Family Theatre presents James Gleason and Hugh O'Brien. From Hollywood, the mutual network in cooperation with Family Theatre presents Caboose starring James Gleason and Hugh O'Brien. Family Theatre's only purpose is to bring to everyone's attention a practice that must become an important part of our lives if we're to win peace for ourselves, peace for our families and peace for the world. Family Theatre urges you to pray. Pray together as a family. Now to our transcribed drama Caboose starring James Gleason as Pop and Hugh O'Brien as Bob Plank. I wonder how much longer it's gonna be? What's the difference? We're on company time. Have you ever been up here in the executive offices before? Yeah, once a couple of years ago. But not for anything like this. They were retiring. One of the engineers gave them a gold watch. Perfect safety record. 25 years with a road. Yeah? What's this Rogers guy like? Here he is what you'd expect. Assistant to the president. Big bag of wind. Pretty tough? Plenty tough. Well anyway, it's all out in the open now. Don't have to lie about it anymore. Rogers, we'll see you now gentlemen. Right this way please. Mr. Frisbee? That's right. And Plank? Yes, sir. Sit down please. You got your book, Miss Pooner? Yes, Mr. Rogers. I'll tell you when to start taking this down. Yes, sir. Well gentlemen, I need not remind you how serious this is. We understand. Yes, sir. I'd like to make it clear from the outset that a transcript of everything you tell me will be on Mr. Claxton's desk as soon as it can be typed up. You'll then decide personally what action should be taken. You mean whether we'll be fired or not? Among other things, yes. And I trust you both appreciate the inconvenience to which this is putting him. Yes, sir. He must be a pretty busy man. Busy is hardly the word. Presiding over a railroad is a task of unexampled complexity. Yes, sir. Now as to the bare facts. You were both assigned as breakmen on the 836th freight of Winnebago last night. Yes. That's right. You, Frisbee, according to my records, you've been with the road for nine years. Yes, sir. And you've planked less than six months. That's right. It says here that you've been working as a switch tender until this week. That's right, sir. Last night was my first run as a breakman. Very well. Suppose we begin at the beginning. Take it the freight pulled out on schedule, Frisbee. 836 on the dots. Start taking this down this corner. Yes, sir. Mr. Rogers. Yes, play. There's something that happened before we pulled out of Winnebago that really started the whole thing. Then included? By all means. Well, it was about 20 minutes before our scheduled time at departure. You're getting this, Miss Bonner. Yes, sir. I remember the time because I'd been standing on the station platform out of the rain. And I could see the clock on the wall of the telegraphers' shack. It was just a minute or two past 815. Frisbee had told me to get to the caboose early and check the flares and extra signal batteries because, well, he might not be back until the last minute. So I started down along the main track to the freight siding where the 836 was standing. It was pretty dark, and, well, like I say, it was running hard. Last thing in the world I ever expected was for someone to be out in that freight yard who didn't belong there. Bobby? Bobby, is that you? Who's that? It's me, Alice. What are you doing here? You've got to help me, Bobby. He helped you get out of here. Oh, listen to me. It's important. Ben's with me. Where? Don't get mad, please. I couldn't help you. Where is he? Waiting over there under the signal tower. Did he marry him? Yes. We're going away as soon as we can. What is happening? Ben wants you to do something for him.  Do what? I'd rather have Ben tell you. Come on. I can't see him now. My train pulls out in less than 10 minutes. Well, it's about the train. Hello, Bobby. Yes, you never expected to see me again. What's Alice talking about? What do you want? You didn't want me to ask you this, but I'm going to ask you anyhow. There's something you'll be carrying in that caboose tonight. I'd like to have you. In the caboose? Come on, Bobby. Don't dummy up on me. There's nothing in the caboose except the cold stove and a couple of chairs. What are you getting at? There's another break button that's making a run with you. I had a call from the station master by half hour ago. I haven't seen him since. I guess he's the one. Okay, you don't know anything about it. Let's just keep it that way. What is this?  Wait a minute. You're going to give me what that partner of yours brings back from the station. Listen, I'm going to make it look good. I'll come into the caboose sometime while he's up checking the other cars. I won't be any witnesses.  I ought to cave your face in. Yeah, but you won't, Bobby. You'll do just what I tell you. You both know why. You got that, Miss Pooner? Yes, sir. I gather then, Plank, that you were well acquainted with the two people who approached you last night in the freight yard. Yes, sir. Alice used to be my girl. I thought she was, anyway. And the man called Ben? Ben Dixon. I met him in the army two years ago. I'd been in some trouble and well, he knew about it. Then he was holding it over your head? Yeah. There's something that Dixon said would be carried in the caboose last night. Did you have any idea what it was? No, sir. Not until Frisbee got back to the caboose. And then you asked him? Well, no, not exactly. Yes, Frisbee. I don't want you to get the idea that Bob tried to pump anything out of me. As soon as I climbed aboard, I told him what the deal was I had to. Had to? Well, I mean, here I was wearing a pistol and carrying this mail pouch with a lock on it. I had to say something. I suppose so.  Yeah, most of it anyway. We didn't pick up Pop until we got down to the water tower. Considering the circumstances, Frisbee, would you say you acted wisely in taking aboard an unauthorized passenger last night? How's that?  Mr. Rogers, this was Pop. He's been hitching rides on the road for years. Have you ever seen him before? Yeah, once, about five years ago, but everybody's seen him at one time or another. So you picked him up at the water tower? Yeah, that's right. I'd noticed when I first boarded the train back in the freight yard that Bob was nervous. Take us down, Miss Boone. I'm getting it. Proceed, Frisbee. Well, as I say, I could see he was nervous, but I thought it was just on account of the money we were carrying. Well, we started up and the train moved out through the yard. It was still raining. Bob was standing on the back platform of the caboose leaning out into the dark like he was looking for something up toward the cars in front. It was about five minutes later when we pulled alongside the water tower. Hey, hey, fellas. Who's that? Beats me, someone standing under the water tower. How about a lift for the Sac City? I saw you, Mr. It's against the rules, you know. Oh, rules. I know all about the rules. I'm Pop, Pop Stack, like in Smoke Stack, like you got on that engine up front. Oh, what do you know? Oh, hiya, Pop. I know this guy. Well, sure he does, sonny. Let's see, four years ago last August, you gave me a ride from Belle Plaine to Atomark, right? You don't forget much, do you? I don't forget your name, either. It's Frisbee. What, Frisbee? And you live down Benton's Port. Come on up, Pop. Get in out of the rain. Listen, we can't carry any passengers. Oh, take it easy. It's all right. What's matter, sonny? You a stock holder or something? There's nothing personal, mister. I don't want to add but 160 pounds of the hull load. Yeah, it's okay, Pop. This is his first run. He's a little eager. Come on in. Come on. We got a fire going. What? Will you settle down? I'm the senior man on this run. I take the responsibility. Come on inside, Pop. Hey, huh. This is cozy.  Yeah. Yeah. I wish I could take my beard off and drive it out the same way. How about some coffee? Yes, sir. Got a cup right here in my spindle. One of them army cups they use with canteen, you know. Yeah, well, we got an extra mug. Yeah, but with my army cup I'll get more. I'll hold more. Okay, suit yourself, Pop. See, I've got a can of tomato soup too. You fellas like some soup, sonny? No, thanks. You keep it, Pop. You may need it. Well, I meant that. And again, I mean not. I'm going where it's warm. Yeah. Yeah, yeah. Have some coffee, huh? Well, thank you. Hey, that's a throat full right there.  See, how come you're wearing a gun? Special job, Pop. Must be. Well, here we go. Yes, sir. Must be mighty special job. Never seen a breakman wearing a gun before. Road cops, plenty, but never a breakman. Well, you had it, Pop. New Orleans, Mardi Gras.  Maybe. Where are you coming from? Rose Bowl game. Great contest. Great competitors. Soul program. Hey, Walt, you think I'd better check the cars now that we're in the way, huh? Well, there's no special rush. Well, I figure we can't be too careful tonight. Okay, suit yourself, kid. If you want anything, I'll be right here by the coal stove. Yeah, well, I won't be long. Well, I bet it's mighty wet up on them catwalks, sonny. You watch your step. He's an edgy one, huh? Oh, he's just eager. Hey, how about some checkers, Pop? My pleasure. Say, uh, you think it's that male sack that's got your friends a word? Pop, you're getting a free ride.  You want the red or the black? Red.  Well, he'd worry anyway. I think he's trying to make a name for himself. That's not an easy thing to do. Well, this kid may find it easier than most. He don't look like to me like he's got much push.  Hey, that's pretty good. This boy got pull? Well, the talk is that's how he got the job. Oh, ain't it that way? Them as has gets. That's another old saying. Yeah, go ahead, Pop. It's your move. Yeah, I guess it is at that. Just a moment, Miss Brunner. Yes, sir? Question for Esbeen. Sure. Seems to me this Pop person displayed considerable curiosity as to the contents of the male sack. Didn't that strike you as suspicious? No, not especially. Then why not? Well, because that was his way. If he was curious about something, he just kept asking and asking until you finally gave him the answer. Then did you finally give him an answer? No, I don't know, until it was all over. And it didn't seem to matter much. I see. To resume, then, you say you were just out of Winnebago when Plank left the caboose to check the other freight cars. That's right. How long was he gone? Not more than 10 minutes, I'd say. Does that coincide with your recollection of the FACTS Plank? Yeah, that's about right, Mr. Rogers. Wouldn't you say that 10 minutes is a very short time in which to complete a single-handed check of the couplings and hatches on a 16-car train? Yes, sir. Well, that's not really why I went out, was to see if Ben was aboard. Oh, the man who approached you in the freight yard. Yes, sir. Continue, Plank, continue. Well, it was still raining when I closed the door of the caboose and stepped out onto the platform. The way I figured it, Ben not knowing much about freight so how to move around on them would probably hide himself as close to the caboose as he could. So I climbed up to the top of the first car forward and started along the catwalk on my hands and knees. Only gone about six feet when I remembered the inspection hatch on the corner of the roof. I crawled over to it and tried the cover. Sure enough, the seal was broken. Ben! Ben Dixon, you down there? It's me. I've got to talk to you. Something's gone wrong. What was that top after you? Extra batteries for your flashlight. No, not with me. Mine's going kind of dim. Yeah, we won't need it anyhow. You've got to get off the train. You're getting chicken, Bobby. I think it isn't going to work. There's someone else riding in the caboose. An old guy popped somebody. Frisbee picked him up at the water tower. So what? So he'll recognize you. That's what. How far you taking him? I'm on my way to Sac City.  