All yours. Morning, guys. Thank you.  Did you not drink enough last night? Seriously? I mean, I wanted to sleep in late, but anyway. Okay. Like I said, my name's Weasel. That's about it, so. All right. The semi-secure state of compliance. Basically, we all love compliance. It's this great, great, great thing. It gives everybody jobs. It's wonderful. Nothing could possibly be wrong with it.  Basically, compliance probably started out with some good concepts and some good ideas and maybe some good intentions, but the problem is, is business got involved. You've got a lot of vendors out there that want to make money, and when money comes in, conflicts of interest come in.  Benefits of compliance. Those of us who have been around the security industry for a long time, we fought and fought and fought and fought for all kinds of controls that couldn't be put into place because it affected the usability of the systems, whereas for ages we had anywhere from zero to six character passwords back in the day when passwords were actually useful. We never could expand beyond that because it was just too hard to remember your daughter's birth date or whatever people used for passwords back then. So good thing about compliance is it does come along and set down some standards in some places that we never could get put into place before. And then of course standardization of controls comes in handy where across multiple systems we can finally start standardizing on some controls that were extremely different across systems and locations.  Okay, it's not a benefit. I'm going to do a quick overview of some of the compliance standards just to make sure that we're kind of on the same page here. I'm not going to go over all of them. I'm not going to really talk about them in depth. I'm not a compliance expert.  COVID probably one of the first big compliances that affected IT was put together by ISACCO, which is the security auditor's organization that's international in the States and I think Europe, maybe a couple of other places. Those of you who have gone through and looked at the security controls and so forth in there, if I remember right there's like maybe two sections in that 5,000 page document that actually cover IT controls. But for those controls that are there, they're okay. I worked for an organization that used to write security checking tools and when COVID-4 came out, we had to go through and map all of the controls that we had to COVID and amended that suck. But you know, vendors wanted to say that they were in the compliance business whether they were or not and so it basically detracted research for a year just so we could say that we were a compliant business and then we got bought and not got fired. PCI, that's probably the biggest one right now. Anyone who has to deal with credit card transactions either moving or storing or copying or whatever credit card data gets covered under the PCI DSS standards. It's probably the shortest standards document of all the compliances out there. I think it's 13 pages or so. It's not very big and it's very practical. I mean it seems like they're getting on the right path at least for writing compliance standards that can be actually be implemented. But the downside is which I'll get into in a bit is it's an organization that feeds on itself. There's possible conflicts of interest there in that the people that write PCI also make money from training for PCI and from the certifications and so forth. So what it looks like on the front may very well be an initiative to secure systems and it's all the great idea. Bottom line is that there really is just a business behind it trying to make money. This is the health care compliance standard that's pretty much implemented in standard state or steady state. There's not a lot of IT controls in that one either. It was a lot of verbiage over health care information. GLBA is a compliance standard that covers financial data. I'm sorry, not financial. What is it? Yeah, I guess it is financial. And then SOX being the knee-jerk standards that came in with the Enron and WorldCom meltdown. One thing about SOX is that you can sit there and say that it was rushed through and all of the really bad controls in it that are oppressive. The organizations are screaming that are oppressive and were hastily put in as we're learning. And then those of you that saw, I don't know when it came out, but Lawrence Lessig's talk recently over the impending I-911 and the soon-to-follow I-Patriot Act. Most of this legislation is written far ahead of time. They're just waiting for the opportunity to implement it. So SOX was, even though SOX is very restrictive to a lot of organizations, they're just controls that someone thought up a long time ago and just waited for the opportunity to put it in.  Somebody specifically wanted those controls. And then, of course, the ISO standards that we've all dealt with as through its many generations. And then, I don't know much about the ITAF. I just ran across it. I think it's just ISOCA trying to get yet another auditing standard out there. All right, the psychological impacts of compliance on the enterprise. Of course, the false sense of security. We've got, and this is kind of the vendor space that's really doing this, but they're really selling compliance as security, and that's a really bad thing. As a friend of mine said the other day, security almost equals compliance, but compliance does not equal security, and that's extremely true. The vendor space is kind of cleaning up in this area to some extent, at least externally, where they used to get webinars and so forth and invites from various vendors telling you, come see our little webinar, we'll show you how to pass an audit. And anybody with any amount of intelligence knows that's not how you approach any kind of standardization or security. If you're focusing on passing audits, you're fucked. You're really just playing to the management and the decision makers outside of your organization or outside of your small compartment of the organization. You're not doing what your job is, which is to secure systems, not to pass audits, and that's a fight that we'll have forever. It's just something you get to fight every day. Then there's always the misinterpretation of the concepts of compliance. You'll have senior management that will go through and say, well, again, compliance equals security, so we've got one million a year that we spend on security. Why don't we just push that into compliance and we don't have to worry about it? It's the right way to go. We kill two birds with one stone and never mind the fact that there's considerable amounts of areas that are not covered by any kind of compliance or compliance standard that doesn't get any attention. And you're right back to some of the paradoxes that you used to run into 10 years ago where you couldn't implement security controls because of usability or whatever. Let me check my time. Okay. Compliancy is self-diviring serpent, obviously. Misinterpretations and misrepresentations creates a really shitty posture for compliance. There's a considerable amount of conflicts of interest, specifically with auditors who get paid to deliver results. You're never going to go out and hire an auditor and he's going to come in and say, your secure congratulations, give me my paycheck because you're going to want something tangible and return for that, so you're going to find that they find all kinds of auditing problems with your organization, whether they're there or not. It'll either be nitpicky or whatever. And then there's the extreme worse. An auditor is not going to get shot in the foot or shoot himself in the foot by finding so many problems with your organization that you don't want to bring it back in again. Granted, the right state of mind is that you want that kind of audit report, but the problem is management doesn't. Management, they want the executive summary and not only the executive summary, but they want the reduced feature set. First thing they're going to ask is, okay, which one of these do we not have to implement? Well, an auditor is going to say you're going to implement all of them, but the first thing that happens when you go into the mediation meetings is they go, oh, okay, well, maybe this one's not so bad. You don't have to implement it.  And, of course, there's the governance hypocrisies that I mentioned earlier where you've got just too many influences coming into these governance organizations that just pull it so many different ways that there's really no focus whatsoever in it. I like to think that I was an optimist when some of these compliances started coming out and that people really were focused on securing systems. But as we see, I mean, those of you who made it over to Black Hat and saw the wonderfully and strategically placed booths that made everything move so smoothly, 80% of those booths had compliance in there, even vendors that have nothing to do with compliance. The industries, and this happens in every industry, this isn't something new, but it just seems that the industry is constantly trying to replace people with product. That's where the money is. Organizations are going to go out and find products that replace people, and that's all part of the CapEx, OpEx, balancing circus show that organizations do to look like they're being productive and effective. But yeah, it's bad. Everybody wants to be on the compliance bandwagon, whether they are or they're not. As I said in my previous organization that I worked on, we tried to sell multiple, multiple times to very large acquiring IT entities. At least one of those attempts was botched because the CEO pissed somebody off, so they went out and hired two consultants, two MBAs, and focused on improving the presence of these organizations to larger organizations to make them more attractive for buyouts. And we went from like January of 04 or 05 being a security tools company to in six months we were a compliance company. Every product we had had a compliance component, whether it was well implemented or not, that wasn't the question. And the really sad part about it was that the buying company that ultimately bought us, they didn't care if the products were there either. They wanted compliance next to their name. There was a gap in that organization, and they needed to be able to maintain their lead in the market by being in the compliance space. So they went out and bought somebody who said, hey, we're a compliance company. I was like, okay, well now look, we're a compliance company. So not fine. What's going on here? Hold on. It's not moving forward. There we go. Okay, the anti-progression trap. Many times, compliances put controls into organizations that sure sounded great when the compliance component was authored. But you've got situations where controls are being demanded to be put in a place where they're not needed. And one, they're crippling progress. Two, they're not really securing the systems. And three, it's a waste of money. But we're secure because we put a firewall in front of a reverse proxy that had firewalling features because it required that a firewall be there. And then, of course, you've got the antivirus is dead argument. I'm not really going to get into it because I don't think that it is, but I think people are getting in on that. But there's just these concepts that come up that we need to embrace and make sure that we're at least looking at them as possible evolutions of the IT industry and just technology in general. We need to at least embrace them and really take a look at them and make sure that they're right before we immediately dismiss them as wrong. The other thing, password technology is a dead technology. It took forever to convince people of that. We still don't have technologies developed or invented that truly replace it, but it's pretty safe to say that password cracking is extremely fast now. And most organizations are eight-character passwords. And what's that take? Half a day at most to crack an entire SAM?  