We are recording on here. Oh, yeah. Well, Mr. Vatman, it's been a pleasure to get you on here. I've been following you when I first came out, when I got introduced to the information on Narciss. It was through your information, and that's what I want to make clear here today. Many people don't know, but you basically pioneered a lot of what's in this community came from you. And this is one thing that I see now with a lot of these newer coaches on YouTube in the Narciss community. They're using a lot of the terms and stuff, and they're not really realizing where this came from. Who basically pioneered this? And then they're taking it as it's theirs, and they're running with it. So I just want to get that out out there first and foremost.  And before people knew about narcissistic supply and all this stuff, this is the source of where it came from. So I want to make that clear to people and let you go ahead and go in from there. OK, that's extremely kind of you to mention. I've been a consumer of your videos, by the way, from the moment you had started. I think the first videos were in a car. You had these videos in a car, right? I started to watch these videos when you just started. And I've been following you ever since. Yeah, I started the whole thing in 1995. No one knew what it was. Narcissism, there was no internet. 1995, there was no YouTube, no nothing. I mean, it just started. There was a smattering of things. And I ran the first website and the only website for nine years on narcissism and all six support groups for the victims of narcissistic abuse. And I coined most of the language in use today. So narcissistic abuse, somatic narcissists, cerebral narcissists, flying monkeys, narcissistic fleas, hovering, all this. These are my grandchildren. But I'm, and most of these experts and coaches and self-styled experts today, they've been teenagers when I started.  But it's gratifying. On the other hand, it's gratifying to see that, because I coined, for example, the phrase narcissistic abuse and now it's like a major phrase all over. So it's gratifying to see this. Paternity is a secondary issue. Just to see my work make headway that matters. Even being used by people, peers in a psychological field, they're using the same terminology that you first came out with. Yeah, I'm a professor of psychology in several universities and in textbooks and academic papers and so on. My language is used. Yeah, I've seen it. I coined about 90% of the language in use today. I borrowed many terms. I hadn't come up with everything new. I borrowed many terms from earlier psychoanalytic literature. For example, I borrowed narcissistic supply from a paper which was written in 1938. I borrowed the term false self from a guy called Winnicott who was a pediatrician and psychologist. So I borrowed many terms, but I imbued them with the meaning they have today. I sort of redefined them. And so that's been my contribution. I've branched out since then. I now deal much more with borderline personality disorder, cluster B, social implications of narcissism, technology and narcissism. So I've moved on. And that's in speaking of that's where we're going today with this conversation. Social media and the impact of where it seems to be almost like molding people's mentalities. So you see so many people who are almost like no self identification. They're all a conglomerate of everything that is on social media. What have you say about that in that regards to what we're witnessing now in today's society, most of today's societies? Well, I think it behooves us to make a distinction between the technology, the philosophy behind the technology, the unintended consequences of the technology, and the intended consequences of the technology. Now, there's a god awful mix up of all these issues. The technology is extremely basic. It's actually the most basic, conceivable computer technology there is. It's very simple, a series of databases. They coalesce. And it's a no brainer in terms of technology. However, behind this technology, there is pernicious intent. The technology was designed with addiction and conditioning in mind. Now, this is not a conspiracy theory. This is based on testimonies provided by the engineers who had originally come up with the platforms, the multiplicity of them, the Google engineers, the Facebook engineers, the Twitter engineers. They had testified in front of Congress. They went public. They repented and confessed and so on and so forth. When these platforms had been designed, they had been designed with two things in mind, to condition and addict people, to constitute virtual or digital drugs, and to encourage base instincts, such as aggression. Because these are very conducive and very good for viewership, monetizing eyeballs. It was an advertising-based model. So the idea was to increase the number of views. To increase the number of views, you need bad things to happen. You need envy. You need aggression. You need ill will. You need conflict. You need fake news. I mean, you need all these. It's inbuilt. It's baked into the platforms. Integral policy philosophy of technology. Now, there's been intended consequences. Of course, people got addicted. People had been conditioned by the platforms. The rise of emotional negativity or negative emotionality, to be more precise. Things like relative positioning, competitiveness, competition, bad type of competition. The rates of suicide among consumers of social media has skyrocketed by an average of 50%. The rate of depression has quintupled five times higher. The rate of anxiety has tripled in a period of 10 years, within 10 years. So among social media users, there's a pandemic of mental illness propagated by the platforms intentionally. It's shocking, but it's intentional. There have been unintended consequences. There have been unintended consequences. These platforms have been leveraged by terrorists. They've been leveraged by state security services. They've been leveraged to disrupt elections. They've been leveraged for hacking. These were unintended consequences. But when it comes to the psychology of users, the abuse of the psychology of users, and the perpetration of a crime against humanity, that's the only way to describe it, these are two billion people. This has been intentional. And it's not a conspiracy theory. I detest conspiracy theories. That's not a conspiracy theory. To add to that, how much of that do you think contributes to the lack of identity and individuality to people today through social media? How much has it possibly stripped away people's individuality? I think there's a double effect here. On the one hand, people escalate behaviors in order to attract attention, to get noticed, to get likes, et cetera, et cetera. So this causes behavior escalation. And by definition, if your behaviors are radicalized, if they become idiosyncratic, if they become unique, by definition, it forms part of your identity. The concept of individual, indivisible, means that you stand apart, you're distinguishable. You're distinguishable. So if your behavior becomes radical and extreme and attention-seeking and so on, by definition, you are more distinguishable. So by definition, you're more of an individual. The more of it is that you are more of an individual only in a highly restricted sense. In other words, not all the areas of your personality flourish and develop and evolve and grow, but a tiny sliver of your personality is emphasized.  So social media is, what it does, it creates substantial imbalances between traits and behaviors in the personality so that you actually do become more of an individual, but a two-dimensional individual, a cartoon figure, an animated cartoon figure rather than a human being. And is it so that because of the attention, right, that they get, it incentivizes the behavior to become more extreme and others see it and then they want a part of the attention. And so there they go following with the same type of, you know, these radical behaviors. Yes, of course, we call it positive reinforcement. There's a positive reinforcement look. The more radical you are, the more inane, the more insane even, the more aggressive, the more conflictive, the less compromising, the more outlandish, the more attention you attract, the more attention you attract, the more of an influencer you become, the more of an authority figure. That started not with YouTube and not with social media, it started with Google. Google's ranking algorithm had placed emphasis on popularity rather than quality. And that was a decade before social media, like the first search results, the number one and two search results were the most popular ones, not the most qualitative ones, not the most authoritative ones, but the most popular ones. So popularity was a gauge, a gauge of dissemination of information and influence long before social media. Social media just incorporated it into the algorithm. But yes, you're absolutely right. We feed on each other and we create these infinite feedback loops which only escalate and radicalize and extremize. God knows where we're gonna end. It creates conditioning, no question. And to kind of go off of that, what we're seeing now was specifically on YouTube. And I've been saying that the new currency, attention is the new currency. It seems to have more value than money now. People will do almost anything for attention, views, likes, which again, as you said, that it was intentionally set up that way for people to seek that. Now you're getting a plethora of individuals that are coming out in different communities that are pseudo experts with stuff. And you just see, it's just everywhere now. Is that all intertwined within that where you have all of these individuals now that see one individual doing something and it's like, oh, here they come. How does that play? How have you seen that play out over the years throughout social media and the stuff that, including online dating and stuff? There's a fallacy, a natural fallacy. If you see many people running one way, you're gonna join. You're gonna join. You don't know what they're running to, what they're running from, why they're running. She's gonna join the crowd. So people confuse the number of likes, the number of views, the number of subscribers with authority. They interpret it as authority. So they exchange quantity for quality. They conflate quantity with quality. They say, well, if she has a million followers or if he has 300,000 subscribers, he must know what he's talking about. 300,000 people can't be wrong. A million people can't be wrong. There's something there. There's a kernel of gold, the morsel of truth. And we gotta pursue this, not to miss the opportunity. So social media leverage fallacies. They are fallacy engines. They are constructed on fallacies that propagate and perpetuate fallacies. And one of the fallacies I'd mentioned is this, confusion, conflating the quantity with quality. But there are many other fallacies that are perpetuated through social media. Social media is constructed on our cognitive deficits. It is intended to divorce us from reality. And above all, it is intended to divorce us from sane voices, from other people who might balance us. They want us to get enmeshed in infinite feedback loops which push us in one direction. Think about it. Intimacy is the worst enemy of social media. Worse, because if you're paying attention to your wife, if you're paying attention to your girlfriend, if you're paying attention to your child, these are a few minutes taken away from Mark Zuckerberg. These are a few minutes taken away from his bottom line because these were a few minutes he could have clicked on three ads and he could have made a dollar 50. You're paying attention to your closed ones, to your nearest, to your loved ones, to your dearest. This is taking away money from social media. They don't want you to do this. They want you to be atomized and isolated.  They're gonna feed you confirmation bias. They're gonna push you with like-minded people. They're gonna encourage herd mentality, not herd immunity, herd mentality. They're gonna encourage what used to be called the madness of the mobs or the madness of the crowds. Because it pays. It pays. And so their first task of social media is to separate you from society, from reality, and from your loved ones. That is the first overriding task of social media.  