I'm Randall Sobi, I'm an Institute of Particle Physics Research Scientist at the University of Victoria and I'm involved in international collaborations such as the Atlas Experiment which is studying high energy proton-proton collisions at the Large Hadron Collider at the CERN Laboratory in Geneva. It's a basic research physics project that's trying to just understand what the universe is made of, its constituents, and just what we're made of. Well these projects such as Atlas record a lot of data, typically we have 200 of these proton-proton collisions we record at 2 megabytes each, so we're recording 400 megabits per second. So this adds up to a very large data sample. So we have computing facilities that are geared to managing this data around the world. We have in the past used the grid technologies, but now we're moving to cloud technologies which OpenStack is a key element of it. So many of the facilities that we use around the world, I mean being an international collaboration, each country or group of people bring their computing facilities and contribute them. So one of our goals is to utilize these distributed computing cloud facilities in an integrated way so all our users around the world can use them for their data analysis, leading to projects like the discovery of the Higgs boson. Cloud technology is still sort of at the beginning for us, we're just starting to learn how to use it in our distributed model, but it looks like it has a lot of potential for simplifying the way we do our computing and maybe making our resources more efficient and more effective for our use. To say we're sort of at the beginning and we're learning how to use them in our current infrastructure. We're trying to bring in the technologies gradually into our production systems, so we have a combination of research projects on the computing end of with OpenStack clouds, but in some places we're just starting to bring them into the production systems. The grid sort of had a lot of promise, but in the end we started to just write our own things and we got kind of isolated in the way from all the development that the commercial world is doing. I think now the cloud, we see that the big users are making a lot of developments and technology that we can use and I think OpenStack is attracting. We can see today all the big companies and so we're trying to figure out ways in which we can leverage their developments for our needs. Having users I think is always a good way to get feedback on the development. I think also the developers like it when people use it. You don't want to build it and they won't come. So now our experience with OpenStack is quite positive.


What a star from Holder, he's charged out of there, tight between Mickelson and Holder. Mickelson's been terrific so far this evening, he had a smashing win early on, but Holder determined to stay out in front, tight going into turn number three. Certainly coming through into third place, it's Gulles who had a smashing win last time and he's right on the pace. Tough first lap here. Yeah, it was a tough first lap, got very very close. It's a pretty good start there from three, Jack Holder right around again, another rider with his back wheel on the white line, he won't have to pay a penalty for that, but he was very very close, T-Y was awfully close coming into that corner, as Jack Holder there runs across, just nudges I think the front wheel of Mickelson, and Gulles there looking to creep up the inside almost does so, but look how close it is here, dirt deflector there just rubbing on the front wheel of Mickelson, couldn't get a lot tighter than that.


All right. Welcome, everyone, to today's Google Search Central SEO Office Hours Hangout. My name is John Mueller. I'm a search advocate on the Search Relations team. And part of what we do are these Office Hour Hangouts, where people can join in and ask their question around their website, around web search, and we can try to find some answers for you. Bunch of things were submitted already, a lot more than I expected. I thought this would be kind of fairly low-key one, but it's always good when things get submitted. But if any of you want to get started with the first question, you're welcome to jump on it. Yeah, so hi, John. We have a question that is kind of keeping us on the edge for quite some time, because we would really love to know when the URL inspection tool will start to work again. Do you have any suggestion or any possible time frame, because it's not available for six weeks? And we had some great results and really fast indexing in the past with the URL inspection tool. And so a lot of our content, the crawling of our content, is obviously stored this way. And we would just be very interested in a possible relaunch. I don't have any news on the timing there. But in general, websites should be able to get crawled and indexed normally within reasonable time without using manual tools like that. So my general advice there would be if you rely on this for normal content that you add to your website is to think about ways to really improve the quality of your website overall, so that our systems are kind of keen to go to your website all the time to get the freshest information. So to me, that would be kind of a signal that something on your side isn't the way that our systems would ideally like it to be. And less that you should use this tool as a way to do normal site maintenance and normal updates. I definitely see its uses in cases where something urgently needs to change. And you made a mistake on your website, and you need to get that updated as quickly as possible. That's something where I think this tool is fantastic for. But for everything where you're updating things, you're adding new posts to your site, if you need this tool, then it feels like you're kind of covering up the actual problems on a website. Because from our point of view, search should just work automatically. It's not something that should require any kind of manual intervention. Yeah, thank you very much. So we'll look into that. So it's not that the crawling is then too long or has any crucial problems. It's just that it's obviously, in our experience, way slower than when you manually trigger the indexing. So that's just because we're curious to see when the inspection tool will be upheld again. I don't have any updates on that. I know the team is working on it. So it's not that it's going away or anything crazy like that. So it is something where internally people talk about it and say, well, people shouldn't really be using it for any kind of normal site changes. They should try to find ways to make that update automatically with site maps and all of that. But yeah, hopefully it'll be back soon. Cool. Any other questions before we get started? If I may. Sure. OK. First of all, thank you for having this call and for giving the information and answering the questions. I hope you will do that. My name is Alexei Ivanov. And I'm from Russia. I represent Rambler and Media Holding. And we have a question. We have asked at the page where you have been gathering the questions. But the thing is, when you sort the questions by popularity, it just disappears. And when you sort them by time, it is the first one. So I wasn't sure if you will be able to see it and answer it. So if I may ask it, it will be great. So the question is quite specific. And it relates to some localization. And the question is about live blog posting markup and the badge, live badge. So what we saw that, for example, if you take bbc.com and search for some articles from bbc.com from the US, you might find that it has a badge live on the result. And the same badge you can see if you search from Russia for them articles. So we did this markup, too. And we found out that for our website, it's Russian, this works if you search from the US. And we have the badge live. But it doesn't work if you search from Russia. And our goal, as you might understand, was to get this badge in Russian results. So any