So my name's Ed. So I work with our customers to help around container adoption. So I work within Europe and beyond. Sort of similar things to what Jeremy was talking about. So I sort of feed in from a cultural perspective into things like innovation labs. But also looking at getting, helping you find the right kind of services teams to help you build platforms. And then also how you can kind of build out an approach for containerization of existing and legacy applications as well. So sort of covering some very similar things. What I was going to do today is talk about just containerization. So like taking existing apps and how we can get those into containers. So I thought it would probably be a good idea to just walk back on actually what a container is. So if we're running an application in a container, what we're expecting to see. So if I run an application traditionally on a Linux operating system, then I'll have an application. It may have a number of dependencies, its libraries. And then it talks to the Linux operating system or the kernel, the Linux kernel. When I containerize it, I basically do exactly the same thing. The only difference is that we tell the kernel to put that application process into a set of namespaces. And we can move those dependencies, those libraries into a namespace file system for that application so that it actually has all of its dependencies and everything bundled up together as part of an image. And so essentially what's going to happen then is we run our application the same within the container. But now that application is still talking to that underlying Linux operating system. And so we would say that then the Linux operating system that you have is still very important. So we're not virtualizing your application. It's still running on that. And that does have a bearing on what you can and can't containerize within, what types of applications you can and can't containerize. So why is that a good thing, putting stuff in a container? Well, first of all, we can distribute our applications much more easily. So previously, before we had containers, you'd have lots of different ways of packaging up your applications or explaining how to install those applications in an environment. Now we have a container image that we can take that container image. And if your ops team now had to run containers, then we're good and we're able to distribute that. And also because of the way that we build our container images with these layers, I only need to distribute the layers that have changed. So if I've only just changed the layer that has the app in, then the other layers, which have got the dependencies, if they've stayed the same, I don't need to send those out with that. So distribution is really straightforward and nice and easy. It does mean that we're consistent as well. And so the idea with a container is that we don't rebuild our application for every different environment. We build one container image, and then we distribute that across all the environments. We're going to run it. And also it's the same container image that we're running through the software development lifecycle. So you start in dev, you're moving into test, and then into production ultimately. It means that what you've got is consistent across those different areas. It also means that you can choose different software technologies and languages. So you're creating a nice abstraction between yourself and the guys that need to run the containers. So if your developers want to use Go, or Rust, or Java, or whatever it is, they're kind of free to put that into those container images. And we get, from a runtime perspective, we're able to run irrespective of the technology and language that's inside the container. It also means that your application is encapsulated and is protected against other applications and that underlying operating system. And because it has its dependencies within that, if the ops team wants to, say, patch the operating system, or another application that happens to run on that needs to be patched, all of your dependencies are actually within that container. And so we don't have that issue, well, if I patch this, then it's going to have a knock-on effect on my application. Because everything that application needs is carried with it in that container. Yeah, so we talked about that consistency. If it's gone wrong in production, how do I test that? Well, at least we know that container images are mutable. So when I'm testing that in development, I've got exactly the same image. I can link to exactly the same image that they're running in production. And so it should be a lot easier for me to repeat the way that we run our applications in production. The other thing, as well, is that we see a lot of them. And Jeremy touched on security as well. But often, your security teams may be interested in what you're actually running. Can you show that? Can we audit what's running in production and show that it's gone through all of these governance checks as it passed various tests and things like that? Well, what we can do with the container is we can sign it so we know exactly what it is. We also have a unique ID for that container. And then if you have the process set up within your organization, you'll be able to then reference that across all of those steps or all of the gateways that it's gone through to get through into production, you'll be able to show that. But if you're just running a single container, well, that's a trivial example. But in real world examples, you're not just running one thing. You're running a collection of applications that talk to each other. And so how do we do that? Well, that's what Kubernetes is for. So it'll take your applications, it'll orchestrate them, and enable them to talk to each other in a non-trivial architecture. OK, so that's great. So how do we take all those existing applications that we've got today that we've built using our traditional methods? And how do we get them into containers? Well, first of all, how do we tell if we can actually run that application in a container? So the sort of rule of thumb is if it runs on Linux, then it should be able to put in a container. Well, kind of. There are a couple of red flags that you need to look for. So you generally want something that's running in user space within a Linux system. So it's not tied to the kernel. It's not a kernel module. It's not got that sort of thing. So typically, a red flag might be that you've got some code that's got assembler in it. What is better is applications that are using higher level libraries like libGCC, for example, because they'll do a lot of work to map you to different versions of kernels. And they'll stop you from falling foul of swapping between different systems with different kernel versions. You may have specialized hardware or technical requirements or networking requirements. So not all of those are going to work within a containerized environment, so say like a token ring network, as I got as an example there. It may be a mainframe application that's difficult to turn into an I-86 architecture. So those sorts of things can also be red flags as well. And also, important to remember is that where are you getting that software from? Are you getting this from a vendor? And does that vendor support it running in a container? And so there may be licensing contracts. There may be support contracts, maintenance contracts, which prohibit you from running that application in a container. Those red flags don't mean that it won't containerize. And often, you just need to have a conversation with the development team. So recently, we had one where we had a customer asking, well, this application is a REL5 application. We can't run it because we don't do a REL5 base image. And so, well, why is that? So why do you think you can't take your application? And actually, it was that the ops team for that application didn't support anything other than REL5. So they only supported a REL5 operating system. But if you put stuff into a container, then we're really not worried about the operating system. We're worried about the user space, libraries, and the application. So if we can take those out and then we have a supported platform, then we can do that work. So sometimes, you just need to have a bit of a discovery session, talk to the teams around that, and understand what those problems are. So if it's in a container, will it run in Kubernetes? Well, again, we can hit some other problems around that. If you look at systems like OpenShift, where we are promoting OpenShift as a common platform that's multi-tenanted, you have lots of teams using it rather than one cluster per development team, then you need to start adding additional capabilities and security policies within that to make that viable. And particularly around security and things like that, we need to make sure that we're kind of mitigating any risks around vulnerabilities and things like this. And so different policies and ways of working can have a constraint on what you're able to do in a container. So a very common one that you may have seen if you've used OpenShift is we don't let you run as root. And not only do we not let you run as root is that we randomize your user ID that you're running that process in. Now, many applications are quite happy with that. But you'll often find the odd application where you'll hit some roadblocks because of that. Generally, we would say, well, why can't you change your app to do this and to be more secure? And generally, we can work away around that. So that's generally OK. But you do need to be aware of these things sort of going into it. The other thing is, is it optimized for Kubernetes? So you may be able to get it running on the Kubernetes, but then maybe we're not getting the best out of the platform. And so it's things like being able to horizontally scale your application, so making your applications more stateless, more aware of each other, more cloud native, essentially. And so these are sort of things that you can consider. But actually, if you can get your application onto Kubernetes and you get this workflow and delivery pipeline through a Kubernetes-type environment, and particularly on OpenShift, then it gives you an opportunity to then modernize your application then in situ and do that as well. So what's a good idea is to start that containerization journey with Kubernetes and not start straight with just doing Docker files. Because if you start with Kubernetes in mind, it changes the way that you will architect your application and the way that you containerize it. What I hopefully I'll show you now is that there are different decisions that you're making during that development process and that containerization process. And Kubernetes takes you down a different road. In particular, it gives you opportunities to have something which is to drive towards things like microservice architectures, but use things like sidecars, which I'll explain in a minute, and to actually take your logical design for your application and transpose that into a running operational environment. If you contrast that with a traditional approach for applications, you typically have a logical design for your application and then you have, this is the physical realization of it, so we'll have a number of servers and then each server's got its own manifest and they've got different things installed on them. And so what you end up with, what you actually deploy into production doesn't really look like your original design. Kubernetes actually gives you an opportunity to essentially implement your logical design within the platform. So where's OpenShift and all this? So I'm sure someone's mentioned this already today. So the upstream community, OKD, derives from Kubernetes and a whole bunch of other upstream projects and creates, it's the upstream OpenShift community. And then feeding from that are the various different versions of OpenShift that you can consume. So OpenShift Container Platform being the one that you build and manage yourself on-premise or in cloud, whereas Dedicated is a managed service that we offer and Online is an open managed service that we share with lots of different organizations. So OpenShift Container Platform is certified Kubernetes, so you can use Kubernetes constructs and objects and everything within it. OpenShift does add some additional extensions, but that's part of our work with the community. So why use that instead of doing it yourself? Well, really it's about the most important thing in your business are the business outcomes. And those business outcomes are derived by the applications that you're gonna be running on this platform. And whilst it can be very interesting to build your own Kubernetes and build all of these services that are in there, like registries and logging and metrics and service meshes and things like this, it's actually better just to be focusing on your applications and OpenShift gives you an opportunity to basically build that platform for you and then you can then focus on those apps. So, okay, using OpenShift. So maybe you're already building containers so you don't need OpenShift to build your containers for you, right? So you've already got your Docker files and things like that. Well, that's great actually because OpenShift