Okay, every sense stuff came out, right? With social media and all this, even you talk to any family law practice and attorney, the divorce rates have been skyrocketing. And now no one wants to really get married anymore because they're anticipating the inevitable of what's going on. People get married only a year, it's over with, right? It's done. And most of the cases, it's from someone, some infidelity or something through social media. They're hooking up with somebody. It's so accessible to now create different connections with total strangers and then build from there. And it's the accessibility to be able to do that. It's so much more now than what it was, say, 20 years ago. And that's another thing I would say. I want your opinion on it, how much it's played into the decline where marriage and stuff has been more so. It's outdated now, almost in a sense. Well, social media and technology more generally, they fed into existing trends, social trends. What they did, you're right, they catalyzed them. They sped up the interactions. So where in the past, you had to work very hard to find 10 strangers to interact with today, a thousand strangers or nothing, the push of a button. Where in the past, in order to date, you had to go through a series of processes and steps and so on and so forth and you still ended up dating. But today, today, all you have to do is swipe left or swipe right or whatever. So it's a catalyst. It's not a cause, it's not the prime cause. It didn't cause anything, but it catalyzed to the point that quantity became quality and speed became quality. So that if you can do things much faster, you do them more often. And if you do them more often, the damage is compounded, the damage to social fabric, damage to social institutions, damage to hope and to anticipation. Today, young people, for example, fully expects relationships to fail. Less, fewer than 6% of young people try to attempt to have a relationship. 81% of young people, and I say under the age of 25, 81% of young people, the exclusive sexual modality is hookups. They have never had any other sexual experience with an intimate partner. One light stands, that's it, nothing else. That's 81%, men and women. So the situation is such that the ability of technology to fast forward, to speed, to accelerate, had been translated into qualitative changes in institutions, in sexual scripts, in behaviors, both romantic, sexual and intimate, in workplace relationships, in everything, politics, in everything. You can't blame technology for just emphasizing existing social trends, but you can blame technology for not building in safeguards, because it would have been extremely easy to build in safeguards, extremely easy, but not profitable. For example, I'll give you two examples of safeguards. One, limit the number of hours you can be on social media. Have a clock. Have a clock. After two hours, that's it, that's your allocation, end of story. Number two, you cannot have as friends, people you don't know. You can have as friends only people who know you and supply a written attestation that they know you. So then you have real friends on Facebook and you spend two hours on Facebook. These would have been massive safeguards against conditioning, against adultery, against cheating, against addiction. Only these two steps that I've just mentioned would have solved 90% of the problems we're discussing. But of course it would have cut down the profit of Facebook by 90% and Facebook shareholders and Mark Zuckerberg wouldn't have it. It's all about money and the health with humanity. So we are living in a death cult. Western civilization had become a death cult where we sacrifice human values, human institutions, long-held traditions and human bodies, human beings for the sake of money. Look what's happening with vaccination. We don't abrogate vaccine patents because pharmaceutical industries would make instead of $16 billion that Pfizer made, Pfizer would have made $6 billion. And that's not enough, $6 billion. They want to make $60 billion. So the health with the dying Indians, 4,000 of them a day, and the equity. So we sacrifice human beings and everything human to the monoc of material goods and money and that's a death cult because material goods are dead. It's a thematic society. It's a society built on the death instinct, not on the life instinct. And the greed seems, the greed of societies now seems to be more, it's more overwhelming. More people are into what they can get and instantly and never mind the consequences. And you know where I'm going with that, that seems to be kind of along the lines of the cluster B typical narcissists. They don't care, they want, they see this money and by any means necessary, if they can get it, they're gonna do it. Even if it means people have to die, even if it means that you're corrupt in minds, they're gonna go for it. It's not only money. You see a sexual partner in a bar. You gotta go for it. You gotta consume him. We consume, we consume money. We consume material goods. We consume other people. We consume them and spit them out. We don't bother to be long-term relationships.  I mean, we are consumers. We're simply, the main mode of interaction in modern Western civilization had become consumption. And the second mode of interaction is simulation. So we either consume or we simulate. When we consume, we consume everything. We consume other people, we consume money, we consume our time. But then when we simulate, we simulate things that we used to have. So we simulate traditions. We simulate emotions. We simulate relationships. We simulate political activism. We simulate gender relationships. Everything our fathers and forefathers used to have took it for granted. Today we have to put an effort into. We simulate it. It's not really even, it's fake. But we're trying. We're trying to fake it. We fake it, hope to make it. We will never make it. We'll never make it.  They wonder about why is it so bad in the dating field now? You know, where most people, people are busy now. So yes, they're gonna go to social media.  And I say that it's a trap that some of the most bio people are on there. I'm not saying all, but a high proportionate amount of individuals, these are where the sexual predators are. And the psychopaths, sociopaths, all these types of individuals prey on individuals that are on there. And it's a practice ground for them. They get tons and tons of practice. Not just people in their local area, but all over now. So now people are saying, well, how do I date? How do I get to, in a social media driven world, how do I properly vet someone who I may have to go through that channel or that route in order to meet someone? Because it seems like everyone's getting burnt, but going out and having the belief that they can somehow even change someone on there. And this is my opinion. Most of these individuals are like you said, they're consuming. You're like food and they see you and they come on there. So whatever you say to people who are still having, the belief or some people are addicted to going on these social media platforms to get to find dating. That's the only way they know how to find a date. What do you say about that? It's a problem because all alternative institutions have crumbled. You used to find a date because your friends had introduced dates to you, but we don't have friends anymore. You used to find dates because your auntie, your auntie knew someone's auntie who knew someone might not know, so you got through family channels. We don't have family anymore. You used to find dates because you lived in a village or in a town or in a city even, or in a neighborhood where everyone knew each other. And they knew singles and they introduced singles to each other. We don't have neighborhoods anymore. We don't have communities anymore. We hardly have nation states, even they're crumbling, you know? We don't have alternative channels. We don't have alternatives. It's not only dating, I'm mentioning dating, it's not only dating, it's everything. You don't have alternatives for empathy and support and support, so people go to therapies.  Psychotherapy is a major, major indicator of a breakdown of society that you need to pay for someone to listen to you.   That you need to go online among millions of sexual predators, you're absolutely right, and pray to God that you will find someone who is not. That's an indicator of sickness, that people refuse to have relationships. There are studies by Lisa Wade as to what's happening. People think that people are afraid to tell each other that they're looking for a relationship because it's not cool. It's not cool. They fake casualness.  That's four-fifths, that's four-fifths. Why? Because the experience is horrible. It's disgusting, less than 10% experience orgasm.   Never mind what anyone tells you. And so people have to numb themselves. They have to get themselves unconscious to do this. And then it also signals to the other party, don't worry, I'm drunk, I don't know what I'm doing. It's I'm not threatening you with an intimacy. I'm not threatening you with a relationship. Don't worry, it's just sex. It's meaningless, it's emotionless, you know? We have come to a point where the disintegration of social institutions means that we have to act.  And so, yeah. Where do you possibly see? Because it looks grim. If it keeps going this way, it's only gonna get worse. Where do you possibly, just from a forecast or a guess, a guesstimation of where this may end up leading 10, 20 years up the road, if it's already trending in this pattern, what are we in, what are we in stake for? There are two possibilities, of course. One, the backlash.  Possibility number one, we are seeing maybe hints of that in some forms of social activism, environmentalism, black lives matter, et cetera, et cetera. That's one possibility. But I'm not very optimistic because these movements are hijacked by narcissists and psychopaths. The minute they acquire a critical mass, narcissists and psychopaths infiltrate these movements and take over. That's not me. These are studies, recent studies that have demonstrated the preponderance and prevalence of narcissists and psychopaths in these movement explodes exponentially once these movements become a critical force. So I'm not very optimistic. I think these movements are gonna be hijacked and compromised by psychopaths and narcissists as politics has been. Politics used to be a social movement, you know? The 60s, for example, used to be a social movement. But look who we ended up with. We ended up with Nixon and Donald Trump. I mean, psychopaths and narcissists. So I'm not optimistic, I'm not optimistic about the chances of a backlash. The other option is, so I said two options. So the other option is that we can extrapolate this trend line and we can say at the very, very, very end, we're gonna become 100% self-sufficient. We're gonna avoid other people altogether. So we're gonna have Japanese sex dolls. We're gonna have virtual psychotherapists. We're gonna have Zoom bars. Everyone will go to a bar and Zoom. Already you have Zoom orgies. I'm kidding you're not. I mean, we're gonna have a full-fledged life online. And already companies like Google and Facebook and Twitter, they say, wow, the pandemic has been a blessing. We're gonna abolish our offices, our physical offices, and everyone's gonna work from home. So the last vestige of socializing, which was the workplace, it was the last place you socialized with people. This place is gonna be abolished and eliminated soon.  You're gonna have a work life from home. You're gonna date from home.  And what is pornography? Pornography is outsourced sex. It's having sex at home. Rather than going out to someone, you bring someone to you visually at least. Shortly pornography will be via holograms. So you'll be able to project the characters into your living room. Into your living room. Then there will be a technology which will allow you to touch them. And that'll be the end of it. And we're gonna have virtual sex. And sex is only one thing. You work from home.  