Hi, I'm Zor. Welcome to IndieZor Education. I would like to start getting closer and closer to derivatives, and the next stop is talking about function limits. Actually, we have already considered this particular topic function limits when we were talking about the limit of the sequences. I deliberately included a few lectures about sequence limits to this particular part of the course, which is basically dedicated to derivatives. And the whole course, by the way, is presented on unizor.com. I do suggest you to view this course from this website, because, number one, it contains very detailed notes for each lecture. Number two, so it's basically like a textbook. And number two, registered students can take exams, which is just very useful for self-checking. Alright, back to limits. So, as I said before, we have already touched the limits when we were considering the limits of the sequence. But let's just think about what E is as sequence. Well, sequence is a function. It's a function which has as a domain all the natural numbers, one, two, three, four, five, and the values are some real numbers. Alright, so we can say that this is a function from the set of all natural numbers to set of all real numbers. Now, there is only one more very important consideration when we are talking about limits. Talking about limits implies talking about certain process. It's not like a single value of something. It's a multitude of values which are going somewhere, right, to infinity or to some natural number or whatever. Now, what is the process in case of a sequence? The process is one, two, three, four, etc. So we are moving within our domain of the natural numbers from any number to the next one, to infinity. So this is the process. So whenever we are talking about more general functions and in particular we will be talking about functions which will be of that kind. Domain is all real numbers and the codomain is also real numbers. That's the only difference between the function and the sequence. But again, there is a second aspect of talking about limits, the process. So in sequences we understand what this process actually is. It's moving towards increasing natural numbers. In this particular case we don't really fix this particular process. We don't imply it. If we are talking about the limit of the function so far we have not implied any kind of a particular process of changing the argument. So that's something which we need to basically introduce. In addition to the fact that this is a function of the real argument and real values we have to introduce the process, how argument is changing. Well, it's changing according to some rules, according to some sequence of values which argument takes. And the simplest way which resembles exactly the situation with sequences is to consider this process of moving our argument, making it infinitely large. So if we imply this particular process to the function of real argument then actually there is no difference between this and the sequence. We can define a limit in exactly the same terms as here. Here is how. Let's just recall again how the limit is defined in this case. Now what does it mean? If you remember we want it to be as close to A as possible whenever my index is large enough. More precisely, for any degree of closeness to this value we can find the number, the index such that all the members of our sequence will be closer than that particular value of closeness which we want. Let's define it in more abstract terms using symbolic. So for any epsilon greater than zero this is the degree of closeness we would like to be to the number A. However small doesn't really matter as long as it's positive. So it can be as small as possible and we don't really care how small it is. For any however small we can always find or there exists such number N. Now this N is just a number, it's not a set of natural numbers. So there is a number N such that as long as our index is greater or equal than N immediately from this would follow that our X N minus limit less than or equal to epsilon. Sometimes people are using strictly greater and strictly less. It doesn't really matter, it's the same definition, the same property. So this is the definition of the sequence for our sequences. We can actually make very very close definition here. Namely for any closeness to some kind of a limit which we are talking about. So we are assuming that we want this to converge to the A as X goes to infinity. That's what we are trying to define basically right now. So for any degree of closeness greater than or equal to 0, I'm sorry. There is always, now instead of number N of a sequence I can always have some value. Let's say A, some value A such that as long as X exceeds this value immediately my function of this X would be close to the A by the distance less than epsilon. This is exactly the same as this one. So instead of using the index, I'm using the value of the argument itself. Well, actually index is an argument in this particular case, right? Because this is the function from natural numbers to real. This is the function for real numbers to real. So this is the real number and instead of index number N I'm using some kind of a real number A. So as long as we exceed that number from that time on my function would be closer to its limit than the value of epsilon. And epsilon can be chosen completely, any value even the smallest one possible, as small as possible. So that's what it means that the function goes to its limit A converges to A when X goes to infinity. Now, absolutely symmetrically, which does not really have an analogous with natural numbers, we can have when the X goes to minus infinity. Well, why? Because, well, natural numbers are starting with one goes to only plus infinity. But here we can go in exactly the same fashion to minus infinity. How can I say, so this is as X goes to plus infinity, right? Now, what if I'm talking about minus infinity? Well, this is the movement, right? Goes to minus. So here is minus infinity. Let me write it cleaner. Negative infinity. It means we're going to a smaller and smaller number and there is no limit which limits us as far as argument is moving to the minus infinity, right? So it's infinitely growing by absolute value, staying negative. So that's what it is. So whenever we have this type of a movement and we are looking for a definition of this, when X goes to minus infinity, what does it mean? Well, the only difference is I have to choose this A on a negative side and all the X which are less than this negative A, this closeness is supposed to be observed. So for any degree of closeness, however small, there should always be number, real number A, which obviously in this particular case should be on a negative side, right? Such that as long as X moving towards minus infinity, as long as X is less than to the left of the number A, negative number A, our difference between the function and its limit would be less than the epsilon. So these are two definitions of the limit of the function as argument goes to either plus or minus infinity. And these are very much parallel to the sequences. Okay, now let's consider that we would like actually to expand it even more and that is completely impossible with sequences. We always have M goes to infinity and that's why we started for function in exactly the same fashion. But in real functional analysis and if we want to talk about derivatives, not only we are interested in limits as the argument goes to plus or minus infinity, but also as the argument is approaching certain concrete real value, converges to a value. And I would like actually to go basically the same logical way. So what can we say about, that's what we would like to define as X to some number R, not to infinity plus or minus, but to some number. So X is converging to R. Well, what does it mean converging? Well, for instance, X actually has a sequence X1, X2, etc., Xn, etc., and this sequence is converging to R. Now, if that is the case, then we would expect that the corresponding f at X1, f at X2, etc., f at Xn, etc., is converging to A. Now, we have actually transformed the definition for the function into a definition for sequences. So what I'm saying is that if a sequence of arguments goes to R, then my sequence of functions of these is supposed to converge to A. Now, this is something which I would like to use as a definition, but I can't. And here is how, and here is why. I mean, I cannot just leave it as this. I'm saying, okay, if my arguments are converging to R and my functions of these arguments are converging to A, then I can say that the limit of the function at point R is equal to A. This is wrong. I have no right to do this. And here is why. Let me just explain to you, for instance, how this is possible. Well, let's just have a concrete example. Xn, Xn is equal to, let's say, R plus 1n. For instance, as n goes to infinity, Xn goes to R, right? And my functions are, and I expect them to be converging to A, right? As n goes to infinity. Now, on the other hand, I can have another function, another sequence which approaches R. Let's say R plus square root of 2 divided by n. As n goes to infinity, this also converges to R, right? Because square root of 2 over n is infinitesimal. Now, my functions in this case would be, now, square root of 2. Now, am I guaranteed that this is true? I mean, if this is true, am I guaranteed that this also would be true? Or any other way how X can approach R? Will we always be having this type of a converging to the same number on the app side? Well, the answer is no. Here is example. Consider the function 0 if X is rational and 1 if X is irrational. And now consider X going to 0 by equal to 1 over n. Now, 1 over n goes to 0, that's true. I mean, I should say Xn, right? So, Xn goes to 0 using rational numbers, right? 