Okay, so I haven't had much to play lately. I've been playing Dark Siders 2 and 3 and the game below which I'll be making a video about. But I was reminded in the comments in the last video that I'd said I would do a video on Red Dead Redemption 2. And I'll be honest about why I haven't until now. This is probably the first time I kinda sorta censored myself because my opinion is so wildly different than everyone else that it's kinda crazy. So today, let's take a look at Red Dead 2, a game that swings wildly from titanic achievement to frustration simulator at a moment's notice. We'll examine what it does well, what it does badly and overall why it left me so conflicted. And I need to give fair warning here, if this is the kinda thing that's gonna make you mad, don't watch, I guess, after the logo. A Brief History Rockstars are making high quality games for an awful long time now and they've settled into a very familiar formula. Now that's not a critique. This is an Assassin's Creed where the game settled into a homogeneous yearly addition nearly indistinguishable from each other. The open world mayhem sandbox has become nearly synonymous with Rockstar because they basically invented the formula and they've never released a game that didn't feel A. ambitious and B. like it was a labor of love. And before I go further, this one does too. So I wanna make it clear that my critique of Red Dead 2 isn't like my usual cranky critiques where I get pissed off at the laziness or safeness of a game. Red Dead 2 isn't a game where I ask, why does this even exist? It's a game where I ask, why is this annoying thing in the game? To really drive home, just how successful they've been, we should take just a minute to look at some of the previous games. The original Grand Theft Auto is interesting to look at as a game caught between eras. It featured GTA's core design ideals in its infant form. It was a top down 2D arcade style title in which players earned points to progress to the next map. And true to the enduring gameplay loop to this day, you earned those points by causing mayhem. The game reviewed poorly for something that would never happen to Rockstar again. Bad graphics. And for something that remains to this day a major gripe, a shitty control scheme. Either way, the late 90s was a period when games were just starting to push the limit on what they could get away with and GTA was right at the forefront of those discussions. When you think about the games controversy from McDonnell, you'll think of Doom, Postal, and GTA. Even though the game was panned for a variety of shortcomings, it was praised for the one thing that would become a staple of Rockstar's design. Player freedom. Right from the get go, one of Rockstar's core philosophies was allowing players to do the things they could not in other games. Want to steal a car? Yep. Want to run over pedestrians? Yep. You can do that too. Want to shoot police? Yep. You can do that. GTA 2 iterated on GTA by adding a bunch of quality of life improvements, dynamic NPC interactions, side missions like driving a taxi and generally allowing for even more mayhem and chaos. Though it still had the same top-down perspective, the game reviewed much, much better and sold extremely well, setting up the third game in the series. It's GTA 3 that is the first game in the modern series. It had every piece of what makes a Rockstar game what it is today. It had a real and compelling story, characters that you learned about through scripted, well-designed, linear missions with very strict fail states which remains today by the way. In between those missions you could roam the open world. It had third-person shooting, though no cover system yet, and it had a shitload of controversy about its depiction of sex and criminal violence as well as its treatment of women. It also sold 14.5 million copies and is still considered one of the most important video games of all time. It appears on almost every best ever list written. From GTA 3 onward, Rockstar would basically iterate and perfect the formula. Every game that followed, including the Red Dead titles, would follow these basic core design imperatives. Player freedom mechanically and crucially morally. Extreme violence, anti-social behavior as it means to progress the game, a disdain for established cultural norms, and very strong stories and characters who all work as anti-heroes. In 2004, Take 2 Interactive, aware that Rockstar was the most successful of their labels, bought a studio in California and renamed them Rockstar San Diego. The dev team there had been working on several games, including one that was going to be published by Capcom. Only one of the projects that Angel Studios had in the works was continued and finished under Rockstar. The game, a fairly linear third-person action title with a focus on story and featuring criminals in the Old West, was an easy fit for a dev team looking to diversify out from just the GTA games that have been releasing every year or two up until that point. Red Dead Revolver like GTA 1 had the seeds of what would come, but it wasn't until the sequel, which was heavily modeled on GTA, that it really took shape as what it is today. And GTA with Horses ended up being a much better fit than anyone could have imagined. Red Dead Redemption is, in my humble opinion, one of the best open-world story-based action games ever made. GTA has always had good stories and moments of serious emotion, but it's also always been ready to trade that on a moment's notice for cynicism and satire. It's impossible to talk about Rockstar's titles without acknowledging the strongly libertarian themes within the games. The violence and the sex in the games is a sort of statement that they will not be restrained by cultural values. And this in general works pretty well most of the time. GTA V is excellent social satire at times, even if it occasionally veers into cruelty or misanthropy. But by placing GTA in the end of the Old West, Rockstar was able to examine the last era of wilderness liberty and contrast it to today better than GTA ever could. And without the easy targets that modern consumer culture affords and our familiarity with all of the obvious hypocrisy in our society to lean on, they were able to focus less on harsh critique and more on sincere examination. And to be honest, GTA V's anti-consumerist libertarian values often come up kind of schizophrenic, because this is made by a tremendous publicly traded company that wants to get all the money in the world. So you know, eh. The first Red Dead featured a fantastic and thought-provoking story, wonderful for its time graphics, solid for its era third person shooting gameplay, and a more immersive experience in general because Goofy Mayhem wasn't its main selling point. It was an outlaw simulator, and much closer to an RPG than GTA is, and it did that unbelievably well. And of course, it probably has the greatest ending of any game ever.  It was a triumph in almost every way, and its universal praise made a sequel all but certain. Red Dead 2, the game says no. When Red Dead 2 was announced, it was met with universal excitement from players, including me. Red Dead 1 remains one of my favorite games ever, including its really great zombie DLC. It was a nearly perfect game with incredible production values, graphics, sound design, music, art, direction, all of it combined for a deeply immersive setting, and it paired that quality with really good gameplay. It's easy to forget now, but at the time of its release, the horse riding mechanics in Red Dead were a tremendous step forward from everything that had come before. If you're going to do a game in the Old West, you need to get horses right, and Red Dead 1 pretty much has set the standard for a horse control scheme. To this very day, it remains one of Rockstar's most playable games with a relatively intuitive control scheme and a large, but not obnoxiously large map. Because horse riding felt so wonderfully fresh, and because the map felt so unique and alive, the game never felt empty.  The first game lasted dozens of hours, and had you traversing a map that was more than large enough to offer a ton of variety, while also being reasonable enough that it wasn't a chore to move around.  It's larger than GTA 5's map. Let that sink in for a second, man. GTA 5 has a ridiculously large map, and in that game you can use planes, and helicopters, and race cars. This is a map larger than GTA 5. Four times larger than Red Dead Redemption 1, and you will be traversing it basically on a horse. Except when it dies, or gets lost, or your mission takes you out of range of your horse's hearing. Then you'll spend 30 minutes walking to a stable or your camp.  The entirety of Red Dead Redemption 1's map is in this game as a single zone.   