And then, of course, compliance is not really helping that area because as we put more and more controls in place, there's less breathing room for the innovators. Okay, the risk bandwagon. It's the best name I could come up with this. But basically, we've got a huge amount of concept going around. And I don't know if it's in the CIO magazine. I don't know if they're teaching this in Harvard Law where they're creating the NBA drones who replicate what they learn in their books or what. But risk, if you can mitigate the risk, or I'm sorry, if you can manage the risk for considerably less than actually paying for the mitigation cost, no one's actually looking at the potential damage cost of controls. So let's go out and let's just put in a good process for handling disaster recovery. And that's great. Yes, we'll just dump it in the disaster recovery bucket, but no one ever actually looked at the potential cost of the disaster.  But if that part of the organization were to go under, the costs could be 100 million or more, and no one's really balancing that. And it's really scary because you've got leaders of organizations that are basically building these IT groups within their organization that follow along with their methodologies and mentality, and it's going to be a really scary thing. This is probably the type of thing that's going to feed into the I-911 that I mentioned earlier that Lawrence Lessig brought up. Organizations are going to have so much risk management going on. There is going to be that big catastrophe that happens and we're all going to be screwed, not only from a financial standpoint, but also from a freedoms standpoint, because I guarantee the I-Patriot Act that will eventually come out is way filthier and scarier than anything that's on the USA Patriot Act. And incidentally, those who aren't aware of this Lessig talk, I can't remember what website I saw it on. I think it might have been on Google News, but I'm not sure. It was basically information passed along directly from Richard Clark, so I think he's a pretty reputable source of what's coming down the pipe. Compliance brings up the Fingerprinting Foundation. Now we're getting into really more of what I wanted to cover today. The great thing about standards, for those of us who do penetration for a living, or those of us who have agendas that involve getting into systems we're not supposed to be in, I think that's about as political I can get on that. Standards do basically create a matrix for attacking an organization or systems. That's great. Now you know exactly what length to set your scope for for brute forcing passwords or for cracking encryption, because odds are you're going to know exactly what encryptions are in place. You're going to know password links. You're going to know data retention stuff. You're going to know exactly what data is supposed to be and what organization and for how long. That's bad. Yes, we need data retention for other reasons, but when everything is so heavily, it's the best way to say this, when everything is so heavily regulated to the point, you basically you're creating a scope for a software solution that pushed a hat, clicked the hat tools because there's no thinking that has to go into the back end of software that breaks into systems anymore. Let me back up just a second. And configuration management, that's the other big thing, is when we're configuring all of our systems exactly the same, this all goes back to Dan Gehr's monoculture paper that got him in trouble at At-Stake several years ago. When everything's configured the same, the systems almost tend to be the same, especially when we start going into VM spaces and stuff like that, that you've got so many systems and so many organizations, again, that we're feeding right into that I-9-11 event that's inevitably going to happen. I think I've already touched on the encryption, basically. That's another thing, is encryption feeds, tells us exactly what the juicy stuff are. When people implement any kind of compliancy, they're only worried about implementing the bare minimum. You only require to have encryption on credit card data? Well, that's all they're going to encrypt. They're not going to encrypt the rest of the traffic. So guess what, if I can't read it in the clear, that's credit card data.  I mean, yeah, I don't have immediate access to the data, but again, decryption is super easy these days. I mean, there's so many tools that make it so easy. People don't even have to write their own tools to break this stuff anymore.  Okay, using compliance to map penetration. When you look at an organization, those of you who penetrate systems, either for living or for leisure, look at the organization, whether it be an individual or a corporation, nonprofit, government, whatever it is you're working on. You can do a high level look at what the compliancy standards that meet on that organization, and there's your map. You know exactly what controls are going to be in place for that organization. Like I said with the PCI stuff, if you know that they deal with credit card data, you know that they have to adhere to PCI, at least on the systems that do handle credit card data. So you don't spend a lot of time or effort trying to break into something or break something that you know it's not going to break in those scenarios. And then of course, what was the other? Yeah, and then what was my thought? Sorry guys, it's early, still drunk. It was a late night. You're with me, thank you. God damn, I can't remember. I had a good point that I was going to make on the slide and for some reason my notes are gibberish, probably because I typed them when I was drunk last night. Okay, we'll move on. Here's an example of basically an attack. The concept, this is not something that's even remotely beneficial to anybody right now, but basically look at your attack avenues on an organization, then overlap what standards apply to that, and then you basically, you eventually start building that roadmap into that organization or into that system to circumvent and reduce your effort. The other benefit of mapping out an organization ahead of time through compliancy is that you reduce risk of detection as well. If you're sitting there hammering away at a system with something that's not going to get in because of a compliancy implementation, you're improving or increasing chances of detection. All right, two developers out there. I've got a tool request. This would be a really, really cool thing. If someone could come out and make an attack matrix tool based on compliancy standards, you basically put in all of the things that you know about the target. It goes through and determines exactly what compliancy standards apply to it and creates your attack matrix minimums and then feeds out into a common format for feeding into those tools. I'm kind of a big fan of the whole metasploit ease of use concept of attacks. It's just a really, really cool thing. It would be great if somebody could do this. If somebody wants to contact me to work on this or something or get my notes on this, I'll be happy to disseminate that. I may actually put all my notes. I've got quite a few notes on the tool features on this that I may put them in the slides because I'll publish these slides on the NMRC website this weekend and I'll put those notes in there. It's not quite the conclusion, but it's kind of the end of this section of the talk. Really, you know, go out there and fight, really, really, really fight the compliancy stuff out there. Get involved in the organizations that actually develop these. Join ISACA and see if you can't feed into the decision makers in these groups and help them realize that, yes, we need controls in place, but let's try and do theoretical controls that don't create standards that are so restrictive that they're creating these roadmaps for attack. Do some real quick Q&A and I'll move on to the next part. Did anybody have any questions? Okay, so basically the question is, have I ever run into an organization that does the risk assessment and actually really looked at the actual costs of an incident versus the costs of mitigation versus risk management? Is that right? No. Well, I can't say that. There was one organization that I worked with that was one of these companies that had been around literally for 100 years and is very process-driven. They've made it through all of the growing pains of major organizations so they could spend a little bit more time on things like this. And it was a critical infrastructure so there was heavy regulation during the Clinton administration to protect critical infrastructure. So we kind of had a benefit there, but I think that was a diamond in the rough. But we did pretty extensive research on everything. We assumed what it would cost, total cost of replacement of equipment, basically go and take your total cost of ownership, subtract that for every system that could be impacted. It's not really that hard to do. I don't believe. I don't know who's... I haven't been in the disaster recovery or the business continuity domain for many years, but I can only assume that people have now applied all the psychological costs and all the other ancillary costs that go along with a major disaster or a major loss. It shouldn't be too hard to do that. I'm sure there's 1,000 consulting firms that had a booth at Black Hat that could probably take care of that. Anything else? What are my thoughts on GLBA and SOCS and to what specific component? Right? Well, as I said, I'm not a compliance expert and I was luckily... When SOCS and GLBA were both being implemented, I didn't work for financial organizations to really have to dig deep into them. The only components that I really looked at on those was when we were trying to map out controls at the organization that I worked at during that time, looking at the technical controls, trying to map them over to the functionalities of our products. So I'm probably not the best person to ask that question because I don't know it well enough at a broad enough scope to be able to give you a solid answer on that. But if you want to get into a more detailed question in the Q&A afterwards, I'd like to talk to you and maybe help a little bit better there. I'm sorry, that's kind of a gap in my compliance experiences. Any other questions? Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't see you because of the light. Right? Is the audit valid? That's really the question. Obviously, the organizations behind... I'm sorry, what was the... Is the validity of an audit on a new technology where the audit standards were not in place prior to that technology... I'm sorry, the audit requirements were in place prior to that technology being invented. So basically, when someone comes out with a new technology, an auditor does a, say, a PCI audit on it or a SOX audit on that system. Is the audit valid? Now, are you saying is the audit valid specifically the total audit or just the audit of that system? Right. Well, I would say from a legal standpoint, it's probably very valid because from a legal angle, we tend to back up the establishments and not necessarily question everything every time. Is it valid from a security standpoint? It really depends on the system, of course, or the technology. But, yeah, bottom line is it's really up to the interpretation of the person being audited. That's the thing that you've got to do when you guys are getting audits in the IT field is make sure that the education goes into management as to what exactly these audits are. So many times, you know, there's that fear monger that goes on with auditing. It's like, oh, no, we're getting auditing. My job's on the line. Your job should be on the line as to whether or not you actually implemented the mitigation components for the audit. And that's so often missed. Again, that goes back to the marketing campaigns from a lot of the vendors, is, you know, past your audit webinars and training and so forth. It's bad. It just seems like we keep missing this point, is that, you know, yeah, if you have two audits in a row and you said that something was mitigated or something was, you know, you actually implemented controls to fix an audit item and you still fail it, that's when people's jobs should be on the line. That's when the audit actually, one, has benefit for what it's really doing and two, really grades the effectiveness of the implementations. But other than that, from a legal standpoint, I'm sure it's backed up. If you question it, the only thing you can do is go to the governance board. I haven't really dealt with any of the governance boards directly, other than I saw, I'm sorry, ISC2. Is that how they say that? I guess it's ISC2. Is it? ISC2. Oh, that's even geekier, that's awesome. Yeah, I've dealt with them and there really was deaf ears. I had issues with quite a few things. Another example is I know somebody that works for Juniper who was, there's a new CERT and it might be ISC2 as well that's doing a CERT on software assurance, is that correct? Someone's developing a software assurance basically, you know, secure coding and so forth and he submitted extremely basic questions for the test pool for this new CERT and some of them were basically very simple basic memory management and the response he got back from that board was that the question was too technical and I mean, if you're a software assurance professional shouldn't you know very, very well how important memory management is? It baffles me. That goes back to feed with the hypocrisies of the governance boards is that they really are out to make a buck. I would love to say, no, no, no, that's not what's going on, but it really does give the impression that they're just trying to create yet another credential that people want to run out and get so that they can get high paying jobs without experience or education. But hopefully, hopefully it's changing, I know it's not, but hopefully it's changing. I won't go into my certification rant here, but okay, I will for a second.  