OK. Who is Ola Bini? I'm Ola Bini. I'm a Swedish developer. I've lived in Ecuador since 2013. And I consider Ecuador my home. I've been a developer for close to 30 years. The developer means that I write software programs. And for the last 10 years or so, I have been focused primarily on developing software related to security and privacy. The kind of programs that I develop are things that I give away for free for everyone. So I want to protect the privacy and security of everyone on the planet, not just specific people that pay me. So that's really who I am, or part of who I am, of course, my job, and this is not. It doesn't define everything that I am, of course. Since April 2019, I've been under investigation and then charged in a criminal procedure here in Ecuador. And I'm still not free for that procedure. OK. Number two, can you explain the motives of the Ecuadorian for pressing charges against you? I actually have no idea. I really wish I could explain the motives. I have been spending nine months now trying to figure out why they're doing this. Me and my legal team and my friends, we have a lot of guesses about why they're doing this. But to be clear, they have never said their real motivation. When I was first arrested, I was arrested on the charges of impacting the integrity of computer systems. But they never actually said which computer systems I had been attacking in any way. They never actually asked me any questions. They never interviewed me over the whole time when I was in prison up until the end of the interest from this calendar has never been an official interview of me where they've asked any questions. And of course, in media and in other places, both Maria Palaromo, the minister of the interior, well, previously minister of the interior and now minister of the government, and the president of the Republic, Kilea Ben Moreno, have both made a lot of pronouncements about saying that I've done several things in shooting. I have worked together with the former minister. We have the patinium to destabilize the government. The president also said that I was actually caught in the airport in the process of hacking systems that I've been hacking computer systems, telephone systems, and many other things. They said that I was doing that when I was captured in the airport. Of course, the official statements from the police officers that captured me and also the videotapes from the airport show that I was actually reading a book. So all of these things are very, very weird. The government has also made connections to Julian Assange. And of course, when I was taken at the airport, it was the same day as Julian Assange was actually thrown out of the exploration embassy and given to the British police. I'm only a friend of Julian Assange. I've never worked with him on anything or with Wikileaks on anything, but they claim that I have worked together with him to destabilize the government. However, none of these accusations have ever been presented with any evidence. It's something that the prosecutor of the case, he's been saying it in every hearing we've had, but he only refers to what Julian and Moreno has said in public statements. They've never provided any evidence for any of this. So from my perspective, if I were to guess, the fact that I'm friends with Julian, that I visited him in the embassy, might be one reason. Another reason might be that I work on digital human rights. A lot of governments don't like people working on encryption, working on digital human rights. And you can see this around the world that there's been an harassment of lots of different people doing legitimate security investigation and work and actually facing pretty much all these requests. Nine months have passed since you were arrested in Airport in Quito. In legal terms, what are you being accused of? Okay, so in legal terms, my current accusation is different from the one when I was arrested. When I was arrested, they didn't have an accusation and about 30 hours after my arrest, they finally charged me with all the possible crimes, number 232, which is this attack on the integrity of computer systems. But as I mentioned, they never actually specified which computer systems I attacked anyway. Two days before the end of the Instructional Fiscal on the 29th of August, they actually had a hearing where they changed the charges to another judge, which has the number 234. 234 is the unauthorized access to a computer system. And what they claim is that they have an image that shows that I broke into a computer system owned by the C&T in conjunction with Petri Kodore and Saini. Of course, the picture in question, first of all, the picture in question is just a picture of text. So you could say whatever, it doesn't actually prove anything. In fact, the technical experts from the prosecution side have already made a conclusion that they can't actually make any informatic, they can't extract any informatic data from it because it's not informatic evidence. However, the government is moving ahead with this and they also have now an accusation from C&T based on this. They still claim that this proves that I actually entered into C&T system even though the image in question, if you assume that the image actually shows something that happened, it actually doesn't show me entering username, it doesn't show me entering a password, it just shows going to the first page and then doing nothing. So this is what they claim my prime is. So this is, of course, very, very different from what they arrested me for, which was attacking the integrity of computer systems and impacting the integrity of the Ecuadorian government and working together with many previous Ecuadorian officials in order to, I don't know, sort of revolution or something like this. They've said a lot of many things, but what they're now saying is very small. And interestingly enough, they claim, of course, from the beginning that I was working with Patino, they claim that I worked with Rafael Correa in order to do these things, but the accusation of intrusion is actually for October 2015 against the C&T, which, of course, was during Correa's time and C&T, of course, is a public company. So if they needed anything from inside of C&T, they would presumably have easier ways of doing it than trying to get someone like me to break through to it. Okay, number four. Recently, it was announced that there were other surveillance in your house. What irregularities have there been in your case and what rights of yours have been violated? Wow. I'm sorry, but what rights of mine have been violated? That should be more or less all of them repeatedly. And in terms of all the violations, I have to admit, I don't remember all of them because we're talking, last time we counted, I think we were up in over 120 different specific violations of my rights, violations of due process and so on and so on. When it comes to the audio surveillance, I suspect you refer to the image that my lawyer tweeted out last week of two people sitting in a car outside of my house with the antenna pointing out of it. We don't know if this is audio surveillance. We don't know what kind of surveillance this antenna was used for. There are several different possibilities including surveillance of phone traffic, surveillance of Wi-Fi or other biographies. So we don't know if it was audio surveillance or something completely different. We do know that they keep following us, both me and my lawyers and my friends have been repeatedly followed. Most days, there is car support outside of my building following me when I leave, when I go to work, when I go somewhere else. Sometimes the surveillance is more heavy. Sometimes they're not there. But in general, since I came out of prison over six months ago, they are still following me almost everywhere around. As far as we know, they don't have any legal right to do that. In terms of other violations, of course, my violations started on the same day when I was arrested. I was arrested at the airport between 3 and 3.15 in the afternoon. And at that point, as we found out later, the actual orders to detain me were happening less than an hour before. But we also have evidence that I was followed at the airport even before then. I was detained without a translator, without getting access to it all year, without at any point being told why I was detained. I was taken away from the airport and then back to the airport during the eight-hour window of the first detention, which is so this kind of, I don't remember the name of it, but this first eight-hour detention is not actually supposed to be a detention. It's like a holding order. But a holding order has to be two different things as far as I understand. The first one is it has to be in the same place. So you can't take me away from there and then take me back. Then the holding order is over. So by taking me out of the airport and then back again, they actually broke the holding order. And secondly, the holding order is supposed to hold someone at the place where a crime was committed. And of course, the airport was not where they claim that any of the crimes were committed. So for these and many other reasons, this holding order was not actually a holding order, but it was actually an illegal detention. When I was finally officially detained on an order from my judge at between 11 and 11.10 in the evening, I still did not have a lawyer. I still did not have a translator. They claim that they read me my rights, but actually I didn't understand Spanish enough. And they tried to read it in English. Their English was so bad that I couldn't understand what they were saying. They denied me calls to family. They denied me calls to lawyer. And they never notified the Swedish embassy about my arrest, which is something that you have to do according to the constitution. They then held me outside of proper detention facilities until around 8 a.m. in the morning the day after when they took me to Florence. So that was just what happened on the 11th. And during the process going on from there, there had been so many violations of my rights and that I, yeah, we just spend all day just in your room. We have a nice infographic that details some of them that tell you a little bit of the different things that happened. The latest one or the biggest one that had been happening over the last few months is that my pre-trial was supposed to be the first scheduled for October 10. Of course, this is also legal because the Instruction of Fiscal ended on 31st of August. And the pre-trial according to the administrative rules of Ecuador, a pre-trial can only happen maximum 15 days after the end of the Instruction of Fiscal. But the 10th of October, this was actually canceled with that hearing because of the pattern that's in hand. And up until Friday, we had not had a day for a pre-trial. So we had basically just gone for three months just waiting for them to decide to report to a pre-trial. And during this time, there have been several judges assigned to the case and they've spent basically all of their time fighting with each other about who can get out of the case because no judge is interested in having the case. So