Okay, so let's get this started. This is what now the sixth of these 4844 calls just posted the agenda in the chat.  Then we were supposed to be launching DevNet three tomorrow so it makes sense to chat about that where things are out there. And then we have two other updates or at least one update on the, some benchmarks for the pre-compile and we can also talk about the large block spam test as well and see how things are going there. And I don't know if Xiaowei is on the call but right before she posted, oh yes, you're here, Xiaowei. You wanna just give a minute to talk about the new test vectors on the CL? Yes, so yeah, thanks for sharing it. So Terrence found the issue in the test vectors that we released last week. So I caught a new release today here, yes. And I hope that if any of you have tested and just let me know and if there's any new issues and please ping me, thank you. Awesome, thanks. Okay, next up, we had two specs issues open on the CL side that we didn't have much progress on last time and I just want to follow up on them. The first was Terrence, one of your issues about adding blob availability checks for ancestors. What is the status there? Yeah, so hey everyone, I have a corresponding PR to the issue. So the PR was approved by Danny but there was more feedback regarding that we do not want to remove that is data availability because it's nice when you go to Dencharding, you still have that notion. So I made a minor update to that and the PR is ready again. So yes, feel free to take a look and further comments is welcome. So yeah. Okay, and that's PR 3125, right, the I am? Yeah. Okay, nice. And I just linked it in the issue so if anyone was following just the issue and weren't aware, they can go there. Great, and then George, you had some updates on the crypto side of things. So you 3093 was merged and now there's another PR 3138.  Yeah, sure. So okay, for a quick update, basically we settled down on how we want to handle empty blobs, empty sidecars basically. And now like the correct behavior is on the spec that settled. So basically now client devs can basically pass empty sidecars to the crypto library and it will handle it gracefully. So that's done. And the future things on the cryptography side is another thing raised by client devs about when we use the pre-compiled and we are given a scalar field elements as bytes whether we validate them or not. Before we were not validating them and we were just kind of using them as they were given to us. But it seems like the more correct approach is to actually like validate them and error out if they're not canonical. So this new PR 3138 basically introduces the validity condition that should have been there from the beginning. Yeah, that's also isolated on the cryptography side. So that's one nice thing from the API we have designed that kind of all these things are nicely abstracted away on the cryptography plan. And it doesn't give much clutter to the rest of the client dev workflow. And another thing that's happening, I'm not sure, Kev, are you here? Let me scan the... Yeah, I'm here. Right, okay. You want to give an update on the pre-compiled gas cost or where we are right now because I'm also not sure where we are right now. Yeah, and Martin is here as well. He ran the benchmarks originally. We can maybe do that after. So we already had a note for that. Yeah, so we can come back to the... Sounds good. One question by Infi. What is it? Does 3138 resolve the canonical encoding issue you highlighted a while back? That's a question to Kev. Yeah, yeah, it causes the issue. Okay, so I guess that's it from the cryptography side. Sweet. Any other updates or concerns about the spec? And then if not, we can cover the benchmarking of the pre-compile, but anything else just at the design level or rate to the spec? We had a concern on Lighthouse's side. So for the interop depot, we have like a specific preset that has been generated where the slots per epoch is set to three. So like, we were wondering why that is because it's a bit annoying to handle it on Lighthouse because we have to define another preset which is only valid for the purpose of the interop spec testing. So I was wondering like if it's not that big of an issue, we can just like change it to mainnet spec. I'm not really sure why it exists. Yeah, does anyone know why it was set to three? Are you talking about the minimal specs for 4844? No, like this, like in the interop EIP 4844 interop repo, we assume that that's what's going to be used for the devnet eventually. There's a different preset defined which has like the slots per epoch set to three, which is like not mainnet and it's not minimal either. So it's a bit hard to handle this specific case only for the testnet. I was just wondering why it exists. Okay, just for... Yeah, so Mofi answered, he just said it was easier to debug and I guess it makes sense with the three epochs. It's just quicker. Yeah, does anyone have an issue? Does anyone have an issue moving it to 32? Okay, it seems like we want to move it to mainnet. Mofi, is that something you can do? Okay, awesome. So Mofi will make that change. Anything else on the spec? I see that there is no lion here, correct me if I'm wrong, and just want to highlight one issue that he opened and he's highlighting a couple of edge cases that to me sounds reasonable to discuss. Yeah, so that's 3113 that you just posted? Yes, exactly. So if anyone has some room to have a look to that and maybe start discussing in there, it would be nice. Has anyone already reviewed this? So we're like looking at it in Lighthouse and like these are the types of edge cases we're still trying to figure out how to handle. So we're aware of it and we'll comment on it soon, but don't we have ideas yet? Yeah, same with Prism that we are actually studying this issue. It's a tricky one, but yeah, we will review very soon. Does it make sense to chat about this on the CL call in two days, or should we basically come back to it next week on this call? I think if we have more traction on it, it'd be worth it on the CL call, but I'm not sure. So I'd say no for now and then wait for it next week, but yeah. Okay, sounds good. Yeah, so if people want to have a look at that and share some thoughts on it. Yeah, we'll keep an eye on it. Any other issues or spec related concerns? Okay, I guess then the next one that's kind of also part of the spec. Martin, you ran sort of an initial set of benchmarks for the pre-compile on the get the branch. Do you want to take a minute to kind of walk through what you did? Yes, sure. So what I did is basically a rerun of what's been done a few times before when we added new pre-compiles, the Blake and the BN add and the BN model and those a long time ago. That was at the time when the implementations were get and CPP ethereum and parity. So kind of the scripts that I used to take the raw data and transform it into columns. There are three formats for that one for get from the other one for CPP ethereum one for parity. So, right now, I only have data for get, which I ran into different machines. And both of those kind of indicate that the proposed gas cost it's not it's not far off, but probably it would be good to bump it by a factor of 1.5 or maybe two. And that's something I mean it doesn't need to be set in stone now because it's very simple constant change. And that's also pretty nice with this pre-compile that there is only one flat cost. It's always I mean it's more difficult. Last time we priced something it was where you have a formula where the pricing depends on the complexity and or the length of the input. And of course that makes it another dimension of difficult. Yeah, so now we've got some some preliminary results. It would be nice to have the same kind of executions done on the other EL clients, never mind and be so. I suppose that the error gone is mostly on par with get. And at least we have a sense of whether they're on on the same level as gas or someone something is dangerous as well. And the methodology used is to compare the new pre-compile and gas per second wise with the other pre-compiles and the reference one we've used has been easy to recover. And yeah, that's about it. I guess I don't have much more else to say. I know Kev you had some thoughts on discord you want to quickly give an update. Yeah, I guess it wasn't entirely intuitive that the failure cases were taking longer or were more expensive than the correct cases. I've managed to reproduce it on my computer so I'm just investigating why that's the issue. Yeah, and I kind of assume that something that can be fixed. But that's my instinct. Yeah. And then I guess for the other EL teams. How easy is it for you all to reproduce this. Is this, I assume people might not have had a chance to look at I think, I think, I mean, I know that never mind. Both never mind that these have done benchmarks and pre-compiles before that we've