I don't want to do that. I've never wanted to do that. With a map this big, some systems need to be in place to make moving about it less toxically annoying for people, but the game says no. Want a reasonable fast travel system? No. You'll have to unlock it several dozen hours into the game, which is fine in and of itself, I guess, but then it will only take you to a few spots and you can only travel from your camp, but never fast travel back to your camp. Why? Missions sometimes end in the middle of nowhere. Why must the game force me to ride back for 9 minutes 25 times? I get it.  If I want to marvel at the beauty, I will make time to do that. Rockstar games have always had player freedom as a core tenant of the design, but many of these forced inconveniences for the sake of realistic immersion stripped that freedom away. The game is constantly saying no. You have to walk. No. Can't call your horse. It's too far away. No. You can't use the stagecoach because you have a bounty. The game is just always forcing you to ride or walk for 10 minutes to get back to camp to start another mission, and with a map this big, it's bound to be pretty empty most places. The random encounters in this game are okay. Nothing fantastic, mind you, just okay, but they are astonishingly rare. I would wager a full 60% or more of your playtime is spent riding your horse to and from your camp with literally nothing to do but stare at how amazing the game looks. You take on plot critical missions by meeting up with members of your gang. When they're in your camp or a fast travel location, it's great, but often they're in the middle of nowhere, meaning you've got to fast travel near them and then ride your horse. It'd be nice if I could simply fast travel to any story character to begin their mission, but game says no. It'd be cool if after a story mission I could fast travel to a town or the camp, but game says no. You will look at our scenery whether you want to or not.  Once you get to Santani, most of the game's missions are finally clustered in one area, but for the first 50 hours leading up to that, missions are spread five or 10 minutes of horse riding apart for dozens of missions. Let's think for a second about how GTA V paced its content. In that game you can fast travel with cabs to and from anywhere, and the player chose to engage in open world content between missions because the city was alive with things to do and missions to complete. Red Dead 2 has a story orders of magnitude better than GTA V, but insists on doling it out like a miser. It forces you to ride for two hours for every 20 minutes of story. It feels just arbitrary and it's boring. Now, sure, you can say that this is a petty complaint, so you have to ride your horse and can't fast travel, but I'm just getting started on the inconvenience this game mistakes for gameplay. Want to run? You'll have to repeatedly tap the A button. You can change this deep in the game's totally awful menus. But I played like 30 hours before I found this. 30 hours of impatiently tapping the button nearly constantly. And then once you do turn it on, you realize that the controls are so bad. It isn't possible to navigate anywhere if you're moving faster than a crawl. Want to jog through camp? Game says no. Let me explain something as a native New Yorker. If you walked this slow on a street in New York, you would get punched in the throat. Look at that.  Who walks like this? I go to the kitchen like three times faster than Arthur moves in combat, and conversation, and contextual dialogue, and camp, and town, and buildings, the game is constantly forcing you to walk like the most tired octogenarian on the edge of death. I get it that Rockstar thinks that this is how real men walk, but where I'm from, this is how great grandma walks. Let's go, Arthur.  Come on.  Watching this clip is making my blood pressure rise.  This feels like the game is trolling me, or deliberately wasting my time to force me to appreciate your scenic vistas and amazing animations. Got it. Game looks great.  Oh, game says no. How about animations? Well, they are spectacularly good and infuriatingly realistic.  The 631st time, I sluggishly meander over to a corpse, grab his shirt, pull him up, pat him down, and then do the little swipe motion.  Having to watch Arthur open a cabinet, pick up a can, inspect its label, open his bag, and put the can in the bag. Is the developer smelling their own farts? Does it look amazing the first few times? Yep. Is it a technological marvel and maybe the best animation work ever in a video game? Absolutely.  Yes. After the 10th time in a single room, a thousand times, yes. This design style is everywhere. Want a shop?  Page by page. Want to take a bath? You need to take a bath, scrubbing each individual part of your body. If I added up every moment of tedium, it would be like dozens of hours, no exaggeration, easily a dozen hours. I've read people saying that this is immersive, but it is exactly the opposite for me.  But all these things are in there to show off how good the game looks, right? So let's get at least one positive section and talk about that. Visuals. Yep. Red Dead 2 is the best-looking game ever made. Period. End of sentence. The map is insanely detailed. The towns look real. Lighting, weather, animations, models, textures. It isn't good. It's mind-blowingly insanely good. It's like looking into the future. It's so good.    Dear carcasses bounce up and down on your saddle.  Your clothes wrinkle. Your beard grows. Your shirt gets dirty. It is insane. End of section. Personal hygiene simulator. So how's the gameplay?  We've come a long way since the last game, and gameplay has gotten very tight and snappy in Triple A titles, but Red Dead in its insatiable desire for realism plays kind of like Resident Evil 2, with the most aggressive auto-aim in history. It's a strange combination of systems, so let's get to the game's biggest problem, controls and game feel.  Either that or every single action was assigned to a different team, and when they got together at the end, they realized they'd all use the same buttons for different actions. And not only is the game's control scheme ridiculously unintuitive and out of step with other games in its genre, it isn't even consistent with itself. It's left trigger to draw, except when it's right trigger. It's like six inputs to get my hat from my horse. May they combat? Since all combat actions are mapped to triggers, it makes sense that you just do right trigger to hit and left trigger to block, but game says no. It's B to punch and X to block. Running requires tapping A, looting requires a button hold, not a button press, one of my least favorite designs ever. Equipping weapons is the left bumper, unless the weapons have suddenly and automatically unequipped themselves again and stored themselves on your horse. Again, then you go to the horse where you check the horse cargo with the d-pad, but get your horse weapons with the left bumper. Bumper hold, not press. Then you navigate to the weapon type you want, use right trigger to switch through all the specific ones you have. Unless it's one of the many times the game decides you can't interact with your horse, then it's nothing because the game says no. Getting into cover? What's the least intuitive input we can think of to map that to? Right bumper? Yeah, that's it. Throwable weapons? Having games pretty much decided that the bumpers are for throwable weapons?  Oh, well, you've got to specifically equip that item in the God awful weapon and item wheel, then switch back to your gun when you're done. Picking things up is X, unless it's your hat, then it's Y. Imagine playing Doom without knowing what any input did. Guess what, you would figure it out in like three minutes. Red Dead takes dozens of hours to get comfortable with its terrible mapping and control scheme. Very few things frustrate a player more than not being able to complete an action because the input scheme is unintuitive or annoying. On its own, this might be a small issue, but it is not on its own. Everything about playing Red Dead Redemption 2 falls between annoying and perplexing. Arthur controls like a tank or a survival horror title. His turn radius is worse than the pickup and trailer combo I use at work. I can back that thing between two trees easier than I can negotiate Arthur up a flight of steps. Why? Why does the player character control like this out of combat? Is it to simulate realism? Because I don't control like this. I have no problems making a full 180-degree turn and easily navigating small steps in my real life. In combat, things aren't any better.  Hell yes, best feeling in the game. But the meter depletes very quickly. So you'll either have to negotiate a frustrating items menu in the second of the three weapon wheel sub menus during combat or go without it. And the game uses the same snap auto aim as all the other Rockstar games which makes the combat so easy. Ridiculously easy. Hold left trigger, shoot, let go. Hold left trigger, shoot, let go. Hold left trigger, shoot, let go. Over and over for hundreds of dudes. It's fun because the music is insanely good and I like shooting dudes, but it's less good than shooting dudes in almost any other game. Turn the auto aim off then, Pliny. Yeah, I did that and it demonstrates why the system is defaulted.  