we've been without judge for most of the case or for most of the last few months, which is also something that is not proper. And in fact, the provincial court at the end of December finally made a decision about who the proper judge should have been and they also sent a kind of a warning to the community that saying that this kind of thing and that this judge was not properly, she should be assigned to the investigative force. Okay, number five. Why is the struggle for digital rights and free software important? So digital rights, basically sometimes I feel like this whole idea of digital rights is kind of absurd because your human rights should be the same no matter whether they are in the analog, I would say real world, but of course we live a lot of our lives in the digital world, so it's as much real as the other world. But our human rights should be the same in both of these places. But the fact is that they are not. The fact is that right now, because digital media, because digital technology makes it so easy to evade privacy and to abuse people's rights in so many different ways, a lot of these kinds of abuses happen. The right to security and privacy are much better protected in the analog world. But because surveillance is so simple to do in the digital world, it's something that happens naturally and a lot of governments claim that the digital place is different. From my perspective, it shouldn't be different and from my perspective, technology should protect us. We should have the same rights everywhere. I don't feel like that's a very radical statement, but a lot of people seem to think that that's a crazy thing to say. So free software is very important because without free software, we have no way of doing what the computers are doing. We don't know what the technology is doing. We can't trust that they're doing the right thing. And we know that there are backdoors. We know that there are bugs. We know that there are errors that are in the system to use. Free software doesn't always fix all those problems, but it makes it possible for us to fix them. It gives us the possibility of, gives us the chance of fighting back against these kinds of attacks and digital limits. For me, privacy is one of those rights that by itself, privacy might not seem like it's super important. But at the end of the day, privacy is something that we need in order to have all the other things that society depends on. Say for example, elections. Democracy as a concept is based on the idea that people are free to choose who they want to govern them. And without free elections, then the whole idea of democracy kind of goes out the window. But the problem is, if you don't have privacy, if you know that you are gonna be surveilled, you don't really have freedom because you know that your choices will be observed. And if the government are the ones that are surveilling you, well, you're probably not gonna be doing the same kind of choices as you would make if the government was not surveilling you. So privacy for me is one of those core principles that is necessary for democracy to function. And there's been studies, Facebook did some, and there's been some other studies that show that when people are being surveilled, their political choices changes. They become more conservative. They don't consider alternatives and they would have considered other ones. So we know from a lot of research that sociologically, privacy is necessary for democracy. Okay. Why do you think that the preliminary hearing of the trial will happen in February? Yeah. First of all, I have to say I'm skeptical that it will happen in February because considering what has happened up until now with multiple delays, with multiple cases where the judges disappear, where things get canceled for no reason, I would not be surprised if they changed the pre-trial date again. It is my feeling that the government is afraid of moving forward in this process because they know that they have no chance of winning unless they proceed with completely illegal means. And they also know that if they proceed illegally, this case has so much international attention that sooner or later, if they do this illegally, this is gonna come back to them. Maybe they will win in the law court by pressuring the judges to do the wrong thing. But sooner or later, we're gonna get to the higher instances. We will get to the Supreme Court and if that doesn't work, we will get to the international court. And sooner or later, we will prove that this case has been, first of all, without any basis and second has violated every fundamental right of me and of people in Ecuador because don't forget. If this kind of thing, if they can do this to me, they are gonna start doing it towards Ecuadorian and they are already doing it towards Ecuadorian in fact. To the question of why they finally scheduled it, I do think that maybe they also feel that there is this balance, right? Like they probably don't want to ever do it, but they also know that they can't drag it out forever.  So if it actually happens in February, it's because they realize that they have to, they have to bite the sour apple and move forward at some point. Okay, final question. From the beginning, Lenin Moreno and Maria Parlar Romo have insisted in making accusations against you in the media. Were said accusations ever formally presented in the legal process? So I touched on this a little bit before. It's not just that they've made accusations, they have made accusations that have been disproved in the evidence for the case. So for example, Lenin Moreno gave his official witness or his official testimony where he simply said he doesn't know anything about my case, except for what Maria Parlar Romo has said publicly. But Maria Parlar Romo never said publicly that I was hacking in the airport. She never said that I didn't have any training equipment with me, so even here we can see that the president is actually contradicting himself. Maria Parlar Romo has said the same thing. In her testimony, she actually claims that they didn't have evidence that I had committed a crime. They only were worried that I might commit a crime. This is of course different from what she said publicly where she has claimed not only that I've committed several crimes, she's also claimed that they have all the evidence needed to convict me of those crimes. She has said this repeatedly, and Lenin Moreno has said this repeatedly. None of that evidence has ever shown up. If you look in the expedited, there is no such thing in there. In fact, the only evidence that they are really using, the core evidence they're using to accuse me of a crime is this image that I talked about. All the other stuff is ancillary report from the CNT and from technical experts and so on. That's what they're going to try out. So all this talk about having evidence that I've committed a crime is clearly something that was completely made up from the beginning. The only thing that is in the expediente is actually Lenin Moreno's public statements because the prosecutor seems to believe that those public statements are equivalent to proof. So those are in the expediente and sometimes or quite a lot of time during the hearings, the prosecutor spends a lot of time during the hearings actually talking about what Lenin Moreno has said. But no, no evidence at all.


Good morning, Amy. Good morning. Can you hear me and see me? I can hear you under your voice as quiet as usual. How's this? Okay. That's better. That's better. Okay. Thank you. Good morning. Good morning. I can't hear you very well. Let me check something here. Is that better? Just a second. I want to check my sound settings. Yeah, that's set correctly. Your voice sounds very quiet. Oh no. Does it still sound that way? Yeah, that's a little better. Okay. Good morning. It's past 10 30. So I'm going to go ahead and call to order this zoning administrator meeting. Of May 5th. And pursuant to government code section. This meeting will be conducted by zoom. The meeting will be conducted by zoom. And five, four, nine, five, three E and the recommendation of the health officer of the county of Sonoma. This meeting will be conducted by zoom webinar. Members of the public can participate virtually. At www.zoom.us. Join. Or by toll free telephone. At 877853. Five, two, five, seven. And the meeting ID number is eight, eight, five. Five, four, six, one. Seven, five, zero, eight. Public accessing today's meeting through zoom can provide comments during the public comment periods. And additional information related to meeting participation is available at srcity.org slash zoning admin. And this meeting is also being streamed on the city's YouTube channel. And let's move on to item two, which is general public comment. This is a time when any person may address matters, not listed on today's agenda. The public may comment on agenda items when each item is called. So each speaker is allowed three minutes. If anyone is interested in making a public comment. For an item not on today's agenda, please go ahead and use the raised hand feature. I'm not seeing any hands raised. So we'll move on to item number three, which is zoning administrator business. The zoning administrator is appointed by the planning and economic development director and has the responsibility and authority to conduct public hearings and take action on all applications for all administrative permits and approvals issued by the department. A determination or decision by the zoning administrator may be appealed to the design review board. And there are no zoning administrator reports for today. There are also no consent items today. So we will move on to item number five, which includes our scheduled items. The first item is a public meeting item for a conditional use permit for malaria fitness located at 2305 Chapman, court and Ms. two means is the project planner and perhaps our planning intern. Ms. Rago might be presenting on her behalf. Thank you zoning administrator Nicholson. Let me go ahead and share my screen. The project applicant is requesting a minor conditional use permit for their business. Meloria fitness located at 2305 Chapman court. Meliora fitness LLC is primary and online personal training and nutrition business. Clients may schedule one-on-one trainings at the submitted address 2305 Chapman court. Training will be conducted in the 24 by 21 feet finish garage. Only one client will be seen at a time with a 15 minute period between the next client ordered to the next client. Clients will park in the driveway and enter either through the main garage door or the side door into the garage located in the side yard beyond the fence. On site, scheduling hours will be from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m. Monday through Sunday. No access noise will occur. Music playing in the studio will comply with noise ordinances set by the city of Santa Rosa for zoning PD 0018. This area shows the project site highlighted in blue as the corner of Chapman court in Chapman way. The parcel is zoned very low residential and is zoned as a plan development PD 0018 which allows uses that are applicable under the R1 zoning district. No public comments have been made at this time. The proposed project has been reviewed in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and satisfies the provisions of CEQA and that a home occupation qualifies for a class 1 exemption under section 15 301 in that a home business presents negligible or no change in residential use for environmental consequences. The planning and economic development department recommends that the zoning administrator by resolution approve minor use permit for the property located at 2305 Chapman court, file number CUP 22-014. If anyone has any questions at this time, please feel free to contact us. Thank you for your presentation. I don't believe I have any questions right now. Is the applicant here and wishing to make any comments? The applicant is present. Great. I see a hand raised. Billy, would you like to provide some comments? No, I'm just here to answer any questions. If any come up. Okay, great. Thank you. Okay. Let's go ahead and move into public comment. Is there any member of the public that wishes to make a comment on this item? If so, please use the raise hand feature. Okay. I'm not seeing any hands raised. So I will close public comment. So thank you again for the presentation. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for your comment. So thank you again for the presentation. This seems like a. An appropriate and compatible home occupation. I can make the findings. I think that they're well done in the resolution. And I also appreciate the conditions that were added. Related to the number of. Non resident employees and just the, the staggering of appointments, which should minimize any parking or traffic impacts to the neighborhood. So. I, with that, I will be approving this minor conditional use permit. And just a note to members of the public. Any action taken by the zoning administrator today is not required. So if you wish to file an appeal, you can contact the project planner and that needs to occur within 10 calendar days. The date of the decision. Thank you. And with that, we'll move on to our next item. This is item 5.2. This is a public meeting for the. Hillside development permit. Retaining wall and arbor. This is a hillside development permit. And the site is located at 3893 sky farm drive. And miss two man's is the project planner. Thank you, Ms. Nicholson. Let me share my screen. So yes, this is a hillside development permit for. Proposed landscaping for. The request is to allow the construction of a retained wall and arbor. In a hillside development area. This is the aerial of the property before the tubs fire in 2015. As you can see, the site was altered for the original house. Here is the aftermath of the tubs fire. Unfortunately, in 2017. Here's the aerial from 2020. And as you can see this, the site is still considerably altered by the original house. Here's the site plan showing the replacement residents. And the landscape alterations. That include retaining walls. And the arbor to the rear of the house. Here's a topographical. Representation of the property. As you can see, there's some flat areas where the original house stood before the fires. And the applicant is the designers making use. Of the flat areas. As much as possible. Here's a slope analysis. There is an exception in the hillside development. Section of the code. That allows. Building into. Areas with higher grade. If it was altered originally altered. By the original dwelling. And that, that is the case here. Or it was altered by through the construction or. In this case, probably clearing. The burn debris from the original house. And here's that code section. The code states that project should not alter the slope that is greater than 25%. But it does provide exceptions. When the areas. Over a previously constructed slope in which case this is, and that's why I showed the original. Area of the original house. The planning and economic development department recommends that the zoning administrator by resolution, approve a minor hillside development permit for. A new retaining on Arbor and areas of 10% slope or greater. But I'd like to. Propose. An alteration to one of the conditions. Let me stop my sharing here. There is a standard condition. In the resolution that we. Normally include for hillside development permits that. Requires that the grading be limited to. In the resolution. Roadways, driveways, garage pads and under structure areas, including accessory structures, such as swimming pools. So it's condition number one in the resolution. Unfortunately, it doesn't capture retaining walls. So. I didn't want to. Exclude that from. The project. So. My suggestion would be to either. Or modify the condition to state. That the. Grading shall be limited to the plans dated. The plans that are part of the. Project dated receive January 26, 2022. So I, I wasn't sure which. Alteration of the condition you would prefer, but that is my recommendation. Thanks for bringing that up. Thank you. Perhaps the, the second condition that you recommended is a little bit better. Just so. You know, it captures. Any grading that might occur. Like in the Arbor area. And so that. That sounds good. And I'm. Yeah. Okay. With that. Thank you for the presentation. I do have a question. I just want to make sure I fully understand the area where this is happening. Certainly. Let me share my screen. Great. Okay. And then so this. The. The retaining walls. And it might be a better question for the applicant. I see that. The designer is present. Okay. Mike, would you mind raising your hand and then we can give you speaking permission? Thank you. Good morning. Good morning. I was just hoping that you can clarify. On this slope analysis. Just. Where the. The Arbor and the retaining walls are, are located. I just want to make sure that I, I mean, I, I know that they're. They're to the rear of the lot, but. I don't have the ability to move your mouse around, but. I don't, but if you, if we start on the left side of the drawing. The, the retaining walls. Yeah. Keep going to the left with the arrow. There's two walls right there. That you can see on the slope analysis. We superimpose the site plan on the site analysis. So you can see where we're proposing. There's a set of stairs there. Correct. And then there's a lower terrace. If you go above that with a round, rounded off. Retaining wall, which we were trying to round it to keep with the. The contours. So it's those three retaining walls. And then if you go to the right kind of parallel or horizontal. It's the. Yeah, keep going. Keep going. Yeah. Just a little bit above there. The zigzag wall and then the rounded off wall. Those are part of this permit as well. That we're requesting to flatten out the, the lower level. So. On this site, there used to be a two level house. The lower left. Was it's higher and then the lower terrace is upper right. The lower terrace. And then making that with the new house. But the new house is a little bit bigger. And so in order to provide enough flat terrace for the rear yard. We are pushing out and putting in a, you know. Landscape wall basically. On that lower terrace to get the lower terrace. And that's also an ADU there. A little bit of a backyard area. That's what it's going to look like. It's going to look like it's showing on this. Plan is. If you see those kind of step pads. To the left to where your arrow is. The arbor is in between those step pads and. The pool. To the left more and down. Keep going left there. Those rectangles. Yeah. So between that and then up to the right. The pool is that larger rectangle. Kind of where that two green, darker green triangles come together. That's the middle of the pool. That's been permitted with a separate permit. And then down to the left in between the step pads. And the pool is a 10 foot tall arbor, a 10 foot tall arbor. That's going to cantilever over the pool. Great. Thank you for that clarification. Okay. I don't have any additional questions at this time. But I'd like to open up public comment. Is there any member of the public that wishes to make a comment on this item? If so, please use the raise hand feature. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for that. And I'm just taking a look at the resolution. Miss. Miss two means. Were there no conditions of approval from engineering? Yes, there's no exhibit A for this project. Okay. I didn't mention there was no public comment either from neighbors whatsoever. So. No interest from the neighbors. Okay. Great. Thank you. I appreciate the presentation and thank you, Mr. Quick for providing that additional detail that was helpful. I have reviewed each of the findings in the resolution and. I, I agree with them. I think that. The retaining walls following the contours is important. I also appreciate that this site has. You know, some fairly large areas of 25% slope, which were likely altered and this would allow for, for use of the yard. And I think it's designed in a way that's sensitive to. Again, topography and also views in the area. So I will go ahead and sign the resolution of approval. Once miss to me and makes that. Modification to the first condition. And I'm assuming that that's okay with the applicant as well. That, that modification is acceptable. Thank you. Great. Okay. So yes, as soon as that modification is made, I will go ahead and sign. Sign it. And with that. I'll conclude this item and just a reminder to members of the public. This action is subject to appeal within 10 calendar days. And that's what we have today. And that is our last item on today's agenda. So. I will go ahead and conclude today's meeting. Thank you very much for attending.


Today, I've had the pleasure of doing a keynote speech at the ECB conference, of course, on the very timely topic of monetary policy management at the current conjuncture. And I think my lasting message is that I took, of course, not just an advanced economy perspective, but also a global perspective, that we are confronting risks that are well known, but importantly forgotten, the old world of stagflationary concerns where we are many countries, as I emphasize, especially in the emerging world, but not exclusively, the recovery from COVID has been at best imperfect. Many countries remain well below previous per capita GDP and yet inflation is much higher. In the advanced economy, there is still the hope or the, if not, I wouldn't say expectation, but certainly the hope that the exit from low for long interest rates as central banks tighten to deal with inflation can be benign. I flagged very much in my remarks the risks that soft landings are difficult to engineer and rare an a rare occurrence in history. Therefore, much of my talk was concerned with the risks, yet the importance of acting quickly, but the risks associated with exiting from low for long, the low for long real interest rates and nominal interest rate world that we've been living in. I also emphasize that the exit risks are not just advanced economy recessions, but importantly, aggravating conditions globally in the context of higher likelihood of debt distress among many middle and low income countries and rising poverty rates and political discontent.