1 first, 1 second, 1 third, 1 fourth, etc., etc., converges to 0. And my function would be equal to, on each rational number, it's equal to 0, right? So, my function is equal to 0, so it converges to 0. Now, let's just have another example. Square root of 2 over n. Now, this is irrational number, right? So, every value is equal to 1, and it's converging to 1. So, it looks like the limit depends on how we approach 0. If we approach 0 on rational points, it's one limit on irrational and another limit. That's not good. We cannot define, therefore, we cannot define that the function has certain limit if approaching the limit point by one way we have one limit and by another way another limit. It just basically means that the function does not have a limit. So, how can we correct this particular definition to make it really valid? Okay, here is the valid. f at x goes to a if r converges to, sorry, if x converges to r, if for any, here is very important, for any sequence converging to r, the corresponding sequence of the functions converges to a. So, the key here is this. So, not only one concrete sequence should go to r, and then we see the sequence of the functions converging to a. But if for any possible sequence of arguments which converges to the limit point, to this value, to the limit point, if for any such sequence of arguments, the corresponding sequence of functions is converging to real number a, then we can say that function converges to a when x converges to r. So, that's very, very important. We should not tell this if we observe this particular behavior for one particular sequence of arguments. We really should say that if for any sequence of arguments this is true. As long as the sequence of arguments converges to r, this converges to a for any sequence. Only then we can say that the function has a limit a at point r. Now, what's good and what's bad about this? Well, the good thing is that it's a really very good definition. The bad thing is, okay, how can I check that particular function has a particular limit at a particular point? Well, I have to basically go through all the possible sequences of the argument which lead to this point and check that for each such sequence, I have the function sequence which is converging to a. Well, that's impossible. I cannot. Which means that I need some more constructive definition of the limit which resembles the one which I did for infinity. You see, for infinity all I had to do for any degree of closeness I had to find the boundary after which my function would be closer to its limit than this particular degree of closeness. Actually, I can use exactly the same approach in this particular case which would lead me to an alternative definition of the limit. And let's try to do it this way. So, we are looking for different definition but would basically mean the same thing but in a more constructive way. So, what do I want to do? I want to approach my argument towards the limit point. So, I want x approach r and I would like as a consequence of this to have function of x approaching its limit a. Now, so how can I express this? Well, as any sequence, I just did, any sequence of arguments which is approaching r. But I can do it differently. I can do it the same way as I did for infinite limits. First, we choose any degree of closeness between this and this. Now, instead of saying that for any sequence which is approaching, any sequence of arguments which approaches r, I can say different as long as x is closer to r. So, if for this particular degree of closeness, instead of finding like in the sequence number n by which my sequence would be closer to its limit, I would say I will find degree of closeness of the argument such that if my argument is closer than this, then my function would be closer than that. So, let me just repeat it again. So, there is analogy with definition for cases when x goes to infinity. In this case, I'm basically measuring, instead of how close to infinity my x is by putting the boundary after which it's closer than we need. I'm putting this closeness using this particular inequality. So, as long as my x is closer to the limit point than this particular delta, then my function would be closer to its limit less than the degree of closeness which I'm looking for. And that should be predicated with this. That's very important. So, for any degree of closeness of the function, there is certain neighborhood, if you wish, of this limit point r that if I am within this neighborhood, if the difference between them is less than this delta, then function would be in the neighborhood of my limit. So, this is alternative definition of the limit. It basically means exactly the same thing. The equivalence of these two definitions, one through any sequence which is converging to r, another through this neighborhood concept. The equivalence of these two definitions will be addressed in the next lecture. But in this lecture, I would like actually to stop exactly here. I would like to finish with these two definitions of the limit of the function which are equivalent. Now, I consider this to be a little bit more constructive definition. Why? Because given the epsilon, given the degree of closeness of my function to its limit, I actually can find, if I can find such delta that from this follows that, it means that the function has its limit. Now, let me just give you an example. For instance, I am looking for limit of function x square as x approaching, let's say 1. Now, we feel that it should be 1, right? Because 1 square is 1. But let's just think about it. My x is approaching 1 and I am looking for, given my epsilon, I am looking for such delta that if x minus 1 less than delta x square minus 1 would be less than epsilon. Can I find this? Can I find, for each epsilon, can I find delta? Well, let's just think about it. If x minus 1 is less than delta, it means that x is in these boundaries, right? From 1 minus delta to 1 plus delta. Now, x square would be from 1 minus 2 delta plus delta square and 1 plus 2 delta plus delta square. I would like this to be true, which basically means that x square should be 1 minus epsilon and 1 plus epsilon. So, how can I do that? If I know that my x is in these boundaries and I know that x square, my x is in this, x square is in this boundary, basically I have to really do this. It is epsilon equal to delta square plus 2 delta on the bigger side, right? And on this side, is this sufficient or not? Let me just check. Let me just try on this side first. So, if my delta can be found from this particular equation, so for any epsilon, I will find delta which satisfies this particular equation. Then I can say that my x square, if x is less than 1 plus delta, then x square will be less than 1 plus epsilon, right? So, that's all I have to do to find delta. Now, on this side, I have to find, let's call it delta 1. On this side, I will have its minus, right? So, minus epsilon is equal to minus 2 delta plus delta square. And this would be my delta second. So, I will solve this equation. And when I solve these two equations, I have two different deltas, I will choose the smaller one and that would be sufficient to satisfy my both equations. So, that's basically how this thing is solved. I'm really finding, I'm saying that the definition of the limit is, for any epsilon which is the closeness of the function, I should find the delta which is restricting my argument as close to the limit point as possible. So, this is how I can find a concrete delta for any epsilon. And that's the advantage of this second methodology, that we can always find exactly this particular delta in cases when the limit exists, obviously, like in this case. And if we can find, for any epsilon, we can find this particular delta, then it means that the function does have the limit 1, in this case, if argument is converging to 1. Alright, that was my introduction to the concept of the limit of the functions. And the limit, basically, we are differentiating between three different points. Two are very analogous to each other when argument goes to infinity or minus infinity. And the second, when the argument is approaching certain concrete number, and in this case we have given two different definitions of the limit. One is like for any sequence of arguments which is approaching the limit point, we have the corresponding sequence of functions approaching to, converging to its limit. The second is using this as they call epsilon delta language. So, an epsilon delta language, which is a different definition, although equivalent, we have expressed it differently, but more constructively in such a way that we can actually find and prove that this particular function has this particular limit under these particular conditions of argument. Alright, I do recommend you to read the game through notes for this lecture on Unisor.com, and basically that's it for today. Thank you very much and good luck.