Look, you're going to have to forget it. It says you... Listen, Dixon, this isn't just army-style pilfering. It's big stuff. $6,000 worth. That's why I'm not about to forget it. I'm not taking the fall for even this time. Who said you would? Ben, it can't work. If I notice the seal on that hatch was broken, Frisbee will see the same thing when he makes his rounds. I figure it will. What you may not figure is that he's got a gun. What do you think this is? Well, that does it. Deal me out. All right, listen. Listen good. You're in this to stay and nobody's going to get hurt unless you want them to. And what about Frisbee? Just like you tap on the head, you meet nice and warm down here. The old guy? Same thing. Keep his back to the door of that caboose. You never even see me come in. What do I say to Frisbee when he comes to and wants to know how come I didn't notice the broken seal on that hatch when I checked the cars? You just missed it. That's all. It was raining hard. You missed it. You made a mistake. Yeah, like I made a mistake covering for you two years ago. Forget it, Dixon. Where you going? Back to the caboose. Why not? Put away that gun. You don't need it. You turn me in. You know what happens. Don't worry. I'm not turning you in. I'm going to do you a favor. Just a little one. Me? Yeah. You, Alice, Frisbee, me and everybody involved. What's a favor? I'm going to give you a chance to get off this train before anybody else sees you. This thing's going 40 miles an hour. It slows down to about 15 outside of Mount Pleasant just the other side of the bridge. It'll be around 20 minutes from now. You hop off there and we'll forget the whole thing. What about that broken seal on the hatch you're so worried about? I'll tell Frisbee about it after we're out of Mount Pleasant. Once you're gone, I won't make any difference in here. Mm-hmm. Quite a few reports you've been taking so long to say anything. Oh, I broke a rule. He's breaking another given the old guy a ride. We both got something to forget.  We could go quite a ways together. Yeah, well, not tonight we couldn't. You're getting off at Mount Pleasant. Question, Frank? Keep writing, Miss Boone. I want this in the transcript. Very well, Mr. Rogers. You have already stated that you realize Dixon boarded the train with a criminal motive. Yes, sir. And you've stated further that you realize the seriousness of the crime he intended to commit. Well, only after Frisbee told me how much money was in that sack. And yet knowing all this, you still connived to let a would-be fellow on escape? Well, like, I told you I was thinking of other people involved. I mean, his wife, Alice. And yourself? Yeah, and myself. Well, did you suppose, Plank, that the company was still unaware of the false statement you made in your application regarding the army discharge? Well, I... You mean you knew about it? The discrepancy became apparent about two months ago. Why didn't you fire me? Because, upon investigating, we learned from the authorities that you had refused to defend yourself at the court martial and were suspected of shielding the guilty party. Was that the pilfering that you referred to in your conversation with Dixon? Yeah. He was the company's supply sergeant and I was his clerk. I knew what he was doing. But a misguided sense of loyalty kept you from speaking up? Well, it wasn't just that. You see, by the time the court martial came along, he and Alice were going together. And I thought if I said anything, she might think I just dragged him into it for spite. Apparently what this young lady thinks is very important to you. Used to be. Doesn't anymore.  Yeah, that's right. And what happened after you left the freight car? Well, I closed the hatch and crawled back along the catwalk toward the caboose. The one thing I couldn't afford was to have Frisbee or the old man leave the car any time before we got past Mount Pleasant. And after that, it wouldn't matter. So, we sat around for the next 20 minutes chewing the rag and listening to Ponte lies about himself. Then I could tell by the sound of the wheels that we'd started across the bridge. Coming into Mount Pleasant. Say, hey, we're slowing down. I don't recollect this. Well, I'm making a stop here. Doesn't pop. There's a grade on the other side of the bridge. You got to slow up for it. Hey, go on, Pop. Finish telling us how you like the Kaiser. Oh, well, now. I don't want to give the impression I'd done it single-handed. I sure wouldn't have got fur with a little pea shoot or like that thing. That's a 32. Yeah, and that's just about the number of feet it'll fire. Now, when I was soldier and they gave me a pistol, they pumped a slug to knock a man back 10 feet. Well, picking up speed again. Hey, how about some checkers, Pop? I'm agreeable. Oh, Walt, by the way. Well, I was out there making my rounds. I noticed a seal on one of the inspection hatches that had been broken. Broken? Well, it's all right. I checked the inside of the car. Nothing's wrong. Well, if it's broken at all, that's wrong. Well, that's why I checked the car to make sure it was empty. I'll tell you the truth. It didn't even look like a new seal. Maybe they overlooked it, huh? Never heard of that happening. That's how I found it. Nothing else was wrong. Which car? First one forward. I better go have a look. You're the boss. Here, you strap on this gun. What do I need with it? Well, they're supposed to be an armed guard watching that male sack every minute. Now, put this on and don't give me any trouble. Okay, what have you said? Now, I'll be right back. Just one double check. Well, he sure got the wind up handy. Yeah. He's the one that's calling you eager. Well, maybe I am. Yeah. You want pretty hard to make good of this job, don't you, sonny? Yep. Someone dependent on you? A couple of people. My mother went out on a pretty big limb to get this job for me. Oh. Yeah, she used to know the man who's the head of the road now, the president. She wrote him a letter. Well, you have got connections, haven't you? I just don't reckon. Well, I've always said it.  I'd sit right where you are, Pop. Ben.  Don't turn around. That's the idea. Where's Frisbee? Warm and dry on the floor of that freight car. That's where I said he'd be. Okay, Bobby, on your feet now real slow. Get over by Pop. I don't want everybody to spread out here.  Listen, Ben, you'll never make it. Let me worry about that. Look, you're going to be identified. Frisbee never even knew what hit him. Sonny, speaking of hitting people, that gun you got here... Don't worry, Pop, it won't go off unless I want it to. Yeah, you mean until you want it to. Just keep your hands up, Bobby. Get the sack off the hook here. Ah! Get him, Sonny. Pick up his gun. Oh, you'll be fine. Just nicked your nose. Hey, Pop, what did you... I mean, when... Right out of your own holster, Bobby. Lucky you didn't have the safety on it. Except that's a terrible way to carry a pistol. Holy suffering cats. You better go forward to the next car and wake up Frisbee. Yeah. I'll just keep an eye on Benny the Kid here while you're gone. I see. And you say that this Pop character got off the train of pilot grove while you were turning Dixon over to the police and simply vanished. That's right, Sonny. And Mr. Rogers... Yes, Frisbee. I think he did it to try to protect me from getting into trouble for giving him a ride. He probably figured if he wasn't there and Dixon didn't mention him, well, then we'd get the credit. I don't know, Walt. The more I go over the thing, the less that seems like the reason. What do you mean? Yes, Blank? Well, a minute Dixon stepped into the caboose he called me by name and the old man wouldn't have missed that. We could tell we knew each other and I'm sure he must have been able to figure that, well, that Dixon had something on me. Or be that as it may, he seems to have vanished without a trace. Oh, we'll just have to take your word that the incident occurred as you described it. Well, I think that's all, gentlemen. You'll be on temporary suspension until otherwise notified. Yes. Miss Spooner, you'll have that typed up for Mr. Clarkson as soon as possible. Immediately, Mr. Rogers. Well, you can show these gentlemen up. Mr. Rogers. Yes, Blank. I just want to say that, well, whatever happens, I think I've been given a very fair hearing, sir. And while I just... I understand, Blank. We'll let you know. Goodbye. Goodbye, sir. Frisbee. Bye, Mr. Rogers. Yes. Well, yes, Mr. Clarkson, I'll be right in. Well, you heard their statements over the intercom. Miss Spooner's tapping up a full transcript. What's your general impression, sir? Young Plank's telling the truth from what I saw of it. Even to the part about the gun? You've been out on my target, Range Rogers. I'm very good with the 32. Well, indeed, sir.  You think it's childish? I think it's risky. Well, I'll go so far as to admit it's probably both, Rogers, but it gets the work done and I enjoy it. But, sir, the stockholders, what would they say? The only time the stockholders ever say anything, Rogers, is when they miss a dividend. Now, you're going to be president of this road someday, so remember that. But really? Furthermore, I think it's high time you join me in one of these masquerades, as you call them. Well, Mr. Clarkson, no. You'll never be able to gauge the temper of your coworkers by going around and asking them questions in a gray suit and a humberg. I learned that a long time ago. But, Mr. Clarkson... Also, take a memo. Plank stays on. His mother's very fine lady. I took her to a dance once when I was a conductor. Yes, sir. And Frisbee? Oh, of course, Frisbee. He gave me a ride, didn't he? He's got a good heart. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. And I've got yours all picked out, Rogers, so tell Ms. Spooner you'll be leaving town for two weeks beginning the second week in February. You have my, what, already picked out, sir? Costume. Claw hammer coat with contrasting baggy trousers, plugged hat, cigar with toothpick. Mr. Clarkson...  Well, well, where are we going, sir? New Orleans, of course, like I told Frisbee. Mardi Gras. And now, here again, is James Gleason. Thank you, Tony Lafrano. Do you remember the Edgar Allan Poe story, the Paloined Letter? In it, a person had to hide a letter, a very special letter, where no one would ever think of looking. He hid it on his mantelpiece in a handful of other letters. It's a classic story written about a very general human failing. Man's tendency to overlook the obvious. Most of us do it. Overlook the obvious, I mean. No matter of prayer, for instance. Since 1947, Family Theater has been suggesting family prayer as a means of keeping the families of America and the world strong and happy. And in these little talks, at the end of each program, we've given you hundreds of reasons why you should pray as a family. But there's one reason which is really pretty obvious we'd like to point out. The greatest prayer God gave us is not even worded to be said by one person. It's worded to be said by a group or someone speaking for a group. Our Father is the name most of us give the prayer. Not my Father. In it, we ask that He lead us, not into temptation, that He give us our daily bread, forgive us our trespasses, and deliver us from evil. Not once, the Our Father, or Lord's Prayer, does it become a personal petition rather than a family or group petition? I can think of no better endorsement for family prayer than the endorsement which already exists in the prayer God Himself composed for us. Pray together as a family, and you'll find, too, the family that prays together stays together.  From Hollywood, Family Theater Transcribed, Caboose, starring James Gleason and Hugh O'Brien. Others in our cast were Herb Vigran, Charlotte Lawrence, Ben Wright, and Lamont Johnson. The script was written and directed for Family Theater by John T. Kelly, with music composed and conducted by Harry Zimmerman. This series of Family Theater broadcasts is made possible by the thousands of you who feel the need for this type of program, by the Mutual Network, which has responded to this need, and by the stars of stage, screen and radio, who give so unselfishly of their time and talent to appear on our Family Theater stage.  This is Tony LaFranco expressing the wish of Family Theater that the blessing of God may be upon you and your home and inviting you to be with us next week when Family Theater will present The Victim, starring Robert Rockwell. Gene Lockhart will be your host. Join us, won't you? Family Theater has broadcast throughout the world, and originates in the Hollywood studios of the world's largest network. This is Mutual, the radio network for all America.