They've got some really, really good benefits in that, thank you. One of the benefits of certification, which is this is if you use certifications for anything in your organization, this is exactly why you use a certification, and it's a common body of knowledge that you can hold your people responsible to.  It's not a drop-in replacement for 20 years experience analyzing systems. It's not a drop-in replacement for a Dartmouth PhD. Sorry, it's just not that.  I've got, I tend to work with a lot of educated people, maybe that's why, because they think on a different level. It's crazy stuff. I'm more of a practical person, so as opposed of a theological person, even though most of the talks I do are really theory more than anything, that's just kind of sharing of a mindset. Certes aren't going away. Compliance is not going away. Get used to it. Get involved with the governance boards and see if you can really change their mind a little bit. I would love anybody from a governance board if you're here. Please come talk to me.  And I know I recently saw a movie. I was a little late watching it called The Smartest Men in the Room, the Enron documentary or Drama Humanity or whatever you say. They referenced a study from the 60s over accountability. And it really comes into play here and I think this is why these governance boards get so screwed up because it's someone else's responsibility. It's someone else's fault. I'm just doing my job making a paycheck. It just happens over in this crazy loop. The premise of this study was that they had an actor and then they had a subject in these tests and the actor was in one room, the subject was in another and the subject would systemically go through and I don't remember if he was asking questions and every time he got the question wrong he threw a trigger and the trigger was supposedly shocking and the actor would act like he's actually being shocked and they would have the subject actually systemically go through each question. Every time a question was wrong it would be a greater shock and if I remember right they had a section of the panel as you went up the panels.  So it really created a great illusion that this was a massive apparatus and you're really hurting this man in the other room and he would be screaming and everything but there was actually a section towards the end where it said fatal or dangerous or warning do not go past this point and everybody would get to that point and the guy would scream extremely loud when he got close to that and people would not push past that section. Sorry I'm talking to God damn much for one slide apparently. There we go. Anyway the thing was the interesting thing about the study was that as soon as they would get to that area they would stop and turn to the tester and say I'm going to kill this guy I can't move forward and half of them would ask a very important question are you talking to the tester saying will you take responsibility for this and when the tester would take the responsibility for the shock treatment they would just go right at the switch because it was no longer their responsibility it wasn't their fault if they killed the man in the other room.


Hello, in this lecture, we will define product costs. According to fundamental accounting principles, while the 22nd edition, the definition of product costs are costs that are capitalized as inventory because they produce benefits expected to have future value, include direct materials, direct labor, and overhead. Support accounting instruction by clicking the link below, giving you a free month membership to all of the content on our website, broken out by category, further broken out by course. Each course then organized in a logical, reasonable fashion, making it much more easy to find what you need than can be done on a YouTube page. We also include added resources such as Excel practice problems, PDF files, and more like QuickBooks backup files when applicable. So once again, click the link below for a free month membership to our website and all the content on it. When we're thinking about the profit product cost, we can think about a manufacturing company and we can think about the items of inventory. What is included in inventory? Clearly, they're going to be the direct materials. That's what most people think of when we think of inventory as if it's just a natural resource. But obviously there are other items involved, including the direct labor and the overhead, everything else that we're going to have to categorize somewhere. So we could break those out into direct costs and indirect costs. These being the pieces, the components of inventory, including direct materials. So if we're making something out of plastic, obviously the plastic, it's going to be some kind of direct material would could be a direct material that would be included in the ending product. Then we have the direct labor, that labor that's going to be directly included into the production process. That labor that we can tie to a particular job or a particular process, whichever system that we are using. These two items, the reason they are direct is because we can tie them out to a specific inventory or specific process or a specific job. That's what makes them direct. Indirect means that it's still going to be part of inventory. So it's still going to be thought of as a piece of the ending product of the inventory. But it could be something like the rent or depreciation on the factory. We could have a supervisor salary, small components like glue or something like that. We can't tie these things directly to a particular job process or unit of inventory. The rent is going to be for all the inventory that we make within the factory. The contractor may be supervising all inventory within the factory. Glue is so small that we probably don't want to track it to any particular item and therefore we can't, we don't want to try, it's not cost effective to track it. And we could have maintenance on the factory, again something that is not applicable to a specific unit because it's on the entire factory. But we do want to include it in inventory. The way we're going to do that is to put it into an account called overhead and then apply it out to the particular inventory unit or job or process.


So our final keynote for this afternoon will be introduced by Professor Jeffrey Sacks, Jeff. Wow, what an incredible program we just had, and what an incredible finale we have now. I could not be more thrilled to have the opportunity to introduce Columbia's wonderful president, Juan Manuel Santos Calderón, with us. Columbia has had two absolute grand slam homeruns for an American. I don't know how many goals that adds up to in a World Cup, but it's a lot of them in recent years. Columbia, and that's Columbia, I should be clear, Columbia was the great innovator of the whole concept of the Sustainable Development Goals. So when the president comes, give him a special thanks for that. It was in 2012 when the governments of the United Nations came together on the 20th anniversary of the Rio Earth Summit to ask what to do, given that 20 years earlier at the Earth Summit, a lot of great agreements had been reached, but they had not yet been implemented. And it was the government of Columbia that said, we need to bring this to the people of the world. And they put on the table the idea of sustainable development goals, carried the day, and that brings us to where we are today. And for that, we are all profoundly grateful and in admiration. But the next triumph, I think, is as remarkable and is notable for the world. And that, all of you know, Columbia is the great peacemaker of the world in recent years. Columbia is the country under the president's leadership that ended a decades and decades long war and did so with incredible imagination and creativity. Now, this is our second chance in two years to host President Santos. He was at the World Leaders Forum in September 2015. And I'm not saying it's all causation that he came to Columbia University and then got the Nobel Prize the next year. But I would like to think that there's a little bit there. But anyway, we are absolutely thrilled for that so meritorious prize and also the inspiration that it gives for the whole world. So it is really a very distinct honor and great pleasure knowing how wonderful this gentleman is and what a world leader he is and how combining peace and sustainable development. It does not get better than that. So please join me in welcoming President Santos through the stage. Hello, President. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you, Professor. Thank you for that very kind introduction. We're not choreographed properly. I think we're going to sit and you're going to talk. Is that right? Or you're going to stand and talk. Or if you want to talk and I sit. No, no. I definitely do not. We're here to listen to you. So please, if you want to use the podium or if you want to speak here either way. It's OK. I'll speak from. Well, thank you very much for attending this. It's not a conference. It's simply a chat. I thought it would be very interesting for you to know how the sustainable development goals were structured, how they finally became a law of the United Nations because it was approved. They were approved by the United Nations in the year 2015. And I thought it would be good to carry you on that path of how we did it, how we have been using three key words that I want to convey to you that are necessary in the implementation of those development goals. And those three key words were also extremely important for us to be able to reach peace in Colombia after 53 years of war. The first word is ambitious objectives. To put yourself very ambitious objectives. The second is innovate, innovation. And the third, persevere. You have to be persistent for the objectives to become reality. How did the idea of the sustainable development goals emerge? As always, there's some people, some persons, group of people who have very good ideas. The important thing is to hear them and give their good ideas to try to implement them. We have here one of those persons, Paola Caballero. She's here with us. She was working at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The world was discussing what next after the millennium goals. We had in Colombia been very disciplined in trying to fulfill the millennium goals. We were about 85% of the goals we managed to fulfill. But what can we do afterwards? So the idea emerged. Why don't we unite, merge sustainability, which was a word that was getting more and more fashionable and important, with development, with the causes of underdevelopment and how can we rally the whole world around some goals, not only the developing countries? So that's how the idea of why don't we merge these concepts and have the sustainable development goals as a goal for the world? At the beginning, as usually happens, these ideas, especially in the multilateral diplomacy, are very difficult to sell. There is a tremendous degree of skepticism, idea coming from a developing country, and many developed countries. Why