It's pretty clear that almost zero effort went into the actual gameplay systems here. They are the same as they've ever been and they were never all that good to begin with. It's showing its age badly with combat that is uninspired and pretty bland and controls that are downright hostile. What do you end up doing most of the game?   I have a beard because I'm not wasting time every day shaving. If my wife fails to buy me clothing and shoes they will rot off of my body because shopping is tedious. Having all of these chores gamified is basically kind of like hell for me. Bathing isn't fun. Shaving isn't fun. Buying shirts is not fun at least not for me. Riding a horse is fun. Brushing is coat digitally? Not so much. Brushing is coat digitally 78 times? Not at all. I can bathe and buy shirts in real life. I can marvel at the sky and the trees in real life. The game is only intermittently fun because for every time I snipe a deer or shoot a generic dude there's three hours of riding my horse or crossing the camp at a snail's pace or holding X to scrub my left arm and then holding X to scrub my right arm.  How's the story? Yeah, it's great. All of the characters in dialogue in Red Dead 2 are of the very highest quality. Writing is fantastic. Voice acting, second to none. Rockstar San Diego should be lauded for not only some of the most powerful cutscenes the game has ever had but also for its judicious use of them. Games often struggle at making the important story moments interactive but almost all of Red Dead 2's most important story moments are gameplay missions. There's one mission at the end of Chapter 3 that's about as powerful and cinematic a gameplay experience as I have ever had with some of the most intense acting and direction ever in a game happening while you actually play the level. And that's not rare for the game.  It's that a lot of design went into creating missions that allow players to play the most important plot moments rather than simply watch them.  People like to talk about which games would make a great movie and they are almost always wrong because most games don't actually have two hours of powerful enough story content to carry a film but Red Dead 2 would work just as well if not better as a movie. It's narrative and direction is that damn good and to its credit you actually get to play quite a bit of the parts that would work just as well cinematically as they do in a game. All of the characters are unique and interesting and make you both care about them deeply and want to get to know them better. The only problem is to get to know them better I've got to ride my horse through the woods for 11 minutes. The game's pacing is so off that a story keeps losing its power as it fades from your memory between missions. It's the rare game that would have been significantly better if it was significantly shorter. Each of the main story missions is straight fantastic with varied mission design great character development real tension and power as well as stunning cinematic art direction. The story and all of the missions are in and of themselves so very good that it's the game's greatest failing that it only got to each one right at the very moment I was so bored and frustrated I was going to stop playing. Now I'm not saying the game would be better as a linear story based action game like the original Red Dead although frankly I think actually it might have been but I'm saying the map needed to be like one third of the size so that when I see Micah has a mission for me I don't go Jesus Christ it's on the other fucking side of the map forget it. This game doles out its story like Scrooge McDuck giving alms to the poor grudgingly and only if it has to you go hours hours in between significant plot points and there's no way to know which yellow icon will be plot critical and which will be hey I heard about a house with 19 dudes that you can auto target to death and steal their beans belt buckles and pocket watches want to come? At 45 hours I had not unlocked more than half the map and I had been to the game's major city twice to sell pocket washes instead the game seems to want you to spend 25 to 30 hours wandering in between every one of its truly spectacular moments the story that is here is powerful and interesting but it's also somewhat muddy philosophally and I don't want to overstate this but I do have to talk about it there's only so much sympathy and yearning for the libertarian ideals of the old west I can feel if those ideals mean stealing shit so you don't need to get a job rock stars always had a heavy dose and a heavy handed dose of libertarianism in all their games GTA is constantly poking fun and how overbearing the government is and the last red dead game painted the government as a corrupt means to manipulate honest thieves into farming this game is ostensibly more an excellent morality play about the dangers of vengeance but it's also trying to make me see the decisions these people are making as legitimate but why? why should Arthur and Crue be allowed to rob a train and steal everyone's money? why is it wrong for the government to say yo rob and everyone on a train at gunpoint and killing every person who rightly tries to stop you is fucked up was something lost some spirit of independence when the old west closed I guess but it's also kind of nice that it's less likely I have all my shit stolen by a gang of people who think it's their God given right to take whatever they can and create nothing of their own and you don't just rob as Arthur you straight murder field hands stable boys stagecoach drivers law officers it's one thing to murder outlaws and rival gang members and bounty hunters it's another to plunge a knife into a stable hands throat so that you won't be seen stealing horses you could argue that the game is attempting to illuminate the hypocrisy at work here but the game is also dead set on making you like these people and see them as honorable thieves trying to make their way outside of the system it's got a schizophrenic tone at times and seems unsure whether it wants you to like these characters or not what you do as Arthur Morgan is sociopathic and that doesn't jive well with the story being told sometimes similar to how in GTA 5 Franklin was portrayed as a likable everyman who one minute serves as the game's conscience and winks at the player about how crazy this all is while the next murdering 62 cops during a robbery if the gameplay is going to have me strangle citizens to death it'd be preferable if the main character wasn't also supposed to be a likeable and good guy deep down or at least make him morally conflicted about it much earlier in the game Red Dead One's story was about the loss of this independence but was also about the conflict that John navigated of having to hunt down his old friends to save his family this game has better acting and a much more thoughtfully plotted and deeper main narrative but it also muddies its ethics and doesn't really ever ask us to account for it Red Dead One left what John had done in the past to our imaginations and the story based violence in that game could all be seen as somewhat justified the man was trying to save his wife and child Arthur's violence within the main plot is stuff he should be hung for that one thing that I mentioned before there's a mission where you have to steal horses and as your friends are talking to a character clearly marked as stable hand you need to sneak up behind him but the only prompt I got was stealth kill this seemed ridiculously out of character for Arthur so I stopped the game and I looked up how to choke him out you can't you've got to murder him for horses now it doesn't ruin the game and it's not a crippling blow to the story but it does keep it from being perfect the game wants it both ways it wants Arthur to be a hero and a good guy with no racial animus a man who treats everyone equal and beats up racists on the street and will ride with women but it also wants him to be a dude who will knife a stable hand in the throat for a horse it's strange is all just kind of strange I could do some deep long analysis of the story but that would be a waste of everyone's time the story is very good it was a good entertaining two to six hour story told over the course of 70 hours it has some amazing moments and a lot of shooting deer and taking a bath in between and to be fair those amazing moments are so damn good that it saves the game and makes it worth playing but the pacing keeps it from being some kind of game of the generation masterpiece and the fourth act the game really picks up steam and hits its stride hard from st. Dignion the game has a momentum it was lacking for the first 45 hours because shit finally focuses itself and the story missions come quicker and are more relevant to the plot and once it gets that momentum yeah it is a total masterpiece but I mean if I have to wade through 45 hours of shitty controls and taking a bath and wandering the wilderness don't I have to ding the game for that? can you really say a game that has