Morning from the beautiful city of Zimbabwe, Bulawayo. The more I travel within Zimbabwe, the more I find out that Zimbabwe indeed is not what you think. There's so many hidden games in Zimbabwe that I think the people of Zimbabwe need to try their possible best to come out in their numbers to promote their country in a positive way. So I was in Harari and I thought Harari is Zimbabwe. But when I came to Bulawayo, seeing white roads in here, I've seen beautiful buildings, even though it's a bit colonial. But yeah, I mean, coming from Ghana, I never saw Zimbabwe this way until I stepped in here. So I'm just gonna tell you that if you ever have any thought about Zimbabwe, change it right now. Maybe after this video, a lot of people are gonna change your perception about Zimbabwe. It's a beautiful country. I wanna say this once again, God took his time to create Zimbabwe. For Zimbabwe, I'm here to talk about a retiree born and raised in Bulawayo, went to America, retired and came back to Bulawayo. I mean, moving to Africa is a movement. I've been telling you guys that it's time for Africans to make Africa home again. I know we've got our own problems. I know Africa is not perfect, but it's time for us to tell our own stories. And listen, I've not met this woman anywhere. I don't know her anyway. I just found out about her yesterday when a friend of mine came to visit me and said, do you know that this woman living in Bulawayo was actually inspired by you to the extent that she's actually helping you do your job, which is Africa to the world. She's trying in her own way to change the narrative about Africa by telling people to come back home, by showing you the beautiful stuffs that are happening in Zimbabwe. And I'm like, wow. I wanna give out a shout out to Wodemaya. Yay, young man, you've done, you've done as well. You've done as good. And because of you, I have felt motivated to say, hey, it's time I bring the narrative as well to let other folks my age, older, younger to see the African continent with a different lens. I am on my way to go meet her. And I just can't wait. He just give her a hug and say, thank you so much for supporting the initiative Africa to the World, changing the negative narrative about Africa and make it Africa home again. I mean, she's on retirement, but I would say that if you are living abroad, don't wait for retirement before you come back home. Come back now and let's build Africa together. Is this real? No, it's real. This is Wodemaya. I can't, I can't. No, I mean, that's how the universe works. Welcome home. Thank you. Thank you so much. Come on. Thank you. No, it's true. No, it's a dream. No, this is Wodemaya. It's not a dream. Come on.  I cannot believe it. I saw your video a year ago. Yeah. I saw that you're going back to Africa to change the narrative. Yeah. And you're inspired by Wodemaya. I was so touched. Even though I didn't see the video, I saw the video just last night. Yeah. And here we are. Here you are. I cannot believe it. I cannot believe it. No, I am so proud of you. I am proud of you. Ah! I am proud of you. We've raised you well. Salibonani, Makadi. Hello, and welcome to my channel, Kaya's Gogo. My name is Subongile. I'm sharing with you my journey back to the motherland. I have settled back in the city of Kings and Queens, Bulawayo, doing very well and loving it. I don't even know what to say, you know? I just don't know what to say, but... I am moved beyond words that you could actually come and see me. As soon as they told me that there is this woman who moved from US to Zimbabwe, I was like, you know, I need to meet her. Then I spoke to you and he said in the very end, I'm like, no way! No way! I was just... You know when you are out there, it's kind of... Everybody is telling you you're doing the wrong thing. And you start self-doubting. And you start thinking it might be wrong. But then I kept on telling myself, I was born there. I was born there. And what is the biggest fear of me going back? Missing the luxuries, maybe? Nah. But you've created a luxury in here. Well, I mean, I don't think in America you'd have had this house with the garden. Back to the garden? Live again, dad. Mom, what time? I don't think so. I don't think so. This is what they are missing. They don't even know. Yeah. Definitely, she's growing what she eats in here. Yeah, yeah, yeah, I have...  I am truly inspired by you. Truly inspired that you would pick up that mental and show positivity in this continent. It's heartwarming. It is heartwarming. Yeah. Yeah. We need more young people who embrace the continent as it is with its foes. The more of us that say, it's OK to be home. You know what I'm going to do? See, I have been seeing what you're doing. And I think, since Whatabai is here, I've seen that she has over 2,000 subscribers. And before I leave here, we are making it 10,000 subscribers. So let's do this. You know that me, I don't beg. I always tell you that it's by force because what she is doing, I think I'm here. I'm definitely going to change some few things before I leave. And I want us to do this. The channel link is in the description. Let's go. We're making sure she hits 10,000 subscribers today. All right. So go there, subscribe and be part of Kaia's Google. Yeah. Who is Kaia? It's my first grandchild. What? And I want to... Google means grandmother. So I wanted to take Kaia with me. I used to travel with them. But when I left, I knew it would be few and far between the traveling with her. So by carrying her name with me, she's right there. Yeah. That's beautiful. How long did you live in America? I was in America for 20... Combined. In Canada, in America, it was a total of, I think, 25 years? 27? Something like that? Why did you left in the first place? Why did I leave? Yeah. That gentleman over there is the adventurous one. Can you join me? I like to travel and I like to see new places. OK. And I easily get bored of my empire. After 25 years, it decided to come back. It was actually a total of 32 years out of the country. Yeah. We passed through Botswana and then went to Canada and then the US. But it totaled... Did you force him to come back? No. No. You know, we always knew we were going to come back. But you know, the longer you stay outside, the further that dream becomes. And you create a lot of fears for yourself. That's true. Yeah. And then when it's time to do it, there's always a reason why you can't do it. Well, let's say that, you know how it is when you're outside the country, you read a lot of negative things about Africa in general. What kind of negatives do they do here? No, I mean, they talk about things like... Mostly that, like how the economy is, like how the unsafe it is, crime and, you know, political issues. So you buy into that a lot. But when you visit and when you live outside, you quickly realize that all those problems that they amplify about Africa, they exist elsewhere too. Like, you know, in America they exist, in Canada they exist, in Britain they exist, in Australia they exist. It's just that our scenario is Africans, you know, he's been given by somebody else other than the Africans. So they tend to put a lot of emphasis on negativity. But when you're here, you see that, yes, you put the poverty as well. And those who have made it live well. And nobody talks about the good parts of Africa.  I'm not going back home because all there is, all there is that, all there is that, you know. You know, when you guys were coming, it was coffee time. Yes, it was, yes. But you kept on pushing. I think it took you guys seven months. It took us almost eight months, maybe nine months. It was the worst time, it was scary. And there was every opportunity for us to stop and say, you know what, this is not going to work. It was scary. The time that I left, because I had been in San Diego. It's difficult to leave this beautiful city called San Diego, specifically Chula Vista. I've loved living here. The beautiful streets that are lined with palm trees. Just the beauty of the city. It is really tough to say goodbye. But I'm ready. I'm ready for the African continent. I'm ready to go and enjoy the long sunny days in the mild winters. I love San Diego. I love the state of California. And it is hard for me to say goodbye, but it is time. So I left, right? And I was going to see the kids in Michigan. I was the only person other than the employees in the area that I was sitting at, the lounge that I was sitting at, at the airport. I found myself sitting in an empty airport. It was eerie. It was scary. And I felt alone. And I'm sitting there thinking, where am I going? What am I doing? It was scary.  But your heart is telling you, do it now. Yeah. Something when we traveled from after seeing the kids went to Canada to see our other two kids, was two in Canada, two in the US. So we were three. Three passengers. Three passengers in the plane. With five crew. And five crew. All the way from Canada to the US. So it was a scary time. And all you could hear was about death here, death there. So you wonder, is it OK to go down there when the health system is poorer than what we're living? But guess what? God has other plans. More people died there than here. So, you know, it's unfortunate. But you know, those things happen. And as the plane is going up and up, I look through the window and see the beautiful city of San Diego slowly fade. It is hard to say goodbye. The lovely beaches, my workplace, where I've enjoyed the love and support of my team. I will forever cherish those memories. But my mind is set. I'm on my way to the motherland. Before stopping by, so we're finally in Zimbabwe in Bulawayo, a beautiful place, enjoying being outdoors in the sun and just listening to the sounds of nature. I want to know, after living in the West for that long, how is life in the West? Is it the way we from Africa see it to be? Yes, there's the glamorous part of it, but there's a lot of... You don't get to enjoy that that much because you're working. You're working most of the time. There is really work, work, work, work, especially if you have an agenda to come back. When you're there, it's work, work, work. Work, work, work to be able to get the money to do what you want here. Yes, unless you want to live there forever, then that's a different story. But at the end of the day, as you get older, there's all these things with home, your identity. It sinks in, it sinks in. You start feeling a sense of belonging to be somewhere else other than where you are. I know, for example, most of Africa, including Ghana, the respect we have for our elders, is different when you're out there. Out there. Are you trying to say that out there, no one restricts you? No, it's not the same though. It's not the same. I mean, for example, if you're in a village here in Africa, if you, let's say, a child is misbehaving, you, even as a stranger, can tell the child, don't do that. Out there, you can't do that. You've been in trouble. Out there, you're going to be in trouble.  