should we be part of that? And we started to persist. No, because we think that it's a world problem, not the problem of only the underdeveloped countries. It's a problem of the whole world. Sustainability is the responsibility of the whole world. So we should have goals that involve the whole world. This skepticism started to weaken, and we started to play multilateral diplomacy. What do I mean by that? Multilateral diplomacy needs, think of concentric circles. You need to get a group of countries interested and then enlarge the number of countries interested in whatever costs. We started by the region. Some of the countries were a bit skeptical or lazy. They didn't want, I mean, this is too ambitious. This will not work. But other countries got enthusiastic about it, country like Peru, Guatemala. That sounds good. Let's work on it. And we started a process of convincing a critical mass of countries to defend the idea of sustainable development goals. So the region, God involved. You need also validators from international institutions. The Secretary of the Economic Commission for Latin America of the UN, of the Mexican Alicia Valsena, she got very excited. She became a great validator. And then we went to other countries. For example, the United Arab Emirates, they got very much involved, very enthusiastic. So slowly it became global. And some people asked, but why Colombia? Colombia is a country which has a war. Colombia has many problems. Why should Colombia be the leader of this initiative? The simple reply to that question was, why not? Why not Colombia? And the fact that it was an underdeveloped country or developing country suddenly became an asset. Coming from a developing country has more credibility. And so the idea started to become a strong idea. And countries started to add their names to the initiative. And finally, in the year 2012 in Rio, we made the proposal, the formal proposal, that was accepted. What aspects were important for this initiative to really get the strength to be approved three years later by the United Nations in the General Assembly here in New York? I would say, since the beginning, we said, let's find validators outside the normal stream of validators. And so the private sector, which usually is not very much involved with UN decisions, we invited the private sector to get involved. They were very enthusiastic. And they became tremendous allies all around the world. We invited the civil society. We said, civil society must be a part of this. They should understand the importance of this initiative. And the more civil society gets involved, the more legitimate the initiative will become. And civil society responded very positively. We made a tremendous effort for almost every single meeting. And we had hundreds, I think, thousands of meetings with many people. That civil society should always be present there. And that gave the initiative a tremendous strength. Finally, in the year 2012, it was approved. I remember very well the Secretary General of the conference, Chinese, stepped down from the podium and said to me, Mr. President, Colombia is a small country, a relatively small country. But what you have just proposed is a country with big ideas that will have a tremendous impact on development. The Chinese are fully enthusiastic about this initiative. And we will support you all the way. And so finally, in the year 2015, the Sustainable Development Goals were approved. There was an enormous discussion of how many goals and what goals. And this discussion was very academic, but also political. And we finally agreed on the 17 goals after many discussions. Number one goal was poverty, reduced poverty. Because poverty is probably one of the worst enemies that sustainability has in the world. Poverty, it really is one of the reasons why many of the actions that the world makes against the environment happen. So reducing poverty as a necessary condition to have a sustainable world was one of the goals that we put and we put it as number one. But the discussion there was fascinating. I remember we were discussing with the British Prime Minister about what goals, how many goals. We had different panels. Our ministers participated in those panels. And somebody from a Scandinavian think tank went to my office in Bogota and said to me, you're doing the wrong thing, President. And I said, why? He said, too many goals, which I thought he had a good argument, too many goals. But this is a political discussion to reduce the number of goals right now. It would be very difficult. And he said, you have the wrong goals. And I said, why do you think we have the wrong goals? And he said to me, what do you think is the most important thing anybody can do in the world to save the planet? And I immediately thought, well, plant a tree, reforest what we have destroyed. I was thinking of Humboldt and what he said 200 years ago, man is destroying the forest and mankind will pay for that. And I said, we have to reforest. And he said, no, there is one action which is 10 times more profitable in terms of the dividend for the planet, for the environment, which is saving the coral reefs of the ocean. It was a surprise for me, but it was too late. We had already sort of agreed on the 17 goals. And that type of discussions we had throughout the whole process. But finally, the goals were agreed, and everybody started to implement the goals. That's a big challenge now. Are we going to fulfill those goals? This brings me to the second example that I wanted to share with you. We said, OK, Colombia, we need to comply and try to fulfill these goals, poverty. Again, the word innovation, high ambitious goals and perseverance. And we sat down and said, what can we do to be more effective in the fight against poverty? And I remembered a former professor of mine. He was a professor of mine. Unfortunately, I didn't go to Colombia. I went to Harvard and the LSE. He was a professor at Harvard at the LSE also. Amartya Sen, Nobel Prize winner. He had a completely different approach of the traditional approach of how to combat and measure poverty. So I went to him. And I said, Professor Sen, you have an institute. He has an Institute of Human Development in the University of Oxford. I would like to try your approach in my country. Will you help me? And he said, of course. And we designed a whole new institutionality, new institutions, and a new approach to fight poverty. We defined 45 different factors that a family should have in order to consider him not poor and address those factors with a one-on-one approach. We changed completely the way of fighting poverty and that helped us tremendously, for example, to focus our social spending in those areas that would have the biggest impact in the fight against poverty. And the last six years, we've been able to reduce poverty more than any other country in Latin America. We have reduced extreme poverty. We were a very unequal country. We still are, but we managed to reduce extreme poverty by half. And if we continue the trend, extreme poverty will disappear by the year 2025 from Colombia, being one of the countries with the highest rate of poverty in the whole world. And this has been extremely effective because we innovated, we had a new approach. Now, roughly 60 countries in the world are following this type of, it's called a multi-dimensional poverty approach or following this type of policies to fight poverty. And that's an example of how we were able to, our being, we will not finish that, finish yet, but we have been advancing satisfactorily in the fight against poverty. We did this with almost every other of the development goals, but I'm not going to bore you with the history of the 17. Maybe jump from the number one to number 13, climate change. In climate change, we did a similar approach. How can we innovate? What can we do to really contribute to this responsibility that everyone has to stop climate change? My predecessor was one of those who didn't believe in climate change, so he abolished the Ministry of the Environment. So I said, let's reverse that. And the first thing we do is we have to recreate the Ministry of the Environment. We did that. And we started saying, what is it that we have to do? As a country very rich in biodiversity, Colombia is the second most biodiverse country in the world, the most biodiverse per square kilometer, the density of biodiversity in Colombia is the highest in the whole world. And we were endowed by God with tremendous natural resources, water, that we need to start protecting areas. So we set ourselves some very ambitious objectives we had when I came into government, roughly 13 million hectares of protected forest. We said, let's double it. We have already doubled it. Just last week we took a decision to protect one of the most biodiverse areas in the whole world in marine biodiversity around an island called Malpelo. It's north of the Canápagos Islands in Ecuador, which is, some people say, the richest area in terms of different species of fish and marine biology. And that raised our protected areas to $28.5 million, $2.5 million above the target that we had set ourselves at the beginning. And we will continue until the last day of my government. I have here the minister of the environment who said, who tells me that if we continue at this rate, we will be over $30 million for sure at the end of the government. We then also said, what is it that we have that is important for us to protect? There is a word in Spanish that I don't know why it doesn't have a correct translation in English called Paramo. Paramo is the sort of wetlands in the top of the mountains of the mountains that are near the equator. And there are not many Paramos in the world, but Colombia has 50%. Those are really factories of water. You go to the Paramo, and what you see is water going out, and that's the source of the fountain of many of our rivers. Colombia has more water than United States without Alaska. You fly over Colombia and full of rivers, and we need to protect that. So we started to limit all these. We have 37 of these so-called Paramos with a unique vegetation. And these factories we must protect. We have already protected 24, 25, and we will protect the 37 before I leave next year. We also said, who are the best guardians of biodiversity and of the environment? Our indigenous people, our indigenous communities, when I took over the presidency before going to Congress and inaugurating myself, swearing that I will abide by the Constitution, that same day, I went up to a beautiful mountain near the Caribbean coast in a place called the Sierra Nevada, where the oldest indigenous communities are. And we called them our older brothers. I went to them, and I asked permission from them. They're blessing for me to take over the presidency. And they gave me their blessing, but they said, you have a mandate. You must protect better what they call Mother Earth because you are destroying it. The world is destroying it. And she is getting very mad, and she will react. And you are going to suffer by that. And I said, well, I promise I will do my best. And that week, the worst phenomenon of La Niña, the Florens, started in Colombia. We have never had such a natural disaster. I had to handle that for two years, more than 3 and 1 half million people who were affected by that. And they said, this is what I told you when I said that Mother Earth is getting bad.  