Hey everyone, you might recognize me and Eric here from the Nintendo Prime podcast I just want to let you know before you get into this segment that this merchandise you see on our shirts and on our cups and on Anything else you oversee with Nintendo Prime brandy on it. You can get in the description below You can also get the full audio podcast not segmented in the description below And if you would like early access to our podcast, please go over to patreon.com Slash Nintendo Prime for $5 a month you gain early access to the full audio podcast and well mr. Eric What do you get for $20 a month you get to join us on a podcast that is right?  Anyways folks on to the episode Dude um I'm gonna kind of wrap this podcast up on this final topic Because you guys haven't know I've been avoiding it outside of talking about NBA 2k talking about third parties in general on switch Just because there was all these new announcers between tomb and Wolfenstein the new Colossus Two Bethesda games huge games doom was just bunch of people get to play at an impressive end We just had a bunch of video footage come out last week looks pretty good on switch runs at 30 FPS I know I know 30 FPS blah blah blah Bottom line is everyone who said they played it there were people who couldn't even tell if it was 30 half the time because that's all smooth It ran, right? All right, so so that's great, but what's interesting is Bethesda did an interview at the event And they were asked about why they're supporting Nintendo because Bethesda is basically never supported Nintendo And Bethesda is a massive Western publisher. I mean you love some of their games Yeah, so it's It's just huge to have them on board and now so that they're also going to support Rockstar All the way in the water is coming out. Yeah Rockstar game granted My grandson's old five I'm not even gonna get the old five and but it's still like the board of the best selling games of all time Right, and you made it from 360 in place. There's three you can run on switch. We're gonna let you finish But it's one of the best selling games of all time But yeah, it's It's such a interesting thing that Bethesda put it but that's a basically said They didn't really talk about why they haven't supported Nintendo in the past they admitted they haven't within you know Maybe they want to pad talk to Nintendo because maybe their reasons are that's what the the Wii U sucked and the Wii sucked So we're not gonna support them, right? I mean that might literally be the Wii U might not have fit with their games Yeah, well that that no that's the proper response But yes internally he's probably thinking like you don't want anger in with those platform Yeah, but what what he's what he would not to say is One they Bethesda apparently thinks these games are going to sell very well, and they said they approached these games As if this was the interesting markets if a majority of people playing on switch have never played them Very interesting. Yeah, that is that is definitely interesting Because obviously the game like Skyrim never been on Nintendo platform Making an assumption that most people that own a switch because I'm not one of those people Don't experience gaming outside of Nintendo platforms, and I don't think that's true a switch I think it's which has brought back people who haven't been on Nintendo platforms in a while, right? And have been a lot of their platforms, right? So I actually think it's the opposite of that, but it's interesting their perspective that they think the games are gonna sell well because There's just no competition for these games on there and no one's ever played a game like this on those platforms So to them it's like this whole brand new game That's really high quality. You know awesome like Skyrim You know, I think Skyrim actually makes a lot of sense just because it's following our breath of the wild Yeah, breath of the wild really set the table that a lot of people that own switches love games like that Skyrim fits in that kind of right open world adventure realm although.  I'm someone that does enjoy third-party games Mm-hmm. We just talked that like thoroughly about NBA 2k 18 like I enjoy third-party games. Oh, yeah, for sure I'm enjoy doom. Yeah, I enjoy We halo how much halo have you?  Mm-hmm. It's that but that's just like look They these games we think are gonna sell well and and they kind of threw in the by the way It's not like we're just doing these games. We have more. Yeah, right and like it was inference that it's not just like This is that they have more games coming to switch. Yeah, basically They're basically saying that we're supporting switch moving forward It's essentially what they said before because there's been all and I think this might have been a response of some people with that like a critical EA like I am where they're not really putting their best foot forward with the switch and they're just giving us FIFA 18 They're ignoring all their other games and they're not willing to put frostbite fully on the system Oh, right. That's just like look like we're giving you some of our most recent new generation game Plus we're giving you a game that's never come off and we ain't done. Right exactly. That's huge. We ain't done. Oh You won't fall in New Vegas. We'll probably make that happen. You want You want whatever whatever new Bethesda games coming up right next year like it basically sounds like Every Bethesda game from this point moving forward is gonna come out. It's coming to switch. Right basically what it sounds like. Yeah And I know that some people there was one comment saying though Well, do we even want these games if they're gonna run at less than HD resolution because like do one handle drops on like 540p And less than 60 FPS. I'm like you don't have to have it but everyone You what you desire, right? Doesn't necessarily mean another person. There are people that they don't care, right?  I you know what I actually for people like that I would like to say 5 540p gameplay of one game 720p gameplay of a completely different game Cuz I'm just the same game. You're gonna tell the difference right play a different game You tell me which one 720p and which one's not right without me telling you right because I actually question on that tiny screen If you're able to be able to tell the difference, right? Because it's a movie and 720p are closer together than 720p and 1080 and to me even 30 FPS versus 60 FPS to me doesn't matter as long as it sticks as long as it sticks Within one to two frame rates if you start dropping five frame rates, it doesn't matter if it's running at 60 That's then you're even at 60.  Yeah, it doesn't matter. You know it is It's jarring. It's something that kicks you out of the experience, right? It reminds you you're playing a game.  Yep Yep. Oh, that's just it if I'm at 30 FPS 29 28 30 30 30 30 the only game the only game I accepted on Is world of warcraft? No. Oh, yeah, I play it at 4k ultra settings I used to play at like two FPS rating and 40 man Yeah It somehow was like one of the best healers in the whole server because I had to Anticipate things like minutes ahead of time because of how long it would take my commands to get through the game itself is running That yeah, you know the highest frame you're possible. I'm not Registering that stuff. Yeah, like don't get hit by the fire. So I'd have to be like, okay I got a memorized game. I think the fire is gonna come here. So I better move here Yeah, it's gonna be a good movie. I'm in the core. What am I gonna do is the boss on me? I have no idea because healers back then drew a lot of aggro. I better just hit my fade button just in case Oh, I got so used to playing at such a low frame rate that now I'm like, whatever I put I have a GTX 1070 so I push it to ultra. I push Every setting is max as I can 4k everything's maxed out and the game runs at like 22 FPS and to me It's like a dream, but again, it's like it's my experience. It's consistent. It's not consistent FPS It's not it's not FBS is not consistent But usually if you can keep it over 60 in a game like wow, you're not gonna notice the drops I want it just below 60 is when you do and I can like literally I could drop like two settings And I would be at like a hundred FPS. Yeah, because like they got some crazy Anti-aliasing settings and stuff that I just had maxed out that have no business maxing out, but whatever I can I can't That's the thing if I did that on my old computer it would just crash like I can't so I'm going to but 42 FPS I'm granted. I'm sure in a raid setting. I'd probably be down I don't know but it's just interesting to me that really what matters to me at least on consoles So PC that thing I choose to deal with that. I could I can make it way better if I were right, right? Consoles we can't and that's just because I'm so used to playing that game it even worse less than five frames That 22 feel smooth to me But in a console space all that matters to me is whatever the target frame rate is it either Stays there and it's locked. Yeah, or as you said, I can handle a two-frame drop Mm-hmm that doesn't really bother me too much But a five frame drop and it also depends on how long that two frame drop. It's just a single frame That's not a big deal. Yeah, or you know if it's sort of cutscene It's a cutscene doesn't really bother me too much. I can't control the game, but during gameplay, right? I shouldn't say that because every 2k 18. That's excessive. Okay. Can't drop that. All right. That's not a five frame drop That's like that's like a 25 frame. Yes. Oh, man, but yeah, it's definitely something that As long as the frame rates are mostly consistent or mostly at the target. Mm-hmm.  Just trust me you You think you can't tell the difference, but they're your controls are more accurate You might find like in doom one of the big appealing assets was that it was 60 FPS, but it's okay.  I'm like it is an excuse Mm-hmm the game we're talking about a game that was built for PlayStation 4 Xbox one and PC Last year running on switch. I'm sorry switch is not even close to as powerful as any of those platforms, right? So yeah, we're gonna have that game. It's not gonna run as well, right? Right and Do we just shouldn't get it because people don't yeah, right? No because you are not okay with it I yeah, I don't know.   It's not shitty hardware.  