Whereas here, we are used to collective upbringing. Like let's say, it takes a village to raise a child. It's very true here compared to out there. So, those things, I mean, they sink in as you grow older. You're like, oh, I remember my grandparents used to do that. And you don't find anybody that you can relate to with that same story, unless they're a bigger African community out there in the West. At what point, both of you decided that it's time to go back home? I have really, really, really hit the desire to put the African continent on a very different narrative. Because generally, what we hear or see is a continent that is poor, a continent full of wars, fighting tribes, hunger, poverty, and anything that disease, everything that is negative. However, there is a lot more to the African continent than that very, very, very negative narrative that we've all heard, seen. So this is why I would like to take this time in my retirement to invite you to come along with me. The conversation was happening. But around 2013, I remember talking to my friend. Her name is Rulu. Shout out to her. And Maria, I said, mark my words. 2020, I'm out. You always say that. You always say that. But I remember 2013, I said, girls, I'm out. 2020, that is it for me. And when 2020 came, I started having the jitters. Am I really serious? Am I going to do this? Did I mean it? And then COVID is happening. So it was harsh. It was scary. Was the move worth it? Absolutely. Yeah. Absolutely. And then I really want to know. Yeah, absolutely. Because I believe that this video will inspire others to also move back. It's really worth it. How has life been since you moved back to the continent? I love being here. I love being home. I feel grounded. I feel this is where we have a saying in Shona. And I've said it before. I wanted to go back to where my umbilical cord is. And it's buried here in this country. So despite, like today, we had a disaster. We don't have water right now because the pipe burst. And the city council water is not there. Thank goodness for my tanks. Otherwise, we wouldn't have no water. The electricity is gone. We can't even test if the repair is done right. But I am content. I'm at peace. Despite all the challenges. Despite those challenges. So when we came back, sorry, the first 10 days, we came with a disaster. It was a baptism with fire. You wanted to move back? No, no, no, no. Never. There was no water. No electricity. There was no electricity. For a good solid 12, maybe 10 to 12 days. Yeah. The first time we came here. Yeah. It was really rough. Yeah. It was as if it was a test. Yeah. To see if you can really handle it. Like it's almost like a test today. To see if I can still tell you that I'm going to stay here. The water pipe burst. Unbelievable. Unbelievable. So with the tank system, with the booster and solar that we have, none out of 10 we never know when there's no water. Yeah. Those are some of the things that when you say, wow, when you face arrived, how did you cope? And also, conveniences. Yeah, conveniences. Those who I think are what hits you the most. Like out there you're like, OK, it's 10 PM. I want to go and do my groceries because it's quiet in the shops.  Out here, everything is closed by 10 PM. We have a lot of Africans living in the Diaspora who are not even ready to have this conversation of moving back to the continent. Right. If you have a message to Africans living in the Diaspora, what would that message be? I would say visit home more frequently. Yeah. Because then you won't get a cultural shock as I like to put it, a cultural shock. Well, it shouldn't be because you are from Africa. But if you visit more frequently, you get to adapt to the changes. I'll give you an example. When we left Zimbabwe's economy was doing great. It was one of the best economies in the region. In the region, you know, you had everything. But imagine somebody who left when we left. And never came back. Now they come back. They're like, what has happened? You know what I mean? Yeah. So if you visit home more frequently, get in touch with people at home more frequently. Not just, I know the Diasporians support the African economy. We send them money a lot. So don't just send money, go and see what your money is doing, especially with your family. If you visit more frequently, you will want to come back. Yeah, I also say the same thing. Come and visit.  Doesn't do justice. See how people live here. There are differences. You won't find the conveniences. But there is life here. People are happy. I'm content. I'm happy being here. So visit. You are here in Zimbabwe right now. If you had a chance to change one thing in Zimbabwe, what would it be? If anything would be to have Zimbabweans understand that only you can make the changes that you want. That's the only thing that we know what's out there. We want what's out there. But you can do it here. I would say for Zimbabweans, we can do better. We can work together to make this place the best it can be. The best is yet to come for this country. And we can do it ourselves. The way you said only Zimbabweans can solve Zimbabwe's problem, that's what you mean. But I was also doing research about the number of Zimbabweans living in the diaspora. There's a lot of Zimbabweans living there. Way too many. Way too many. Way too many. What is the problem? The problem is, like we always say, one thing which I see in most, especially in this region, compared to West Africa, for instance, West Africans have learned to work together. When they're out there as diasporians, they do work together. We appear to be very individualistic in Zimbabwe. And also the honest fact is we also need to fix the politics so that it makes it comfortable for all Zimbabweans of different beliefs to be here. We shouldn't be killing each other or fighting each other. We should look at different ideas from different backgrounds in thinking, put it together so we can grow something better. Our differences make us stronger. Our differences make us stronger. Now that you all have lived in different parts of the world, do you think the system in African countries is discouraging the diaspora from moving back to the continent? Partly, yes. Partly, yes. To be honest, partly, yes. I think you do get a little resistance from the status that those who are making it want things to remain the same. When I look at it, I say, OK, it's fine. OK, I can have this, right? I have this. But am I comfortable? Am I happy when I step out of my comfort zone? I go to the market and I see other people suffering. Obviously not. Obviously not. So that's the kind of thing that I would like to see change. And I think most diasporians also might want to want that change. And I think also, if the diaspora is seen as part of this continent, we are children of this continent. We are not only there to, in Shona, we say, jager-jager, you know, supporting our families. But we are children of this continent. So our ideas matter. Our input should matter. So if that would be embraced by the continent at large, that the diaspora, the people in this continent, we work together to bring something bigger and better. I think African leaders should be ready for these conversations because I lived in China before. And China was built by the diasporians. Yeah. They just went out there, learned new things, came back to their country and applied it. Yeah. That's the key thing, applying it here. If you see what the fast-speed train in China, they got the idea from Japan. And even they have better trades than Japan now. So I think African leaders need to come and understand that people living in the diaspora, I suppose, and they can come in here and work together to contribute. Then build the continent that we're all looking for. Exactly.  Yes, yes, yes. You know, take the reins and keep the continent moving forward. I think the older generation don't believe in us. We should. No, but... We should. But I think that that's the downfall of our society, not embracing our young people. Yeah. I mean, he's a good example of what a young person and their idea can do to an older person. You moved me to have the courage to say, I can do it. That's my kid. That's my son. That's my grandson. He's pushing the continent forward by telling the good stories. Get up and do your part. I got out because of a young mind. That's what we should be embracing, young minds. And all the person who's, let's say, 70, 70 years old, doesn't even know how to handle a digital camera. No, they don't. So why should that person be a minister of technology? So this is what... So this is what we... What am I just left? Minister for sports cannot kick a ball. Kick a ball. Exactly that. So we should let young people start taking over, start taking over. We'll never make it if we keep the status quo. We will never make it. It's plain clear. We will never make it. We need to embrace our children. By not embracing our children, it's because it says one thing. We failed to bring up our children to do what they should be. We have no confidence in you. Because we failed to build it up. We should have confidence. I should be able to say, my son can do ABCD because I taught him. If I didn't teach him, then it's my fault. If I don't trust... If I don't have confidence in him, it's because I didn't teach him. So I'm the one that's failed. So that's how these leaders should be looking at these things. If we can't get our child to... Here you are. If we can say, okay, let him go and set up a broadcasting station. Then what does that say? It means we failed you. So we, as the older generation, we should be able to have confidence in our children. If we don't have that confidence, it's because we are the failures. We are the ones failing this system. So here's what I was trying to put across to the world at large. Diaspora, people here at home, different cultures. I am African. I am Zimbabwean. I am comfortable going back home because I can. And when I'm there, I'm able to have a life. I'm able to be comfortable. I'm able to make it work in the worst of circumstances. I just told you about our water wars and the electricity. But I'm still here. I have a firewood. We have dying trees here that are not helping me. Neither are they doing anything to the environment. So we use those when the electricity is not there. I have a kitchen there which is an old, what is called a dover stove that I can use and I can cook. I would love to see the hospitals a little bit better, but that fear of there's no healthcare would not deter me from coming here. The public transportation can be a little bit better, but I have no problem jumping into the back of a car to get to where I want to go. It is possible. It is doable. So whenever I travel, like I go to different places, I try and show especially the people that have left. This is the place you left. It's still there. It still looks beautiful. Also to attract other people who might want to come to the continent to visit it or even to settle. So that's what I'm doing. The new tourism ambassador for Zimbabwe. I want to say thank you so much for having me. I really appreciate your time. Thank you for coming to see us. Listen, I'm not a big fan. I have subscribed and I will make sure that each and everyone watching us today will subscribe to this channel. This is my new channel. This is my new channel. Subscribe. I'll be so happy to see the comments saying that what am I brought to me here. 10,000 new subscribers. Don't fail me. I love you all. Take care of yourselves and each other. I'll see you on the next video. Bye for now.


