So I give too many about too many things. Find out which book I'm reading next and how it's going to help me. Okay so welcome to Kyla's reading day. Today we are talking about a book called the subtle art of not giving a and this book is fantastic and the best part about it is that it's not what I thought it was about. So I told you the book title. The book was written by Mark Manson and I haven't read anything else of his. He is a blogger and he has a couple of other books but I haven't read anything else but this was a great book. So the genre of this book is nonfiction. The topic or theme of the book is self-help or self-improvement which I've really been enjoying and the book is read by the author so that's been fun as well because they're getting to tell you the story in their own words and that's a extra special twist. So the main characters of the book, you. The book is about how you can improve, how you can change things, how you can stop caring about so many things all the time. So you are definitely the main character. Mark Manson does share a couple of stories and anecdotes about his own life and about a couple other things but the book is about you right.  So that part was great. So I had a lot of quotes that I really liked from this book so I'm gonna give you my top three okay. The first one is many people become so obsessed with being right in their life that they never actually live it. The next quote that I really loved was short rejection hurts, fear hurts. These are particular certainties that we can hold on to, certainties that we are afraid of letting go of. Easier to sit in a painful certainty that no one finds you attractive or no one values your talents than to actually test those beliefs and find out for sure. So these two quotes are really important to me because being right is really important to me and it's something that I learned in law school and if I can do the research and find backing and facts and all these things to prove this is my angle, this is my perspective and these are supporting materials to show that I am correct. So that is really important for me. I do try very hard not to roll that over into my personal life right because I can be right, I can be wrong, I can say I'm wrong all of it. But it was really hard for me to learn so I really love that quote where it's like don't be so right in life that you actually don't do anything. I thought that was exceptional. And the second quote means a lot to me because Mark gives a couple of examples of someone who thinks they're unattractive so they never tried to ask someone out or someone who believes that they are untalented so they never asked for a raise or asked for a different role in a company. And that quote meant a lot to me because you can be so mired down and believing this is what's happening. I know they'll never give it to me. I know I can never do that thing that you never actually go for it. And so you would rather feel comfortable in knowing I know he's not going to give me the job why ask for it than just going for the job. And I was like, okay, all right, I see what you're doing here. So bonus, the really important plot twist to this book is that it's impossible for you to not care about anything. So spend your time wisely and care about things that are really important. And I was not expecting that right I thought this was a book written by a rebellious person who was just like, don't care about anything, run through life, burn through people, burn your bridges, have a good time. And that's not the book. So I will definitely reread this book. I had a great time reading it. In fact, next for me would be to purchase the book and see what it's like to actually read it and process it through my own words as I'm reading it. So this one is definitely a will read again book. So thank you for watching this video of Kyla's reading day. I had a great time discussing subtle art of not giving a I cannot wait to read your comments if you picked up the book and you found it helpful or if you know anyone that's read the book and you thought it was great. Also let me know if you've read anything else by Mark Manson Manson. So until next week, this was Kyla's reading day. You have a great one. Bye.


So Helsinki! Oh my god, it's so great to be back at Slash and couldn't there be a more amazing guest than having Nico with me? Thank you so much for being with us today, Nico. It's a pleasure to be here. Yeah, so I'm half finished. So that was all the finished words that I know with those two. So it's a pleasure to come back a bit to my roots here in Helsinki and so cool that. I mean, greatest startup event in Europe is here and I've been here now since yesterday. It's fascinating. Amazing. Now you always spoil at half of my intro, but fair enough. You know, normally you would say a world champion needs no introduction. In this case I really really disagree because there's so much more behind the person, Nico Rosbeck, than you could ever guess from the outside. He's an incredibly humble person, very determined. He's a father, a family father. He's an active angel investor. He's a sustainability entrepreneur and so much more. So I can't wait really going going deeper into those conversations today and and really the background of your life and actually like athletes, entrepreneurs face so many extreme situations every single day and in the end it's always about one thing. It's about human performance and it's about the determination to win. I would really love to dive into this because you have had to perform at the maybe most competitive environment. Someone could think about Formula One. So let's jump right in, but maybe before you were a Formula One world champion, take us back to when you were a teenager and you had to make the decision to go all in on racing and maybe people don't know that Nico got accepted to so many Ivy universities, Ivy League universities like Imperial College for aeronautics. You were playing tennis for the Monaco tennis team, so how was that decision to go all in 110% on racing back then? Yeah, well, thank you very much for the for the introduction. Yeah, I mean it was a difficult decision mainly because all of my best friends were going down the usual path of going to the university and I think that would have been also pretty cool, but of course my racing was really kicking off and it's really the the winning that obviously helped with that decision because I saw, okay, I'm really good at this. Maybe I can make a career out of this. So it was carting back then or was it basically cart racing? Okay, and so of course then when the winning happens that really grips you and grips me and I thought okay, wow, this can work and so that's really what helped me essentially to make that decision. Then also my father, of course, some of you from the older generation will know him, so he was a he's a Finnish Formula One world champion as well and he of course also really supported me and encouraged me to go down the route of being a racer myself. I have actually great respect for this decision because if you're, you know, I come from a family, my father was the world champion, my father wasn't like a venture capital investor, so every decision I made was basically out of my, I don't know, humble background experience, but if your father has already been a world champion and then taking that step to say, okay, I compete now in the same class, I have great respect for this. Speaking about becoming a world champion, I mean, we all know Formula One and we all know how close those races are and there, I don't know, is it 16 drivers now in the in the field? What, if you had to summarize it in the time that we have, what element really separates achievers from almost achievers and makes you a Formula One champion winning against Louis Hamilton in the same team, the world championships? Yeah, so this is where where I think I can relate so much to all of you who are who are founders actually, so I was speaking also, I had the honor just to meet Peter from Adion yesterday. I think maybe you're in the audience, Peter, can you can you raise your hand if you're there? There's a pizza. There you go, okay, amazing. So and I really saw and I saw the synergies there like between a great founder and someone who can win in sports and there's a couple of things like one thing is of course this insane focus on what you are doing, you know, and really eliminating absolutely all distractions possible from around you. So back in my time when I was fighting for the championship, you would not have seen me using social media. I deleted all the apps, there was nothing there. I never looked at media also because it's a killer because they write about you and that's a disaster like you don't want to go down that rabbit hole. So just absolute focus with an incredible intensity to your next goal, to achieving that next milestone and to preparing in the best possible way. And so then when it comes to preparation also, that's something that I love to talk about and it's the point about marginal gains. So really focusing on also taking the small details and nailing them. And so there's a nice example in F1, one kilogram of our body weight was 200, no it was 300th of a second slower per lap. So if I was, if I had a big, big summer with eating ice cream, I came back one kilo. One kilo because 300 milliseconds is a lot. Which is almost two seconds of race time. We improved position in number six or something. Exactly, it's almost two seconds of race time. So it was that insane. But of course I couldn't be super skinny because I needed power at the same time. And so for example, just the attention to detail that I was trying to get to, I had a black helmet because the helmet paint was 80 grams. So I was the only guy with a black helmet. Then I cut, I even cut my socks. I did everything I could. I put Swiss cheese holes in my carbon seat where it was non-structurally like relevant. Finally, I even stopped road cycling. So I was a big road cyclist and I realized that damn, I got these really heavy leg muscles. I got to get rid of those because that could be at least, that could be 500 grams or something like that. So I stopped road cycling as well. And in fact, I did manage to lose with the helmet, the leg muscles and everything that one kilogram. And then we come to after the summer and it's qualifying in Japan. And we're really neck on neck with Lewis Hamilton, who was my teammate at Mercedes. The two of us were fighting for the championship. We were equal on points. 