will, you can point OpenShift at your Docker files and it then becomes basically a build farm for your containers. So not only will it build those containers, but it then has a registry where it'll store them and they'll be nice and secure in there. So you can manage the security and the access of those containers. We also wrap a whole bunch of metadata around that. So if that Docker file is say in a Git repo, you'll have the commit reference and things like this within the metadata, all bonded into that container and then stored for you. And so instead of having three or four servers sitting there, their job is to build containers, you now can just fire that into a Kubernetes cluster and it will build those containers for you. It gives you an opportunity to increase and reuse with those Docker files. So your traditional approach is to, with a Docker file is to say, well, from some OS base like Alpine or something like that, add some application dependencies and everything that I need for my app and off I go. Whereas we can now start looking at a kind of a build pipeline for your containers and going to vendors to get third-party containers that maybe you add your own specializations to and then again, focus on your app. All your Docker file needs to do is take the binary for your application and then drop it into your container, into a base image. So an example of that would be this Tomcat one. So this was based on a Tomcat example that someone had put on GitHub. This is typically what you would see in a Docker file. So you've got, we start from a JDK base. They're installing lots of dependencies. There's lots of making directories, making sure the permissions are correct, downloading binaries and things like that for the application, putting them in the right place, applying any static config for that, adding maybe init scripts and stuff like this and then explaining how that application is going to run. But if you take an upstream Tomcat vendor image, we can basically simplify that into three steps, which is basically get the binary and drop it into the deployment directory for your Tomcat. Maybe add some standard libraries and things like that. If you needed, maybe you wanted to connect yours to an MS SQL server database, so you need to pop in the driver. You just need to add that as an extra step. So again, we're focusing on the application using that approach. So designing for Kubernetes means that we have some other choices around that. So instead of having trying to treat your container as a mini VM and trying to bundle in all of the things that we need to put into our application to be able to access it, like you may have done traditionally on a traditional VM, we can now start splitting this out and having a logical design. So kind of rules of thumb, like one process is per container. For example, you don't need to have like a sys init type process that launches your process within the container and make sure that it's always running because Kubernetes is essentially going to be doing that job for you. Splitting things out into sidecars, so if you have tightly coupled things that need to be able to talk to each other locally. Maybe you're building from binary. So you've got like a CI process. For example, you're building Java applications using Maven and you have a deploy step at the end. It takes the Maven artifacts and chucks them into, I don't know, like a Nexus or an Artifactory repository. That's great. So we can take that. We can basically do a binary build from that approach. So we can take the binaries and the libraries that you've got resulting from that existing CI and we can build new images for you. So that's really easy as well. So we can do that. Maybe you're starting a new project, you've written some source code and you just wanna check that this is working nicely in a Kubernetes environment. We can do that as well. So source to image enables us to take, you just point us at your source code, we will build your source code for you and then build the container and then run your container. So it's all about accelerating and getting you into the platform as quickly as possible. So what do I do about all of these Kubernetes resources that I've got that describe my application? Well, these are essentially just like the code that you've got for your application. So we can treat that as source code, use your source code repository to manage and maintain those Kubernetes resources as well. OpenChef does a load of work to help create those so you don't have to type in these YAML documents from scratch. It will help you create them, but once you've created them, it's very easy to export them and have them as resources that then goes through that software development lifecycle as well. So different examples of the types of resources that you've got. So things that describe how to deploy your application and how to transition from version A to version B. So deployment information, we've got services, which are the stable endpoints. So when you have your applications talking to each other, you typically would talk through those services. How are we gonna talk to these applications that we've created from the outside? So how do we get ingress? And how do we provide specific runtime context? So we talked about immutable images going through the software development lifecycle.  So we use things like config maps and secrets to be able to mount within the container and provide that context for us throughout that lifecycle. Okay, so let's look at a particular example. Can I containerize this web app? So this was taken from an actual example with a customer and say, well, it's a Tomcat app. And that was like great because we've got a Tomcat image, so that's cool. And they wanted it to talk to an external Microsoft SQL server database. That's cool, absolutely fine. They were using the ODBC Java driver. Okay, so it makes it a little bit fiddly. We need to make sure that we build them a custom image with that driver built in, but that's actually super easy, so we can do that, that's not a problem. And they wanted it to, the ODBC driver used a valid Kerberos token to authenticate to the database. It didn't use username and password. And so that's where it became like a little bit tricky. So okay, so we'll need to get some kind of token somehow. So the first thing I asked was like, well, how do you guys do this today? And they said, well, what we do is we install a Tomcat server and then we run a cron job, which does a K in it with a service account and just make sure that the token is always up to date. So I think they gave their tokens expired after about an hour, so okay. And you don't wanna rewrite your code. No, they didn't wanna rewrite the code, so right. So that's what they were doing today. So we said, well, look, what you could do, and this is actually the, which is where they were kind of heading was, all right, so if we create a custom container and we write essentially that cron job to sit inside that container that's gonna do that, it's gonna do the K in it for us and we can provide like the initial credentials through a secret. So we get the key tab and we do it that way. And I said, well, look, you could do it that way, but then basically that application has got that Kerberos stuff built into it. And they said, well, maybe, okay, well, maybe we could put that into another container which sits outside and we somehow inject the token into it in some way. And I said, well, actually, I think what the preferred option would be using this sidecar approach. So what you would do in this case is you have your app, your app is expecting to have a Kerberos token that's valid, but we write another container and its job is just simply to get that Kerberos token and authenticate it. And they said, well, how does that, how do the two containers like share that information? And so when you run sidecar containers, we're able to share different bits of capability within a Kubernetes pod. And one of them is shared memory. So we can have a shared memory space, a directory, there's basically a temporary file system. If I put a file into that directory in one container, it then, the other container can then see it. And so we can share information in that way. And so what that means is that we can create a container that just does the initialization and you can then have a standard container for running the application. So in order to test this out, we did an architectural spike. So an architectural spike, we have one thing that we need to test and it's that we can essentially authenticate or get a valid token, Kerberos token using one container and then show that we've got a valid token in the other container. And so in order for us to do that, we needed some sort of tame Kerberos KDC that we could talk to. We needed a test application and we needed to build our sidecar application. So actually created a test Kerberos server to help do this. And so this again used a sidecar approach as well. And so the Kerberos test server, so we ran a KDC process and we ran the K-Admin process, both in separate containers and they were using the shared memory as well to talk to each other. So it's a bit like how you would install it normally. And because both of those two things run as a service within normally if you install them on a Linux server. So we ran them in two separate containers. And so actually what we ended up with was this stack here. So we've got two pods, we've got a pod which is the KDC pod, that's our test server and it has a service for that. And then we had the application pod which had our application in it. In this case it was a, because it was a architectural spike, our application just simply did a K-List. So if you do K-List, it tells you if you've got an authenticated token.  So it worked like this, there's actually a test script. You can run this if you've got an OpenShift environment that's running. If you run this test script it will basically create, this is an example. It basically provisions the KDC server. It provisions the test app with the sidecar. It runs K-Admin to basically create a new account in the KDC server and then passes that to the application. I do actually have a little video of it running if you wanted to see that running. So this was the example. So we've got the KDC server that's running which is there, it's just starting up and then here's our test application. And so if you've not seen this in OpenShift if you look at the pod, sorry, I think I clicked through into the pod, and then we look at the logs, you'll see that we've got both containers running. And then in the, when you look at logs you get a dropdown. So you can look at the console from one container or console from the other one. So in this one here it's showing you the console from the K-Init sidecar. So it's just waiting to get the credentials. You'll see that it gets, should get credentials in a minute. There we go. So we've got, we've actually logged on and we've got a valid token. And then if we swap to the example application which was just basically looping and waiting till we got credentials. And we can see that we've then got the credentials coming through in that test application. No, stop playing, go. Yeah, I know. Okay, and all right, there we go. So what I wanted to show here was really that Kubernetes changed the way that we solved this as a problem. And it's given us something which we've got very clear separation of control concerns. We've got something that's reusable. So if someone came along and said, right, I've got a Go application which needs to do the same thing, we can basically use the same technology. We don't need to rewrite it for that Go application. And it can have its own release cadence. So we've got basically a team and then it looks after this as a feature. And they can roll that out to all of the developers that are using it. And then they have their own development cadence. If you look at how this has been rolled out across things like Kubernetes, Istio is a good example of this. So Istio provides, is providing you with a service mesh so you can control and manage your APIs within the platform. It's essentially using this same kind of technique. So we've got sidecars running against your applications. It then supports any type of technology that you've got in your applications. And so the old approach of having all of that logic built into your application, you can then take that logic out of your application and have it defined by a common service and configuration. So it makes you get very clear separation. So explain like I'm five. So it does look a little bit like it's a lot more complicated. So if you look at the system, we've got lots more moving parts. But actually, if you look at your monoliths with all of these things in and you look at, if you had lots of monoliths all doing these things, all of that logic traditionally is bundled into it. And now we're kind of separating these things out and managing them separately. And so it gives us the ability to tune against the capability that we're looking for in our environments and optimize and innovate and things like that around that. And ultimately, what this means is you get to focus on your application and not all of this kind of infrastructure that we need in order to get your application running. Thank you.