done some comparisons on. Okay. Okay, so I can reach out because I don't think there's anyone from base you on the call. And then I think Alexa maybe from all Jerry sorry. Yeah. We just starting to actually do many things so very almost nothing's done. Great. Okay, so there's not much to benchmark for enough. And then on the never mind side, Alexa, I see you're here. How do you have like their bandwidth or how easy is it for you to benchmark the 4844 pre-compile relative to other pre-compile in terms of pricing and then there's a script. The last comment I had in the chat is Martin's results for doing this. So we have quite basic tests for that pre-compile on dot net side and we did not run any benchmarks actually from inter or from any other place yet. Okay, got it. Do you think the pre-compile itself would be in a spot where like is the implementation far enough that it makes sense for you to benchmark it or are you still working through it and even if you benchmark that now it won't be a good benchmark because there's still stuff to optimize. Benchmarks are always good and we can compare probably implementations as a future right. Because we do have, we do have people who like might be not in fine teams who might be able to help with the stuff so I'll reach out after the call and check with them if they could help with at least the never mind one in parallel. So if this way, if you're all still working on the implementations you can get the benchmark set in parallel. Okay, so I'll follow up on that. And then Bruno has a comment about the pricing being more of an issue for ZK rollups and optimistic rollups. I don't think there's anyone here working on ZK rollups, correct? Okay, I can follow up offline as well and paint some ZK teams and get them to share any thoughts they have on their pricing. Anything else on the pre-compiles? Okay, then next is the DevNet. So DevNet 3 was supposed to be launched tomorrow from skimming the chat. It doesn't quite seem like we're ready. So maybe it'd be good to just get an update from the different client teams about where they're at generally and yeah, what the next steps are for them. Yeah, thank you. I was going to say Tim, I think I agree that we're not nearly ready for Wednesday. Things are coming along quite well though. So that would get the individual teams. Yeah, I can give a quick update on the prism side. So thanks Xiaowei again for fixing the SPAT test. So right now we have been testing the SPAT test as of this morning. We've gone on two to three test failures and the same side those test failures are on our end. So yes, I think we just want to fix those as soon as possible. And then after those we should be ready to begin interupt but no guarantee that it works right out of the gate. I kind of imagine some trial and error. But yeah, that's where we are today. Any other teams from prison? So for White House, we still have things to iron out with sync. I think otherwise we're there with an implementation. So we've been working a lot more towards trying to join the interoper repo and making solid progress but now we sort of need an execution client to test with. And then also like Puan mentioned earlier, if we can make the spec use 12 or sorry, like the main net slots per epoch 32, that'd be helpful. And I think part of the reason it was set low was for the tests in that repo to run faster. And I'd like to have us run the tests. So I was wondering, is it possible that we can just like start the test net from a later epoch so we don't have to like wait a ton of epochs to run the tests. Sorry, what was the question? So, if I understand the suggestion is to use the main net 32. Right, so why don't we use and assume the minimal preset is used on like existing test nets or something. Well, so the issue with the minimal spec is right now it has incorrect fields per BLS elements I think. Like, that value is hard coded in the CKZG library. So, yeah, I don't think that KZG library works with the minimal spec at present. But if we update that in the spec. At that point I think we could change the tests in the interoper repo to use minimal. Sean did you say update the hard coded value in the spec. Yeah, I think the field is like it's in the minimal preset the fields per BLS element. It's lower in minimal versus main main net. And that value is hard coded to the main net value in the CKZG library. So fields per block, right. Yeah, yeah, I think so. It's like 4096. Yeah. Yeah, this is something just to say that I want to talk to Ramana today so that we make it compile time configurable he was amenable to it last time we talked so I think we can now move on with that. Okay, so if that's the case then like whenever that's configurable, we can transition the interoper repo tests to use the minimal aspect so I'd be reasonable. So I don't know much about these presets but why not just change the minimal one to use the 4096 value. We do have that right or no we were. We didn't want to change that right so I shall I. Hi. Hello so so the minimal preset and config are for the specters to provide the minimal test vectors with less low cost for the client teams to run in the CI daily or weekly. So we also provide the many test vectors at the same time. So, but for the spec side, since we are using a pie CC the Python implementation and our. Our KZG implementation are actually from the spake lines so I that is incredibly slow in compared to the C implementation so for the spake itself. I think minimal config in minimal preset with like build elements for black with like four or eight is needed for the specs but for the definite you can free to generate to use any numbers in the configurations or in the preset if I understand correctly. Okay, so we don't want to change the minimal preset because it'll be too burdensome on certain testing, but sounds like there's not another existing preset. Yeah, I think you can define your the definite only preset. If I understand correctly that we might have used it in the previous short term definite before. John is that an issue just to define a definite specific with 4096. So we we actually sort of have that right now because we were trying to get the test passing. So that's not too big an issue. Yeah, I guess, if we update the slots for epoch at least to match like the minimal spec. So if we just update that to eight. So we'll just fill the elements high until it's configurable. That seems pretty reasonable. So, the definite has the minimal configuration do I understand that correctly. So what's there now is already a sort of custom configuration where it's main net apart from slots per epoch is three. But main net is 4096 right so you wouldn't have a problem CK is a junior. But the question would be if we just wanted to switch to a preset that exists, it would be minimal. And that one wouldn't work. Yeah. And why would it be minimal maybe you already said that but I didn't catch it. It's to have this lots per epoch be lowered so that the tests run reasonably quickly, because we have to fork through multiple epochs. Okay, got it. Okay. Yeah, see and if I understand, are you able to run with the interop now with the current slots per epoch of three. No, we got like, we're able to run up until the withdrawals work. And then at that point, we don't really have anything to test against so then it breaks. But we have like, like pre like up to Bellatrix working. And the issue is this three slots per epoch. No, we have that working. It would be preferable not to have that though, because we had to like have a, like one of the assumptions we make is, for example, like his slots per historical route, being divisible by slots for epoch, which that doesn't work when slots per epoch is three. So we have an AI to change that to 32 so let's let's assume that's going to happen what what else to do. If it's changed to 32, then we can just use the main net spec and that's great. And, and, and Mofi you, you, you did most of the interop config stuff as I understand it is other than the tests maybe running slower is there a concern with that you may have lost Mofi. Mofi says it should be fine in the chat. Complains we can add more machines okay so tentatively let's set it to 32. I'll try to make that change today. Awesome. Thank you, Roberto. Yeah, that's it from my house we're sort of just like trudging through interop and then trying to finish up sync. Awesome. Kind of the same issues of another man. In other mind development we, we want to, to have someone with timestamp based for us for Shanghai and for withdrawals and for the IP for eight or four to test with so we are a bit blocked by that. Just to like form the structure of the campus with our notes we made a pull request, but we still don't know what genesis will be relevant for the next three with timestamp based books and we are continue our testing with available tests. We hope to join the network right after. Or a few days after