some of the best characters in story missions ever but also the most hostile gameplay controls and dozens of hours of annoyance as a masterpiece? how much do you dig a game for this stuff? The Witcher 3 took me well over 150 hours to finally save Ciri but in that game in between each important plot story were dozens of intricate discreet stories and missions and never felt like it was dragging and never felt like I was just wandering an empty wilderness there was a tremendous variety not only in narrative but in gameplay and combat and exploration and everything it had its UI issues yes but they were pretty quickly patched to respond to feedback the control scheme was a little clunky but nothing like it is here and it didn't weigh on me and the game didn't feel this arrogant I guess like it's just taken for granted that I'll forgive its controls and decade-old gameplay because the main story missions are so good I don't know maybe I should but I just can't get past the fact that until two-thirds through the campaign this game has the masterful main story missions and then 35 hours of a few side missions that center around playing cards or fishing or robbing raiders for their belt buckles the Witcher 3 never had me say Jesus can I get to the story now this game had me doing that its pacing is really terrible its story has spread way too thin across a map that is way too big in conclusion wow that came off pretty negative once I actually got to writing it I've seen that many reviewers and youtubers and sites have this game as the best of the year which I just don't agree with it's like I played a different game God of War is so much better than this game and everyone who didn't have it as their best game has it as their second best game which Spider-Man God of War Monster Hunter Subnautica Yakuza Dead Cells Hollow Knight The Missing JJ Macfeld Hitman 2 Gris all of these games got releases this year and while none of them aside from God of War hit the highs that Red Dead hits when it's firing at all cylinders none of those games takes 35 hours to hit their stride I enjoyed every one of those games more so by my reckoning this is probably the best most proficient game released in 2018 but somewhere around like the 13th or 14th most enjoyable game released this year it's a technical marvel and an artistic masterpiece in animation and world design it is a quantum leap forward in graphics and amongst the best written and performed dialogue ever to appear in a game it features some of the best designed missions and story beats in recent memory and it pairs it with music and direction and production values as good as any film you will ever watch but it mixes that 10 to 20 hours of awesome into a 70 hour game I love film and when I was a little younger I used to buy lots of DVDs and watch the director's cuts and you know what I never once saw a director's cut that was better than the movie that was released and almost all of them were significantly worse than the movie that got released movies books poems they're at their best when they are as edited as possible skimmed of all of their fat with every second feeling needed and nothing that feels like filler Red Dead 2 is like 30 hours of fat it's dozens of hours of filler it is several hours of watching Arthur put beans in a bag it's gameplay is so deeply unfun its controls are just inexcusably shit its input mapping and contextual commands are a recipe for repeated frustrations like accidentally shooting a shopkeeper or punching a dog or punching your horse and the level of tedium and boredom required to get to the end of its really great story meant I felt like the entire game was spent waiting for something to happen its artistry meant that it didn't feel like I'd wasted my money but its problems felt like I was wasting my time it is a technical, artistic and narrative triumph of the highest order it's too bad it's spent so much time being a bad game alright see you next time thanks for coming bye take two get it?


Hello friends, I am Sanjay Gupta. In this video, I am going to demonstrate you how you can find out minimum from an array by passing array into function. Before starting, you can note my information, you can follow or subscribe my YouTube channel through the url youtube.com slash sanjaygupta underscore tech school. You can download my programming app Techimace which is available on Google Play. Now coming on to the topic, here in this video I am going to implement a code for you which will check whether the number sorry which will find out minimum number which is available inside array and I am going to pass the array into function. So first I am including a header file and I am declaring a function whose name is minimum, its written type is integer and it is receiving an argument of integer type array. So first statement is declaration. After declaration, I am defining main function. So here an array, i and m variables then printf statement which will display a message on console enter 10 numbers then for loop which will repeat 10 times and with the help of this for loop I am going to repeat scanf statement. So scanf will read all the numbers which are provided by the user and all those numbers will be stored inside array A. Now I am calling minimum function and I am passing a array inside it and with the help of minimum sorry with the help of printf I am going to show the minimum to the user. This is the definition of main function. Now I am going to find minimum function. So this block is function definition. Here I am declaring a variable i, m variable which I am initializing with 3, 2, 7, 6, 7. So it is the largest number of integer range. Then for loop inside this for loop I am applying a condition a of i less than m. So if a of i is less than m then I am going to assign a of i into m variable. So m is containing minimum value. So if a array element is minimum then m so that array element will become the next minimum value. So this way the loop will repeat 10 times and the smallest element will be available inside m variable after completion of loop. So I can return the value of m. The returned value will be received at function calling statement and then result will be displayed on console. So this is the complete implementation of the code which will find out minimum from the array and array is passed inside function in this program. Now I am executing this code. So it is asking for 10 numbers. So I am entering 10 different numbers. You can see the output. It is showing minimum equals to 1 and if you check the input the minimum or smallest element is 1. So the program is working properly. I hope you have understood the code well. How we can pass array into function and how we can find out the smallest value which is available inside array. If you want to watch more programming related videos you can follow or subscribe my YouTube channel through this link youtube.com slash sanjay kofta underscore tax code. You can download my programming app tachymus which is available on Google Play. Thank you for watching this video.


In the same bin, the APC Governorship Candidate in Kaduna State, Senator Obasani, has warned leaders, politicians are the relevant authorities, not to politicize insecurity. Sunny spoke at the Southern Kaduna APC Zonal Town Hall meeting with the theme and engagement with citizens in the forthcoming election in Khafenchan. Plus, TV News correspondent Habila Darifi filed in this report. This town hall meeting is to engage stakeholders towards the forthcoming elections with the aim of ensuring credible and competent leaders emerge to champion the affairs of Kaduna State and the nation at large. The Governorship Candidate of the APC, Senator Obasani, acts on the state of insecurity. He calls for the amendment of the Firearms Act, while noting that traditional rulers have a constitutional role to play in intelligence gathering to end the lingering insecurity challenges in the country. The chairman of the Christian Association of Nigeria, Khan, in Jamal local government, says the role religious leaders play is to pray for those at the aim of affairs. That is why our responsibility is to pray for every leader who is expected to become a leader and is not voting or talking with that person because he is the one who searches the hearts of every member. The much younger and vibrant generation are concerned about the fulfillment of campaign promises when politicians are elected into office. Let's go to the Supreme Court. Lawyers there and even the classes are there, so I want you to stay in those zones. It will not be very wise for those leads where we have agreed who has started a new arrangement or lead because the betters are agreed. It is better if we continue for where we are, I will be all the showers, sometimes only ours. The consensus is for the government to intensify efforts in addressing the security challenges as elections draw close. Hello, hope you enjoyed the news. Please do subscribe to our YouTube channel and don't forget to hit the notification button so you get notified about fresh news updates.


