? We do not risk anything yet again. We, being hominids, climb and... Why am I still listening? So that's a very natural-based food, and our body has an easy time digesting it. Much more so when it's raw than when it's cooked. When we cook eggs, it denatures the protein and it gets pushed straight into the liver. But when I watch somebody eat a raw egg, it goes straight through most of it gets digested. You watched somebody digest a raw egg? How? Okay, so the white is only protein. The yolk is fat. What would you advise? I think there is no problem with eating white. Egg whites that are organic. And what about the yolk? Is it healthy? Is it... I think the yolks are really good. Yeah, we've got a major issue with fats in general. At least she admits it. We associate the fats with fat, but we don't understand that your body needs fat. It's essential that you get healthy fats. Yes. So really, you shouldn't be trying to steer clear of fats. You should be going towards the right kinds of fats. Certain oils, nuts have a huge amount of fat.  All right. So this is good fat. We know for a fact that the egg yolk is packed with cholesterol and saturated fats, which I agree. Yet again, it's super good and super healthy for you. But you will have to admit that it's the complete opposite of plant oils. Avocados, olive oil, nuts and seeds. That is a totally different type of fat, which is not classically a fat, but oil than the egg yolk. At the same time, you're of course admitting that the animal protein found in eggs, which has a biological value of 100%, is good indeed. So yet again, this protein is a totally different protein than the plant protein. If eggs are good, how come fish and meat equals bed? It doesn't make any logical sense. And really what fats do is they enable the transfer of molecules and nutrients through the cell wall. So they're absolutely crucial for all kinds of processes within the body. So we need to not be steering clear of fat like it's all bad. We need to think in terms of good fats and bad fats. Saturated fat, polyinsaturated fat, monounsaturated fat. Yes, so yet again, egg yolks have saturated fat, a lot of cholesterol. The same fat that you would find in animal foods. If egg yolks are good, which are the most cholesterol-rich things that you can eat, how come that everything else is bad? And how many yolks do you advise per week maximum? Is it the maximum or can we eat one every day or two every day? She's asking her master how many eggs she can eat. How cute. I would try them. Yeah, they're not a major problem. That's why I think every morning. Okay, that's good. It's really hard in the United States to find anybody who offers eggs, unless you're raising your own chicken, that anyone offers eggs that come with a vibration that's positive instead of one that's out of alignment. So the egg vibration has to be on a certain frequency as well, of course. That's kind of one of those benefits versus not so good for you.  That's very sad. What about the eggs? So have you ever raised chickens before? No. I grew up with chickens. I live in Paris. I grew up in Paris. I can see through the backyard of a chicken. So the interesting thing about chickens that most people don't understand is that an egg doesn't have to be fertilized. In order to be laid. So literally it's like a chicken period. Yeah, I know. Yeah, but literally it isn't. It does create a certain level of contrast to take eggs away from chickens, but what's really interesting when you raise chickens is a lot of times they don't watch their eggs. They'll lay it just like a female having a period every day. They'll just lay it and leave it. So there's not a ton of suffering contained in that particular thing. Yeah, but what the vegans say is that to produce eggs we need female chicken, and so the other male are crushed alive. Well, yeah, if we are being retarded about the way that we deal with meat, which is the case for our life right now, which is why I don't eat eggs, but it doesn't have to be that way. Yeah, but it is. So that's why you can't don't eat eggs. Yeah, that's why I don't. Yeah, and that's why I... I believe you. Try to... In France it's different than in the States. The quality of our food is better in Europe and... Indeed. So we are still able to find little farms and organic well-treated animals. So... You still are, but if the vegan agenda continues at its pace, you won't be. Very, very soon Bill Gates is already the owner of most America's farmland. Congratulations. That's the difference, but I know when I'm in the States I don't eat eggs. It's... And even only the eggs area is so big, it's like... And you have eggs of different colors. I don't understand why, like purple eggs and stuff like that. And so it's just, you know, marketing is not... Yeah, it's all marketing. So the best sources of protein to you would be so protein in vegetables, in grains, cereal, but always organic. And again, I am here, 2021. I will have to repeat myself yet again for the world to hear that grain protein, vegetable protein is in feria. It lacks plenty of amino acids that you would find in meat. How don't you know this still? I assume in the most raw form.  Three protein sources that are my favorite, four. Nuts, I really love those. My second is chia seeds. Humans absorb in massive amounts of protein from chia seeds. Broccoli, super high source of vegan protein. And the last one would be combining beans and grains. So if you combine like... So none of those foods, you would eat raw, first and foremost. So you have to cook every single one of them.  