some other execution client and consensus client like prison and get will provide us will provide the community with time based, timestamp based books. Those are stages. All right, I'm not sure we have anyone working on switching to time based forks right now at least in a guest, prism, or or Terence are you guys doing time based presets and prism and based books. So from the sales perspective, it doesn't really matter. It's the changes will mostly come from the outside. So what we have been doing is that we have been testing local interrupt and there's a local interrupt with withdraw and there's also withdraw test net. And then they, and then I believe that is based on the timestamp for him mechanism. And then we have been using the like client branch. So, so like client that has a branch for that. So let me post a branch here. So maybe we can, you guys can look at how that branch is done and because because that is the branch we're using for testing withdraw based on timestamp. So does it include a pre for foreign with rules both. No, it doesn't include 444 so someone has to basically build on top of that. It's just a special case. Nevermind special case we did not plan to have block number based forks for these two cases, some kind of sharding forks. We'll get some other teams implementations with them based books. If I understand right time same case forks are the preferred going forward fork mechanism so it makes sense to switch to that if it's not too much trouble. Yeah, we're going to have to do that anyways. Because withdrawals have to be timestamped. And because the, the, the, the 444 fork, even if it went live, you know, effectively at the same time it's still activates after, and after the merge so I think it there's no world where like, we do withdrawals with timestamps and then we come back to blocks for 444. So let's queue that up as an action item we get. Yeah, stay based forks and get within interop. We have a volunteer for that if not all I'll try and get to it. I have a, I have commit somewhere that it's just like one, one commit that you need to pull in. It's, it should be really easy. Oh, fantastic. Nice. So people of starting with a merge network. As of now. Yeah, hey lion so we just merged it, we just merged the feature, like last week so yes, as of today we are capable. Can we update the interop repo for the IP for it to start at Capella. Or Ben at the same time. Yeah, we can do that. Awesome. Thank you guys. So, and to begin, so yeah, we want the interop repo to start post merge basically. Yes. Okay, okay. And so I guess I can add those two changes to the devnet three specs so to clarify we're using timestamps for fork, and then would we want devnet three to also start at Capella basically. I'm not a post. Also, also not a policy. Okay, good shot. I'm just going to say, I'm also not opposed to anyone. Are there any drawbacks to doing that other than just perhaps not exercising more of the fork logic. I guess it doesn't matter really if we're going to go out post withdrawals anyway. Right we could start at Bellatrix as well right like you could start at the merge go through the power fork and then does anyone have a preference either side. I think if we're going to do not like a phase zero start a couple of start would be better just we don't have to deal with the like terminal told the total difficulty logic and whatnot. I mean we can we can also do Bellatrix epochs zero TTT zero and then Kapella and AP for it for the same epoch. That's a good question. Yeah I don't know maybe this requires a bit more thought. But so for sure we want to do timestamps because that's what we're doing everywhere else anyways. And then, whether we start at Bellatrix or Kapella tbd, but clearly not starting from case zero. Does that make sense. Yep. Yeah. Okay. Okay, I'll add those two notes to the definite three spec up to the cough. Okay. Anything else on the definite we sort of went through some client updates and technical issues but any other client want to share updates or any other issue. Yeah, this is Andrew from Ethereum jazz I'll just just next I think I noted in the last call was able to and that we were, you know, we're going to be very, very late to devnet three, if at all at this point. I have a mostly working local fork of the interoperate but now so I can at least get our client up and running as I've been able to get partially working with Lloyd stars having a lot of trouble getting it to interact with prism correctly for some reasons there I'm going to start working on that again today. But I do have I think most of the spec implemented at this point on the EL side so have the the new engine APIs and we have a reason this the CKZG library and it at least works in local testing not not about interop testing yet. But that's my goal for this week is to try and get interop to actually kind of cross the sharding block. So hopefully at some point maybe in the next week or two we'll be able to actually start really running the tests in interop repo and then possibly join devnet three at some point before Christmas or whatever the current devnet is at that point. I'm very nice so yes. What's what's your. Yeah, we can add you to the table and that the three thing is also you can track the progress there. Yeah, I think realistically given all the issues, you know, it better been popping up, you know, and next week is probably may even be optimistic but I think we should try and shoot for end of next week as a new deadline. Okay, let the question so prism and get are able to run the fully IP of for it for for logic today. Um, we both fee and coin based one mostly on it I believe they have like, they, so we don't have that to, but it that's not the latest back so I wouldn't say we're fully functional as of today based on definite three, there's still more work. Um, I got a prison repo in interop. It should be abiding mostly by the new spec. I think we still are waiting for kev to submit the zero blobs tweak. But that's under review I imagine that's going to happen. You know probably within a few days. So my point is during early alter days. So the suit on from the cool. Essentially started definite really quickly and really fast on whatever was the latest spec and the definite was only take a and running with four nodes, but it was incredibly productive to have that test that as a target to testing this logic quickly. When you are developing. If it is available, it will be extremely helpful if you guys can quickly spin, as long as that's somewhat working. A tiny desk net that we developers can use that will be very appreciated. And that could be done in parallel to that. If he's ready for. And I guess the prism thing, the biggest concern is that it does not re based on Capella as for the chat so there needs to be some work done on the prism branch as well. So let's say what's the quickest ELCL combo we think we can get. We re based on Capella using timestamp forks and kind of running so other teams can, can try to interrupt with. Yeah, so it sounds like the issue right now is a CL client that is re based on can bella. Yeah. So we have this and like we might be able to get it working. If we have like a local test that where we won't miss blocks because for us the big meat missing piece is sync. It's like we have sync parts implemented but it could get messy if we're missing box. So if you have a test network or dev net where lighthouse, you know there's only lighthouse validators perhaps the start then yeah like maybe like a couple lighthouse nodes with just lighthouse validators my work. Okay, local to each other. Yeah. Could we use kurtosis on this one because all it does is as long as it is just a beacon node a validator and an EL, then you can set up a local test and put that quite easily. Yeah, I mean I could build a document with what we got. Yeah, I think that work. But I can give you the I'm the file to learn that then. Cool. So you understand, you cannot sync or you don't do not expose for others to sync. We think we'll panic if we get a blocks by range request right now for sign blocks and blobs. And then we'll sync because like we're able, like we have gossip implemented. So like we'll just import blocks as we see them, but it's if we miss a block and have to request a block. I don't think that'll work for us. So yeah, got it and blocks by route. Yeah, I don't think we think no because we're trying to figure out how to handle the edge cases you pointed out where like, what do you request pre and post fork, as well as before and after the prune boundary. So I don't. Yeah, blocks by route I don't think we serve either. Okay, so I guess. Let's, it seems like either lighthouse or prism are probably the two first that are going to be ready on the CL side that's trying to get that and get running. And on the dev on the interoperable hopefully you know it doesn't lead to lighthouse missing blocks and having to sync. Roberto you were saying before, and of next week would be like an aggressive but nice target for the dev net. Yeah. The people think, basically may say before our core devs. Next week is realistic that's about 10 days. Yeah, it's really up to the CL devs I think at this point, I think death is going to be ready. You know, I think I'll be able to implement the ai's that have come up around making the epic changes in the time based fork. But the CL stuff's a little outside my control. I don't have a good handle on that. Got it. The loadstuff should be ready, logic wise and it's released. But we have never attempted to run like the full the full thing. So get is ready today. Get will be ready soon I think yeah. A few more things to be done on the execution API and working on that right now.  