Just want to wait for some more time? No, no, we have more in life. Just a minute. Yes. Directive principles, origin, need, and relationship with fundamental rights is one of the concepts which not only touches the heart of every Indian, but as a lawyer and as a judge, one definitely wants to have deeper insights into it as to what was the intent of the directive principles to be incorporated into the constitution here as to what could be the vis-a-vis director of principles with fundamental rights, what is the relationship. This all we will be understanding in this short video for around one hour, wherein Mr. Amit Pai, who has already done a session with us, who is a Supreme Court lawyer, would make us things better to understand. We are also proud that this session is in tie up with the recruitment associates from Karnataka. And tomorrow we all know that tomorrow is a big day. Before that, we thought tomorrow we will all shift our focus towards that. And let's understand the things in the better perspective of directive principles as to how it originated, what was the need of it, what the constitutional makers actually deliberated upon, and what is the nice balancement between the two of the directive principles and fundamental rights. I will not take much time and I will request Mr. Amit to take over and make us understand the things in a better perspective. Thank you very much, sir. How I intend to have the session is I intend to divide how the directive principles came into being briefly discuss what happened in the Constituent Assembly, what really is the philosophy behind the directive principles, and how the courts interpreted it, how governments used it, and how directive principles, the sentiments behind the directive principles of state policy are probably found in our chapter on fundamental rights. So let me just understand, at any point of time, if anybody has any queries, if they want to make a comment, it's most welcome because it's always better to have more people talk than have one-way traffic. Let's understand what is the philosophy behind the directive principles of state policy that we have in our Constitution. Directive principles of state policy, really, are based on what we think of or what we understand to be a welfare state, where the economic opportunity of the citizenry is equal, where the citizens are given a fillip in terms of how their lives are to be governed. As the name suggests, directive principles of state policy, these are principles on which the state was expected to make laws, was expected to have its policies, was expected to have the manner in which the state is supposed to function. And at the very beginning of the directive principle, the state policy, you have Article 38, which lays down categorically that this is really to secure a social order and for the promotion of the welfare of the people at large. This is Article 38. Let's understand, where do we get the directive principles of state policy? We've all learned in political science class that Jeremy Bentham had proposed the theory of utilitarianism, which is the greatest happiness of the greatest number of people. Perhaps that is what is the basis for these directive principles of state policy. As we go along, I will go through the different directive principles to understand what they are. Greatest happiness of the greatest number of people. Now, the initial part of the directive principles are very utopian. However, the very beginning of the directive principles is where they started Article 36 and Article 37 say, look, these directive principles are not enforceable by law. This is opposed to Part 3 of the Constitution.  But Part 4, Article 37 says, are principles that the government will take into account while making the laws. But one cannot go to the court and say, look, directive principles, articles, so and so, is not being enforced. In other words, they are not enforceable, right? So let us understand how directive principle, as we go along, we'll see the relationship between Part 3 and Part 4, because that's a substantive part of the constitutional litigation that India has seen, particularly in the 70s. But at this point, suffice it to say that the basic difference between Part 3 and Part 4 is that Part 3 are rights, which you can go to the court for enforcement. And Part 4 are principles on the basis of which state is supposed to legislate. They are not enforceable. However, Sirvai suggests that one of the greatest architects of our Constitution, Sir B. N. Rao, who was not just a special advisor to the Constituent Assembly, but was also the draftsman of the 1935 Act. The 1935 Act really provided the skeletal framework for our Constitution, as it is seen today, which was drafted by the drafting committee really headed by the great Babasai Bombayatkar. Now, he had proposed certain amendments to Article 37 and other articles to make Part 4 also enforceable. That was what he had proposed. However, he was turned down. He was turned down. And one of the biggest criticisms of Part 4 of the Constitution, is the Directive Principles, is that they are toothless. In response to this criticism, in the Constituent Assembly, Babasai Bombayatkar said as follows. He said, and I quote, if it is said that the Directive Principles have no legal force behind them, I am prepared to admit it. But I am not prepared to admit that they have no sort of binding force at all. Nor am I prepared to concede that they are useless because they have no binding force. So the point Babasai Bombayatkar further elucidates is that these principles are, in a sense, a instruction manual or an instrument of instructions for the government of the day, for the executive, for parliament, in terms of how they must legislate. What is it they must take into account while they are legislating? And he said that wherever there is a grant of power in general terms of peace, order, and good government, it is necessary that it should be accompanied by instruments regulating its exercise. Equating this to the Directive Principles, he would say, whoever came into power would be held accountable. He was not free to do what he wanted once you got power. He would be held accountable by the electorate as to whether these particular principles, which are elucidated in the Directive Principles, had been followed or not followed. Now what are the Directive Principles of straight policy? Let's just look at the Directive Principles as they are. Article 39 talks of equal economic opportunity. Saying that everybody must get equal economic opportunity, adequate means of livelihood. Men and women must be paid equal work for equal pay. The economic system must not operate in a manner in which the wealth is concentrated in some hands. It also said that it further went to equal justice and legal aid. Article 39A subsequently amended article. But it's important because you need free legal aid for those people who cannot go to court. Because going to court is not a very cheap affair. It is an expensive affair. 40, I think somebody has a question. OK, somebody there. All right. I thought there was a comment. Anyway, article 40 talks of strengthening of the Panchayat system. 41 talks of the right to work to education and public assistance, to make sure that there is no unemployment, to make sure that the old and the sickly people, the disabled people, are taken care of by the state. 42 talks of humane conditions for workers, as well as maternity benefits. 43 talks of a living wage for workers. 44, 44, I mean, it's much in the debate nowadays. The talks of the government wanting to have or the parliament or the state will endeavor to have a uniform civil code. 46 talks of educational and economic interests of the scheduled caste and the scheduled tribes and other weaker sections of the society, which would be OPCs, religious minorities, et cetera. So as to ensure that they are not to protect them from social injustice in all forms and exploitation. 47, again, is very interesting. It talks of raising the levels of nutrition and health. And it ends with saying that the state shall endeavor to make sure that there is a prohibition of consumption of liquor, intoxicating drinks, and drugs which are injurious to health. 48 talks of animal husbandry and agriculture. Mind you, when we got freedom, when independence was obtained by the struggle, and when the Constitution came into being, a principal part of the country was in agrarian. It was agrarian. And 48 has a very interesting thing. It also says that the state shall endeavor to take steps to prevent cow slaughter. 48, 49 talks of how the state will make sure that the monuments, et cetera, are protected, monuments, historical monuments, and places of national importance. And 50, where the state will ensure that the judiciary and the executive are separated from each other. 51, international peace and security will be ensured. What is interesting, if you see part 3, every single article, right from 39 to 51, says the state shall endeavor. It's quite different from saying the state shall. Now, just suppose this to say part 3, where it says article 12, 13, particularly, 13 says that the state shall not act in a manner in which your fundamental rights are taken away. So please understand the difference in approach in these two parts of the Constitution. The first part, the part 3, puts an obligation on the state to ensure that there is no legislative or executive action which will take away the fundamental rights between article 14 and then 31. We'll come to 31, because that's very relevant at this point of time. The first time the question of whether directive principles of state policy versus fundamental rights, which one was to prevail, came up in the case of Champagam Durai Rajan, where then Justice Esar Das subsequently became Chief Justice. Categorically held that fundamental rights were obviously sacrosanct and at an elevated position in the Constitution of the country. And they could not be equated. They could not be equated with part 4 of the Constitution. And obviously, part 4 could not be interpreted in a way to give them predominance over part 3. Now this holds relevance as we come along in our history. What is interesting is if you see the directive principles of state policy which we discussed, article 39 and 40 and 44 uniform civil code, 47 which talks of prohibition, 48 which revisions of council order, some of them are extremely Gandhian in their way. Please remember, this is a time when Madhava Gandhi had just been killed. Today is the 21st of January. 20th of January was the failed attempt on Gandhi's life. 30th of January was the successful in 1948. So some and most of the people in the Constituent Assembly were had political allegiance to Bapu as they called him. And these principles being made a part of the Constitution have only one reason, because Gandhi was a very vehement sort of proposer of ban against council order, prohibition. Gujarat still sees prohibition because of Gandhi. The Panchayat system, because he always talked of devolution of power and non-centralization, these basic principles. Now let's just look at how part 3 of the Constitution and part 4 of the Constitution are related. How their relation, their conflict, et cetera, came along. The first, according to me, was the very first amendment to the Constitution, mind you, to the government of India in 1950, 51, 52, headed by Pandit Nehru. One of the chief projects was land reforms. This can directly be linked to economic redistribution of wealth. The socialist mindset, land reforms. And we all know that when land reforms were struck down by the Patna High Court in Kameshwar, the government of the day came up with a very unique sort of savings clause, which was Article 31A and 31B. 31B said that anything that is put in the ninth schedule of the Constitution, anything that was put in the ninth schedule of the Constitution cannot be challenged on the grounds of Articles 14, 19, and 31. The ninth schedule, I mean, this is very unique because fundamental rights are supposed to be protected and laws cannot violate fundamental rights. However, if a law violates a fundamental right and is put in the ninth schedule, it is saved from that fundamental right. So this is something that is actually strange and unique. But perhaps it was the political, constitutional, and social need of the day. Today, 75 years hence for me, it's very easy to make a comment. Now, why I bring about, bring to your notice land reforms is why they are directly not connected to Part 3, Part 4 of the