This is a, I'm enjoying this line of questioning, but there's another thing that's popped up for me, which is I'd love to get your thoughts on. So one of the things I do is I train entrepreneurs. And as I've been reading your work and thinking more about what the gifting economy means and like, are there business models that I've never thought of that could be just as effective? Do you have any advice for ways to think about doing business as entrepreneurs that are, you know, examples of the story of interbeingness more than the story of separation? Yeah, you know, I've actually, I've been contemplating writing an article on this business and the gift. Cause it actually is a viable business model. I use that business model. Like I have a sub-stack and you know, a lot of people on sub-stack, not everybody cause a lot of people get this actually, but a lot of people, like the classic business model is you put some stuff on for free and then other stuff behind a paywall. And the idea is if you want, you know, this good stuff, well, I'm going to keep it unless you pay me for it. Like that, it's kind of an adversarial relationship. And I don't do that. I just put it all on for free. And I say, if you would like to support me, then, you know, get a paid subscription or donate it on my website. But I don't compel people to do that. I trust what I have noticed in myself, which is if somebody gives me a gift, I want to give them something in return. Like I subscribed to some very popular people on sub-stack like Glenn Greenwald, Matt Tatey, they've got tens of thousands of paid subscribers or more. They don't need my money, but I want to give them money. Like when Radiohead released an album like this, I think it was in Rainbows or whatever, back in 2007, they were like, okay, you know, all this electronic music downloads, we're just going to put it out there for voluntary payment. Yeah. And it's not like Radiohead needed the money, but I'm like, yeah, I want to give you guys some money because this album rocks, you know? This is great. So I've noticed this in myself. Like I want to give to those who have blessed me. So I do this for online courses. In fact, there's an online course that I have called Living in the Gift that goes really deep into, because there's so much psychology and so much wounding comes up when you try to offer things by gift and then people take advantage of you, you know? And then you realize, oh, maybe I wasn't fully in generosity and trust to begin with. So there's like, it's a whole journey. And so that's why when people try it, sometimes it doesn't work because maybe they're still putting some manipulative energy into the ask. So what I'm saying is that, yes, it is a viable business model, but it's not trivial. And it can work for content creators of all kinds, musicians, it can work for software, it can work for film, it can work for pretty much any digital product. Non-digital products, that's a bit more complicated because the cost of production is non-zero. For me, like the cost of producing the first copy of an essay, I mean, that's days or even weeks of labor. The second copy costs me nothing. And the third copy, the marginal cost of production is zero. Therefore, there's no natural price point. And the only reason that people can charge for such things is that they maintain artificial scarcity. Digital rights management, copyright, you know, paywalls, artificial scarcity. And like, there's no scarcity in the world already. Why create more of it? So I really think that this is the business model of the future. Was there anything you didn't expect when you first implemented that? Anything you were surprised by? You know, I didn't enter into it with full consciousness. So pretty much everything that has happened has been, if not a surprise, like a discovery.  And finally, it was ready to publish as a book.  I'm like, oh man, now I gotta take it down, you know? Cause otherwise, no one will buy the book. I'm like, no, I just, I don't care. It's too beautiful and I don't want to make people pay. And besides, I don't really believe in intellectual property to begin with. Like that's another thing. Anyway, so I put it online. I kept it online, you know? And like maybe people will buy the book anyway. And that's kind of what led me to do more and more things in that way. And part of it also was, I'm putting this out for people to read, not to like make it hard for them to access it. I want them to read it and it's sacred to me. And where did it even come from? Where do these ideas come from? Did I actually make them or did I receive them? They're part of a cultural and intellectual context. They come from many, many conversations and many, many books. And from my own capacity to think, which was given to me by my mother, by my father, by the world that made air and water and sunshine. Like in a certain sense, my life itself is a gift. My ability to do work is a gift. My ability to think, my ability to write. Like everything that went into my creation came from somewhere else. So it is by nature a gift. And so that's another reason why I want to maintain it as a gift and a trust that the return gift will come. And it has, yeah. It's a viable business model. Yeah, thank you for sharing. I find myself, I want to move in that direction and I on some level intellectually understand the reciprocity of all things. And I have a great ability to charge a nice fee for my coaching and that's like such a juicy thing also. Yeah, I'm not saying like that you shouldn't do that. Yeah. It's again, like trusting what really feels right. Like there's a lot of good reasons to charge money. It making a payment is a kind of an initiation. Yes. It's an entry ritual. It signals to the unconscious that I'm doing this for real. So it could very well be that if you didn't charge people wouldn't take your coaching seriously. Yeah, well I didn't pay for, I can just take it or leave it and maybe I'll come late to my session, I'm not gonna do the homework, but if they're making a payment they're affirming to their unconscious mind that this is important. I hold this valuable. So definitely like the reason to do gift economics isn't so that you qualify as a good and virtuous person. Yeah, I think where I'm coming from is something I hear a lot in the coaching industry of like, it's coaching is great for people that have the resources to pay for it. And I find myself wanting to supply it to people that don't have the money at the time in a lot of senses. And maybe you do that sometimes too. Yeah. Yeah.