Hello and welcome to the session. Let us understand the following problem today. Find the area of a triangle with vertices as the point given in the following. We have 1, 0, 6, 0 and 4, 3. Now before adding the solution, let us look at the key idea. To find the area of a triangle by using determinants, given to us this as a triangle ABC with vertices x1, y1, x2, y2, x3, y3, then area of triangle ABC is given by it has equal to half into determinant of x1, y1, 1, x2, y2, 1, x3, y3, 1. Now let us write the solution now. Here x1, y1 is equal to 1, 0, x2, y2 is equal to 6, 0 and x3, y3 is equal to 4, 3. Now required area using the formula we have stated in the key idea that is half into determinant of x1, y1, 1, x2, y2, 1, x3, y3, 1. Which is equal to half into 1, 0, 1, 6, 0, 1, 4, 3, 1. Which is equal to half into 1 into 0 minus 3 minus 0, 6 minus 4, plus 1, et minus 0. Which is equal to half into 1 into minus 3 minus 0, plus 18. Which is equal to half into minus 3, plus 18. Which is equal to half into 15. Which is equal to 15 by 2. Therefore required area is 15 by 2. I hope you understood the problem. Bye and have a nice day.


That leads me nicely, matter of fact. That leads me nicely into something called front loading. Yeah. And I don't know whether you guys have picked up on this word. Yeah. What is front loading? Has anyone seen that mentioned in articles? Front loading rates, front loading interest rates? Yep. Daniel has anyone else? Anyone else seen that? Right. Okay. Well, I'll give you a, just to kind of simplify what they mean by front loading is that, so central banks will generally have a target interest rate that they want or they think. Yeah. Okay. So I'll explain it to you. So central banks will have a, potentially have a target. So they say by the end of 2022, gosh, sorry, one second. Where's my pen tool? Pen tool, pen tool, right. Right. So they'll say, by the end of 2022, right, interest rates should be somewhere like maybe 3%. Yeah, it's a 3%. And they project that through what's known as, I guess, the Fed called it dot plots, but they typically will have, if we're what second quarter right now, Q2, right, and inflation is at, I mean, interest rates are at maybe 1.5%. What they're saying is, is that in the next two, three meetings, if they have a 3% interest rate target, so what you've got is, you've got their projected interest rate targets that they think they wanna meet by the end of a certain time period, which they think if interest rates and go up that high, then inflation should want to potentially come down, right? So what they'll do is they'll say, okay, so if you wanna reach somewhere around that 3% target and the next meeting, we have to, if we increase rates by 0.05, 0.5, I should say, right, that'll bring us up to 2%, and then in the next meeting and the September meeting, we, if we do another 0.5 meeting or 0.5 increase, that'll bring us up to 0.2, 0.5, and then if we do another one right at the end of the year, that'll take us up to 3%, and then hopefully by that time, with interest rates being at 3%, inflation should come down. That's basically what it is. But the front loading, what front loading is, is basically increasing interest rates now, and then having smaller interest rate hikes later on. So what they might do, and talking about the FOMC and even the Bank of England, they might say, all right, then we'll let's, if our target is 3%, let's increase by 0.7, like a shock. I'm not too sure what a shock is, but basically they're just trying to increase it now. Like a shock, like it's shock. Oh, a shock. Oh yeah, sorry, West, sorry. Yeah, I mean, I wouldn't even say shock. It's just, while I guess the thinking behind it is more to do with, look, if we can increase rates as much as we can now before a recession comes, right, because we may avoid recessions if we increase rates by more to get to our 3% target in the short term, and then maybe later on we can only, we only have to maybe do 0.25, because then let's say for example, the second quarter Q, let's say Q3 data comes out, right? And Q3 data comes out, and then it's, GDP growth is at like 0.1%, and that's coming down from maybe 0.5%. Let's just say, right, just use these random numbers. Yeah, at least then, if there's disappointing GDP numbers, they're not hiking at 0.5%, which could then tip that number into a recession. They're, because they've hiked more in Q2, yeah, by Q3, if that number does come out as, you know, being a poor GDP number, they're closer to their 3% target, which means that they have room to then just say, all right, and maybe we'll do a 0.15, you know, interest rate hike, does that make sense? Because it's harder, it'll be harder for them to rate, to hike rates at maybe 0.5 with contracting and bad GDP numbers. Does that make sense, guys? So that's what front loading is. Yeah, so they're still gonna get to their 3% target, or 3.5% target, or whatever it is, but what they're actually doing is just trying to hike more sooner. And there was evidence of this, in fact, you know, back in, when was this, this was in April, right? April 21st, this year. So a couple of months ago, Powell, you know, Jerome Powell, head of the Federal Reserve Chairman, right? Powell backs front-loading Fed rate hikes, yeah? So he backs that, yeah? The Fed's Bullard says, front-loading could lead to rate cuts by 2023. So what he's saying is, if you front-load now, yeah? Because I guess if they think of recession is coming by 2023, and the recession does come by 2023, again, you can then start to cut rates because you've hiked rates so much that you can cut. So, but I don't really wanna get into that now, but just understanding that they kind of support front-loading, right? And he says it here, right? So in speech marks, quotations, he says, I have also said that we should get to 3.5, so the number's not 3%, it's 3.5 by the end of the year, which is higher than some of my colleagues Bullard said in a Fox Business interview on Friday. The more we can front-load, the more we can get inflation and inflation expectations under control, the better off we will be. In years out, in 2023, 2024, we could be lowering the policy rate because we've got inflation under control. So front-loading is just them saying, let's, what's happened here? It's just them saying, look, we can, yes, it, so we can high-create, it's better to high-create sooner and be more aggressive now than later on, because later on, we could be in a worse place economically, which would then really kind of tie our hands. So there might be a chance that they might front-load seven, yeah, exactly. That's exactly it, Alexandros, right? That's exactly it. So the FOMC meeting, they could actually, and that's why the dollar rallied. If you, I don't know, I can't remember the report or exactly where I read it or someone posted it, but basically, there was something, there was an expectation somewhere here. So there we go. So basically, when CPI came out last week, you know, more than expected, that pushed the expectation that there could potentially be a 75 basis point hike. Does that, and that makes sense, right? That makes all the sense in the world because inflation didn't come down, it went higher. So they said in effect have to act more aggressively. They have to front-load, right? And that's what this pricing was, right? Oh, is anyone in the, is anyone in this, by the way, in the short in the euro, I got in up here. This was a nice, I only got in one position though, which was a bit annoying. Yeah, you got in Daniel, excellent.