Constitution. They are definitely related to Article 39 of the Constitution, which we just read a while ago. Article 39 primarily wanted a situation by which there was an economic redistribution of wealth. I'm just going to read for your benefit one part of Article 39 where the state will endeavor in directing its policy to secure that men and women have ownership and control of material resources of the community so as to be distributed to best serve the common good. Mind you, when we started, we discussed the utilitarian theory of Bentham, which had greatest happiness of the greatest number. You can directly relate this to that. And the second thing, which the directive principle, this is 39B and 39C. Along our discussion, this will assume relevance and therefore I'm reading it right now. 39C said, again, the state shall endeavor to direct its policy to secure operation of an economic system that does not result in concentration of wealth and means of production to the common detriment. Now, how is this related to land reforms? How is this related to evolution of zamindari? At that point of time, it was the zamindars who held large tracts of land and the tiller would till and then pay the zamindar and would be impoverished. So land, the ownership of land by imposing ceilings, redistribution, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. There was also a great social movement headed by Vinoba Bhave and actively participated by Jatrakash Narayan, who was called Bhutan, where people donated their lands for redistribution, not taken over forcefully by the state. These two principles, 39B and C, sought to ensure that the land which was held by a few was redistributed to the many. And the tiller was the owner of the land now. Not that the tiller was somebody else and the owner was the zamindar. That was what the object of land reforms was. We all know that land reforms came under challenge. And it was upheld. The 9th schedule came under challenge in Shankari Prasad and was upheld. And it went on like that. What is interesting here is that, which we've already discussed, the enforcement mechanism. You had no way of asking a writ to the government to enforce a certain directive principle of state policy. However, if a law was passed, which in furtherance of a directive principle of state policy would take away a fundamental right, that law could be challenged on the ground that such a law is taking away the fundamental right. 25th amendment, this now the 25th amendment comes immediately after the landmark judgment of Golaknath. As you people all know, Golaknath was the first time the Supreme Court said, 11 judges headed by Chief Justice Subba Rao, the Supreme Court said that fundamental rights could not be taken away by a constitutional amendment. Of course, the source there, they sourced the power to amend the constitution as being a legislative power which is found in the residuary entry of the first list, which of course was corrected later on. In reaction to this, in the 24th amendment was passed by which the power to amend the constitution being a constituent power was specifically given in Article 368. And it was categorically said that whatever is done under Article 368 could not be amiable to a challenge under Article 3 of the constitution. Now, this is where the founding sort of steps to Keshan and Bharti are laid. But remember that 25th amendment in 1971, which is very, very important. And we must understand it from the political scenario in which certain things happen. So I'm just going to take a step back from the directive principles of state policy for a couple of minutes so that we understand what was the political scenario in which the 25th amendment was passed. In 1964, Pandit Nehru died. Lal Bahadur Shastriji became the prime minister of India. He gave a big trust to agrarian reforms. Jai Javan, Jai Kisan was the Nara at that point of time as we all know.  Otherwise, constitutional law cannot be understood in a vacuum because the constitution, according to me, is a political document. So 1965, we had the war in 1966, January 11. Sadly, Lal Bahadur Shastri passed away. There was a struggle for who was to be prime minister. Murarji Desai contested against Indira Gandhi. And Indira Gandhi was supported by the old guard and Mrs. Gandhi won. In 1966, she became the prime minister of India. Murarji Bhai became her deputy. Of course, there was a tussle between Murarji Desai and Mrs. Gandhi through and through. The old guard in the Congress made Mrs. Gandhi prime minister because they thought that she would be under their control. But as we see later on, that was not to be. By 1967, 67, 68, Mrs. Gandhi started coming into her own being. In 1968, 69, in 1967, Zakir Hussain, the president was elected in 1969. He passed away. The Congress party wanted the party, that's the party the heads wanted, the Sri Neelam Sanjeeva Reddy to be president. Mrs. Gandhi wanted the incumbent vice president who was V.Giri to be president. He, however, relented to what the party elders said. The party's decision, which was to propose, which was to officially sponsor Sanjeeva Reddy's candidate. Giri, on the other hand, contested as an independent. And this gave rise to what was interestingly known as the conscience vote. When Mrs. Gandhi says, my conscience asked me to vote for Giri and there was no whip at that point of time, which could be enforced. Remember because now the whip comes with the tent schedule, et cetera. Sorry. At that point of time, V.Giri won by a small margin because those who supported Mrs. Gandhi all voted for V.Giri. And the Congress old guard was left with egg on its face. As a consequence, they expelled Mrs. Gandhi in 1969. And in 1969, she went ahead with, in 1969, she went ahead with the support of the communists to proceed and have to continue her government. Came 1970, between 1969 and 1970, in number of policies, pro-poor policies were projected by the government, which were, one of them was bank nationalization. 14 banks were overnight nationalized. Princes were devolved off their privy purses. And in 1970, when Mrs. Gandhi went for elections, when the opposition jointly had Indira Hatao as their Nara, Mrs. Gandhi went with the Nara of Garibi Hatao. And from that comes, again, Garibi Hatao is really found in part four of the Constitution. So therefore, in 1971, with the 25th Amendment, came Article 31 C. Article 31 C, the reason why I've given you this background is because this was the fundamental political push for the 25th Amendment. The 25th Amendment principally said that a law which declares that it is in furtherance of articles 39B and 39C, we read 39B and 39C a while back, could not be challenged for falling foul off articles 14, 19, and 31, 31 at that point of time, right to property, right? To borrow what Palkiwala said in a lecture in Madras in 1971, 72, all that parliament had to do, and parliament at that point of time made a clear-cut majority like we had today. Not much of a check. There's a clear-cut majority. There's not much of a check and balance on parliament's power. All that parliament had to do was say that this law is in furtherance of Article 39B and C. And then Part 3 could not be, 14, 19, 31, could not be used as a ground to invalidate such a law. Now, that's very strange, and I'll tell you why. Suppose there is an act which takes away, these are obviously for economic purposes. I mean, the basic fundamental principle, Article 39B and C, are for economic purposes, right? For economic opportunity and to bring people on an equal scale and equal distribution of wealth, et cetera. Now, I'll tell you the problem which Palkiwala, he doesn't specify it, but let's explore it. Suppose there is an act which takes away your fundamental right to free speech or your fundamental right to assemble or move from place to place in the country. These are all protected by Article 19. And such an act starts with that this is in furtherance of the directive principles specified in the Articles 39A and 39B and C. You could not challenge them saying that my free speech is taken away or my right to assemble is taken away. Please remember, no fundamental right in India is absolute. Every fundamental right is restricted by reasonable restrictions. Article 191, which is your right to free freedom of speech and expression, is restricted by Article 192. And there are eight heads. For example, peace, public order is one of them. Friendly relations with neighboring states, sovereignty, defamation, contempt of court, these are restrictions of your free speech, which can be there. Article 31C, now, by this device, made Article 39B and C as a restriction on your Article 14, 19, and 31. How could that be? This is more so in the background when Part 3 at this point of time was at an elevated status where you could go to court for the enforcement of your Part 3. You cannot go for an enforcement of Part 4. This article made Part 4, at least two articles of Part 4, 39B and C. They made Article 39B and C a super restriction on the right in Articles 14, 19, and 31. And another article which came into being by the 26th Amendment, which was added, Kerala Act was added in the 9th Schedule. Collectively, the 24th, 25th, and the 26th Amendment came to be challenged in the great case of Keswananda Bharati. Keswananda Bharati completed 50 years last year. And a great number of people these days, amongst them the vice president, a former chief justice, keep raising questions on the correctness of Keswananda Bharati. I will go chronologically as to why Keswananda Bharati was correct and why the dangers of Keswananda Bharati not being there. We'll just go to that as we discuss. At this stage, let's understand that Keswananda Bharati saw the challenge of 24, 25th, and 26th Amendment. And one of the principal questions was what is the relationship between the directive principles and the fundamental rights? Could government restrict your fundamental rights for furtherance of directive principles of state policy? Could that be done? Because remember, Golaknath said fundamental rights cannot be taken away at all. The 24th Amendment undies Golaknath. And now we are in Keswananda Bharati where they say Golaknath is not correct perhaps. All judges say except for two, three. But what is of significance? But what is of significance now is what is it that the judges? Because remember, Keswananda Bharati was on a wafer-thin majority. Six judges said that there were implied limitations. Six judges, six other judges said that there were no implied limitations. And one judge said there were no implied limitations. But there was a basic structure, Justice Khanna. So seven is to six. The basic structure came into being. The majority headed by Chief Justice Sikri simply said that 31C had a very, very sweeping wide connotation and language. And as a consequence, it granted immunity to laws and restricted judicial review, where the court could not examine whether these rights, because mind you, Baya Sahib Ambedkar had said at the time of the Constitution that judicial review is one of the most important parts of the Constitution. The most important article he said was Article 32. Of course, it is 32 and 226 for the reason that I'm sorry, somebody is saying something. No. The reason why he said Article 32 and 226 are so important is because that was the way you would be able to realize your fundamental rights. So Chief Justice, coming back to what Chief Justice Sikri said, Chief Justice Sikri said that the wide sweeping language of Article 31C, which restricted judicial review from being exercised in respect of Articles 14, 19, and 31, was so wild that any article under 19, 14, 19, and 31, merely by saying that these were in furtherance of 39B and C could not be exercised. This was concurred to by Khanna. This was said in the similar way by others. Ray, on the other hand, said that look, the power that was conferred on parliament was subject to safeguards. And these are not my words. These are words of Chief Justice Ray. He said that it was the good sense of the legislature. These are the safeguards. And the innate good sense of the people, comma, the community, sorry, the ascent of the president, and the room for judicial review to determine the relevant mixes. Friends with great respect to Justice Ray, this would be obligating Article 37 of the Constitution as opposed to Article 13 of the Constitution, obligating both those articles, giving Part 4 a status higher than Part 3, would be directly in contravention with what the text of the Constitution and what the Constitution