comments on that, maybe you can tell us that this works with AMP, for example, because we search through the documentation. And some details can be found like a tip. Use the live blog posting metadata markup. So your blog can be integrated with the third party platform features. So any comment? I don't know the specifics there. I thought the live blog posting was also something that we're just trying out with individual sites at the moment. So that may be something that is playing in there. But if you could drop maybe some examples into the chat here, then I can pick that up afterwards and pass that on to the team to check out. Or if you have the examples in the question itself, then I can pull it from there. No, we don't have examples in the question itself. But I think me or my colleague will drop some screenshots into the chat here. Fantastic. Cool. OK. Happy to take a look. Thank you. Hi, John. Hi. So I had a follow up on URL submission in Search Console. So this tool is going to be live with more features or with the same features that we had already. Because the way it is taking so much time, it could be we feel like it will be also revamped. I don't have any updates on that. So you'll have to stay tuned. OK. Cool. Hi, John. Hi. Hi, this is Derek from Singapore. So I do have a question regarding conflicting HREFLANG signals. So let's say we have implemented the correct HREFLANGs using sitemaps. But because of some reasons, the web pages also have another set of HREFLANGs in there, even though they are not the most correct version. I know that we have to try to minimize conflicting HREFLANGs like this. So my question for you is, how does Google actually treat these conflicting HREFLANGs? Do they prioritize the sitemaps over the on-page HREFLANG, vice versa? So any comments for that? What kind of conflicting HREFLANGs do you have? So for example, I may have a HREFLANG directive that is correct in the sitemap that says that this page is meant for English US users. But then the source code for the same page may be showing French US. Yeah. OK. So what would happen there is we would combine those. So from our point of view, HREFLANG is not something where we say you can only have one language or country version on one page, but rather you can have multiple country versions on the same page. And you can have multiple different levels. So you could say, this is the page for English in Singapore, English in US, English in UK, and you have a different page for English in Australia, for example. But you can have one page with multiple country regional targeting on there. So if you have some HREFLANG in the HTML and some in the sitemap, then we would try to combine that and add that together. And that means that if you have multiple different country versions across those different things, we would just combine that into one setup. The one place where it would get confusing or where we would see it as conflicting is if you have one country language version on the page and you use the same country language version for a different page in the sitemap file. That would be the kind of situation where our systems would probably have to guess. And as far as I know, we don't have any prioritization where we say sitemaps is better than HTML or better than the headers. But rather, we would just see, well, this doesn't work, and we would probably just drop that pair. OK, thank you so much. Sure. John? Sure. Hi. How are you? So if a publisher owns several different sites and sometimes promotes or recommends the same content across its network, but they're not trying to do Google as that it's original, it's just part of they want to signal that it's part of the same network, what should they do to signal that it's not original content but just being promoted or recommended? Should they use a rel equals canonical or is there some other mechanism? Yeah, usually the rel canonical is the best method to let us know that this is your preferred version. And from a practical point of view, it's not so much that the web spam team would get upset about that situation. It's just that the publisher is spreading themselves thin. And instead of saying, this is one really strong version of my content, it's like I put it on 20 different sites and they can all rank maybe. So it's kind of like diluting the value. But with the rel canonical, you can help to concentrate the value on the version that you prefer to have indexed. Yeah, I think it's more of not trying to even, it's more of a, here's our network. And if you're interested in this, you might also be interested in this. It's not really to rank, in fact. It's just to recommend. Yeah, yeah. I mean, that's a totally common use case for that. OK. All right, thank you. Sure. John, quick follow up on that. So in cases where there's a network with, it's the same business, but it has like 10 websites, let's say. And each website kind of links to another one using keyword rich anchor text. Does Google determine that, oh, it's from the same business, so it's kind of like an internal link? Or can it be a problem? Can it affect or attract a manual action or anything like that? For the most part, we can figure that out, and we treat that as normal links. So it's not problematic. I think it would get problematic if you have a really large network of sites. And if it starts looking more like, oh, you're just using these links for SEO means rather than to kind of like say, well, these are other places where you can also get similar products or you can find our business online. Yeah, I'm asking since there's a thread in the private forums regarding that and somebody has a manual action. And within the manual action, a few examples of those links are from a website part of the business's set of websites network. So yeah. I mean, usually with manual actions, there is a much bigger pattern involved than just like, oh, there's one bad example in kind of the set there. It's really kind of a bigger picture problem. So it can happen that some of the examples are kind of like, if you look at them, you can be picky and say, well, this link is actually OK. But if you look at the bigger picture, it's like, well, there's actually a bigger pattern here. And this is just like one kind of thing that fits into the bigger pattern but is also kind of something debatable that you could talk about it. OK, so should that webmaster do anything about that link? If he or she sees it in the manual action example links, what should they do about it? So my recommendation there would be to fix the bigger issue. Like the broader overall issue first. And if that's something specific with that link where you're like saying, well, actually, I'm going to keep this link because I think it's right, then that's something I would include in the text of the manual of the reconsideration request. And kind of like say, there are five links. And it's like, I cleaned the bigger issue that the five links point at. And there was one extra link there that I think is OK. And I kept that. And one more thing regarding this. So as far as I understand it, this is a network with very big, very large websites. Like they have millions of pages. And the business sometimes buys other websites. So in this case, the links in those two examples that the team sent were from a property that the business just bought. And it was a very large million pages website. And so can this pose as a problem in the sense that if they just bought the website, Google has no way of knowing that it belongs to that business now or anything like that? Maybe. I don't know. I'd have to take a look at the thread. It sounds like there is a bigger story behind it. OK. Yeah, OK, cool. Cool. OK, let me run through some of the questions that were submitted. And we can chat more afterwards as well. I don't actually sort them in any particular order when they come from the YouTube comments. So it's like just taking them as they show up here. I think this is generally sorted by whatever YouTube's ranking system does. I