Dyma'n gwnaeth yw'r adiad, ac,yn am beth sy'n ddiogelio ar yr DEA yn gwleidio'r yma. Efallai e'n dargot counhraff i chi yn yw Dublin. Rwy'n credu yma yw'r IE, fel ym seven awydd, ac mae'n ystyried o un rydyn ni. Yn yw'r ystod, blwyddyn nhw hefyd wedi dweud o Dublin wedi'u hi ddувати a gofyn. Efallai rydyn ni'n rhoi. y cyllideg cyllidegol yn bwysig, mae'r griffau yn gyntaf i gael ei gweithio gyda'i cyllidegol hwnnw. Mae'r gweithio'r cefnod, a'r holl yng Nghymru, ac mae'n gweithio, mae'n gweithio, mae'r meddwl bod hynny'n gweithio. Mae'n gweithio. Mae'n gweithio'r meddwl. Mae'n gweithio'r meddwl. Mae'n gweithio'r meddwl a'r holl o'n cyflwyllfa o'r rhaglen ..a'r rhesymau gweld i Eurwyr, a'r rhesymau i Ffrans. Rhyw unrhyw yw ydy'r gweithio, rydyn ni wedi'i gweithio... ..yna ysgol i Ffrans, a'r ffrans yw'r cwmfrans. A'r gweithio, rydyn ni'n gweithio unrhyw. Rydyn ni'n gweithio ar y cyfrannu'r cyfrannu... ..yna'r cyfrannu ar y Cymru. A'r cyfrannu ar y gweithio ar y gweithio ar y cyfrannu. ac rwyf amdag y plesig hefyd yn mynd i ymddiadio eich iddydd i'ch leidi yn y cyfrifio. Maen nhw'n bwer o bwysig gyda'u ei chynllun, mae wedyn oeddortunu'r ddigwsg iddynt nhw. Hysbeth ni'n ddigwsg gyda'u gwaith yn gyffredig. A ni'n ddigwsg gyda'u mynd i'r ddigwsg Gymru, ac rydw i'n ddigwsg gyda'u gwybod pan fynd yn gwyrdd pe twice. Mae'n ddigwsg gyda'u gwybod, oherwydd rydw i'n ddigwsg gyda'u gwybod. It would be bad for jobs. You have to stand in the line. So, I felt like saying, although I did not say, You are the country with the 11th and the only employment. We are the country with the 6th and the half of the unenvelopment, but instead I stood in the line for 40 minutes. My second story, which is slightly more pro-French, is that actually at the weekend I went to Paris with my wife for her birthday. Rwyf i chi'n cymryd i'w amser, rydyn ni wedi cael ei wneud. Rydyn ni'n gwneud o'n ysgolwyr ar y cyflwydoedd John Lewis, ac i'r ysgolion â'r ysgolwyr yw'r amser a'r ysgolwyr yw'r ysgolwyr yw'r ar gyfer yng Nghymru? Rydyn ni'n deallr bod gyda'r croes iawn o'r cyflwydoedd. Rydyn ni'n ddau'n gwneud i'r ysgolwyr yw'r ysgolwyr yn ymgyrchu. Ieithio llai'r gweithio, ac mae'r gweithio yn enwm y fydd yn gweithio'r gweithio'r ffrans i gael o'r gweithio'r awdol. Mae'n rhodod yn ystod yn ei wneud, ac yn edrych yn ymryd yma, y gweithio yma, mae'r gweithio'r gweithio yn enw ymlaen. Ond ydych chi'n gweithio'n gwahanol o'r gweithio'r gwahanol a'r gweithio'r gwahanol i'r sefydliadau i'r gwahanol ar y Prif erioed yma, ac mae'r gwahanol yn ei wneud yn ymlaen. Ond dyma, mae'r wyf wedi y gwneud yn gwneud i parrhaf yn yr anytime, ychydig sydd yn gyfarwydd i parodau yn y dynna ar y gyfnodau. Arioryn iawn i ymduso, yu herio o'r ymgyrchodio sydd yn gwneud i wneud i ymdusech, byddai'r wneud i gyfrifiadau iawn i wneud i gyrwch gyrhaf o'r cyffredinol, i wneud i'l argynnu cyfrifiadau. Rwy'n mynd i gydag yma, rwyf wedi lŵn i wneud i gyr�ddiaid yma i ddau. Felly mae'n rhaid i ni gyd ddod o'r rhaid i'r economa i European Regulatio, ac mae'n mynd o'r cyffredig o'r economa i'r economa i'r economa i'r economa i'r newid, felly mae'n mynd o'r gennau a'r gennau a'r sphysbethau a'r bobl a'r yma, yn ddau ddyn nhw'n ei dŷl o'r past a gennau i'r ffordd yn cyllid yn hyd. a this is a particularly timely topic at the moment, regulation in Europe and its particularly timely place to talk about it in. We've seen a set of changes and incidents that I think have subtly changed and sometimes quite crudly changed attitudes within Europe, felly i yw'r gennymu heb sydd yn gyflawn i'r cyfry canfion i gael cyfyniad o'r cyfyniad o'r cyfyniad ymgyrch. Mae'n rhai caffiau i'r erbyn yn gwlad ac i'r cyfyniad yn gwlad cyfyniad. Mae wedi y cwbwys��io i'r cyfyniad am gweithreidau a gwbwn fydd yn gweithio'n gweithreidau cofyniad a'r cyfyniad ym ym diddyn nhw yn cyflwydoedd. ac yn ymweld i'r ysgolion i ei gweld. Y dyn nhw ddyn nhw, fel oedden nhw wedi'i arwain, mewn y llyfr yn unrhywun i'r NSA ac yn Google. Yn ymweld i'r NSA, i'r ysgolion i'r unrhywun i'r llyfr i'r unrhywun i'r unrhywun a'u cymdeithasol. ac yn ymlaen i'r unrhywun i'r hwn o'u cyfaelio yma o'r e-mailiau gyda chi'n ei wneud eich cyfaelio'n ymweld i'r llyfr o'i mwylltau. It was sense that the NSA was in some sense unwilling of the part of the large US internet companies. But an alliance where they would scoop information out of these big information repositories, particularly the US companies, and that it was that European individuals, European citizens, had no choice and were under threat from this power. The third incident recently is the European Court of Human Rights ruling on the right to be forgotten where an unexpected ruling actually that Google had to censor its results in Europe and take out certain search listings when individuals complained that it was an invasion of their privacy. And then finally and pertinently to double in the recent debate about tax avoidance by large companies Google, Apple, Amazon as well as others and a sense that these large internet giants was coming here providing some employment certainly but participating in a large consumer market without paying their fair share of tax. And behind all of these things, there's a growing sense I think of a fear of our US dominance, two attitudes actually together, both fear and envy, a feeling that we are within the European economy that the US companies are dominant at the same time an envy of what the US has produced in terms of innovation technology, an envy of Silicon Valley and what it's done for the US economy. And so those two attitudes can be held together. Now I'm sure many of you here have been to Southern California, outside Northern California have been to Silicon Valley and the sense one has just being there in Palo Alto or Mountain View, not only that this is a place where a lot of people do things or enterprising create new companies but I find a sense that one feels if I were here I'd go out and found a company, I'd go and do something because there just seems to be something in the water or in the air that encourages risk taking. And I would say there were three things there. One is an attitude and I think the cliched American attitude of optimism, risk taking, willingness to throw things up in the air, willingness to take a chance in search for a better future and in search for a reward. Second infrastructure, by infrastructure I'm talking broadly, I'm talking about Stanford University, a highly educated workforce, a research base that has formed historically the basis of many Silicon Valley startups and Silicon Valley companies. Sandel Road, the home of venture capital, the fact that if you have an idea which seems like it might work, there's a ready base of financing for it if people can see a profit in it, if these companies which again have a history of achieving really rather higher returns from a few enormous successes think that you might be the next big thing. And then finally regulation, and by regulation I mean a sense that you're not going to be regulated out of existence, that if you start a company which is disruptive it won't be blocked from doing something, that a venture capital company that invests in that company even if it has large disruptive effects will be able to get large returns from it. And generally speaking those things come together I think to create an atmosphere of energy and risk taking. And of course the favourite word of Silicon Valley these days, there's conferences named after it, people talk about it all the time, is disruption. And disruption is a rather nice sort of word because it suggests that you're shaking things up in a positive sort of way. But of course what it really means in some ways is destruction. You're talking about setting up a company, a small company that will destroy part of the business of a large company, that's why it's going to make a lot of money and that is why venture capitalists want to invest in it. Joseph Schumpeter, the Austrian economist and actually briefly his finance minister was European but he expressed it very well in this phrase of creative destruction and the nature of capitalism being creative destruction, a constant ferment of things rising and things being pulled down of companies rising and collapsing and he compared that with socialism. Now and I think that's a sort of broad sense not only in the US but even within Europe itself that the US is much more comfortable with the idea of creative destruction than many European citizens are. This is not to say by the way that there is no such thing as regulation in the US. Believe me if you've ever lived in New York you will know there's an awful lot of regulation and really quite detailed regulation from not being able to jaywalk to all sorts of rules. It doesn't sometimes when you're there the image of the US as being a light regulation society certainly doesn't feel like it and a lot of US regulation is not only quite detailed but highly politicized. It is a democratic system where often a financial regulator will be an elected official and will be trying to make a name for himself or herself by imposing new rules. And there is the whole web of both federal and state regulation and you can often end up in different industries particularly the finance industry with four or five different regulators taking interest in your affairs. Equally I don't think that the cliche that European regulation is bad, heavy handed and protectionist is true either. There's actually been quite a lot of quite smart EU regulation in the area of telecoms technology and media over the years. I think of the creation within the EU of the GSM standard which was one of the reasons why Europe was actually ahead of the US in the earlier development of mobile phones. I think of local loop unbundling in telecoms where state companies were forced to let their networks be used by competitors. Much more effectively by the way than in the US where the Federal Communications Commission attempted a similar thing and then backed down from it as a result of which there is a cable telecoms duopoly in a lot of places. If you're in New York you have a choice of time on a cable or a horizon and that's about it. You have a much greater choice of services in Dublin or London. Behind that I think the EU competition push to limit the power of state companies and former state owned companies is quite important. A lot of the EU regulation at least some of it is much more technocratic and economically rational. I don't mean that as an entirely values judgment. It takes a strict economic view rather than a political view of what is best. Equally I would say that we're seeing moves in the new European Commission that understand the importance of small business investment, infrastructure, energy and broadband investment. I think that the EU Jobs and Investment Programme is due to be published in February. If this EU Commission is actually allowed to start working these are quite hopeful sensible initiatives. I also think that there is a danger at the moment at this particular turning point of European attitudes to technology. The danger I think is exemplified in the open letter written by Matthias Dofner of Axel Springer, an open letter to Google, which I think if those of you haven't read it is very much worth reading because it's a sort of long cry of pain about various aspects of privacy, of media content, of copyright, of whether or not Google will allow search engines owned by Axel Springer, not coincidentally, to have high rankings on its search pages, and a sort of general all-encompassing sense that Google is an overdominant bad thing that needs to be rained in on any number of grounds. I think one has to