Got it so on on your repo on in this repo now the CI passes for prison and get. So if that is the case, what is the difference between those tests and actually what we want to do in the definite. We've done the execution API work for withdrawals. Those tests may no longer pass. I'm not sure. Moffi might be able to better comment on that. So I think that's where we start getting interoperability issues with between the interoperable prism and where the get this right now. Yeah, yeah, and then Moffi is saying that they did CL. So yes, it's passing now with an older version of our geth repo. We're not doing the entire expectations of the capillary base. That will break very soon. And we'll need that updated CL at that point. Okay, so let's try I mean yeah I tried that then anyways we'll have the call next week. A couple days before to review where we're at. I agree. Even if it's not all the clients, you know, even if we get like three or four out of six running, the other ones can come after and having the whole set before the holidays would be great. So we at least know this is this is working on a definite. Yeah, I think it's possible. I'll push it along best I can. Sounds good. Okay, last big thing that I wanted to make sure we cover is this big block test. I know Georgia's here still on the call. I think yeah, yes. Yeah, you want to give us an update there. Yeah, quick context so last week's progress was that we ran it on with 128 kilobyte transactions and it looked like nothing happened. So I wanted to do it with<PHONE_NUMBER>. I'm connected the flashboots builder, but right now there's a cryptic RPC bug that I'm waiting to get support on. So that's the blocker but the code is written and once I'm unblocked on the, on the flashboots. So if you want to actually build it, it should be good might even be today. So I'll let people know, I think in the chat. Awesome. And Perry, I think you were saying that you've added. You've added support or are going to add support for me boost on it all if the def DevOps validators. I've already done that. So now something like 30 ish percent of colleague should be running my boost and we are getting a couple of consequent proposed blocks that are all coming from a boost. Nice. Very cool. Any questions. Maybe let's coordinate after this call on like maybe giving me like the RPC for the EF builder and the address so that we don't have a builder we're just relying on the flashboots one. Okay. But but the relay is plugged on the builder so we have more hashrate for inclusion of multiple blocks in a row. Yeah, right. Yeah, so we're at about a third now. Yeah, cool. No problem. Then that's even easier. Thank you. Anything else on that. Okay. And then the last thing, Henry, I think just had to leave, but he started working on a Nimbus prototype. So we should start seeing more on the Nimbus side in the next couple weeks. There's already an initial PR open. Yeah, anything else anyone wanted to cover. Okay, so it's the first time we've ended these not over time. So I guess that's a good side. Yeah, thanks everyone for joining and talk to you all on this y'all call in a few days. Thanks guys. Thanks everyone. Bye. Bye. Thanks.


strong in that first inning and then kind of unraveled a little bit what was the difference later in the game Yeah, definitely, you know, I came out in the in the first inning. I felt really good really strong then the following innings I lost command of my fastball and He's using too many pitches, you know, so I got myself in trouble there Why do you think you haven't been able to maintain the consistency where you've had command issues as the game progresses? I don't know, I've always tried to work with the strikers, the strikers, the rector, I really don't know what's going on It's something that hasn't happened to me, I've always been in smaller leagues The control is what has helped me a lot and I came here, I don't know, I kept working, I kept working and trying to be more economical with the strikers On the other hand, my control and my command has been what has taken me to here, you know, to the big leagues So that's something that I want to work on, you know, keep working on because I know it's there but just got to focus and find, do the whatever adjustments I need to make so that I have the opportunity to be consistent out there


The HP system has been all the talk for the last week or so since its introduction into stepping. It has already been changed multiple times in the week that it's been live as many users were complaining that it was costing them more per run than what they were actually even earning. The team responded by eliminating the cost of GMT in order to restore, which should honestly probably be done in more parts of the game, and lowering the comfort gem requirements for restoration. So although I'm not with this new tax on the players, it is something that it looks like we will have to deal with going forward. So today we're going to take a look at exactly how the HP system works and analyze the data from the community to see how we can optimize to reduce the cost of the HP system. Let's dive right into the video. What's up guys, my name is Jay and welcome to Bitcoin Daily. First thing we're going to do today is take a look at the HP system in the white paper to really understand how it works. So HP stands for health points and freshly minted sneakers start off with 100% HP. The health points of a sneaker decays as users spend energy and use the sneakers to move. HP of the sneaker does not decay if users only use a sneaker to provide energy. So what affects the HP decay rate on your sneakers? So the first thing is going to be comfort value. The higher the comfort value on your sneakers, the slower the decay. Sneaker quality, the higher the sneaker quality, the slower the HP reduction. Now that's an interesting one and I'll go back to that one. And the final one is the amount of the energy used is proportional to the HP reduction. One thing to note is that after a sneaker is minted, HP will not decay for the first 48 hours. Next let's take a look at HP restoration. So HP needs to be restored via burning GST and comfort gems. If left unattended, following penalties apply. If the HP is under 100%, the sneaker cannot be listed on the marketplace or transferred away. HP below 20%, sneaker cannot be counted to provide energy in that realm. And if the HP gets to zero, then the sneaker cannot be used for moving. To restore HP, the user needs to burn GST and comfort gems. The higher the sneaker quality, the higher the cost. So now if you want to go more into detail, Steppen wrote an open letter of the recent changes mainly focused about the health points. I'm only going to highlight a few parts from the article, specifically what are the benefits of health points. They said that the HP bar is an additional sink for GST and gems. The benefits that come along with these are comfort gems are given an additional layer of value. Comfort stat is no longer completely obsolete for anything other than GMT earning. So those two are definitely true. However, this third reason I do not agree with. More GST is burnt thus regulating GST supply and reducing cell pressure. I completely disagree with that statement because although it is true that you're burning some GST, 99% of users will actually be trading their GST or selling their GST for Solana so that then they can buy those at level one or level two gems to burn the gems. This increases cell pressure on GST. It does not reduce it. And if your argument is that people will bring outside money back into the realms to buy gems, you're only kidding yourself. So level one gems are currently selling for 0.048 Solana. Level two gems are currently selling for about half a Solana. Right now for my sneaker to be back at 100% health points, it will cost me about three to four level one gems. So for three level one gems, that would be about 107 GST. For four level one gems, it will be about 143 GST. For a level two comfort gem, it will be about 336 GST. So you can easily see how that begins to add up in cell pressure in order to buy these