makers envisaged. I read to you what Babasaheb Ambedkar said. Abbedkar categorically said that they have no legal force. But they are instruments of instructions for governments. Obviously, Babasaheb Ambedkar did not mean that these instruments of instructions are to be exercised in such a manner that that very soul of the Constitution, Article 32 or 226, judicial review, was to be taken away. And that mechanism by which Part 3 of the Constitution was to see enforcement be reduced to a nullity. If what the minority view in Keshan and Bharati is to be said is to be correct, then, well, every government could come. The dark clouds that Palki Wala had said in his Madras speech in 1971, 72. It's a speech which is available on YouTube. Everybody could look it up. It is a speech where Palki Wala speaks with the great see Rajagopalachari, where he said this. And he talks of privy purses, et cetera. Those dark clouds of rights being taken away merely by stating that these are in furtherance of directive principles would actually come true. What came out of Keshan and Bharati is well known. It is the great, basic structure doctrine. Today, as I mentioned, some people in very high places keep questioning the basic structure doctrine. But taking you straight away to the reason why the basic structure doctrine is important is the 39th Amendment, which was enacted immediately upon the imposition of the emergency. It was enacted in a matter of four days because in five days, I'm sorry, because on the sixth day, the matter was listed before the Supreme Court. The matter being the prime minister's appeal, where her disqualification by the Ilabad High Court was being heard. As we all know, the Ilabad High Court set aside the election of the prime minister on some grounds of the prime minister, Indira Gandhi's elections at that point of time. On the grounds of corrupt practices because she had used some government servant, Yashwal Kapoor, and some government machinery for her election. That was challenged before the Supreme Court. That order was passed on the 12th of June. It was then challenged before the Supreme Court. And then the single judge, vacation judge, Krishna Ayer, heard it on the 24th, did not grant a stay. He granted only a conditional stay to the prime minister, which severely undermined her authority. So on that very day, on the night of that very day, on the 25th of June, the country saw, perhaps the most abused constitutional action, which was the imposition of the internal emergency. And with emergency came the entire opposition being picked up and put in jail or being debarred from parliament, and therefore being debarred from parliament. And when no opposition in parliament, barely one or two few people here and there, the 39th amendment was passed in four days. On the 6th of August, 7th of August, 8th of August, and 9th of August, the matter was listed on 11th of August. So on the 6th of August, the Lok Sabha passed the 39th amendment, 7th the Rajya Sabha, 8th, one-half of the states rectified it, and 9th the president signed it, 10th it was gestated, 11th when the matter was called out to the attorney general, waived a paper saying that the prime minister's election is saved, because what did the 39th amendment do? The 39th amendment said, you cannot challenge the prime minister's election, khatam. Prime minister and speaker, but that was only to add somebody else other than the prime minister. Such an amendment was applied retrospectively. Obviously, a matter that an election that was challenged and set aside by the court would, if the 39th amendment stood, be revived in terms of the 39th amendment. By God's good grace, we had the basic structure doctrine which became the fundamental basis for striking down the parts of the 39th amendment. That's why the basic structure of the constitution is very important. There were some draconian amendments in the infamous 42nd. Of course, we all know that there was an attempt during the, on the fourth day, three days after this judgment of where the prime minister's election case was decided. Of course, the prime minister's election was upheld. The Galawad High Court was set aside, but the 39th amendment fell, or at least a part of the 39th amendment fell. Three days thereafter, an attempt was made to review Kishan Bharti, which was aborted in the middle. And then what happened was, in 1976, the infamous 42nd amendment came into being. The 42nd amendment came from the then, I'm not sure whether he was defense minister at the point of time, but he was earlier a defense minister. On the basis of a report by a gentleman known as Swarant Singh, Swarant Singh committee report, which gave huge, huge, made huge changes to the constitution. I'm not going to go into all the changes that the constitution made, but they make a very worthy reading because you will realize with almost every amendment that the 42nd amendment made, you will realize a substantive amendment that, thank God, we had a basic structure, basic structure doctrine. So that article 31c, which we remember from the Kudol Kishan Bharti days, the 21, the 25th amendment in 1971, was now further amended in the 42nd amendment. Now what 31c said was that instead of only 39 b and c, all articles in part four, the entire part four, would enable a law to be immune from a part three challenge, a 1419, 1931 challenge, took away judicial review, made article 32 and 226 in a sense, in a sense, took away the teeth. It made it a paper parchment guarantee. Now what was the need to do this? Obviously it was a political agenda at that point of time to say that the directive principles of state policy would be the policies which we will proceed with and you could not challenge them for violation of part three rights. Of course, a year thereafter, fortunately for us, the emergency got over after the emergency. Much of what article 42nd amendment had done was undone by the 44th amendment. Some part of it was left. One of the things that the 44th amendment did was it deleted in entirety the right to property as a fundamental right and moved it to a constitutional right in now which exists as 300a. Why this is important? I mean, I've always found it to be a mystery because a government headed by Muradji Bhai and with other free market entities, I found it a mystery why the right to property was demoted to a constitutional right from a part three right. But be that as it may. This part 42nd amendment made another amendment in section 55 of the 42nd amendment. These two amendments came to be challenged in the case of Minerva Mills, which is one of the most important cases in the series of cases on constitutional amendments right from Sankari Prasad to the NJSE case. In Minerva Mills, the question again was can you take away judicial review on 14, 19, and 31? The age-old question, remember, the age-old question of which is more, which is above the other, which is more relevant. Chief Justice Chandrachud, who wrote for the majority, said, and I'm quoting here and then I will just summarize the remaining part of what he said. I'm just quoting. He said, to destroy the guarantees given by part three in order to purportedly achieve the goals in part four is plainly to subvert the Constitution by destroying its basic structure. Remember now, this is Chandrachud was just Chief Justice Chandrachud was one of the dissenting judges in Keswanand Bharti, followed basic structure in Indira Gandhi, sat on the bench in that aborted review. And this Minerva Mills comes in 1980 or 1979, 1980 when he is now Chief Justice of India and the country has seen seven years of political developments. So therefore, even Chief Justice Chandrachud now understands what is the importance of the basic structure doctrine. And Chief Justice Chandrachud, this is Yashwan Chandrachud, I must say, Chief Justice Yashwan Chandrachud says that the guarantees in part three cannot be subjugated to the principles that the state is supposed to follow in part four of the Constitution. He said further that particle 31C undoubtedly had an effect of abrogating articles 14 and 19. Mind you, by now 31 is deleted when it comes to those laws which parliament would enact in furtherance of part four of the Constitution. Justice Bhagwati took a slightly different view. Overall, Justice Bhagwati is in agreement. But on this aspect, and I'm going to read out what Justice Bhagwati says for the reason that perhaps it's interesting, he said that it was not correct to say that the fundamental rights alone are based on human rights. He said that the directive principles fell into some or the other category of human rights. Because now I'm coming to the end of my discussion, I am quoting Bhagwati because then I'll show you how fundamental rights also get us to what Bhagwati says. He says further that socioeconomic rights embodied in the directive principles are as much a part of human rights as the fundamental rights. The only distinguishing feature between fundamental rights and directive principles is that the former are enforceable in the court of law, and the latter are not. Remember the words of Bawa Saheb Ambedkar, who had at that point of said, yes, they don't have a legal force behind them. But they are instruments of instructions. Taking what Bawa Saheb Ambedkar had said and taking what Justice Bhagwati had said in his differentiating opinion, where he further said, but merely because directive principles are non-justiciable, he does not follow that they are subservient or inferior to fundamental rights. I respectfully disagree with what Justice Bhagwati has said. Of course, they are subservient to fundamental rights. But what Justice Bhagwati says that look, part four also takes care of basic human rights of the many in terms of economic policies. This is something that has actually been catered to in part three of the Constitution and is the running theme of the Constitution. I say this because even prior to the amendment, the even prior to the amendment, the preamble itself spoke of justice, social, economic, and political. Liberty of expression, belief, faith, and opportunity, liberty of worship, sorry. Equality of status and of opportunity. Please remember, socioeconomic justice, political justice, equality of opportunity and status are all there in that very document which was finalized at the end, which is really the identity of the Constitution, the preamble. Further, these socioeconomic rights, et cetera, are embodied in Article 14, for example, where all persons where the state shall not deny to any person equality before the law or equal protection of the laws within the territory. The state prohibited discrimination on grounds of race, caste, religion, economics, et cetera. The state made sure that equal opportunity was available in terms of public employment and touchability, which was a great gain of our country, perhaps in unfortunately it is still exercised in some parts of the country, was abolished. Titles were abolished. These are all enforceable rights and obviously the basic philosophy behind these particular fundamental rights, which I just sort of read out, and the preamble are reflected in Part 4 of the Constitution. Therefore Justice Bhavati was not wrong in saying that Part 4 takes care of a larger human, larger section of society, human rights, and of course they are, but they are also reflected in Part 3 of the Constitution. With that, I would like to conclude my discussion. If anybody has any questions, comments, it would be, I would be more than happy to engage. At least we don't have on the chat, I'm just checking it out on the YouTube. Yes. One Ravi Pandey probably knows you, he says that it's great to catch up. He's writing from Bihar that it's great to catch up with you Amit. And one Subed says it's a very informative lecture. One has come. Does nevertheless in article 37 equal to not-withstanding clause? I don't think it can be equated to a not-withstanding clause. A not-withstanding clause would be then it would override, not-withstanding what is said somewhere, this was override. Nevertheless in 37 says that governance, this nevertheless is suffixed by that the governance of the state must be in furtherance of the policies between articles 39 onwards in 51. Mr. V. Sudarshan has written, can I get this video on the WhatsApp? Mr. Sudarshan, not only you, but for others, we are already live on the YouTube. You can subscribe to the channel of Beyond Law CLC. You will get all the sessions, even the previous session done by Mr. Amit. So thank you everyone, stay safe. And thank you.