What's up everybody? Jason here for jasperjasebase.com. Another wax party promo break sold out. This is a 2021 Panini Spectre basketball This is a two box break. Pick a team's number seven As you can see number eight's already on the website number seven sold out earlier today before went live So we're just running number seven now. And again, here we go. I get some new toner tomorrow But uh, everybody's in here guys. There you go. Dusty got a lot of the last teams remaining and last spot modules but again Everybody has a chance to get a wax party problem spot at the end We're gonna give away one and again two boxes here. So number eight's actually the last two box break we have So if you guys want to run it back tonight, we definitely can I believe it's already down to like I want to say it into the teens maybe Yeah, it's at 20 left. So basically 20 more teams to go I'm sure depending on what gets pulled or what doesn't we'll determine if we sell it out pretty quick or not, but Like I said, it is a wax party promo break it will eventually get done All right. Well, the good thing is that there's no R&B time into this so everybody gets whatever card they get for their team Let's start this guy's dark Bictacular debuts. There we go. Good luck guys. Oh Like that Lebron and Horace Horace Grant to 75 Well, I always got a sign in the sticker and this Lebron is a variation Lebron as well Lakers with that one Aaron Gordon Denver Nuggets. That's number to 99 Christian Wood Caleb Martin and Jack Sigma to 49 Seattle Supersonics, which is going to the Old Public City Thunder and that is Dusty You like here Lewis Jr. The 35 Bojan Seronis So 49 All right, this one hasn't had a rookie yet right damn this this next card might be huge Usually it's supposed to be two and two at least this one was three veterans So I expect this to be a big rookie and it's a thin pack too, man. It might be a redemption. Yep. It's a redemption and Caleb Martin a little teaser number 299 Charlotte Hornets, that's Dusty Pritchard Shay Gilgis Here we go guys Mon Lamello Rookie Jersey autographs interstellar Let's look this up last time. So Celestial last time was only to 99. What is interstellar? So interstellar would be out of 49 So Celestial is out of 99 or 75 interstellar is out of 49 Astral is out of 35 and then you have meta 25 gold out of 10 and then you have down be the local man one of one So this one's out of 49 card number 190 Cole Anthony very nice. That is a Orlando magic. You want a John Paul? Sweet Orlando that's pretty nice Usually when it's like three veterans, it's usually a pretty nice patch autograph for a big rookie or maybe potentially big insert There we go. Next box. Yeah, Canva. These cards are so beautiful 92 out of 99 Boston Celtics going to Dusty Beasley and Luke Canard to 25 Full spectrum. So that'll be Clippers and Detroit Detroit's Dusty and Clippers is Dusty. So I don't need to randomize this at all. Nice. That'll be yours Dusty alone We got Gary Trent, Jr Toronto Raptors that's going to Dusty as well to 35 and Obi-Top into 25. Wow. Look at that patch Nick's going to John Paul. Very nice patch right there. And that is 24 to 25 Very nice RPA Laurie Markinin Brandon Clark to 49 Catalyst autographs Memphis That's going to John Paul Last one here guys. Good luck for the Lakers LeBron James. Very very nice Number 41 out of 49. Alright, last patch or last autograph I'm going to call him a rookie and we got Larry Nantz, Jr. to 49 Cleveland by Jimmy. Make sure I miss any variations per se Just based right there. Okay. There you go guys. That was the break So the last two boxes potentially maybe have a big lamella or a man I don't know what was pulled in the first maybe box or two But this one did have a nice Obi-Top and RPA and a redemption for Cole Anthony So pretty nice boxes here guys And again, everybody has an opportunity to get a wax party promo spot now. Remember number eight is on the website I want to see what's in those last two boxes now so let's switch scenes and Let's do the giveaway So let's get everybody's name here.  Good luck one two three four five Boom five times four and a one. There'll be 29 sad people one happy person Hope it's you guys. Good luck Just missing L was dusty. Don't know if you might be at the top dusty, but good luck and good luck to everybody Dusty there you go play the odds game right there. There you go. So congratulations another wax party promo spot for you, buddy so let's put you in here and This was spectra number seven So spectra number seven in the books again, we guys want to run it back Number eight on the website 20 left a lot of great teams available Even some cheap teams like the nuggets at 40 spurs and raptors at 30 each I mean, that's a good way to get a promo chance and some big teams of course like the Hornets warriors Etc. Etc. So Maybe there's something nice hiding in there guys. Maybe that's right there. Who knows maybe that Seven hit one of those you're right. Jasper's case race calm. Good luck guys


Persuasion by Jane Austen is a book and is also at least three movies, three that I know of. I read Persuasion recently. I was already planning to read it for a vlog project. That is a secret vlog project. So now you know one book that's in that project, but anyway, good timing. So this was already on the list of books I needed to read for that project. And I was like, well, let's read this sooner rather than later, because there is a film coming out. You knew one. So let's let's read it so that we're ready for the film. I did and I really, really, really liked it. I don't know that this supplants sense and sensibility is my favorite Austin, but I really, really did like it. And I was quite surprised by some things in it. I had seen the 1995 adaptation when I was like in middle school or high school. I saw the 2000, I believe, 2007 adaptation when it came out because I aired on like PBS. I've seen that one a couple times. And now I've read the book. And having seen those previous adaptations, as I say, there were some things in the book that surprised me a little bit because there was a common theme in both adaptations that I would have therefore expected to find in the book. And I didn't really. But anyway, what we're really here to talk about, right, is the new persuasion film on Netflix. A little bit about me as a content watcher, rather than creator. I love when there is some piece of media that everybody wants to rip to shreds. And then I will binge hours and hours, cumulatively days and weeks of content about it. So like when Game of Thrones season eight was terrible, I had days worth of content to watch. I was so excited. Even if I didn't agree with all the takes, I just I love it. I ate it up. I watch it all. I just chew through all of it. And then similarly, when Rise of Skywalker was terrible, I mean, I personally do think it was terrible. But regardless, I loved watching all of the content about the Rise of Skywalker hours, cumulatively days and weeks. When the second Fantastic Beasts movie came out, there was hours, days, weeks of content for me to marathon and binge and chew through. There have been, you know, a few other things. And every time something that I think is going to do that for me is going to deliver tons and tons of content, tons and tons of content creators giving their hot takes about it, the after movies, there's usually great content about that, the 50 shades of gray movies, tons of content about that. And so recently, there have been a few things that have come out that I was so sure I was going to get hours and hours of content for. Wheel of Time comes to mind, Morbius comes to mind, the third Fantastic Beasts movie. And while there were some videos about these things, there wasn't the like hours and hours, days, weeks of content that I was expecting slash hoping for. And then, surprise, surprise, sneak attack, my, my feet is flooded with content about persuasion, the Netflix persuasion movie being horrible, being the worst thing ever, being atrocious, being a sin against book-to-film adaptations as a genre. I didn't watch any of it. I will. I haven't watched any of it yet, because I knew I was going to read Persuasion and I had intended then to watch the film, just, you know, because why not? Because I watched Austin adaptations pretty much if there is one I watch it. So I'd already planned to watch it, and then I started to hear bad reviews and I said, well, I'm still curious. And then I saw all of this content and I was like, I can't watch any of it yet, because I want to see it for myself and form my own opinion, which is why I also have not watched it yet now, because this is my opinion. I have not seen anyone else's takes. All I have seen is all the thumbnails for the take. So perhaps it's all clickbait. Perhaps all of those videos are going to say the same thing that I'm saying. And they just chose to go with very aggressive thumbnails. Now, based on all the thumbnails that I saw, when I went to go see the film now, or when I sat down to see the film now, I was preparing for the worst movie of all time, frankly, based on all of the buzz about this being the worst movie of all time, about how this has failed, again, Jane Austen as an adaptation. It's a failure on Netflix. It's a flop. Never make a film like this. This is the worst thing ever.  It's terrible. And I was like, well, at the very least, maybe I'll get a fun hate watch out of it, you know, have a drink and laugh. And so I did go into it with extremely, extremely low expectations. My own expectations before I saw those thumbnails, but when I had just seen the trailer for the film, just based on the trailer, my own reaction to that trailer was, I don't know about this, because it was very clear in the trailer what they in particular chose to highlight were all the clips were all the scenes where she's saying something that sounds anachronistically modern, where she's saying something that sounds like it belongs in like a rom-com with Sandra Bullock. I'm single and thriving.  