2016 after the summer break, last lap, he puts in pole position. I come around and like 10 seconds after him and I beat his time by two hundredths of a second to get pole position. And that was the paint, the leg muscles, which is like looking back now. It's pretty amazing. And then after that, four races later, I was world champion. So it was so much on the edge, on the details. And really it was that focus, attention to detail that made the difference in the end. And I think a lot of you founders can really relate with that. And it can certainly help to achieve great things. It's incredible to see this determination. I hope you guys don't stop cycling now and everything because I know Peter loves cycling and he comes from the Netherlands. But I think, as you mentioned, there are a lot of parallels to founders because the founders we love backing are founders that are obsessed about product. They have sleepless nights to think about every detail, every feature of the product. And it's basically every day you have to solve 1,000 problems. You have to be a perfectionist about it. And I think what if we look at Formula One, like this drive to perfection, this obsession to think about every gram that you can save to win. And it's exactly those milliseconds that make the title against someone like Lewis Hamilton. I think at startups it can be sometimes the same thing. If you launch products, you have competition. You need to be so focused on every detail and obsessed. If I think about this, this looks super nice from the outside.  And let's just take the Formula One time for 10 years.  How did a day of Nico Rosberg look during that time? Yeah, so in focus, of course, that work-life balance is part of the equation. Otherwise, in a couple of years, you will not be able to perform at your best level anymore. In F1, it was in a couple of races because it was just so much more in the moment intense. But for some of you, it will be over a little bit longer period of time. And so that work-life balance also, I think, is very, very important to find that time. For me, I have two kids now. They're six and eight, so it's become even more difficult. But yeah, it's critical, really, because you can gain so much energy back by spending time with friends and family and making time for that. It's so crucial. Let's speak a bit, because you mentioned Lewis, and let's speak a bit about rivalry and the positive and the negative elements of it. Because I think you, I mean, when you were car racing, you were already racing with him. Then you went into Formula One, and then, I mean, the peak of it is being in the same team, having the same car, competing every single day. What does this do with a human? Because how can you describe this relationship? Are you friends? Are you frenemies? Without Lewis, maybe wouldn't you have the level that you have? Because you always have this thing on your shoulder that there is this other guy that is also great, and then he just got the best out of you. How can you describe that relationship? Yeah, so with Lewis, we were actually best friends. We were young. We were 13 years old, best friends racing. But then in F1, there's so much at stake that it just became quite quite an extreme, like even, you would say, enemy. It went to that level, and it was just so fierce. One guy would use more engine power than was allowed. The other guy would run to the Stewards and tell the Stewards, hey, you need to investigate him, because I saw he did something wrong under the yellow flag. Don't do this among your startup competitors. Maybe you have to. And this is between, in the team, it's between teammates. So it was incredibly tough to manage. But of course, that was also a big driving force then, to have that rival. It pushes you to dimensions and motivations that you think you didn't even have. So it was very intense, to say the least. It's interesting, because a pattern we see with many of our founders that we back, and even VCs who are successful, is that they have something in their life that they just want to prove. Maybe it's a childhood experience that was negative, that they want to work against, or maybe it's a competition thing. And I also added it in my life. I founded a few companies, and then also, as you see, founded two venture capital funds and decided to start all over again. But this kind of competitive element maybe also got the best out of me, even though it's something that is, of course, also a daily challenge. If we look at that career, you know, I think you were 31. Let's imagine you're Nico Rosberg, you just won against Lewis Hamilton, the world championship. You likely get another 100 million as an offer to stay in Formula One. You're on top of everything.  Or what was the situation back then? Like how did it feel to make this decision to say this is it with Formula One? Yeah, so the 100 million was not an offer. It was actually a signed contract. Oh, you signed it, okay. Yeah, yeah. So it was even worse than that. I would have done it for you. You should have let me know. I was doing carding when I was a kid, so you should have called me back then. My dad was a little bit, how should I say, shouting on the telephone to me, like, are you crazy? You can't stop now with that contract for a couple more years. So the decision was, and again, I'm sure many of you, especially founders, will be able to relate. It was just so intense and such a struggle.  Yeah, you become that race driver or you become that founder. It becomes your identity completely. And even worse or even more extreme for us is that it, we're watched by hundreds of millions of people every moment and judged on split seconds.  Yeah, and my problem was I had the best of all time next to me in the same car. So, and he was beating me for like, I think it was almost eight, 17 years in a row, kind of. He was beating me. He was, He was a massive applause that he in 2016 never gave up, never, never, ever gave up to beat Lewis Hamilton and become a world champion. I think it's a great lesson as well, but sorry. Yeah, so it definitely required some tenacity to keep going. But it's such a, it turns into such a fear of failing then also. Yeah, I remember, I remember my last race and we're like 20 laps from the end. The championship was on the line and my engineer tells me in the ear, he says, you're going to have to pass Max Verstappen in the next three laps, otherwise you will lose the championship. So this is him in my ear now. And this is like, this is crazy hard to pass Max Verstappen. And so I'm trying to, trying to get this done. And as I'm, as I'm getting this done and I'm overtaking, I suddenly feel my foot jumping on the throttle pedal from so much fear, being so scared that I'm going to mess up and lose my, the opportunity to achieve my dream in that moment. And it might never come back because you never know, you need the best car to have a chance to win the championship. You don't know if you're going to keep on having the best car. So my foot was jumping on the throttle because I was so scared. It was shaking so much.   And I never had that in my life before. I never will have again in my life. That's certain. So it was that insane, the intensity, the struggle for me. And that's why then when I achieved that dream of winning in that sense, it was just a great moment for me to say, you know what, it's been a super career. It's actually also risking my life out there. So it's very dangerous. So actually it feels like the right moment to go for, in your words, the exit. So it was a good exit. And looking back now for myself, it was the right decision.  So it's a, it's a, and I'm sure a lot of you founders can relate with that. Yeah. And so that was my reason really for exiting. And for me personally, it was a good choice. And I'm very happy to be now here on the stage at Slush. I was just saying that that was just the start of Niko's career, the actual things we're talking about in the next 10 minutes. But first and foremost, thanks for sharing these transparent moments with us. I think I have great respect for making such a decision. And I think it's also learning, you know, venture capital and the startup ecosystem is such a high performance environment. And let's be very honest. It's a lot of pressure for every founder. If every VC tells you it's a 10 billion plus company, it's the minimum you need to achieve. So you're basically putting yourself almost into a loser game, right? Because you can almost not achieve this, but then also having the obsession and the conviction to fight for this. But I think it's a, it's a very honest and great learning from yourself that you did that 10 years and you did that, you know, far longer before in carting, but also being honest to yourself, challenging your life every now and then, zooming out and saying, okay, I'm not 31. I have a family that I'm building. And is this really what I want to do the next 10 years? We'll get into it in a minute that actually this was not a finishing of a career was actually a lounge pad of an amazing new career. But maybe if we talk a little more about this human performance element, where do you see the parallels to founders? Because a lot of the things you're just described are things that we see every day in founder life. In a way, founders are athletes, right? Because they're in an extreme situation. They