Phytates in this case especially, super unhealthy for you. Rice with beans, that's a complete protein. That just means we've got all 12 amino acids. That's all protein is, by the way. It's not like this super difficult equation. I know. Talking about a complete protein, all we're talking about is that something has all 12 amino acids and you can easily combine... Yes, you can combine foods. And as I said, then you will take in more anti-nutrients and overall more calories and more sugars instead of eating a simple steak. It makes no sense whatsoever. Did you get that solution? Yeah, especially in the whole day. It doesn't have to be at every meal or it's during the whole day. So... Let your stuff. Okay, so now we're gonna jump to... Yeah, okay. Yeah, tell me. Well, I was just saying that like it's really important for people to understand that the reason that they're seeing so many unhealthy vegans and vegetarians is because you got to look at what they're eating. So most people eat a terrible diet in and of itself. It's crappy already. Yeah, because the crescent is vegan but it's not healthy. Exactly. So what you take out meat and that's all you do to become... It's even worse. You're left with sugars, essentially. Of course the body's gonna break down and go to hell, but if you're... Exactly. You're left with sugars.  Actually eating good food, hardy food, a good substitute, not just a substitute, the stuff humans are really supposed to be eating here, then you're not gonna have an issue at all. We are supposed to be eating mass produced plants. Those will be very healthy people. Yeah, I think it's pretty simple. We just have to go back to what is natural, what is found in nature. So if we ask ourselves, should I eat that, we should just ask ourselves, does it exist in its whole form in nature and that's pretty simple. Yes, yes, yes, yes.  If we eat something, we should check if we can find it in nature. So right, you can find chia seeds in nature. You can find huge amounts of grains, nuts, seeds, all of those new fruits, such as bananas, mangoes, papayas, all of those things have been created by men. All of those things are human made food. None of those things you can find in nature. Mind blowing. That's vegetables, fruits and a little bit of goat cheese or goat milk. Yes, exactly. Because goats are not domesticated animals, right?  Yes, we. And maybe eggs. Sure, chicken eggs especially because they are natural as well. It's not like we domesticated chickens. All variety of grains and buckwheat is a good source. Buckwheat. Ham protein and lots of things. Ham protein, exactly. Yet again, it's not like you have to colonize mono crop hemp. No, not at all. You can find the hemp protein in nature as well. Just stay away from all the refined products and sugar and aspartame and sugar substitute. Harold, you say it's even worse than white sugar? It's worse. And what about organic cane sugar, like the real one, the raw one in organic stores? Well, obviously it's going to be better than your average white sugar for sure. If somebody wants to stay on sugar, I would suggest doing that by far. It's just that the body is not designed to eat it in that way. So like if you were to rip off a whole sugar cane and suck on it, that's pretty much the closest you could get to as close as we could get to sugar. But you wouldn't see. How is that an argument? We can extract sugar, so therefore we can eat sugar. That is not an argument whatsoever. We can do all kinds of things with our brain, which is our biggest weapon. All of these, I mean, we produce products as a result of doing things we could never do naturally. We extract so much. What is natural? Out of those canes, you know, when we're taking sugar, that you couldn't get that even if you tried, you know, if you're eating it naturally. If you chewed on it, you'd probably get, well, like a teaspoon or a tablespoon of sugar.  And it's way too much for the body. And your blood sugar system is not designed to take it in that way. Oh, yeah, I just think about a question that is so often asked about vegans. What about a B12 vitamin? What about it? Is it necessary to supplement? That's an interesting one, because my attitude towards the whole system in general of a human is that if a human comes into alignment, there is no way for them to be attracted to foods that would leave them with a deficiency in any way. So unfortunately for many people, I tend to align with the idea that this whole you need B12 and B12 can only be found through animal protein as a bit of a conspiracy on the part of the... But well, it is not. A simple Google search on that will enlighten you. There is no bioavailable B12 found in plants. It's not a conspiracy. It's a meat industry. Nutritional yeast is ironically a really good source of B12. Ironically, because it is fortified, it is not a natural source of B12. Besides, okay, so I'll go through some. You've got bran. You've got, let me see if I can think of a spirulina. No, please do not. You're destroying humans' lives. Spirulina has an analogue that acts similar to B12, but it does not have real B12. Like sea vegetables. There's a good amount of vitamin B12 in them. No, they don't. The thing that people don't understand is that animals don't make B12. But they actually do. By fermenting their food through their guts. Plants. B12 is actually made by bacteria. Yes, exactly. By bacteria that is produced during fermentation. So the bacteria has to be in the plant or be in the animal in order for the animal to then convey B12 to you. No, it doesn't. Yet again, it is produced due to fermentation.  