So here we decided to give the indigenous people more land around the protected areas, the natural parks, the reserves, for them to help us protect our biodiversity and our environment. And so we have been expanding and giving them self-governance in order to help us protect the environment. This has been another example of how we have been compliant with the Sustainable Development Goals. We, of course, were very active in the negotiations of the Paris Agreement and the Paris Summit for Climate Change. We were the first country in Latin America to put a tax on carbon, on carbon emissions. And we are completely compromised to fulfill our targets there of lowering our emissions, at least by 20% as we signed the agreement. Those were just simply two examples of how you have to innovate, think with a different approach, and persevere in order to fulfill your goals. And of course, in order to be able to do that, we needed to have peace. A country at war, a country at war in a war that had tremendous cost, of course, of human lives, but also from the environment point of view. The tax on the oil pipelines, for example, if you add up how many oil has been spilled in our rivers and our seas, if you sum up all these attacks, they're equivalent to 14 times the Exxon-Bardes disaster that you remember was the worst disaster ever in the history of the world, 14 times. The war stimulated illegal mining. Illegal mining uses cyanide and mercury, which contaminate permanently the water. The war stimulated the production of coca drug trafficking. And that was a tremendous stimulus to deforestate our Amazon jungles. So one necessary condition to be able to comply with the development goals, a sustainable development goal, was stop the war. That was difficult. It was a big challenge, but what did we do? We set ambitious goals. Many people said that would be impossible. Almost all of my predecessors had tried. They had failed. But again, innovate. Let's have a different approach. So there, what I did was I brought in some new and fresh ideas, people who had hand-on experience in other parts of the world to come and help me think how to do this, how to initiate a peace process that could have a large degree of success. And they started giving me ideas. One idea that gave me that has been extremely important was in every peace process in the world, the victims have been neglected. They have never been taken into consideration. And they are the ones who had suffered the war. If you want to have permanent peace, if you want to have a peace that lasts forever, you need to take the victims into account. And I said, that's a great idea. Let's put the victims and let's put their rights, which are stipulated in a treaty called the Treaty of Rome, that regulates the armed conflict resolutions in the world. And they have four rights. The rights to justice, the right to the truth, the right to reparations, and the right to non-repetition. So we said, let's put the victims in the center of the solution of this process, and let's start negotiating around the victims and their rights. The first thing we did was to approve a law that allowed us to repair the victims. We didn't even have a law that allowed us to repair the victims and to give the peasants the land back that was taken from them because of the violence and start repairing and healing the wounds of the war even before we finished the negotiation. That was a crucial aspect. Another crucial aspect was let's identify the stakeholders in the peace process who have been the ones who, for some reason or another, have been against the peace process or have been spoilers in the past. And immediately the military emerged. And I said, well, let's bring the military in to the process. So I appointed two generals, the most prestigious generals, one from the army, one from the police, as key negotiators. And I started going around the country, explaining to the soldiers and the officers a phrase that General MacArthur made famous and says, the soldiers never want war because they are the ones who put their life at risk. They always should fight for peace. And I told them, peace will be your victory. Help me achieve that peace. And slowly we were able to convince the military establishment that peace was the best in their interest also. It was not easy because there's always all kinds of prejudice and all kinds of suspicions.  And many of those ideas that we had to erase from the minds of the military establishment and they became fundamental allies in this process. The other aspects of the peace process that were important. In today's world, asymmetrical wars that like the one we had in Colombia, it's very difficult to negotiate if you don't have the support of the region, of the countries that are in some way or another affected by the war or involved in the war. And so you have to use their diplomacy. And I had a very bad relationship with the then president of Venezuela, Chavez. Very bad relationship with the then president of Ecuador. But I said, if I want peace, I need to have a good relationship with them and we sat down. And we said, listen, you and I, we think very differently but let's work together on what your people and my people are in agreement that would be good for them, for all of us. And that is peace around the whole region because it was the last armed conflict of the whole of the Americas. They said yes. They started helping in the peace process. That was another key factor, the regional support. Then the support of the whole international community. The United Nations got involved and they have been extremely, extremely supportive. They say this is the only good news that the United Nations received in many, many years. It's Colombia's peace process. The Security Council has already unanimously approved three resolutions, giving a mandate for us, for example, to monitor the ceasefire, then to monitor the disarmament. Now, the last of the arms of the FARC are in some containers being destroyed. And tomorrow, I'm going to go with the Secretary General to signal the place where we're going to build a monument of peace with the arms that would be melted. And we have a contest of the artist to see who wins the monument. And then we will build three monuments, one in the United Nations, one in Cuba and one in Colombia. Why Cuba? Because Cuba was the host country. Why did we choose Cuba as a host country? Because it was an island, because it was secure, because the Cubans had a lot of influence in the guerrillas for many reasons. So we are now in the process of finishing this phase and starting the other phase, which is the construction of peace. Because peace is the silencing of the arms is the first phase, but that's not peace. You have to construct it. It will last a long time. You have to start by healing the wounds of millions of victims, displaced people, changing your attitudes. The pope went to Colombia a few days ago. He went there specifically to help us reconcile. And he said, Colombia needs reconciliation. This will take a long time. You have to change your attitudes, but you're going in the right direction. Go forward. And that's what we're doing now. So these are three different examples of how we were able to put the Sustainable Development Goals in the agenda of the world and approved by the United Nations, how we have two of the 17 goals we have approached each goal with this attitude of innovate, put high objectives, and persevere. And peace that we have now will allow us to fulfill, to be able to comply with the objectives much easier. Without peace, that would have been impossible. Without peace, you cannot go. And recuperate a forest that had been destroyed. Without peace, you cannot fight poverty as we are fighting poverty. So the peace was a necessary condition which have fortunately been fulfilled. This is the experience I wanted to share with you. And Professor, you said that there would be a question and answer. And we have some time to answer questions. And I hope this is wonderful. Wow. Ending poverty, protecting the planet, reforesting, making peace. Not bad. Very, really wonderful. We have a very short period of time for maybe one question, maybe two. There is a mic. Please, right here, if you could stand up, introduce yourself. Please be brief. The president has to leave momentarily. And we have to clear the auditorium by 5 o'clock. So we'll just have maybe two questions. Virgilio Viana from Brazil, a Sustainable Amazon Foundation in Manaus. My question to you is a regional one. The Amazon is one of the biggest assets of Colombia in countries like Brazil as well. But the challenge that we have is to improve the coordination of activities among the country so that we have something which incorporates the fact that the Amazon River begins in Peru. Many rivers begin, or the Negro River begins in Colombia. And they drain to Brazil. And Brazil exports water through the clouds to the Andes. So we're all connected. My question to you is how can we improve coordination and integration among Amazonian countries? That's a very, very good question. As a matter of fact, look at this coincidence. I am meeting your president tonight. And you know, we're going to meet in the apartment or, I don't know, in some place with President Trump. And I'm going to hand him a letter. Telling him that we need to push forward an idea called the AAA. The AAA is the Andes, the Amazon, and the Atlantic. And that's we have already identified. We need the Guyanas also and the part of Peru and part of Venezuela. But Brazil, I know there you have many NGOs there that are very, very excited about it. And yes, we need to coordinate any action because climate change doesn't know frontiers. Borders, species don't identify frontiers. That's why collaboration and we have a responsibility. Brazil, Colombia, Peru, the whole Amazon basin. We have a responsibility with the world. And so we have to, there is a specific plan that we are going to pursue of how to better protect the whole of the Amazon corridor, the AAA, and the different cultures. There's a lot of things that we have not discovered yet. We made a, we're making an experiment in Colombia. One of the dividends of peace is we now can go to many places that we could not go before. And we're doing a replica of the botanical expedition that we made 200 years ago with today's technology. And we are making 21 mini expeditions. We have already done, I think it's 11 or 12. And we have already discovered, Professor, more than 90 new species that were unknown to mankind. But there's a lot more. And if we collaborate, we can do, I don't know, we can discover many, many things that are there hidden in our jungles, in our richness. Because I consider our jungles part of our natural richness. And that we discovered and protected correctly everybody will win. Thank you, Jen. I slur from mediators beyond borders international. I commend you for the work you're doing and the excellent presentation. My question is, what role did the presence and involvement of women play in achieving the peace of court that you have been able to do in some of the work that you just described? Thank you for reminding me, because I know you had a panel before about women leadership. The peace process, the peace process has, for the first time ever, a special chapter that has to do with gender and the protection of the victims. The women are considered the victims of the victims. Because they are the ones who lost their kids, lost their husbands, got raped. They are the victims of the victims. So there is a special consideration in the post-conflict for the role of women in the creation, in the construction of the peace. Because they have more credibility than we do. They have suffered more than we have. And so this specific peace process has given women a special role in the construction of peace, a special leadership there, in order to be able to be more effective. We've reached the end of the hour. Let me, before finally thanking our wonderful speaker, make two quick announcements. There are a very, very few tickets left for Carnegie Hall this evening. If you want to go, you better get online or rush to the box office, because it's just a tiny number. It is your chance to see Yo-Yo Ma and other virtuoso artists. It's going to be absolutely a phenomenal evening. So if you can make it, please join. Second announcement is that tomorrow it's at the faculty house. We look forward to seeing all of you there. There are spectacular sessions. Let me close by mentioning that with all of this inspiration and great leadership, when we at the United Nations and the UN Sustainable Development Solutions Network look to how to bring the SDGs throughout Latin America, we wanted to establish an SDG center of excellence for the Americas, and for Latin America in particular, and of course, the only place that the compelling place is in Bogota, in Colombia. So we will be launching an SDG center of excellence at Universidad de los Andes. And that will be early in 2018. We hope many of you will be involved. We anticipate absolutely thrilling new center of excellence that will attract people from all over the world and that we'll be able to share these ideas from all over the world. Mr. President. And remember, high goals, innovate, and persevere. There we are. Thank you so much. Wonderful. Thank you. Really wonderful. Bravo.