I like to believe that this is a test from God. I like to believe that if you become the most Googled man in the world for saying that you have mental resilience, that God is going to make sure you don't have that degree of fame without testing you. I like to believe that God comes along and says, yes, I've allowed you to become the top G. We're going to see if you really are the top G. I believe that's how the world works. As-salamu alaikum guys. Andrew Tate has gone and taken the opportunity during his interview with Taka Kalsing to give atheism a proper roasting. He was asked about how he saw his potential imprisonment in Romania and his response was, right, surprise, I'll tell you. I like to believe that this is a test from God. I like to believe that if you become the most Googled man in the world for saying that you have mental resilience, that God is going to make sure you don't have that degree of fame without testing you. I like to believe that God comes along and says, yes, I've allowed you to become the top G. We're going to see if you really are the top G. I believe that's how the world works. It's certainly intimidating, especially knowing you're completely innocent. But I believe it's a test and I believe it's my job to pass the test for my ancestors and for people watching over me and for God. And I think I have to do the absolute best I can possibly do in the scenario and the circumstance, regardless of whether I win or lose. I still believe I'm going to win because I've seen the case file and I've seen that no laws have been broken. But even in the very unfortunate circumstance that this matrix of tax goes deep enough to throw me into a jail cell, I think I should handle it like a man. I think I should stay and finish the process and I should walk with my head held high and suffer as much as I need to suffer to stick by my convictions and know that I'm an innocent person. I refuse to break. I refuse to cry. I refuse to be depressed about it. I'm going to wake up and I'm going to smile regardless.  And two, I think that as a man, there's always going to be a degree of pain and suffering in your journey. I don't think you're ever going to become a successful man or be good at being a man without pain and suffering. And there's many times in my life where something terrible happens to me and at the time if I could change it, I would have, but retrospectively you kind of look back and go, you know what, that was formulative for me. That is what God decided I needed to become who I became. So all of the pain and all the suffering I've ever gone through in my life ended up in the end building me into the person I am and I'm proud of who I am. So if God decides I need to go back to a Romanian dungeon for however many days, then all I can do is accept it and accept his plan and accept it. It's going to make me a better person. What really got me, Cos Mark, was his answer. I was expecting him to go on a round about how it's impossible for him to be locked up and how innocent he is, but instead he just touched on it briefly and openly credited God for having a hand in the situation. He even pledged to fully resign himself to God's designs for him during and maybe after the trial.  Absolutely. I think that he was the best of planners. And like I said, if you retrospectively analyze all the times in life, you wish you could have changed things, he'd do better. And I'm going to have to accept that. When did you conclude that? I think I guess I always kind of do. I was atheistic for a while when I was younger, but as you get older you start to look at the world and understand that the thing for me was actually, I guess the scientific principle, it was Newton's law of equal and opposite force. If there is evil in the world, and I'd like to think we both agree there certainly is, there has to be an equal and opposite force, which is good. And I would like to think of that as God. Even the idea of God as a notion, even just as a concept, if that idea of God resists evil, then God is real.  So I think even just the concept of God in and of itself, if enough people believe in it and makes them do good, then God must be true, and that's the equal and opposite force to the evil of the world. And this is how I view it. So I don't see how anybody with a conscience cannot believe in God anymore. That's such a profoundly different world view from the one that we're presented with, I think. Do you think that's maybe the division in the West between people who see those forces at work and those who don't? I think the West is actually split between people who think and people who don't think at all. I think the people, there's no such thing as these two opposing world views. I think people believe there's worldview A and worldview B. I disagree with that. I think there's worldview A to good guys which are primarily people who do believe in God, do have parameters, do believe in standards, do believe in self-respect, do know how to say no, and there's worldview B which changes day by day based on what they're told, which means they have no real worldview at all.  There's nothing you can tell them that will make them wake up and go, that's wrong because they have no inherent morality. So you could literally, you could say bestiality is accepted and encouraged now.  So I think you have a camp of people who think and you have a camp of people who repeat and I don't think there's actually the opposing side to the good. I don't think function as a thinking populace at all. I think they simply repeat. This hardly shifted in my seat throughout the Arlong interview. The bloke was dead set on his path and you could hear the determination in his voice as he was ready to bear the consequences if he were unfairly convicted. But that is not what got me so excited. I tell you what really impressed me was his unwavering appreciation for the Quran. When Taka asked him how he spent his days in that Romanian jail, he spoke highly of the value the Quran brought to his life in jail. What did you do all day? It's a good question. I looked at the wall, stared at the wall, smoked cigarettes, lots of push-ups, read the Quran. You smoked cigarettes, did push-ups and read the Quran. Basically, yes. And certainly had some introspective moments, tried my best to get out, tried my best to via my small phone calls understand what's happening in the outside world, tried to make sure that the people I love and care about are taken care of because I'm the man of my family and I'm also the man of quite a large, I wouldn't say empire, but life. And there's a whole lot of people who rely on me. I reckoned these shows the metal of a resolute individual mate he ain't bowed down to the system, I tell you. It seems like he's devoted his life to ensuring that the teaching of Islam on true masculinity are preserved and embraced by all men, whether officially or unofficially, jolly good on him, I say. For me, it all tells the story of sticking to your guns mate.  Even in the face of possible backlash or negative outcomes, he's chosen to devote himself to spreading the idea of true masculinity according to Islamic teachings. These are proper reminder for all of us to stand tall and stay true to what we believe in, even if it means going against the grain or challenging the norm itself. Alright folks, it's time to wrap things up here. Before we part ways, I would like to ask you for a little favour. If you enjoyed this video or the new style, how about giving it a thumbs up, showing it with your pals and subscribing to stay tuned for more. Until we meet again ladies and gentlemen. As-salamu alaykum.