run their companies for 10 years, for 15 years. I spoke with Nate from Airbnb three weeks ago. He's running Airbnb now, I think for 15, 16 years still. And I have great respect for everyone who still has the energy after such a time. But where do you see the parallels between an athlete and an entrepreneur? And also, what do you bring to the table when you're back an entrepreneur as an angel? Very important, of course, is also to have that courage and to push into discomfort because that's where you grow as an individual, as a company. So that's a direct also synergy with us athletes. But at the same time, of course, understanding the risk that you're facing and managing that accordingly. I had to risk manage all the time because my life was at stake. And I'm seeing that now with founders as well, very, very clearly, that they're always spending a lot of time in analyzing and understanding the risk that they're facing and then managing that, mitigating that. That's a common trait also amongst the best founders. Is there a typical advice that you give founders that VCs others don't give founders how to deal with those situations or things? No, no. I mean, generally, I just like to exchange those thoughts because you can always learn when you tell the personal stories and exchange. And that's always when it's the most interesting. I loved our conversation a week ago when we were speaking about regeneration and having infrared sounders and really bringing your body performance to the top. And I think it's interesting that keeping that balance because you told me a lot about Formula One and all the things you do on the side. I mean, on TV, we only see the race and we think, okay, those people are flying over and then they're driving the car and they're flying home. But I think that's like one percent of your life because you're doing so much sports, so much other mental trainings. We already mentioned that that was finishing your Formula One career was a launchpad to start a career that I think is incredibly successful so far, but it's just starting to get exponential to be an angel investor, a sustainability entrepreneur. And you're taking this to the next level and we can speak maybe a little bit about it if you allow us what you're planning on the VC side. But maybe you can explain a little bit about those activities that you're doing now and how you're basically bringing your experience to the world of venture capital and startups. Yeah, no, I really enjoy the VC space. Fascinated by the opportunities that there are there available now, like Mobility, which is my home. The disruption that is happening there is almost comparable to the horse to the car. The change, it's huge. So I really enjoy being involved in that change, which is also a change for good. Electrifying is going to bring a lot of good to us as a society on the planet. So it's awesome. And so I'm an angel investor, especially at seed stage. And the way I help because I'm not just passive capital, I really try and support the founders we work with. And mainly my angle is that I have, of course, now quite a strong sea level network in Europe. Thanks to my past, I built that up because all the corporates are sponsors of Formula One. So I've built up a really strong network where I can then connect the startups with the sea levels and that really adds value. They can become customers. So that's been quite successful as of late. We even have one example, one of our portfolio companies. We managed to put them in touch with SAP, which worked well and was very, very fruitful. So that's kind of our angle of being a value at, which is important. No, I can only seriously kind of, and this is not advertising, but we're invested in many companies together, whether it's VAE, whether it's even B2B software companies, where, you know, sometimes founders ask in the beginning, why should I take on board a sports person? You know, there are a few sports people or celebrities that invest in venture capital or founders and then you never see them. Niko has been in those investments that we're doing very often quoted as the most active angel really supporting the founders, whether it's sea level introductions. You mentioned SAP for the software company. So it was basically a call to the CEO of SAP. Now they're basically teaming up together to sell products. But I think also this mental part, like that kind of coaching that you can give founders, because there haven't been many VCs or angels that have been in Formula One and have gone through such a mental stage. I think that's super impressive. Robert, let's go to you. I'm sure the audience would love to hear from you as well. You are the best VC out of Germany. That's my personal opinion. I'm allowed to say that, right? So I'm sure everybody would love to hear from you too. What are you planning on building with Visionaries Club? I can say I'm a proud LP. I'm a proud LP, proud to be part of the journey. So what is your vision there? What are you building? Thank you. I'm humbled to hear that. Look, I think I would start maybe a level higher. If you look at myself, I was also starting a company before I was selling it. So I was an Operative Entrepreneur and then I did angel investing. And I just, if I was honest to myself and waking up on a Monday morning, I figured out my obsession, really my obsession was being an entrepreneur in VC. So it's not just investing. It's not going to VC fund being a partner. And it's not just building an operational company, but this element of building a new venture capital fund that in our case is only backed by entrepreneurs and a Formula One champion and a soccer world champion. But that's my obsession. I think that's what I'm trying to build every day. And with Visionaries, our idea is basically what separates us a little bit from other VCs is that we only have successful entrepreneurs as our investors. So we have 30 unicorn founders on the one hand side and we have 30 family entrepreneurs, which you can call the old economy. But it's so important that we, if we really want to build a new business model for Europe, we need to include the old economy. And I think if you look at software, bringing the customers together with the disruptors is something that personally, I have a strong believe in. It's what keeps me up at night, but we're very, in the early days of day one, so still building it. But thanks for your kind words. So speaking about what drives me, what keeps you hungry after, I mean, 10 years in Formula One, Formula One world champion, you retired when you were 31.  You're always here in the podcast. We like founders that have a chip on their shoulder. I think, I mean, I don't want to compare myself, but I also have a chip on my shoulder. I want to achieve, I want to take on challenges, grow, do something significant, have an impact. There's a huge opportunity now to have an impact. We're seeing a slash like climate tech. Climate tech is exploding here, especially like this time round also, which is so great to see. So I think that's just keeping me going, that I want to do things, stay sharp. So it's exciting. That's great to see. And you'll ever see the Nikos Eisner. You can still, he always kept the boy in him. So he's kind of, there's so much energy. Maybe one last question or two last questions. I think there was once a Formula One driver who said you cannot overtake 15 cars in sunny weather, but when it's raining, I don't know if it was Ayrton Danner or Michael Schumacher or if it was even a right quote. If we look at the current world, there's a lot of rain. We've discussed it a lot. There's a lot of wars. There's a lot of, you talked about sustainability. If we take an optimistic perspective to turn adversity into advantage, what opportunities do you think can be born out of recent events? There is, I mean, it's incredible now how sustainability is starting to go hand in hand with profitability. And that is the new era we're entering now. And that is where exponentially, I think, the opportunity set is going to grow. And that's something I'm extremely interested in and extremely happy to see, essentially. And so I think also for all of us in the next years, you know, to be involved in that space is going to be extremely engaging. And I myself, an active climate tech investor, just did a flywheel. A flywheel is going to be like an energy storage, I mean, battery energy storage alternative for the grid. And it's going under the ocean.  That can work. You know, there are real investable business cases. So it's a fascinating time. That's great to hear, Nico. One last question. There are so many founders here. If you had to give an 18-year-old an advice, like one piece of advice after this insane career and all the things you've gone through, what one piece of advice would you give a young person now being in this world? I have a good one. So it's always go looking for mentors, find yourself the best possible mentors. I did that. In fact, one of my most important mentors was my, I would even say psychologist that I was working with. So I worked 10 years with a psychologist very, very closely, two hours with him every two days. Like it was more intense than the physical training. Just to find improvements, progress mentally, you know, and find improvement through the mental struggle. And it was like spectacular for me, not only for racing, but also for my life. So that was one of the mentor example for me. And that's what I would recommend to every 18-year-old here in the audience. Really hustle to find the best possible mentors for your journey. That would be very, very valuable. I'm sure many people will try to get you backstage now, but thank you so much. Well, champion, Nico Rosberg, thank you for being with us here in the heart of Helsinki, being 50% from Finland, 50% from Germany. Thank you so much for being with us. Today 100% Finland. Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you. Thanks.