Legends of unexplainable creatures have permeated the age of man. Some, such as the mermaid and satchquatch, found depicted within some of the oldest cave paintings on Earth, with many accounts found within New World history made and documented upon differing continents, far before either were ever apparently in contact with each other. Most of these creatures have continued to surface over the years, the skunk ape, the moth man, along with many others, reportedly encountered by several independent witnesses at the same time, with a number of these experiences even reportedly photographed. These images are now touted as proof of their existence by those who snapped them. With the number of reports of apparent cryptids, just within the last few decades alone being in the thousands. Some of these claims obviously hold more water than others, the Loch Ness Monster being one example, some being so convinced by the purported evidence of its existence, dedicating their entire lives to the pursuit of the creature. Our reasoning behind our decision to investigate this creature, however, is due to the astonishing claims made and seamlessly collaborated with each other regarding an event involving two enormous reptilian-looking birds which swooped down and attempted to snatch a young boy all the way back in July of 1977. On the 25th, a police report was made and a subsequent search for the creature occurred. A mass search, a terrified boy and mother, along with many other witnesses over the coming years, would come forward within the state of Illinois in the U.S., all claiming they had witnessed something many would simply dismiss as impossible if it weren't for the incredible corroboration of the event made by those who witnessed it on that fateful day. A pair of creatures which have now become infamously known as the Thunderbird, a possible breeding pair of living, flying dinosaurs, most reminiscent of a pterodactyl, targeted 10-year-old Marlon Lowe while he was playing in his backyard in Longdale. One of the, quote, birds latched onto Marlon and began to take flight with the boy. His mother instinctively took to battling with the creature, managing to rescue her son from its enormous talons. The creatures, reportedly startled with his reaction, then made their escape. The flurry of activity caught the attention of many people nearby, who all also claimed to have witnessed these creatures making their escape. Reportedly, weighing some 50 to 70 pounds, if this Jurassic-sized creature does indeed still exist, it may be due to an enormous cyclical hibernation period. The flying reptiles would, however, have a wingspan many meters in length, so the chances of it going unnoticed for very long we feel are near to impossible, yet that does not take anything away from these people's claims, testimonies which they have all stuck to, convinced of what they saw, and indeed what Marlon experienced that day in 1977. What do you think regarding the existence of the Thunderbird, real or just a hoax? We find such claims highly compelling. Julia is the name given to the unknown source of a sound recorded on March 1, 1999. It was recorded on the Eastern Equatorial Pacific using an autonomous hydrophon array. Heard for many thousands of kilometers, the source of the sound has been largely dismissed as an iceberg running aground somewhere off of Antarctica, its point of origin being somewhere between Brandsfield Straits and Cape Adair. What gave this story a rather chilling twist, however, is a classified image which later surfaced, a classified image later redacted, taken by a NASA satellite which shows something with an enormous shadow within the waters of Cape Adair at the time, which, if confirmed as a living animal, would be classified as a sea monster of gigantic proportions. The USA's National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, or NOAA for short, have captured and subsequently released a number of mysterious sounds of possible underwater monsters over the past few years. The upsweep is an unidentified sound detected on the American NOAA's Equatorial Autonomous Hydrophon Arrays. This sound was present when the Pacific Marine Environmental Laboratory began recording its sound surveillance system, SOSUS, in August 1991. It consists of a long train of narrow-band upsweeping sounds of several seconds in duration each. The source level was high enough to be recorded throughout the Pacific. The sound appears to be seasonal, generally reaching peaks in spring and autumn, but it is unclear why. The source can be roughly located at 54 degrees south, 140 degrees