All right, so I have 28 slides in 20 minutes, so I'm going to make this very quick. Lots of material, so let's get going. Oh, before I start, this talk doesn't represent the opinions of Berkman at Harvard, Indiana, or any other organization I'm here by myself. All right, so I'm going to describe who I am. I'm going to tell you a little bit about the credit system and credit agencies. I'm then going to go into some motivations as to why someone would want to manipulate the data in their credit report or someone else's. And then I'm going to finish with some interesting techniques from abuse and manipulation of the credit reports. The paper that's online now has fixes for these flaws, but there's just not enough time to cover it. These techniques are not mine. They have been created and discovered by a thriving community of credit hackers who congregate in one or two internet forums. But these techniques are really not known outside those forums. And they're not forums that are frequented by security folks. They're finance geeks. And I think it's really interesting to analyze these techniques through the lens of the computer security community because you can really see some amazing parallels. And as I'll go into things, we'll see things like race conditions and buffer overflow attacks and these other techniques that are used commonly in the security space and just haven't been looked at or addressed in these other areas. All right, so a little bit about me. I'm a student fellow at the Berkman Center at Harvard, PhD candidate. I do privacy and security research. You may have heard about some researcher that a couple years ago where I made a fake boarding pass website for Northwest Airlines that got my house raided by the FBI. The lesson from that story is always have a good lawyer. Since then, I've done a few more things in the last few months. Just I think a month ago, 38 experts from the security and privacy community sent an open letter to Eric Schmidt, the CEO of Google, to chastise him for not turning SSL on by default for Gmail. I wrote that letter. I have, thank you for that one person, we have an open comment that we submitted to the corporate office to argue that consumers should be able to hack the DRM for music, movie, and media stores that go bankrupt and the authentication server is shut down. You may have seen in the last week or two that the content creators said that consumers do not have an expectation of being able to access their works deep into the future. We disagree with that, and so we want consumers to be able to hack their works and play them, things they've legally paid for, well into the future. And finally, I also created a tool for Firefox called TACO that opts you out of behavioral advertising. It came out three months ago and has over 100,000 users. If you're worried about your privacy online and you don't want these companies to follow you around the web, you should use it in addition to tools like NoScript and Adblock Plus and blah, blah, blah. OK, so a quick introduction to how the credit system works. There are three main credit agencies that store information on around 90% of Americans. They get information on all your financial transactions, but mainly the ones involving loans. All right, what does a credit reporting agency know? So every time you apply for a card, a loan, a mortgage, a student loan, and something from a medical bill, they find out about the application, and then they find out every month how much you've paid, how much you currently owe, whether you paid it on time. Information like that, if you've missed payments, if you've declared bankruptcy, all that information, they store it. So the three agencies get that information directly from the lenders and the financial institutions. They get it directly, which means they don't synchronize the data amongst themselves, and it means that three different agencies can have three different sets of data, depending on when they get it and any mistakes that might be in the data stream. In most cases, it's done via tapes and they're sent once a month by the banks, and these can have all kinds of errors. Based on this information, they compile what are called credit reports. And from your credit report, which details all your past financial activity, you get a credit score. When you apply for a credit card, they look at the credit report and the credit score and figure out whether you're a deadbeat or not. The important thing to note is that the three credit agencies do not compare notes. And so when you manipulate data held by one agency, the other two never find out about it. So I don't know if you can see this, but this is a screenshot from actually my report, but the numbers have been changed. But this is an example of just one card, so it tracks the account number, how much the maximum amount you've ever spent in one month, how much you've spent the most recent month, how your maximum credit line, and then you see the little stars at the bottom, and each one of those records a month in which the credit agency got data. All right, credit inquiries are really important and the talk will be heavily focused on these things. So each time you apply for a credit card, or loan, or anything else, the act of asking for your report causes what's called a credit inquiry. These inquiries themselves show up on your report. There are two types of inquiries though. There are what are called hard inquiries, and these relate to the creation of new accounts. So when you apply for a new mortgage, or a new car loan, or a new credit card, an inquiry is added to the report. Now the lenders only request one credit report at a time. So typically only one of the three credit agencies is contacted, and that credit agency will add an inquiry to the report held on you. Soft inquiries are non-harmful. They're not shown to anyone but you, and they reflect things like identity checks for apartment rentals or jobs. When you request your own credit report, those are soft inquiries, and any time you have an existing account with someone, that lender will usually check up once every couple of months just to see that you haven't become a total deadbeat, and that is also considered a soft inquiry. Now the important thing to note is the soft inquiries are not shown to anyone but you, and they're in no way harmful at all. All right, so if you get more than say four or five inquiries in a single six month period, you're, the credit companies that have basically decided that that's a negative thing. You're shopping around for credit, you've gotten four, five, six new loans, they'll cut you off and they won't give you any more credit for maybe six to 12 months. And so some of the attacks I'll describe in a few minutes look into this question of well, how do we either erase these inquiries or how do we make it so that these inquiries don't show up as fast as they otherwise would? This is a screenshot of a hard inquiry from my report, and you can see that these are all related to credit card applications, and you'll see, as you can see, that they're all for the same date, and I'll get into that in a minute. And then these are for soft inquiries, and these are from banks that I already had accounts with, and these are harmless. All right, so motivations. Why would you want to mess with your credit report? The techniques I'm gonna describe, they can only really be used by people with good credit, and the people who've been hanging out in these forums, most of them seem to have spectacular credit, and they've used these to actually make real money. So there are three main ways to make money that I'll go into. The first is sign up bonuses. So many credit cards will give you money for signing up for a new card. Sometimes in the range of maybe $100 or $200 per card, which is not terribly huge, but given enough credit card, that adds up fast. The second bonus are what I call non-cash bonuses, so these are airline miles, free rooms and hotels, that sort of stuff, and then the third and most lucrative benefit are 0% balance transfers, and these can be arbitraged, and I'll go into that in a minute to make some fairly significant profits. So as an example, Sony will give you $100 for getting a new card. United Airlines will give you 30,000 bonus miles, which is enough for a free domestic ticket, or two of these equals one international ticket to Asia or Europe, and Citibank will give you a huge pile of money at 0% with no fees. All right, so the balance transfer arbitrage, which is the most interesting of these attacks, you borrow a huge amount of money at 0%, you ask the bank to send you a check instead of paying off an existing loan, you put it in the bank and you get a CD or a savings account, and after one year, you pay it all back and you collect the interest. $30,000, this is real money, $100 or $200,000 as I'll get into in a few minutes, then we're talking $5,000, $10,000 a year given decent interest rates. All right, now these techniques that I'm gonna describe are somewhat limited, or the techniques I just described are somewhat limited by the fact that you can only get four or five cards in any six or 12 month period. So that's some income, but not huge amounts. So the question is, how can we raise this limit? How can we make it so that we can get many, many more cards without any of the lenders finding out? So what I'm gonna describe now are the application of several techniques, so race conditions, buffer overflows, and then the abuse of failing open or failing closed system design, and I'll cover these one by one. So the first thing that these credit hackers on these forums discovered was that it takes one or two days for inquiries to show up on a card or on our credit report, which means that if you simultaneously apply for 40 or 50 credit cards in a single afternoon, you can be approved for most of them, if not all of them. Now obviously there are some limits, so you can usually only apply for one or two cards per lending institution. So you can't apply for 10 credit cards from Citibank, for example, but there are enough banks out there that