don't know how you can game that. Do you treat anchor text that contains many words differently in comparison to anchor text that contains like two words only? I mean, do you assign more value to those two words when you compare it to anchor text that has like seven or eight words? For example, two words anchor text like cheap shoes and the seven words anchor text is you can buy cheap shoes here. Can you elaborate on that? So I don't think we do anything special for the length of the words in the anchor text, but rather we use this anchor text as a way to provide extra context for the individual pages. And sometimes if you have a longer anchor text that gives us a little bit more information, sometimes it's kind of like just a collection of different keywords. So from that point of view, I wouldn't see any of these as being better or worse. And it's something where, especially for internal linking, you want to probably focus more on things like how can you make it clear for your users that when they click on this link, this is what they'll find. So that's kind of the way that I would like to add it here. I wouldn't say that shorter anchor text is better or shorter anchor text is worse. It's just different context. Let's say you look at a page and test it to see what's there and you decide that it wasn't relevant after collecting signals. Let's say I improved that page to make it the best out there for those queries. Would you automatically test it and try to look if it's the best page out there, even though you've collected all those signals and it wasn't the best piece of content for those queries in the past? Absolutely. So pages can change over time. Pages can get significantly better over time. Pages can get worse over time. That's absolutely possible. So that's something where if we've collected signals and found the page to be like this in the past, it doesn't mean it will always be like that. So from that point of view, if you have pages on your site and you significantly improve them, our system should be able to look at that over time and say, well, this is a much better page now than it was before. So that's something that definitely gets updated. And I think the hreflang question we talked about briefly, I noticed that free websites created on business.site have a follow link in the footer that goes to the page that redirects to google.com slash business slash website builder. Isn't this against Google's guidelines on link schemes? I don't know. I didn't take a look at the exact example here. I think we looked at this one in one of the previous hangouts a while ago as this kind of started rolling out. In general, when it comes to these kind of links, what we try to look at is the specific anchor text there. So if it's something where when we look at it, it looks like, oh, it's promoting this website in a way that it uses very keyword-rich anchor text, then that would be more problematic. If it's essentially just linking to the URL or if it's using the business name as something that is linking to the website name, then usually that's less of an issue. So from my point of view, if this were any random website, I wouldn't really say much there. But since it is a Google property, I will pass it on to the web spam team just to double check to see that they're OK with this. I don't know what will happen there with the web spam team. It's very possible that we already ignore these specific links because these are the kind of links that are very easy for our systems to pick up and say, well, we can just ignore those. But it is always awkward to get kind of these reports that Google properties aren't doing things perfectly. What's the difference between these? But I think the problem is that everyone that asks those type of questions hopes that the answer is going to be, you got us OK, you're all right as well, rather than, OK, we'll fix our site. You're never going to go the direction of letting everyone else get away with it, rather than just fixing your own problem. So I don't know why people ask these questions. Yeah, I mean. Well, forgive all of your penalties. You're right. You caught us. Everyone's fine to do it as well. Yeah. It's just an answer question that gets nowhere. Yeah, I totally understand that it's frustrating, especially if a website got a manual action for buying links or doing this kind of thing in footer links across other sites. It is frustrating to see other sites kind of get away with that. But yeah. If you build a $100 billion network, then I think you have a little bit of leeway to do what you want. That's my opinion. I don't know. I think now. Yeah, I think it's worth also to hold our sites to a little bit of a higher standard just to make sure that we're really kind of doing the right thing. Yeah, but you'll be linking from one very high-quality website to another very high-quality website with a purpose. Is that not fine? No. I don't know. We'll see what the web spam team says. I look forward to your penalty. It wouldn't be the first time. I mean, one of the tricky parts with all of these things is that just because someone works at Google, they don't know all of the kind of ways to do SEO perfectly. So it is very common to see sites across Google do SEO in a way where if it were to come to the forum, people would be like, oh, gosh. But it's not my style, obviously. But I'm not sure Google should be punishing naivety. It should be punishing people that deliberately do things to game the system. If you don't know anything about SEO, then by definition, nothing you've done could be penalty worthy because you're not trying to game the system. Yeah, I think the way I see it more is to kind of level the playing field in the sense that it's not always the intent, but rather kind of the effect. And if our systems can't kind of neutralize that effect on their own, then maybe we need to kind of like manually just kind of neutralize it so there is no kind of negative effect on the search results. John, I had one follow up on this link penalty or link manual action. OK. So I was just going through link scheme document. There are two types of links, basically, that Google has documented. One is a first paragraph, which is talking about link scheme. And the next paragraph talks about unnatural links. So in links, I was just to know in links scheme, I was noticing it was like buying or selling links is against Google guidelines. That was one thing, right? Or excessive link exchange. You will give me link. I will give you a link. And the other thing was unnatural link, which was all talking about unnatural links, like keyword rich was mentioned over there. So I was a little confused about really Google considers both these sections for manual action or unnatural link is related to manual action. Because for the first section, link scheme, I never saw any manual action or any penalty, like some websites are having excessive give me link or I will give you a link. This kind of strategy. I have also personally saw a lot of websites buying links also in the app. They are just buying the links. But how Google treats them. Does Google also consider link scheme as manual action for the websites? Sure. Yeah, absolutely. I mean, it's always tricky to see this from the outside. Because just because a website has a manual action doesn't mean it will not show up in search. So unless there is something that is really problematic with the content itself, then we would keep that website in the search results. We would just try to neutralize the effect that is happening there. And sometimes we can't isolate that effect completely. And we kind of neutralize a little bit more than just that effect. But essentially, just because a website is in the search results and they're doing something shady doesn't mean that they're getting away with doing something shady or that they're ranking because they're doing something shady. So on the one hand, our systems try to automatically just ignore those things. And even if there is a manual