examine that sort of thing pretty carefully. It's not that he doesn't identify real concerns, but it seems to me that there is a, and one can also see it in the lobbying campaign against, which is attempting to get Google's competition case, sorry, the competition commission in the EU to limit Google's power and to effect and to change its search rankings. If you look at the lobbying and the complaints against Google, they come from all sorts of different industries with very different interests from search engines to content companies, and one is left with a broad impression that they were simply like a lot of smaller European companies not to face such tough competition from a large US one. Behind that, there is a sense that Europe is a place of a strong creative industry, but based more on media content from print to audio-visual to video games, than it is to do with software, software and services and technology, and I understand that fear. My brother-in-law works for the Neu-Azir to Zeitung, the Swiss paper, which is just currently going through tremendous upheavals, and the real question is about whether or not it can survive. And the NZZ, or like the Times of London, maybe the Irish Times, is absolutely part of the fabric of Swiss society. So these are real, it's causing real pain. If you look at the figures, there's a recent study by Bertelsmann of what he calls the European creative economy. And indeed, you know, this is a large contributor to many European countries, evaluated of, it estimates, 40 billion, 48 billion euros in Germany, 34 billion euros in France. The composition, if you look at it, in Germany, 20 billion of its GDP, annual GDP, is from print, 10 billion from audio-visual. The UK is actually balanced rather differently in its definition of what is the creative industry. 560,000 jobs are in software and IT, which is a third of the total. So it's a third of the total and the rest of the pie are things like print, audio-visual, music, and so forth, content, as we would call it. And of course, the UK is very far from the sole case. A lot of the, some of the Scandinavian countries, Finland, Sweden, Denmark are particularly innovative and have a strong technology base. But generally speaking, when the EU agenda for technology talks of a slow uptake of ICT and how that affects not only the ICT industry itself, but more broadly productivity across a range of industries. And indeed the EU itself points to the research and development in ICT being at 37 billion in the European Union. This is 2007 figures and 88 billion in the US. So something feels as though it might go wrong here if we start simply trying to protect what we have. I think that there's a rather obvious flaw and it's a symbol more than anything else in the right to be forgotten ruling. Where the court decided that Google had to Google and other search engines, but Google has I think 90% market share in the EU compared actually with a much lower market share, 68% in the US. But the court decided that Google would have to remove search references to underlying content. Now it did not say that if you had a story, if there was a story published about you or a Facebook entry and that the actual content owner had to take the story away, it said that Google had to simply delete a link linking to the content so that it would be harder to find. Which at a logical level just strikes me slightly odd and it doesn't to me make much sense. If you really think that something should be censored, you should censor it. The idea that you should simply stop somebody pointing to it and leave it be is strange. And it suggests a bias more towards looking to the technology industry for responsibility rather than the content industry. As I said, I think that's more of a symbol than anything else. There are real questions about dominance of large organisations such as the US technology companies. The European Court of Justice and the European Commission views tended to be much more than in the US. It's tended to be that size in itself can create harm that if there is a large dominant company something ought to be done about it. But some of the history of that attitude within the European Court comes back to the former state-owned monopolies. And there's less of an emphasis on an analysis of economic harm and whether or not the company may be large but it's actually distorting competition. From my point of view I think that the recent EU competition case against Google is wrong. Or rather the settlement reached by Almunia with Google strikes me as being fair enough. And the fact that the cases had to be reopened under lobbying pressure and under pressure within the Commission I think is wrong. If you compare that case with the Microsoft case of the past where Microsoft was disciplined by the EU for bundling, the reality was that if you had Microsoft software on your computer it was extremely hard and it then bundled its browser and its other software. It was very hard to escape that.  With Google that's not the case. People are choosing to use Google. They don't have to. Two clicks away is Bing or any other search engine. It's not entrenched in some technological sense. It's just a preference. And it seems to me therefore that the EU has to think carefully about this identification of size with abuse. The two aren't necessarily the same thing. I'll also mention in passing something that I believe the European initiatives or EU initiatives are more sensible than that taxation. Which is a subject that this country is directly affected by. Particularly the double Irish treatment with companies such as Apple and Google of being able to set up either an Irish incorporated company but have an arrangement with an offshore company charging royalties such that the tax base is very low or indeed a company that is incorporated in Ireland but not registered in Ireland for tax purposes, a concept I don't really understand. It seems to me that if at some broad level the social view that a large US companies should pay their fair share of tax is perfectly reasonable. If they want to be over here and take part in the economy there is no reason why they shouldn't pay standard rates of tax. Interestingly I don't think there is anything wrong with what one might call the single Irish which is competition on straightforward corporation tax. Because I think that is broadly accepted certainly within the OECD as being legitimate and if Ireland happens to have or has deliberately a low rate of corporation tax then fair enough. But I think that the European effort to try to get large US companies to pay more tax and certainly not to engineer their tax arrangements in some of the ways which I mean is latest initiatives have suggested is fair. So where does that leave us in terms of the EU's competitive position with the US in terms of technology and innovation? I would suggest that the EU from an infrastructure point of view, one of those three categories I mentioned earlier, is actually not in a bad state. It has a relatively speaking in many countries an advanced and sophisticated education system. It produces a lot of highly educated people. The venture capital base, the financial base, again it's been weaker than it is in the US but it's getting stronger. There's quite a move not only of US venture capital companies into London and other centres but also indigenous venture capital. There is an attitude certainly in Ireland, certainly in the UK, certainly in the Scandinavian countries towards encouraging enterprise through taxation for allowing people who make money and are successful to keep more of the capital gains of that. The one thing I would say about the infrastructure is that Europe suffers from not having the language infrastructure of the US in that it doesn't uniformly speak English or as I think really it would be more appropriately called the days American. Americans do speak English. The Irish I'm pleased to say have been rational enough to keep the English language even if they decided not to be part of the English empire. That's a competitive advantage. I have nothing against Gaelic but in terms of business opportunity English is a useful language to speak and it's a serious point because across Europe having different languages makes it much harder to spread a single business. On the regulation side I think you can see good things about European regulation, some of the measures I mentioned earlier and some bad tendencies and some protectionist tendencies which could damage the picture in future. I think not encourage companies to set up, not encourage companies to believe in the possibility of disruption in the possibility of creating something which even if it causes incumbents discomfort will be allowed and encouraged. I think it's very easy for everybody to like the idea of creativity and innovation. They sound like good things and nobody I think would be against them. It's much harder to believe that that goes along with disruption and other people losing but the reality is that the US economy has done very well out of that combination for a number of years. Other European economies have done well out of it and that broadly speaking we should think about regulation in terms of not protecting, simply protecting instinctively what that is but thinking rationally about what should come along. The example I'm going to use finally is of Uber, the rather aggressive San Francisco based taxi or rather it calls itself sometimes ridesharing but it's not ridesharing, it's really private drivers and limo drivers based on a smartphone app. I've used Uber in different countries, I've used it in London, I've used it in LA the other day, I used it in Paris and there's an interesting contrast in the regulatory attitudes towards Uber. In Los Angeles there's virtually no regulation that I can see, you can turn up and anybody with a car, if you look on the smartphone app, can come and give you a ride. In Germany in Berlin have been court cases where there are quite intricate regulations which mean that Uber finds it very hard to compete as a mini cab company because it doesn't obey the strict regulations which have been placed on what mini cabs can do as opposed to taxes. For example the requirement to return to base between rides if you don't get called in the meantime. And it strikes me that that's actually the wrong way to go about it. If a different category of thing comes along which could be of use to the consumer but it doesn't happen to fit with historic regulations that's not a reason to ban it, it's a reason to think very hard about what the first principles of regulation should be. And then finally I don't want to be too nationalistic about this but in London the Transport for London has actually decided Uber should not be unregulated, it should be regulated like a mini cab company. So in other words you have to have a licensed driver but it can compete openly with taxes and that's upset quite a few of the taxi drivers but the reality is I think Transport for London is thinking about the nature of competition and thinking about the way in which the consumer benefit can actually be increased by technology innovation and it's allowing a degree of upheaval. And so my final observation is that being in Ireland a country that's gone through a great deal of upheaval and has been historically open to foreign direct investment, open to the idea of the economy benefiting from flows not only of capital but of intellect, human resources, Ireland has been pretty successful in many of these ways and if it fiddles with some of the slightly more egregious aspects of its taxation system I will support it fully. Thank you very much.