Thanks for taking it back after lunch. I know it might be ready right now. But what are you doing? Do you have a couple cook announcements? If you have lost anything, we go to Lawson Town for registration. So you can check right there. And after we wrap up everything today, we'll be getting out to the Museum of Madness on the clock tonight. There is a fantastic party. We won't miss it. You will need your badge to get in. We go to the bar. We're in your ID. We'll be checking those. And he's going to share with us something very technical. We can't wait to learn all that. Hi everyone. I'm really happy back here. I was here in 2016. That's the t-shirt. I love San Diego. I'm Carl Alexander. I basically write a lot on WordPress technical topics. You can also find me on Twitter. And this is my website. And speaking of my website, one of the common things with me is I like technical topics. I like advanced technical topics. And often people are like, oh, I didn't understand anything you said after this point, Carl. And that's okay. I have several strategies that I use that make my talks a bit different to help you with that. So first of all, there's going to be question breaks throughout the talk so that you can ask any questions in case there's something that I talked early on that you didn't capture and you have more questions about. You can ask me then instead of waiting until the end. Or you can interrupt me too. That's completely fine. And there's also going to be a companion article that is going to be posted after this talk that you can read more if you want because it's a very large topic. So you can read more about it. The slides are going to be there. So, yeah. So I wanted to start by talking about growing pains. We all want to write high-quality WordPress code. I don't think anybody here wants to wake up in the morning. It's like, I really want to write a shitty code. You know? I want to write the worst code. I want to be really embarrassed about it when I look at it at the end of the day. Nobody wants to do that. And it's hard. It's actually really hard. It requires kind of consistent alertness, constant effort on your part to be like, okay, I guess I could do this really easy, gimmicky solution now where I could, you know, take a bit more time and do it a bit better. Well, that's for you. Now imagine doing that as a group of people. Who here works long? Who here works quick? And who's here on a team of three or more? Yeah. And who here started with one and is now with a group of people? Yeah. So, I've done that. And I remember when it was just me and it was easy to keep myself in check.  You should do this better. But, you know, now there's like gimmicky and, you know, John and Jane working on it and they might not have the same standards as you. You might not agree on the same things. It gets a lot harder. And that's because you're no longer the only person pushing code.  There's code changes coming in all the time, all the times of day. So you really need a way to standardize what you're doing, what you think your standards should be, your coding standards, what your testing standards should be. And that's kind of the goal with continuous integration. You want to ensure that your code quality stays consistent. And you want to minimize going back and fixing things that Timmy did or Jane did or, you know, but the other way around, Timmy sees your code. He's like, I want to help Carl do that. Like, that's awful. And he just comes back and cleans it up. So you want to prevent those things. So what it does is it automates these different kind of workflows. So let's talk a bit more about continuous integration. So what is it? It's actually part of a larger practice called continuous deployment. Who here is familiar with the idea of a continuous deployment? Okay, quite a few of you. So this is what continuous deployment looks like.  Well, continuous integration is really the first part of that. So we'll talk about why there's like one part of the hour of solid and one of them isn't, but it's these two to four processes are what really define continuous integration. So let's talk about those processes. The first one, sorry, the first one is what we call the build process, which really for WordPress code comes down to like, okay, I'm checking out code for my repository, you know, whether you have a team, a plugin, or just an entire WordPress site. If you, this is really what defines more building for WordPress, so who here uses like SaaS or yeah, so a lot of you. So pre-compiling, pre-processed CSS, JavaScript, all this stuff needs to be minified either or converted to CSS. So that's part of your build process. Then you have testing. So for testing, testing can mean a lot of different things to people. Holy wars have been fought over testing, testing which type of testing is best, which one you should do first, but really in this context, more often than not what we do is some unit tests, but really the most basic ones that you can run because you're really trying to catch errors and things like that. It also includes things like code quality checking, complexity checking, static code analysis, and things like that. Where things can differ a bit is this idea of deploying to a staging site and running acceptance testing. So who here is similar with acceptance testing? Okay, so a few of you. So acceptance testing is this idea that your site's almost live, so you have like data in it that's meant to simulate what's on the live site, and then you want to really test to see that the website is behaving the way it should in this kind of live data. So depending on how intense you do it, you can even copy your data from the production site to the testing site consistently. But the problem is that this is where things vary a lot for people because not everybody has a staging site. Who here has a staging server? Well actually there's quite a few of you. I'm really impressed because normally there's not a lot of hosting providers that come with staging sites. Who here uses something like Antion or WP Engine for the two that really stand out for running staging sites? So these two hosting providers have staging sites. They're getting more and more common because they're useful also for just demoing stuff to clients and things like that. So a lot of the hosting providers do it. But on top of that, not everybody does acceptance testing either. So that's where the kind of, you know, where continuous integration of the implementation changes from one person to the other. Now what do you need to do continuous integration? Because continuous integration can exist on its own.  It actually relies on other processes and tools to do this job. So the biggest one, it seems, you know, I'm a bit obvious here to mention it, but you do need a version control system. So you need Git, you need SPN, or Material, or if you're in any industry, Perforce, whatever it is, you need one. Because you need your system to check out code, get it, run it, test it. And speaking of testing, you also need an automated test suite. Because if there's no tests to run, then there's a lot less to do and there's nothing to catch. There's no errors to catch and, you know, to yell at the other developer, hey, you broke something. So you need a testing suite to do that. And then this is more optional, but code quality tools, super useful. There's Code Sniffer and PHP and there's Mess Detector, that are the two big ones to use for PHP. So, why do we need continuous integration? Obviously, I mentioned it a bit at the beginning, but really it comes down to, we as developers, we want it, there's pressure from our bosses, but also to ourselves, we want to commit code often. You want to make a change, just push it and be done with it when you catch something. You don't want to have to think about it or do more. There's this idea if you work with agile, extreme programming, whichever methodology that you're using, the idea is you want to commit code often. And there's a lot of benefits to doing that, but it's not without its issues either. So, here has broken a left side of the client code. Yeah. Everybody, right? So, the faster this happens, the faster errors can get split in. You know, you've got a typo fix and actually you forgot to put a semicolon in it and you just broke everything.  So, you really don't want it to let it affect the quality of your code because, again, you make changes quickly and you might be, oh, I'm just going to make this variable A and I'll be done with this. And you want to catch these errors as well. So, that's really the idea here is you want to prevent these two specific types of issues with continuous integration. So, this is our first question break. I don't know if any of you have questions so far. That's fine. All right, so piecing it together. So, I want to talk about two types of continuous integration workflows. So, the first one I want to talk about is what I would call a local workflow. So, just doing it on your own machine. So, why would we want to do that? I mean, after all, we're talking about automation, about working as a team. Why would you want to do it on your own machine? Well, first of all, it's a lot easier to get it up and running. You can do it on your machine on your own time. You get it working and then you don't have to sign up to the service, figure out how the service works, read all the documentation, connect your repository, all these things that we're going to see in a minute. So, it lets you test these things on your own. What's really useful about it is that even if you do all this work locally, it's still useful when you decide to move on to a service. And that's because of the tool that you can use to do that. It's called Grump PHP, although I just call it Grump. And Grump is basically this tool that takes all these other tools that PHP has for static code analysis, for mess detection, for code styling. And it bundles them all together and lets you... It checks all your code whenever you commit. So, it's also the only tool to do... There's no other tool like it in the PHP ecosystem.  So, if you have a PHP unit, it'll run your unit tests. It'll run your code styling checks. It'll run everything. You can even tell it to check your commit messages. It'll yell at you if you do...  You can really... It's very, very, very flexible. And it's all done through...


Hello, my name is Ann Payalletti. I teach at Clearview Regional High School in South Jersey, right outside of Philadelphia. This is my fourth year at Park City Math Institute and the teacher leadership program and my first year on staff in the program. I wanna talk to you about the conflict that PCMI stirs deep within my teacher's soul and share it with you with what I'm doing to address it. The solution is quite simple. A new math elective for high schoolers. It's gonna be great and you're invited to join us. Hear me out. At PCMI, we get to experience mathematics in a way that is totally different than what my students get to experience. We get to play, explore and create mathematics here and we don't do this alone. We do this together as friends. My students don't get to do that. They don't get to play or explore. To do math well is to be fast and procedurally efficient. We are also on a really tight calendar with a state test at the end of the year. There is no wiggle room in the curriculum for play. So here it is, the new math research course. Finally, high school students will get to explore, question, conjecture, fail and try again. Souls will be shaken up and not just from frustration but from seeing the beauty revealed in mathematics. During the fall, we will explore a variety of topics, encryption and decoding, modular arithmetic. We will play with ratios of consecutive Binochi numbers and let them lead us to the golden ratio. Our minds will explore higher dimensions and see how naturally they flow from the three dimensions we usually see. Topology, combinatorics, graph theory. How about music, James? The possibilities are endless. This will be the fun part. Then during the spring semester, students will deep dive into a topic of their choice. This will be the hard part but also the most rewarding. They will get stuck quickly. Now what will they do? Something they've never done before. Dig deep. They're gonna document their discoveries and open their curiosity and follow it. Conjecture, test and prove.  At the end of the year, each student will have a portfolio of work. Their creation of mathematics that documents their journey and discoveries. Students will showcase their work in front of an audience. What kind of students are in this course? Out of the box thinkers who can see things differently. Future STEM majors looking to build their math portfolios. Mathematical daydreamers, curious students. Mathematical artists who need time to work out their ideas. Students like this young man who invited me to his chess club just so he could beat me in chess. And he did. His talent goes beyond the traditional math curriculum. He deserves an introduction to the awe-inspiring math that we get to experience here. The students lined up for this course have a lot of personality and I expect magic to happen when they are together doing math. But there's one missing piece and that's where you come in. In the fall, you could compose a problem to the class. This could be done in person if you're in the Philadelphia area or by video conference if you are not. It's a simple way to get involved. Or maybe you're looking for ways that by participating in our work can help you build concrete examples of broader impact for your National Science Foundation grants. You could affect young mathematicians by mentoring a student. This is not the same as taking on another advisee. Rather just guiding a high schooler through their research in the spring semester. This could be you or Jaiadab. Listening, questioning, and giving a little direction. Students who check in with their mentors every week or two throughout the spring will do better. If the mentor role won't work for you personally, then maybe you know of a grad student like John Urschel who might be a good fit or maybe you are a grad student. This could be a great opportunity for a grad student who's thinking about a career in math education. Here's one last thought. We all have our story about how we came to love math. When was it when you first fell in love with math? What was it that grabbed your heart? Now think back, who was it that first recognized your mathematical talent? We all have a who. The people who first introduced us to new mathematical worlds. My original who are Glenn Stevens and Al Quoco who began shaping me over 15 years ago in Boston and then came a bunch more. Imagine influencing a younger mathematician by mentoring him or her. Seeing something exciting in their ideas. Inspiring them into new beautiful and enriching mathematical paths. Are you interested in joining us? Please come see me if you are. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.