Everything will be delivered to you and taken from you. You have already Uber Eats and Amazon and you name it. We are constructing knowingly. Knowingly, we are constructing a society based on alienating, isolating, atomizing, self-sufficient, self-contained technologies. We're all becoming unabombers. Simple. Yeah, I was gonna say, that's not a good thing to... It makes people that don't get enough social interaction become socially awkward. And he's just worse. And worse. Anti-social, anti-social. Right. And that's what we're seeing today. We're seeing, look at the mass shootings that are going on. They're starting to happen every week now down there, you know, here in the state. I mean, they're happening way more frequently. I think in France it was a stabbin' or something like that in Europe or something. They're starting to happen with more frequency. Allow me to correct you. Not every week, every day. You have 400 and something school shootings a year. Wow. Wow. Every day was 1.4. And that's just, you know, especially with the pandemic that had people locked down. And when you mentioned porn, I think that the porn site, the Top Ones, it was so much, it broke their bandwidth. It broke their bandwidth. I mean, so that people are finding different vices, you know, and it's a cope. These are coping mechanisms. People gave up on each other. Men gave up on women. You have migtails, red pillows, insoles. I mean, men gave up on women. Women gave up on men, longer. I mean, the heck with it. The genders gave up on each other. Then people gave up on each other as friends and so on. People don't get along with each other. They have no patience. They don't, they're intolerant. They, there's a lot of aggression much more than ever before, if you ask me. It's sublimated aggression. It's not open or vert, but it's passive aggressive.  The social experiment of humanity which had lasted only 10,000 years. The social experiment is 10,000 years. The concept of society is very new. It's about 150 years old. The first city, the first city was established 10,000 years ago, Jericho. And probably 7,000 years ago was the first real city. So the city is a very new concept, seemingly new concept. The agricultural revolution started 5,000 years ago. And it was the first time that people had to collaborate on a structured way year long. Hunter-gatherers, they were like Advok combinations of people hunting a mammoth or a deer, I don't know what, and then disassembling. So the social phase of humanity had lasted in the best case, 5,000 to 7,000 years, which is nothing, nothing in terms of the existence of the species. And I think we had failed. I think the social experiment had failed. We are perhaps constitutionally not built to be with each other. We are built to collaborate on short-term goals or even long-term goals. But we are not built to cohabit. We are not built to be together. We are not, we don't have, we don't have the emotional equipment, the cognitive equipment, and we definitely have the wrong instincts and reflexes as social media is demonstrating. Given the opportunity and so on, people will do amazing antisocial and psychopathic things. I mean, we have studies, for example, that men, given the opportunity, would sleep with women, even if they are unconscious, drug and drunk, mentally, even evidently mentally ill, sick, and that's a majority of men in studies. We have other studies that show that given the opportunity to steal money from your fellow students, nine out of 10 students would steal money. These are the done and rarely studied. We have other studies that show that one way or another, we lie about 90% of the time, one way or another, not overtly, not directly, but you know, small lies, white lies, fudging, you know. So these are all psychopathic things. These are all antisocial things. But the vast majority of people do them all the time. So 60% of men cheat, commit adultery. Officially, 30, 40% of women, I believe the number is equal to men, at least. So it's not working. We tried, we tried with religion. We tried with constitutions. We tried with enlightenment and science. We tried in a variety of ways. It's not working. We are not built to work, to be together. We are built for ad hoc collaborations on specific projects, sending a man to the moon, inventing a vaccine, but nothing beyond that. Anything beyond this, which is emotional, romantic and so on is bound to fail. So you have people, Sam, that would say, but why?  And if they're, you know, just, if they do it under the auspices of religion, that marriage, you know, will be better. It'll work better than someone opposite of that, who's just together. But from what I gather from what you're saying, the human nature trumps both of those, you know, scenario. Human nature is gonna prevail with the trending pattern of how it is, and neither one of them will work out in the end. Well, first of all, it's not working. It's not speculation, it's not working. The rate of difference is very high. By the way, it's high among religious couples as well. It's lower, lower than among non-religious couples, but it's still very high. So the thing is, the thing is this, we are a social animal in the sense that we do collaborate to take goals. But when you look at other social animals, for example, elephants or dolphins or other social penguins, other social animals, they live in relatively small groups. A typical herd of elephants would never exceed 20 or 30 members. I mean, the groups are small. And when we don't, we live in groups of 20 million or 30 million in a typical city in the world, you know, 20, 30 million. That raises a serious problem. There's been a series of experiments with rats and mice. What happens when you put too many mice or too many rats in an enclosure?   Fertility collapses. Females become super promiscuous and slip around with all the other mice and all the other rats, where actually rats are monogamous. So the rat utopia or mice utopia experiments, which were conducted in 60s and 70s and so on, they showed us the basic fallacy in assuming that we can cram together many people and still retain their social instincts and humanity. It's not working, it's not working. We are too many, we are too, our habitation is too dense. We had failed to create institutions that can cope with masses of people. We, our institutions were, remember that all our institutions, including marriage, they were constructed, they were designed when our number was 100 million worldwide. We are now 80 times this number. We are now eight billion people. These institutions were not built to support such a weight. Right. Also remember that when we had constructed these institutions, our life expectancy was 35 years. We now live to be 90. What monogamy can survive this? What marriage can survive this? What institution can survive this? Also remember that the pace of technology is now thousands of times faster than it had been in the 60s by many measures. So the change is normal because our entire environment is technological. We no longer live in the jungle, we no longer live in the woods or the forest, we live in a techno forest, in a techno wood. So if the wood changes, imagine a wood that the trees change location every few seconds. Would you survive in such a wood? It's a problem. And the fourth element is inflation. Throughout human history until about 100 years ago, prices were stable. The price of bread in 1600 was the same as the price of bread in 1700 and not much different than the price of bread in 1800. That's a crucial point as people could plan ahead. There was predictability. Prices reflect supply, demand, economic activity and so on. Inflation is a pathology. It reflects an inherent pathology in the way our economies are constructed because our economies are constructed on the premise of infinite growth, growth all the time.   And of course, if you grow all the time, you can't maintain social institutions because social institutions are based on stability and growth is based on change. These are conflicting values. You have to choose. Do you want growth or do you want stability? Do you want change or do you want predictability? And we had chosen growth. We had chosen change. We had chosen predictability and instability. So no institution can survive this. Nothing, not marriage, not community, not nation state. Nothing can survive this. And to further emphasize on what you're saying, we're witnessing inflation now. And inflation is very... We're seeing inflation right now, big time. Rearing it, so I'll bring that again. Inflation is a pathology. And of course, COVID had pathologized the economy in massive ways. And people were saying, oh, there'll be no inflation. And I knew there's gonna be inflation because inflation is like fever. It's when the body is sick, you have inflation. It's the economic body is sick and it's gonna be inflation regardless of demand or supply or it's gonna be inflation because of uncertainty creates uncertainty. People don't know and say, okay, I don't know. I don't know what to charge for my product. Let me charge more. Let me charge more. So everyone is charging more. Everyone is charging more, you have inflation. It reflects unpredictability and uncertainty, not supply and demand. So all these together, when you put all these forces together which are millennial forces, which culminated now, it's destroyed. When I say institutions, I'm not talking only about marriage. I'm talking about what is it to be a man? What is it to be a woman? Gender, gender roles. These are institutions as well, they're cultural. So they were destroyed as well. So now men don't know how to be men. Women don't know how to be women. Women are imitating, emulating psychopathic men. Women are more men than men now. We have unigender, we have one gender, half of it with vaginas and half of it with businesses. That's the world today. Is that kind of why we see a growth in the whole red pill community and there's people like Kevin Samuels that's out now and a lot of these other groups of men who have broken away and haven't going to where these talking points are made, which I think some of it's kind of toxic in a way to be following these different, there's red pill, there's so many pills, there's red blue pills and it's just, I don't know where they're coming up with this stuff.  It's from The Matrix, the movie The Matrix. Okay, you know, it's all these pills now and all these pills have a different mindset of what... What do you think about that? Because I think some of it can get kind of on the lines of, you know, too extreme. I blame the radical or militant variants of feminism. Feminism started off as a social justice movement, a very justified social justice movement. They're right. Women were enslaved, women were discriminated against, wasn't right, wasn't okay. So they start, proto-feminists, the feminists of the 19th century and well into 1940, let's say the 1950, these feminists demanded equality. If you do an equal job, you get an equal pay. You have the right to vote as a woman. We have the right to access to education. You have the right to medical degree, to medical degree. You have the right to be quoted if... So they're right. These were laudable votes and so on. But then they went haywire. They went haywire because they were hijacked by narcissistic women and possibly psychopathic women. They went haywire and they... The message became everything masculine is bad. All institutions constructed by men are intended to enslave women. Men are evil, men are evil. Men are slaveholders. You're living in a plantation called marriage.  