We should be looking for bacterial sources of B12. And it's just, it's a bit of a misunderstanding about the human body. That you would have to eat a certain thing in order to get that into your system. And otherwise you'd be totally screwed. Because the reality is there are vegetarian and vegan societies all over the globe that have existed that way. There are no vegan societies all across the globe. Another lie. For years that are doing perfectly fine. They don't have birth deformities. They don't. I think it's underestimating the power of our bodies. Big time. Yeah, big time. Exactly. It's not like all the ex-vegans that we find on YouTube have suffered even though they ate a nutritionally balanced vegan diet.  The body is resilient but goes only so far. But I think too. And especially if we eat very used food and we shouldn't care about it. Exactly. So let's talk about supplements for a minute. Because supplements, your body's not taking a ton in when you eat a supplement because it's not designed to eat it in that way. However. Yes. It would be okay to take vitamin B12. Like if I was committed. Because we evolved. To decreasing the amount of suffering on this planet. Taking a vitamin B12 supplement would be decreasing the suffering on this planet. And so it would be in alignment for me. We're at a point right now. Sure. And suffer all kinds of nerve system damage. Because my body doesn't absorb the B12 properly. That is the way to go. That is the right consciousness. We should take advantage of that. Our society is evolving to a place where we literally can eat this way and be perfectly fine. We don't need meat to survive anymore. And so it is unnecessary. And it's even worse than that. We eat meat and it's not even we don't need it. It's killing us. That's the first mortality cause. And today I read this quote that says you kill an animal but then it kills you. And it's true. Yes, absolutely. That's exactly true. All of your parents, all of your ancestors, all of your forefathers. They all killed themselves by eating meat. That's what happens. So what about protein powders? I like a few breads. All right, guys, but this is long enough.  If you enjoyed it so much that you would like me to react further to this, then let me know in the comment section and I will keep on watching this. This live stream was two hours long and I made it to 32 minutes. Long enough for me. Guys, if you want to support this channel, all the links are in the description box. As I said, if you like this video, leave it a quick thumbs up. If you haven't subscribed already, please do so. And as always, guys, may God bless you all. Much love and peace.


The history of internet is so interesting that a couple of lectures could be devoted to it. However, for the sake of purposefulness and gravity, I've tried to consolidate the periods of internet evolution in three phases and the latest advancements that we see today. In this module, we'll go phase by phase to understand how the development took place in the evolution of internet. First thing first, the origin of internet is usually attributed to military, but it saw a lot of research investment coming from academia and the commercialization by the industry took it all together to a different level. So combining all these three, no single factor could be attributed all with the success of internet. So essentially it is a hybrid kind of evolution that took place. What we can do is, if you really want to understand and draw lessons from the evolution of internet, we have to go through the phases of internet history one by one so that we can rationalize certain conclusions. Let's look at the first period. Starting from 1960s, the Advanced Research Project Agency, which later was named as DARPA, Defense Advanced Research Project Agency, it started off with the concept of using internet and the primary goal was to secure installations, primarily military installations in Hawaiian islands in the US. The famous project known as Aloha is attributed with the foremost project at DARPA. Later, Professor Leonhard Kleinrock from UCLA did his PhD and gave the concept of packet switching and did a theoretical or in other words a probabilistic analysis of how packet switching is going to behave versus circuit switched networks. In 1969, the first internet ready computer host was established. In 1969, two nodes, one at UCLA and the other one as Stanford Research Institute were connected to transfer basic textual message. In 1969 again, Steve Crocker came up with the idea of request for comment. Request for comment is a system through which the participating agencies involving government, industry and academia can all chip in and share their findings at a unified platform through which standardization could take place and this standardization was overseen by the Internet Engineering Task Force. In 1972, the first email program was written by Ray Tomlinson and Larry Roberts. This email was based on a protocol simple mail transfer protocol. In 1974, Windsurf and Robert Kahn created TCP and later IP. In fact, I had the honors of meeting Professor Windsurf in a conference, I think it was Scotland, it was Ireland. There, Professor Windsurf was just a chair who was hosting and inaugurating various sessions. In 1980s, the user datagram protocol was standardized. UDP is another protocol that sits at the transport layer next to TCP. It provides services. In fact, it does not provide any service. That is why it is well suited to the transmission of real-time content. Anyways, UDP is one of the most widely used protocols these days for real-time transmission of voice and video. In 1981, the RFCs for IP and TCP were approved at the ITF. In 1982, the domain name system that translates the human understandable domain names into computer understandable