Enjoying warm baths. Rather than a Jane Austen adaptation, using words like X's, like we were, we are X's. Now we're worse than X's. He's a 10. Because he's a 10. I never trust a 10. This is the playlist he made me. Playlist he made me. Stuff like that where you're just like, what? I'm sorry, what? But apart from that, I mean the costumes, the way they were shot, the cast, I was like, those things all still look good. They looked good when I hadn't seen the trailer yet when I just saw stills and I'd heard he was cast. And now seeing the trailer, it still looks good. But I don't know why there's a randomly modern dialogue in this film, but okay. So before my feed was flooded with all of the takes on it being the most atrocious thing of all time, I was beginning to form expectations for it. And the expectations I formed for it at that time were, okay, this is not going to be a loyal, like the A&E Pride and Prejudice. This is not going to be like Masterpiece Theater on PBS. This is not going to be even the Keira Knightley Pride and Prejudice. I was like, this is going to be something else. This is going to take a lot of creative license. And so I was like, okay, I'll meet this movie on its own terms if that's what you're doing. And I've often said if there is intentionality behind what you're doing, I may still end up not liking it. But that's a very different metric by which to judge something. You know, like if the project of it is to be stylistically different from the norm in some way, then okay, that's the metric by which I'll assess it. Did that choice work or not? So for example, so the basically the type of expectation that I began to set for myself was that this is going to be the a night's tale of Austin adaptations. So if you watch a night's tale, if you've never seen it, a night's tale is a medieval film about jousting, but it uses modern rock music the entire time and the costuming and some of the dialogue is like kind of halfway between. Sometimes it sounds very archaic with all the bees and boughs. And sometimes it sounds like something from a modern day rom-com. When you watch a night's tale again, you could hate a night's tale. That's absolutely fair. If it's not your cup of tea and you don't like it and you don't think that worked, but it is clearly a stylistic choice on the part of the filmmakers to kind of make this comparison between nights jousting and rock stars and how that's why they're using rock music to kind of be like jousting nights were kind of the rock stars of their day. So we're kind of doing this weird blending of things with this is a stylistic choice we're making. This is very intentional. It's not that you're like, don't these filmmakers know that queen music didn't exist in the middle ages? Like they obviously know that it's not a case of like, gotcha. This is anachronistic. Like they definitely know this is anachronistic, but it is a choice to do it this way. So I was like, okay, persuasion might be terrible, but it seems to me that it's going to it's purposely choosing to do this kind of extremely modern. It's not just like a sometimes you'll watch in the historical like a Jane Austen type adaptation, even if it's not Jane Austen, or read a book, I complained about it a lot in books, and it's all like clearly kind of trying to be within this time period. But then out of nowhere, someone will say something that isn't quite what one would one would expect or they're wearing something that technically hadn't been invented yet, something like that, where people are like, this isn't accurate versus here where they are clearly choosing, like they are under no illusions. They know that this dialogue is extremely modern. It's not like an accident. It's not a misstep. It's not them not realizing that this is modern. So it's like, okay, I will go into this expecting again the a night's tale of Austen adaptations. And maybe it's terrible. Maybe that stylistically does not work, but that's what they're trying to do, it seems. So I will judge it according to that. And then again, I saw all of my feet flooded with everything saying it's the most atrocious thing ever, and I didn't see a single divergent opinion from that. I didn't see any thumbnail saying, I actually liked it or why it's actually brilliant. Every single thumbnail was like, this is atrocious. This is a synagons film. So I was like, okay, I guess the a night's tale of Jane Austen adaptations is unanimously the unanimous consensus is that this is a terrible idea and it didn't work. So I sat down expecting to be hate watching something to just get through it and best case, I can laugh at its awfulness. And maybe I would have hated it if I had gone in with higher expectations. Maybe if I hadn't seen all those thumbnails saying this is the worst thing of all time, I would have hated it. I don't think that's I don't think I know myself well enough to say that I don't think that's the case, but it could be. But so I did it did benefit from bottom of the barrel expectations from me having seen the reaction everyone had to it. So I sat down to watch it. I watched it with my mom. She has not she has seen the adaptations of it, but I don't think she remembers them very well. Like she vaguely knew the story, but not really. She definitely hadn't read the book. So me being me, I do this all the time. If I'm watching a film with her that is based on a book, pause it to be like, well in the book, pause it to be like, well, this was better in the book or pause it to be like, hey, okay, they totally skipped over in the book. There was this thing that's not here, et cetera, et cetera. And it's funny because I feel like the comments on this video are going to be yelling at me because I'm okay with them changing things from the book.  You won't accept anything that's different from the book. And I'm like, Oh, honey, no, no, no, there are people like that. And I am not one of them.  And I'm telling you when, if and when those differences bother me, or when those differences seem to me to be a curious choice, I don't exactly see why you would make that choice. Because when you're adapting, you may need to make changes. And sometimes I'm like, I see why they changed that. And other times I'm like, I don't get why you would change that because that would work very well on film the way that it was in the book. So I don't need it to be the same, but I need it to make sense for why you changed it. There were definitely things in it that I did not think worked. There were definitely things in it that I thought were a strange choice, a weird choice, and a bad choice, perhaps. There were a couple of scenes in particular, two that stand out to me distinctly as being the two that I really, really bothered me where I definitely paused the movie to be like, okay, so before I get into spoilers for book and film more specific like scenes and choices that were made and changes that are made. Just overall, I would say this was not my favorite film of all time. And it's definitely not my favorite Austin. And in overall, like, it's, you know, it was, it was okay. The things that it did well, I think it did pretty well. Like, I honestly, I haven't watched the videos yet, but I'm getting the sense from the little bit that I have seen like posts and things, not videos, that people hate Dakota Johnson and blame her. I don't know if that is the consensus. If it is, I vehemently disagree. The issues with the the way the character is in the film, in my opinion, have literally nothing to do with Dakota Johnson herself, unless she was the screenwriter. And I don't believe she was the screenwriter. The problem with the character, if and when there is a problem with the character is down to the script to the screenplay. And Dakota Johnson did a very good job with what she was given. The parts of it that where they wrote it more, I mean, there's there's parts of it where her lines are pulled basically verbatim from the book. And she delivers those lines very well. And I think that she can play the character of Anne and could very well play the character of Anne in a more serious traditional adaptation. Here, the parts where it's strange, the parts where it's weirdly modern, that is how the script was written. And that being the case, I think she handled it pretty well. I don't have any problem with Dakota Johnson herself at all. I think she did the best with what she was given. And I feel similarly about the other characters in the story. She's always the main character, so there's more screen time and more chances to f up with her. But the other characters also have instances of saying things that are strange, saying things that are anachronistic, saying things that are not in the book, alterations to the natures of their characters. She just gets the brunt of it because she's in it the most. But if people, again, I haven't watched all the takes yet, but if the consensus is that everyone is great except her, and they're blaming her for the state of things, one, it was the screenplay and not her. And two, she's not the only character that has this kind of thing happen to her character in this when it's being translated from book to weirdly modern adaptation. Overall, I felt like they didn't know exactly which way they wanted to go with this. And so it's kind of like, this is a weird analogy, but it's the one that comes to mind, you know, if you have like a cup and another cup and you're trying to pour like coffee or something, for example, into the other cup without spilling any. And if you do it slowly and carefully, and like are not like confident in the poor, it's going to drip everywhere and spill everywhere. But if you're confident in the poor and you just do it, you might maybe you'll spill a little bit, but you're much more likely to get it all in without spilling anything. So I kind of feel like they weren't sure they wanted to go this way with it. They weren't totally confident about this choice to make it kind of the a night's tale of Austin adaptations. So they like kind of did it and and it kind of dribbled everywhere and it kind of didn't work. And I feel like they should have not done that at all, or they should have like actually really done it and like leaned into that and then the a night's tale of Austin adaptations completely commit to that stylistic choice. What made it so strange was that most of the time for the majority of the film it it feels like it's relatively period accurate or as period accurate as any Hollywood version of period piece is. There's dialogue again that's literally pulled verbatim from the book. The plot progression is, with some changes that I'll get to, more or less the plot progression of the book. The costumes do not look like again in a night's tale. The costumes are like a very much a stylistic choice. Like they don't look period accurate. They look like what people wear to Renfair or something. And the costumes here, again, I'm not an expert on period accuracy, but as a lay person looking at it, it didn't stand out as looking strange or stylistic or modern. I mean, when you watch Bridgerton, it looks weird and stylistic. It doesn't look like it's period accurate. Whereas here, everything's pretty muted. No one's wearing like garishly bright colors or strange head pieces. Everything like and especially she's wearing very simple clothes that look like something that I'd see in most Austin adaptations. Like, Keira Knightley would have worn these things in The Pride and Prejudice that she was in. So it didn't feel like a film that was doing something out there. So then every so often when it would do something out there, like, and would say this is the playlist that he made me and hold up some sheet music, it would just be so jarring because the film is not really like this the rest of the time. And so when that happens, you're not like, well, this is the style of this film. You're like, it's not the style of this film. It's the style of this line of this scene. Why is this here? And as bad as those lines were, I think Dakota Johnson, who gets the majority of them, did deliver them decently well. I mean, if I was her and I read the script, I'd be like, you want me to say what?  