There's a lot of cancelled Disney shows that are floating around the internet, some of them seeming like they'd be great, like the three different cancelled Muppet cartoons, and the sequel series to the Enristo Cats, or not so much, like the high school musical sitcom, and the edgy Seven Dwarves cartoon, pitched prior to the 7D. However, did you know that there are four cartoons, that the Disney company will never try to unearth again, placed under a special stipulation, that would make it illegal to pitch the concepts? These four cartoons are as follows, Maleficent's Minions, Penny Maureen, Pocahontas' Quests, and Ring Ring Girl. Maleficent's Minions followed the titular Minions, as they raised Maleficent's four-year-old daughter, Nightshade. The main two Minions, were a fat female minion named Loba, and a skinny male minion named Tata, who tried to convince her, that Lora and her prince were pure evil in each episode. However, Nightshade didn't listen to them, and saw only how kind and good they were to their newborn daughter, Lalek. Fusely, the episodes consisted of Nightshade trying to do something kind for the new parents, as Loba and Tata tried to stop her and they all ended with Nightshade recapping the events to her mother's grade. Michael Eisner himself came up with the idea in 1996, hoping that it would help children who had deceased parents move on, but he felt like the story was too juvenile for the older audiences of the Disney Channel, or even totally kids only. When Playhouse Disney began to again popularity, he found it perfect for the block, so he took it off the shelf and screened it for testing audiences in the summer of 2000. It was moderately popular with children, but adult critics and parents despised it. An over-dramatic parent referred to it being, as tasteless as teaching children about the Holocaust with Anne Frank's tap dancing ghost, and called the creators sick monsters that deserved to be blacklisted by the industry. Even promises that her father would return at the end of the series, and that you would live happily ever after, didn't quell any enraged parents. So Eisner sadly shuffled the project into the vault, and we'll never see it now, that he stepped down from the company. Betty Maureen was created by French-Canadian writer Roselyne La Rue, another program pitched to Playhouse Disney in 2005, that would teach young children about the aftermath of the French Revolutionary War, as well as bits of the language. While critics were impressed at the history lessons contained within, they originally derided it as a door of the Explorer knock-off, set in France. As a tongue-in-cheek reference to these critiques, the first screening had doors said, poorly digitally composited into Maureen's in the opening credits. While the adults in the room got a chuckle out of it, this decision ultimately alienated the target audience, as many children were unsettled and afraid of door-eating Maureen at the beginning. Eventually, Roselyne shelved the idea for a show, and simply released the episode scripts in a chapter book, under a nom-de-plume. Even though Disney still owns the rights to the cartoon, they can legally do anything with it, effectively screwing themselves over. Pocahontas' quest is a bit of a strange one, namely being that pretty much everyone I've talked to cannot remember who created it. Sure they had Steve Marmel and Andrea Robinson as the writers, but the actual creator seems to be completely unknown. A vast chunk of my information about it comes from a woman, who was used as a consulting director about Native American clothing styles, so a few details are still a little fuzzy. She told me that it was meant to be Disney's answer to Danny Phantom and Spectacular Spider-Man, with a heavy emphasis on action and very little on romance, aside from moments between Pocahontas and John Ralph. The first three 11-minute episodes were compiled into a pilot movie about Cockham's ghost, and really coming back to haunt the tribe due to being jealous, that Pocahontas chose a pale man over him. Pocahontas would later reconcile with him, and the true villain of the movie would be revealed as an evil plant monster that was trying to wipe out all animal and human life in America, and then spread itself across the globe until only plant life would remain. Aside from the pilot, three other episodes were finished, one about Pocahontas meeting a wood sprite named Tiny Bloom, one about Niko dying of old age, and a half-hour special where Nakoma's husband is kidnapped by a vengeful redcliff on her wedding day. The whole thing was scheduled for a late 2007 release, but the production became a wreck very quickly. Many of the artist's tablets and pencils were destroyed overnight, the plant monster's voice actor was accidentally electrocuted during a recording session, and walked out in an angry huff, and dead animals kept showing up outside the lot. Granted, all of these problems were revealed to have completely solid explanations, a frequent storm destroyed the art materials, the equipment in the recording booth needed to be replaced, and there were some stray cats that had grown a liking to one of the storyboarders, and kept trying to leave her gifts outside the building. Nothing however, could explain the dumpster fire that was the first screening. They were using Adobe Flash to animate the entire series, but what can only be explained as a massive file corruption occurred while rendering. The final product was a garbled mess, that was full of repeating dialogue and disturbing glitched visuals, that looked like someone had beaten their computer with a bat. Despite the storyboard roughs with voice acting being perfectly fine for a potential redo, Disney TVA was too angry with all that had already happened to move any further, refunded everyone involved, and buried the project so deep, that even they forgot about it. I'm pretty positive they hired some kind of FBI agent to scour all traces of concept art too, because I can't find anything. The final cartoon is Ring Ring Girl, a 2011 cartoon pitch made by Swapy Marsh and Dan Covenmeyer. She was a half Asian, half white kid that sewed onion rings in her backyard. The main running gag of the show, was that she'd get horribly disfigured by grease once an episode. Finding the entire premise far too dark for a kid's show, and not wanting anyone to know someone at Disney came up with the idea, it was immediately shelved, and Dan and Swapy were punished by having their funding slashed to Phineas and Ferb.


So Outriders is a game many, many people thought was going to be at least in some way or another, a rival to Destiny in terms of offering a great loot shooter with longevity which keeps people playing and happy for a long while. But in reality was this ever the purpose of this game? Did people come fly set out to bring you this kind of game? We are what six to seven weeks after release now? Closing in on two months? And what we've seen so far in terms of what people expected for the most part has been there. Problem is for a game like this to last beyond its problems it needs consistent content. This is where I feel people overhyped what was and what was going to be with Outriders. As it going guys my name is DPJ and if you enjoyed the video leaving a like really helps out and if you like what you're seeing and want to see more Outriders be sure to subscribe. So Outriders in theory is a great game. Outrelease is still ongoing there are problems with the game though. These will eventually be ironed out leaving a fully playable and enjoyable game. The problem is in my opinion by the time this game is free of those major bugs the majority of its player base will have moved on or put that controller down in terms of playing this game. And the reason they have moved on for the most part is due to lack of content. They get to the end of the campaign they are met with a great end game and those challenge tier expeditions where the farming really starts. And this is the kind of thing most players really enjoy about these kinds of games. And while Outriders are for the in abundance the problem is once we've reached top level got those and legendos created an amazing build players from here simply slowed down on that game time and well in reality reach out and play other games. I myself for the most part all of my friends who were playing a lot of my community we haven't moved on but we have put it aside in hopes of some kind of DLC eventually coming. And this is where I feel the problem lies. This game was intended to be a one and done. People can fly admit this themselves. They didn't expect people to play the game the way they did. This was apparently in the early days of the demo. People can fly in reality in my opinion hit the jackpot in terms of a looter shooter but at the same time got lucky in doing so and it surprised them. The demo was great. It hit great and it led many to believe the full game was going to be the same. It was in a way but that loot just came way way quicker than expected meaning overall expected grind time dropped massively. Now back to people can fly being surprised by the way we play these kinds of games. This isn't promising either as like I said I heard on very good merit that this was going to be a one and done game. Meaning once you complete it once you get what you need build what you want don't have a challenge left it's normal to move on and people can fly planned it this way as crazy as it seems. An interview with people can fly not long after release confirmed also that DLC wasn't out the window and depending on the release date and response to the game the way it was received DLC might one day come. This confirms at release no DLC was in the works. Now people can fly also did say that the game at release would be a full game they ain't going to sell us half a game and then sell us the other half as DLC and that is what happened we got a full game at release and it was met with a decent response but soon after that release the game had many many problems many problems came and appeared people can fly were no doubt then working under many issues they didn't expect to come taking away the workforce from no doubt working on any future content. People can fly in response somewhat a month later rewarded players with the best loot in the game which was also met with negative feedback due to them actually taking a reason for these players to play the game at the equation. I mean give everyone the best loot in the game in reality there's nothing left for them to play for because right now that's all we have we only have loot to chase once you get to that end game. Now they could have done this for two reasons the first being they just wanted the remaining player base to be happy while they fix the remaining bugs and then move on from the game like I said that one and done game or they don't mind rewarding players with the best loot in the game because sooner or later it won't mean much because new content is coming. Personally I feel it's because they just wanted the game within a state where they can just leave the game finishing the original plan of the game being that one and