gems. Even though I would be burning 30 to 40 GST to restore, I'd be exchanging about 150 to 300 GST selling it for Solana in order to buy those comfort gems. Which at the end of the day of course puts more cell pressure on GST. And the last thing that GST needs right now is more cell pressure. The last benefit they posted is that it prevents massive frequent buying and selling of sneakers. Which I don't think that's really a benefit. I don't think it really matters. So they ended this article by saying that they will always aim to listen, monitor, and incorporate the community's feedback. And one of the things that they did was roll out a free HP restoration at level 25. Now my issue with this vote first of all is only 33,000 people that voted on it. Which probably accounts to less than 1% of the stepping community. Number two, the core players probably are between one to three sneakers. And they probably have common sneakers. Three, if you guys have watched any of my breakdown videos on what level is the optimal level for you to be at with common sneakers, it is at level nine or level 19. Upgrading beyond level 19 just doesn't make sense. It is not efficient. It is not optimal. So pretty much the core community of players will not be getting this free upgrade at level 25 because it already costs so much to get up to level 25. Right now it is literally cheaper to just buy yourself a common level 28 sneaker than it is to level up from level 19 up to level 25. And it's probably also cheaper to buy a level 28 uncommon sneaker versus leveling up a sneaker from below level 10 all the way up to level 28. So things are just not adding up there for me. Either way, the results are loud and clear. HP is not going anywhere and it's something that we will have to live with. So let's break down some of the community data to see how's the best way to go about using comfort and comfort gems to reduce your costs for HP restoration. Alright, so for this community data, you guys already know and if you don't, then you need to get into the know and start following crit underscore stepping on Twitter. He basically collects all the data from the community and puts it in these incredible, incredible charts. So much props to him and thank you for taking the time to do this. So if we look at his tweet here, he said that the quality of sneaker does not seem to influence HP decay, which is strange because in the white paper and in the official thread, it clearly states that sneaker quality, the higher the sneaker quality, the slower the HP reduction. Now he also did say that we lack data and only have 170 entries. So we cannot be 100% certain of this as of yet. If we look at this chart here, you'll see that the light gray is common, green is uncommon, rare and epic. The left side is a HP decay in percentage per energy and the bottom is how much comfort your sneaker has. So what we can see here that it's not really dependent on the sneaker quality, but it's more just dependent on your comfort stack. So even if you have a common sneaker, you can get to the same levels as the uncommon by just adding to your comfort attribute points. You could also get to the same level as the rares and epics by again adding to your attribute points. You can see that the rares start right here and that's because the lowest a rare sneaker could have as an attribute is 28. And at 28, you're only losing 0.1% per energy as you work your way to 40 comfort. You see that it drops down lower, not really a big change between 40 to 50 or 60 really. It looks like that next range is probably between 80 to 100. And it looks like at 120 is when you're only losing 0.05% decay per energy on your sneaker. Now you can also see that the uncommon sneaker at these same levels is only losing the same amount. And as it continues going further and further, you see that the decay between the uncommon and the rare sneaker are exactly the same pretty much on each level, meaning that the quality of the sneaker does not matter. The only thing that does matter is your comfort stats. So they should probably delete this from the white paper. Again, we don't have enough entries yet to know this is for 100% facts, then they should definitely change the language in the white paper. So it looks like if you have a common or uncommon sneaker, you want to probably get to at least that 0.1% range. Because to get there, you really only need between 20 to 30 points in your comfort slot. There's really not another big drop off unless you add like another 30 points, maybe at 60. Looks like in the 70s is really that halfway mark between 0.1% and 0.05. And then of course, beyond 120 is where you get to 0.05. So I would say 20 to 30 is probably the sweet spot of where you want to get your sneaker. If you have a gem slot for comfort gems, then you don't even need to add anything with attribute points. You can just throw in a level two or level three comfort gem in there and you should be good to go. If you don't have a comfort slot and you still have points that you either haven't used or you're still upgrading your sneaker and I would throw in that 20 to 30 points in it. Someone else in the community, Fanboy Master also made a small thread on this. He currently has a level 18 common runner with only 2.2 comfort and he uses it about three times a week with nine energy. Every time he goes out for a run, he loses about 2.46% HP. So if we run the numbers, that means that he's losing about 0.27% per energy right now. And if we look back at Chris' charts, you can see that that pretty much falls in line with that low level of comfort here. You can see that it can go anywhere between 0.2 all the way up to 0.35% per energy. He says at this rate, he'll be able to use his sneaker 32 times before it gets to 20%. Remember that below 20%, the sneaker will no longer provide energy in that realm. When it gets to this level, he's going to need 266 GST plus 27 level 1 comfort gem. Remember, we already know that a level 1 comfort gem costs about 0.048 Solana. So if he has to buy 27 level 1 gems, that would cost him about 2 Solana. It's going to cost you about 1,512 GST. So although he'll be burning 266 GST, he'll be selling 1,512 GST. Now he said that he'll try to balance this out by opening up mystery boxes and hoping to get lucky in a mix of buying some level 1 or level 2 comfort gems to fully restore when the time comes. Also, he's going to take his comfort stat to 30. That way he'll be on epic quality base stat range. And of course, if we take a look at that 30, remember, that's pretty much that sweet spot that we spoke about. So do you like the new HP system or do you hate the new HP system? Let me know in the comments below. Also, if you have any ideas on how to possibly improve the HP system, also let me know in the comments. Whoever has the best idea, I will send 100 GST to, aka I'll buy you a cup of coffee. I'll see you guys on the next one. As always, peace and love.


The law of detachment uses conditional statements, if then statements, to be able to make conclusions or to be clear that you cannot make a conclusion. We're starting with the conditional statement, if a person is an engineer, then they can do geometry. Now we have Susan is an engineer, therefore we can conclude that Susan can do geometry. That is a logical conclusion. We had P, the P portion of the statement was true, therefore we can conclude that Q is also true. In the next situation, we have that Chris can do geometry. Can we conclude that Chris is an engineer? Okay, what we have in this case for Chris can do geometry is we have Q. Do we know anything about if Q then something? No we don't. We only know if P, if a person is an engineer, then they can do geometry. We don't know about if a person can do geometry. So we cannot conclude that Chris is an engineer. Another law of logic is the law of syllogism. This is a series of if P then Q, if Q then R, if R then S, and we can make conclusions about those things as long as we line them up properly. So I have if a person is an engineer, then they can do geometry. That is my first set of if P then Q. If a person can do geometry, then they know a lot about triangles. If a person knows a lot about triangles, then their favorite number is obviously 180. How can I combine these to make a new conclusion? Because I know that P is true, then I know that Q is true. And so I can say for sure that I can say that I know Q is true, therefore I know that R is true. So if a person is an engineer, then they know a lot about triangles. Because I know that R is true, I can say that S is true. So I line up my logic statements and because I know P is true, therefore Q is true, therefore R is true, therefore S is true, I can sort of skip all of that stuff, skip the middle parts and say if I know P is true, then I can say that S is true. Therefore I can make the statement that if a person is an engineer, then their favorite number is 180.