And this was the first message. And the second message is, the only way for you to prevail in a men's world is to become men. You also should become men. Not only should you become men, but you should become macho men. You should become psychopathic men. You should beat men at their own game by being more men than they are men. You should outman them, you know? And so many, many women, especially after World War II, where women were forced to become men, they were forced to work in factories, they were forced because the men were away. Mine, the breadwinner. So these women, they didn't want to go back to the traditional roles. They were amenable to the message of radical militant, sick, poisonous, toxic feminism. And so they adopted these two messages. We're going to dispense with men because men are evil and we're slaves. And we're going to become men. And we're going to become hyper men, super men. We're going to become psychopathic men. And these women had daughters. And these daughters propagated the message to their daughters. And today, the dominant strand in feminism and in the feminine mindset, the dominant strand is not only are we equal to men, in many respects, we're superior to men. We're going to destroy everything that men had built because they had built it to enslave us. And we're going to be more men than men. We're going to curse more. We're going to drink more. We're going to F more. We're going to do everything more. And they used to have one-night stands. We're going to have one-night stands. They curse, we're going to curse. They drink, we're going to out-drink them. I mean, we're going to be more men than men. And of course, where does this leave men? Men had mistreated women for millennia. And they should repent for this. And they should atone for this. And they should restructure society to incorporate and include women, I'm not saying otherwise. But where does it leave men? It leaves men without women. There are no women left. There's simply no women left.  I challenge you to find a woman. There are many people there with vaginas, but I challenge you to find a woman. None is left, not one is left. They're all taking men. The psychology of the natural woman has now been transformed into, they have the bodies of a woman, but the psychology of a man. They're masculine. By the way, it has a clinical name, just for you to know.  This has been studied and there is a discipline and there is a name, a clinical name for this. It's called the Stold Revolution, S-T-A-L-L-E-D, the Stold Revolution. We have discovered in a series of studies, we had discovered that women now define themselves as men. In other words, when we gave them a list of adjectives, they chose only masculine adjectives and not feminine ones. And we are talking about tens of thousands of women in 21 countries. So these are giant studies. And we discovered that most women in most countries now identify as men. They choose masculine adjectives, adjectives to describe themselves. And they resent and reject and abhor any feminine adjective. So there is a process of masculinization of women. And of course, many men say there's a process of effeminate men, a process of feminization of men. That is not true. That is not supported by research. That is not, but you are right. There is, and I mentioned it before, men are withdrawing.   Not because they gave up traditional gender roles. It's not that they gave up traditional gender roles. It's that they didn't come with anything instead.  We don't want to be like our grandmothers. Okay, fair enough. What do you want to be like? And women didn't come with an answer. They didn't come with an answer. They got rid of the old gender roles. But their answer was to adopt a psychopathic men role. So they became psychopathic men. And it's a disaster. So disaster. I'll say this too, Sam, because you mentioned that they were hijacked by narcissists and psychopaths. It seems that narcissists and psychopaths are now hijacking many different aspects of society and how they went, and they seem to be, they're more aggressive now in their approach. So it's a problem. They're a problem. Right, right. It's glorified, it's glorified. Yeah. And they even in, within the Black Lives Matter movement, they were in there. They get into everything and they twist it, even though we can speak on the online dating, it was intended to be something, something for where people good, kind of meet someone good, but they get in on everything. They get in on the YouTube commit in the YouTube communities. And this community too, as well, they come in and then no one sees it. Like no one recognizes it, even with the feminist movement and stuff like that. How are they so able to infiltrate and disguise and lure people? We know that they have, charismatic characters and stuff, but how are they able to get in so well and there's no opposition? There's no pushback from their radical agendas? People want to believe in good. People want to believe that other people are good. This, by the way, also has a clinical name. It is called the base rate fallacy. We discovered in psychological studies that people overwhelmingly believe that other people are good and overwhelmingly believe everything they're told. People believe 95% of what they are told without checking it, sight unseen. Like if someone tells me, it's right, probably right. That's the foundation of fake news. So people want to believe that other people are good. So if I come to you and I say, look, I'm so empathic, my, your pain touches me. I love you. I want to help you. Let me help you. I mean, you'll believe me. 95% of the time you'll believe me because you want to believe that I'm a good person who is really empathic and trying to help you. No, what's a big deal? That's psychopathy 101. That's psychopathy 101. The psychopath tells you what you want to hear. The psychopath pushes all your buttons. You want an empathic person, he's empathic. You want modesty, he's modest.  You want an altruistic charitable guy. He's altruistic and charitable. Whatever you want him to be, it would be. They shape shift. They don't have any core. They have an empty schizoate core. There's nothing there, there's nobody there. They shape shift.  They are blank screens. You see yourself. You fall in love with yourself. You get addicted to yourself. You're trauma-bound with yourself, not with them because there's not them. There's nobody there. They are a mirror.  Now it's much easier to break up with someone else but it's very difficult to break up with yourself. Fall in love with yourself. This love is forever, is addictive. You can never extricate yourself. And so when there's a psychopath or a narcissist who comes online and pretends to be a self-help guru, a public intellectual with a solution to life's problems, a mystic, an Indian mystic. Many of them, by the way, have criminal records and I mean, don't ask them. Their message is consistent. I am love. I am empathy. I'm here to help. I'm here to share my experience. I'm here to, you know, and people buy into it because they buy into anything. They're gullible. Gullibility has been documented in psychological studies to an amazing extent. People are gullible to an amazing extent beyond expectations. Right, so basically, and speaking of the Indian guru, I talk about the spiritual narcissists, the one that they start off basic and as they get more empowered, they end up being God himself almost at the end, you know, and people never challenge it. It's like, first he was normal, now he's the one that knoweth all. Even his name changes at the end and people don't even pick up on it. You know, they don't even pick up on, wait, wait a minute, he's just, he advanced itself to a superior position of power and no one questions it. There are two things here. You need hope. You need to believe. What is there to believe nowadays?  There's nobody there anymore. What is there and who is there to believe? These people online, these faces online, they are your new family, they are your new friends, they are your new affiliation, they are your new reference group. They are, so it's a cult, it's a cult dynamic. And the second thing is, so this is the first reason that people fall for it and the second is that the more exaggerated your claims, the easier they are to believe. We discovered in psychological studies that if you make outlandish claims explosively and you insist on these claims and you're very aggressively invested in these claims, the more, the more exercised you are, the more believable you are. So no matter how outlandish it is. No, no matter how outlandish it is. The only parameter that we discovered that affects believability or credibility is intensity, emotional intensity. The content was irrelevant. We did not discover in any of the studies of gallability, we did not discover that content had any impact on how much you believe the person. Only his emotional intensity, that had an impact. So these people are good actors. They're good actors, they cry on camera, they hug other people on camera or they are very, very passionate and all over the place. So they're intense people, they're all intense people. And that of course, that of course- I noticed that too, Sam, like when I started focusing more on a healing aspect and having people be more accountable, I started being less likable on there when I started saying like, you gotta get it together. They drift off to people who will buy into, or basically patronize and placate to what they wanna hear. Oh no, you are this and it's like, you can see it unraveling, like I can see it, but it's like, if you're trying to say, look, okay, you went through something, but it's time to move on. They don't wanna hear that. And so that's why it's big business for these individuals. Yes, you touch upon two very important points. The first important point, the status of victimhood is very gratifying and lifelong. Victim mentality and victim position, position of a victim is very gratifying because you're the angel and there's a demon. It's a morality play, like medieval morality play, where you are the embodiment of everything, splitting, it's a splitting defense, where you are the embodiment of everything that's good and your adversary, your abuser, for example, is the embodiment of everything that's evil. It exempts you from personal responsibility, accountability, the need for soul searching and the need for change. So it's the lazy position. I don't have to change, I'm perfect, I'm angelic. I didn't do anything, I didn't do anything. I was just there, it was an accident. And so when you demand responsibility and accountability from people, when you ask them to investigate their contribution to the situation and how they might avoid this in the future and so on, you are demanding from them to acknowledge that they had been partied to what had happened. In other words, there were not 100% victims and you are demanding them to work, to invest work. The two things people hate most, they hate to admit that they're responsible for anything or guilty because they interpret responsibility as guilt, and they hate to work. People are lazy, they hate to work. Now all these self-styled gurus and experts and so on, they perpetuate the victimhood stance because it makes them a lot of money. I watch lectures, no names mentioned, but I watch lectures by these self-styled experts, which by the way, vast majority of them have no idea what is narcissism and so on. And I watch lectures by these people. One trick pony, they have a one trick and only one.   So many victims are actually grandiose or even I would say covert narcissists. I said the same thing. And their victimhood is their grandiosity. They are grandiose via victimhood. They are the perfect victim. Narcissism is about being perfect. So they're the perfect victim. And there are competitions between these so-called empaths, and I don't know other nonsense, there are competitions between these people. Who is more victim than the other? Who's abuser was more horrible than the other or more monstrous? And which one of them is the most righteous and most morally upright and compare tortures? I was tortured more than you. No, I was tortured more than you. My abuser was unique. No, my abuser was unique. I mean, it's totally, it's a madhouse and it's totally insane. And there's the names that come with them. What is an ordained impact? I, well, what is this an ordained impact? Now, what is that? You can be an ordained impact. There's no such thing as an impact. Empath is one of the nonsensical labels. And I am just shocked that academics, I'm an academic, I'm a professor of psychology, and so I'm shocked that my colleagues saw the money and forgot their academic degrees, forgot their integrity and climbed on the bandwagon.  So now they're talking about empaths and they're distinguishing types of empaths and so on. And now they're talking about, and they're propagating me, myths and nonsense about narcissism and so on, because it pays. They've been corrupted by money. Professors, doctors, totally corrupted by money, totally.  