Hey guys, it's Nate, A.K. The Foot Account, and welcome back to the channel. Happy Friday on FIFA Ultimate Team. It's another Friday, but it's a different kind of Friday. Usually what we're talking about is a new promo that is coming. We're so used to having promos on Fridays. This, this is the way they usually run FIFA nowadays is there's a promo almost every Friday, but that is not the case as far as we know. Today, road to the final is ending at 6 p.m. UK today, those cards are going out of packs. No new SBCs or objectives that we should see. The biggest thing today that is coming out is the new season, which you can see the timer up here kind of top right here is is almost over. So there's about 14 hours left and I'm recording this, but it's 6 p.m. UK. The season is going to reset and that brings a whole new host of objectives and possibly, well, guaranteed new level 30 players, possibly level 15 storyline players. So there's any of this stuff you want to finish up now is the time to do it. But since we're seeing this new kind of content today and there's not actually a promo going on, it's the week before Black Friday, a lot of people are expecting icon SBCs and it just makes sense, right?  And take a lot of coins off of people's accounts and out of people's accounts before Black Friday, which is a huge pack promotion where they try to get people to open packs to buy FIFA points and stuff like that. So if you're thinking from an EA perspective, this would be a perfect time to drop icon SBCs. Now, I've also heard some people mention, hey, couldn't icon swaps come out? No, actually, in fact, EA themselves said that icon swaps will not be until December. So a lot of people are asking about new objectives to grind. I'm not entirely sure what we could see for objectives today, unless there's a promo that EA is just going to drop on us for a week right before Black Friday. I don't expect anything really big in terms of objectives today, but we'll see what EA has up their sleeve. There's nothing really new. I've been watching the Foot Watch Twitter. I haven't seen anything yet in terms of new car designs or our hints or anything like new packs that have been added to the code. But the biggest thing that I think people are expecting today is the return of icon SBCs. And we're going to throw it back to look at FIFA 18. Yeah, FIFA 18. We're going to look at some of these icon SBCs and just kind of talk about how I think that could be structured today. And if we see one of these types of SBCs, or if we see a icon, a base icon, repeatable SBC, regardless, since the rumors are going around, I do think you're going to see panic selling on the market today in the morning. And I'm going to talk about that. I think it's probably going to be a decent time to get involved, because I think the content today has a higher percentage chance of being lackluster than being something way over the top and being incredible. So this, I don't know if you guys remember this. This is FIFA 18, the first three icon SBCs that we ever saw in FIFA Ultimate Team. Del Piero, Overmars, and Rui Costa. EA tweeted this out. They used to release these on Thursdays. They would release three prime, the three prime icons and call it a throwback Thursday. It was really awesome time. Now, Del Piero also was released in packs at the same time. So his SBC came out at the very same time. And this is also what I want to show you guys, a squad for a player like Del Piero. Obviously, right now, EA said that we're only going to be getting icons that are available in the game as of the time the SBC drops. So it's going to be a middle or a baby icon version that would be released today. And that's part of what we're going to talk about with the hype, too. If it's a player that's like a middle or like a baby Del Piero, it would be a pretty sick SBC. And if it's priced correctly, because baby Del Piero is about a 1.1 mil card. If they price that SBC at like 800 K, a lot of people might be interested in that. But if they come out with a repeatable base icon upgrade pack as well, that might be an SBC that's maybe 500, 600, 700 K that a lot of people would be interested as well. And we'd see more market movements and more coins taken off the market if they did that sort of SBC. But just to kind of remind you guys of what a regular icon SBC is like. They used to require icons. They said this year that there is a possibility that they would require icons. I don't know if I would expect it this early on, unless they would drop a big name player. Like usually what it was in FIFA 18, if the SBC was over like 800 K to a million coins is when they had an icon requirement involved, because the icons were about like three, four hundred thousand coins in FIFA 18, I believe they they went up really high at one point. But that's kind of what I would expect if it's like 800 K or above for an SBC. That's right. I think they'd include an icon requirement. But then again, it's just a lot of high rated squads, right? 84 is 85s, 86 is 87s. So that's why a lot of people right now are invested in these players right here. SBC fodder. Now, of course, today on FIFA, we had the Bamba SBC that was released. This card right here coming in at 300 K. Now, it is a really good looking card. But this caused SBC fodder to drop for a just a slight period. And then it actually got reinvested in and went back up. People bought those cards back when they got cheap because they are expecting more icon SBCs today. So that's kind of what I wanted to talk about with the SBC fodder today. Two things are going to happen, one of two things. Here's this is scenario number one, right? So Nario number one is right. A lot of these cards are inflated. They've gone back up a little bit. 87s were like 18 K today at one point after the Bamba SBC was released. And now they're back to 20. So option number one is EA releases icon SBCs that are lackluster in value or lackluster in hype. Or there's no repeatable icon SBC. Or it's just some sort of icon related SBC that is not hype. All right. That's option number one or if they release nothing at all, that'd be option number one. And what would happen in that case is a lot of people that have invested in fodder, they don't like being unassigned. They don't want to continue to be unassigned and have loads of these cards in their trade pile. They're going to sell, they're going to take the loss. And a lot of these higher rated cards are going to drop. Right. That's the worry. A lot of people have fodder right now and they're saying, hey, should I sell it before 6 p.m. If you don't think the content is going to be good today.  If you're already making coins in these cards, like if you bought these at 24,000 coins, which Harry Kane was 24, 23 K like two weeks ago. And when people started buying this stuff, then you're already in the money. And maybe you just take your coins and you don't risk it. Right. Option two is they released, they released multiple icon SBCs that are very hyped that a lot of people want to do and or a repeatable icon SBC, like a baby icon upgrade. In that case, what I would expect is fodder to spike a little bit right away. If you kind of move up a little bit and then everybody that invested would start selling those cards and probably would hinder the rise. Maybe even watch fodder prices go down a little bit because there's a ton of people that have invested in SBC fodder at the moment. And you can actually see with new SBCs coming out, even if it's a really hype SBC fodder could go up, then it could move down and then it could go back up and boom. Once everybody sells all those investments for their profit because people will start listing these high rated cards after 6pm UK when the content comes out, regardless of whether there's SBCs or not. You're going to see people start to go on the market, list these cards up because whether or not they make profit, this is like their time they've been waiting for to figure out if they're going to hold or if they're going to sell and hopefully make coins. So they're like aiming in their minds that they want to sell at this time. So you could sell before if you want to take the guaranteed profit and take the no risk cash, I guess you could put it as and make those coins there. Or you could kind of, as said earlier tonight in the live stream, twitch.tv backslash the foot account and link in the description. We said holding your nuts and basically holding through the 6pm content drop and seeing if a repeatable SBC would come out or hype icon SBCs would come out that would actually make fodder continue to rise up. Now, of course, without Mbappe player the month that made people panic sell today because that was another SBC that would have supposedly come out that would have required 88, 89 rated cards, 87s and those higher rated options. But instead we got Bomba today that requires a lot more of like the 85, 86. Still some of the higher rated ones, but there's not as much hype for that card because it seems very overpriced compared to what people weren't expecting and they were expecting a Bbappe or a Bnitter. So I think that kind of made people panic a bit today. So that's why that's what I'm thinking could happen with the fodder market today. I know a lot of people wanted to talk about that. That's what I am thinking about. So, of course, if we do have icons, let's talk about actual icons. If those cards come out today and what I'm thinking we might see in terms of the foot bin market in terms of just just like the the icons and panic selling and stuff like that. I think that with the rumors swirling around and a lot of people feeling that we're getting icon SBCs today, you're going to see panic selling on some icons. Now, of course, right now the index is showing as I'm recording that the icon market is up and that is true. Since rewards icons have gone up, a lot of cards, you know, we look at these cards that are up in price. A lot of them were lower at rewards and people still bought icons, right? The whole market went up with weak and weak rewards. If you follow the Thursday Flipping investments video, you made some coins, right? GGs. But I think there's going to be some panic this morning, not only on icons, but I'm also expecting some panic on special cards. I really think so. The past two weeks, we've had panic on specials and especially if there's any foot watch tweets or, you know, just some sort of leaks or speculation that there could be icon SBCs coming. Then I feel like you would see some panic selling on this stuff. And especially since this is a totally different area than icons, right? If there is panic selling this morning and it is pretty big panic selling, wrote to the final cards. Well, Lukaku was three seventy. He was literally three ninety a couple hours ago. That's a footbed undercut, actually, as you can see here. That's not his true price. But if you see panic selling, right? Like, let's say this Lukaku is back at like three fifty, three sixty. Let's say Royce is like four twenty again.  