But she delivered it pretty well, as well as as well as she possibly could. There were other scenes like that.  Well, she's because she's like messing around and playing.  And then there's like turns around and the love interest is there. And it's kind of an awkward moment. Captain Wentworth and I am handsome. Captain, meet nine. Where she shouts something and spills food on herself. Perfect. Things like that. We were like, again, this feels like something Sandra Bullock would be doing in her present day of rom-com. Like, why is Aunt Elliot from Persuasion doing this? But she's only doing it in this scene. She's only doing it in this particular moment. But like most of the rest of the time, she's just being Aunt Elliot from Persuasion. So like, why is this here? But so there were, like those, those things didn't work for me. Like I didn't like them, but they weren't that many.  I'd be like, no, didn't like that. Why, why, why would you do that? And then we'd go back to having a normal film. And then something like that would happen again. And I'd be like, yeah, that was weird. I don't know why that was there. And then we'd go back to having a normal film. So I just, they were relatively few and far between. It felt like every single one of the instances where it did that are in the trailer for, there's, there's a couple more in the film. But mainly, that stuff is in the trailer. And pretty much the rest of the film is not like that. She just break the fourth wall a few times. But the 2007 master of like British television adaptation of it with Rupert Penry Jones and Sally Hawkins, she also breaks the fourth wall a couple times. And it's a very serious and melancholy adaptation. Her breaking the fourth wall could totally work as well. That's not what makes it modern. It's just some of the things that she says. And I, some of that would absolutely actually work for me as well. Because I was telling my mom this that the problem with a lot of Jane Austen adaptations is that a lot of the wit and social commentary and snark that is present in Jane Austen books is delivered by the voice of the narrator, not by any of the characters in the scenes. Sometimes she has witty characters as well. But when you're adapting Jane Austen unless you have a voiceover or unless you give the narrator's words to a character for some reason, there's, you're going to lose it. Because if you're just depicting what happens in the scene, the scene itself might be pretty dry. The social commentary, the sarcasm, the wit was in the narrator describing the scene to you, which you're, that's necessarily going to be stripped away unless you have a voiceover or something. So having Anne Elliot break the fourth wall and deliver some of the lines of the narrator is a solution to that, to include those pieces of wit that are in the book in a way that they can be present in the film without a voiceover narrator. So the choice to do that is an okay choice. It's all in the execution of course, but that itself doesn't bother me. They did make some of those parts where she's saying stuff. It's sort of a, that's, those aren't the words Jane Austen used, but it is the gist of the attitude of the narrator towards what's happening. So Anne, Anne doesn't say it in the book, it's the narrator. And then when the narrator is saying it, she's saying it in a more old-fashioned way. So in the film, Anne is saying it instead of a, you know, omnipresent narrator and Anne is saying it in a slightly more snarky and zippy modern way. But the message that she's communicating about what's happening and the nature of the characters around her is essentially the message that Jane Austen is conveying about the situation and about those characters in the books. My father, he's never met a reflective surface he didn't like. To me, that's kind of, I mean, I don't know that I would say that's, I would say that's decently loyal to the book because it's finding a way to include material from the book that otherwise would be difficult to find a way to include. I also felt that between the three adaptations now that I've seen, I don't really feel like any of them do justice to the character of Anne Elliot. And if any of them do, I kind of think it's Dakota Johnson's Anne Elliot. And I mean, like, she's far from perfect and not an ideal version of it either. She's not, you know, the book's Anne Elliot. But the thing that really bothers me about the older adaptations is that they focus so much on making Anne this shy wallflower that just gives way to the smallest bit of coercion or persuasion. I don't know, it just, it's too much. They belabor that too much to the point where I'm like, how did Captain Wentworth even notice her when she's melting into the wallpaper as we speak?  And so that's one of the things that surprised me when I read the book, having seen the older adaptations only, that Anne, she is quiet. She's not like Lizzie mouthing off to people. She's not like Marianne Dashwood loving and not caring where the chips fall. She's not like Emma being a busy body and getting in everybody's business. She's not like that. She's not like any of those people. But there is a quiet confidence to Anne's character, at least in my reading of persuasion. Feel free to disagree. When I read persuasion, that's what surprised me. I was like, Anne is quieter. She's not talking all the time. She's not being snarky all the time. And she did years ago yield to persuasion, floated the name of the book. But who she is today is a person who does have her regrets. But day to day, she's got a pretty good idea of what the people around her are like. She's got a pretty good idea of what she likes and doesn't like, what she does want to do and what she doesn't want to do, what matters to her and what doesn't. And she's kind of okay with people being with people judging her for that a bit. So when it comes to like going places with her family and wearing fancy clothes and going to fashionable places, she doesn't like doing that. And she's like, nah, I'm good. I'd rather stay home.  How can you possibly want to stay home? Or how could you possibly want to see a poor friend instead of someone rich and important?  I would much rather stay home. Please and thank you. So when there's moments where there's like a fancy dinner and someone needs to stay home and like, it's fine. I'll stay home. It's really, it's fine. I don't care.  And the book she's just kind of like, I don't need to be the center of attention. And I just to soon be in the countryside, then in some fashionable part of town, I know what I like. I'm good with it. You know, sorry if that's not cool. Sorry if that's not fashionable. But, you know, I am who I am and I know what I like. And so I was pleasantly surprised by that. I thought that that I liked her as a character much better than I thought that I would. That's one of the reasons I didn't really want to read it for a long time. Having seen the adaptations of it, I was like, the story's fine. But I don't know, I don't really like Ann that much. And so when people said it was their favorite Austin, the book, I was like, I mean, I'm sure it's great. But reading it now is like, yeah, I mean, the book is great. The story is, you know, it's pretty much how it is in those adaptations. They're decently loyal. But Ann herself is a much better character in the book.  She's not interested in being cool. She's not interested in doing the fashionable thing. She is pretty okay with who she is and what she is interested in and would just rather go her own way if that's all the same to you. And I like that. It's one of the things I like about Ann in the book. So while this version of Ann in the film, again, is more in your face and does more silly, dumb, anachronistic thing, her general demeanor and vibe, I liked better because it did remind me more of the book, Ann. Now, the scene that more than any, there was several scenes like the part where she's talking about having a dream about being with an octopus. I was like, why is this here? This is making me so uncomfortable. Why is this happening? But like mostly that was like dumb. But the scene that truly bothered me that I literally paused the film and talked to my mom about it for like five minutes because I was like, I know nope, nope, nope, nope, nope, nope. This scene was a true misstep in my opinion. It wasn't just like, ew, that's weirdly modern. I was like so much about this scene. I don't like it. In the book, it is known that Ann's sister married a man who originally wanted to marry Ann. Yeah, if you don't know anything, okay, if you don't know anything about the story of persuasion, so you know, eight, I think it's eight years ago, maybe 10 years ago, but regardless, Ann, Elliot, the middle daughter of a well-to-do noble family, she had a romance with a young naval officer who hadn't really made a name for himself, wasn't rich yet. He was just enlisted in the Navy. And they had a romance and they were very, very much in love, but she was persuaded by a family friend who had become sort of a mother-like figure to her when her mother died that, you know, she'd be throwing herself away. She's young and she is, you know, rich and noble and whatever. And to marry this man who's a nobody, maybe he'll be somebody someday who distinguishes himself in the Navy, but he's not anyone today and it would be a waste to marry him. And so she deals to persuasion and doesn't marry him and he knows why. And now it's many years on, she's still unmarried and he has made a name for himself and so, you know, she's filled with regret over the fact that she still loves him, she wished she had married him and that all the practical concerns that were put forth as why she shouldn't marry him ended up not really mattering because he was successful and he has made a name for himself and he is now an eligible bachelor. So he's come back into their lives because his sister is renting the house that Anne's family owns and, you know, social relationship dramas ensue with Anne's family and the neighbors and Captain Wentworth, etc. But so it is known or becomes known in the book that the man that Anne's sister married originally wanted to marry Anne. And when Captain Wentworth learns about this, he learns about this from someone else and he hears about it because someone is telling him or talking, someone is talking about how, you know, we all wish that he had married Anne and he's like, what? And they're like, yeah, originally he wanted to marry Anne. And Captain Wentworth is like, she refused him. And they're like, yeah, which is a significant revelation because it means after she refused him, she continued to refuse someone else who did have more money and status. She turned him down as well, which is a quiet revelation, but a quiet moment for Captain Wentworth to be like, interesting. There might be hope yet. Whereas in the film, they're all at dinner at Captain Wentworth who's there, her sister is there, her sister's family is there, a bunch of people are there. And for, I cannot fathom the reason, Anne volunteers the information that her sister's husband, who was seated at the same table as them, that he originally wanted to marry Anne, but he originally wanted to marry her. She's saying this about herself and about the man a few seats down from her and her sister who is married to him is across the way, sitting next to Captain Wentworth. And she blurts this out. Captain Wentworth is unsurprisingly kind of disgusted with this. Like, are you really just bragging? Like, why would you want us to know that he wanted to marry, that he preferred you? And then I guess to ease the tension and make it a funny scene, the sister's husband is like, it's true, I did want to marry her. And everyone's like, this is awkward. I was like, why? This is such a quietly important revelation for Captain Wentworth to make in the book to realize that she had refused other people after she had refused him, that she might still have affection for him, and that she had refused other offers. And that to hear this information from someone else, like, Anne's not bragging about it. She's not telling him this. Like, you'd want to find that out from someone else.  