You made an important point. There is a lot of pay also as well to anyone who sensationalizes victimhood. There's this big money in that. If you're gonna play up on it, yeah. Sensationalizes and perpetuates, because if you perpetuate, you make more money. I mean, if someone is a victim for five years, you can milk them for five years. They're marks, the victims are marks. These are pseudo-psychopathic people, even those with academic degrees. They're pseudo-psychopathics, not fully psychopathic. I mean, they're co-artists. No other word. I mean, I've been in the field I mean, I've watched lectures by so-called doctors and professors and so on. Co-artists have no idea what is narcissism. In one of these cases, one of them we can contrast in writing. I have a letter from him saying, I have no idea what is narcissism, but there's a lot of money there. I'm gonna declare myself an expert on narcissism. One of them was famously. And that's, and not painting myself in any way, it's the good guy, but as I healed, I started trying to take people to the healing where I was. And I started to introduce more laughter and it kind of got off. I wasn't talking the language of victimhood anymore. And that's when the breaking away started. Like the breaking away, like I don't want nothing to do with him anymore. He's talking this funny laughter stuff and giving people humor. I don't want that. I want to hear how much I was heard and all this stuff in grade A supply. What do you say about that too? Cause that's being blown on a proportion where people are selling the grade A supply as a way to say that the narcissist will always want you. They'll never get over you specifically.  They can't find another grade A supply. Isn't that to even, to give people a false sense of hope and to, you know, they're overemphasizing that person's importance. Like there's no other person on left for grade A supply. There's no foundation for this. Narcissists are promiscuous in the sense that they are indiscriminate. If you can provide them with supply, you're the next intimate partner. Intimate partners are commoditized, commodified, interchangeable, faceless, impersonal. That's why it's very easy for the narcissist to jump from one intimate partner to another. Sometimes within a matter of days. Because you're meaningless. As an intimate partner of the narcissist, you're utterly meaningless.  And if you provide supply and services and sex, you're good to go. If you don't, he dumps you, he discards you, he moves on to the next intimate partner. He forgets your name. There's no grade A and no grade B. There's only supply or no supply. Two states, binary machine. Yes, supply you're in, no supply you're out. Someone else is in. Someone else is in who is as good as you or as bad as you. And that someone else will be discarded. Prepare to immobilize. You don't have any privileged position. Never have, never will. Not emotionally, not otherwise, because narcissists have no access to positive emotions. They don't regard you as a human being, but as a device. It's like saying that my iPhone is grade A supply. It's not grade A supply. It's my iPhone. Next version comes. I'll dump this iPhone or buy the next iPhone and I will never give a second thought to my previous iPhone. Right. I hear it so much, Sam. I hear it going around so much and individuals emphasizing and telling people that which is misleading. Because if you're putting yourself in a position to say that you are a life coach and the expertise and the expert in this subject, there's no way you should be passing this out. But again, as he said, victimhood, playing into the victimhood, it makes money. People want to come back. They want to hear and be told how wonderful they are. And that's what, and you touched upon something very important that a lot of these so-called victims are actually on a verge of being narcissists themselves or some are outright narcissists themselves. And not everyone is a victim of another narcissist. They may have been a victim of another narcissist, but they are narcissists. Covert narcissists. Two narcissists and one that lost, one got the bad, the worst end of the stick. Yes, they were out narcissized. Let's put it this way. Right, right. But yeah, for example, there are many myths. Many myths. So one of the myths is that narcissists are attracted to co-dependence. Narcissists are attracted to empathic people or narcissists are attracted to accomplished strong people or whatever. Narcissists are attracted to anyone who will provide them with narcissistic supply. End of story. You could be co-dependent. You could be a grandmother. You could be a dog on three legs. I mean, if you provide supply, narcissists will be attracted to you as an intimate partner.     Narcissists are not attracted to a specific type of refrigerators. And they're not attracted to a specific type of human beings. They don't see you as a human being. You're not a human being.  You provide functions. As long as you provide them, you're good to go and you're transparent because our devices are transparent to us. When you open the television, when you switch on the television, you don't go into the internal workings of the television. You just want to see a picture. That's all you want to have sound. Picture and sound, that's all. You don't really care what Samsung puts in or what Apple puts in or what. It's just a picture and sound. Give me a break. That's what the narcissist wants. He wants supply. He wants sex. He wants services. He doesn't care what's your internal workings. Are you a co-dependent? Are you traumatized? Like, who cares? Who is, you know, he doesn't care. And that's where I was wrong at in my infancy of coming into the knowledge. I was thinking, well, there's these grades. But once I learned, and that's where I had to correct myself and put that out there, I learned that because I keep studying this. I don't just listen to people and I keep studying and researching them. Oh, okay, I was wrong on that. I have to correct my position on that, stand corrected. And I agree 100% wholeheartedly. It's not, you're not in a special place. You're not in a special place because the narcissist got with you, you did all this stuff. It's you that think that. The narcissist doesn't. You were just giving them supply. You just was giving them a certain amount of supply that they liked. Some people gave it better than the others. But if they're without, who's up next? I'll tell you a story. I was in a seminar. I went to a seminar with Richard Granum, who by the way has taken flak for the very same reason. Richard tried to transition to stop being a victim, stop watching narcissism videos, stop working on your life, start looking at your contribution and so on. We no longer work together. But at the time he organized the seminar and I was a guest in the seminar. So I went on stage and I said, what bothers you most is that the narcissists hadn't seen how special you are. Had regarded you as a commodity, interchangeable, dispensable, replaceable, substitutable, and you can't stand this. It's destroyed.  It's, this is what bothers the victim most. That they actually never existed in the mind of the narcissist. That it wasn't a big love affair that went awry. That they were used. Used as instruments, tools, devices, switched on and switched off at the blink of an eye, unhesitatingly and unthinkingly. Never occupied any internal space in the narcissist mind, except maybe as an internal object, an introject. They can't fathom that. They need to feel special. They need to feel that they had a special place in the narcissist's life, history, memory, and identity. Many of them even bragged that they had changed the narcissist, shaped the narcissist, affected the narcissist, or took revenge on the narcissist, destroyed the narcissist. They had done none of these things. The narcissist is implacable, untouchable. That kills people. That the narcissist, this monster, this abuser, actually never pays a price. He never pays a price. He's incapable of mourning, of grieving, of heartbreak. He never pays an emotional price for anything he does. The only way to touch the core of a narcissist and to affect him is a process called narcissistic modification.  So when you do this, there's a process called modification which destroys his defenses and then he's very vulnerable. But that's the only case. Otherwise, he's impervious and indifferent to all your shenanigans. I mean, who cares? You're stopping a good supplier. You're out. Next, please. There's a queue waiting. And that's so profound, Sam, that you say that because I see that is why a lot of people stay in victimhood and don't wanna move on because to face that means you have to, you have to stop crying over spilled milk. You have to leave all this alone and you have to go about accepting a loss.   Self-deception, you deceived yourself. You agreed to participate in the narcissist shared fantasy. So you suspended reality.  And then you said to yourself, okay, I'm gonna become a part of this theater production. I'm gonna be an actor. I'm gonna be a figment of his imagination, but he's gonna value me for that. He's gonna appreciate me. He's gonna be grateful. And then you discover it, there's not even that. There are no wages, no wages for this participation in the fantasy.    For nothing. And it was all done by you. You self-deceived. You brought yourself to this place. People can't accept this. They just can't accept this, it's too much for them. Absolutely. And I'll say to conclude here, Sam, because you've been a blessing on him. I'm sure people are gonna definitely love the array of knowledge that you threw out on here, as usual as you've always been doing. But to conclude, advice to people, especially those who are dealing with the hardships that have happened to accept this and especially deal with social media and how all this stuff is now. What would be your advice, just a way to move forward and understand the world that we live in, what it is and to have more of an acceptance or a reality reference point to how to move at least with their lives? Put all your efforts, all your energy into re-establishing meaningful long-term or at least regular and repetitive connections with living, breathing, sweating human beings. What you have online, these are not human beings. These are avatars, these are representations. They are manipulated by real human beings, but they're not real. Go back to reality and you go back to reality by saying good morning to your neighbor, by walking to the grocery store and chatting for a minute or two with a grocer, by climbing a bus and sitting next to someone and saying, howdy, reconnect to the fabric, defy, defy the symbolic and the abstract and the virtual and the digital and the imaginary, defy all this, defy the fantasy, reconnect with reality. And as you interact with other flesh and blood people, you will suddenly feel flesh and blood again. As right now, none of us feels real. We all feel depersonalized and derealized as though we are not inhabiting any reality and as though we don't exist. Partly, we experience partial existence. We suspect that we may not actually exist. Maybe we are a figment in someone's imagination. It's very unhealthy. When you connect with other people, they're gays.  Suddenly you exist again. Start small, start small. Put a target of five interactions a day. Each one, two sentences.  Two sentences. Good morning, I love you though. That's all, walk on, move on. Interact with people. Gradually you will discover the intoxicating effect of interacting with flesh and blood people. They will, this effect dwarfs anything social media can offer you. Anything online can offer you. That's one piece of advice. And second piece of advice, trust judiciously. Don't be paranoid. Don't be a conspiracy theories. Don't distrust as a matter of policy. Trust is a matter of policy. But trust judiciously. Learn how to trust and who to trust and never trust anyone about everything. Allocate trust. You can trust some people for some things, but not for others. Distribute your trust. Create a distributed network of trust so that you always have a solution for a trust issue with a specific individual. Create a trust network around you. And then once you have this safety net of trust which you can rely on, then you can venture out safely. You venture out, you take a bit more risk, you seek novelty. You can connect with strangers and make them not strangers in due time. Try to avoid casualness. Avoid casual sex. Avoid anything casual. Take your life seriously. Invest in it. Consider it a business proposition. You wouldn't take your business casually or you wouldn't have a business.  