action, then it wouldn't remove the website completely from search. So it means that Google also just neutralizes those link scheme links. Yeah. I mean, we try. I'm sure there are situations where we don't manage to do that automatically. And that's what the manual actions are for. And we can't catch everything on the web. But it is one of those things that we work on. All right. Thanks. Sure. All right. Now a question from the new crawl stats report. What's the difference between discovery and refresh? In our case, it's showing 84% refresh. Does that mean 84% of the time Google is crawling known URLs from the database and only 16% of the time they crawl are site maps, outlinks from URLs that they crawl from the known URL database? So I'm not 100% sure of what exactly we would put into each of those buckets. But in general, we do split things up into refresh crawling, where we try to update the information that we have on a site, and discovery crawling, where we try to find new URLs that we've heard about from the website, which could be things like from new internal links or from external links pointing at your website. So that's something where, for a large part, I would imagine, for most sites, a lot of the crawling is concentrated on just refreshing the information that we have. And that refresh crawl doesn't mean that we're just updating the page's content. We're also looking for new links, which we can then use for discovering new content. And yeah, that's generally how we deal with that. Does a link that qualifies as referral traffic, so it gets clicked, get more link equity than a link that has never been clicked on? I don't think so. On the one hand, I don't think we would be able to see what people actually click on. On the other hand, I don't think that would usually make sense. Sometimes links are out there, and they're really important references, but they rarely get used by users. But that can still be a useful reference. I have a question about indexing queries that are non-English. Does Googlebot actually go through translation algorithm in order to understand the meta title, meta descriptions before indexing them? If yes, is the same algorithm that is being used in Google Translate, and how can we be assured when it comes to accuracy? So for the most part, we index the content on pages the way that we find it. It's not that we try to normalize everything into English and then only index it in English. And then if people search, we try to understand the query and translate it and show it back again. It's essentially we index the content the way that it comes. So if you have a website in a language where maybe Google Translate is not so good yet, then we will still index that content in that language. And when someone searches in that language, we will try to map those words and point to them directly as well. So from that point of view, we don't need to translate things into different languages. That said, we did some experiments in the past. And I don't know if that's still live in some regions, especially in places where we don't have a lot of content. What we have done is when someone searches in their local language and we recognize that there isn't a lot of content in that specific language, then we may try to translate the query into a different language and bring results from that different language and show those as well. And say, like, you search for this in your language and here are some results that were in English and we can show you the Google Translate version of those pages. So it's not so much that we translate the pages before indexing them, but rather we take the query and then say, oh, there isn't a lot of information for this, but for the translated version there is. And then we try to search for the translated version of the query itself. And that's something you would see in the search results directly. If you search, then you kind of see that this is happening. I don't know if we still do this or if that's just an individual location, but that is something depending on your location that you might have run into. What about Google News appearing issue for new publishers after the December 2019 update? I don't have any update from the Google News side. I'm also not on the Google News teams. I can't really help you with those specific issues. My recommendation there would be to kind of go to the help form. In general, when it comes to Google News, it's something where what we show in Google News is kind of different ranking algorithms than we would use for Google Search. On many PDPs, we have very old user reviews, professional reviews, can old dates on those reviews create negative impact for that page. So PDPs, I think, are product detail pages, so especially on e-commerce site, if you have for one particular product, for example, a landing page. It's totally fine to have old reviews on a page like that. I don't think there would be any downside to having kind of those older reviews there. I think that can be very useful for users. Is search volume of a brand a ranking factor? How does Google know a brand of a website and show site links, click-through rate, or backlinks? I don't think search volume of a brand would be that useful as a ranking factor, because if someone is searching for that brand, we would already try to show that brand. Anyway, because probably the brand's landing page is very, very relevant for those kind of queries. So I don't think the volume of brand queries themselves would make a big difference there. With regards to knowing the brand of a website and showing site links, that is sometimes hard, sometimes quite straightforward when we can recognize that a website is very relevant to a specific query. And sometimes we can recognize that by the site wide information on the website and recognize, oh, well, this whole website is on this specific topic. Maybe that is the name of the website or maybe that is the brand of the website. So it's less a matter of people linking to this website saying, oh, this is a brand or a matter of people clicking on the links, but more like, well, this website is just very relevant for that specific phrase or word. Event-rich snippets. I have a list of sports events on my website that are imported through an iframe. Can crawlers read the data on the iframe? That's tricky because sometimes we can and sometimes we can't. So my recommendation there would be to think about what you would like to have happen here and to make it as obvious as possible for us that we should be doing that. So if you're embedding these sports events on your website and you want to have them associated with your website, then my recommendation would be to try to implement them directly on the page itself. If you can't do that within the static HTML, maybe there is a way to pull them in using JavaScript in a way that we can render the page and also see those events on the page. On the other hand, if you don't want those events associated with your website, then maybe using something like an iframe is fine, but probably you would also want to use robots.txt on the iframed content itself so that you can really be sure that we don't take them into account. So that would be my recommendation there. I think using an iframe and saying, I don't care if they get indexed, maybe they will, maybe they won't, that's kind of fine. But usually, when you're running a website like this and you're trying to optimize it, you have something specific in mind that you would like to have happen. And if that means you want those things to be indexed on your pages, then make it so that it's easy for us to recognize that. If you don't want them indexed, then make it so that we can recognize that they shouldn't be indexed. Can I use an anchor in an event snippet link? I mean, you can definitely use it, but whether or not we would show it, I think probably we would not show it. As far as I know, the only place where we would show links in the rich results would be the FAQ markup in the answers to the