Yeah, how's it going? Very well. Thank you. I mean like I've said before this is honestly an amazing opportunity Like I remember watching your videos. I mean it must be like what four or five years ago now Lucid dreaming videos like oh, yeah That honestly start got me into the whole spiritual spirituality thing like learning how to lucid dream as a kid Like it was honestly mini awakening within itself and genuine laughing you were the root reason to that Which is no way quite a weird experience That's so cool. Yeah, I feel like lucid dreaming is kind of like a gateway into Deeper stuff like spirituality and consciousness because it makes you ask more questions You know you you want to know more about like reality consciousness? How we hear how does it all work and like the it opens up to the big questions? I think but yeah It's cool that you used to watch my my videos and now you have a tick tock and you're following is bigger than mine You're like, I think you have like 70 something K and mine's like mine's a 40 Reach 70 K in the space of like a month now, which is very weird when I've been doing tick tocks in February But yeah hasn't been since April that it's just exploded often one video about a post in about a collective consciousness Off of one video really. Yeah. Yeah, it hit a million views and then from then I've just been racking it up Oh, that's amazing. That's amazing. Yeah So I'm curious actually what what how often do you actual projects and How do you think it differs from lucid dreaming because I feel like they are definitely different But I'm curious about your opinions on it. Yeah, so this is an interesting one I think with astral projection It's certainly more difficult like I feel like it's way more difficult than lucid dreaming lucid dreaming I can do comfortably several times a month if I try and do it several times a week Depending on like how much I want to interrupt my sleep because if you do certain techniques like wake back to bed You interrupt your sleep and then you feel tired the next day But you get it's like more likely that you'll lose a dream with astral projection. It's very for me at least It's very difficult and it's very rare I've only done it like a hand a small handful of times and then there's been a few more times Which I'm not a hundred percent sure it was astral projection because it was kind of in that in between state But to be honest those few times were enough to Make me massively interested in it like I became obsessed with learning about consciousness and reality and yeah I guess my downfall is I love information So I feel like I focus too much on learning and reading about stuff and not enough time on Practicing it or at least not as much as I should but and so sorry the differences So the differences are with lucid dreaming again that the lines are quite blurred but with lucid dreaming It's theoretically all in your mind or at least mostly in your mind Even that we're starting to realize now there's and there's different theories about this But we're starting to think to see that the lines are kind of blurred like things that happen in a dream Can kind of influence and interact with real things outside the dream and there's all kinds of stories about shared dreaming and Premonitions pre-cognitive dreams past life regression through lucid lucid states and all this kind of stuff So I'm amazed like how little we know and Maybe you've kind of felt the same thing It's like the more you research something the more you realize how much we don't know and like how Incredible it all is and there's just so many different rabbit holes. You can go down hundred percent I mean the difference between lucid dreaming and national checks and so crazy I mean in my experience I've lucid dreams like quite a few times But like you say actual protection I've literally had one experience of it and it was like yeah just almost the part of leaving my body out I wasn't even able to fully like travel around travel around so to speak It was just there You know almost like I was being lifted at my body flying through my ceiling But that in and of itself felt so different to lucid dream It was almost like a completely different and experience because a lot of people are like are maybe actual projections Just you have another lucid dream and you imagine an actual projecting it in the lucid dreaming But I say tonight this experience of actual projection is so almost a different feeling like the vibration You actually send it on your bodies almost so real more than really no isn't it?  How do I explain that in normal terms? Yeah, no, absolutely that the crazy thing is because I've heard I've heard many people talk about like Oh, it's just lucid dreaming or it's like it's just you're just sleeping or dreaming it thing is my main astral projection experience So like the one I remember the most clearly was when I was wide awake Like I was literally in my bunk bed fully awake and I was quite young. I was maybe like 10 12 something like that fully awake and then I look down at the floor and the next thing I know I'm literally like flying across the top of a forest, you know, like have you ever seen wingsuit diving videos? Where they kind of like saw down they kind of like glide down a mountain mountain range So it was literally like that and I was freaking out because I didn't know whether I was hallucinating or whether I was like asleep But I was wide awake holding the bed literally like this and when I came out of the vision I ran downstairs and I was like what the hell just happened. I was like really confused So at least for at least for that one like there's no doubt that was astral projection because I was awake You know, like I wasn't even dreaming or sleeping 100% I mean dreams honestly just make it completely questionable reality I mean one of the biggest things that took from dreams was when you're in a dream Your mind separates yourself from the external environment within the dreams you feel separate from it But it's not until you wake up that you're like, oh wait I was everyone in that dream and they were my projections and beliefs and I feel like that Linked to how when we die, we're gonna come back and be like, oh in this reality Everyone else was like projections and dreams like it's almost not in a Solipsistic type of way, but everyone has their own individualistic reality that we can control and manipulate and Dreams wake you up to that. I feel like psychedelics do as well Like the minute ego death like it puts you in a state of of dying and reveals that Spiritual awakening to you. Yeah. Yeah, absolutely So an interesting thing with that is if you heard about the the egg theory where the whole universe is an egg and we We are basically the same Life force Interacting with each other. Definitely. There's a there's a great. Is it Kirchhozag? They have a YouTube channel on that and it's amazing video on that And I think I've got a posted video on my TikTok actually about that But yeah, I love that theory about how we are everyone including your Jesus and Hitler We're both sides of it. You know, we have both the God and the devil in one like Yeah, then you get into the questions of determinism and karma and free will and these are like I feel like these are insanely complicated topics And there's really no definitive answer isn't which why I think it's so interesting to discuss. Yeah Like no one knows the actual absolute truth to our is just open for discussion. Yeah, I love it I love it. So, like what do you think about karmic laws for example? So like like what we're saying with everyone being connected as one Life or something egg theory. I feel like the best way like for karma to work And the fairest way is if you are everyone in Europe and some point in your life experience everyone's life Every bad thing you do to someone you then experience that bad thing So it's almost like an intrinsic karma in of itself because the only bad things you're doing is to yourself And you then feel that pain when you experience that life after this life because you know, you know all you're the one God That's connected Yeah, exactly I think that's I think that's how it probably works But it gets confusing when you think about by by incarnating or by being born in this world You you have to create karma in one way or another so I don't think it's possible to go through life without creating any sort of karma So then the question is like if you're forced to create karma both good or bad Then is it really a free choice? Is it really free will because the karma so I've heard in many different like spiritual texts They say that it's karma that keeps you reincarnating so because you have a karmic debt you have to reincarnate to then like pay off that debt or Experience the rewards of good karma or something like that But then if you if you have to create karma when you're born Then you'll be kind of like forced to reincarnate to then pay off that debt So then where's the free where does free will play into that hundred percent? I mean, I think I feel like that's also linked to the the story of Adam and leave Adam and even Christianity as well You know the choice to take the apple to choose knowledge from good and evil, you know suffering I feel like was a choice one when I know I'm talking metaphysically here But say we were you know God like before we came to this life. We were omnipotent and had full power I feel like we chose to then come down here choosing to know the difference between good and evil Choosing to have suffering our lives to enable us to progress Throughout I feel like because I feel like karma like you're saying is a choice It is suffering but you choose to do it so that you can know the other side almost Yeah, that's an interesting idea actually yeah because by having the choice of good and evil Then it's more valuable when you choose the good and then when you choose the bad you In theory would get karmically kind of punished for that So you learn the lesson to not choose that in in the next like lifetime or next time Definitely and without the binary opposition of good and bad, there wouldn't be a good and bad anywhere Like that's the yeah, it's like the dualism Within the world, isn't it like we need there to be the suffering in order to reap the wards of happiness So an interesting. Yeah, exactly an interesting rabbit hole I've been down is looking into then how much I can say that we'll be allowed on youtube I'll try and keep it basic but if you assume that there's a kind of structure in the world of Elite people or like groups of people institutions and collaborations that make certain things happen like certain agendas and everything like that The rabbit hole is that what if those are necessary to create a perfectly balanced world with just as much good as bad And so that when let's say the scales tip too far in one direction and the world starts turning really good on average Then these elite kind of groups would make certain things happen to bring it back into balance So that there's always a perfectly balanced choice between good or evil Do you know what I mean? Whereas compared to like if the world was just chaotic all the time or if the world was just bliss all the time Then it's not really a free will choice between good or bad because it's already in that state 100% that I agree with you I mean, I just even go as far as saying that maybe it's not even the elites on our world It's potentially even elites like alien worlds coming in and yeah Trying to control us because they they've been there. They've done that They know how to get a start level of consciousness