Ask yourself, which of my beliefs, which of my voices are mine and which I borrowed from someone, adopted from someone, I'm imitating someone, I'm influenced by someone. Consider yourself like an onion. Peel the layers. Discard the layers that are not yours and remain with the essence of the onion. And the essence of the onion is none of the layers. It is the smell of the onion. Because once you have discarded all the layers, the smell of the onion lingers.  Focus on the smell. Focus on you. Sartre, Jean-Paul Sartre called it authenticity. Many of the things we do, many of the things we believe, many of the things we say, the ways we behave, people we attached to, et cetera, this is not us. These are voices, a mother's voice, a father's voice, teachers, influences, peers, society, government, and so on. Discard all this. It's not you. It's dead weight. It's a burden. It falsifies you. Discard all this. That's what I call nothingness. Throw away everything. Remain with three sentences, but they are yours. Remain with three behaviors, or three traits, or three people, but they are yours. They're really you.  Sam, very well put. Again, I want to thank you for taking the time out. You bless us with a lot of gems today. I hope it resonates and really educates a lot of you to give you a reference point of where to start at, where to kind of come out of this. Sometimes that's what we need. We just need that little pep talk to get us going. And again, Sam, as always, it's been a pleasure to have you on. Blessing to thank you again. Thank you. Very kind of you to have me. Thank you. We'll definitely be in contact. And again, enjoy your day. Everyone, please, please make sure you share the video once you get it. People definitely could benefit from this knowledge. Of course, I've recorded the video. I'll send you the recording. Absolutely. OK, thank you, Sam. Take care. Talk to you again. Bye. Bye now.


So thanks for coming to my talk. I am going to be talking about how to make your deployments better and automate them with Flux, but also I'm going to talk about how you can take advantage of the Terraform controller. And I am Priyanka Ravi. I also go by Pinky. I'm a developer experience engineer at Weaverx. And I like dressing up my dogs and making them wear Flux gear. And so if you're not familiar with Weaverx, we're a company that's funded in open source. Founded on open source, sorry. So we're open source first. We have a bunch of different open source tools. The ones you probably heard of most are Flux and Flagger, which recently graduated, so we're very excited about that. They're CNCF projects.  So if you're not familiar with GitOps, I just wanted to give a brief intro to get us all on the same page. GitOps is an operating model for cloud native applications such as Kubernetes. But it's not limited to Kubernetes as you're about to find out. And you basically utilize a version-controlled system. So most commonly Git, hence the name GitOps, as a single source of truth. But you're not limited to Git. With Flux, you can use other truth sources as well. And you can enable continuous delivery through automated deployment, monitoring and management by a version-controlled system. And the idea is that you manage your applications and infrastructure declaratively. So these are the GitOps principles. And these were compiled by the GitOps working group. And you can find them at opengitops.dev. And there are meetings that you can attend with the GitOps working group. So if you go to that website, you can actually find more about it and attend those monthly meetings. And you can be more involved with the community. So the first principle is that a system managed by GitOps must have its desired state expressed declaratively. So everything is written through code. And that's kind of why GitOps and Flux work so naturally with Kubernetes. Because Kubernetes is, in itself, very easy to use through a declarative nature. And so the second principle is that it's versioned and immutable. So desired state is stored in a way that enforces immutability versioning and retains a complete version history. So that kind of covers your audit trail as well. So there's no sneaking in a change or anything like that. And then software agents automatically pull the desired state declarations from the source. And they continuously observe actual system state and attempt to apply the desired state. So in this case, we'll be talking about Flux as that operator. And so you have that continuously listening. And whatever is written in code is what's actually deployed out in Kubernetes or elsewhere. So why? Like what are the benefits of GitOps? So GitOps has better security, velocity, and reliability. So it just enhances the developer experience as well. So everything's automated. And you're not stuck at work on a Friday trying to deploy the latest change. I've been there. So then let's move on to Flux. So Flux is actually the tool that the term GitOps was coined for. So our CEO at Weaverworks is the one that coined the term GitOps. And what happened was it was actually created internally at the company because we had some outages. And it took time for things to come back up. So Flux was created. And then we realized that other people started pulling it and using it once it was open sourced. And so that's when it was donated to CNCF to further grow the project. And so it's a Git-centric package manager for your applications. And it's a set of continuous and progressive delivery solutions for Kubernetes. So it was really created with Kubernetes in mind. So it works with everything that you're probably already using, the common Kubernetes tooling you're already using. And we have some things we like to say about Flux. We say that it provides GitOps for both apps and infrastructure. And like I mentioned a second ago with the progressive delivery solutions, you can also use Flux with Flagger to do progressive delivery. So AB rollouts, canaries, feature flags, whatever. You can just push to Git. And Flux does the rest. It's as simple as setting it up on your cluster and then just walking away. And every time you make a Git change, it takes care of everything for you. And like I said, it works with your existing tools. It was created with the ecosystem in mind. And it works with most everything you're probably already using. And it does multi-tenancy. And as we like to say multi-everything, it can do soft multi-tenancy. So namespace multi-tenancy. It can also do hard multi-tenancy with multi-cluster. And it alerts and notifies. So you can actually set it to tell you on Slack when a change has been pushed and actually applied. And then so I didn't mention this until just now I just remembered. I actually started my journey with Flux as an end user. I used to work at State Farm, an insurance company in the US. And we were trying to implement GitOps at the company. And so we, for our Kubernetes platform, chose to use Flux. And so that's how my journey began with this. And now, obviously, it's my job. But I do really love Flux. And that's why I decided to come here and get involved with the community. And as a user perspective, it really is very awesome the community to work with. Everyone's super helpful. We do have a channel on the CNCF Slack called Flux. And we're very active there. So if you want to come chat with us. OK, so the benefits of Flux are very simple to GitOps. It reduces developer burden. You don't have to worry about cube control versions to interact with your cluster. It's extensible. So it's very modular. So if you want to tailor your experience with it, it's really easy to do. And I'll mention that with the controllers. But it comes with out-of-the-box support for Customize and Helm. And like I said, it's designed for Kubernetes. So Flux is actually a set of Kubernetes controllers. And if you're not familiar with Kubernetes controllers, they just manage the lifecycle of objects on Kubernetes. So you can create objects. You can destroy them. You can update them, things like that. And so yeah, so the source controller is it basically fetches artifacts from the source. So like I mentioned earlier, you can use multiple sources. So there's Git repositories. There's S3 buckets. There's Helm repositories. Helm repositories, OCI registries. There's a few things you can use. And it'll look there. And then it grabs all the YAMLs or whatever terraform and stores them. And then the Customize controller then goes and applies manifests. And it runs the manifest generation using Customize. So that's why it's called the Customize controller. This used to cause a lot of confusion. But it is actually using Customize in the back end. So if you already have a Customization.YAML in the folder that you're pointing it to, it will just take that and apply whatever is there. So whatever overlays, whatever resources you have listed there, it'll apply them. But if you don't have one, it will recursively search through your folders and apply the YAMLs that it finds. And it creates its own Customization in the back end. So that's why it's called that. And then the Helm controller does deployment of Helm charts. And it's using the True Helm API. So it actually does do a Helm install. So if you wanted to also use the Helm CLI to then look up your resources later, you still can. You can interact with it that way. The Notification controller handles inbound and outbound messaging. So it can be set up to notify you on Slack, like I mentioned, or whatever messaging system to tell you that, hey, this has been updated and deployed, or hey, somebody went in and deleted something that it's not supposed to be deleted, and some drift was detected. It can notify you that way too. But it can also do the opposite, where you can set up a webhook and say, so the way that all these controllers work is they're running on an interval that you set. So we call it reconciliation when they run. And so if you have, say, the source controller to pull only every 10 minutes, or even later, and then you actually make a change, you might not want to wait 10 minutes if you get unlucky, right, and have the full wait time. So you can set up a webhook to tell the notification controller that it will ping the source controller, hey, go pull this change. A change was made, and it'll do it right away. And then we have the image controllers. So the image reflector controller is just looking at an image repository and looking for any changes, any new versions. And then the image automation controller actually pushes back to Git, and it can apply the YAML to say, hey, a new version is out there for this image, go update it in the YAML. And so it'll push that change back to Git, and that way it's automated in that way. And you can also version it, so you can say like Sember, you can say only within this range, like you don't want major changes maybe being pushed automatically, that might not be the best. And then also Flux works with a lot of other tools, like I mentioned, these are just a few, and just listing some reasons that I as an end user really loved Flux. And so now let's talk about the Terraform controller. So the Terraform controller I think has been around maybe for half a year now. And so it was created to allow you now to manage things beyond even Kubernetes. So anything that you can Terraform now can be also GitOpsed. So it's a free and open source software Flux controller, like so it's not within the Flux project. So if you go look at the Flux project repo and look at the controllers, it will not be bootstrapped for you, but it can be installed through a home chart, which I'll show in a second. And like I said, not limited to Kubernetes anymore. And then these are some links where you can find information about the Terraform controller, including the docs that are really good for like how to get started and it shows a lot of the ways to use some of the features of the Terraform controller as