individual questions. I think, otherwise, we don't show links that are included in rich results. Do I have to satisfy all the criteria for event snippets to show? Other websites don't satisfy them, and their event snippets are visible? I don't know. I mean, it kind of goes back to the first part there, where it's like, well, what do you want to have happen? And if you really want these snippets to be shown for your website, then I would make it as clear as possible that everything is OK, that we can recognize them, that you're following the guidelines, and that you're kind of doing everything you can to make them appear. So that would be my recommendation there. And it's kind of regardless of what other websites are doing. It's really a matter of, is your website really doing everything it can to make sure that our systems can recognize that it's relevant and OK to show those snippets? I'm very interested in the development of web stories. As of now, they only appear on Google Search and discover in the United States, India, and Brazil, is there a time frame when they will come to Europe? I don't know. Good question. Whenever I think about web stories, I assume that they're already everywhere, but apparently they're just shown in individual places. The thing with web stories is also their normal HTML pages, so they can rank in the normal search results like any other kind of page. However, I think the embedding, especially in Search and Discover, where it's a little bit the more fancy type of embedding, that is something that is limited to individual locations at the moment. With all of these things, I can't give any prediction of when they will be expanded and come to other locations. Sometimes it's a matter of kind of refining the technical details and the UI. Sometimes it's a matter of policy questions as well. That's always a bit tricky and not something I can guess for other teams at Google. John, just curious regarding web stories, what do you do if you have a certain type of content that you wish to present in kind of a long-form format? Maybe it's thousands of words, but you also want to benefit from exposure via the Discover and Search web stories, carousels. Should you do both? Should you do just one? Isn't it with the web stories being kind of a smaller format in terms of text content? Can that be a problem? Should you canonicalize the two? I think it's totally up to you. So what I have seen a lot is that a web story is a really nice way to build interest on a topic and then to link to the more detailed page. Because a web story is usually something you would look at on your mobile phone. You're kind of like in a mood to be a little bit entertained and informed, so presenting it in a way that is visually compelling and interesting and then having kind of that read more link at the end. I think that's a pretty nice model. But how that works for your specific content is really hard to say. And it is also something where I've seen some sites do it really well in that they have really nice and visually compelling content, a little bit animated, and other sites essentially just use clip arts or just use images from a blog post, where when you look at them in web story format, it's like, well, it's not really that exciting. And probably what I mean, I don't know the details. My guess what will happen there is we might show this web story. But if users kind of get lost on the first couple of pages, we're like, this is not really that interesting. Then they're not going to click through to your site. So now. So in cases where a lot of the traffic is coming from desktop pages, can you have a fallback? So instead of showing the web stories, the same URL shows like a normal blog post and anything like that? I don't think that would work that well with Search, because we would index one set of content for that URL. And if you have a long-form blog post and you show Google the web story so that you get the web story ranking, then you miss a lot of information that is not in the web story. So that's something where I would tend to just see them as separate formats where maybe you're kind of referring to one or the other in the different locations. OK, but if it's not that much content though, is it OK to have a blog post, a normal blog post, and a web stories and the blog post canonicalizes to the web story so that Google shows, would Google show the normal blog post on desktop users and the web story for mobile users? I don't know. Yeah, my guess is our systems aren't kind of designed for that and the outcome is a little bit unknown. I mean, if it ends up that people do this very, very frequently, which, from my point of view, probably doesn't make sense because the amount of content is just very different. But if people ended up doing it more frequently, then I think we'd have to come up with a way to deliberately do this so that you can kind of like with a desktop and a mobile page, you can say this is my alternate for the desktop page and this is the canonical for the mobile page kind of thing. But at least at the moment, I don't think we have any provision to understand that one URL is both a web story and a traditional page. Yeah, yeah. Right, I was thinking since I think, if I remember correctly, with web stories, you can kind of swipe up and put more content there. So you kind of have a bit of content on the image that you're being shown. And then you can swipe up and see like additional text that by default is hidden, but users can swipe up and see the text. So you can put a bit more text there. Apparently, I haven't tried this. I've just seen an example. So I'm guessing you could kind of maybe smaller blog posts kind of retrofit them into a web story for me. I, my recommendation would be to try all of these things especially with web stories, with kind of the newer technologies. It's something where theoretically, you can talk about this in a long time. But it's sometimes more interesting to just try out and see what actually happens. And then you also kind of gain experience there. I know also the team that is working on web stories, they also run the web creators channel on Twitter. And they're currently looking for questions about web stories. So you might want to kind of like find their Twitter account and drop some of the questions in that thread there too. Yep. Cool, thanks. OK, let me just grab maybe one or two more questions and then we can move to more discussions. Some websites in the EU use a JavaScript-based GDPR cookie solution. And this prevents users from interacting with the site, navigating pages, reading content, or clicking links until they have either accepted or rejected cookies. Where this is implemented, will Google's crawling technology be able to crawl and index the content and internal links on the pages? I checked Google's cached versions of the pages, of various pages of various sites that use this solution, and the content does not appear navigable. The links are also not clickable. So I don't know this specific cookie solution. So it's hard to say. In most of the cases that I have looked at, we can crawl and index the content normally. So what is important for us with any kind of interstitial or anything that you use as a pop-up or as a banner on a page is that in the HTML version of the page, when we crawl it, we can find the information that you want to have indexed for that page. And that includes textual information. That includes all of the layout information, the CSS, the images, all of that, also the links on the page. And if those are in the HTML, even if they're blocked with some kind of an overlay or some kind of a banner on top, then essentially from an indexing point of view, we can crawl and index that site. And at least what I've seen with the different kinds of cookie banners that sites tend to use, that all tends to work out. And this is something that is fairly easy to test. On your site, you can use the Inspect URL tool to do a live test of your pages. And then you can look at the