I just, I don't know, it's not funny. It's intensely awkward. I had the most intense secondhand embarrassment of my life watching that scene. But like, narratively, I was like, okay, so there's funny scenes in movies that I give me personally secondhand embarrassment that I don't like watching. But in Emma, there's a scene that gives me intense secondhand embarrassment. But narratively, it's an important scene. I just feel really uncomfortable watching it. But this scene, I was like, why would you choose to deliver this information in this way? This is something Captain Wentworth should learn. But not from Anne, not at dinner, in front of everybody. I was like, I, this scene, why, why is this here? Why would you choose to do this? Like, that scene was enough to enrage me. The rest of the film was fine. That scene, no, absolutely not. I mean, they made another substantial change. They took out an entire character, which at first confused me, because there's a significant revelation with the sort of, if this is a love triangle, though it's not really much of one, but I guess technically it is. So the other leg of the love triangle, the man that wants to marry Anne now, there is a revelation about his motives and his behavior that is made by a poor friend of Anne's, who has found this information out and is telling her this information before Anne makes the mistake of engaging herself to him. But this information, which the book and the other adaptations treat as like a big shocking reveal. The character in the, in this film, he volunteers this information after a brief acquaintance with Anne. He's like, oh, these are my motivations. This is what I'm doing. And I was like, that's the reveal from the end of the movie, like at the end of the book, like, you're just telling us? Like, what? What? And later, when I realized that they had entirely removed the character of the poor friend that tells her this, I was like, okay, I guess that works. And then I did kind of, it was still strange to me, but I kind of liked the idea of Anne knowing who he is from the get go, especially because they were going for a slightly more modern town. So knowing who he is and what his motivations are, they aren't a big shock to her. She's still flirting with him after knowing that. So it's not a big bombshell revelation that would like make her turn away from him. It's that like, nah, I'm not into you. I'm into Captain Wentworth. And like, you know, like, it's he's not treated as like the villain of the piece. And I kind of like that, actually. Like, I get why it's not that way in the book. And it is quite modern of Anne to be okay with his motivations. But I get that in this film, when you find out his motivations of what he's been doing, it's, I don't know, as a modern, as a modern viewer, it feels less awful than it probably would to a to the audience that this story was written for originally. So I get why they would make that change. It caught me off guard. When they did that, I was like, I why tell it? It's like, if in Pride and Prejudice, Mr. Wickham just volunteered the information that Lizzie finds out that's the big reveal, you'd be like, what? Why are you telling us this information? This is a big secret. So that was strange. But I ultimately, I thought that that worked. But overall, I thought the actor who played Cosmo Jarvis, I think the actor who played Captain Wentworth, was good. And he had good chemistry with Anne, played by Dakota Johnson, the actor who was playing Mr. Elliott, the one who just outed himself as the villain of the piece. I thought he had great chemistry as well. Richard E. Grant playing Anne's father was absolute perfect casting. He was fantastic. I mean, he's a great actor. And he really gave that role his all. Sir Walter Elliott, on March 1st, 1760, man of consequence, known for his exquisite jawline. A lot of the other minor characters and minor actors, a lot of them were new faces to me. The actress that played Anne's younger sister, the self-important hypochondriac, she kind of reminded me of Florence Pugh. And I really enjoyed that actress' performance. I hope to see her in more things. I really liked her. I'm just too kind, Anne. That's my problem. I give all of my attention to others and then I suffer for it. So I had a good time. My mom and I watched it.  And we were like, let's get through this.  I'm enjoying this. She was like, I am. I really was expecting to suffer tonight. But so far, I'm having a good time. And I was like, me too. And when the film ended, we hated so, so, so, so much the modern music that was played over the final scene. Because it was so modern. And it was so loud. And it was so aggressively singing over everything. I really, really disliked that. I could have done without that. But otherwise, when it ended, she and I were like, that really wasn't all that bad. That was fine. We had a good time watching it. That was pretty great. Dakota Johnson was fine. She looked adorable in all her costumes. She was a good anteliot. There were some weird choices made by the film, but overall, hardly the worst thing that I've seen. And hardly worthy of inheriting the mantle that was previously held by Rise of Skywalker and Fantastic Beasts and The Last Season of Game of Thrones, where the entire content feed on YouTube is just bursting with takedowns. I was like, I don't, this movie doesn't deserve this. I've seen much worse. This movie is like, you know, if Persuasion's your favorite book of all time, I could see why you'd be like, they did it dirty. But like, it's, it's not that bad. It's really not. It's fine. In fact, it's quite enjoyable at times. So that's my hot take. Persuasion was fine. I liked it. And if you want, if you're not an obsessed fan of Persuasion, if you've, if you've, I mean, I read the book pretty shortly before watching it, and I liked the book a lot. And I still enjoyed the film. But if you've never read the book, or if you like the book and don't, you're like, it's a good book, but I don't need it to be exactly like the book. If you're okay with it, kind of having some scenes, we were like, well, I could do without that. But anyway, back to the film. It's fine. I enjoyed it. And you might too. It's really not that bad. Let me know your thoughts in the comments down below. If you've read Persuasion, if you've not read Persuasion, if you've seen all the adaptations, if you've seen none of the adaptations, if you watch the new one, if you will never watch the new one, whatever you want to let me know. I post videos on Saturdays. Other random times will be on Saturdays, so like and subscribe, join my Patreon if you feel so inclined, and I'll see you when I see you.


Okay baby, good enough? We did not put this on the studio. We wanted to show it. I made these when I was about two years old. I made these when I was about two years old. I was so close. You can put it right in here. No, no. Just to clean up your mess. Really? Yeah. Thank you. You have me as a model. Okay. You look good. You're still good. Would you like this? We could try this one. Thank you. Fun. Do you want me to? No. Just after the religious part.


SCP-1162-J Object Class Safe Pending Review Special Containment Procedures SCP-1162-J must be stored under biosafety level 4 conditions. Under no circumstances may SCP-1162-J be handled without adequate BSL-4 protection or by personnel not in full Class A hazmat gear. Staff personnel who have been exposed to SCP-1162-J are to be subjected to post-mortem incineration. In the case of containment compromise, full nuclear sterilization is considered automatically authorized. Description Inspection reveals SCP-1162-J to be similar in form to an ordinary bacon and cheese sandwich. Two slices of cheese are present within the sandwich determined to be ██████ and ██████. A sauce of undetermined composition has also been located within the sandwich. SCP-1162-J's anomalous properties result from its bun, which is composed entirely of fried chicken. Despite this deviation from ordinary sandwich structure, SCP-1162-J maintained its sandwich designation through unknown means. SCP-1162-J was deposited into Foundation care on ████ by Agent ████, who has spent the previous two weeks on leave. Agent ████, after ensuring SCP-1162-J's prompt containment, left directions for emulation and promptly committed suicide. Elevated levels of sodium were indeed found within the corpse prior to destruction. The ultimate origin of SCP-1162-J is not known. Packaging originally found with SCP-1162-J at the time of containment identifies it as a Kentucky fried chicken double-down sandwich, but Foundation scientists have judged it unlikely that any such product would have been designed by said company or produced on a large scale, being entirely inconsistent with all previous definitions of sandwich, as well as its property of inducing violent revulsion in human subjects. The effects of direct exposure to SCP-1162-J have never been deserved, but are soon to be rapid heart failure followed by death. Consumption, in part or whole, have been theorized who had the result of ████ hazardous concentrations of sodium remaining in the corpses necessitating ████ damage to nearby unprotected human subjects. Stendom, testimony from research personnel assigned to SCP-1162-J has raised the possibility of a psychic lure effect emanating from SCP-1162-J, intensifying with exposure over time. This hypothetical effect manifests as a compulsion to consume part of SCP-1162-J despite knowledge of health risk and the near certainty of permanent physiological damage to be incurred by such an action, described as a morbid curiosity. As a precaution, staff rotation has been instituted. Addendum, unverified reports have been forthcoming regarding sightings of additional instances of SCP-1162-J in the wild. I need not remind you of the potential hazards posed to the public by such manifestations. All agents have been cleared for unlimited funding with the aim of containing as many instances of SCP-1162-J as possible.  Give your orders. Richard Stillman, Site-D, Director.