IP addresses and vice versa was approved. In 1983, there were around a few hundred nodes in U.S. All these hosts were using a protocol called network control protocol. This NCP was replaced by UNIX Berkeley software distribution company and they replaced it with TCP IP. The third period is actually the emergence of the worldwide web. This WWW is actually the web of pages which are hyperlinked together. This forms a mesh of information network. So, in 1989, Tim Berners-Lee's discovery or invention at CERN lab is considered to be one of the groundbreaking moments in the history of internet. In 1993, this WWW concept was made public and people were encouraged to create content of their own and host it over the internet. In 1993, the dynamic host configuration protocol that allows the IP address assignment to these laptops whenever you enter into a Wi-Fi zone was approved. In 1996, the hypertext transfer protocol version 1 was approved in this RFC-1945. And in 1998, the migration with much desired migration for IP version 4 to IP version 6 was realized. IP version 6 was meant to solve the famous Rhodes problem that is running out address space. In very recent years, we have seen some torrents and peer-to-peer networks to appear. I have witnessed the time when we used to have an application called Napster. It was kind of a peer-to-peer torrent kind of network that would allow the audio and music files to be shared between the peers of a certain network. However, because of copyright violation, it was banned in the US and subsequently in the whole world. There was another file sharing system called eDonkey in 2000. Skype came as a watershed because this was the moment when voice over IP through Skype became widely accepted and got so prevalent that it gave a financial dent to different telecommunication companies in various countries. And very recently, we have experienced the torrents. The BitTorrent is a file sharing system that is based on peer-to-peer protocol. So you see, the concept of the evolution of technology owes its origins somewhere into these protocols and how these applications were developed by various professors and scientists.


Okay, so there's two types. There's French chocolates, which will go amazing with the coffee over there And there's Icelandic chocolate and the brand I wish we had like the brand is called omnum I'm not shitting you. This is the brand Just for that go to Iceland because it's totally worth it Also, if you ask me a good question, I might throw a chop so this talk is called polishing Ruby and the subtitle kind of hinting at the idea of what I mean by polishing Ruby The idea is to basically together even if you're someone who's not confident We're gonna kind of go through kind of like my experience not being confident with Ruby And the question I want to ask every single one of you in this room is Why are you here? It feels great and technique like practice this thing, but it's actually hard to manage So the the idea is like why are you here at RubyConf sitting there listening to people talk about Ruby? It's probably because some at some level you kind of care about Ruby. I hope In what I want you like what I want to try to exercise with you is to prove that if you do care about Ruby You should maybe try to think about a finding a way to leave it better than how you found it Maybe a few years ago or maybe just now if you have any ideas Nobody's asking you to change the world We're not asking you to the the revolutionize the garbage collector like that's not your job necessarily there's someone who's really good at that but you can add to it so you can You can add to it in a meaningful way, and I don't mean like that Like don't do that. It's just like plus ones on repos and stuff like that That's not necessarily how you add to it But you can add to it by just a little bit changing it and not not changing it But adding something without meaning to like you don't want to change everything that's ever happened So just you know think the world as it is right now and just increase the the coolness of it by a little bit My name is Olivier. This is how you say that oh leave me yay, and you feel happy at the end I am not a Satanist For real I promise you this is the show Silicon Valley You don't have to watch this but everybody on Twitter is like super super excited about telling me how much I look like this guy But I am not a Satanist, and I really hope I don't get smitten. Is that how you smoten? How do you how do you conjugate this? smiten Smoten see there you go. We have a we're gonna talk about language. So I Worked for code school, and so we teach people a bunch of things like Ruby rails So if you like these things we have amazing stickers There's Katie and Joel over here that have a bunch of really awesome stickers We don't have shirts anymore sadly and recently I worked on making an API for an iOS app And I had made APIs before but not APIs that would Create a lot of havoc if they didn't work So I made it with Ruby, and I made it with rails and crazily I didn't wrote tests for it Thank you not test-driven The reason I wrote test because what if someone Especially me changes the API later, and it breaks the app, and I don't realize it until someone just says like It's not loading the right thing. So I was really really scared of this Just like I was scared that I would forget my pants this morning like this is the worst fears So I thought okay, let's write some integration tests, and then we can go have ice cream now Liberate you you can go have lunch so given a user if I ask the user API for something I should receive information about data about this user So something