You know, some of these drops on these cards are like, you know, twenty to thirty percent ish, like pretty big drops out of packs, informs as well. That's when I would start to get interested. And I would say that even if there is icon SBCs that come today, if people are panic selling their teams that they're going to use for Weekend League, a lot of people are going to have to go buy those players back because, yes, they may go do an icon SBC. But let's say there's like an icon midfielder SBC that comes out. Let's say like Javi gets an SBC today, right? And you see this guy Zaha get panic sold from two forty, two fifty. Where is that right now? All the way back down to like two twenty, two fifteen. In my mind, I'd say that's a buy, man, because this guy is going to get bought right back up. If there's no other striker icon SBCs that came out today, or if even if there's a repeatable icon SBC, people go panic sell their teams to do the SBC, then they go buy some of those cards back. So that's where I would look to see if there is panic today. The only thing that I could see that would make cards be panic sold and that would make cause a lot of panic at six PM UK and cause prices to drop even more would be some sort of SBC that is like incredible value that is repeatable. Like let's say a base icon upgrade that like costs really cheap. Like for some reason, if EA really just wants to crash the market, they make an SBC like four hundred K for a base icon upgrade. That would be pretty interesting to me, because the base icon upgrade in years past had been last year, actually. I think I have the SBC pulled up as well. Yeah, right here. And we looked at this in a video earlier this week, but this SBC was five hundred K right away and went up to six twenty five. It was eighty three eighty six eighty six and eighty seven rated squads. And the fodder went up like crazy because nobody was expecting it. And it wasn't invested in. It wasn't overinvested at the start. It was just kind of dropped on us like this and the fodder went sky high. So I don't think fodder would make this big of a jump. We've been looking at in the past, you know, a couple of videos with the Black Friday preparation with SBC fodder. I don't feel like the fodder would really jump this high or all those SBC cards. I don't feel like they would jump that high. So if an SBC does come out like this, though, that's the only thing that I could say could actually crash the market today. There is a possibility for other flashbacks or other SBCs that are player SBCs that you could put out. But I'm just other than icons coming today. It's really just kind of like what the heck is going to happen. We're getting a new season, right? What usually comes with a new season? Just objectives. Now, again, people have mentioned icon swaps, but he said that that's not coming out until. Later. So I'm not too worried about like objective content really messing up the game today. Again, unless EA has something up their sleeve, that they're going to pull a fast one on us today and like they're not giving us any information right now. And we're going to be really, really surprised today when we have the content drop. So again, some of the cards are already being, you know, they've kind of reached their peak from all the buyback from people buying the weakening teams. If you do still want to buy special cards for like your Black Friday investment, I would say watch these cards as they go out of the week and leak. It's going to be very interesting to watch some of those and to see where those prices go. Again, if they get as low as last weekend, that's going to be something we'll be watching this weekend for sure. But at least for today on Friday, watch the panic selling in the morning. If you have SBC fodder, weigh your options for what I talked about in the beginning. Do you want to take the risk and hope they drop a big SBC or take the guaranteed cash? And if they don't drop a big SBC today and we see SBC fodder dropping a lot, that could be a beautiful time to get in on some of these cards as we head into if or even if there's an icon SBC that comes out, a repeatable that is maybe a little bit overpriced. But you see fodder just go down really, really low from all the panic selling. It might bounce back up. So we'll talk about some of that stuff after the release tomorrow or today on Friday and talk through some of those market movements as well. Now, again, icons, right? Let's talk one more specific part about actual icons themselves. If you do see panic on these cards today, right? Let's look, let's use Maca Lele, for example. This is a very hyped up icon, very used, right? This guy's been rising basically all year. He's kind of actually low right now, 76770. Conte hurt his price a little bit this week.  Let's say right now he is a 750,000 coin card. The SBC, they put it out and it's a 500K SBC. It's actually really good value for a middle Maca Lele. You would see this guy crash, right? But then to a point, if the SBC is really good value and fodder drops and makes that price go lower, right? You can kind of like you kind of have to gauge the SBC price versus the on the market price. And that's one one difference that I wanted to show you from FIFA 18 and just point that out to you guys really quick was this is the Del Piero Prime Icon SBC. It was costing first week about one million to one point one million coins. When the second set of SBCs came out, it went up to one point three during foot miss in FIFA 18. But about one point one million coins that first week. Now, of course, his card was not on the market before this because in FIFA 18, they put the cards out right away when the SBC was released. But his card maintained a price for the first couple weeks of like one point six to one point seven million coins. Now, I know there weren't a lot of prime icons on there and his price kind of just dropped for the rest of the year. But just kind of keep an eye on that sort of stuff because the tradeable card on the market should be more expensive than the SBC. It should be more expensive. That's why the draw to the SBC is there. Now, of course, if EA prices an SBC at the same price as what the card is on the market and it's a very, very hacked of card like a Maca Lele. Let's say the price is at seven hundred thousand coins. Maca Lele in the morning, the SBC comes out. He gets panic sold. This card on the market gets panic sold down to like six fifty or goes below what the SBC price would be in the first hour or so. I would expect a rebound because instead of people see that as, OK, I can go buy this card off the market for the same price or fifty K more instead of having to go do the SBC and spend all that time doing the SBC and having an untradable card in the end. Maybe I don't want this guy for my team for the whole rest of the year. So the tradeable value of the card should be a little bit higher than what the SBC cost is. So that's kind of like a range and kind of a, I guess, like ground point that you can use for comparing the icon price on the market to the actual SBC when it does come out. So again, very interesting Friday today. I guess with the new season objectives, it's probably going to be some more. There's going to be more of these objectives that are in here as well. We didn't get a Silver Stars objective. So maybe we'll get another one of these today in the Silver Lounge. Of course, Kunde is going to go away. Malay is going to go away. All of this stuff is basically since there's no timer on all of this, it's going to be expiring when the season expires. There should be a lot of objectives today. I don't think maybe a player or two, maybe they'll drop another Foundation's player. We only have MLS. This is going away. So maybe they drop a new one of those as well. We shall see. And of course, probably new TIFOs and new stadium gear stuff instead of the season rewards. Hopefully no more Loan Abape. We don't need any more of those. EA, you can get those out. Give us like a loan. I don't care. A loan is somebody else other than Abape because I'm tired of seeing that dude. And I think we all are tired of seeing him in a friendly. So big question mark today for content boys. We might have a lot of cool stuff. We might kind of have a bummer of a Friday. So I'm really curious to see what happens. Of course, if there is not that much content, the less content we have, if there is panic selling in the morning, that's just more that the market goes up in the afternoon because people will sell those cards and realize there's nothing to do on the game. Go buy them back and start playing weekend league. So that's something to keep in mind as well with the market today. But big question marks. Hopefully it's cool icon content from EA Sports today on FIFA 21. We'll find out though. If you guys enjoyed this video, smash the thumbs up on it. Comment down below if you have any questions and subscribe to the channel for new. It's been Nate the Foot Accountant. Catch you guys later. Peace.