And if that class suffering it is necessary in our society then maybe that is the way it needs to go because As bad as things is in our society like you can almost escape the matrix of the society and choose to do Like even though it is hard. Yeah, no hundred percent There's also an even further rabbit hole where let's say if you assume there's groups or people that make things balanced on earth whether that's doing good or bad things and then But then they're actually kind of controlled or like the the strings are being pulled by extraterrestrial or higher intelligent beings The rabbit hole that I went down shows that those Those extraterrestrials or those advanced beings could actually be us in the future Who are then reaching back through the timeline to then help guide the earlier version of themselves To but I mean it gets really trippy like when you start talking about timelines I wish I knew everything about timelines like everything I mean that that stuff especially because it's so like Unfalsifiable and philosophical not so many different ways of that time travel can go because you know, obviously can't experience it properly It's hard to know what what how it works in a way Um, but I definitely agree that there is some sort of especially when you look at past human evolution I feel like it makes sense that aliens if um If aliens come down and see us they're gonna want to accelerate evolution because they they know that this is them, you know A billion years in the past Like that I feel like that would make sense for advanced civilization and then to you know Keep an eye on us make sure we're going in the right direction And if that does then turn out that that is them from the past and it's a circular time loop Then maybe but on a slide. I don't know much Some science of the of time continue to To stay whether it is true or not Yeah, for sure That's actually another interesting kind of topic is that if you look around uh ancient history You can see that different civilizations on different continents Had very very similar building structures like for example with pyramids and with those kind of uh, Forgot what they're called now that maybe they're obelisks or something You can even see them in washington now and like various other places where it's like a long pillar with a small pyramid on top And uh, yeah, there's this theory that it was actually higher beings or extraterrestrials that came and influenced or helped Build those things and they had a crazy like really advanced civilization And then every few thousand years like I think it's every two thousand one hundred years the Cycle if you will it kind of gets reset And then the civilization or the level of technology gets brought back down to like a really basic level And then and then it builds up again almost like um Like a farmer kind of harvesting their crop and then they reduce it back to nothing and then it has to grow up again Because uh, yeah, I mean whoever built the pyramids was either an interdimensional Kind of demigod or they had knowledge of advanced electrical power magnetism stuff that we don't even have now I mean, I think if you heard of Graham Hancock Yeah, yeah, yeah He says it best about um human history has a sort of amnesia Like there was parts of human history that because it was so in the past that we just don't know about but Like you say when you look at pyramids and there were the exact coordinates to the speed of light like to the decimal place There's just no way that ancient humans unless they were involved in a more Way that was more intelligent or they'd alien help. There's no way they did it just from our level of intelligence There was some other source of external help going on definitely in our human history Of course Yeah The funniest thing is when I you see these explanations of how they're supposed to have built the pyramids And there it'll be an animation of like these slaves rolling bricks Rolling the stone blocks on logs and you think like these things weighed Several tons like some of them weighed a lot And there's no way you could roll those on logs like you would have to have immense physical strength Literally and a lot of time 100% I think it was Graham Hancock again that said that in order because the pyramids are so big in order for them to have A ramp that takes the rocks or however they were getting the things up there The gradient of that would be so long that it would still be here to this day This um sand ramp that they built, but yeah, there's nothing like that Like we honestly just don't know how their precision was so good. It's my yeah No, and that's the thing So I think I saw that clip actually of Graham Hancock talking about the ramp and the gradient They would have had to have been but even that wouldn't explain how they managed to cut perfectly Chiseled like channels all the way through with no Tall marks no kind of evidence of how they did it They placed the blocks and then they seem to like It seems like they cut the channel after they placed the blocks In there So how on earth would they have done that and it's like laser precision Literally It literally and perfectly perfectly aligned to certain constellations Which they were supposed to not even know about or like they they shouldn't have been able to calculate that All these ancient civilizations at the same time all of them line of longitude around like they just knew somehow Yeah, I love that. I love the pyramids Egyptian stuff In fact, I saw one thing the other day that said there was apparently no There have been no hieroglyphs found on the inside of the great pyramid and no pharaohs have been found Inside the great pyramid because they say that they try and say that it was a tomb for the pharaohs And I think some of the other pyramids were but the great pyramid, which is the really unique one apparently No hieroglyphs and no pharaohs inside. Oh, yeah. I wonder why lies Yeah, I mean that would suggest that it was older than the egyptian Than the egyptian civilization Yeah, maybe they found it and kind of used it. Yeah, no, that's crazy. I do have a question I'd like to bring up what what is your opinion opinion on um on religion on a on god Like an abrahamic god any opinions abrahamic god Well, this is another this is a a big topic So the abrahamic god from what I can see is what I would consider to be like a negative entity And I think that the major religions around the world were massively influenced at certain times by And so with the abrahamic religions, they all seem to have come from like the same kind of seed Yeah And if you notice in let's say the by the christian bible, for example If you notice in the old testament versus the new testament It's almost like two completely different gods Or two completely different post personalities They seem to be the absolute opposite of each other and if you look at the things the old testament god says in the bible They're very strange Very like this very questionable for supposedly an all-loving all-knowing god That it makes you think how does that it does it almost doesn't make sense But then if you look if you compare that to the other gods of the time And then you get into like symbolism and you look at the different types of like fish deities And I don't know if you've looked into like the different symbolism across the different religions throughout history But you can see a remarkable amount of sim similarity between the different deities specifically if you look into things like any uh links or relations to satan to uh fish deities or fish gods anything involving like sacrifice and consuming blood I'm even now right even in the um I believe the catholic christianity they still do that kind of ceremony And the symbolism there is it's still the same with the kind of like the fish deities and Even to the point where the pope wears the hat the exact same hat which is In the symbolism from ancient history showing the fish god Which I mean it's a huge rabbit hole, but yeah, I think organized religion Is very very different to open-minded spirituality focused on A higher power or source creation energy. I think they're very different I mean people like carmarkson's like we've known that organized religion has just been used for corruption. It is an absolute You know population power tool like it keeps it keeps you in line and it because one of the biggest myths I feel like religion teachers is is that Heaven and all the good stuff eternal life all the best things you're going to receive Happens when you die and that you're not in heaven right now Like I feel and it doesn't let you live in the present or stinks at all.  I I've heard some bits about it. I didn't really just do this in like air So I've heard some stuff, but go on tell me some some stuff Right, so if you assume that the so the main Christian canon bible that that exists today That was massively censored and edited hundreds of years ago And I forget the exact date, but there's I have it in my notes somewhere There's a specific meeting that happened where they basically agreed on Bit like changes they were going to make to the bible and then from that point on they just said right from now on The bibles will all be written exactly like this. No changes. No No, whatever refers to the council's nice here. That's the one.  But yeah, now it's completely insane what's happened Yeah, so a couple of the interesting things that that were changed were They removed some of the Gnostic gospels specifically like the gospel I think it was the gospel of thomas and then the gospel of Mary And then there was also a couple of other ones where they had direct quotes from supposedly what Jesus said that These quotes are very different to what you'll find in the bible today And another example I can think of is like the word Elohim Elohim means Supposedly in the bible it means god, right? But if you look at the definition It actually means the mighty ones or the you know, the the gods plural It doesn't mean just one god. It means the mighty ones And that's just one example of like how the the the way we think it works Is so different from the actual truth and I feel like we were only seeing a tiny part of the actual truth of reality I mean, um, I believe I'm right in saying this.  