The amazing benefits of dark chocolate.  Why? Well, dark chocolate is loaded with polyphenols, which as you know are incredibly important for good health. And the polyphenols in chocolate may be one of the most perfect combination delivery devices of getting the right polyphenols into you in a delicious package that's ever been discovered. In fact, numerous studies have proven the beneficial health effects of consuming dark chocolate. Take the study on the Kuna Indians, for example. The Kuna Indians are an isolated tribe who live on the Caribbean coast of Panama. Hypertension is incredibly uncommon in this group, even among the elderly. But when Kuna people migrate to urban environments and change their diet, their rates of high blood pressure soared. Now, notably, their traditional intake of cacao, cocoa, as the beverage was very high. They actually drank more than five cups daily of either homegrown cacao or Colombian cocoa powder, which is rich in polyphenols that are called flavonols. Now, interestingly enough, the flavonol urinary levels of the island dwelling Kuna were significantly higher and their rates of death from serious illness were significantly lower than their counterparts the same tribe living in urban centers. There's a very famous nitric oxide study. Now, nitric oxide is becoming famous as one of the main compounds that dilates our blood vessels. And I have a saying in my office that the more flexible your blood vessels are, the longer you live and the longer you live well.  And nitric oxide is one of the most important compounds for getting that flexibility in blood vessels. In fact, nitric oxide, the discoverer of nitric oxide was awarded the Nobel Prize for Medicine for this discovery. Now, there's one 15-day study in 16 people showed that consuming 30 grams of dark chocolate daily led to significant increases in nitric oxide levels in the blood. Wow! Dark chocolate, more nitric oxide, more flexibility. No wonder you're going to live longer and better. But there's an additional benefit of chocolate that actually may play into this. It's going to have a positive effect on emotions. Now, many women identify this with this immediately. There's actually been a study on the feelings of calmness in a randomized double-blind study. 72 healthy middle-aged participants received a dark chocolate drink mix containing either 500 milligrams, 250 milligrams, or 0 milligrams of polyphenols in the dark chocolate drink. And I'll tell you how you can get rid of polyphenols in chocolate in just a second. So participants consume their assigned treatment once daily for 30 days. So, once again, they all had a chocolate drink, but the level of polyphenols was varied. Researchers didn't know what was in each one. The participants didn't know what was each one, and they all tasted the same. Participants were asked to record their level of calmness on both day one and at day 30. After 30 days, the group that drank the 500 milligram mix reported significantly increased feelings of calmness and contentedness compared to the other two groups. So there was a sweet spot of 500 milligrams of polyphenols that imparted the feeling of calmness. Again, nobody knew which one they were getting. And this again confirms, particularly ladies, that feeling that eating chocolate improves your mood. So, dilate your blood vessels, improves your mood. Fantastic. There's also now been very good studies published by of all people, the Mars Corporation, looking at benefits to brain health and memory. And once again, in placebo-controlled trials, people who got the flavonols and polyphenols in chocolate had improved memory and better BDNF levels, which actually stimulate neuron growth. And in fact, they make a supplement based on these findings. So, chocolate is so good for so many things, including heart health, brain health, and emotional health. So, why not? Okay, so let's go get some chocolate, but not so fast. The first thing you want to look for is the level of the polyphenols. Now, the best judge, polyphenols in general, are bitter. And as you know, one of my favorite sayings is, more bitter, more better. And so, the bitterness in chocolate is a fairly decent way of deciding what the polyphenol content is in the chocolate. At least 72% cacao is where to start. Now, I actually urge you to look for 85%, 90% as a really good starting point. So, if you're eating a small amount of dark chocolate every night, there may be some sugar, but that chocolate, the cacao, is going to outweigh any of the sugar benefits, any of the sugar harm, that is. But use it in moderation. Now, there's numerous bars, more and more, that are coming out with sweeteners such as Stevia, such as Allelos. And believe it or not, there's a Stevia sweetened chocolate at Costco that are called Bake Believe. And Lily's, a company from Santa Barbara, where I live, makes multiple different bars of Stevia sweetened chocolate that I personally love, that I have in my refrigerator right now. There's a very interesting new company called Gatsby's that I have no relationship with that is using Allelos as their sweetener for chocolate. And as you know, Allelos may be the best sweetener on the market right now. It's a true sugar that actually feeds gut bacteria. So it's a win-win. So look for these alternatives. And again, more bitter, more better is the rule. Also, check out my sorghum crisp chocolate bars. They're loaded with prebiotics. They taste great, and they're a great way to satisfy a sweet tooth without wrecking your health. Now, many people seek out chocolate, but they look for hot chocolate or cocoa powder without carefully reading the label. If you see the word dutched chocolate or alkali chocolate, that's code word that all the polyphenols have been bonded and inaccessible to you. The reason it's called dutching is that the dutch were the first people to make this really, really bitter flavor in chocolate disappear by dutching it, by adding alkali to the chocolate. That got rid of the bitterness, and everybody thought that was the greatest thing that ever happened, except that getting rid of that bitterness bound all the polyphenols. So just be careful. If you see dutched chocolate or alkaline chocolate, put it down. Make sure to read the label. Now, one of the better things to do with dark chocolate is to consume it with olive oil. Yeah, I know, sounds crazy, but a study performed at the University of Pisa in Italy found that eating both olive oil and chocolate together actually helped improve people's cardiovascular health markers. This combo was actually far more effective than any other polyphenol stacks. So the polyphenols in olive oil and the polyphenols in dark chocolate was the one to punch that gave the best cardiovascular benefit. I know it sounds weird, but here's how I like to do it. So I like to make a mocha milkshake using unsweetened coconut milk, coffee, olive oil, vanilla extract, and heart defense. My chocolate drink powder.  Make sure to check out the next one here. It's wildly different from high fat to low fat, but what all of these programs have is they have very limited animal protein in their diet.