Coming up on DTNS, Apple TV comes to Amazon. What Stadia can do that nobody else can, and China alarms reach TikTok. This is the Daily Tech News for Thursday, October 24th, 2019 in Los Angeles. I'm Tom Merritt. In Oakland, California, I'm Justin Robert Young. And I'm Roger Chang, the show's producer. Our venerable co-host Sarah Lane is in the midst of the logistics of moving right now, so she will not be with us today or tomorrow, but she'll be back from a brand new studio on Monday. We were just talking about a little smidge of politics, a little bit of baseball, a little bit of music, all kinds of good stuff on good day internet. You can hear that by becoming a member at patreon.com slash DTNS. Let's start with a few tech things you should know. Twitch star Michael Grzeg, aka Shroud, announced in a tweet that he's leaving Twitch for Microsoft's Mixer streaming platform. His first stream will be on Thursday at 8 p.m. Eastern. The move comes after another Twitch star Tyler Ninja Blevins left Twitch for Mixer in August. Blevins commented that Grzeg's move saying massive move for the platform and the streaming industry, which is all words you would expect him to say. Samsung announced that the Exynos 990 chipset built on a seven nanometer process. The chipset features the male G7s, yeah, Mali G77 GPU and eight core CPU, both of which are 20% faster than the outgoing Exynos 980. The 990 supports displays with up to 120 Hertz refresh rate and up to six cameras with a maximum resolution of 108 megapixels. The chipset does not feature a built in 5G modem, and Samsung also announced that the 5G Exynos modem 5123 also built on a seven nanometer with support for sub six gigahertz and millimeter wave. Mass production on both is expected to begin this. All right, let's talk a little bit about the piece in our time continuing. Apple has launched its Apple TV app on the Fire TV Stick 4K, the Fire TV Stick 2nd Gen, and the Fire TV Basic Edition. So no, not all the Fire TV models have it yet, but there are more to come. The Apple TV app on FireOS lets you view your Apple TV and movie purchases, including your subscribe channels as well as Apple TV plus content, at least when that content launches on November 1st. You cannot make purchases through the FireOS version of the Apple TV app. You can through the Apple TV on Roku app make purchases. I just verified that myself moments ago. So that's quite a difference. And it's probably Amazon saying, well, if you're going to take 30% of anything we sell through the Prime Video app on Apple TV, meaning we don't let you make purchases through the Prime Video app on Apple TV, we're going to do something that makes you not want to offer those purchases on Fire TV OS, but at least the app is there. Now this is all part of Apple's strategy of becoming more of a services company. That's why you're seeing them putting their software out on other platforms. Morgan Stanley analyst Katie Huberty released a note Wednesday projecting that Apple service revenues should grow about 20% next year. What with the growth of Apple music and the storming of the gates of Apple TV plus, as well as Apple Arcade and a few other things, iCloud, etc. Huberty believes that Apple TV plus particularly will end up being a $9 billion business by 2025. This is the legacy of Tim Cook services. Internet services in general under Steve Jobs were never a bright spot for Apple. It wasn't something that they did a lot of and when they did it, it often did not go well at all. This is a pivot since there are less iPhones being sold. There's less Macs being sold. They can't count on their hardware in the way they once did. And if that's the case and you are now selling a product that people need to subscribe to, then that means you've got to put it everywhere that people are. You can't rely on the Apple install base. While that is a great head start, you can offer a discounted or free version of some of these products. If you have the hardware, it's got to be everywhere. Note to the pedants in the audience, when Justin says they're selling less iPhones, he means the growth rate is slowing. He knows that. You don't need to send that correction.  And yeah, this is the kind of thing you have to see for Apple to expand. Now the one I'm waiting for is when I can get that Apple TV app on my Android phone. I can get Apple music on my Android phone, so I'm not discounting the possibility that that's coming. But once that happens, suddenly, well, why wouldn't I buy things through Apple TV? Now granted, not being able to make purchases might be kind of key here. Not being able to make purchases on the Fire TV OS is not great. But the fact that you can through Roku means Apple says, well, if the deal's right, we'll definitely let you make purchases. We want to take your money. So I'd be curious if that happens on Android as well. Prediction, we are going to see a price breakthrough or a percentage breakthrough with Amazon and Apple. Yeah, this is the kind of thing that'll put pressure on those kinds of deals. Yeah, it just got to make it easier going forward. Google announced that its Game Studio for Stadia will be located in Montreal in an interview with GamesIndustry.Viz. Studio head Jade Raymond said the studio will focus on making games that do things that dedicated platforms cannot. For instance, Raymond said a fully physics simulated game is possible with reference to the failed attempt at 1998 Jurassic Park trespasser. MMOs could benefit from the fact that all players Sun Stadia are essentially playing in one big LAN party end quote. He also described games with believable interactions with NPCs drawing on tech like Google's duplex. One test of this kind will be orcs must die three set for spring 2020 on Stadia where armies of up to 500 enemy monsters cluster in one tight space. Yeah, I mean, this is part of the Stadia hype machine leading up to the launch on November 19th. But there are some very interesting possibilities if you have a well functioning centralized streaming platform like Stadia working where you could do some MMO stuff that when everybody has to be running a piece of the game locally, as they do with most MMOs these days, it wears things out real fast.  And that's why they have to limit stuff. Whereas if it's all happening on one big, big, powerful data center computer, you can do all kinds of stuff that you can't do otherwise. You know, Stadia seems really cool in 2023. There's a lot of talk about all the cool things they're going to be able to do the cool things they're building to make amazing games. We're going to leverage all this technology. I swear to God, it's definitely going to happen in anywhere between two to three years. I'm not a video game expert, so I'm not going to put any kind of money or predictions on how Stadia will do. I am just very interested to see because you know they have to be around the corner in the next week or so. The like, I've been playing Stadia for the past month. Here are my thoughts, early reviews. Yeah, it's funny that in the game industry biz article interview with Raymond, they asked her about, you know, when are we going to see this stuff? And she said, well, it won't take four years. We'll have new stuff rolling out from our studio right from the get go, which is kind of avoiding the question of like, yeah, but when does the really cool stuff happen? Well, not four years. So there you go. It's 2023 or before. Not four years. Not four years. Google Watch several new apps from its digital well being experiments project. Like all app stores, I'm not picking on Google particularly here, but you can't find them easily. So make sure to not only search for the name, but also the word digital well being and then they'll show up. For example, unlock clock is a live wallpaper that will display the number of times you've unlocked your phone that day. If you're trying to keep that down. Postbox is one I've installed. It lets you choose one to four times a day when your notifications are delivered all at once. You can still go in and see your notifications on demand at any time. But the, you know, notification aspect that like grabbing your attention aspect is limited. So you're not constantly being pinged by your phone. Morph is an ass kind of a launcher that shows you different apps on your screen based on the time of day or location. It's got all your work apps at one time or all of your entertainment apps, you know, in your off hours or on the weekend or when you're traveling, vacation and apps, stuff like that. A group game called we flip counts the amount of time elapsed since anyone in the group has unlocked their phone kind of a way to, you know, win the game of not using your phone. And the desert island lets you pick up to seven apps and starts a 24 hour challenge to see if you can stick to only using those apps. All of this, of course, people trying to trick themselves into not using their phone so much. What a, what a fun, strange trend that we are in the world. We live in, right? Well, we live in a society. Well, I mean, the information you put into your body and the attention you give to things bears a lot of resemblance to food, right? It's like, ah, I can't stop myself, but I know it's bad for me. Sure. And it just, it demonstrates how few players comparably there are in this ecosystem when the food manufacturers are running diet programs, right? This is, I mean, I'm excited for anybody who gets value at it, but man, just as a large scale thing, the fact that this is the big push of our technology manufacturers is trying to remind you of how harmful their products are is just interesting. Listen, we know you're addicted to our product, but we don't want you to be harmed by it or you'll stop buying it. So, yeah. One thing I will say, a lot of these sound great in theory, but when you try to set them up, you realize just how much thinking you have to go into. I was setting up Morph and I realized, ah, crap, I forgot to put email into my work screen, you know, like you have to do some, some, some thinking. And I think that might be too much of a barrier for a lot of people.  Let's, let's build a suite together or some of these things and just say just less. I want, I want to drive down my screen time in all the world of machine learning and the tools that you can build into the OS. How can we make that happen? That's why I like postbox. Postbox is a good one because you can choose one to four times. You can get the notifications when you need them. If you're like, wait, did I get a note about that yet? But it also stops your phone from pinging all the time. Better thing is just turn off notifications for everything except the stuff you sure you absolutely need. I feel like people having notifications on is one of the worst things for your attention. And man, Android really like wants you to leave notifications on. It tricks you into leaving notifications on. So it's not good. Twitter announced that it earned five cents per share in Q3 on revenue of 824 million up 9% on the year. Analyst had expected revenue of 874 million of earnings of 20 cents on the share. Twitter cited problems with its ad tech and a slow summer as causes of the revenue miss. Monetizable daily active users, however, rose 17% to 154 million, beating expectations of 14%. Ad revenue increased 8% on the year to 702 million. Twitter also said that machine learning flags have removed a removed 50% of abusive posts before they are even reported by users. Look, we're solving the problem before people can complain. 