Hey guys shave your 1,000 here check this out. I was staying out here in a garage Smoking a cigarette right? Now always watch computer or the DVR monitor Now the camera needs clean. I know I don't know if I shut this light out if maybe it'll help any but Yeah, maybe a little okay, but Regardless of that, okay. I want you to check something now. I caught Let's see this was at 1020. It's like 1030 now Just few minutes ago, and I wanted to share this with you What I got to do is I don't have a memory cord to put in that right now in the DVR system To take it straight from there so What I want you to do is watch this for a second Okay, and and and see what you think of this Now you'll see some spider webs up in this area across, but what the hell is that as you can see? Look at that and disappeared now what I want to explain to you guys something is This is you know infrared. It's night vision, right? It's outside now whatever that was was in front of the camera and It had enough mass to reflect the eye or light back into the camera now I looked outside as soon as that happened and The we have a motion light on and it kind of acted like a motion sensor turned on on the on the porch light Well, it didn't So I'm going to place back for you a couple times. I want to see Well, you guys may think it is I mean it just literally brightens up and then hangs there for a minute, you know Now of course, I'm reversing it and I'm gonna play it forward What is that? It's not a spider. I've seen spiders on there. They look nothing like that.  I don't see any legs. I don't see any wings so I Don't know it's not a spider Now Want to roll this back and we'll zoom in on it. Okay, you know, let's zoom in on it here Let's do Well Little bit too much. I think yeah, that's zoomed in just too much. I want too much on it But it was like over here My mouse is not working right. Let's zoom it in like that. It was up the whole screen It's not making sense to me. Let's back it up. I don't Just don't get it Now this is running backwards guys. It's crazy. Let's run it forward again one more time You tell me what you guys think it is. I just stand there smoking a cigarette and happen to see it Should be getting there. It's not a spider. We went out and checked. It's it's not spider I really don't know what it is guys But now that's live. That's what's going on now See the time is now 1048 PM it's Friday, so Just thought I'd share that with you didn't want to bore you guys, but What do you think is it paranormal? I'm not saying it is. I'm not saying it's not. I just want your take on it and you can see the spider webs and I Mean but that was not a spider. I've seen spiders and mobs and even flies on here after dark See you can see headlights from cars as you can see if you see a headlight from a car You'll see the car. So that was a good point right there But you know like I said, I've seen all kinds of bugs on there and you can tell it's a bug You can see wings you see legs that you know I mean you see bugs flying past here and when they get real close to the camera and you slow them down You can actually see them you can take a good still image if you wanted to but I just I thought I would share that with you guys because you know That's just I Don't know. I don't know pretty neat. I thought but you know, I mean, yeah, what are your thoughts? Give me your take on it. It could be nothing could be something. We don't know but I Know it's pretty interesting to just stand here because I always watch that you know keeping on the place and everything Really weird. So I guys think I should have kept you going. It just showed a Moth just went climbing up the screen. You can tell the shape of it and a wing So it's pretty wild. Sorry guys. Thanks for watching. Remember saber of the myth of the man the legend Paranormal carrier. I don't know guys have a good one. Thanks for watching again. See you guys. Bye. Bye now


This makes the narcissist very angry after everything you have been through with the narcissist There is a point in the relationship where you try to heal Where you try to become more like yourself Where you try to develop your authenticity and when you do that the narcissist will punish you They will subject you to pain loss or confinement healing from narcissistic abuse It's one of the most difficult things you can do and it is something that you must attend to As a result of their actions But when you try to do that They will see it as an act of defiance As an act of both disobedience a determined opposition against their authority The narcissist does not want you to heal They do not want you to become your authentic self You may have experienced narcissistic abuse throughout your childhood You may have experienced narcissistic relationships You may have experienced it throughout your life But you still choose to remain dedicated to your healing You still choose to pursue your own goals and dreams Without seeking the narcissist approval or validation You do it for yourself rather than doing it to make the narcissist happy Because you want to become your authentic self But the narcissist is not going to accept that They're not going to encourage or support you They're not going to let you become your own separate person Because once a narcissist has power and influence over you Once they've had a commanding position over you and they've gotten narcissistic supply from you They see it as though you exist only to give them supply You have no other purpose in life Other than to make them feel more comfortable At some point you accept that the narcissist behaviour is never going to change And you start focusing on yourself again You start trying to become your own person And when you do that They punish you They punish you by withholding money from you Or by taking your money away from you Because they see money as power As a tool that they can use to keep you under their control So they use it as a punishment and as an act of revenge If it's a narcissistic parent They will cut you out of their will They will give more to their siblings than they give to you If it's a narcissistic partner They will drag you for the courts They will make a strenuous effort And use every available means to take all of your resources To punish you for trying to become your own person When you try to become your own person It makes the narcissist very angry But sometimes they just won't pay any attention to you They will ignore you They will show a lack of interest and concern for you As though you're unimportant As though you're average or ordinary They will never very affectionate anyway But as you go out to become your own person They will become very cold They will become very unfriendly to you They will be full of cheerful high spirits around everyone else But they will deliberately treat you With a lack of affection and warmth They will withhold love They will distance themselves And they will do it to punish you Because they know that you want nothing more than to be lovingly protected and cared for They know that you want to be appreciated So they will withhold that from you Until you give up on becoming your own person Until you give up On your own beliefs and ideals that are separate from the narcissist Until you give up on your own needs But if you still continue to develop your own identity They're not just going to sit back and let you do that They will start a smear campaign They will say horrible things about you to anyone who will listen And people will support their narrative Because then they feel like they have earned the narcissist's approval and regard They feel like they are in the narcissist's favour and good opinion And you may have thought that these people Would have offered support and assistance to you But when you go out to become your own person And the narcissist starts a smear campaign against you That is when you realise that no one has your back No one is in your corner When the flying monkeys come after you You're as good as dead to everyone who you once thought were on your side Because now you're in a position of great and irreversible danger and trouble And they're not going to fight for you Which leaves you with only two choices You have to follow in everyone else's footsteps You have to give up on yourself and be a puppet like everyone else Or you can escape from their control and lose everyone Which can often be a very difficult decision to make But if you do decide to break free The narcissist will be opposed to it They will become your adversary And while they may not be in your life anymore They will send you mean emails and text messages They will use technology to hurt you Because you're no longer under their influence or control You're set in a boundary And whenever you do that You should expect their poor ability to manage their extreme and inappropriate emotional responses To be expressed through their text messages or emails Because they can't escape their own fantasy of psychosis They have a strong and unraising desire for revenge And it's like they never lose their energy, motivation or enthusiasm to continue doing it And that's where you get the word salad That's where you get the unintelligible, extremely disorganized writing Which is manifested as a symptom of their mental disorder They feel entitled to keep sending you this garbage But it's ridiculous Because your only offence is living your life And not doing everything the way that suits them But whenever you see their emails or text messages It makes you feel sick With time They will lose motivation in doing that It will no longer be as rewarding or satisfying for them But they may become more covert They may start monitoring you from a distance without your awareness And as you try to achieve a sense of individuality They may take legal action against you They love hiring lawyers to submit to their orders and perform services for them Lawyers often act as their flying monkeys And the legal system is set up to reward narcissists So you may end up with letters from the narcissist lawyer And you may get the word salad Letters from the narcissist lawyer And you may even have to pay for your own To defend yourself from the narcissist Which can take a toll on your mental and emotional health It can bring you down and leave you in a lot of debt When you try to become your own person It is an act of resistance and defiance to narcissistic abuse They see your authenticity as an offence And the narcissist will try to get revenge They will try to punish you Thank you for watching I hope this video resonates with you Please like, comment, share and subscribe If you would like to donate, my PayPal link is in the video description Coaching Inquiries You can email me at coaching.naxify.uk Thank you for watching and I'll talk to you soon


Hi, my name is Yongjun Kim, who is a CEO in Pume company. And what is this product here? This is LOOHA tea, and it is a healthcare device for dogs. It measures activity level and skin temperature and heart sound. So does it do any kind of tracking? No tracking. It's specialized in medical analysis. So what does it track? Is it just steps? Like here, we provide calorie consumption based on physical information and also provide active pattern during the day, so you can check. And also skin temperature, monitoring skin temperature and detect fever like that. Also for measuring heart sound, the application analyzed autonomic nervous system, so you can check your dog's physical condition, even if abnormal symptoms are not feasible on the outside. Is this mass production? Yes. Do you have many customers? Actually, we just launched a Korean market. Is there any chance to integrate 4G or 5G tracking? Actually, you will make a version for this? The problem is, it's related to power consumption. This is like 30 days? Yes, one charge at least 30 days time. So that's a different kind of consideration, because it would be nice to have everything in one, one thing that tracks and do all the health in one go. Is this the best health tracker for dogs, the best in the world? There's a difference between a dog and cat, and also cats don't like wearing something like that. The cats are a little bit fuzzy, they don't really do what you tell them.