Live from Dublin, Ireland, it's theCUBE, covering Hadoop Summit Europe 2016, brought to you by Hortonworks. Now your host, Dave Vellante. Welcome back to Hadoop Summit, Dublin everybody. This is theCUBE, theCUBE goes out to the events, we extract the signal to the noise. This evening, the big event is of course at the Guinness factory, we're excited about that, the customers are all going to be there, drinking that lovely beer. Andrea Capodacasa is here, joined by Hessel Medema. These gentlemen are big data architects with Cap Gemini based out of London. Gentlemen, welcome to theCUBE. Thank you very much. We got the double factor of the big data architects, big brains in touch with customers and what customers are doing, so let's unpack it. I mean, we've been talking all day about how Hadoop and big data, it's kind of reaching adolescence and growing up. So Andrea, let me start with you. So from Cap Gemini's perspective, where are we in this whole big data theme? So after a few years in which, let's say the big data was this technical novelty and was a technical problem, now we start to see with our customers, especially the largest ones. The first large implementations that are going into production. And so we see the focus that is shifting from the technical problem into a wider problem. So you need also to take into consideration the operational and the organizational aspects when you want to transition smoothly into these modern architectures. So Hessel, you guys are both big data architects. What is that in the world of Cap Gemini?   Is that a technical role? Is it a business role? Is it a dual role? Talk about that. So I guess probably it is on the dividing line of business and technology and so many of these kind of roles. I think the last couple of years it was primarily a technical role because we're just trying to implement all these new technologies and learning how to implement them in the best way because nobody had done it before. I think nowadays it is more about trying to establish a business transformation to actually know how to leverage all this information and that's now readily available for all the people in the business. And how much of the role is strategy versus sort of implementation? It depends on the project, of course. And also the suit is depending on the project in general. But I would say at the moment I think we are lucky enough to be considered as advisors for our customers in their transition to the new world. So I would say that especially lately we are probably 60 to 80% in the advisory and in the strategy and in creating this roadmap for a smooth transition rather than the implementation. I mean essentially your company is all about getting people to do something to improve their business or their organization. I mean doing nothing's a strategy, it's just not a very good one. So you're trying to achieve business outcomes. So one of the things you guys are talking about is moving folks to a modern data architecture. Generally big data I guess specifically. What does that mean? I guess it means that you understand your landscape well enough that you can leverage all the technologies that are available in the big data ecosystem to the best of their advantage. And if you look at all the vendors here at the Hadoop Summit there's so many technologies to choose from and but actually leverage them in the best way and I guess a lot of lessons that were already there for example in the data warehousing world that everybody has experienced with for tens of years. We have to a little bit relearn again. So for example how do you manage your data and how do you tackle data quality and all those kind of things? So the traditional enterprise data warehouse, Andrea, has we got a kind of a love hate with it. I'll say that, right? I mean it's obviously driven a lot of business value but it's been a challenge for people. It's like a snake swallowing a basketball in terms of data. It's very difficult to keep up. You have to go through a select few analysts that can get you the answer. And the architecture is you put a big pipe into a big box and then you have some lords over that box. So how is a modern data architecture different than what I just described? And is it fair what I just described? Yeah, I think it's a really good question and the promise of the enterprise data warehouse was to have this kind of unified architecture, this kind of ivory tower with some top that was the Oracle, the definition, full definition of the reality. And this did not work. So this single view is something that cannot be achieved by a single architecture. So what these new architectures are bringing is the agility. So you will have different layers. This is something that actually we will be speaking about later in our presentation at three o'clock. Let me do some sort of promotion. Three o'clock on the second floor. So coming back, there will be still some sort of data that are very well certified, very well of higher quality. And these are, let's say in water, we call the traditional data warehouse. But then we have more flexible ways to join new data that are giving us a better business insight. So we are building on what was the data warehouse that is not the only way to show the data that are being used. But we essentially have this kind of archipelago of data that are interconnected. So this is possible just to these new architectures that are very open, very flexible and very powerful. And not to mention it's very cheap. Is this always cloud? Is it 100% cloud, however you define cloud? From our point of view, we are agnostic. I mean, the data needs to stay in the place where they need to reside. Especially in Europe, you know that there are some concerns about the privacy. There are different nations that have different views on this. So sometimes the best option is to keep them in, let's say, data centers, et cetera. So cloud is an option. In many cases, it's a fantastic option, especially to start very, very quick because you can start immediately focusing on the data rather than on infrastructure. But we are open to many different... But what if I define cloud differently than where the data goes? What if I define cloud as sort of the operational experience? In other words, you know, people think of public cloud, Amazon, Azure, whatever is very simple and agile. Can I replicate that on premise today? Absolutely. Okay, so let's call that cloud. Yeah, yeah, yeah. So is it fair to say that everything must be cloud as I've just defined it? Yeah, I think in your exception, essentially, what if I can rephrase it? Yeah, sure. The users need to focus on their analysis, not on the iron that is allowing their analysis. And so we're going in that cloud in the sense that we are leaving behind, we are hiding the technical complexity and we are leaving the users to what they need to do. That is business. So I wonder if you could comment on the following. So we've seen this emergence of Hadoop and Data Lakes, et cetera, and I want to talk about the business value that customers are seeing. It seems that a lot of the business value is coming from cutting costs. Hadoop is a cheaper storage container than putting it in a million dollar mainframe box, for example. So okay, that's a good way to get ROI, cut the cost. Have we gone beyond that? And what kind of examples can you give in terms of real, tangible business value? I guess the easiest examples are in the main, for example, like fraud analytics and just seeing who's doing any credit card fraud. And with the proper data scientist, it is actually quite easy with all the technology that's available now to find those kind of patterns. And that's like, for example, predictive asset management. I think that's getting very, very popular right now, is that you can actually, for example, maintain very expensive equipment before it actually breaks down. So is that, I want to follow up on that. Is that a technology factor or is it a cost factor in the sense that it's now inexpensive for me to eliminate sampling, for instance, fraud detection? I couldn't do it before because it was just too expensive or is it a case where the technology wouldn't allow it? It was too rigid, too stove-piped. Is it some kind of combination? I think it's actually giving the tools to the right data scientists to actually leverage that information. And just the enablements that a Hadoop environment can bring to indeed not use any sampling, but also just create many, many models of machine learning that you want to test against your data. That really is the big different shape and the agility that it offers. As the data scientists kind of taken over the role of the business analyst, the person who built the cubes and so forth, are they a bottleneck? They can be because in some cases when you have to do something that is very complicated, you need to have very specialized and very bright people that are kind of unicorns in the term. They need to understand the mathematical models. They need to understand the business and they need to understand the underlying technology to crunch this massive quantity of data. However, the solution is to keep the data scientists where it's strictly needed because there are many cases in which, for example, the fraud analytics, you need a data scientist to set up the system. But then the analyst without the mathematical degree can easily use the parameters, can tweak it to identify if there are frauds. So in essence, again, you will have very specialized people for very complex tasks. But in general, you are giving very sophisticated tools that are easy to generate and agile to change for a much wider and less specialized audience. So let's simplify the discussion for us. Let's say there's two types of installations, architectures. One is the traditional enterprise data warehouse and the other is sort of a modern architecture. You guys are espousing. When you go into talk to clients, do you see patterns emerging for each of these that are clearly discernible? Is it still fuzzy? I wonder if we could talk about that, Hessell. Well, I think it is very sensible just to think about your use case. What do you want to use? And so data warehousing technology is clearly not obsolete. But what you do see is that more and more use cases can be delivered by big data platforms. So I think most of the people who are building data warehouses already are doing this for a long, long time. So they know when to build a data warehouse. I think it is very important to actually know what are your right use cases to start leveraging a modern data architecture. And of course, if it's streaming data, probably it's quite likely that you want to use a modern data architecture. If it's unstructured data, of course you want to use Hadoop architecture. If it's structured data, well, I guess it's a cost-benefit kind of analysis that you have to do. So let's assume the use case lends itself to a modern data architecture. What do you see as the critical success factors to getting there? So in general, of course, you need to find the right set of tools for the right case. This is kind of obvious, but sometimes, let's say, the enthusiasm for some particular technical solution is prevailing. This, of course, now is kind of fading this kind of problem. But then, of course, we need also to make sure that we are able to transition to the new architecture in a very simple and smooth way. The users, they wanted to have their continuity when they are after the migration. So we have also this kind of decommissioning strategy. And of course, we need also to take into consideration the user adoption. Most of the users don't even know what is big data. This is the reality. We are super excited about the reality. The users, especially in big companies, they barely know what is a database. So they cannot really understand. So we really needed to think about a communication plan. We need to get them excited about the possibilities that are enormous, about what you can do, like joining the old data, let's say, with this streaming data, the different data, all the data that are so different, so big, so fast, et cetera. So this is something that needs to be done. Cannot be left, you know, the improvisation. But the reward is huge