like this you have a user that you create with a factory or a fixture you Call the user API for that only user that exists because you just made it and then you parse that response And then with our spec if you use our spec you can do Expect data to include the name Olivier, which is my name super still hard to pronounce So our spec says that's awesome. That works. This is cool. Let's go have ice cream and Then I just had this moment when I was building this API was like can I do that in Ruby? Can I ask a hash do you include another hash for chance? Let's try so you take the same response. That's an object. That's been parsed and you ask I don't know the first thing that came to mind because of our spec was Maybe blame our spec was include. Okay, so do you include this other hash? that's You know similar and no it doesn't because that's not what This method is for so our spec is neat and it kind of like gets what I want to do but and So he has this match or called include right there and I was wondering okay So if there's a thing called include in our spec and I think I'll include in Ruby or for the hash include What's the difference there? Like what is this? Include match or doing that the include method is not doing or am I misunderstanding this whole thing? So I just looked into it So there's this matcher and inside of it It's checking when it when you're doing a match on a hash it's checking to see if you're comparing the hash with a subset And then internally so it does this thing and then it checks whether the two things that you're comparing our hash And then if you're a hash, and I'm a hash, let's dance you we're gonna actually compare things And I'll tell you if it's true or not if you are included in the other thing It's really good. And actually after that it does an actual Hash include so it's actually it does the simple thing that Ruby does With a key and a value that's great and only the only thing is that yeah It's very simple. It just does the the the check there and As long as your value for this key is the same as my value for this key It's gonna be true which is for my API I really want to make sure that These keys and values match and not just the keys and not just the values on one side and I'm lazy So I wanted to work that way and it makes sense so warning though This only works for one level you can't have a nested hash in our spec It won't work or figure out like where in the nested hash. It's gonna be back. So back to hash. How does Hash include work because it doesn't work how I somehow thought it would work It's not as neat as our spec, but it's it's still kind of cool. It makes sense So you have a hash a true be false another hash a true and you ask The first hash whether it includes why and it's gonna say false Because it's basically has key so it's not checking for anything fancy inside of your hash or whether it includes it or not It's an alias to all these things are the same actually It's include has key member key if you don't like the has thing That's actually how it's named and see Ruby, but I Find that weird, but I don't know this much about Ruby. I can't really have crazy opinions turns out we value keys over values nobody Poor values are going to feel devalued at the end of the day So they kind of like okay, so I made me grasp for this this thing because we like rules So like if a necessary feature has a high astonishment factor It may be necessary to redesign the feature, but then Can't ask the Ruby core team to redesign a feature because it brubs me the wrong way Probably a terrible idea. So is hash include astonishing if I compare it to say string include Which words the way I expect it because I'm lucky it you know if you ask it for the same string It's a substring of itself. So this is totally fine. If but if you do that on array include It's not gonna work exactly the same way either you can't ask An array if it contains itself so It's it's a little astonishing to me, but just to me probably so I tweeted about it because that's the first thing That happens when I have a thought. I just put it on Twitter If you follow me, I'm sorry So I said, okay, I don't understand why it works that way And it's a little as to key when it should check for a sub hash in my mind. It should check for a sub hash just linguistically probably not an adverb but So maybe I can do something about it So I thought about okay, so I'm gonna write down what I mean and not just in a tweet so that other people can tell Me this is completely crazy stop now and they did that was awesome So passion honestly was like yeah, no, I expect a key check Not what you think and Terrence was like no, please don't do this and everybody else So Mike fix it my my first lesson doing this like a little deep dive was my expectations and surprises are not necessarily universal like What surprises me as someone who's not coming from computer science because I'm not are different from what language implementers and people come from computer science expect and And also nobody wants to break the API. So like that's a thing like very important thing If you're ever gonna try to do something with Ruby don't do things that break API's because that's just no But then I got some some hope from Pat He was like hey, what about a new method name maybe and that was like, okay Yes, maybe I can do something. Maybe I can have this thing and maybe it makes sense and other people are gonna agree So that's the simple question. I want to ask is does this hash contain this other hash? So maybe it should be called hash contain That seems to make sense and a bunch of people agreed So this is how we work pretty much exactly the same