So yeah, um Yeah, he's he's very interested in what you're saying about um, Elohim and that being plural because it it does just prove that You know back in the day the change from polytheistic to now monotheistic Um, and and then just all the there's 33 thousands denominations of christianity. Does that not just show that? Clearly there's some sort of thing going wrong between what how they get their truth Like when there's that many dispersion of beliefs Within that one religion like it's crazer and and not just that So you'd like to say the 33 000 denominations of christianity There's also dozens of versions of this of the main stories in the bible like for example the flood story That's not the only version of that story like hundreds of years before There were other versions of that that tell it in a similar way, but with slightly different details And Yeah, that's an example right the epic of gilder mesh. My point is there's different versions of this story The flood the bible flood story is just one of them and the same as the creation story I need to I wish I knew everything about this stuff literally And it will be so cool It's an unlimited rabbit hole to dive into Have you heard about the the holographic universe? Have you read that book? I have not So this guy basically summarized a few studies that have been done recently that show The world is essentially a hologram So with a hologram every piece of the hologram has a copy of the entire image And so the idea is that in every tiny atom of our existence Inside that atom is the key or like the map of everything else in existence And uh, yeah, interestingly like modern quantum mechanics and quantum physics has apparently shown that If you take away the empty space in between atoms or in between electrons or protons And then shrunk everything down everything would fit into a grain of sand and uh, so yeah, I find that really interesting And I've seen comparisons of like think small things in nature Compared to massive things like for example, like your eye Compared to the structure of a universe and it's very similar And then if you look as well at like the structure of Um a galaxy compared to the structure the um the way our neurons in our brain Create different synaptic maps They look almost identical like the way they form these patterns And then even on in the middle ground like the way we build our cities if you look at um a picture of a city at night From a buff like from a satellite image the Way we spread out naturally forms the same kind of pattern as the neurons in our brain and how galaxies are formed So it's like no matter how far in you look or how far out you look We're following the same kind of template of creation As above so below Yeah as above so below exactly that's and that's again that idea is all over the ancient spiritual texts in like Every religion every spiritual and historical uh text They seem to have like their their version of that as above so below. So what does it all mean? Definitely it is honestly crazy I mean the facts the facts that the way I look at it is the facts like the universe almost has this line of progression like the way that we're evolving the The way that I um has intrinsic patterns set in the universe Shows me that there's explicit meaning within the universe. There's explicit You know direction that we're heading to you know, whether that's you know, humanity's ascension Whether that's you know, the unity of everyone I feel like there is you know a direction of evolution that We need to push through and not even actively need to push through because I think the universe is going to do it For us and we're just here for the ride almost in a way Yeah, the question is If there's a direction we're going in as a species or as a I guess as a whole universe Are we here to experience that kind of like the observer and everything's determined Everything is like destined to happen exactly how it's going to happen Or are we here to create or change that outcome? Like using our free will to actually create something we want to experience. I'm really curious about that Yeah, that is a very good question. Um, I feel like with the determinism and free will debate I feel like there's not a certain answer because everyone's level of free will is varied Um, I feel like um depending on your level of consciousness The factors of determinism, you know decrease or increase So if you've got a high level of consciousness, you have more Capacity for free will if you have a low level of consciousness You are more inclined to deterministic factors and therefore you have a set destiny And I feel like, you know, our goal in life is to be the observer of The input that's coming into us the deterministic factors and then making that self aware choice to Have the free will to act against those deterministic factors and then by developing that scale of Choice through, you know, increasing our level of consciousness. We become more free will You know enlightens and yeah, I've advised the path that we should do but For times the question. I feel like yeah, um, there is a variety of free will within everyone I like when you what you said about how your level of free will is linked to your level of consciousness Would you do you think that it's also linked to our level of intelligence? And then how does that play into like Transhumanism or blending with AI? Yeah, this is a very tricky debate. Yeah, and I like it's true because My my struggle is I'm not sure if we were to implement Technology into humans and transhumanism was the direction we're going in because we're natural and our thoughts and come from the universe Is that then the logical next step of natural evolution or do we avoid that and stick to You know just being humans and see where that takes us but it might be slower So I'm honestly divided. I don't know what would be the better route. Yeah So I think for me, I think what it is is there's this collective consciousness that we're all that we can all tap into Which is infinite and I think that's kind of that's I think where we should be focusing on But then so when you then go to transhumanism or AI Usually that means that the AI technology has been created by a small group of people Sometimes even a handful of humans And if their agendas or interests are not good then it becomes very dangerous because they're essentially dictating The way you think and this is the problem. I think with a lot of Social media and search engine algorithms is they algorithmically get to determine They get to like kind of guide our thoughts and our thought processes Even like with google auto suggest they alter the things that they suggest to you Which then alters the way you think about what should I search for how should I ask questions What topics should I focus on and then by definition the ones they don't suggest other ones you kind of avoid Or you don't think to look and look them up and it's like suddenly an algorithm is determining what we actually Have the way we think instead of connecting individually to source and collective intelligence Which I think that is the key to evolution. I think transhumanism It could be used for good, but I think it's also there's a big danger with that Definitely know you are right especially with the way things are going when you look at the metaverse And that's how it's all monopolized with one company like Yeah, no, if that if that technology were to get in the wrong hands It definitely would not look good for humanity And and like say the element of free meal would probably be completely diminished because you'd be completely controlled by You know in 1984 robots Yeah, the thought police the ministry of truth I'll tell you what the one If I was going to use a metaverse like walk around in a metaverse the last one I would want to do would be the facebook one Like having Mark Zuckerberg in control of my virtual reality would be a nightmare Yeah I mean The scary thing is that honestly might be no escape from it in our society like it It could just be implemented as like this is the standard way we work now Like I mean no one could stop phones being such a utilized part in society No one could stop the internet, you know these guys with money Honestly, do you just control the world and we could just be living in some disorder in reality where we're in headsets Yeah, even this could be a simulation. We wouldn't we wouldn't have an easy way of knowing actually There was there's been a lot of things when you talk about reality shifting But I honestly don't know too much about it. Could you expand upon that for me? Yeah, so basically so there's different types of uh, like definitions of reality shifting It's also been called things like quantum jumping quantum leaping For me what it is is being able to shift that conscious attention to a version of reality Different to this one and then moving into that reality There's different ways of doing that and it gets very complicated when you bring in like timelines and The multiverse and things like that So what I'm trying to do is shift towards just a very basic kind of definition of it where you just Similar to manifestation and law of attraction where you just decide on a reality You want to experience a version of yourself. Let's say your A lifestyle social circle like something that you want to experience and then you just kind of live in that But in the present moment So you just almost like you're not pretending But you're kind of acting as if you're that person and then those things will manifest in your life now So and I've heard this from manifestation coaches and like all kinds of different people who use manifestation It's and so I think it is a real thing Like I think you can change your reality in that way 100% and I feel like Well, a lot of the people feel like The confusion comes from like I feel like this is definitely a slow gradual process like people who You know start going or Or if I just you know manifest them going to be a billionaire But you don't do anything about it and wait, you know 10 days That also is not going to happen But if you start at a point where you just manifest in your small amounts of money like Consistently you will get to that point where eventually you have reality shifted into You know becoming a billionaire, but it is just a gradual and slow process That because I feel I feel like a lot of This simulation the way it works Is you put something into the simulation, you know through the choices that you make and then the the matrix opens up doors for you and then But through going through more and more choices more and more Doors open for you within this simulation, you know, like we were saying before your free will expands for you to have more opportunities And more realities to shift to Yeah, exactly. Exactly. I think what the problem is a lot of people don't decide what they actually want in their life So they they just kind of get drift they drift around get influenced by these different things society their friends Parents media and then because they're not deciding what they want to experience They just experience kind of a bit of everything or what their parents tell them to or What society says they should do But then if you actually just stop that and decide what you want to experience like where you want your life to be What you want to do that you actually I feel like you actually have more control than you think over that Like it is cheesy, but like genuinely in this world if you put your mind to it If you believe in anything like that is their age hold um like Law of attraction, whatever you believe comes to you, isn't it like yeah All possibilities are open in this world. It's just about Getting to that level of consciousness that you can achieve those dreams. Exactly


The United Nations Office of the Higher Commissioner for Human Rights and the South African Human Rights Commission invited local community radio stations across South Africa to enter competition based on the theme, stand up for someone else's rights. Ten finance radio stations traveled to Johannesburg to be at the Galo Awards ceremony on 29 March 2017 to await announcement of the top winner. And our winner, Bohori Community Radio Station. I'm from the United Nations. I'm from the United Nations. I'm from the United Nations. Judging criteria was based on, first of all, the issue. It was essential that a specific human right was violated as per the Constitution, the Supreme Law of this country. I was in the police station, in the police station, and I was told that I was going to be sent to jail. I was told that I was going to be sent to jail. I was told that I was going to be sent to jail. From Mohodi FM, or Mohodi Community Radio, the point was that they went over and above in actually resolving the person's concern. It was a vulnerable farm worker that got injured. He needed an RAF claim to be settled, and they went to the extent of actually helping this person realise that.