done. I mean I understand if DLC comes they give us an extra two levels I mean we got real early datamined images of weapons and armor being a level 52 I mean if they dropped an extra few levels and armor and weapons or that perfect rolled loot that they handed out would be useless. I can see it in either way I mean they could easily drop a simple update a patch which wouldn't take long for them to do at all where they up the loot levels I mean once this game is fixed and through your bugs they may just do that they may up that loot level just a couple of levels would be absolutely fine therefore all that loot everyone was handed out where a lot of the people that got that loot didn't deserve it or even need it or were already taught anything like that I myself I got 20 legendaries top level I mean I lost nothing but I still rewarded some of the best loot in the game but yeah if they did drop a couple of extra levels on the loot we can farm for all that loot would be absolutely pointless so I can understand it from that point of view as well I actually feel though this is how they see the game right now that one and done like I mentioned earlier people can fly said future content depends on how the game is received that release so answer me this how was this game received that release because it wasn't great at all yes many many thousands of us enjoyed it but many many thousands of people did not due to the bugs glitches server issues problems connectivity I mean you name it this game had it but I won't lie to you even with the bugs the glitches and server issues and problems I still feel out riders is a great game the only thing I worry about is now if these people can fly I'm wondering if future content is even worth the effort because again like I said they themselves said it depends on how the game is received at release now with the game being planned as a one and done not a live service game and was never going to get that frequent post launch content I feel the game has been good for what it's meant for it's been great again though this was never supposed to be the game it ended up being it was never supposed to be that live service game and let's not lie to ourselves it was never going to kill the likes of destiny the fact people are saying the game is dead now because players have stopped playing because they have done everything is absolutely idiotic this was always going to happen if the LC is announced that may be e3 if the lc does come and drop big things which add to that in-game grind we all love the player population will shoot back up and this is also to be expected so is out riders dead no far from it there are still many many people still playing this game on a daily basis but in terms of reaching the levels expected and those numbers we saw around release changes will have to be made and future content will have to be right but out riders is not dead it's a good enough game and a great enough base foundation to have many people including myself interested for the future of it if people can fly decide there's one there only time will tell here people but let me know your thoughts on this down below within that comment section i am seeing so many people say the game is dead i've seen so many people say it will not make a comeback so let me know your thoughts on this down below like i said i believe the game was always planned to be a one and done and if it's received well at release like people can fly said future dlc may arrive but i ain't done with the game yet guys i've still got videos to make i'm still enjoying it for the most part i've still got legend those two chase i never burned myself out at release i've still only got one character leveled up to the max so i've still got plenty to play for i'm just taking my time but yes on that note the end of the video has arrived if you enjoyed it leaving a like really helps out if you're new around here and want to see more out riders on a daily basis be sure to subscribe and if you never want to miss a video i upload you can turn notifications on by hitting that bell button but guys thanks as always for stopping by and hopefully i'll see you on our next one


Konfirmative factor analysis differs from the exploratory factor analysis in that in a converter factor analysis a researcher specifies the factors for the data instead of having the computer discover what are the underlying factors. So converter factor analysis requires that you specify the expected result and then computer will tell you if that result fits your data and will estimate the factor loadings for you. This is a more flexible approach to factor analysis than an exploratory analysis. In this video I will demonstrate you on a conceptual level what converter factor analysis does and how it can be applied to more or different kind of scenarios. Our data has three or six indicators. We have indicators A1 through A3 that are supposed to measure construct A so we can see that there is variation in these indicators due to construct A and there is also some random noise at the E here so that's unreliability of these indicators and then we have some variance components that is reliable so for example if we measure A3 multiple times there is a specific part of the A3 that is reliable but it is specific to A3 so for example if we ask whether a company is innovative or not that measures innovativeness it can also measure something else so the only unreliability is not the only source of measurement there but there is also some item uniqueness and the idea of a converter factor analysis is that we specify a factor model for this data ourselves so for example we would say that because these are three indicators A1 through A3 are supposed to measure construct A we assign them to factor A and then we assign these to factor B and then its indicator also gets an error term then the factor analysis takes the variance of those indicators apart into variance that can be attributed to the factors and variance that can be attributed to the error terms like so so now we have a factor solution here we have all variation that is due to our construct A goes to factor A all variation that is due to construct B goes to factor B and all these are item uniqueness and unreliability goes to their terms that are assumed to be uncorrelated so these are uncorrelated distinct sources of variation for each indicator and then we have the two common factors so that's the idea of case sometimes your data are not as as great as you would like and a converter factor analysis allows you to model also problems in your measurement so for example if we have this kind of scenario there is a variation again due to construct A variation due to construct B and then we have unreliability the black circles here and we have unique aspects of each indicator but there is also some variation in A3 and B1 that correlates the variance component are here these these letters are no particular meaning by the way they're just letters to distinguish these different circles so A3 and B1 correlate for some other reason than than measuring A and measuring B that could possibly be correlated if we feed the converter factor analysis model then this variation that is shared by A1 A3 and B1 actually goes to the factors the reason why it goes to the factors is that these error terms are are constrained to be uncorrelated and what happens now is that our factors which are supposed to present construct A and construct B are contaminated by these are secondary source of variation are that are present in A3 and B1 and as a consequence the correlation between factors A and B will be overestimated and our results will be biased and this is also the case in exploratory factor analysis so if you have two factors that influence or if we have this kind of like minor factor that influences A3 and B1 and we only get two factors then the factor correlation between those two factors will be inflated if we were to run an exploratory analysis then the exploratory analysis could identify that there is a third factor that loads on our A3 and B1 but because it's just two indicators it's also possible that the exploratory analysis wouldn't identify that factor for us so what can we do with this kind of situation a converter analysis allows us to also model correlated error so instead of specifying that these error terms of A3 and B1 are uncorrelated we can say that it's possible that A3 and B1 correlate for some other reason so we relax the constraint we specify that these two can be correlated and then the the variation in A3 and B1 that is shared between these indicators but not with others so it's not part of the factors then gets to escape to these error terms and then we also again get clean estimate of the factor correlation A and B but this is something that many people do so your statistical software will tell you that the model doesn't fit the data perfectly and it'll also tell you that you could freeze some correlations to make the model fit better and but that's a bit dangerous unless you know what you're doing you should only add this kind of correlated errors if you have a good theoretical reason to do so so the fact that your statistical software tells you to do that you could do something to increase the model fit is not a reason to do something it's an indication that you could do something and you should consider something it's not a definite guideline that you should actually do that so under which scenario then are you are is it a good idea to allow the error terms of two indicators to correlate for example if our indicators are would look like that so we would have indicators about innovativeness so A here A factor here is innovativeness and B factor is productivity so we would have questions about innovativeness and questions about productivity then we realize that okay so A3 is our personal is innovative and B1 is our personal is productive so both of these actually have this this personal dimension as well so they don't measure only innovative and productivity they also measure how high quality the personnel in the company are so then we realize that okay so there is a secondary dimension that these two indicators measure and then we can add the error correlation here but it also you have to justify it so it's not enough that you say that our statistical software tells us that the model fits better if we do something you have to justify it also in non-statistical terms this is the same thing like with the outliers you don't delete an observation because it is different you have to explain why it's different in non-statistical terms the same thing when you are eliminate indicators from a scale so your statistical software will tell you that sometimes eliminating an item from a scale will make chromebacks alpha to go up but that's not the reason to eliminate an item you should also look at non-statistical criteria so what does the item look like is there a good reason why we think it's less reliable because these kind of are suggestions by your software they could also be just a random correlation between two random elements so random correlation between these is and then you would be