as the original one Wouldn't that be nice? Or it could be sub hash I think a bunch of people were when we were talking we're like this is kind of like the subset method on the set Which is kind of cool. It checks for that and then while we were talking about this and I'm just talking to just a few people Just like make sure I'm not completely insane This happens this person thanks to Terence actually Before I'm even done like figuring out if the name actually makes sense. No, we made a patch like I Don't even understand how that works like I knew he was called patch monster, but I shit you're not I just wrote a gist and a blog post and he had a patch for it Yes, you had to talk to him, but that's still kind of crazy. You just mentioned it, right mentioned it in passing This is the patch. It's on github. He just put it up on github and what's awesome about this patch is that if you are like me Completely illiterate when it comes to see you can see well you can't see on this slide because it's a lot of a lot of more But this is actually not a big patch. It's like 20 lines something like that 20 30 lines and there's just very simple things going on and you realize that's the thing I'm dreaming of Can be real without that much crazy effort and that's kind of Feels awesome. So thank you. No, boo. I don't know if you hear someone the hallway Holy shit, thank you So that's So you don't need to know see to contribute to Ruby It's good to be aware of it like like I am now because of the way I've seen how he's implemented that patch And also there are many good humans like him like him like him. So that's Terence sack And and so many others that will help you even when you're fumbling and you're really Your argument's not solid yet because it's totally not solid. So what now? So this is the second part of the talk. This is the part where actionable things are discussed So I'm sorry with the boring like stuff now. It's getting in the serious stuff So the second part is bugs.rubylang.org like just like memorize that as a litany You're just you're just gonna have to go there. This is the Ruby issue tracking system It's a little verbose and not the best CSS That you'll ever see And there's a lot of wikis and they're a little messy, but they're really really really helpful One of the most helpful ones is these this little four developers one and there's this thing called how to request features so if you're if you're a pedantic crazy ambitious and OCD then you're probably one of those people who are going to think oh I can add something So whether the first thing that you have to think about is is this thing that I want to add to Ruby a meaningful Improvement that's kind of a vague thing, but here's how I broke it down before my thing To iterate over a hash you had to iterate over a hash or use the side effect of another method The merge method hash merge to achieve the expected result that I that I expected so like make sure that are you inside of you after you can ask a hash if it contains another hash and it's just going to tell you and It's expressive. It's not surprising. It makes sense Now the second criteria is is this a new request? So is this something that someone's? Actually submitted before could you please look so that you don't repeat the same thing that somebody's already asked and we turned them down And there was a good reason so I searched and I found 11 results for this weird query that I had And there was there was actually one pretty pretty similar feature of West to extend hash include in order to be able to I think check for I think past multiple arguments or something like that. It was it was Basic as you could path. Okay, two arguments a key and a value and the way it was done was interesting It wasn't actually breaking the API. She's kind of cool, which is the thing that would actually prevent people from going But it's not exactly what I wanted to do and it's not exactly the same scope or use case So I think like that's this will work out and the issue was a year old and hasn't been followed upon After people from the core team like ask a bunch of you know questions other people were like Can you clarify this and that so the third criteria is can it be done any other way? So if there's a way so I told you about hash merge and that's a way to achieve the same result And that's how I implemented my thing originally in Ruby, but just okay. How can I hack this in Ruby? Yes, it exists. It's either verbose Or if you loop over the hash or it's an expressive because why would you merge a hash to figure out? It's just doesn't make sense. It's like you have to take a detour Then there's also would it benefit many people so I thought okay I found this method this include method in our spec and this this is where the could the idea of it came around What about our spec like how many people use our spec a lot of people Like 20 21 million downloads for all versions and then like half a million for this version Which is kind of crazy and that's just the aspect expectation gem which gets included in our spec So it seems like it could benefit people because people are using it and expecting it to work at least in this library Is it a good name? Well, if you ask the question does a hash contain another hash and the method is called hash contain I think it's a good name now of course like Of course there's people who might disagree But I think so Now what does the method accept as arguments a hash? What is the return value a Boolean? Are there any risks of incompatibility? No, because it's a brand new method and I'm not actually changing anything existing I think I think that's fine. And then finally one of the criteria is right write it down So this was the implementation that I mentioned This was my super naive implementation that just did the merges as a side effect of the merge You could figure out whether it's included or not But of course no boost patch is better probably faster and Finally you have to make a concise But complete proposal which is the part that I think is the most terrifying because You've formulated these ideas maybe on Twitter or two friends or two people at conferences.  