50% of the time. 50% of the time, Tom, it works every time. Yeah, this would be a really great earnings report for Twitter, right? The big thing with Twitter has been, are you increasing users? And granted, they changed how they report the users to only the users they sell ads to. But I think that makes sense. I think that's justifiable. Yes, up 17% on the users that you make money on, that's great news for Twitter. Granted, it's only 145 million, which is smaller than Snapchat's audience. But okay, you got to start somewhere, I guess, in your recovery. But your ad tech being the thing that brought you down, because otherwise they made more money, they made the revenue. They just didn't get to charge for all the ads because they had three different problems with three different aspects of their ad tech selling. That's not a good sign. Yeah, who's heads on a pike for that, right? I kind of feel like when that's the reason why you've missed your revenue projections, then you have to like march three people out in front of Wall Street and execution might be a little grisly. So maybe you just delete their accounts. Termination would be the grisly word that would apply because it just means they lose their job. What could say termination and then sell an ad for Terminator Dark Fate and try to make up for that money that they lost over the summer? Yeah. I mean, I don't want to get too much in the weeds on the actual ad tech that went bad, but it was like their mobile application promotion product had a bug. They had ad tech personalization wasn't operating as expected, which gave bad numbers. So they had to do give backs or they had to make goods? Yeah, yeah. That's brutal. I mean, this is the stuff that they should have nailed down after the many years of doing this. So that's unfortunate because otherwise they flipped the script and said, hey, we're growing our users. And yes, largely because they change the way they report those users, but if these are the users that make the money, those are the users you want to grow. So it's good to see them growing them.  Well, the good news is, is that at least of those monetizable users, they still have every reporter in America fraud. The BBC has published a version of its international news website accessible on the tour network in an effort to help readers avoid government censorship and surveillance. The site is the international version as seen from outside the UK. There are foreign language services like BBC Arabic, BBC Persian, BBC Russian available as part of that. But UK only content, you know, like BBC iPlayer will be unavailable. That's the licensing restricts them to only offering that within the UK. The site can be found at BBC news v to v J T P S U Y dot onion. This is a lot of people call it a dark web website, but it's a site that means you can access the BBC without having to leave an end node. When you go out and grab something from the rest of the internet from a tour browser, you have to go out through an end node and which end node you pick is very important because that's where someone can potentially track down who you are. If you don't have to leave the end node because it's end to end encrypted, you're much better protected. So this is this is a safer way for someone to read the BBC if they're in a situation where just reading being seen as reading the BBC would be dangerous to them. And there are plenty of those places because the internet becomes more and more of a viable everyday part of the global experience. You find out that there are many governments and non-governmental organizations that are very protective about what goes in talking about information being food, right? There are certainly some very restrictive diets around the world. Yeah. Roger pointed out that BBC on the shortwave was was for large parts of history a great way for people to find out what was going on in the rest of the world when they lived in a regime that clamped down on the news. And this is the BBC carrying on that tradition by trying to find a safe way that people can read their coverage. So good on them. Hey, folks, if you want to get all the tech headlines each day in about five minutes, subscribe to dailytechheadlines.com. U.S. Senators Chuck Schumer and Tom Cotton sent a letter to the U.S. Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire requesting an investigation into possible national security threats from TikTok. Yeah, with the music and the memes and all of that. Senator Marco Rubio wrote to Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin earlier this month asking the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States to investigate TikTok for national security threats and censorship. TikTok told the Verge it does not have details on the request, but TikTok is committed to being a trusted and responsible corporate citizen in the U.S., which includes working with Congress and all relevant regulatory agencies. That's the thing they have to say. They said the thing they had to say. TikTok guidelines told moderators to censor any content that refers to Tiananmen Square, Tibetan Independence, Falun Gong. This was discovered in September by The Guardian and Bite Dance, which owns TikTok, said those are old guidelines. We retired those a long time ago in May of this year. We were totally retired those guidelines. And now TikTok takes a localized approach. They have different guidelines for each market based on what the norms are in that market. Now, if you're wondering about TikTok being a Chinese company, it's not quite that simple. Bite Dance launched an app called Douyin, D-O-U-Y-I-N. In China, September 2016, it hit 100 million Chinese users within a year. And it's still there under that name. In September 2017, Bite Dance decided to go international. And the international version of Douyin was TikTok. That was not terribly popular until November 9th, 2017, when Bite Dance bought Musically. Musically was a Shanghai product that was also based in Santa Monica. So it was a more worldwide product. And in August of 2018, Musically and TikTok merged. And so all of the Musically people flooded into TikTok and instantly made it hugely popular, in addition to the TikTok audience, which had been building over that time as well. Now, as I mentioned, Douyin is a separate app for China. Up until the merger of Musically and TikTok, TikTok was mostly a Chinese operation. Bite Dance had had some international popularity in Southeast Asia. And so I find it totally believable, Justin, that Bite Dance would have had one manual created for Douyin and just copied it over for TikTok because, well, we're not that big internationally yet anyway. Let's not waste the time on that. And in May of this year, started to realize, crap, since August, we have blown up when we merged Musically. The Musically folks have different moderation guidelines. We need to clean up this documentation. But of course, the Guardian gets ahold of it and says, hey, look at all this stuff that would make perfect sense for Douyin because it's in China, but it seems like it was applying to other people.  They wanted those moderations to apply. And then further say, even though they say they got rid of it in May, they're still pushing it. And I'm not sure there's evidence that that is happening. So how much of this announcement by Schumer and Cotton is, do you think, based just on the headlines and how much might be based on something that they know that we don't? All right, here's, there's one more vector for those of you who are aware of TikTok, the product. And that is that the primary way that they want you to experience TikTok is not how we experience other social networks where you find people that you like and you follow them.  TikTok wants you to algorithmically serve you videos. As soon as you open that app, it just starts playing videos before you even have an account. It doesn't ask you to sign up for an account. It just starts playing videos. And then the more you watch it, the more it recognizes by machine learning, this is their pitch, which ones you like and which ones you don't. So it makes it even harder to say, wow, geez, my mashup of Falun Gong history with Zach Fox's I Got Depression is certainly not making the for you section that's being serviced. That being said, there is an old saying in Washington, DC that the most dangerous place in the district is between Chuck Schumer and a camera. This is like being between me and a slice of pie. I get it. Exactly. You have no idea what kind of ferocity will will come between you between those two those two items. And this is because Chuck Schumer has not been shy about attaching himself to any and all different issues that you know, what will get pressed. You know, when I was in my 20s living in New York City, it was the Fung Wah buses, the Chinatown to Chinatown buses that were largely unregulated. Then guess who stepped in to offer guidance or threatened legislation? Indeed, it was Chuck Schumer because that was a popular thing at the time. There is a bipartisan effort in a very unbi-partisan time right now to look into China. Obviously economically we're seeing it from the White House, but also culturally we are seeing an uncomfortable recognition of what happens when American companies, let's say for the most popular example, Blizzard and the NBA, how they interact with China and whether or not they are censoring or affecting their product for the money that China can bring in. This is an even closer tied situation, but I do think that this is more of a let's review what they're censoring situation in the same way that we would look at Blizzard or the NBA and less of a Huawei ZTE. I think that this is, you know, a part of the Chinese government to build a backdoor into American society. Which is why it's weird that it's a letter to the director of national intelligence to me. When Rubio wrote to Mnuchin, I'm like, oh, well, this is this is very clearly the United States waging a little bit of soft economic war with China. And you could argue that TikTok deciding to make the moderation and being based in China could be pushing its own point of view. It's funny to be that what we want is our tech companies to moderate more. And TikTok's like, yeah, no, we totally do that with machine learning. And it's like, yeah, but you're Chinese, we don't like that. But I get that what I don't get is the security risk. I'm not quite sure what's going on in TikTok.  