you can apply for huge numbers of cards. Now in the case of a balanced transfer, they'll send you the check within five or 10 days of the card, and then you wait another five or 10 days for the check to clear, which means by the time that that information about that account has been sent to the banks, to the other lenders, that money can be long gone. Now in the case of the people I'm discussing in this paper, most of them are law abiding, so they're putting the money in the bank, they're not running off with it. But if these are attacks were used by an evildoer, you could very well see that this money would be out of the country before the banks had even heard about this. So on these forums, reports of two or $300,000 in zero percent balanced transfers are extremely common. Credit, these hackers report getting 30 or 40 or 50 cards in a single day, very successful. For a year or so, that your credit report is completely shot. No one will give you any new credit, which in many ways is actually a great way to protect yourself from identity theft, right? So once your credit is maxed out, it's not worth stealing anymore. Okay, so the second technique that I think is really interesting is what they call it bumpage. So two of the three credit bureaus, the TransUnion and Equifax, store both the soft, which are the non-harmful credit inquiries and the hard, the harmful credit inquiries in the same FIFO style buffer, which means that if you request your own credit report once a day for 60 days, you can push out all of the old negative inquiries. Now these can be done via free or maybe $9.99 a month credit monitoring services. My paper goes into more depth. There are a few techniques you have to avoid, so doing it more than once a day can actually cause your report to be split into multiple segments. It's complex, but it's really bad. But once a day seems to be fine. One of the credit agencies has discovered that this is happening and is manually adding the old inquiries back onto reports, but people report that you can still flush them out again and remove them. So it's a game of cat and mouse of one side deleting the inquiries and the credit agencies adding them back on again. All right, in the third attack, which I think this one is pretty cute too. So a few years ago, states started passing laws requiring what are called credit freezes. And after one state after another passed them, eventually the credit agencies decided to apply these across the board. So you as a consumer can contact the credit agency and ask them to lock your report. You give them a pin number or a password and it ensures that no one else can access your report for that time. If you want to apply for a new loan, you have to call up the credit agency, give them your password or pin number, and either they will open up your report for that specific lender or open it up for a 24 hour period. They usually charge between five or $10 a go for this. And when this legislation was being proposed, the credit agencies pushed back really hard. They didn't want to have a simultaneous credit freeze. So there's something else called a credit alert, which is you've been a victim of credit fraud and you can create a credit alert and three agencies are required to simultaneously give that information to their competitors. So you do one credit alert and everyone gets it. Where the credit freeze, they didn't want to do that. And so what you can do, you can abuse this technique to basically control which credit agencies the banks can have access to. You have control over the three reports. If one of the reports happens to have far more bad information on it than another, you simply freeze that report and the other two are left open. And so as I said before, because the banks only request your report from one of the three agencies, it's quite possible to have really bad information on one. And as I described in the previous attack, with two of the three lenders, people have been able to successfully remove negative information from those reports. So what you can do essentially is freeze a bad report and then apply for cards. And many of the financial institutions when encountering a frozen report, rather than turning a customer away, what they do instead is just contact another credit agency to get the report. So rather than failing close, they're failing open, right? This is a really, really simple technique and the best part about this technique I think is the fact that there's no downside. If the bank refuses to contact that alternative credit agency, no trace is left on your report. So it's a beautiful technique. All right, so these techniques right now have been used heavily by those in online financial forums, like Fat Wallet and a few others, but they haven't really been used by the credit hackers or by the identity thieves. And I think that now that these techniques are gonna get a little bit more attention, they could very easily be used by identity thieves. It's sort of strange, right? But now that the interest rates have dropped to one and a half or two percent, the actual legitimate profits that you can get from the arbitrage schemes are fairly low now. So you're looking at like $4,000 profit for borrowing $200,000 at zero percent, which for many people who are gonna invest the time and risk, and that means there's a little bit of risk, but for the people, maybe this isn't a good payoff. But for an identity thief who's not actually gonna pay the money back after one year, the lowering of the interest rates actually has zero impact on them. And if anything, maybe the banks have more money to lend the identity thieves now that the credit hackers aren't using these techniques as much. So I have some fixes that I outline in my paper. They're not rocket science. I mean, these are techniques, these are flaws that we've seen again and again in the security community and the solutions are things like separate the hard inquiries from the soft inquiries, that these are not rocket science. So more information. The paper was published in first Monday, which is an online journal, a peer review journal was published yesterday. It's firstmonday.org. You can get the full paper there with more information. These two forms are a wealth of information.  One thing, the techniques that I've described, they're not so easy as they sound. And there have been people on these forms who've sort of tried to do it, but haven't done the required homework and have completely destroyed their credit reports in the process. So I'm not recommending that you try this out. And in sort of strange way, the identity thieves have again a leg up here, right? So they can experiment with other people's credit reports and when they screw up, whatever, it's someone else's report. Anyway, that's it.


And a first-class traditional ruler and Mayor of Zazel, Ambassador Nuhu Bemali, has urged Nigerians to embrace tolerance and unity irrespective of tribe, cultural and religious affiliations. The traditional ruler made the appeal in Katharina at a state-level strategic stakeholders' engagement workshop. The programme tagged effective early warning, early response system in Nigeria was organised by the Institute for Peace in Conflict Resolution, IPCR, in collaboration with the Katharina State Peace Commission. Peace issues, you know, ranging from patrimonial issues to inheritance, land disputes, religious intolerance, and also ethnic minority. This is what we do, appeal in different communities to stay in peace.  The whole city is disintegrated. Displacement of people, you have refugees, and then, you know, you have people coming to give you palliative. People that don't even like your face will now say that they are people that will support you. Also, the Director-General of IPCR, Dr Joseph Ochoago, said building a robust and early conflict response system is key to mitigating against violence and destruction of lives and property. Meanwhile, the Executive Vice-Chairman of Katharina State Peace Commission, Dr Saleh Mumale, hinted that they are working with religious, traditional leaders, and youth groups to ensure religious tolerance in the state. There is also a huge challenge that are working in desire, unity, and connection. Stability, peace, stability, and peaceful coexistence are inclusive development necessary for the pursuit of happiness. High-level conflict is certainly in the fabric of our existence and challenging our humanity in so many ways. It has become telling me to invoke every patriotic attempt to incite conflict prevention and nonviolent approach to conflict. There is needs to find an effective way of communicating early warning to attract the fastest response in order to prevent conflict from escalating into violence. We insisted that we should have a three-digit number in this country that our brothers and sisters that are no opportunity to go to the school find it very easy to call for response, quick response. Like Rosetti, we have a number which is very simple, one, two, two. What I'm saying in essence is the whole country should keep into one digit. We have like NDLE, they have about eight to nine digits too. Some people will find it very difficult to cram it and call it. And prompt rescue operation is very paramount. That's why we have this golden environment in the city. Once there is a crash, once you call us, within 50 minutes, we'll arrive at this early warning, early response. We are all aware that either directly or indirectly, summarily or again summarily, we have early warning, early response structures within our communities. So this program does not come to reinvent the wheel, the program taking cognizance existing structures. But what it's safe to do, like the EBC of Cardona State Peace Commission mentioned, is to create both vertical and horizontal alien cages where all the critical stakeholders are informed with this idea, providing a platform to collaboration and coordination amongst them. Hello, hope you enjoyed the news. Please do subscribe to our YouTube channel and don't forget to hit the notification button so you get notified about fresh news updates.