because then the users, we love, we start to love immediately, the new and we forget the old. And then you can decommission much quicker than the old. So let's talk a little bit more about that adoption. You know, you go through the process of, you know, you're consulting with your customers, advising them, maybe they have you do some of the implementation work. They bring their best people in and now they've got this modern data architecture. So you talked about some of the ways in which you can get adoption, but can you operationalize it so adoption can really go through the roof? So I think maybe our biggest success story in this is I think when we are able to actually create physical environments where the data scientists and the business analysts and the consumers, the end consumers of the data get together. So when you create these insight centers, it really provides a collaborative environment where you can actually transform the raw data to actually the business insights that you're looking for. And I think, again, if you then compare it with a traditional setup, it's actually where you used to have the business analyst and the data modeler sitting there from their ivory tower creating these models of which they think will lead to business insights. Now you can have a direct impact on how you're going to use the data and find those insights. Actually, when you can set up a physical environment where people can be close together, we definitely recommend it. It's always a success. So that physical, the proximate collaboration, interesting. Yeah. We joke a lot in theCUBE about the data lakes. My partner, John Furrier, he doesn't like data lakes. He likes data ocean because lakes sometimes become ponds and they turn into swamps. And how do you avoid that dynamic? The data lake just being a bog of data of no value. So even that, we are in a world in which we have the traditional data that even before the big data they were significant. But now they start to explode. You'll see like the terabytes of data that are created by any sensors, any plane, et cetera, et cetera. So you need some processes that make sense of the data that you are introducing into the data lake. And then you need, on the other hand, to give the users a very simple user experience to get the data that they want in a really simple way, not in a technical way, that are able to join the data so they get most of the information that they want. So these are the new challenges. And we do this in two ways. When we ingest the data, we are working on the automatic metadata creation. So we are tagging the data. This is customer data. We are ingesting them only if they are not duplicating, only if they are not replicating data that already existing. We suggest where they can join, other transactions, et cetera, et cetera. Maybe we can make sure when ingest a PDF with a letter, I understand that this letter is from this person and I join it to the rest of this. And this is done automatically. On the other hand, there is an interface, as I say, Google-like, which there is a user. I want to see the highest, the most likely causes of fraud. And then there are essentially a set of information that are categorized and are leveraging this information that I created when I was ingesting the data. So this is crucial because since the data that you are ingesting are enormous and very fast, you need an automatic process to tag the data. You cannot rely on just manual processes. Hassan, when you talk to customers, what's the biggest concern?  Or is it, I have to do this because the organization is pressuring us to do this and I need to make sure it's secure and compliant and the data location is proper and it's governed, et cetera. Which of those seems to be the overriding factor? So I guess from a business perspective, they just want to use the data and they hear all these great use cases and stories. So they always just keep pushing everybody. We really want to apply machine learning to our data or we really want to be able to correlate these data sets. Then of course, when you talk to the IT department of the big enterprises, it's always a discussion and how can we do this secure, how can we meet up with compliance and regulations and all those kinds. So it's really dependent on who you talk within an organization. And I guess that's also why we as a system integrator try to talk to all these parties to align everybody within an organization. What's the engagement model? How do customers engage? Are you typically going, talking to the line of business? Are you talking to IT? Are you bringing the two together? What's the engagement model? It depends on the engagement itself. It depends on the use case that we know. It depends on sometimes there are requests for information or requests for proposal and in which we have a landscape that probably they want to migrate or some use cases that they want to address. Most generally we are asked for a point of view on what they can do with these new technologies. So we are given information about their current landscape. We use our experience in all our customer base and we are giving them some use cases with other companies that are a little bit more advanced in this case. We help them, but we respond to all types of engagements. It can be very specific. I want to do this with this technology, right? No problem. We have experience essentially in all the technologies rather than starting from like a road map that is not well defined at the start essentially. Just to start them and to organize themself for transitioning smoothly. And you guys are part of a big data practice not specific to any industry, is that right? But you have industry focus in some cases. Is that true or? Yeah, so we've got a global big data practice. So you're part of that? Yes, yeah, yeah. So it's a global organization within Camp Gemini that's just, it's called Insights and Data and it's just purely focused on big data and analytics and things around that. But the big data teams definitely has a big data of a global focus because it's just a global problem and all our clients are global as well. So you have to have that global mindset. And also we have the global size because we have 10,000 people and growing with significant rates every year. And so we are very lucky because we work with the most advanced customers that not only are addressing these problems they have already solved them thanks to our help. So we are very happy to help also the new companies that are embracing this transition to get that as smoothly and successfully. Excellent, all right, we'll leave it there. Gentlemen, thanks very much for coming inside theCUBE. Thank you for inviting us. Thank you for having us. All right, keep it right there, everybody. Check out, go on Twitter and check out hashtag CubeGems. You'll see little snippets of the interviews from today. Check out siliconangle.tv. Of course, go to wikibond.com. We just released our latest big data market forecast and always always go to siliconangle.com for all the news. This is theCUBE right back right up to this word from Dublin.


That's where Steve Nash begins postgame. It's been a while since we've talked about late game defensive execution. So why not talk about it tonight? What did you think about the way that that was going down the stretch in the regular, in regulation?  But you know, one or two mistakes, but we also missed two layups, you know, the game's over. So the last play was funky too. The kid trips on the ball and is rolling around on it. And I think our guys fanned out to three-point shooters because that's the only way we could lose the game. And he stands up and makes a shot. So, of course, you could say we made a mistake or two down the stretch. But, you know, more importantly, if we had made a couple layups, game was over. So still plenty to build on. But lots of positives as well. Do you see this as being an evolution for maybe some of your earlier games when you were looking at that defense in those crunch minutes? Yeah, I mean, I think we're improving on the side of the ball. You know, over time, we held them five points. You know, we had good stretches, a couple four quarters, but I think the first quarter, we held them to 21. So there were stretches where our defense was really solid. But we recognize that that's going to be something we have to work on and address every night for the rest of the year and continue to get better at. Bruce Beck, NBC New York. Steve, what about the way your ball club respond right there, especially at the beginning of overtime, making your first three shots? Kind of putting the memory quickly in the background and focusing on the task at hand? Yeah, it was a great response.  You could fold, you know, you could think it's not our night. You could drop your head a little bit. You could come out and lack confidence, but we came out with confidence, made big shots, defended, rebounded and took care of business and overtime. So a great response from our guys after a disappointing last minute or so. Alex Schiffer, the athletic. Hey, Steve, would you make a next game, you know, career night for him? And then it looked like he had an ankle and a hidden face. Just how's he feeling after all that? I haven't spoke to him, frankly, you know, just, just got, yeah, just, just got here. So, you know, he was great, you know, his activity was outstanding, made a few mistakes, but so did everyone. And, and, you know, he showed some ability. You know, he got fouls, blocked shots, steals, went to the basket, scored, made free throws.  It was a big part of our win and he continued to get better. Christian Winfield, New York Daily News. Hey, Coach, similar question, but for Bruce, I mean, this is fifth straight game, I think, in double digit scoring. Just have you seen him kind of start getting comfortable in the offense and where he can find his shots? And then he also hit a three tonight, maybe more than one. What did you think about just his development as a perimeter threat as well? Well, it's great when he makes threes, but you know, that's not why we put him on the floor. When he makes them, you know, we're happy for him and hopefully he continues to develop that part of his game. But, you know, when he's out there rolling the basket and they're scared of James or Kai, and he can, you know, play two on one or three on two and finish at the rim, you know, he's found a niche there. And, you know, like I said, I really, really admire his ability to, to roll and finish and make plays.  He took the ball in the basket coast to coast a few times tonight as well.  We love Bruce because he's such a competitor and fighter and, you know, he's really clever at kind of playing that role or position as a card. Mark Medina, USA Today. Hey, Steve, I know part of this has to do with James' talent, but what else has jumped out to you as far as his ability to blend his game together with the rest of the group regardless of who's on the floor?  You know, he makes others better. He can get to the line, he can finish in the paint and he's always a threat from three. So, he literally can do almost everything there is to do out there and he's been a great leader for us. So, he can control the game.  I think he's been outstanding as far as just keeping his team on track, you know, leading, talking things out, communicating and his passion for the game and willingness and will want to win is fantastic. Sir, it's Zoe, Yahoo Sports. Hey, Steve, I just had two questions related to Bruce. First of all, what does it do for a defense when that communicates at the level that he does? Seems like he's talking a ton. And when did you realize that he could be a roller for you guys? Yeah, I mean, Bruce is a terrific defender. He works so hard at it. He's aware of the game plan and our schemes. So, he communicates well.  And, you know, that's not an easy thing to do for guards who don't, you know, haven't spent their career doing that, but he's picked it up so quickly. He's finished around the rim. You know, he's now very comfortable in those spaces and those positions. And, you know, it's been amazing how he's developed into that role. And I just thought it was a way to keep him on the floor so that he can defend for us.