Oh, I have a laser. I forgot Mine is red Yeah, you this is a very important part. There's a thing in English. You don't have to know Japanese to Submit an issue. This has been going on for a while But there's still people who don't understand this and they're still worried about that to submit their issue The only important thing of that is that in your description or in your explanation of your request You include code that makes it explicit to anybody involved what you're talking about which is exactly what I'm not doing here So don't do that And then I think the other thing that I did was yeah Make sure the title is it is clear and you're not just rambling in the title so I think I try to make it as clear as possible use this to check whether something contains a hash and That's about it. This is not a finished thing. I actually haven't done this it's in my browser right now and I think I might actually submit it at the end of this talk if if nobody like tries to tackle me in the meantime So I'm still working on it and finally the final thing finally the final thing. Yeah Follow through so you remember the thing I mentioned where someone had open an issue similar like that So a few people gave feedback, but they the author of the future request didn't really come back to say oh, okay Sure, I'll I'll change this thing this request to assess for that So following through making sure you're responding when people actually take the time especially from the court team to respond to you is very important So I will do that. I promise So I'm gonna rewind really quick to the first step Because I have opinions and you're not necessarily someone like me who just like finds a thing and I'm like But you can find an inspiration in other people's feature requests if you if you're not like if you now have a strong will to change things or if you're just trying to learn how the Things work in this issue tracker. So for instance, you can take Aaron Patterson's feature requests for I think time elapsed Yeah How he phrased it how he titled it the code that he included in there that might be meaningful to you Charles Nutter you could see how he made his own feature request So those are people that are familiar with the process and to see how they do it when they're in familiar waters May make you feel better about your feature request because you'll be like well mine has the same amount of detail. So Then there's documentation patches. So Zzak is right here Zachary Scott and There's this really great project the Ruby documentation project and in there They're actually great steps for you if that seems like a crazy jump for you to just be a Ruby user and then change Ruby and add something to it You can make it better Documented so and I love this sentence by the way. This was right. This is like waiting for me Existing documentation could use some polish Exactly in form and in form of clearer descriptions and better examples examples being the things like there's a lot of really Quick sentences in the documentations, but not a lot of examples that are so it's a great place to start if you If you if you don't know where to start if you're kind of intimidated There's a lot of really nice step-by-step guides on on the site and also Zack may face mush you if if you do it because he'll be super happy and So yeah, there's that little getting set up thing that actually is useful not just for documentation patches because I learned a lot from that to fork Ruby which is on GitHub now and you know have it locally Etc. Then there's accepted features and it's something that Zack mentioned to me yesterday on the Ruby tracker There's a custom query in the sidebar that you can click on that shows you the accepted features for the current major branch I guess and In there you could see the things that need action and there's quite a few of them. They're not assigned. So I don't know if Right. So those are need need to be assigned There's already a ton of them already assigned so and the ones that are not assigned. There's 159 so that's quite Quite enough for you to chew on and of course there are bugs So the problem with bugs is that there are many people responsible for things in the Ruby core team So I don't know if it's probably Something a little more hairy to look at maybe a good place to learn how people report bugs So these are the unassigned bugs that you can also find in the Ruby tracker it sounds as fun, but Fixing or learning or understanding bugs will probably help you kind of like get Situated and of course remember that although I spent a lot of time talking about feature requests because I was excited They're a tougher sell because you're adding things that people are going to have to maintain for you inside the Ruby core team If you don't join the Ruby core team that means somebody else is gonna have to maintain this thing that you were like I'm super excited about this This is the greatest idea ever and and then you just go and you never touch it and never fix it ever again And they have to deal with it. So empathize with them and realize that somebody has to pick up your stuff Speaking of maintainers There's a really cool list of