HTML version that Google actually uses for rendering and indexing. And within the HTML, you can check to see is my content. Actually, there are my links there. Is it formatted in a way that Google could understand? And if that's the case, then you're all set. And because these tools exist and have existed for a while now, pretty much all of the, I would say, mainstream types of implementations for this, they should be able to get this right. When it comes to the Cache page that we provide, one of the things to keep in mind is this is based on the HTML page that we have fetched from the server. And sometimes JavaScript can run within the context of the Cache URL, and sometimes it can't. And it depends a little bit on the JavaScript itself. The main issue here is that the Cache page is, of course, hosted on some Google domain. It's no longer hosted on your domain. So if you have JavaScript that requires that it runs on your domain and is not able to run on other domains, which is often the case with the security implications of JavaScript, then that JavaScript won't run. So a really common place for this comes into play is if you have a JavaScript-based website and you look at the Cache page and it's empty, then you might assume that Google is not able to index the content. But that's actually more kind of a technical thing that within the context of this Cache URL, JavaScript can't run. So you can't see that actual content there. And what might be happening in this case is maybe JavaScript can run for this particular kind of banner that you're using. And it's also blocking the Cache version of the page. So that's something where essentially that cookie banner thing that is running on the Cache version of the page would also apply there. But like I mentioned, the Cache version is essentially more a technical copy of the HTML rather than a representation of what we would actually index. And to check the indexing, you'd need to use the Inspect URL tool. OK, we have just a few minutes left. So maybe I'll switch to questions from you. And I also have some more time afterwards if any of you want to hang around a little bit longer. I have a question, actually, if you hear me, John. Sure. It is about actually programming languages and their documentations. Since we have so much versions in programming languages, they create really duplicate content or nearly duplicate content. So we are using canonical tags for making only one of them index. Or Google chooses one of them as canonical version and tries to index just one of them. But this is also creating a kind of confusion between programmers because actually we are using old versions too. But when we search for them, we can't find them on the Google search. So we need to find them in the stock overflow while with internal source system with the websites. And some of the developer size or programming language size are using canonical tag in a manipulative way. They are marking the new version as canonical from the older version. But actually, the content is different. Yeah, purpose is same, but the content is different. So what can we do to improve this situation? I think that's always tricky because usually the names are exactly the same. And maybe the way that you call the functions are slightly different. And it's hard to know. Also the queries don't have versions. So even if I search for, I don't know, ECMASsecret6 or ECMASsecret5, I am using just ECMASsecret in the queries. So I understand your point too. Yeah, so my usual recommendation for this kind of issue is to try to keep the current version of the URL stable and to move the older versions to kind of archive setup. So this is something that we run across with events or with different product generations that happens fairly frequently. If you're searching for an iPhone, you probably want the newest iPhone, but you also want to find information about the older iPhones. So what we recommend doing there is then having a kind of a stable URL for the current version, which could be, I don't know, which iPhone version is the current one, whatever number it is nowadays. And when a new device comes out to take the old current version and move that into a separate URL. So maybe you would have the new one is, I don't know, iPhone 15 or whatever it is. And then the iPhone 14 moves to a different URL, which would be iPhone-14 or something like that. And what would happen there is we would not lose those older versions of content, but rather we would notice that the stable URL is kind of the one that is the main version of the content. So if someone is specifically searching for just the newest iPhone, they would find that stable URL. But if they're looking explicitly for the older version, then they would still find the older version of that. And with programming languages, you can probably do something similar, where you say, well, this is the newest version of the JavaScript syntax, and this is the current version. And when something new comes out, then we take the current version, move it to an archive, and say this is ECMAScript 5, and kind of move that to an archive situation. OK, thank you for the recommendation. I will try that. OK. Hi, John. Hi. I have two questions about manual actions. The first is, after a manual action is revoked, is there a kind of time frame in which the website has less trust than it would have without the previous manual action? And the second question is, if you start using the disavow tool, what happens if you completely remove the disavow file after many years? Is there a risk of getting another manual action? Yeah, so when a manual action is revoked, essentially everything that is associated with that manual action is turned off. So if there were issues with links to your site or with the content on your site and the manual action is resolved, then that is completely resolved. Sometimes there are technical things on our side that just take a little bit of time to get updated. So for example, if a site is removed completely from indexing because it's just a scraped copy of other content, and we revoke that manual action, then it takes a bit of time to get indexed again. And that's not because we don't trust the website anymore. It's just for technical reasons, it takes some time. With regards to the disavow file, if you remove the disavow file, then all of those links will be treated as normal links again. And it could happen that at some point, the Web Fem team looks at that and says, oh, well, this is very problematic. And there is no disavow file here at the moment. So we will have to take a manual action there. And that's something that from a spammer point of view, we have sometimes seen, where people will say, oh, I get a manual action. I fix my manual action. I know what to do because I'm a professional at this. And the manual action is revoked. And they'll be like, OK, I will switch on all of this spam that I've been doing again. And that's something that the Web Fem team has also run across. And when they see this kind of switching back and forth happening regularly, then they may say, OK, the next reconsideration request, we will just wait a while to see what they actually want to do. But with, I would say, normal websites where after a couple of years you just remove the disavow file because you think it's no longer relevant anymore, your website is in a new clean state, then probably that is less of an issue. OK, thanks. All right. Maybe I'll just pause the recording here. If any of you want to stick around a little bit longer, you're welcome to do so. In any case, thank you all for joining. Thanks for all of the questions that were submitted. We didn't get through all of them. It looks like there's still a bunch left. I'll try to add some questions, some answers, in the Q&A on YouTube as well. But hope to see some of you again in the future. And like I mentioned, if you want to stick around a little bit longer, you're welcome to do so. Thank you, John. Thank you very much. Thanks. You're welcome.