It's actually really good for mobile hardware But it's okay. It's like it's basically like running doom 2016 on a phone. Yeah, come on. Yeah pretty impressive stuff Yeah, and the fact that they can that's why I made that video about third-party don't have an excuse anymore Yeah, but as you hear like they're not those and it sounds like they said Nintendo came to them Nintendo said what do we need to do right? Well, you know like Nintendo the Nintendo coming to a third-party studio. They've never had on board. I mean like Let's make it happen. Well, what do you what do you guys think about our platform? Here's all the information we have on it Here's all the dev tools and then like it's not just like a lot of third-party platforms Come to the Nintendo okay, we want to see a switch. Can we get a dev unit? Can we get it? Nintendo's like no we've we've came down to your office. They don't must be and dumb not to to see how bad Nintendo hasn't done that That's what I thought was interesting about is Nintendo has kind of avoided outside of EA and Ubisoft They really don't talk to Western Studios and here they are flying from Japan I mean not even just Reggie. They had their guys from Japan come to their office and be like, yeah This is a switch man. What do you guys think you can do on this thing? And they're like Run all our games on this thing. Yeah, I mean it just just to see the size of market that Bethesda has and For Nintendo did not even approach that's I want to say the same thing for rocks right right right We were just waiting like Ellen waters just that tip. There's actually more coming We don't know for them to not even approach that Well, especially with a brand new system going in a completely new way different directions in anything. They've ever done before For them to not approach Bethesda rock star, you know the major third parties kind of dominant would be kind of stuff Would be kind of dumb. Well, even now square Enix Okay, the Japanese company and I was a lot closer that used to have a fantastic relationship with them way back in the day Yep, then PlayStation happen, right? so Square Enix obviously has project Octopath travelers exclusive to come to switch They have you know Kingdom Hearts 3 in the works, which a lot of people are excited about Which they should be especially if you're the one that love visuals They because they have a toy story world in there that almost looks better than the original toy story movie and people I'm a while waiting in video games for video game visuals to catch up to what toy story did back in 1998 right and They took forever 20 years. Yeah, right, but we're there. Yeah, which is really cool Just just a really cool thing to think about because just how good the visual like how good Pixar is Oh, yeah, yeah, they're at their best. Oh, yeah, but to To have that happen with Kingdom Hearts 3 and this being me made an unreal engine for They've released Final Fantasy 15 last year.  Well, they don't call out the engine specifically. It's basically all been referred to it's it's the engine Mm-hmm, but that was our engine and we didn't have a choice. Well a lot. Well They want to bring the game to switch Luminous engine obviously does not run very well on switch It doesn't even run very well next one PlayStation 4 for being honest Mm-hmm. Final Fantasy 15 does not have very good performance on those systems It doesn't you know good for the PC the engine's just a piece of junk But they try they threw it at switch to see what happened results weren't good They didn't do any optimizations we talked about this briefly before but now we have more information where they're saying you want to know How serious we are about getting the full console version of it on on switch We're gonna talk with Nintendo and we're gonna talk with epic about converting the entire game into unreal engine for That's crazy because the switch fully supports unreal engine for that's crazy and Square seemingly is now exclusively using unreal engine for came to horse trees using it project project about travelers I'm gonna be surprised if they make everything an unreal engine I project octopath travelers could probably done in unity. They don't need to use. Yeah unreal engine for yeah, but why not? That's their engine of choice That's their engine of choice and switch runs it so well It doesn't matter anymore all the platforms they want to put the game on are gonna run well And right now it's exclusive to switch switch uses it well So they have experience making a game in unreal engine for ready for switch and what's exciting about this for people who might know It's fine if I was 15 who knows no What did I say is in unreal engine for a square Enix? Yes Kingdom Hearts game have been on Nintendo before they had on the DS. Yeah, so If they can get three with unreal engine for on switch like a square Enix is really that dedicated to getting games on switch The games that are already running unreal engine for our perfect candidates Yeah, so like it's crazy to think that square Enix is willing to take their big big flagship game that represents the whole company and final fantasy and Possibly rework it into an entirely new engine, which is not going to be cheap to do That's probably why they're talking to the intent of trying to see they republish this and pay for a little bit of that You know or get some of your developers involved right because they're obviously they know what's gonna be That's why they're unable to confirm right now Because they're probably still working on some deals down the scenes to try to get some funding to make it happen So I'm sure Nintendo's like, yeah, of course, we have a final fantasy on our system Yeah, if they're going after doom and going after I love you in the water They're going after Final Fantasy. They want it You know if there's anything Nintendo loves more than Western their party support It's Eastern third party support, right? They would love to have square Enix back in the fold completely and you know Maybe Nintendo at least I could look at it as if they do fund it. That's a sign of good faith They might be like look we will fund The the team that's going to do the conversion will fund it We'll pay for it and publish it as long as you bring but you gotta you gotta bring Kingdom Hearts 3 Yeah, they got that simulation like any any games you have running on the real engine for already You need to at least try to bring a switch. Yeah, yeah without us having to pay for it, right? Because if the whole big thing is you think it runs better on real engine for this game is visually impressive Okay, well your other games are visually impressive already run on real engine Can you try at least right try tell us what the results are? Right, you know how bad how much do you need an icon resolution or whatever else to make it work? Yep? What what I find is interesting in all this is just One how desperate square seems to be to want to get this game on there Yeah, our granite the game didn't sell that well another platforms Maybe because of the performance issues. I don't know. Yeah, I haven't played it much. So It didn't sell it well So they might think because Nintendo as a well, you know, they haven't had Final Fantasy forever, right? Maybe they'll just appreciate just having it right And it's on the go which might be another appeal factor for it because it's a game that takes hundreds and hundreds of hours Plus your breath of the wild again another RPG adventure kind of game six hundreds of hours Okay seems like a good platform for it because a breath of the wild again breath of the wild setting the stage for these kind of games And I think that's actually what's interesting about that while launching the system was that I think it almost Encouraged third parties because Nintendo Delta games have never been this big wide open world thing outside of like Zelda 1 and Zelda 2 Yeah, so they come back to it and they see oh It's selling everyone wants it. Why are we not making these? Games, so why are we not giving it to them? Yeah? For sure It's just crazy to me seeing one how confident Bethesda is their games are gonna sell and not just so confident They think it's gonna sell and they're not waiting to see if they sell before they commit more games Yeah, like EA feels like they're waiting that they're doing the Wii U thing if FIFA doesn't sell We're not doing it anymore Because FIFA didn't sell on Wii U. Yeah, they stopped making it Madden didn't sell on Wii U So they stopped making it well again you have and and you can argue 2k is doing the same thing because they did NBA 2k And Wii U didn't sell so now they're not doing it anymore And if this one doesn't sell then they might not do it anymore But again, you got to give games that are actually not buggy. Yeah, I know the full games But again those are obviously sports titles and a lot of our audience isn't gonna care about the sports title arena But if they can get everything but the sports title, that's still a win if they get all of Bethesda games They start getting all the rock star games, which it's funny because rock stars actually part of 2k Yeah, but whatever technically rocks rock star Could pretty much do anything they want. Yeah, let's just be honest 2k does not run rock star. Yeah, right I mean they own rock star. They publish everything, but yeah, if rock star wants to make Red Dead Redemption 2 They get to make Red Dead Redemption. They want to make GTA's Rockstar gets writes their own paychecks That's right. When you make a game by GTA 5 that's selling like a hundred million units You get to do whatever the heck you want. Yeah, so yeah, oh, we need a 500 million dollar, but okay. Yeah, right Okay, you've only made us billions. Yeah, right. Yeah, whatever you want. You can do that's what's so cool I thought they could take six years with their games because who cares they make so much money off them They're one of the few AAA studios that actually bucks the trend of I always say like AAA studios spend too much money on games Yeah, they need to cut back the budgets and yeah Focus on a more core experience making something like mad and all you're expanding also like just break it down to the essentials Get all that right cut back the budget do it right and then add on to it. Once you have it right, right But rock stars the exception rock stars the we already make billions We we should be able to do what we want as long as it doesn't go over what we previously made right And so if they're the ones that you want to spend 500 million on GTA 6 you go right ahead Yeah, right. You do not tell them. Yeah, right. You can tell them no for a billion I guess that way right all the games probably made them over a billion dollars. Yeah, right But I mean you just think about it if they sell like a hundred million units what are they gonna get to get to a billion on that make Well, they're selling what $60 that and I'll say they make $25 profit off it.  Yeah, but I might not be a billion might be 2.5 billion Yeah, right. Yeah, right. It should be easy 100 times Right depends on how many millions of copies they sell but the reality is Well, it should be good 100 million copies and you sold 10 million. That's a billion. Yes, so yes Or $10 So and they haven't actually so I know it's like 80 million. I'm just saying listen on switch Now possibly could GTA 5 like a full console version on the go You tell me people don't want that great. How many people don't want to take it to school where they shouldn't have it Um, I mean college. I guess it's fine.  Oh god or Excuse my language here.  Get out of the car. Yeah Okay, I only say get out of the car. Yeah, there's other things you can do in GTA. Yeah, um, but yeah, it's It's just interesting to me to see this kind of dedication especially from Western I feel like squares almost scrambling because because Square has lost a lot of tread in Japan It's got a hurt for them to not be relevant in their own country Right, Nintendo is maintained the relevance because of 3ds. Oh, we didn't sell very well or we you didn't sell it doesn't matter Yes, it's still doing fine So Nintendo never lost relevance in Japan but square You know Santa has and now they view that switch is blowing up in Japan too Well, we make games that don't appeal to Japanese audiences But if it's on switch, maybe they'll buy right because we make console games in Japanese only care of a portable Again, Japanese also bought more copies of Breath of the Wild than they bought of Zelda in a long time, too So again, yeah, you know, they might look hey because if we can move 200 300,000 units of Final Fantasy 15 in Japan Does nobody in Japan bought the game? It's just interesting dynamic seeing these third parties This is It's almost like I almost feel like I'm living in a dream This is what I've been waiting for.  