well. And so the benefits of the Terraform controller are that now you can do full GitOps automation for your Terraform resources. But you can also, how many of y'all are already using Terraform? I'm guessing a lot of people in here probably, yeah. Okay, so if you're familiar with Terraform, like the usual way of deploying things, you usually do a plan, then you check the output, right? And then you apply. So you can still do that with this if you don't want it to do automatic deployment applications. So you can set it to do manual applies and that way you can even have it output to a config map. So you say human readable in a config map and then you can output the config map and see it'll look just like what you're used to with the pluses and minuses. And then you can apply it. So another use case is if you're already doing a pipeline approach for your Terraform and you don't fully wanna commit to this version yet, like this way of doing things, but you like the idea of getting drip detection, you can set it up so that it still monitors your Terraform resources. But then don't have it do the applies and you can tell it to notify you in Slack if for some reason things get out of sync. So that way if for some reason someone goes in and delete something, you will get pinged and notified that like, hey, it's out of sync and then you'll just have to go in and apply it, but at least you're aware. And it does check your live state. And so it can be used basically as a glue for Terraform resources and Kubernetes workloads. So these are some of the features of the Terraform controller. And it's really changing all the time. It's continuously being worked on and added to. But like I said, you can do manual and auto approvals. Drip detection I already mentioned, it can accept a list of config maps and secrets as variables. And so the state file is stored in a secret by default, but you can set your own backend. So if you're using an S3 bucket right now as your backend, you can keep using that. If you're using Terraform Cloud or Terraform Enterprise as your backend, you can keep using that. Whatever you're using to store your state. But yeah, so it also has health checks enabled. So you can do things like, you can also do things like depends on. So you can tell one module to wait for the other one to complete and apply. And it'll wait till the health check is passed to then apply the second one. And you can also destroy resources on deletion. So that's not the default. If you're familiar with Flux, Flux has a flag called prune.  But that's not the default. So just so you're aware, you can add a flag to destroy resources on deletion. And you can also write the outputs to a secret and then use it. So like I said, if the second one depends on the first one, you can then output this output, set the outputs to a secret, and then use it in the second one. And then recently, maybe not recently, but the most exciting thing I think that more recently has come out of the tariff and controller is concurrency. So you can, it now uses runner pods. So they tested it with, I think 1500 concurrent modules and it handled it very well. And so, and with that, it also allows you to customize the runner pod image as well and other things with the runner pods. But you can also set how many runner pods you want to run concurrently with it. And then just like flux, you can use OCI artifacts as a source. And it also has the ability to force and lock Terraform state as you know, things happen. And like I said, you can use Terraform Cloud and TFE as well. There's integration built in for them. Okay, so I'm gonna be showing, I'm not gonna be doing a live demo because they scare me, but I just deployed it a couple of days ago where I have a, I have two modules, two Terraform modules. One is a setting up an EKS cluster and the second one is going to configure it. And what it does is this. So second one configures it, but adds no groups and also users. And obviously I want the cluster to stand up first. So it's gotta depends on, I'll show you. I'll just show y'all, it's easier. So I just wanted to mention this is the getting started guide for the Terraform controller. So this is a good place to start, but I will show you how I did it. So the way that flux works is, or the best way to get started using flux is through a CLI command called bootstrap. So flux has a CLI, that's one of the ways to interact with flux. There's a few ways I'm gonna show, but bootstrap is really, really good because you run it and then if the repo that you're telling it to bootstrap to doesn't exist, it will actually create it for you. And then it'll create this flux system folder and it'll put all the manifests that flux needs there. And the other thing that's good about it is that, let's say later on, I want to upgrade to the newest version of flux, then I can just update the flux CLI to the latest version and rerun the bootstrap command and it'll go in and it'll update all the manifests to the newest version so it's item potent, it's pretty cool. Okay, so what that does is it creates these three middle files. And so if I go to GOTK components, this one has like everything that flux needs to run. It has like the flux system namespace, which is where all the controllers get installed. And then it also has all the controllers in here. And it has like the cluster role bindings, everything that's necessary in this large file. And then there's a customization.yaml. So if you're not familiar with customization, this is what it would look like to say I want to apply these files. It's a very simple use case of the customization. And then GOTK sync is what's actually allowing flux to basically manage itself. So this is like eating its own dog food, I guess. So the top part here is the source. So this is telling the source controller to listen to a Git repository. And it's saying this is the URL and it's pulling manifests every one minute. So every minute it's going to check for any changes. And then the customization is looking for files that are within this cluster's kind path and it's applying it every 10 minutes. And when the source controller finds a change in like a different commit shot, it actually kicks the customization controller to also reconcile. So if you do make a change, you don't have to worry about reconciling both. And like I mentioned, prune is set to true. So in this case, if I deleted a YAML, it would also delete the resource. And then I went in and I added in apps. I added the Terraform controller in this way. So it's through a Helm repository and a Helm chart, Helm release, which installs a Helm chart. So the Helm repository is telling the source controller, hey, go look at this Helm repo and pull every one hour of the charts that you find there. And then the Helm release, this is how you would then tell it to apply this specific Helm chart. So in this case, it's got the version and you can also put the values here as well. And then I also installed the, so we go, we've getups, is our free and open source tool for a UI around flux. And so this is how I installed that as well. This is also through a Helm chart. And as you can see here, this is like a better example for showing how you can just input the values to the Helm chart through here. And then, oh, sorry. Oh no. Sorry. And then that installs this. I have to, oh, yeah. So, and this is the, so this is the UI you can get with flux. And it's going to have your applications, which is where your customizations and your Helm releases and things like that will show up. And then the sources as well in this folder, it'll also show all the like flux controllers and their status and everything that like flux has installed. And so, yeah, that's this UI. There's also another way to interact with flux as well, which is the BS code extension. I don't know if y'all can see that, but I just wanted to show it real quick. So there's this extension. You just can look up GitOps, and it should be like the first one, but I think it's GitOps tools for flux, or for, yeah, flux, Kingdom's Notting. So, yeah. And it's taking a second, but it will load all the, we'll come back to it and it'll load all of those. And there it is. When I said I was going to leave it. So it'll load all the sources, and then you can come in here and you can also reconcile and suspend them here. As with the UI, I didn't show it, but there's also a button in there. And so this is really cool if you have developers that are developing and then also want to just make the change go straight to flux, then they don't have to wait either, I guess, if they don't have webhooks set up, and they can just come in here and make the change. There's a lot of other cool features on this as well, but there have been talks done on it by Kingdom, so go check those out. Those are really cool if you're interested in it. Okay, so back to this. So the way that I get the Terraform controller to work is I, let me go to, so I have these, let me go here. So I have this Terraform object, so it works the same way as like the customization controller or the helm controller in the fact that it's looking for an object called Terraform with a map of how to actually deploy the resources. And so in this case, I have this kind Terraform, I named it TFC, we go demo core, and then I have this section down here, which is telling it, this is how I'm interacting with Terraform Cloud. If you're using a different backend, it's also very simple, it would be like, I think it's just backend, and you put in the, there's good examples on the website as well. But yeah, this is, the way, the cool thing about this one, this section, if you're using Terraform Cloud, is that you can, if the workspace doesn't already exist, this will actually create it. So in this case, I had it create my workspaces and it works. And also if you're familiar with Terraform Cloud and you don't have, I mean, if you work Terraform Enterprise, then you know that there's no real way to tell it, this workspace depends on this one. You can't have it like wait for one workspace to finish its run before doing the next one. You just have to wait for the first, the second one to fail while simultaneously and then rerun it after the first one's done. I know from experience. So this is the first one, right? We have this core and then down here I have this config and there's a line in here that says depends on. So that's what's gonna force this second one to wait for the first one. And then I have this in the first one, I have this write outputs to secret. So I'm telling it to write these outputs and I'll show you in a second, but that's actually writing out the subnet IDs for AWS. And so for the cluster, and so if I go down here, I can then say vars from and input the subnet IDs to this one. So yeah, it's pretty nice. You can set in vars and yeah, you can customize it here. So then if I go back and I go to Terraform and then I think it's in here. Yeah, so this is what the Terraform object is pointing to. And if I go in here and I go to main, it's pointing to another set of files. I was trying to be organized. And but basically it's just creating an EKS cluster, which is outputting in the outputs. It's outputting the subnet IDs, which are then getting used. And then if I go to config and I go to main.tf, it is setting up a node group. It's setting up identity and stuff like that. So let me go back. So if I go in here and I go to my clusters, this is the one that was stood up by this demo.  WS, take a second.  Oh, and I can also show, I think it's, yeah, lost my phone yesterday. So I was trying to look for that. So if I look here, so these are the ones that were running and the config was waiting on the core to finish and it took its time and then it didn't. I think that's everything I wanted to show. So I'll open it up for questions. Authority, no questions? Yes, yeah. Yeah, so Flagger's actually under the Flux project group and it is, are you already using Flagger? Oh, okay, so Flagger allows you to do progressive delivery and continuous delivery, yeah. And, well, progressive delivery, sorry, my brain. And yeah, so you can do canary deployments, you can do AB rollouts, you can do feature flags, you can do a bunch of things with Flagger. I personally have never actually used it as an end user, but I've gotten feedback from other end users that are using it and it works really well, yeah. You don't, it doesn't have to only be used with Flux though. So it can also be a standalone application as well. Any other questions? Thanks. Thank you.