Back in 2013 the conservative majority on the Supreme Court gutted the Voting Rights Act And I don't even think a lot of people realized what happened, but they did this again last week They landed another nail in the coffin of the Voting Rights Act and this time with a larger Conservative majority and now what's left is a husk of a piece of legislation That was one of the most important civil rights bills to ever be passed in our nation's history And that's really worrying because the answer to the gutting of the Voting Rights Act before the people act All the momentum for that seems to have dissipated and now it just looks like millions of Americans Have been disenfranchised and the Supreme Court is saying That's a okay So from more on this we go to NPR's Nina Totenberg who explains the US Supreme Court Thursday gutted most of what remains Of the landmark Voting Rights Act the court's decision while leaving some protections involving redistricting in place Left close to a dead letter the law once hailed as the most effective civil rights legislation in the nation's history The 6-3 vote was a long ideological lines with just Samuel Alito writing the decision for the court's conservative majority and the liberals in angry dissent At issue in the case where two Arizona laws one banned the collection of absentee ballots by anyone other than a relative or caregiver And the other threw out any ballots cast in the wrong precinct a federal appeals court struck down both provisions Ruling that they had an unequal impact on minority voters and that there was no evidence of fraud that would have justified their use But on Thursday the Supreme Court reinstated the state laws Declaring that unequal impact on minorities in this context was relatively minor that other states have similar laws And that states don't have to wait for fraud to occur before enacting laws to prevent it just because voting may be Inconvenient for some Alito wrote doesn't mean that access to voting is unequal in Evaluating what the voting rights act requires said Alito court should look to what the voting rules were in 1982 When the relevant provision of the law was enacted back then he observed almost all voting was in person and on election day And the mere fact that there was some disparity in impact does not necessarily mean that a system is not equally open Or that it does not give everyone an equal opportunity to vote So this is absolutely Outrageous because in the majority opinion Samuel Alito admits that these laws are Inconvenient for some and yes, they know that this specifically disadvantages voters of color still Doesn't disadvantage them enough and you know these These states have a right to enact Protections to prohibit fraud even if fraud isn't taking place because stopping potential fraud is more important than Disadvantaging people making it harder to vote. This is This is a joke.   It's section 2 but I'll tell you why Just that remaining in place isn't enough if you know what we're gonna read doesn't make that clear enough on its face So the landmark law widely hailed as the most effective piece of civil rights legislation in the nation's history was Reauthorized five times after its original passage in 1965 But for all practical purposes all that is left of it now is the section banning vote dilution in Redistricting based on race and the ban on intentional discrimination Which generally applies to only the most egregious forms of discrimination Eight years ago the court by a five to four majority gut of the law's key provision Which until then required state and local governments with a history of racial discrimination and voting to get federal approval Prior to making any changes in voting procedures when that provision was struck down by the court in 2013 The only protections for voting rights that remained in the law were in section 2 though section 2 has largely been used to prevent minority vote dilution and redistricting Importantly, it does bar voting procedures that result in a denial or abridgment of the right to vote Though section 2 has largely been used to prevent minority vote dilution in redistricting Importantly, it does bar voting procedures that result in a denial or abridgment of the right of any citizen of the United States To vote on account of race or color So the Arizona case was viewed as particularly important because it was the first time the court dealt with the claim of vote denial under section 2 and how to evaluate it so section 2 remains which is important but since The Republican-led voter suppression efforts Irrespective of racialized outcomes aren't explicitly racist in the text of the laws that they pass well Doesn't apply no section 2 protections here It's just it's so purposefully obtuse That it's offensive to me So in order for a law to be unconstitutional According to the Supreme Court using their logic It would have to specifically say we do not want black people to vote But they're not going to say that in the text, but you can design a piece of legislation That will produce that outcome without explicitly saying it. That's what voter ID laws do That's what reducing the number of polling stations in poor Disproportionately communities of color does But the court is basically Pretending to be oblivious to that and I shouldn't even say that because they acknowledge that it makes voting inconvenient for some But I mean, you know not enough minority voters are affected by this and again The text doesn't say we don't want black people to vote It doesn't matter that that's the outcome and that specifically like these laws are being designed to criminalize things that specifically drove turn out in 2020 it doesn't matter They're just trying to prevent fraud and states have a right to do that voting rights act doesn't apply look This is an attack on democracy and Justices on the highest court in the land are complicit in that attack on democracy If we don't pack the courts, which is not likely then I don't know how democracy survives And I'm not trying to be purposefully hyperbolic here, but that's literally my thinking. I don't know how democracy survives when the highest court in the land Greenlights voter suppression that they know Inconveniences people of color in communities of color How does democracy advance? I mean democracy itself is a project You're always supposed to be further consolidating democracy making society more free and equitable Infranchising more people every single election cycle.  It's explicitly anti-democratic and These folks on the Supreme Court are nothing but adilogs adilogs and anybody who reads this should be furious and If you read the dissenting opinion from Justice Elena Kagan She's laying out a very very clear case as to how These are unconstitutional These laws especially the one cited with Arizona. It's unconstitutional and Yet It doesn't matter. I mean look at the things here That they're trying to ban if you turn in your ballot in the wrong precinct Doesn't count the obvious goal is to diminish voting power of minorities in this country and the Supreme Court is Pretending to not know the extent to which these voter suppression laws hurt communities of color and disenfranchised communities of color and also they just don't care because you know the The means justify the ends and they just want more Republicans in power So this is what we can expect more of if Joe Biden Doesn't have the spine to at least Consider for a second it's stacking in the Supreme Court at least adding two more seats to make up for the two That Donald from stole and Republican stole Just fucking ridiculous like I'm exasperated reading the story Because it's a it's bullshit