Yep We see the potential we agree with you and we're not just gonna screw around We're not we're going to give you our best. We're not dipping your toe in and giving you not testing like like two cake might be Testing with them. We don't know. I hope we get 2k19. I hope we see a lot of improvements over this year But we don't know yet. We don't know what he is gonna do All we know is that he has a crap-load of games for us only get one. Yeah, right. Yeah I mean, we're getting an exclusive game in Square Enix plus they're trying to get their flagship game over We're getting Last year's best game out of Bethesda Plus they're giving us the new Colossus that hasn't even come out yet. Yeah, like that's not dipping your toe in You're fully invested. It almost can ball like that's yeah You not now you even see in rockstar being like look, you know rockstar takes forever to make new games You know we got red every time to two coming people presume. It's not gonna be on switch Don't know are they dipping their toe in with LNOR or is LNOR because it's coming out at the same time on other systems That's not like they're releasing like doom is already out on the other platforms So it's a late port. This isn't a late port LNOR is being remastered currently for all the platforms Yeah, so it'll get it at the same time. So that feels less like a dip in the water, right? That feels more like no, we're releasing this game. This is our new game this holiday We're releasing all platforms including switch and then when Red Dev Redemption 2 comes out maybe next year Yeah Yeah, it's possible and I mean think about the games Nintendo's even sitting up and through I bay a net of two You can't tell me that Nintendo at some point stop bringing that over to switch Yeah, they own the rights to it. Why wouldn't they great and I don't know and it sold decently. Well, I'm we you. Yeah Come on. It's coming to switch. Maybe they'll bring it to switch after they get Come on. Yeah, go to platinum them because they wanted to make a banana three go to be like fun You know what we have an even more popular platform now I'll get all these third party games actually perfect time to kind of bring over a bayonetta game. Yeah, yeah You know, I feel like I don't know what happened during the Wii U era But for some reason third parties give a crap suddenly six months later I don't know and it can't just be oh, it's selling the we was selling to okay Grand it was a there's a drastically different control scheme, and I understand that is powerful This isn't as powerful games are sometimes running at sub HD on switch to now, but I think it's all based on potential It is everybody can see the potential that this I think everyone's it's realizing that this is meaning potential What's the potential to you? Oh, I mean What's the appeal to third parties the appeal to third parties is that this thing is an on-the-go and a home console? You can play this virtually anywhere you want. I Think the appeal. It's it's you have our major games, and you can play them Anywhere you want sure that is the biggest appeal to anybody. I Think it is a huge appeal just to have Forget the TV aspect because I don't think they Third-party companies think they're selling their their games that people who care about playing on the TV Let's say because they have consoles that already do right I feel like it's more so that that on the go aspect right. I think they don't I think This is what's interesting Is overall a lot of people talk about oh switch an Xbox one a place for four and who's winning? Well, I don't think switch competes with Xbox one I think it's in its own market entirely it to me. I could be toward the 3ds I think exactly and that's what I was just gonna say to me actually wondering if Nintendo's the only one that considers this basically a home console Where we're all these We're all this gaming companies are like no, this is a portable. This is a portable much the portable that you can dock on your Yes, this is a portable. This is a portable gaming console. This is not This is an extremely powerful handheld that has the ability to play console Yeah, and I think the Especially now that it's selling third parties are like okay clicks. Yeah clicks people get it They want third party games right on the go Anyways, yeah, it's It's just a very interesting thing to see third parties is dedicated So I think it's just because the whole idea appeals to them I think the idea for them to want to play their games on the go like wait a second I want to do that. Yeah, well course consumers want to do that.  They're not gonna notice on a six inch screen.  They just want to plead they just want to rip parts out of demons and do right exactly You know have blood fly everywhere and they just want to kill dragons and Skyrim Yeah, and you know Yeah, they just want to do these things and do it anywhere. They want right? I think they almost see it like this is like the convenience that The almost the smart device revolution was in 2007 right. Yeah. Oh Touchscreens wait everything in one You don't have to have a separate iPhone and an iPod and a camera And a camera into that hold on to one And this is like you don't have to you don't have to have a separate device when you play on your TV and on the go It could just be one thing. Yeah, right cuz console game. He's always been like Oh console games are gonna go away because of streaming because of this and that and yet traditional consoles I still found a way and this is like yeah, but this is like the next step, right? This is like what console gaming has to go. I feel like that's what they see We're not gonna stop making PlayStation 4 games. It's huge nice. I'm making Xbox one or PC But Nintendo is doing something that no one else is doing and it's something that just clicks it Switch like it works. It works. Yeah, like the automatic desire for this It doesn't seem so far-fetched like I mean you can make how do people really want to have motion controls in my game It's the people really want this to people really want to play it on a lower resolution or people But they're like but it's different because the handheld so it's judged differently Right, it's like we said before about a fan complaining about 540p. It's like How many people are even gonna notice that right and it's on handheld? Yeah, that's what handheld are you how many people are gonna even notice right if you bought Yeah, yeah, cuz it's such a small screen right exactly the pixels are that condensed anyways, right everything looks better as is right Right like that's the way it is on our phones everything that you watch your phone They're 4k all that all this you watch it on your phone It looks way better than it's gonna look to you on a giant big screen right All everything is Extra condensed down so you could watch a 720p video versus 1080p versus 4k and on your phone You might not notice the difference right because the quality is always gonna look pristine right where's on a TV? You will notice it obviously it's a bigger screen right bigger screens are the ones that need that bigger pixel density Right, so I think that's why even the 720p screen. It's fine right. Oh for sure And if like oh it doesn't hit 720p doesn't matter. You're not gonna notice right You're not gonna notice what man I mean, maybe you'll notice if there's just a lot of jaggies like they didn't put any anti-illusion in that could make it But that's not that's not here's I think I noticed that more at 720p. Yeah, but that's what jaggies were until 720p Yeah It just look everything just like blurry right, then you got a separate view like what the heck Okay, Mario you're smiling, but then I see edges on your beard. What what's this pixel thing going on? What is happening right next HD fix that yeah But yeah, and it was that's gonna do it for this week's episode of the Internet by the podcast This has been an interesting ride. It's an interesting ride It's when I was when you don't really know what you get we have one topic in mind That was the Reggie topic everything else is just kind of fly by our seat of our pants and a couple of interruptions that we had That's okay. You guys. I hope you guys won't notice. Yeah. I hope you guys enjoyed the podcast this week I'll try to have some guests on next week I've been talking to some some bigger youtubers, I guess they're not really super big with their big Nintendo fans I'm hoping to get them on some future episodes And yeah, go ahead and support us over at patreon.com section tenor prime again We're trying to hit that $100 goal. We hit that goal hit our first ever patreon goal It's gonna be like a celebration. Yeah, I might even Somehow some way have an all in-person podcast special when that happens. Don't know what's gonna happen I'll probably try to get Zion back over here. Yeah Maybe I'll try to get a hold of CND see if he wants to travel up here. He lives in Wisconsin Yeah, whatever just try to get a hold of some people and try to get this all-in-person thing for a special overhead in our mark Because I love this podcast. I want it to be the focal point I want everything in our channel built around it instead of the podcast just being here's our podcast And then we just talk about news. It would also help if we did it every week, but yeah, I don't know Right It's just not possible right now But $100 a month makes it more possible because time is money.  I wish time wasn't money Oh, yeah, no, I know I wish that I could just do this. I wish I could do a daily Yeah, I would be the kind of funny games. They have a daily live stream show kind of funny kind of funny games daily Or whatever. Yeah, and literally it's like a half hour show or an hour show live talking about news and just Bs you know more video games every day. I would love to do that, but you know what they get paid, right? That's why they can do it. So We'll get there someday folks. Thanks for thanks for watching All right, follow us on Twitter at and at ninty prime or Facebook Facebook. They're half-sush and tenor prime Obviously the best way to follow us is on patreon hard to talk about that Otherwise subscribe right here on YouTube and we'll catch you next week or two weeks from now Whatever one next one whenever a couple weeks from now. Have a good one folks. Yep


My name is Ben Klebs and I'm a controls engineer. My day to day responsibilities include checking emails, I respond to customers a lot, just kind of updating them with projects and where we're at, as well as designing through AutoCAD Electrical and doing programming, do a lot of things on the shop floor with machines that are working currently as well as getting stuff ready for future students. Currently I am just a controls engineer and as far as growth opportunities go you can get to a senior level controls engineer all the way up into management. So what I like about the packaging and processing industry in general is, Ann Morrison is the designing and building a machine and then fully seeing it developed and then the final product and being shipped to the customer and seeing the difference that it makes in the field.