But like you say, it's hard to find that kind of thing because you can't just go and let, you know, ISIS can't just go and push it out to all their followers, right? Well, you can search by user, but it is a fundamentally different experience than let's say YouTube surfacing. Guess who made a new video? No, that might show up algorithmically in your main feed, or you might go search that person every day. But it's, it's a fundamentally different experience on TikTok, which does make it more insidious because you could, again, have a whole thing about Tibetan independence. And you don't know for a fact whether or not it got the kind of run that it would have otherwise. Yeah. And if that can't make it, I'm guessing Daesh videos don't make it either. But, you know, it's interesting because I think there are some legitimate concerns about, obviously, what gets allowed on social media, whether it's Facebook, TikTok, or what else, but there's also a little China fever going on that sort of clouds the view of it. And it's getting harder and harder to see through that fog, especially when you're standing between Chuck Schumer and a camera. And that's, and that's the other thing is that culturally right now, there is a global, or not a global, a national question of what our relationship is and should be with China in terms of entertainment. It's, it's global. I mean, it's got us one in our chat room says there was a school where students influenced a contract with the union to get teachers better pay and videos blew up on TikTok. So yes, TikTok can have effects on things. I don't think we're debating that. Oh God. Yeah. I mean, and TikTok, you know, that my favorite meme in TikTok is these teenagers with their first job, right? At pizza huts and Panera breads, shooting TikToks of how they're doing their jobs and getting fired because the corporate overlords don't like, like the corporate overlords at Panera don't like the fact that a fort, I guess a 16 year old is showing that they microwave their, their, their macaroni and cheese. Indeed. Indeed. Thank you to all those who participate in our subreddit. You can submit stories and vote on them at dailytechnewshow.reddit.com and facebook.com slash groups slash daily tech new show. All right. Let's check out the mail bag. Chance wrote in and said, I absolutely love Firefox due to their privacy priority, but I'm a web developer too. We had a web developer write in about this yesterday. And I want to tell you animations just don't work in Firefox. I love animating webpages above all things. It's freaking great, but they don't work in Firefox. It's horrible. If you don't believe me, go to a sample blog page I made at chancethehacker.com, great name, and click the fun tab and compare between Chrome and Firefox. It's no contest. Anyway, hope you like the cat pics I sent. And yes, chance. We absolutely did. Also, I did. I went to the, the page he was talking about in both Chrome and Firefox. It works in Firefox, but it doesn't work well. It's kind of like slow, chunky animation, whereas on Chrome, it's like super fast and super smooth. My question to the audience is, okay, if you're a developer and you want to make something cool, looks like, yeah, Chrome definitely has a lot more tools for you. But if all of us are choosing based on other problems, other concerns, is it bad for us to go choose Firefox? And if we do, does that help you put the pressure on Firefox to make better tools to do this sort of thing? Yeah, that's a good question. Because I don't think a general user should not pick Firefox because a developer might not make a cool animation for it. I guess that's where I'm headed. Yeah, I mean, I think it's the overall user experience. And if it's harder for developers to work on it, then it will eventually erode user experience. Hey, shout out to patrons at our master and grandmaster levels, including Andy Beach, Martin James and Bjorn Andra. Thanks to you, Justin, Robert Young for being here. Tom, always a pleasure. It is the highlight of my Thursday. And I'll tell you what, hopefully, after you're done listening to this, you can head on over to the Politics, Politics, Politics podcast because my guest talking all about Brexit is Tom Merritt. I think we had, I've gotten a lot of great praise for us being able to break down what is a very complicated process as best we can and make it at least digestible. So if you've kind of you're aware of Brexit, but you keep finding it confusing, and there's too many people that you don't know, and then amendments to laws that have amendments that then go to another country to decide whether or not they could be law amendments, then listen to the Politics, Politics, Politics show. Yeah. If you like this and it goes well, and Brexit happens, look forward in a couple years to my appearances on Politics, Politics, Politics, talking about the Treaty of 1707 and Scottish Independence. I can't wait to dig into that as well. It is adorable that you would assume that Brexit will ever end. We have new Patreon rewards, folks. Become a member of DTNS and get a peek at our show rundown as we develop it. That's one of the new rewards. You can just watch us build in the show every day, and it gives you access to all the previous tabs if you want to go back into the show notes and do a little Control-F and find stuff. These are delivering November 1st, and also on November 1st, everybody who is at the $2 level or above gets a PDF copy of the official DTNS cookbook. Scott Johnson just sent me the line art for the cover, so it's coming together, and we're going to be delivering it next week. You got to be in at the $2 level by November 1st, Patreon.com slash DTNS. Yes, and of course, our email address is feedback at DailyTechNewShow.com. We're live Monday through Friday at 4.30 p.m. Eastern, 2030 UTC. Find out more at DailyTechNewShow.com slash live. Back tomorrow with Shannon Morse and Len Peralta illustrating the show. Talk to you then. This show is part of the Frog Pants Network. Get more at FrogPants.com. As you have enjoyed this program.


The United Nations peacekeeping mission in the Central African Republic has recorded six civilian deaths in a rabble attack in the country's northeast. The mission says an armed group known as 3R carried out the morning attack against the Central African Army positions in the village of Mann. Several civilians were also wounded in the attack. But the situation in the village, which is some 550 kilometers from the capital, Bange, is now under control. 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.


O'Brien welcome folks. This is Tom O'Brien of TFNN. We go five days a week. We go seven hours a day. We go 24 hours a day in the internet at TFNN.com. Always remember folks, whatever you think about, you bring about whatever you focus on grows. Hope everyone's having a great day, safe day. It's a TGIF folks. It's making a great weekend. Don't make assumptions. Let your life be transformed. When you stop making assumptions, your word becomes impeccable and your life is completely transformed.  What you need comes to you freely and easily because the spirit moves freely through you. Mock it wise. Let's take a look at it out here. We have the Dow Industries right now up 121. NASDAQ's down 42. S&P's off six and a half. Gold. Gold contract down 80 cents. Trading at 1963 an ounce. We have silver up 80 cents, nine, 84. No, that's platinum. Silver up 25 cents. $25, 20 cents an ounce. Light Sweet Crew down a buck 51. Trading out at $75, 38 cents a barrel. Notes and bonds. So 10-year note. Down 16 ticks. Trading 112.17. The 30-year down 20 at 126.12 and King Dollar. King Dollar's up 171 ticks. Trading 99.946. The Euro is at 112. The Yen is at 138. And the British pound is at 130 to one US dollar. Our phone number's<PHONE_NUMBER>. Give us a call, folks. Want to know what's going on in your world and the world of the S&P's. Let's take a look at it. Well, let's go. We're going to go to the spy and the E-minis first. What are you going to see? This bar has big volume, folks. It had as much volume in three minutes into the bar as the rest of the day. So we're going to stay at these levels. You can see what's happening. Look at this bar. This bar, and we're on, you're at nine minutes on this bar. It's the biggest bar of the day we have. So bottom line is that this thing, you know, it can get out of the bottom of it. It can flatten out, but you can see 45,000 contracts. That's inside the E-mini. If we go over to the spy and take a look at the spy, you're going to have the same type of setup. You know, you're broke, lower, and you can see that baby right there. That's 1.9 million. The thing that was wild is that the swing point only had 900,000, and on this bar here, we were actually at 300, no 400,000 at three minutes into the bar. So the bottom line, that's sticking out like a sore thumb, and we'll see where it shakes out, but meaning that it's going to stay lower. Gold. We'll go to the gold contract. We take a look at the gold contract out here. What do you have with the gold contract? Bottom line, this thing's off to the races. You take a look at gold. Gold is flat out here today. We are at a price point of 1963. We went to 1954. We rejected lower price, and we're going to have lighter volume. There we go. Come on, baby. There we go. So you can see what we did here. Yesterday, you had volume of 241,000. The day before we had volume of 271, we pulled back into the 271, the bar. We had 183. Bottom line, rejected lower price, and right now you're at 1963. This is setting up that now wants to try to get up and break the 1987 area. Bottom line, my take is that when you take a look at this, the way this is set up is that you already broke the downtrend in a big way. So gold's on its way now to 2102. Nasdaq. Let's go to the Nasdaq. You're going to see the same setup in the Nasdaq at the NQs first. We take a look at the NQs. You're going to see the same type of setup. Pull this back so you can see it quite clearly. You can see the expansion of volume in the NQs. That's 17,651. It broke in the swing of 15,000. Bottom line, it's broken all the swings here. That's the bottom line. If we take a look at the Qs, you're going to see the same deal inside the Qs. Pull that back a little. You can see that big spike. See that bar? So the little swing there had 867,000 shares. We broke that with 1.5 million. So the bottom line is that they're going to sell us into the close. And we go to the dollar. The thing that's really crazy here, man, is that it's about time the dollar did get a bounce. But it is wild that you just get a little bounce in the dollar and the market basically can't handle it, which is really wild. Now, my take is out where going the dollar, one second closes, the dollar went down to 99,578. So you went 400 ticks over in the dollar, up in the dollar. That being said, when you take a look at how this dollar is set up, we'll put this on a longer basis. What you're going to see is that you get a decisive break, man. That's a decisive break if anything's a break. And that says that your next stop, well actually your next stop just on like a daily gets you down to 96 on the week, on the monthly, that gets you down to, my God, it's, yeah, on the monthly, we're right down here, 89. So bottom line, lower prices in the dollar should set up. So what's going to get interesting here is that we'll see how the dollar bounces first. And as the dollar bounces, I expect that the market will pull back a bit. So if, let's picture the dollar bouncing, if the market starts pulling back on light volume, all is that is setting up, okay, is a higher market once the dollar turns again and goes back down again, okay, because when the dollar is going down, this market wants higher price, gold wants higher price, silver wants higher price. Let's go over the oil market, CLA, because you can see that just that little tiny move, the thing that's pretty wild is that just that smaller move in the dollar, bottom line, you know, made a difference. You know, yesterday, we went up a buck 58. Today, we're down a buck 58. And yes, that's interesting. See, there's more volume missed today. So the bottom line, and yes, they had a higher high. So oil's not done also. Oil wants higher price, man. Wild, absolutely wild. Our phone number is<PHONE_NUMBER>. We have the Dow Industries trading up 143. NASDAQ is down 41. S&P's off four and a half. Sarah, there folks, come right back.