The Equitable Life Assurance Society presents This Is Your FBI This Is Your FBI The official broadcast from the files of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Presented transcribed as a public service by the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States and the Equitable Society's representative in your community Do you ever feel that planning for the future is a hard, uphill task because you don't make a lot of money? Do you wonder how you'll ever own your own home or send your children through college or provide for a pleasant life of retirement? Then here's good news Lots of families with average incomes solve these problems if they know the answers and the man who really does know the answers is your friendly, helpful Equitable Society agent representing one of the greatest institutions in the world In about 14 minutes I'd like to tell you more about Equitable Society men and how they can help you enjoy the many advantages of membership in the Equitable Society Tonight, the subject of our FBI file Extortion, its title The Bridal Shake Down Why intelligent people become criminals will probably always be a mystery After all, even average intelligence is all that's required to teach a person that crime does not pay In the past 25 years tremendous strides have been made in learning what makes us humans click but there are still many unknown factors so it is difficult to explain why a person with a good IQ an individual with many qualities and abilities which should enable him to earn an honest living would rather risk prison than settle down and go to work We must never for a minute underestimate the brain power of many criminals who match their wits against the forces of law and order The sad truth is that they are often very intelligent and industrious Tonight's FBI file is a case in point Tonight's file opens in a gymnasium and health club located in the business district of a large eastern city In a small room in this establishment a muscular rubber is giving a young man a massage Too heavy, Mr. Spencer?  Stay the truth I don't know where I was That's a new thing with me now I had so many drinks and grew up blank Hey, that's bad I know That's all behind me, Herb I'm on the wagon as of today Oh, do you know, Hum? When are you getting married, Mr. Spencer? Two weeks That's well I kind of like it myself Well, you will live Okay, thanks You just relax there while Mr. Spencer Right If you should fall asleep, when would you like me to call you? Come on Hey, get easy Okay, Herb Who's that? Hello, Mr. Spencer Who are you? My name is Ken, Joe Ken What do you want? I'd like to talk to you What about? It's a personal matter Mind if I sit down? I'm trying to get a little sleep What's all this about? My friend Lucy's Who's Lucy? You're kidding? I asked you a question I suppose you don't remember last night No, I don't Last night, you and Lucy got married What? You heard me Is this a rib of some kind? You think so? Take a look at this Marriage license Is that your signature? You and Lucy spent your honeymoon there I don't know anyone named Lucy You just met her last night It was a real quick romance Look, I'm already engaged I'm getting married in two weeks Lucy, you're already married I don't believe you Okay, suppose you check up on this marriage license Take it, it's a photo stack copy Lucy has the original You can also check the register of the central hotel Then you'll hear from me later No, thanks, mother I can't tell you what a pleasure it is For us to be having breakfast together You mean novelty, don't you? Well, yes Anyway, I am grateful Mother Did you hear me come home night before last? Night before last? Why, Wayne, you didn't come home at all I thought you just needed the club Of course, that's right Why do you ask? Nothing important Oh goodness, I almost forgot This special delivery letter came for you early this morning Here you are, dear Thank you, mother I didn't know if it were important enough to awaken you Something wrong? Excuse me, mother, I'll see you later Several hours later in the local FBI field office Wayne Spencer's mother is being greeted by special agent Jim Taylor Won't you sit down, Mrs. Spencer? Thank you, Mr. Taylor Now, what can I do for you? Well, this is a matter concerning my son Yes He doesn't know I've come here to see you, but I just had to Now, what is it, Mrs. Spencer? Wayne received a special delivery letter this morning And when he read it, I could see that it upset him very much I tried to question him about it But he left the breakfast table and walked out Now go on, please Well, in his excitement, he left the letter behind And I did something I've never done before in my life I read that letter And? It was sent anonymously It demanded that he pay $50,000 to straighten out some matter It also said that if he didn't pay His impending marriage would be ruined And he would suffer bodily harm I see Or did you bring that letter with you, Mrs. Spencer? Oh, yes, yes, I have it right here Here you are Thank you Does anyone else handle this other than you and your son? Oh, no Fine, I want to have it analyzed, fingerprints Mr. Taylor, as I told you My son doesn't know I've come here Mrs. Spencer, you did the right thing in coming This is an extortion letter Now, whether the basis for the threat is real or imagined The sender has broken the law and it's our job to find him I'd like to go and talk to your son at once Joe Huh? Were you sleeping? Yeah, yeah, I guess Maybe I was I don't know how you do it What do you mean? Sleep at a time like this What are you talking about? Waiting for that guy Spencer to call I swear to you, all afternoon I've been so nervous I've broken two fingernails Lucy, I spent two months laying this thing out Nothing can go wrong He'll really think he married me License is legitimate, ain't it? Yeah, but you married me with that license, not him I've worked ten hours a day practicing his signature He'll think he signed it, same thing with a hotel register You honestly think he drew a blank that night?  That's right Did you give him our number in the letter?  Well, with us being already married And then getting married again the other night Does that make us bigamous? No, just me Why? Because you've got two heads Oh, that's cute Gee, do you think...  Hello, put him on Right Hello, Mr. Spencer Are you health club? Yeah, that's right I received your letter this morning Well? I'd like to see you Well, come around here What's your address? It's Lake Apartments, 82 Maple What time? 6 o'clock Very well See you later, Mr. Spencer Well, honey What I tell you Go ahead, Mr. Taylor After you, please Very well Let me take your hat Surely There you are Is that you, ma'am? Yes, Wayne That's your son? Yes Come this way, please Thanks I'm here in the living room, mother Wayne, I've brought home company Really? Darling, I want you to meet Mr. Taylor This is my son, Wayne How do you do, Mr. Spencer? Wayne, Mr. Taylor is a special agent of the FBI Oh? I... I asked him to come here because... Well, I... Wayne, I read the letter you received this morning I had to I saw how it upset you Oh, mother You don't have to make a supreme court case of it There's nothing too terrible about reading a letter Is Spencer of any idea who sent it to? Yes, I have Really? Well, Frank Blakely, you know that boy I play squash with But... Why should he... Oh, mother, the whole thing was a practical joke What? How do you know?  I do apologize, Mr. Taylor Oh, that isn't necessary I'm delighted that it turned out the way it has There are a lot of discussion cases Haven't this happy an ending? Do you handle many of them, do you? Well, enough of them to have worked up a pretty strong loathing For the people who send threatening letters How many do you catch? I don't want to sound immodest But we bet pretty close to a thousand Wow Mr. Spencer, I guess I'd better be running along Joe, that must be him Yeah, it could be Who is it? Wayne Spencer Oh, okay Hi, Mr. Spencer Hello Come on in Very well Wayne Oh, Wayne, baby That's Lucy, your wife Oh Honey, don't you remember me? No Well, that certainly isn't very... Without Lucy, Mr. Spencer Came here to talk business Let's give him a chance Okay Well, first, did you check On the marriage license in the hotel? Yes And? Well, it could be my signature When I've been drinking Mr. Spencer, I've told you Look, we're wasting time Now, I'll concede that I've probably got drunk And married this girl And you've apparently set a price For her calling the marriage off Let's get right onto that It's a pleasure to do business with you How much? You got my letter, 50,000 That's out of the question What's your idea of a payoff? I have it right here with me $2,000 $2,000?  