Where did that science originate from? Does glutamine have an effect on ovarian cancer, especially the aggressive kind, and can stopping or prohibiting glutamine help the kill that your immune system does on ovarian cancer? These are some of the things that we talk about with PhD Dr. Joseph Zundle, who has done research on really that kind of metabolism about cancer on a chemical, biochemical level, and the things that they're finding in labs as well as in research that could very much apply to how we treat cancer every day. Tune in on this podcast episode of Target Cancer Podcast with Dr. Joe to learn about these things and way more.


I hope that you guys have been watching my channel if you're new here. Hi, hello, I'm Lydia, and today we are going to be talking about the first time I ever got sectioned, what being sectioned means. So yeah, today's subject is being sectioned. A section is the right to detain a person in hospital, and depending on which part of the app that is, that depends on how long that can be. Section two of the Mental Health Act is a 28-day hold. Well, up to 28-day hold you can be discharged sooner, non-renewable. Then there's section three of the Mental Health Act, which is three months, then six months, then once a year. That one is renewable and can be used as long as needed. Then there's all nurse-holding powers, which are section four and section five of the Mental Health Act. And then there's the police powers, which are section 135 and section 136 and 137. So the first time I got sectioned was in Preston, and I didn't know the police had powers. And I got sectioned under 136 of the Mental Health Act, and then got put into a section two, and pretty much dragged on the ward because I tried to do a run up between getting transferred, and that resulted in me getting my neck pushed down and restrained and dragged in by a lift, and then literally dragged onto a ward. What hallucinating feels like, because a hallucination is ultimately what got me sectioned. It's hard to explain because it feels real, like what you are seeing is real in your eyes, because it's what you can see. When you stood there screaming at a police officer saying, there's a guy over there, there's a guy over there, there's a guy over there, and there's no one over there, you just feel like you're going absolutely insane, and you're not. Like when people say you're going insane, it's not a bad thing, like it's not.  Like hallucinating is the hardest symptom, in my opinion, to deal with as an individual who struggles with mental illness, because it's hard to distinguish real from not real, and when you live with it on a daily basis, it gets even darker and harder, and in this admission, I was convinced that there was this guy following me, even though I was on a female unit. I was convinced the guy was following me around everywhere, and I literally did nothing. I stayed in my room, I stayed in bed, in a corner, I just didn't do anything because I was afraid. Sectioning is only used if a person is either unable to understand the need for hospital admission, point blank, refusing to be admitted, and presenting as a risk to yourself or risk to others.  But I want to say this, being sectioned is not a bad thing.  I'm not going to pretend it's fun, like it's not, you're literally trapped in a hospital. Most of the time it helps. I've had experiences where it hasn't happened, it's made me a lot worse. Generally speaking, putting me in hospital ends with me getting more agitated than when I'm at home. Where's my drink gone? How have I lost? Because when you're in a section, you do not get to say, I'm not doing this because they can just make you. Obviously they can't force you into therapy, no one can force you to participate in therapy, they can make you go in the room, they're not likely to. They try to ask your opinion, they try to involve you, but ultimately it really doesn't matter what you say. They're the professionals and they will take their own advice. The first time I was admitted, it was I'm a bit of a control freak. I like being in control of my own treatment and knowing what's going on. In that first admission I had no clue what was going on, they didn't give me a care plan, they didn't give me a treatment plan, it was just what they said went. The admission, the admission happened because I was off all my medication and I've said this hundreds of times, I cannot be off medication and coping. I was hallucinating, I was depressed, I tried to kill myself and then I got convinced someone was trying to kidnap me, even though no one was there and I found the police and they put me on the 136th mental health act.   The 136th happened in December, I was placed in section 2 which lasted two weeks. The process of an admission so you get given your rights. On a section 2 you have a right to appeal for up to 28 days and they can give you medication by force if needed. I talked about this briefly in my last hospital vlog which was from when I was on a section in January and I got injected with heliparadol, lorazepam, promethazine and heliparadol and all sorts because I was so agitated, I lashed out. Their response was perfectly reasonable like I can't fault them but I tried to escape and I got sedated, that's how it happened. In the UK physical force is only used if necessary, they are much more likely to give you medication if you refuse medication they can force it and it's not dignified, it's not anything anyone wants but it happens. Another thing they do is they search all of your belongings, absolutely everything, get a pat down, they have metal detectors, they do it for their own protection and for your own protection from yourself. There's a lot of paperwork in the beginning, you can speak to a doctor, once you've had that done and told, you get your medication shown to your room or in some wards they have dormitories, I've been in dormitories and I've always ended up getting moved to a side room because I have anxiety issues. When you get onto the ward though it's so, for the first time it is so intimidating because you don't know what you're walking into, especially with acute wards, you have no idea. I've only had a few bad experiences with patients on wards, my first mission was definitely emotional and I definitely did not want the medication that I had to take but I also didn't want to get forced to take it so I just took it. The thing I found the hardest and I still find the hardest is food and eating because they expect you to eat around a group of like 20 to 30 other people that you don't know. I'm really insecure about that stuff like that anyway, it wasn't pretty like it was, I didn't really do anything, I didn't even charge my phone on that admission, I literally just lay there looking at a ceiling and that was it, had my meds went to sleep, woke up, did nothing, had my meds went to sleep. In adult wards there is not like a daily structure like there's not activity, there's no education to do, there's nothing. Kids wards, you have to go to school but you get to the schools on the wards, there's basically an art room and a TV room and some wards have outdoor areas, it varies depending on where you go but what I can say is it is not as scary as you think, you are not likely to be attacked, no one's going to be running around screaming whatever, you're not going to see people getting dragged out rooms by staff, it's not, it's not how films portray it and I've said this for years and I'll carry on saying it.  If you do have any questions about inpatient, let me know in the comments down below and I'll try my best to answer them or if you want me to do a Q&A on this subject, feel free to, I'm going to tell some other stories from Psych Ward but I thought this would be a good introduction to the subject. So this video is a bit about my first admission, like I said it was scary but the best thing you can do is mix with people and try and talk to a few people so you've got not friends but so you can like build friendships and get to know people and talk to them. A lot of my friends I have met through mental health units, twitter um but the best thing you can do on wards so you feel less alone is have visitors if you're allowed like honestly in my last two, in my last, well not the last admission, the three admissions I had it would have been so much harder if Becca wasn't there because I had been so alone and then again visitors is nice because you get this sense of like you get a sense of the outside world. I mean I know I have very bad anxiety but I always try to talk to someone, I've always made friends on wards and I still talk to most of them now and honestly if they can take you when you're at your worst they're in luck when you're at the on your best and that's where I'm going to end this video. Thank you for watching and if you're new subscribe also if you want to go and subscribe to my monthly mental health box the link will be in the description down below you know I do stickers I have all sorts on there so go check it out it would really mean a lot like comment subscribe all that jazz and yeah I'll see you guys tomorrow with a new video peace


The study found that deep sea sediments were a much larger repository of microplastics than previously thought. This suggests that there may be a much greater amount of plastic pollution in the oceans than previously estimated. This article was offered by Lucy C. Woodall, Anna Sanchez Vidal, Miguel Canals, and others.