Hello, I'm Audrey Tang, Taiwan's digital minister. I'm really happy to be here virtually to share with you some thoughts around assistive intelligence from singularity to plurality. One popular vision of artificial intelligence imagines a future of large-scale autonomous systems outperforming humans in an increasing range of fields. Now, that vision, autonomous intelligence, tends to concentrate power, resources, and decision-making in an engineering elite. It is optimizing for artificial metrics of human replication rather than for systemic augmentation. And it misconstrues intelligence as autonomous rather than also social and relational. And because the term AI is used in a variety of ways, let's begin by clarifying the primary target of this talk. It's against a vision of autonomous machine intelligence that aims to achieve and surpass a generality ascribed to human intelligence. The application of this vision implies centralizing decision-authorizing. It implies obstructing more productive, diverse, and decentralized directions for technical development. And the issues of autonomous intelligence is not about the technology that it has inspired to create. For example, there's nothing wrong with deep transformer networks or reinforcement learning algorithms, many of which have genuine utility when applied for human empowerment. Instead, the problem comes from the focus on deploying these technologies in pursuit of a vision of exceeding human capabilities as rapidly as possible, leading to so-called singularity. But we are not locked into this trajectory. A vision of digital plurality have already powerfully transformed how we live. It helped to feel approaches from personal computing to the internet of beings and to share realities. And today, a variety of pluralist approaches could reign in AI's worst excesses. And those approaches range from collaborative governance strategies to treat centralizing symptoms of AI to investment in research programs, such as data collaboration and optimizing human complementarity, and also to build attempts to lay out comprehensive alternative technology agenda, focus on human-centered participatory design and democracy itself as a social technology. Now, this talk is based on a joint paper from a diverse coalition of contributors with a range of disciplinary expertise, personal backgrounds and perspectives who disagree on many things and are each most enthusiastic about different research programs and possible visions. That too is part of pluralism. What unites the contributors is a belief that strongly articulated pluralist projects for technology is crucial to avoiding the perils of autonomous intelligence. So what is autonomous intelligence? Let's see some quotes. Open AI's mission is to ensure that artificial general intelligence or AGI, by which we mean highly autonomous systems that outperforms humans at most economically valuable work, benefits or of humanity. That's from open AI. Solve intelligence and then use that to solve everything else. That's from DeepBind. Human-level AI. Well, that's the goal of Facebook AI research. Now, to avoid strongmaning, it is important to focus on the visions of an AI future as they actually exist in the greatest senses of power in the field. Representatives of these centers are the cutting edge operations of the three dominant technology companies investing heavily in AI. And that's open AI, DeepMind and Facebook AI research. So let's label the common elements of the visions of these groups. Autonomous intelligence. The conceptual and the practical commitments of this research and policy program are already well-reflected in the mission statements I just quoted. And there are three pillars. Human competition, autonomy and centralization. First, human competition. This first year commitment is a target of quote achieving general intelligence end of quote. It's largely defined by comparison to some concept of generalized human-level capability with the aim of surpassing them. This is already explicit in the open AI and Facebook formulations. The DeepMind formulation is a little bit more oblique. It focus on solving intelligence. And indeed, DeepMind's practice have often avoided a single-minded focus on human comparison. With that said, though, to solve intelligence is a single thing. Somehow, to me suggests that intelligence singularly understood is a well-formulated problem. And given that humans are usually described as intelligent, this also implies that outperforming some sort of singularly understood human intelligence is at least a necessary condition to solve intelligence. The second pillar is autonomy. Well, the machine assemblage in this pillar is compared to the human in the envision competition between human and machine. It's targeting independence from human direction and agency. Measures for success in achieving of so-called intelligence are predicated on achieving this autonomy. This is, of course, very explicit in the open AI formulation. It's also visible in the DeepMind formulation as the intelligence that it is envisioned is creating and imagined to itself solving everything else. Such commitment is least visible in the Facebook statement, but the term autonomous appears very frequently throughout their way as well. The third pillar, the final share commitment is centralization. It follows logically from the first two. It's more a practical consequence of the agenda. Though a future of centralization deriving from AI is clearly envisioned in more extended articulations such as with Ottoman. Now, with this term, we name what is occurring, a centralization of capital under the direction of a small groups of engineers of AI systems. Now, if technological systems are to be judged by this singular intelligence they achieve, then the more resource that can be put inside the box and the fewer people involved in creating those systems, well, the more clearly the technological advances can claim to achieve this autonomy. But the pursuit of autonomy from humans drives to what? This concentration, the centralization of power to direct capital and infrastructure in the hands of a very few. And now let's talk about theoretical problems against the three pillars. First, against human competition and other narrow technical benchmarks. The practitioners of autonomous intelligence measure progress by passing benchmarks and competitions with the most common benchmark being human parity in a task. For instance, tracking projects such as Stanford's AI index and the Electronic Frontier Foundation's AI progress measurement project all characterized progress in the field with comparison vis-a-vis human performance across the fields. Yet there is little theoretical basis for considering human parity as a useful target supportive of the interest of the long-term flourishing of our civilizations. Instead, this emphasis is most likely to create brittle technology capable of competing with and substituting for humans rather than complimenting us. And this may seem counterintuitive in some cases where it is human communicative or collaborative capacities that the systems aim at replicating. However, even in these cases, parity metrics are at best imperfectly correlated with desired aims. For example, many of the most effective human communication media such as video conferencing do not replicate any defined human capability. It instead facilitate communication using distinctly non-human infrastructures. Video conferencing and shared realities complement and extend human capabilities rather than replacing us. And we note the human parity in specific fields is often seen as an intermediate step toward the goal of absolute evident advantage over humans in every domain. However, this incessant focus on achieving so-called human level intelligence via task parity itself creates great harm and waste. Specifically, it sets the relationship between humans and machines as one of competition rather than one of cooperation and augmentation. So it both excessively displaced workers and forgoed myriad opportunities for improving human productivity. An array of paths exist for developing productivity enhancing technologies. The autonomous intelligence one based on achieving human parity and automating human work across various tasks is only one path and it's actually an extreme option. Pursuing automation in the many areas in which machines do exceed human capabilities is not itself problematic. The problem is focusing solely on automation even in place where algorithms whether AI power or not seems unlikely to have a significant comparative advantage over humans in the near term. Such focus fuels a more serious problem ignoring areas where technology could create new tasks for human civilization. And this problem flow from the more generally taken automation as a goal rather than a potential side effect of what would be a better goal namely to create new opportunities and productivities for humans. When technology focus on automation as a goal rather than a potential side effect it both displaced workers and fails to generate the new task and opportunities that would reinstate the workers into the production process doubly disadvantaged in them. So other approaches that focus on areas of apparent machine comparative advantage by creating new opportunities and productivities for humans are far preferable across both economic and social measures. A canonical illustration is Alpha-Vode from DeepMind which is a protein structure prediction model. This work proceeded by focus on area where computers already exceeded human performance that's to predict protein structure and where computer performance was highly complementary to a human capability namely medical science. It's important for human need namely relief from sickness and suffering. So the focus on achieving so-called human level intelligence for currently existing tasks frees in place contingent notions of current economic value where humans are capable of and what the economic judge to be valuable co-evolves with technology. The focus on automating economically value human work as in the open AI mission assumes some status in what is economically valued and could misdirect us away from the crucial way of evolving our economic system. Now against the second pillar, autonomy. While the human competition benchmarks for autonomous intelligence are unproductive for supporting a goal of broadly flourishing human society at least they are a meaningful objective and would be worth pursuing. If for example your overarching goal was to enable a technical elite to operate as independently as possible from the rest of society. But in contrast, the conceptual commitment to autonomy is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of intelligence as it exists and functions. That atomized view of intelligence captured in the very word autonomy misunderstands how social technical systems produce value. And this makes autonomous intelligence system inherently successful to good hearts law. That's to say the tendency of optimizing quantitative systems to over optimize what they measure. Despite the avoidance of such situations being the stated goal of much of the currently safety research particularly alignment research but intelligence is not an autonomous but a social and relational quality. While there is significant dispute about what intelligence means or whether it's even a useful concept most attempts at definition focus on capacity to solve useful problems and make plans to achieve desired ends. But both empirical study of such capabilities in humans and computational economic theory strongly suggest that such intelligence not primarily property of atomistic individuals but of entire social systems system that aim to achieve something like the intelligence perceiving human civilizations will thus depend on their capacity for interdependence and sociality not just autonomy. So autonomous exceptions of intelligence are particularly subject to good hearts law. As Drexler highlighted concerns about good hearts law apply primarily to system that aim to autonomously pursue ambitious goals with limited temporal or social constraints. And this is particularly true when pair with a focus on surfacing human capabilities exemplify in canonical thought experiment such as the so-called paper clip maximizer described by Bostrom. Now the autonomous intelligence research agenda cause in the long term both for the development of powerful autonomous human independent technologies and simultaneously though decries these as most responsible for soaring risk potential in the long-term future almost existential. What the clear alternative is optimizing for limited and constrained systems that are deeply integrated into social and communicative frameworks which has have far more circumscribed scope for good heart style failure myths. And moreover, autonomy tends to obscure and undermine important external agency critical to make systems function effectively. The production of the myth of autonomy both perpetuates the erasure of certain classes of human labor and also obscures how much decision making and assumptions on a part of the tiny technical elite govern how they operate and for whom. So our technologies should reflect social realities rather than the fiction of autonomy not only as a matter of ethics or politics but as a simple matter of efficacy and transparency. Now for the third pillar against centralized scale. Autonomous intelligence depends on two symbiotic future visions one optimistic and one pessimistic both dependent on centralization. Now in the first optimistic view a concentrated investment in a small number of people achieving distant and ambitious goals will yield broadly beneficial in the spectacular outcomes for humanity. Now in the second pessimistic view not achieving these very distant goals in a sufficiently aligned and highly controlled manner may result in significant potentially existential harm. But both views are fully dependent on the centralized control of AI systems effectively concentrating