to get started. Okay, well thank you all for coming out today. My name is Anne Watson and I am delighted to announce that I am running for Vermont State Senate. I'm running for the Senate to represent Washington County District because I care deeply about Central Vermont and its residents. I will be a strong experienced voice to fight for a livable planet and protect working families. While there are many topics I feel are worth fighting for, I'm particularly passionate about equitably transitioning off the fossil fuels, expanding access to health care and supporting Vermont's working families. You may know that I've been the mayor of Montpelier for the past four years and a city counselor in Montpelier for the past five years prior to that. But besides serving as Montpelier's mayor, I'm also a wife, a new mother, a teacher, a union member, and a former Ultimate Frisbee coach for Montpelier's residents. As a teacher, I work every day with students who are worried about the impact of climate change. If we're going to substantially decarbonize our lifestyles, we need policymakers to take climate science seriously and to rapidly ramp up our transition off of fossil fuels. During my time on the council and as mayor, the city has made significant progress in reducing its carbon emissions, sourcing nearly 40% of its energy for municipal operations from renewable sources. Just a few days ago, I was on the town hall zoo meeting with the senators from Washington County. One of the issues that came up at that meeting was that people were worried about the eligibility, their eligibility for Medicaid and that eligibility going away. And recently, the CEO of GoFundMe was quoted as saying that nearly a third of all donations to the GoFundMe site are for medical costs. We know that our healthcare system is broken in many ways. The gold standard for me is universal single payer, and I will work towards that end or towards any legislation that improves access, affordability, and increases benefits. Earlier, I mentioned working to protect working families. That means many things to me, but it certainly includes increasing access to high quality childcare and paid family leave. As a new mom, I'm now experiencing firsthand the trouble of finding high quality, affordable care. According to the study by Let's Grow Kids in Washington County, 72% of infants that are likely to need care are in fact without access to regulated care. Vermont is leading the country in equitable public education, so I know we can solve the issues around childcare. Similarly, we need paid family and medical leave to support working parents of young children and those who must care for sick or elderly family members. According to the National Partnership for Women and Families, even unpaid leave under the Federal Family and Medical Leave Act is inaccessible for 65% of remonters. And also, according to them, paid leave means people, especially women, are not forced to leave the labor force to care for their families. The legislature got very close a couple of years ago to passing paid family leave, and I believe it's an issue that could pass in a future session. Vermont's economy has the potential to grow, and the quality of life for remonters has the potential to improve if we can provide high quality childcare, paid family leave, affordable housing, and health care to all who need it. Which is why, as your senator, I will work to increase access to high quality childcare and paid family and medical leave. You may have heard that Senator Polina is not seeking re-election. I have a deep respect for Senator Polina and the work that he's done on behalf of Washington County. I particularly appreciate that he led the charge for Vermont's Green New Deal. These are some big shoes to fill, and I hope I can measure up to his level of service. I've spent nearly 10 years dedicated to leading Montpelier, and now I'm committed to serving all the people of central Vermont as we navigate financial, economic, and social challenges. Thank you again, everybody, for coming out today. And if you have any questions, I'd be happy to chat. Thank you so much. Yay! That's a great question. So I know there was at least one representative, Mary Hooper, who was the mayor and was a rep at the same time, and I have a great deal of respect for her in doing that, especially going into the Senate. I anticipate stepping down as mayor, if elected. Yeah, sure. Well, so especially since COVID, there's been a really a real openness about people talking about mental health needs, and even among students. You know, they get that they need to be socializing. They need to be out, you know, taking care of themselves, and a lot of them, even like their families, are having a hard time. And so one of the things that I am taking from that is I know that mental health is often not, it doesn't receive the same level of attention or care in the health care world. And so that is going to be a priority for me as well, especially in conversations around health care. Yeah. And have state government can work with local government? Sure. Well, I think that there are some of things that, watch it in the back, I see local government as a place where municipalities can try things out where we can be a laboratory. And I know we've, in my opinion, have certainly pushed the edge on some things. And I think that is an opportunity for state legislature, the state legislator, to see what's working and to take on issues at the state level as well. So being in touch with the local representatives and what's happening at the more ground level, you know, the one step closer to the street, so to speak, is a really important way for people to, for the legislature, to stay in touch with what is really important to folks. Is there anything that you've led in Montpelier that you think could be brought to like specific proposals that you have? Yeah, sure. Well, just as one example, we did pass a plastic bag band that ended up not passing as a charter amendment, but the state took on as a whole. So that was pretty delightful for us. But one of the things that we have pioneered here is non-citizen voting. And we know that we have, how do we have confidence that the system is working? We've already had one election where non-citizens were allowed to participate. And as we collect more data from that, I think that is going to be an opportunity, a topic that I think could expand to other other towns and perhaps the state as a whole. Yeah, yeah, thank you. Great. Any other questions? Yeah, okay, great. Super. All right.


That was an absolutely horrendous performance from start to finish.