An old friend of the family Then I'd advise you to take this $2,000 Don't you do it, Joe Don't worry, sweetheart I won't Very well You leave only one course of action What's that? I'm going to the FBI Huh? On what ground? That was an extortion letter I received today They'd be very happy to prosecute you for sending it Is that a fact? Yes Now, will you take the $2,000? No Then I'm going to turn you in You're not going anyplace Joe, I'm glad you hid him What a piker We will return in just a moment To tonight's exciting case From the official files of your FBI If you worry about the future If you have financial problems Then I'd like to have you listen To the experience of Mr. Earl Young The way he solves his problems May be very helpful to you Will you tell us, Mr. Young Why you decided to become a member Of the Equitable Life Assurance Society Of the United States? Well, Mr. Keating I don't make big money And I've got a little boy And a little girl to raise Now, I know my social security Won't be enough to keep them well fed And well housed And well clothed If something may happen to me But I didn't know how much They would need each week Or how to provide it for them If I did know Then you talked about a chart That would help figure it out Well, that's our famous Equitable fact-finding chart For fathers and mothers It's free to everyone Your equitable representative Will be glad to give you one Then what happened, Mr. Young? Well, I called our equitable man And he brought over the chart When I knew the facts It was as easy as ABC to face them My equitable man Showed me how to plan To keep my family in comfort Until my youngest child Finished high school That's the Equitable Family Security Plan That's right And believe me That was a lucky day When I phoned my equitable man And a swell guy too Friendly, helpful And he knows the answers That's a perfect description Of a typical equitable representative He's helpful, friendly And he knows the answers He's a specialist Ready and able To help you solve your problems At all times And without obligation He'll help you to take The uncertainty out of the future And bring you peace of mind So right now Consult your local telephone directory For the name of your local Equitable representative Or write to the Equitable Society Care of this station That's E-Q-U-I-T-A-B-L-E The Equitable Life Assurance Society Of the United States And I'm back to tonight's FBI file The Bridal Shakedown Fear is the extortionist stock in trade The dictionary defines fear As the painful emotion Caused by a sense of impending danger Or evil The key word here is impending The extortioner often manages to Create a sense of danger Where none actually exists Take Wayne for instance There was really no need for him To have gone to Joe's apartment There he made his biggest mistake And impending danger Became real danger Or as Special Agent Taylor said The extortion letter itself Constituted the real crime If ever you should be threatened Really illegally Your FBI urges you to recognize this point To refuse to be bullied To call upon your law enforcement officials And to remember also An extortioner rarely stops After his first successful attempt Tonight's file continues in Special Agent Taylor's apartment It is after midnight He is just preparing for bed as Hello Hello, sir Oh yes, Mrs. Spencer I'm terribly sorry to disturb you That's quite all right I called your office And they gave me your home number What's on your mind? I'm calling about Wayne Yes? I'm here right after you did this afternoon He was presumably going to Drop off at the health club for me He had a dinner date with Mildred His fiancee After that he was taking Both of us to the concert But he hasn't kept any of these appointments And you haven't heard from him? No, Wayne had gone to see him This afternoon right after he left the house He asked for $2,000 He said he needed it desperately I see Well, did he get the money? Yes Mrs. Spencer, I'll come right over to your house Yes Come right in the living room, Mr. Taylor Thank you Oh, I am grateful to you for coming over That's my job, Mrs. Spencer Not to cater to a nervous woman's fears Well, I'm sorry to say It looks like your fears are justified About the extortion note? Yes, your son's getting that $2,000 From your lawyer Certainly makes it appear you wanted it for a payoff Oh, but he told us this afternoon That the note was a practical joke That was just to alleviate our suspicion, I imagine Where could he be now? That's the important thing We have no idea where he's gone Tell me, did he mention anything to your lawyer As to where he might be going? No, he just said he was going to his club The health club Have you called him? Oh, yes What did they tell you? He called earlier this afternoon What for? To see if he'd gotten any messages And had he? Oh, I didn't ask Well, that could be very important, Mrs. Spencer Why?  I'll phone them at once Joe, he's coming too Yeah Should I get him some ice or something? What for? That lump on his head Leave him alone You may grow a few more before we're done On my head It hurts, huh?   There's nothing to discuss Yes, there is We had a board of directors meeting We decided to cut the price To 2,000? No, no, 25,000 Not interested We decided something else in that meeting Really? Yeah, strategy How to make you pay the 25,000 That's not possible Oh, not even if we call the newspapers And gave them the story on your marriage to Lucy I wouldn't listen to a cheap hoodlum like you Well, you're forgetting, I got proof It doesn't take too much time I've got an even better way That's to call your girlfriend, Milton I'm not listening to any of these shakedowns You know something, Joe I bet he don't think you'd have nerve enough to call her Well, you think I should show him? Yeah Give me that address book Sure Here That's my address book Yeah, part of can you pass that Lucy, the numbers Quincy, 7 2932 2932 Yeah, get her on the phone Okay Wait Huh? Never mind Call her, baby Hello There's never anybody on that switchboard Hello, this is Mrs. Kent Lucy Mrs. Kent Do you still think you should make that call?  Yes, sir But like I told you The Kent's left here five minutes ago They had bags with them Like they were going away Oh, I'd still like to see the apartment, please Sure thing This should do it here Kent, say where they were going No, sir You know if they took a cab? Well, they didn't say There aren't many this hour of the morning Go ahead, sir Thanks This furniture belongs to the house They rented the place this way I see What's that? I don't know Sounds like it's coming from behind this door over here That's a closet There's someone in there He's locked in I've got a key that should fit that Good This guy in here Could be the one you're looking for Could be Mr. Spencer There Hey, bound and gagged Yeah, untie the gag We'll get the ropes Sure thing Is he the missing guy? Yep There you go, mister Thank you I'll have your legs untied in a minute, Spencer Thanks, Mr. Taylor Whoa, where are they Kent? They're gone Where, too? I was hoping you'd have the answer to that one No, that doesn't Here, I'll give you a hint Ah, thanks Well, Spencer, your practical joke Didn't turn out so well, did it? I'm sorry Whatever your problem was You were a fool to attempt to handle it yourself I know that now Tommy, did you pay these people any money? They forcibly took 2,000 from me Get away money, huh? Yeah, I imagine so I guess I can kiss a goodbye I don't imagine they'll be easy to find I guess something that might help What is it? Let me get to the phone, please Joe Joe, what are you doing? Puttin' a bag to the trunk apartment What for?   It's Mr. Spencer Hello there, Joe Huh? How did you get here? Uh, Mr. Taylor I'll let you explain that I found a bill from this garage in your apartment, Joe Huh? I called here just before you arrived The attendant was kind enough to stall you Until we could get here Who are you? I'm a special agent of the FBI Joe Kent and his wife Lucy Were both tried and convicted for extortion They were sentenced to long terms In a federal penitentiary And so the careers of two more Shakedown artists were ended by your FBI But ended only after the potential victim Had placed himself in great jeopardy By attempting to deal with the criminals himself You wouldn't ask a plumber to pull a tooth for you Nor would you ask a dentist to fix a leaky pipe Yet you will, you do Ask yourself to perform a job Of dealing with criminals When there is at your disposal Every type of law enforcement agency you need Remember this And do your part in curbing the crime wave When you receive any kind of threat Notify your local police Or your state law enforcement officers Or your FBI Crime is their business Believe it or not, nearly everybody No matter how much money he makes Believes he would be happier if he made more money So the answer is not how much you make But what you do with what you have That means careful planning Now if you are not an expert Why not consult a man who can help you plan Consult your neighbor, your local Equitable society representative Security is his business, your security He'll be glad to discuss your problems Without any obligation to you Simply consult your local telephone directory For the name of your local representative Of the Equitable Life Assurance Society Of the United States Next week we will dramatize another case From the files of the Federal Bureau of Investigation Its subject, armed robbery Its title, the 16 millimeter stick up The incidents used in tonight's Equitable Life Assurance Society's broadcast are adapted from the files Of the Federal Bureau of Investigation However, all names used are fictitious And any similarity thereof To the names of places or persons Living or dead is accidental Tonight the music was composed And conducted by Frederick Steiner Your narrator was William Woodson Special Agent Taylor was played by Stacey Harris Others in the cast were James Dobson Stan Farrar and Morrison Vicki Roth and Paul Richards This is your FBI is a Jerry Divine production This is Larry Keating speaking For the Equitable Life Assurance Society Of the United States and the Equitable Society's representative in your community And inviting you to tune in again Next week at the same time When the Equitable Life Assurance Society Will bring you another thrilling transcribe story From the files of the Federal Bureau of Investigation The 16 millimeter stick up on This is your FBI