Everybody for us tear ripping 2023 a leaf exotic baseball 20 bucks full case number two random teams We'll run the random and then we'll just uh Hear right to it. Good luck everybody four and three seven times names first one two three four five six and seven Nam queue down to po you on and the teams one two three four five six and seven Baltimore down to Toronto Yeah, Levis looked pretty good today Nam queue with the Orioles Nelson v. Marlins Kinsuke a's Gregory M. Angels Josh H. Rangers John M. Cardinals Ron R. Pirates Billy K. Guardians Francis M. White Sox John C. Nationals Michael M. Yankees Wayne P. Mariners Trenton T. Rockies Gregory M. Mets Joseph S. Royals Darren G. Reds Aaron S. Padres Alexandros twins Sean K. Diamondbacks Joseph S. Ray's Ron R. Braves Chris W. Tigers Caitlyn with the Brewers run our Phillies Gregory M. Dodgers Patrick M. Cubs Gregory M. Giants Nelson V. Red Sox and pull you on with the J's These posts and let's get started. There is your link 13 to go on to war Facebook so slow. Come on Facebook Come on Zuck. What are you doing? I think he's all top of the verge of a tag them all Not really they're just running the ball well Solid Okay, so three autos a box here guys good luck. We've got a Daniel Seussac for the a's right Jake Daniel Seussac for the a's Unless unless he was traded that's the only look a lot of these guys up. Yeah still a's Next is an Alexander Ramirez Three of eight I'm gonna check him. I know he's a met but they also they made is he still a met They didn't trading okay, so that's why I was asking. I was like they're gonna trade a lot of their talent Yep, still a met there and do a lot of O'Neill cruise and say a Suzuki that's it Pirates Cubs random at the end one-of-one Suzuki and cruise Pirates Cubs random at the ends Yeah, Jake is here That counts as a win a Dale Amador Rockies Auto 7 of 7 At the end of the day the W stands next to the NYJ Got a Joey Weimer autograph here. That's gonna be three of five for the Brewers and a Jordan Walker autograph But the Cardinals four of ten bang Tiger action. Yeah good box here. This stuff is pretty solid. Yeah, this stuff is cool It's got a lot more legend autos in it than normal Autos around that five six five of six Gavin Cross auto for KC Gavin Cross James Triantos two of seven so a cub right Cubs there triantos and a Frank Thomas autograph Big hurt one-of-one on the like an alligator alligator something that's sick Alligators Big hurt one-of-one White Sox Hold your legend autos in this stuff. Yeah, it's the box Move the ball. What the heck? I thought that just got sacked on down It is a Roy Bear Salinas Braves Auto here six six Braves Gavin Stone two of seven Dodgers Auto and a Spencer Jones Two of three Yankees Yankees Spencer Jones auto the Sean Sean's not happy with that one It's definitely a foul on Jake That's unsportsmanlike conduct Got a Jesus Baez is he immense I Just want to make sure they didn't get traded because they made a lot of trades. They didn't really trade many prospects though Right Yep, Matt's on the bias Jason choreo auto here number three of seven guardians Jason Jason this time yep What the Guardians and a Diamondbacks Corbin to Carol autograph One of one Congrats d-backs Couple of crazy This is good stuff man Lane, how we doing Lane? It's like a something Sterling Thompson or Rockies Auto three of seven Rocky Sterling Thompson Robbie Snelling should still be a Padre Samson Snelling Yeah, Padre still Out of seven and a Pirates to Mar Johnson Auto Nice one there seven to seven to Mar Johnson Lane's apartment apartment such house hunting and packing Yeah, and you got to get out of that apartment complex Get a Luis Matos Giants Auto here number one of two Luis Matos Giants Probably have his rookie guard next year not probably he will Gabriel Arias Guardians Auto two of eight and a goose Gossage Eight of nine. Where does he go longest tenure? It might be Padres? it is The Yankees how far it's only four years white socks with five years, huh? So yeah Yankees on the goose Played a long time Lane's specific apartment though apparently sucks it's got cats outside of it saying hello Got a JR Richie. We're JR Richie go Jake Braves JR Richie. Yeah, she's just gonna win this game and make no mistake Two points for your defense I think right They use two points for your defense depending typically that's what it is chased a lot or Guardians Auto here Sammy, how we doing chased a lot of three of eight Sammy and A Wade Boggs five of seven on the auto. I Would assume a red socks on the box He played there for a long time He goes to the rays Goes to the rays. Yeah, 11 years of Boston. Yeah Oh, yeah, the cats are literally Joe's fault What did I do Joe does have cats it's true See another dual auto come up. I didn't see who it was Red Sox Mikey Romero here five of nine auto Jets the Mets Williams two of two auto Yeah, they're trying to win and dual auto is Randy Johnson Nolan Ryan Randy Johnson on Ryan one of one with the peacock in the back another one of one I Gotta so I gotta make sure I don't think it's gonna be a random in this. We set it up a certain way So He so Nolan Ryan is Houston's longest tenure, but Houston doesn't have any other cards in this product So we took them out. This is gonna go Mariners. No random, right? Is Randy Johnson was a Mariner longest longest He was everywhere, dude Yeah, so he pitched revered to that's gonna go Seattle no random we didn't Houston's not in the Teams in the random because this is their only spot in this so this goes Mariners by default grads Mariners It's like a peacock. I think all the dual odds are one-on-one. They just have different like different like variations of it All righty, we get a Dylan beavers auto here number two of five Where does a beavers go Jake? Orioles Dylan beavers Brandon the Borreira see Jays three of seven Brandon Borreira blue Jays auto Yeah, Greg Much a nonsense in here and a Tony LaRusso one-of-one Tony LaRusso White Sox a legend Tony LaRusso.  He's a manager So yeah, I think he Was a manager there the longest and I think he played there the longest so I think either way you cut it up But we kind of use we've changed our rules a bit to use like common sense on this and he's wearing like a manager thing there That would still go to where he manages So this is gonna go cartels regardless but if there was someone that was in a manager uni on the card and Like we would use their manager spot for that because you would consider that a manager card, right?  I'm just being clear on that for like There's something else in here Smartest man in baseball Sleepiest man in baseball Sleepiest man in baseball Drunkest man in baseball And it's gonna go to the Pirates O'Neill cruise Leave exotic baseball mythical auto the mythicals are all one-of-one right mythical O'Neill cruise Those are all redemption to I don't know what's up with those man. They must be sick Cole young Mariners auto here number four of eight and then a Sasukei Cubs auto six of nine Dustin Harris autograph for the Rangers Tipo, how's it going Dustin Harris Rangers auto to four Curtis Mead raise auto here numbered four of seven Let's go. We have the need for me and an Ellie de la Cruz autograph For Cincinnati one of two Yep, there's some bangers in this set and Lee de la Cruz on what thing No, it's like oil in here. All right, Justin Campbell Justin Campbell. Where is he at Guardians? Yeah, Guardians on the Campbell got a Jordan Walker mythical redemption Cardinals Cardinals killing it And a Jayce young to a five for the for the Tigers Jayce young Tigers That's what really made the chiefs on stop wolf. They had somebody like Deandre Hopkins Red Sox legend Patrick my home senior Also, Fernando Tati senior play for I don't know if he did Like one or two seasons Yuri Perez auto here for Miami six of eight Yuri Perez Alec Burleson for the Cardinals auto here for four and a Nolan Ryan one of one Nolan Ryan one of one But he didn't have it didn't have one solo cards on the checklist. That's interesting. Yeah, I looked it over a few times At least when I looked at so that'll go to the Angels then Second longest ten year One of one Nolan Ryan go into the Angels one of his very very few solo autos. That's I'm sure Yeah, Nolan Ryan debuts. I think Next year. All right, we got a Kevin Perotta auto six of eight Kevin Perotta Mets and then an Anthony Volpe mythical redemption this case is crazy Volpe Yankees And nice prospects here two of eight Sedan, Rafaela Red Sox auto. I still got to get The sauce Get a bear bear claw. It's white good at auto six of seven for the Mets Todd he's ever seen him play in Boston. I didn't made it have like one season Not good in there. We got a Sal Stewart Reds auto Go Red Sal Stewart and a Ronald Acuna junior auto One of three on the Acuna Jersey number one in three there you go braves Got a Marlon's auto Jacob Berry 505 Zach Chin QIN Chin I think Is it kin Think it is gonna be Padres though Yeah, Padres There we go four or five and an O'Neill cruise auto again for the Pirates one of seven What's my what card? I don't even know man Oh and Murphy on the sea is still a brave or see traded So braves braves on the Owen Murphy five of six get a Brady house auto for the Nationals one of eight and a Yankees Don Mattingly auto one-of-one Yankees Donnie baseball this stuff is awesome. Some teams doing super super well here is Ezekiel Tovar on the Rockies auto two of three two of three Rockies by a cam Collier auto for Cincinnati eight of ten on the Collier and Alive Anthony Volpe this time for the Yankees Yankees are killing it man two of ten a goose Mattingly couple of Volpe's Spencer Jones Turn it around immediately Jake have you ever pulled up ever pull the Spencer Jones cards will sit in the mr. Jones Cooper Cooper's sure three of five Cardinals right Sherpa It's like a Sherpa a Brandon Walter auto one of six where is he socks? Red Sox Brandon Walter Yeah, I remember him coming out of the bullpen for them nasty He was good like 12 to 1. Well, he's not gonna stick around that. I'm sure Red Sox and then a Jose Konseko. He should go a some a double check though just to make sure Yeah, but it goes longest ten year Also curious did you only play one season with Boston Konseko? Two seasons It is the A's by a lot He played a lot of other he played a lot longer after he left the A's I was different teams. So, yeah There you go A's and I can say go. Let's do our random here for the it was a ranger for a bit Red Sox for two years He literally just was like bouncing around Like nine years at A's and then he played like 12 more years like five different teams Pirates Cubs one-of-one random here O'Neill cruise sassouki. It'll be a nine five and four What's up top gets it? one two three four five six seven eight and nine the pirates will get the dual auto Yeah, now that you're here Spencer Pirates Do a really quick recap on this one guys. That's a quick break. We'll do a really quick recap here I'm not gonna call it teams just players on this one. Everybody everybody was it's true Cruising Suzuki went to the Pirates. We had Konseko, Brandon Walter, Cooper, Jherp, Anthony Fulpe, Cam Collier, Ezekiel Tovar, Don Mattingly, Brady House, Owen Murphy, O'Neill Cruise, Zach Chan, or Quinn, or Kin Jacob Berry, Ronald Acuna Jr, Sal Stewart, Dwight Gooden, Sedan Rafaela, Kevin Parada, Nolan Ryan, Alec Burleson, Yiri Perez, Jayce Young, Justin Campbell, Ellie De La Cruz, Curtis Mead, Dustin Harris, Seasouki, Cole Young, Tony LaRusa, Brandon Barrera, Dylan Beavers, Jet Williams, Mikey Romero, Wade Boggs, Chase DeLotter, JR Richie, Goose Gossage, Gabriel Arias, Luis Matos, Tamar Johnson, Ravi Snelling, Stirlan Thompson, Jason Chorio, Jesus Baez, Spencer Jones, Gavin Stone, Roy Breselinos, Frank Thomas, James Triantos, Gavin Cross, Jordan Walker, Joey Weimer, Adele Amador, Alexander Ramirez, Daniel Susak, Ryan and Randy. We had Redemptions of O'Neill Cruise, Jordan Walker, and Anthony Volpe on the Mythics, plus a Corbin Carroll Auto. A one of one Corbin Carroll Auto. That'll do it. Thanks again, everybody. Moving on now to more baseball.