Hey traders, this is T Bradley 90 from the my investing club chat I'm one of the top mentors and moderators in chat as a special gift to our viewers on YouTube We have created a free two-hour course to help teach you how to start a consistently profitable trading business and identify high-paying setups in just 30 days There will be limited seating every week so register for the course and reserve your spot now Using the link in the description as a special bonus for everyone that watches the entire video We will give you the link to a free 10-hour additional mini course that has never been released to the public Register now before all slots completely fill up So today we're gonna go over the key traders of the week as normal We're gonna go over market sentiment as normal We're gonna go over the the topics and and fallacies that kind of strike us as plague us as traders from week to week Escape from AF. Oh, is that after hours? We're gonna we're gonna go over some strategy things as far as risk reward and stopping out that I really think should be gone But I really want to go over and then we're gonna end the session Q&A like we always do So if this is your first webinar, please feel free you guys can like you guys can have fun in the chat I don't really care like I'm gonna be going over the I'm gonna be going over this kind of in a almost Lecturey kind of format if you guys have questions about what I'm talking about this throw the question in there And I'll you know if it's pertinent to what I'm saying. I'll try to get to it I might miss it and it's so I'll get back to it at the end whenever when it's Q&A time. What's up, Sam?   So I gotta be able to see them Yeah, let me see him alright, so Traders trades I took this week and one of them was be I am I and this was this is what I call an insta Okay, thanks. This is what I call an insta reclaim trade, right? So I'm pretty famous here in MIC for this pattern because I'm one of the besides See like out of like there's not very many longers here in MIC But out of like between Harry and I Harry's a really good continuation trader and I'm a really good not continuation trader I'm a really good More of a bottom finder kind of longer whereas Harry's like the best One of the best continuation traders I've seen like I mean he like he nails the first bounce like he I'll be selling and he'll Still and he'll be adding or like I'll be selling into some and like he'll like hold something like this huge mood that I won't get But anyway, I'm more of a bottom a bottom scraper kind of longer But important stuff important stuff and NDM. I got a quick stuff sort out of the open on this I actually got a little fearful you see I picked up pretty high cover here And that's because that's because it really snapped back, right? You can't see on this candle, but it really snapped back and I was like Like I got I like I got half of the fill down here. I'm like, uh-uh, uh-uh like I got to cover the rest up here For near break even right like I mean my average is like 64 or something like that So I covered half down here and half a break even so quick scalp, right? It's it's very choppy I'm waiting for the range to break on stock spaces like this is what I'm kind of waiting for I am waiting for Like I'm waiting for the range to break to the top side and the range to break on the front side, right? Before I decide to pick a direction on this kind of stock like this. This is the kind of chart Unlike unlike BMI. This is the kind of pre ship This is the kind of pre market chart where it actually looks like longs are in right So on breakdowns like this I'm much more willing to go short Right because if we break down now I feel like longs can be trapped because like this is an uptrending pre-market chart, right? Do the difference like who Who wants to long this one? But probably a lot of people are long in this one for the rip up. So when we stuff here in the morning Like all these guys are now under water and that's why I'm willing to kind of take this immediate like Tasha and I have talked about this a lot. This is kind of like our yeah, I don't know if it's it used to be It's still one of my favorite trades and it used to be tosses favorite bit I don't know if tosses favorite trade has changed But this is still a classic trade where the stuff happens you short the immediate balance and there's normally that one extra pull Right. OPDM. So this one was a fun one and I drastically undercovered this one. I drastically undercovered this one, but I was still okay with it because of how illiquid it was but You know, like I was just happy to kind of you know, get out with with the liquidity that it had And I got my my my routine targets, right? Anyone anybody who's seen my trading nose I love to get out like on washes on whole numbers and red to green like I love getting out of these levels So it's just so hard for you not to cover This one I actually thought had more potential just because like there's only one reason that there was up a chat room And it got up a lot on this one chat room. So this was essentially a chat room pump play It was a no-volume pump and so this is sometimes a good opportunity happens But they can be very scary trades because they're illiquid, right? These can be very very scary trades. So it's almost like It's not for the new trader, but like I mean the probability is pretty good But you got to be you know, you got like you almost have to just be experienced with it but it was a no-volume pump and An illiquidity made it possible for the extension to happen, right put it this way liquidity just means a whole bunch of people You know, it's a liquid market There's a whole lot of market participants people are paying attention very closely to the stock There's orders everywhere. Everyone's trying to figure out what the right price of the stock is, right? Kind of what I predicted last week was that we experienced a little slowdown and it didn't take a genius to figure that out Like the fact that the market was so ridiculous last week It was almost like how much more ridiculous could it get right like we have like 700% couple 700% runners like two or three 300% runners a handful of 100% runners every single day, right? So I Don't know how much more crazy it could get so I mean it like I said like I said it should have slowed down But you know and it kind of did and we actually got the offering to we got BNGO offering, right? We got that BNGO offering which I was like that was a positive last week no offerings But I bet you know one offering comes starts to slow it down. That was BNGO Typically always works out that way, but we did have a Flurry of market participants still busy This is what I would say a normal small cap market kind of looks like for those like for anyone Who started trading this year the beginning of the month was normal the beginning of the year was kind of normal And we had we kind of had I think an extra slow summer and fall like Like it doesn't even have to be a high probability for it or sometimes I'll take it just because it's a good risk reward trick Right, but the thing is what this requires is knowledge and intuition of market cycles You need to know what market cycle you're in, right? You need to be aware of you know, you got to be like Ideally have a few years of looking at price action under your belt So you can really kind of you know, just have that intuition ingrained in you that like hey like This has the you know So you really have a good idea of what potential something has versus, you know I'm not really sure how high this can go or how low this can go. You know, you kind of have to have a really good sense of How high something or how low something can go So for you to accurately gauge a good risk, you know If you actually have a good risk to reward and you know, I wish I could help you out with this But like I think the only thing that that that really, you know, gives us to a trader is Years in the seed screen time I think that's the only and I say years because it's not like we can just watch price action 24 hours a day, right? Like we only have six hours a day to watch price action. So You know, it's like you need a certain amount of hours and you like that 10,000 hour That's like three years. Like, you know, you just need those years that you need that time to gain that intuition And so this is why I have this as an advanced app, right? And also the damage to a psych to the psyche It's less with experienced traders and the few traders because experienced traders typically have I'm losing my voice a little bit experienced traders typically have a very hard um Like a harder base confidence than new traders because you know, they've proven profitability They they showed that they can survive. They showed that they can pull themselves out of back times So this is why I call it an advanced trade. It's not something that new traders should really do look for But you know, if you know, if you're wondering why I take some trades like that. Well, that's why, you know, like sometimes risk rewards really really good and Even if the risk reward is like, you know, like I said a risk reward can be Four to one and it can be a 30% win rate. That's still an edge trade, right? That's still edge. Even if it wins 300 30% of the time 40% of the time. These are all edged trades There's edge in taking this trade over time. You're going to make money Taking these kinds of trades over time. This doesn't this doesn't incorporate fees. This is very simple, but You get the idea like it doesn't have to be that 70% and so sometimes, you know, I'll take 50% win rate trades If the risk rewards really good Anyway, that that's trading Are we here already? Okay, there's two more. Okay So why is your stock always wrong? God Hey, talk already. Well, why is your stock always wrong, right? It's not always, but I'm just assuming like anyone who's in a bad place really needs to hear that, right? So let's start with what's a correct stop. So A correct stop to me is When my price when my target price exit It breaks two rules.  All right So it has to break these two rules that it's more likely than not to happen That's to break that rule and it has to break the reasonably feasible Chance to get to my target that rule has to be broke. So if it breaks those two rules You know, that to me is a correct stop Hey traders, this is tosh. I go by t bradley 90 in the my investing club chat Just wanted to reach out and say if you have any questions about m i c joining m i c Maybe you're a member already you have three ways to contact myself personally and through m i c you can hit our social media You can hit me through pms and chat or you can contact us through my email at tosh at my investing club.com That's tosh at my investing club.com. I will get back to you in a timely manner And i'm saying this because i'm here to help and I don't want anybody to be afraid to reach out and ask any question That they have we are here for you guys. All right. See you guys