the power over vast resources in the hearts of very small groups. And this worldview of this elite will travel as their system will do displacing alternative perspectives domain specific expertise and pluralist values and epistemologies. However assertions of centralized control are also typically illusory. As many have shown the Soviet claim to conduct central planning what it gave way in practice to a range of decentralized decision-making activities given the inability of central planners to perceive or act on all the details necessary to implement their plans on the ground. And similarly AI system that aim as so-called neutral fairness via control by engineers end up instead devoting to replicating the very biases of society whose data they train on. And the aspiration and illusion also led to the formalization of a narrow set of values namely those of the designers of those systems currently a highly concentrated and homogeneous group with more and more humans left out of the decision-making process and benefits. And now let's talk about digital plurality. If the vision of intelligence as autonomous is the mistaken horizon for a goal setting for technological development then what is the alternative? Naming a single alternative a correct path will be self-defeating. Instead I think the alternative is not a singular narrow focus on any specific goal such as achieving so-called general intelligence but rather research and policy support for a plurality of complementary and dispersed approaches to develop technology to support a plurality the plasticity of human goals that exists inside the boundaries of a human rights framework. Now this alternative to autonomous intelligence already exists. We will refer to this alternative pathway as the assistive intelligence toward digital plurality but what exactly is that in jail? Well, plurality resists any single definition instead of aiming toward a technical end state it describes an ecology constituted of approaches that cooperate coexist co-evolve and operate in support of human decision-making about social well-being operating within their constraints of human rights frameworks. And these approaches create and intersect with and support new modes of decision-making by raising ongoing human goal setting to the surface as governing technology they transform narrow technical questions into opportunities for social innovation whether achieved through collective digital participation or some other modes of decision-making together. And rather than converting questions of social progress into formalized inputs for narrow technical expertise to resolve well they support and extend the human capability for directional goal setting and fair just in productive collaboration. As we here seek to characterize what's actually existing in this digital plurality we describe attributes of this emerging ecosystem and these attributes are reflected within the theoretical statements motivating work into space but not perfectly replicated in the technology that constitute it. And as we see this emergent alternative has three shared conceptual and practical commitments and they are complementarity, participation and mutualism. The content of these core commitments can be summarized as follows. First, complementarity. Technology should complement and cooperate with existing intelligent ecosystems never replace them. Technology should broaden the surface area of complementarity across individuals, organizations and systems allowing for even more network evolution. Two, participation. Intelligence is collective, it's not autonomous. So technology should work to facilitate the social nature of intelligence and in particular to facilitate deliberation on and participation in setting outcomes in equal measure to drive the achievement of the outcomes. And three, mutualism. Decentralized heterogeneous approaches under the umbrella of digital plurality can build on and benefit from one another. Technologies evolve in interaction with each other and social, political and economic institutions form an ecology. A wide range of social and technical projects in and around the digital world are currently developing promising alternatives. These projects differ in the extent to which they target the three pillars of autonomous intelligence and only a subset of them break away from them entirely to define a new ecology of digital plurality. So we can see that there are three rough lanes of work leading to the development of plurality and they share different elements of the three commitments named above and so we'll introduce this field by focusing on these three areas of practice each in turn. The first lane of work focus on mitigating the problems of autonomy. Now these approaches accept the necessity or likely inevitability of autonomous systems that aim at general human style intelligence but they are concerned about the tendency of such technology to become misaligned with human agency or have otherwise harmful effects and often because of centralized control over them. So these approaches tend to cover ethics, governance, safety or redistribution of AI systems and the benefits they create. Practitioners are to be found in various parts of AI ethics and FAT start communities. The AI safety alignment existential risk community and AI governance regulation community and the work on sustainability, windfall causes, capital taxation and related redistributive mechanisms. Now the second lane of work challenges one of the two more technical premises, competition and autonomy. There are a range of approaches that maintain focus on autonomous intelligences but break from the competition concept and break from the focus on imitating or displacing a singular anthropomorphic concept of intelligence and this work aimed to develop intelligences that are related to human intelligence that performs well in humans areas that are not just not that good to begin with like protein voting with alpha food or that complement or collaborate with humans such as the worker optimizing metrics of human complement terracing. Examples here also include cyborg technologies, human computer interfaces via brain and et cetera. Now one opinionated survey of this perspective is Drexler's vision of an AI services model as an alternative to the unitary human agent like intelligence envisioned in much of the AI safety literature. Now within this lane, there are also approaches that embrace the competition concept of autonomous intelligence systems and a goal of replicating various human skills and skill but that take aim at autonomy concept and the vision of systems achieving these goals as needing to be autonomous. So practitioners in this lane aim to explicitly account for, build off and harness the capability of the organizations and the individual that enable AI and digital systems to function. And this lane would embrace work on technical elements such as the privacy preserving machine learning stack or on economic designs like data dignity or on governance and legal institution like data collaboratives and on interaction paradigm such as machine teaching and human interloop systems. For instance, in contrast of GPT-3 some recent work from open AI in developing AI systems for pair programming by co-pilot would also fall into this category. Now the third lane of work breaks entirely with the autonomous intelligence trajectory. And these approaches are the most diverse and focus on decentering the role of technology and its capabilities while centering complementarity, participation and mutualism. This has led to a nascent but powerful ecosystem in which technological approaches and evolving human system for goal setting and decision-making build on and co-evolve with each other. And this lane of work includes many threads that begun as disparate areas of practice. The human-computer interaction, the human-centered design communities have a rich history of plurality evolving a program of understanding needs and limitations, building systems engineered to effectively fulfill these needs allowing for flexible use and compensate for limitations. Distributive agency has entered the design of technology infrastructure itself through self-organizing mesh networks and decentralized age computing. Economics and mechanism design have also played an increasing role in designing and building decentralized digital ecosystems ranging from microfinance and also decentralized e-commerce platforms and also radical alternatives such as those emerging from the distributed ledger and smart contract ecosystems. Now building on those ideas and broader social science there's an emerging agenda of social technology that harness social and computation science to build new and responsive institution enabled by digital technology. And much of this has been practically harnessed by civic technologists that harness collective intelligence to push the boundaries of knowledge. As these approaches have matured and developed intersections and second level complementarities have formed giving rise to new directions. We have seen decolonial technologies that work to distribute power and voice and are grounded in historical analysis of existing post-colonial power relationships that shapes our technical priorities, politics and infrastructure. Work on human-computer interaction has begun to understand the need for participatory action research and collaborative design that rigorously involves stakeholders in the design process often utilizing deliberative and constructive tools seen in other approaches. So there has been a flowering of work on decentralized technology that builds heavily on the work in the distributed larger communities. It aims to augment internet protocols to allow for web 3.0 or peer-to-peer information transfer on a decentralized network interaction patterns. And this has led to the formalization of digital commons and knowledge commons creating processes for systems from Wikipedia to open source code repositories that provide access to collective innovation while instituting a polycentric multi-stakeholder governance structure across local regional and global levels. Now, these are diverse directions and the landscape is constantly shifting and yet a nascent and growing ecology of digital pluralism and active and emergent landscape of digital pluralism makes it clear that we're not trapped on a fixed path to word desingularity.  It envisions intelligence as a single distinct autonomous quality to be both reached for and feared and one that once achieved is uniquely transformative. It becomes a singularity that will be the so-called final invention that humans create. And once this general intelligence is developed well, it will be impossible for humans to keep up or even contribute much directly. But we have another choice. We can replace competition, autonomy and centralization as guiding goals. We can replace them with principle that support digital pluralization, designing for complementarity, increasing participation and supporting mutualism. And emphasis on complementarity would mean evolving beyond the goal of automating human labor and explicitly designing system that augment and support workers. Increasing participation would mean recognizing the contributions of humans to existing AI systems, ensuring fair and dignified labor conditions across the AI supply chain and compensating not just data input but also labor inputs. And this requires regenerating the digital commons rather than enclosing it. It requires fundamentally rethinking the practices of capturing public data and privatizing the economic benefits from the models that are indebted to it. And benefits should be shared with the communities maintaining the commons and efforts should be taken to return the resultant technologies as much as possible to the same commons. Indeed, when data derived from a source specific to some community or a group of individual, what these people should have collective agency over the development, the use and the design of the model be publicly recognized as contributing to it and also share in any commercial benefits. And in a wider sense, greater participation means balancing the optimization of the current fixed and measurable goals with the future investment in broad best stakeholder reflection on whether those short-term goals are appropriate ones to begin with. And this means moving from a thin representation to richer and layered representations. That is to say, deliberative technologies, collaborative design and a fusion of policy change with technology developments. And finally, supporting mutualism would require directly addressing the impacts of technology rather than relying on policy makers or civil society to fix the problems technology creates or to balance highly skilled incentives. Clear accountability mechanisms must be established for the impact of a technology on the distribution of economic and political power, measuring it and reporting it along with other ESG metrics. Now there is a long way to go before the centralization goals can be productively redirected. And so that work must begin now. We must evolve beyond the focus of building autonomous human-like intelligence in preference for exploring a range of other possibilities that complement humans and human societies and facilitate participative cooperation. And by doing so, we will break down the centralizing tendencies with its reactive and proactive dangers. We will move via an embrace of digital pluralism and complementarity, participation and mutualism toward greater collective flourishing. Thank you for listening. And now I will read my job description again. When we see the internet of things, let's make it an internet of beings. When we see virtual reality, let's make it a shared reality. When we see machine learning, let's make it collaborative learning. When we see user experience, let's make it about human experience. And whenever we hear that a singularity is near, that is always remember, the plurality is here. Thank you for listening. Live long and prosper.