Hey guys, welcome to Rotorite. I'm Lajrib, and today I'm gonna be walking you through a solder-free build. When you want to get into doing FPV, one of the most intimidating things is building the drone. You just want to fly, and everyone's telling you that, well, hey there, before you can start actually enjoying flying, you've got to learn to solder, learn how to set up beta flight. All this stuff that sounds very overwhelming, and you just want to fly. Now, one option that we've been really proud to offer is pre-built drones, and so if you want to skip all that and go straight to flying, we offer drones that are fully built, tuned, and just ready to rip. But if you do want to start doing a little bit of your own building, maybe just nervous about some of the things like soldering and configuring, you're who we had in mind when we put these kits together.  This is everything that you need to build one of our drones, and it's gonna be really simple. And then here I've got Bubby's tool pouch with all the tools that you might find in an average FPV pilot. You know wire cutters, and soldering irons, and all sorts of different sized drivers. All you need from this is your two millimeter hex driver, the prop tool, which is a eight millimeter box wrench, a 1.5 millimeter hex driver, a 5.5 millimeter box wrench, double-sided sticky tape. You're gonna need some electrical tape, I strongly recommend you use Loctite. It's gonna prevent your build from vibrating apart. It's gonna make it a lot more robust. That's it. Let's unpack everything. We're gonna start off with the frame. I've got here an HD1 Banny style frame. The first thing we're going to do is assemble the arms to the main plate of the frame. We're gonna start with the main plate, and that's the plate that has these press nuts installed.  Open up your hardware pack, and find the appropriate length screw. Depending on which exact frame you end up with, this might be a little bit different, but for most of the HD1 line of frames, it's gonna be the 12 millimeter screw. But as a rule of thumb, the screws for the arms on the HD1 series are the longest screws in the package. So you don't need to measure the screws. Just find the eight longest screws. Grab your main plate, these press nuts, which stick up from the carbon fiber, are gonna go on the inside of your drone, and the arms are gonna attach to the bottom of the main plate. Lining up the arms is a little bit like putting together a puzzle piece, but there's really only one way it'll go together.  Grab your main plate and your arm. Grab a stiffener piece. Line up everything. Now grab one of the screws. Just a little dip in the Loctite. Don't tighten it all the way. Now grab another arm and just start inserting them and working your way around all the screws. Now that we've got all the arms in place with all eight screws threaded in loosely, we can work our way around and really torque them down. So now we've got the main portion of the drone frame assembled, the arms and the main plate, and for the entire HD1 series of frames, the assembly is identical to what you just saw. So this is the Vanny style edition. It's got thinner but thicker arms in a squished X configuration, but we've also got the standard HD1, which is a true X with wider arms, and for longer flights we've got the XR version of the HD1. The assembly is identical for all the different versions, lower brace, four arms, and then the main plate with the long screws threading up and into the press nuts so that they are on the inside. One of the common mistakes we see people make is having the main plate upside down and you'll end up with a gap, like it won't be sitting flush. So you should be able to see very easily if you've got it right. This is how it should look. The only special case is if you do end up working with an XR version, there are different front and rear arms. So have a really close look at orientation, which ones go on the front with relation to the different holes on the main plate. So this build is a little bit trickier just because of that reason, but these other two are very straightforward since the arms are identical. We're going to continue building with the Vanny style arms that we started with. So now we're going to start putting components on the drone and this is where orientation of the drone matters. So even though all the arms are the same, there is a front and a back. So just have a look at the different holes and this is the front with the four M3 holes up front. The rear has these smaller M2 holes for mounting stuff. Set this down with the front forward. So this is the front, this is the right of the drone, this is the left of the drone, this is all relative to the perspective of the drone and me as the builders. So this is what's going to make this build so easy. In these build kits, the electronics you get have pre-soldered connections and so do the motors. Everything is just going to plug into each other. So the motors are just going to plug right into the center unit. This is the 4-in-1 ESC electronic speed controller and what this component does is it converts DC voltage from the battery and outputs AC voltage to a three phase motor. It has four outputs for four motors and it does this according to signals it receives from the flight controller. It's going to plug in here later on. The first step is to install this 4-in-1 ESC onto the frame. You're going to have a hardware pack that comes right along with it. You'll notice that you get these little gummies. These gummies are going to install into the holes of the electronics boards. You just got to work them in, just kind of pinch them, squeeze them in one side, push through on the other with your tool. You're going to do that for both the boards that you get. Take your ESC board and it's going to install on the drone with the power cable coming out the right side of the drone. Grab these ultra long screws that you get with your kit and insert them through. We have these little spacers. These are going to drop right onto the screws and just do that for the four screw holes that are spaced 30 millimeters apart. Now the board is going to go down onto all four screws in the orientation I showed you. We've got our board installed. We're just going to double check our orientation. Again, with our drone down with the front forward, the front beam, this side with the four holes, we've got our power connector coming out on the right side and the motor connector is going forward and back. Everything is looking really good. Now with the board installed, the screws are going to hold themselves in place a bit better because they're gripped by the gummies. Now we're going to start installing our motors. We've got four motors and we've also got four of these quad skids. These are going to give you something to land on and slide on. A good rule of thumb for your motor screws is you want two millimeters of screw to stick up past the carbon fiber. Too little and you won't have enough of the screw threaded into the motor and too much you risk the screw sticking up too far and touching the windings of the motor, which is really bad. If you're not using quad skids, you want the screw to be two millimeters longer than the thickness of the arm and if you are using quad skids, you want it to be four millimeters thicker than the arm. So on this Vanny Style Edition frame, we've got six millimeter arms. I am using quad skids, so we are going to be using ten millimeter screws to attach the motors. We're going to dip our screw in the Loctite. It's going to go into the quad skid. Think about how you want to orientate your quad skid relative to the drone. I like that orientation. Now this bit is what's going to thread into the motor. Just thread it in loosely. It's okay if the quad skid spins around. We'll fix it in a second. Again, that's the hardest part, just getting the first screw done. Grab your next screw. Again, just loosely, we've got two screws in loose. Let's go for number three and four. With all four screws threaded in, now you can crank them down again. Just do the same for all four motors. There we go. So now we get to do the really cool part and start plugging things in. Now the connectors are keyed, so you can't even do it backwards if you wanted to.  Your motor is now connected to your ESC. Anyone that's built a drone before, they know that's the time consuming part. Soldering all the motors to the ESCs or it could be worse for using individual ESCs. Soldering the motor to the ESC, soldering the ESC to a power distribution board. So time consuming. This is super easy. No heat, no irons, nothing. So this is going to be great for your first build. Now here's where you can finesse things a little bit. You want to make it look nice, right? So push the connector down so it's against the arm. Just kind of route the wires so that they look good. You can grab your tool and kind of stuff them into place. Once the rest of the drone is built, you're not going to see it too much. So it's not super important, but I just like everything to be very neat. And only you could tape down the wires here. You could tape over the connector. I'm going to go with over the connector. Nice, that looks so sweet, so sweet. Let's do it for the other four. All right, all the motors are installed. Let's grab our flight controller. The brain of the drone, this controls everything. This sends signals to the ESCs to spin the motors. This powers your DJI air unit. This has gyroscopes in here to make it so that the drone can stabilize itself. This is the real technology in the drone. Grab four more of those spacers and drop them onto the screws. So again, check your orientation. So we've got our front of the drone and the ESC board is installed so that the battery connector is coming out the right side. Our flight controller is going to drop onto the same four screws with the arrow facing forward. There's an arrow right on the flight controller. Just point that forward and slide her on. Oh yeah, that's satisfying. Now we're going to connect our flight controller board to the ESC board. We've got a whole bunch of different connectors. Find the one that looks like this and is labeled FC Flight Controller and ESC. We're going to plug the FC connector into the front connector of the flight controller. So now we're going to wrap our cable over here and it's going to plug into the side of the ESC. Something you can do to keep things tidied up is lift your flight controller up and put the wires kind of on the inside, route them all clean like. So now we're going to install our air unit. This unit is responsible for being the camera and sending the image from that camera to the goggles that you're wearing so you can fly a first-person view. We've got our camera which is going to go up front and the box part of the air unit which the antennas are going to plug into and that's going to go in the rear. Let's grab that 3M double-sided sticky tape. Get the stuff that says VHB that stands for very high bond. This stuff is really good. So this is pressure activated so you put it down. It's pressure activated so don't push too hard on it until you're ready to stick both sides. Before we stick it down let's install our antennas. The antennas go in this nifty antenna holder. So you're just going to insert the connector side through this 3D printed portion. You want to orientate the connector like so. Just spin the antenna around until the connector is pointed the right way and then push it into place. This is how it should look when it's all done. Now grab two standoffs from your frame hardware kit and install them like that. Now you've also got these little sleeve pieces that are going to install onto the standoff. The two antennas are going to plug into the back of the air unit. Just push hard. You hear that click? That's what you want to hear. Now when we get it all installed it's going to get a little tight there so it's a good idea to grab the harness that's going to connect to the air unit to the flight controller. Thread the flight controller side through. So the flight controller side is the smaller six pin connector and on the side that goes into the air unit it's a bigger eight pin connector but there's still only six wires. Just plug that in. There's a really nice satisfying click. So now let's go ahead and peel that tape. Grab two of our screws. Length doesn't really matter what you've got left over. I believe this is eight mil. These six mil screws will work fine but I like using the longer ones. Eight mil. Loosely thread it into the bottom of the standoff. I'm going to push the air unit back so that the connectors are up against the standoffs. Make sure we're happy with how it's centered, angled, everything. I'm getting it just right. Then we are going to double check that this wire has slack. Wires aren't getting pinched. It's not crooked. Now we're going to push down on that pressure-activated tape and just hold it for 30 seconds or so. So our camera is going to mount up front and you can just run this cable on top of the fly controller. Or again, if you want to make it look nice, just kind of lift the fly controller up. Tuck the wire between the two boards. Push it back down. I've got our camera mounts here. I'm going to go on to some standoffs again. So now on one side of the camera mount pieces, there's a recess for the head of the screw to sit into and that's going to go on the outside of the drone. The left side is going to be on the side of the camera and going on to the inside of the drone. See, it's looking good. That's how it should look. Now look at the camera. On the back there's an arrow. The arrow should point up to the sky because that's where you fly. All right, now find the screws for the camera. They may be in the Air Unit packaging or they may be included separately and you might get four of them because there might be two screw holes on each side of the camera or you might just get two for one screw hole on each side of the camera.  