mis-specifying the model another way perhaps a bit better way to accomplish the same is to specify this secondary factor so we could instead saying that these two error terms are correlated we could say that these indicators A3 and B1 actually also measure something else so we add this secondary factor here and this is a bit more appealing approach because then it makes you have to explicitly then interpret what this factor means and it's a lot easier to free correlations without explaining what they are actually what's the interpretation of these two of the correlation between these error terms it's a lot easier to do that without an explanation than adding a factor so if you had to add a factor then your reviewers will ask you to explain it and you always should so it's a good idea to have the factor instead of having the correlation mathematically both of these accomplish the exact same thing they allow the unique aspect of A3 and B1 that is correlated to escape from the error terms this example of adding the minor factor can be extended to also another scenario so that's just the same indicators again we can have this kind of scenario so what's the scenario here we have indicators A1 through A3 measure A indicators B1 to B3 measure B there's unreliability there is and then there is some variation that is shared by all the indicators that variation could be for example variation due to the measurement method so this is a scenario where you would have common method variance so the R would be here the variation due to the method or the common method variance and then we if we estimate a factor model with A1 A2 and A3 loading on A and this B indicates loading on B then all variation due to the method escapes to this B factor and A factor and the factor correlation will be overestimately greatly so in this kind of scenario it is possible to also specify a secondary factor so we can specify this method factor here and the idea is that all the indicators load on the factors they're supposed to measure the factors representing the constructs and a factor representing the measurement process so looks really good and looks too good to be true but this is not the panacea for method variance problems there are this kind of model is problematic to estimate the reason for that is that a high correlation between A and B is nearly indistinguisable from A1 A2 A3 B1 B2 B3 just being caused by one factor so they are empirically are nearly impossible to distinguish so this kind of model is very unstable to estimate in practice these models are have been shown to be problematic even in simulated data sets but there's one way that this kind of model can work and it's if you add these marker indicators so sometimes you see in the published papers that they use marker indicators the idea of marker indicators is that you have indicators that are unrelated with the factors that you are modeling so A1 and B1 B are unrelated to this M1 M2 for example if you use innovativeness and productivity and then you have questions on one to seven scale you could have a marker indicator of whether the person likes jazz music or not i've actually seen that being used the idea is that how much you like jazz music is completely unrelated with the innovativeness and productivity of your company but if the jazz music indicator correlates with these indicators then we can assume that that correlation is purely due to the measurement method because jazz music liking and innovation really are two are completely different things


Today I square off Disney's big three new princess films for the new generation and you vote on the winner. If you've been a subscriber to Feud Nation for a while now, you know exactly why this episode exists. Let's feud. Hot to plucky dreamers here. Rapunzel has been stuck in a tree house for the first quarter of her life, but that hasn't stopped her from being a lovable, kind-hearted young lady. Elsa and Anna also know what it's like to be a recluse, being trapped in a castle ever since their parents vanished out at sea. Anna is very similar to Rapunzel with her chipper attitude and wide-eyed excitement, while Elsa is a bit closer to a real-world woman. Distant, cold, beaten down by typical issues like what to wear or which ice sculpture to create. Moana is a new girl in class and she fits right in. A brave, strong woman who has to take care of the island and her people.  Thanks. Rapunzel wins this department, as hers are awesome. Maximus the horse is my favorite part of the movie. He's constantly hunting down a thief named Flynn Rider, a Han Solo-ish character who will eventually team up with Mandy Moore as Rapunzel. Pascal is a cute little chameleon that makes quirky faces. And that's really all he does. Frozen gives us Olaf. Love him or hate him, he's a pretty big part of the flick. Constantly joking about how much he loves the summer and just being a bit dense when it comes to common knowledge things. There's a reindeer that does stuff too. If I seem a bit checked out, it's because I've talked about Frozen like 20 times on this channel. Maybe if kids showed even a slight interest in other movies that aren't superhero films or animated kids flicks, I wouldn't have to keep going back to this while. Let's continue.  The kids laughed every single time. So I guess it did its job. This isn't Shakespearean written script work here, but it's doing what it needs to do. I guess. I mentioned Flynn already. He's my favorite of the male protagonists.  Get out with that. Get. I quite enjoyed Dwayne Johnson as Maui, the demigod with the magical hook. This allows him to transform into various creatures like birds and whales. My favorite is the half man, half shark combo. The villains are a mixed bag here. Tangled has a far more traditional baddie, Mother Gothel. Trapping young Rapunzel in a tower just so she can stay young forever. Elsa's kind of the villain and frozen, accidentally speaking. Since she can't control her powers, she inadvertently causes the town of Arendelle to fall under an unending winter. I'm from Minnesota, so that just seems like a first world problem. Grab a coat. Third act, plot twist reveals another bad guy lying in the weeds. I dare not spoil that event, though, for the three of you who are for some reason watching this and haven't seen Frozen. You're welcome, Maui. Moana is new as I make this video, so I won't give much away, but I really like the route they went with the antagonist here. The demonic lava monster is a sight to behold, and the final battle takes a very interesting twist. There are plenty of other notable characters in all three films, which I'm sure will come up more organically in the next round or two. So let's press forward. Let's keep going with this. Young woman feels like she has the potential to be much more than she currently is, but due to circumstances beyond her control, she doesn't get the opportunity. Fortunately, our hero is strong and independent, and able to rise above the challenges thrown in front of her, overcome the obstacles she's given. She meets a man along her journey who's going to help her out.  She sings a song, a tale of hope and wonder and magic, and she eventually will defeat the evils that are present in her distant future. If this sounds like the plot of all three films, it's because it is. It's a template Disney has, and they nail it to a T, and they only seem to be perfecting their wine. That fermentation process is ripe for the taking. I have no idea how wine's made or any of the real terminology.  Sorry for swearing, Mom. Frozen is by far the oddest of the bunch in terms of story structure and basic plot elements. Elsa's powers appear to stretch beyond just controlling the cold weather, and it was clear based on early trailers that she was supposed to be a much darker villain originally.  What? Tangled is the most straightforward of the group, which sees Gothel pursuing her escaped prisoner and Flynn rider as they attempt to get back to the castle.  Moanerly surprised me with the quality of its storytelling. The ocean was where she belonged. She just wasn't sure exactly what that meant until she started listening to her crazy grandma. I like that the movie doesn't rush through the opening act, instead giving us a good 30 minutes to get to know her family and culture. Frozen brushes through all the setup and nuance in like 5 minutes. Cup of coffee, you're done with it. All three films see our princesses grow by learning to embrace powers, listen to their heart, or see past the flaws. I share a lot of the same challenges that they do, being a young white male living in America. The struggle is real. See the line with the sky meets the sea and it calls me and no one knows how far it goes. Why Trish? I'm singing my heart out up here. What could possibly be more important than this beautiful ballad I'm giving to my audience? Elsa's not a princess, she's a queen? Oh, okay. The music in all three are fantastic and certainly up for debate as to which one contains the best. Tangled has a nice variety of songs. The opening Where Does My Life Begin is my favorite, but there's a fun bar song, a beautiful song about seeing some lights, and Mother Knows Best is deliciously dark. Deliciously dark. Okay, you know I was going to read that line off the prompter, Sharon. Why are you doing this to me? Why are you doing this? Those charming frozen gals give us a smattering of jams such as the insanely popular Let It Go, the inspirational for the first time in forever, and the bubbly love is an open door, while songs like Olaf's in the summer and that one by the Troll family are throw away. Space fillers with little substance. Mona may not have the sheer volume of songs that Frozen does, but it's got some good quantity in there, some bigly quality. We Know The Way is a powerful number, but man, oh man, is how far I'll go amazing. Dwayne Johnson puts out a song. He's the PlayStation 4 slogan of actors. He only does everything, and here he is once more showcasing range. Shiny and an innocent warrior are the other two big song sequences. If you want to talk about the visuals in these movies, they're all strikingly good looking.  Confidence. Subscribe. Ice, snow, storms, forests, islands, oceans, volcanoes, towns, castles, peoples, etc. are all colorful and vibrant and perfectly captured. It's apples to apples and really comes down to the personal preference. I've spent enough time on this. I sadly could have just put the three posters up for four minutes and called it a day. Got the same amount of views and recognition. Let's move on on that sour note. I remember when Disney decided to call it quits on hand-drawn animation and move over to the modern computer era. It was a tough time. It was dark times, and I thought for sure Disney was going to fall on their face. Thankfully, the House of Mouse has proven me wrong for a decade now and continues to impress. I've given you my two cents on these flicks and now it's your turn. Vote for your winner. Comment and remember, this is more than just reviews. This is Movie Feuds. How long is it going to take for the frozen as garbage comments to roll in? Let's find out together. I'm excited.