west, which is near the location of volcanic activity, but the location of the sound remains a mystery. The whistle, recorded in the Mariana volcanic arc of the Pacific Ocean, but since it was only recorded on one hydrophone rather than the three required to triangulate a location, it is considered unidentified. Bloop is the name given to an ultra-low frequency and extremely powerful underwater sound, detected by the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in 1997. The sound source was roughly triangulated to a remote point in the South Pacific Ocean, west of the southern tip of South America, and the sound was detected several times. According to the NOAA description, it rises infrequently rapidly over a duration of one minute and was of sufficient amplitude to be heard on multiple sensors at a range of over 5,000 kilometers. Dr. Christopher Fox does not believe its origin to be man-made, such as a submarine or bomb, nor is it familiar to geological events, such as volcanoes or earthquakes. The audio profile of Bloop does indeed resemble that of a living creature, yet the source is a mystery, both because it is different from any known sounds and because it was several times louder than the loudest ever recorded animal, the blue whale. Slowdown is a name given to another mysterious deep-sea sound, recorded on May 19, 1997, in the Equatorial Pacific Ocean. The name was chosen because the sound slowly decreases in frequency over a duration of seven minutes. It was recorded using an autonomous hydrophone array. The sound has been picked up several times each year since 1997. And finally, the train is the name given to a sound recorded on March 5, 1997, on the Equatorial Pacific Ocean Autonomous Hydrophone Array. The sound rises to a quasi-steady frequency. What is especially interesting about this sound is its origins, which are also within Cape Adair, the same general location as Julia. Could some of these sounds be the mating calls of unknown sea monsters? Maybe one day we will find out.


Hello and welcome to the session. In this session we discussed the following question which says each side of a square field measures 20 meters adjacent to this field there is a rectangular field having its size in the ratio 1 is to 3. If the perimeters of both of the fields are equal, find the dimensions of the rectangular field. Before we move on to the solution for this question let's recall the formula to find out the perimeter of a rectangle this is equal to 2 into L plus B where this L is the length of the rectangle and B is the breadth of the rectangle. Then we have the perimeter of a square is equal to 4 into A where this A is the side of the square. This is the key idea to be used in this question. Now we move on to the solution. Consider the square field ABCD with each side measuring 20 meters so we have the side of the square field is equal to 20 meters so we have the perimeter of the square field would be equal to 4 into the side that is 4 into 20 meters which is equal to 80 meters this is the perimeter of the square field ABCD. Now we are given in the question that we have a rectangular field adjacent to the square field with sides in the ratio 1 is to 3 so we take let the length of the rectangular field be equal to x meters that is 1 into x meters so we take this PQ to be x meters and let the breadth of the rectangular field be equal to 3 x meters so the perimeter of the rectangular field will be equal to 2 into L plus B that is this would be equal to 2 into x plus 3 x meters and so this is equal to 2 into 4 x meters equal to 8 x meters this is the perimeter of the rectangular field PQRS in the question we have that the perimeters of both the fields that is the rectangular field and the square fields are equal that is the perimeter of the square field is equal to the perimeter of the rectangular field so this would be 80 is equal to 8 x now dividing both sides by 8 we get x is equal to 10 since we know that 8 10 times is 80 and this 8 cancels with this 8 so we get the value of x as 10 so the length of the rectangular field equal to x meters so as the value of x is 10 so length of the rectangular field would be equal to 10 meters now the breadth of the rectangular field is equal to 3 x meters putting the value of x as 10 we get the length of the rectangular field is equal to 3 into 10 meters which is equal to 30 meters so we have got the length of the rectangular field equal to 10 meters and the width of the rectangular field equal to 30 meters which is our final answer this completes the session hope you have understood the solution of this question