maintainers that you can find either on the wiki of that issue tracker or on the actual source Inside of Ruby doc you can find So there's one thing that I noticed that they might be I don't know. They might be different lists I'm not sure if they're like right What's nice about this list is that you'd find who's responsible for what in the Ruby core team And also the other libraries that are not necessarily like standard Lib and stuff like that so if you if you have a features proposal say for Ostrac and You think that it should work better if you had a say in it You can go talk to Mark Andre and like find him on Twitter or find him somewhere and just talk to him Or you can find someone that actually knows about This domain and this thing or has dealt with it before so go talk to maintainers if you can Before you do your In a roundabout way, that's what I had the luck of doing through Terence Should go talk to Terence The and remember that the core team is is pretty damn busy So if you can save them work by just talking to a human a proxy of them or people who are Knowledgeable on this topic that you've seen a blog post from or something like that Running your idea by them or running your suggestion by them will save basically just distribute the load and help you get comfortable And to get comfortable. There's also a bunch of resources There's this really cool block was that came out last week by PJ Haggerty about so you decided to contribute to Ruby Which is like perfect. It's like exactly the place to go after this talk if you want to learn more there's Terence's amazing talk Ruby and you in which he talks about a lot of the similar things a lot of security things and how the process works and There's this site called Omni ref that Tim Robertson over there puts up so if you if you're it's super intimidated by see the same way that I am you are not alone and This is a great place to go because he's annotated a bunch of the the trickiest part of the Ruby library and other people have to you can discuss little things You can ask questions to people about specific parts of the end just last week. Somebody was I think reviewing the symbol symbol stuff in Ruby and figured out that there was kind of a performance issue there or something that was weird about it and Then Matt's found out about it and this was fixed. I think within what a week or something like that after that Right symbol comparison so just because someone so someone I don't know I don't know their name sadly. I feel bad looked at this with a new set of eyes and was like Why is it like this and I'm not suggesting that everybody go around like poke at everything in Ruby and says like Why is it like this? Why is it like this? But this person managed to improve the performance of Ruby just by looking at a thing with a brand new set of eyes So you're not alone and to prove that point if you've never contributed anything I made a survey yesterday, and if you haven't taken it yet, I would love you to take it And this is basically there's a few questions about your experience as a Ruby developer If you're paid if you have written a blog post and things like that, but really the core of it is this thing If you are intimidated by the idea of contributing to Ruby, why are you intimidated? So there's I don't know where to start which I hope I kind of like to reduce the little bit I don't know see which is not necessarily a problem. Even though that's one of the the biggest things People will figure out. I don't know what I'm doing, which is exactly my problem. That's why it's checked And other things like breaking other people's stuff So and the results are really cool So this was just just five minutes before the talk 128 people submitted Answers to this so what 41% of them were over five years They've been using Ruby over five years ago But that it's kind of like you know a nice little even split between three four and one year ago and more importantly The breakdown of the reason why people are terrified of contributing to Ruby is really cool. I don't know where to start Not anymore There's also I don't have time to work on this Which is a really good reason in which case when you're at a conference Maybe that's the space to kind of like talk about that you have people around there They can help you make it faster and easier for you and save time on the ramp. I Don't know see talked about that also not another big deal So really basically the big three reasons why people don't come like feel comfortable contributing back to Ruby are fixable So let's fix them and if if you haven't so like I said if I you haven't submitted to this little survey I think it's really cool to have a sense for why people are not doing something So please do that's kind of a weird URL, but hopefully you can snap it and see it and go there So to to conclude with like grandiose talks and and ideas Science needs to meet reality at some point before it becomes technology and that's where you come in you There's the people who create something who theorize about something conceptually and then there's the real thing when you're using it and Your point of view matters every single one person that uses Ruby your point of view matters and how you feel about things or You know how you're excited or not so excited about certain features actually matters and your help is needed. It's not It's not useless at all so We have a more diverse community and it's getting more diverse and the more diverse it becomes the better things can be challenged by Perspectives that are not exactly the same And that's how we make progress. So Let's make this Ruby sparkle and thank you for caring. That's it