So we're going to line up the camera holes along with the holes in the camera mount. We're going to grab our little baby screws and our 1.5mm hex driver. Put that on there and screw it into the camera. The last plug we have to do is plugging the Air Unit box into the flight controller. Here we go, looking great. Hooray, hooray. Flatten these wires against the box of the Air Unit. I want to have some slack to the flight controller. We're just going to wrap tape around it and that's going to help hold the box down as well as keep the wires tidy. As you're wrapping it, make sure not to cover the SD card slot or the USB port. It's looking pretty good. Now we're going to do one last look at how all our wires are sitting. Push them in wherever they might be sticking out. Make sure there's free play, like this wire for the camera. Make sure it's not hung up. It should feel like you can move it around freely. Once you're satisfied with all of your wire routing, you can secure the stack with your M3 nuts. Just thread these on. For these, you take your 2mm hex driver, hold the screw from the bottom, take your 5.5 box wrench, and just run the nuts down. You don't want to crank these down because you've got these gummies, and if you over torque it, then you've defeated the purpose, right? You just want to snug it up against the gummy, about like that. The gummy is just compressing a little bit, but you haven't totally pancaked it. Guys, this is looking really good. Really, really good. We've got two standoffs left that are going to go up front here. We've got some standoffs in between the front where the camera is and this lower stiffener. I think it's looking pretty good. Your top plate is going to go on here. This cutout is going to fit around the antennas, and you're going to bolt this top plate down to the six standoffs. One, two, three, four, five, six. Grab whatever screws you have left. Again, just do all six loosely. Now we're going to torque down the top plate screws all the way. Super snug. Now we're going to run around the whole drone and double check every single screw. Make sure they're all super tight. The standoff screws, the arm screws, the motor screws, every screw. Take the time. Double check it. Get this nice looking battery pad. Get your logo facing the right way. Peel the sticker back. Sit her down. The drone is fully assembled, just like that. Super easy. Anyone that's seen us build drones before knows the next step is to plug into the matrix and start hacking the flight controller and configuring the ESCs and getting everything set up and remapping the motors and going into the CLI and doing all sorts of crazy stuff. You don't have to with this. We've taken care of all of that for you. If you've got everything oriented correctly, your ESC is set up so that the pigtail is coming out the right side. Your flight controller is set so that the arrow is facing forward. You didn't force any of the connectors in the wrong way. You should be good to go. The flight controller is pre-configured. The ESC is pre-configured. This thing is ready to rip. The only thing that you are going to need to plug in is the air unit. You're going to need to activate this with DJI software. Update the firmware. If there's a new version out, whatever, there'll be a link in the description to your goggles. Let's grab our goggles and our controller and show you how to do that. Open up the program. Plug your air unit into your computer and power up the drone so that the air unit is powered. It might take a second, but once your computer recognizes the device, you should be prompted to log in or create an account with DJI if you don't already have one. Once you're finally logged in, you can activate your air unit. Once it's activated, it may also prompt you to update it, which is a good idea to do while you're in there. It's really important to activate and update everything. If you don't, you might still be able to get them linked up and get video, but you could have some real performance issues, reduced range, dropouts, all sorts of things that could lead to a really bad time, so definitely activate and update your DJI gear. Go ahead and click through, and this part might take a little bit to actually complete the download and the update. Once you get it going, maybe go make some coffee or something, because it might be sitting there for a while. Just don't leave it for too long because your air unit is going to get really, really hot. Then once you've finally completed updating your air unit, you get to do the exact same thing all over again with your radio and your goggles. So plug your goggles into the computer, and then using the same program, you can update it, and then plug your radio into the computer, and again using the same program, you can update it. The process is exactly the same for the goggles, the radio and the air unit. Now that everything is activated and updated, you can bind all your components. So that means you need to get your air unit actually connected to your goggles and your radio. So get everything powered up and you actually need to link your goggles before your radio. So to start with the goggles, look for this little red recess button under the power port and click it with something small, and the goggles should start beeping. Then go over to the drone and find an even smaller recess button underneath the SD card slot. To get at it, a SIM card tool is perfect, but you could also use a small pair of tweezers. Once you click that, the goggles and the air unit should connect and the goggles will stop beeping. Now you can move over to the radio, which is a little bit trickier because you need to hit three buttons at the same time. You need to push in the wheel on the upper right shoulder. You need to push this button on the front, and you need to push the record button on the upper left shoulder. Click all three buttons at once and the radio will start beeping. So now go back to the air unit and hit that same small button under the SD card slot. So if everything is looking good with the goggles, we're going to go ahead and test arm the quad. Now make sure the props are off.    Now grab your radio and make sure all of the switches are pushed away from you. This is the default position for all the switches.  Now since the props are off, you might hear the motors start to spool up a little bit. That's totally fine. Just disarm your quad if they start to get too high. But something else that you can double check here to make sure everything's looking good with the build, you can touch the motors and make sure they're spinning the right direction. The two front motors should be spinning inward toward the nose and the rear two motors should be spinning inwards toward the tail. Just touch it lightly with your finger and make sure it feels like it's spinning the right way. And now you're good to go. Everything should be ready to fly. I'm pretty excited. I have never built a drone before and just not plugged the flight controller into a computer at all whatsoever. Just put it together. And we're just going to fly it. It's kind of weird for me. So we've got our props installed on the drone. Remember, the motors are spinning inward. So this is the orientation that the prop should be. If you're a little bit newer to this, you might not be able to immediately tell the difference. But if you look closely, there is a shape to the prop. This is the front of the prop and this is the rear of the prop. So the prop spins like this. Just take a screenshot of this image or whatever to help you make sure you get the props all on in the right spot. We've also installed an action camera mount up front. We've got these tuned to fly very well with the weight of an action camera up front. So I'm going to be using a GoPro Hero 9 but you can use really any GoPro or an Insta360 or a DJI camera. We've come to this empty parking lot which is going to be a great place to fly because there's nobody here. If you're newer, you might not want to fly over concrete because it can be less forgiving. So maybe find yourself a similar area but over grass. Now, this is your first or one of your first drones. You're not 100% familiar with how it's all supposed to work. We're going to pop up a program of how you've assigned all the switches on the radio and what all the functions are. You should be really familiar with that before you actually go to pilot your drone. And if you really have never even flown before, we'll leave a link in the description to a clip with some tips on some things to try and practice before you go full FPV freestyle, doing some line of sight test hovers, practicing in the simulator, other things like that. But in this video we're going to assume that you know a little bit on how to actually fly and we're going to get this thing up. The one thing I am going to show you before we actually fly and this is something that you should do anytime you've completed a new build or really completed any repair made any mechanical or programming change to the drone. This is a really good way to test things out. We've got a drone plugged in.  Look at that. It all spins up but we aren't going to take off. We actually aren't going to add any throttle. We're going to hold the throttle down and we're just going to gently with the cyclic stick it. All right, let her back down. Okay. And now we're going to push it sideways and we should see the side go up the same way that we push it. That's left. That's right. And so what we did right there is we safely and in a very controlled way did one last test on the drone to make sure everything is working the way it should and it is. The drone did exactly what it's supposed to do if one of the props is in the wrong place or somehow we had messed up one of the orientation of the board to plug the problem. The drone wouldn't have behaved like that. It wouldn't have behaved properly. And we would know there was an issue before we actually added any throttle and had any altitude at all. So we have tested and double checked everything that we possibly can. It's finally time to fly this thing. We put this whole thing together with very basic tools just assemble the frame put the components on plugged everything in and it was ready to go. No soldering no plugging into a computer to configure or tune or any of that complicated stuff. This was super easy to put together. We're confident anyone is going to be able to do it. FPV is one of the most amazing hobbies you can get into. It is so rewarding. We know it can be really scary especially when you're thinking about doing your own building and all the complicated stuff that comes together to get into building and flying your own FPV drone. So if you want to pick up one of these check out our store Rotoride.com We know you're going to have a good time. Guys, I'm LaDrib and I'll see you next time on Rotoride.


If we want women to be equal, if we want women to be paid the same, if we want women to be heard at the table, we need more of us doing it. We need more of us at those tables where decisions get made. And that is how we help each other. Ultimately, all of the other things that we can do that will matter won't matter compared to how much each of us can do by stepping up and deciding to be a part of the change. And we are getting closer to equality, especially in government, but we have a long way to go until we reach full equality right across society. And that's why I wanted to get all of you in the room together today because I believe that your generation is the generation that's going to crack the code. I believe that after all of the work for hundreds of years that women have put in to make it possible for British Columbia to elect a woman to the highest job in the land, that after all of that work, you are going to be the ones that finish the job because there is strength in numbers. And when you are at the table, you are going to make your voice heard and your generation of young women have it within your grasp to change the future forever for every single woman who comes after you. So go do it. Thank you.