What's up everyone it's your girl Kenzie here from Wayne Sports Cards, and I am ripping some personal boxes here for Jaren S. We've got a total of five 2023 tops archives signature series baseball boxes. Best of luck Jaren. It's gonna be a fun rip here for you Good luck pretty solid today. I think what two one of one so far today Out of this stuff first up here 27 and 56 looks like blue jays it's gonna be a Tiosca Hernandez Well one of these earlier as well that is 2021 tops Out of 56 Hernandez box to number two here Future stars mariners four out of 38 Gonna be a Mitch Hannigar That is from 2018 Tops future stars. That's cool for 38 Mitch Hannigar It's gonna be your second hit there Jaren box three Yeah, and y'all only about a 15 minute queue not very long at all Let me know if you have any questions about any products Can you come always find those elite and sports cards dot com under the personal boxes tab?  I mean 2018 but Um, we have one wrestling box so far today jason I ripped my first uh prism wwe undercard pretty cool looking product Pretty pretty cool box four here Got 72 of 81 astros is gonna be a kyle tucker. Nice Nice Tucker there for you jaren that is from 2022 tops 72 of 81 Tucker Here we go Last box Yeah, I know right jason in the card world. That's old Let's see what we've got yankies out of bowman It's gonna be 95 of 99 or not yankies. I'm sorry. Who's that mara mariners a loken gilbert 95 of 99 the card is off It's out of the mag here Yeah, that's not gonna budge I will send the box here with you on this one jaren Obviously, you can see the gap right here card is supposed to be all the way uh Almost feel it through the sticking out of mag, but it's not quite all the way there That's out of 2019 bowman It is not budging I can't even knock it back in the place. I will send a box here with this one Alrighty jaren that will do it again for your boxes. You had the loken gilbert the kyle tucker dj hall Mitch hannagher and a tiosker hernandez Alrighty jaren. Thanks so much. We'll get these right out to you


Atlantis Mayor Houston you have a go for the next maneuver. One special request please notify the mirror when you are in attitude so they can verify their quaternion. Working off of? We've got it Dave. Catchment 18 of the mirror procedures. Yes Mayor Houston we're gonna hand over to east here in a little over a minute. We'll lose K-Band on the east side. We do appreciate the letting us visit with you on the flight deck. It's fun watching the cameras float around. You guys too. I did it very delicately. There was a large look like a crystal made of cells or maybe the size of a gumball a large three-dimensional tissue and as soon as I moved it it dispersed and I believed we're a intermediate three-dimensional tissue formation which we use for our tumor modeling and our planning to use for our tissue engineering. That delicate intermediate structure I did have the chance to observe. And Dave we copied that. It sounds very interesting. Commander Levy as this change is occurring and Atlantis' jets are controlling the attitude is there any specific extra risk or precaution that needs to be taken during this computer changeover what exactly is going to be happening at that time and is there any other moment to moment kind of monitoring that's going on given some of the past problems that many wouldn't have occurred otherwise. There's no risk at all when they change the computer out by design when we're when Atlantis is docked with MIR we control the attitude and we do that for a very good reason. We carry fuel up to space but by the time we get back down to the runway we want to dump all the fuel so instead of dumping it we actually use it for control. MIR of course stays up on orbit and so they would like to save as much propellant as they can. So Atlantis always controls the stack once we're attached and therefore there's absolutely no risk when they change out the control computer for MIR because they are not controlling. Mike for there's been a lot of talk about the Spectre module when you come back what are you and you debriefed what are you going to tell people about whether you think there's a possibility that the hole or holes will ever actually be found and the invisibility of continuing to search for those holes? Well the answer to that of course depends on how easy it is to find the hole and repair it but the EDA I did with Anatoli the commander here on station MIR Anatoli worked very hard to look for that hole in an obvious place and he did not find it he found the hole well was in good condition it leaves us to suspect a very very potent area which is at the base of the solar array and it's very likely that that is where the leak is and there are materials on board now that Jim and his crew brought up on Atlantis that will be used by Anatoli during a future EVA to try and repair that area and seal it up basically. I think that attempt will certainly take place very soon and if it's successful then the chances of restoring Spectre I think are very high beyond that if that doesn't work I can't hazard a guess I don't know what the specialists in Russia are thinking if it's not in that area it does seem that that is the most kind of it's the smoking gun of the whole issue because that is where the progress hit was on the solar array anyway and that's where the greatest force is transmitted to the station. Very very ambitious science schedule how confident are you that you're going to be able to do that and carry out all of that science and is there any one thing in particular that you think is particular significant that you really want to get to? I'm glad you asked though we just made an observation a few hours ago that I'm very excited about I called most of the crew around to take a look at a structure forming in our tissue engineering experiment which we're using for cancer research which was a very delicate three-dimensional formation which would not occur on earth and which is the basis for our planned tissue engineering work for the future so we're already making critical observations and we'll plenty of time to do that throughout the mission. Let me ask Mike. So you lost a lot of your science is there still so one thing that you think occurred that perhaps you were bringing back the information that couldn't have been achieved any other way one thing that you're going to put up in front of people and say look what I did besides some of the different crises that I faced here are some of the things that I'm really bringing back to you? Unfortunately I can't think of any kind of big gleaming golden banner I can put out in front of everybody and say I learned from a personal point of view I gathered a lot of experience about how to deal with these problems it's an approach to problem solving rather than the actual solutions of the problems in themselves I would have learned from Anatolia and my Russian colleagues that just perseverance and working at it and not being flustered and working around your problems is a great way to approach life in space and I think I'm going to take that back with me but that's something people know already it's just you have to sort of learn it for yourself sometimes. Let me ask you manager Solovia when the shuttle feels good-bye and they disappear what's the first order of business what's the first thing that you're going to ask David Wolff to order in the Galdu to engage in physical culture exercise every day for us cosmonauts as soon as we are in space and no matter how well he has been trained he's got to always train to land he's got to always got to be prepared to anticipate his eventual return to earth. Do you need a translation? No we got the translation. David what is the one thing that you would like to say to all of those people who are concerned about your going who raised some very legitimate issues last words that you would like to say to them now that you're actually sitting there? I think this is the time to show the Russians what good partners we are and it's a wonderful experience to be up here and I'm going to do my best job and I have a great crew on a toly and pavo this should be a great experience for NASA and for our country as a whole so enjoy the mission and we'll keep you informed. Nevertheless how much did all the problems affect your ability to carry out your tasks on the mission? Oh there's no doubt the collision drastically affected the science program that I was meant to carry out but there are pluses and minuses in everything and in this particular case the NASA five flight which is what my flight represented we we lost some of that science the life science that's inspector but we gained an enormous amount of experience I'm looking about not just myself but the whole NASA team working with the Russians in approaching re-establishing power to inspector and then thinking about how they could actually repair it and get the air back inside that volume and make it a useful module again. And just finally from me what is is the future of the mere space station do you think? Well I think the station is in very good hands of Anatoly and Pablo Vinogradoff the board engineer and David and they will work very hard to re-establish the condition that the space station was in before the collision they're a long way towards doing that already we have one mod all the modules powered now that are accessible and David has an ambitious science program to carry out in the parotta module and Anatoly has an enviable number of EVAs to do outside and also inside in inspector again to repair that module so I think there's a good chance that in the next few months maybe six months you'll see a pretty much re-established space station mere beyond that it's hard to say I've heard the Russian news reports that mere will carry on for at least two more years. Fad do you feel that a boy from Kent had to go to America to become an astronaut? It was a choice I had to take and I'm very glad I took it because I wanted to go into space and I do feel sorry for those children that might think they have no chance of doing that however I'm more optimistic about that now and I believe the fact that this crew which represents a lot of nationalities and many more nationalities have been on board this space station shows that very much more internationally people from different countries are going to participate in work in space both on the space station and I hope going towards the moon and then landing on Mars and I know that NASA wants to lead that effort along with Russia and I think Britain will eventually be involved in that effort it's only a matter of time the example of what we're doing is just being seen all over the world and I think it's impossible to deny the importance of that to the young children that are growing up in Great Britain.


Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem, As-Salaamu Alaykum, Pakistan. Welcome back to Corporate Governance. And we are moving forward with the different issues, different contextualizations, different frameworks, and different factors which tend to affect corporate governance within institutions and also within national economies. Today, we're going to talk about problems faced by developing economies because Pakistan is a developing economy. And today, we are going to look at its introduction and then it will be followed by many additional sessions which will tend to elaborate upon the factors and the contextualization which is affecting these developing economies. Ladies and gentlemen, what we see is is that in developing economies, there are various circumstances, various known and unknown factors, various matrices, various interest groups, various vested interests, and many other circumstances which are affecting those developing economies. Many developing and emerging and transition economies lack or are just now in the process of developing the most basic market institutions. Economic growth in these countries has turned out to be lower than expected, especially in the 21st century. We see with the advent of the 21st century, there was a complete transition. There was a complete flux of new technologies which led to the virtual universe towards virtual trading, towards virtual business, and more so, a globalization of economies, of laws, of regulations, and also of expectations. Now, what we see is that countries like Pakistan had many challenges. One challenge definitely being our population. Second, that most of our businesses and industries, especially in the large business segment, are managed or are owned by a few families, then we have this elite culture, or we have this feudalistic approach towards even business and towards growth and economy, and all of this basically has led to a quagmire situation and has led to a multi-flux and confusion and overlap of institutions which has actually undermined good governance and also the fact that we have been unable to meet the challenges of corporate governance in the way it was envisaged, in the way it was expected, and in the way the developed economies are moving forward, which has resulted in much more affluence and much more national and institutional wealth in those countries. But we don't see that over here. And therefore, in this particular situation, what basically emerges is the situation that we currently are in right now, Pakistan is on the verge of a financial default, and we have seen that there has been this flux of the dollar that only in the past one month we have seen that the dollar has skyrocketed by more than 30%. And we have seen that there is a hyperinflation taking place right now of 40%. We see that the products are lacking right now. We do not have the resources to import various ingredients and various parts which are required by our industries in Pakistan to come out with their products. We basically see that there is a outflow of institutions and a dwindled and a very gray market which is unable to predict what is going to happen in the future. And therefore, we have also seen the dip of the stock market, the unprecedented rise of gold exceeding 166,000 per dollar. And so all of these things tend to make the corporate governance and the good governance a very complex animal, an animal very difficult to tame, an animal which becomes unpredictable. So these are the challenges. And then another global challenge of the post-COVID scenario, that also is aggravating the whole scenario. And we see that there are many paradoxes which have been created. And there has been a paradigm change taking place in these economies, especially like Pakistan and the Sahak region. And therefore, we are seeing that the Sri Lanka example in which it has defaulted. And what has happened over there is that the whole market and the whole economy and the whole nation is in a state of chaos and flux and we cannot predict what is going to happen. So all of these things are challenges of developing economies. Now, in this whole process, we also see that privatization has taken place to generate funds. The government has sold many institutions but it has not been able to bear the fruit which was again anticipated. And as a result of that, what has happened is that we have lost our golden hens which were laying the golden eggs and timely relief basically was gotten. And now another scenario has emerged in the past week that the government has put in abeyance most of the corporate laws and has come out with a new law to further privatize our 10 gold institutions like PSO, like Sweden-Ordin, Sweden-Southern like Oil and Gas Development Corporation and these type of institutions which basically are monopolies and have been able to generate immense value and wealth for the nation. But due to our weak economy, we basically have to sell these and sell up to 100% ownership to different countries or to different large global groups just to stay afloat. And therefore, we basically see that privatization does not seem to have brought about the anticipated improvements in corporate efficiency just like I was mentioning that it has had its own shortfalls and shortcomings and the state and para-state institutions such as privatization funds remain the largest shareholders of companies. So again, I mean look at the example of the Karachi Electric Supply Company. As this is one example, look at what is happening in Capco, look at what is happening in other institutions in the IPPs which have been privatized and now we are seeing that they intend to even privatize the distribution companies like Lesco, like ISCO, like MAPCO and all of these other organizations. So they would be consequences of all of this and to incorporate good governance would be a very, very big challenge. Internal owners dominate in many companies while the external owners do not have enough voting power. The capital markets are just developing and do not facilitate the inflow of new capital as intended. So again, what we're going to see with the sell-off of various institutions, with the sell-off of various golden hands in the corporate sector owned by the government would be that it would create an eschewed market and it would be very difficult to regulate and facilitate this whole inflow of capital and also inflow of management and the consequences definitely they would want their own securities and it would be very difficult to regulate but yeah, that is the challenges of developing economy. In the transition economies, a lot of details of the mosaic are still missing, trying to develop a system of good corporate governance in these countries is made difficult by problems such as complex corporate ownership structures. So just like I was mentioning, again, if we tend to put certain laws in abeyance, if we provide certain preferential laws, if we do away with the framework of accountability, of transparency, of meritocracy, of fair play, then the consequences definitely would always be in the negative and not in the positive. So therefore, this whole transition which is taking place right now is very challenging for Pakistan and also for other countries around the world as we are seeing many countries in Africa. We have seen what has happened in Sri Lanka could also happen in some countries in the Far East. So this whole post COVID scenario is very unpredictable. The need for corporate governance in the developing and emerging and transition economies extends far beyond resolving problems stemming from the separation of ownership and control and that is something that I was talking about. And again, it's not only issues of ownership and control. The developing and emerging economies are constantly confronted with issues such as number one, the lack of property rights. And therefore, what we see is that that can also be very consequential. The abuse of minority shareholders, which has been rampant since the past seven decades in Pakistan, contract violations due to the lack of implementation of laws and also the, you can say, the non-efficacious working of our judicial system because it is overburdened with so many issues and so many cases and so many petitions. And that tends to undermine the whole context of good governance and corporate governance. Asset stripping, which I just talked about and again, how those assets are being stripped from the National Exchequer and going into vested interests and very large business groups who would be wielding their own interest and also ensuring that they would be able to maximize profits without following maybe the laws and regulations which are in place and then self-dealing whereby vested groups are basically creating conglomerates and also are creating economies which are dominated by a few oligarchs and that again would be extremely detrimental to the developing and emerging economy of Pakistan. And we have to ensure that such fallacies and such ineducacies and such limitations and constraints are professionally managed, are done in the best possible way to the rule of law and a merit-based, non-discriminatory, non-biased approach towards the different corporate laws which tend to exist. And thirdly, to try to balance out the rights of the aristocracy, of the bourgeois and of the proletariat and that basically means of the elite, of the middle class and of the working class and also to create that balance and not only in benefits but also in roles and responsibilities. So that is very important. Thank you so much.


What about soy food intake and breast cancer survival? We didn't have a clue until 2009 when the LACE study was published Life After Cancer Epidemiology. About 2,000 California breast cancer survivors followed for nine years. Postmenopausal women on the Estian-blocking drug Tomoxifin, who got the most of the soya seflavone in their diet, had the lowest rate of breast cancer recurrence.  Soy was, if anything, protective, but you can't just sprinkle some soy sauce. It took soy levels comparable to those consumed in Asian populations, one or two servings a day, to reduce the risk of cancer coming back. Then came the famous Journal of the American Medical Association study, the biggest yet 5,000 breast cancer survivors. Conclusion. Among women with breast cancer, soy food consumption was significantly associated with decreased risk of death and recurrence. Now this isn't taking soy isoflavone supplements. This was actually eating soy foods. The potential benefits are confined to soy foods, and inferences should not be made about the risk or benefits of soy-containing dietary supplements. Patients with breast cancer can be assured that enjoying a soy latte or indulging in pad Thai with tofu causes no harm, and when consumed in plentiful amounts, may reduce the risk of disease recurrence. And finally, 2011 soy food consumption and breast cancer prognosis, a third study. The only three such studies in existence and soy is 3 for 3, as isoflavone intake increased, risk of death decreased. What more do we need to know?