Women's hockey hosting Minnesota State the beavers were still looking for their first win of the season car worth scored in the first period the midgie up one to nothing looking for two but Emily Berglund denied after the turnover the rebound goes harmlessly wide waiting minutes of the second period Mavericks on a three on two the pass over to Corbin Boyd low Lauren bench gets a piece of it but not all of it that ties it up in the third beavers in their own and no one picks up Rebecca Colstad she skates unimpeded and redirects in the one timer for the goal they get two empty netters as the beavers fall to 0-7 on the season as they lose four to one if you enjoyed this segment of Lakeland news please consider making a tax deductible contribution to Lakeland PBS


Hey everybody, this is Brian. Welcome to the 14th LAMP tutorial today. We're going to be discussing the while and do loops. Go out to w3schools.com and just look up the loops. You'll see the while loop loops through a block of code while a specified condition is true. The do loop loops through a block of code once, and then repeats a loop as long as a specified condition is true. The distinction here is very important. The do loop will always execute at least one time. Don't worry about the four in each. We're going to cover those in another tutorial. The while loop, remember this will evaluate a condition and then execute a block of code if the condition is true. An example of this would be you have a variable i equals one while i is less than or equal to five. Execute this code. Increment your value. Very important. If you don't, you will create what's called an infinite loop, which means this will just run infinitely forever. It will never stop until PHP or the server you're on crashes or just until somebody shuts it off. So as you can see, the number is one, two, three, four, five. Once it hits five, that's no longer true. So dumps it out and you're done. The do loop, remember, do will always execute. And then you've got your condition. So what happens here is it says do, run this block of code, evaluate the condition. If that condition is true, jump back up to do, run it again. If it's false, then just stop. Very important distinction is that the do loop will always execute at least one time. And here you see the code they're using. Exact same, do, increment, print out the value, and then evaluate. And the result is two through six. Now let's actually jump into our IDE and let's play around with this a little bit. So we're just going to say, well, condition. And I tend to write out my skeleton first. So we'll say less than or equal to five, echo out the value. And concatenate a HTML hard return or break as it's called. Then very important, do not ever forget to increment. Create an infinite loop. Now, why would you want to create an infinite loop?  Well, you don't know when that connection is going to close. You just constantly loop until the program is over with. All right, now we're going to echo out, finished, run your program. And you can see how it says one, two, three, four, five, finished. So let's examine this very quickly. We have a variable with the values one. So one is less than or equal to five. That's true. Runs this code because it was true. It loops back up here. Notice how we incremented it. So it's now two and then three and then four. And then once it hits five, five is less than or equal to five. Runs it one more time increments it to six. Six is not less than or equal to five. So then it's just finished with this loop. Over the block of code. It just ignores all of this and jumps immediately down to here. That's how a loop and exits work. See one, two, three, four, five, finished. Now remember our discussion on the break command and ifs. You could actually say if I equals three break. Now what do you think is going to happen here? This is a pretty interesting combination here. We've already learned the if statement. So we're looping from one to five. But here we're saying if our variable is equal to three break. Remember break will remove itself from the current context. Run this. See one, two. It loops it through. I is equal to three. So it says, you know what? I'm done with you. And just breaks out and jumps right here. That's how you exit a loop is using the break command. Pretty simple to understand. Although that's somewhat of the elusive obvious. Some people have a hard time grasping that. Now remember if you're going to use an if statement, never do this. Because then what you're saying is every time this loops, set I to three. So you've created an infinite loop. It's just going to constantly loop. Why? Because when this is evaluated, it's saying if it's less than or equal to five, run this code. Even though you're incrementing, you're resetting it to three. So it will always be three. It'll go one, two, three, and then it'll just stay three for infinity. So never do that. Now we're going to examine the do loop. And we're going to say do. And we're going to say, well, whoops. Notice the semicolon at the end. And we're going to say, well, I is greater than zero. So what we're going to do here is we're going to loop through this while I is greater than zero. Now we're going to do the exact opposite. Instead of counting up, we're going to count down. So we're going to spit this out here. I'm a big fan of copy and paste if you haven't noticed. And we're going to decrement, meaning we're going to reduce that value. Let's actually throw some comments in here. This is starting to get a little cluttered. Do loop, while loop. And let's expand this out. We'll say 10. We're going to put this at five. So basically this will loop. But if it hits five, it's just going to break out. So that kind of pointless to have it. I'm just doing it for illustrative purposes. So you know how to break out of a loop. And then we're just going to do a do loop. Now this will run. Get down to here, print out finish just like we did. And then it's going to say do. Run this block of code. Then evaluate the statement. If the statement's true, it's going to jump back up here. Now notice how we're decrementing. What that means is we're taking one away. So we're going to start at, you guessed it, five. And then reduce until we get to zero. Once we hit zero, it's just going to finish out again. So let's look at our example and see what happens. You guessed it. One, two, three, four, finished. Because we broke out. And then notice how the value is suddenly five. The reason why the value is five is because right here. We're saying if I equals five, which in this case it would, because we've incremented up to five, then break. We executed that. Now our value is five because we're still using I. This is always executed. So it's five, four, three, two, one. Once it's here and it's one and we decrement it's now zero. So that's no longer true. It jumps back out. Pretty easy to understand. Hard in practice. You just need to keep practicing, use it as much as possible. Loops will save you a lot of time and a lot of code. They're there for a reason. They're good for you. And they taste good with milk. I'm just kidding. It's a pain. Making sure you're paying attention. Once again, you could actually throw an if statement in here and break out. So we'll say if, and let's get creative here. If I is less than two. Now I want to show you a different way with the if statement. Notice how we don't have the brackets here. It's all nice neat on one little line. That's called a single line condition or a single line if. What we're saying is if this is true, run this code. Now, if there's a bracket here, it'll execute the code block. But because there's no code block, we're just running it all on one line. Save and run. Let's actually pull this up so you can see what happens here. Do and then echo, decrement, and then if I is less than two, break. So we're saying five, four, three, two. Remember it's here. Gets to one and boom. You guessed it. Breaks right out of there. Pretty easy to understand. I would recommend you actually practice loops. Never, ever, ever forget to increment or decrement your value or you will create an infinite loop. That's one of those little gotchas with programming. That's all for this tutorial. Thank you for watching. I hope you found this educational and entertaining.


Yeah, so I'm Tech Sergeant Damon Notstein, I'm a combat camera craftsman here at the first combat camera squadron. So Exercise Green Goblin is, it's an annual exercise that we conduct here at the first combat camera squadron to really test and hone our skill sets in no light and low light conditions so that we can provide that basically like the you're here kind of perspective to DOD and joint leaders. Our cadre, we plan these exercises like months in advance so that we can kind of provide the most realistic training experience that we can. So we kind of try to work through like a crawl-walk run phase. So there's going to be some classroom stuff where they're going to learn different things from experts that have been out in the field, then they're going to actually get their hands on the equipment where the cadre work and give like instant feedback while they're doing different like sensitive site exploitation, workflow, different things with evidence collection under red light conditions and then lastly what we're really excited about is integrating with EOD. So those teammates are going to come over here in bed with our Comcam team and then they're going to ruck to a different location and go through some of these exercises that we're going to actually go through earlier in the week so it's going to be really exciting. Hopefully they enjoy it and don't really have a bad time. So at the first we provide senior DOD and joint leaders that directed imagery capability in support of strategic operational and planning requirements which basically means that we acquire still and motion imagery in support of air, sea and ground military operations. And since military operations don't stop when the sun goes down we have to ensure that every single member of our team is a technical expert in those no light and low light conditions so that we can actually provide those that imagery whether it's historical record or if it's battlefield assessment. So that's why we conduct exercise like Green Goblin it's necessary and it's definitely important for our team members. So in expeditionary environments we aren't really granted the opportunity to take our time to think through challenges it kind of has to be like second nature, right? So these kinds of exercises kind of put us in that mindset to where we're not only flexing like our skills but we're flexing our mental capacity to be able to process stressful situations so we can see what's happening in front of us, assess it quickly, react correctly and then provide that imagery that we need to do.