What's going on, everyone? Sam here with late sports cards. We are ripping 23 Bowman baseball, Jumbo Eight Locks, case break number 51, pick a team style, read off the list of our names and our teams. We've got Alexandra Oss with the Reds, Barry T. Redsox, Ben C. Twins, Dean E. with the Rockies, Erica E. Rangers, Ferhan A. Giants, Gabriel C. Angels Dodgers, Greg M. Brewers, Ian J. with the Diamondbacks, Jacob H. Guardians, that's Jacob P. Tigers, Jared T. with the Orioles, Jeffrey H. Astros Royals, Nationals Mariners, Joe D. with the Cardinals, John C. Pirates, A's, Jose L. Marlins, Kyle S. Yankees, Logan H. with the Cubs and Phillies, Mallory M. Braves, Mike K. Metz, Ryan B. Padres, Scott N. Blue J. Seth K. White Sox, and Steve G. with the Rays. Let's get going. Here we go. Good luck, everybody. Baseball, Jumbo 2023. Is it your Joan Superfractor gonna be in here? It'll be cool. So when minor league players are called up, is it usually bad teams where their players aren't playing well or just to get people that are injured? Like, is there kind of like a trend of when teams will call players up sooner? So a lot of times, if you have guys who aren't that good in the minors that are mostly triple A, they're good in triple A, not great in the majors, those are the guys who call up when starters get injured. And then the superstars, the jacks and holidays, the guys like that will usually wait until they're ready. How do they know when they're ready? Usually they'll have to play a couple of years in like either double A or single A or sometimes triple A. Lunar Glow, MBRS Tavares, for the Braves.  And then once they start really doing well in certain, there's Josh Jung and a Carlos Comanars. Once they start doing much better in like those, a lot of times then, you know, they're kind of ready. So there's not really like a particular time. Yeah, a lot of times the great prospects won't even go their triple A. So just go straight from double up into the majors. Is there like a, like besides batting averages? Brandon Walter, that is two, two 99. Is there like a stat to pay attention to? Average is a big one, I think. I think on base percentage, I think like some of the analytic, analytical stats as well. What's up, Jason? Cosmic will be going at the last baseball break, I believe, Walt. Cosmic will be doing the, it is sold out, so it'll be the last baseball break that is breaking today. Yeah, also, the Pirates will never ever, what's up, Sushi, Organizational, that's another one. And then service times, another big one. Like you, if a player plays a certain amount of games in the majors, I don't know, I think it's a little bit different now. There's a Lunar Creator to 125, Teal. Nice one there for the Mariners on the Color Match. You get like six years on a rookie, on like a prospect rookie contract, but if they play X amount of games in the majors, you lose a year of that service time. Matt Mervis, there was also Anthony Gutierrez, Merv Deswerves, depends, Sushi. I mean, we have breaks that are as low as like 20 bucks. We have breaks that are up to like 2000 a spot. Depends on what you're looking for, I would say. Golden Victor, Justin Crawford, nice one there to 50 for the Phillies. I was trying to understand if there's any like kind of common trends that look out for. Drew Jones first. You're trying to like look at prospects. Yeah, I mean, there's a few, to be honest, a few different things for sure. Braylon Bishop, that is base auto. Nice one there for the Pirates. It really depends on the tier, like what kind of big time prospect you're dealing with too. Junior Caminero. So I guess I have to understand what defines big time. I think it's where you're drafted. I think it's how much money certain teams spend on like international guys, Josue DePaula. I'm trying to think of who it was. I think Samuel Munoz. Yeah, exactly. Usually he takes it pretty unique. There's like certain like Dominican or like foreign-born players that'll be, you'll have like guys from the DR, guys from like Central South America that teams will have used international signing money on. Right. Nice, Myroshentric Martinez. Blue Lunar Crater, two, one, 50. Nice one there. Base, base, base. There's a purple paper, Bleach Jordan, two, two, 50 for the Red Sox. Cam Collier first. Justin Crawford first, back to back. Yeah, there's a lot of, there's a lot of different variables, various bulls that go into certain prospects. Yeah, I was hoping that wasn't the case, but I guess. Yeah, unfortunately. Yeah, it's like every single case is pretty much different. It's hard to keep track of minor league stuff when it's not really, it's not on TV or... Right, no, that's true. That's very true. It's hard to keep track of it. So I'm looking at like some like MLB related, like I can just go on to any sports, I can just like get box sports, like, okay, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Right, no, that's very true as well. But so, yeah, like I said, there's so many, so many things that go into the different ones, you know what I mean? Yeah. So one second, I wanna check one thing. Right now for just like buying in the baseball and like mostly eBay singles so that I don't buy into the breaks, but like, the only thing I've been really looking for is like the teams that are like over 500 and then like people having a high batting average or like a 300 batting average or something. That's kind of what I'm looking at. Like I took a chance on that Dominic Fletcher from Diamondback, he's doing it fine. Yeah, no, definitely. So like, I'm just trying to kind of repeat the same. Nick Voat, that is refractor to 499. Basically, Foto will be first off the line.  So you get like first off the line exclusive cards, Jacob Berry. So it's a little bit more expensive than like a true hobby. There's Juni Kaminaro. Yeah, everything we do for the most part is gonna be hobby and yeah, I don't think I looked into it, Jeremy. I don't think that the Jude Jones Uber has not been pulled. I would have known at this point if it was pulled, it has not been pulled. Marcos Cabrera, first, Lunar Glow. Robert Perez, Jr. to 399. Nice one there for the Mariners. So it comes to kind of like prospecting. If you're looking at a guy that's, you know, he starts at the rookie level. And let's say like every year he's moving up a level. Like that's probably a sign that's like, That's probably pretty solid. That's probably pretty solid. A lot of times you wanna try, I would say more avoid guys that stay in triple A for a while too. That usually means they're like not good enough to make it up. They're just, I pulled the Jude Jones one of one. Oh, your friend Denny of Dia pulled it. Yeah. Yeah, I did see that actually. Volna, I saw Denny of Dia notable card collector, Denny of Dia pulled it. Yeah, exactly, sock. It'll be a hobby box. It'll be a first off the line hobby box. So it's a little bit higher end, like more higher end. Dylan O'Rea to 75, one of 75, the brew crew. Justin Crawford first for the Phillies. Bass, bass, bass. Here's William Bergoya to not numbered for the, Invicta, Jet The Met. Cheerio, there's a Jude Jones first. Like I know there have been Jude Jones that have been super that have been pulled but not the Jude Jones super. That has not been pulled yet. That happened like five times last year or they're in Bowman draft. We have somebody come in and be like, yo, the Jackson holiday super got pulled and I'm welcome. Did they not know what a super was? I don't know. I just think they're either trolling or just don't know. I've been both. Probably. I'll have the green grass. Green grass are kind of fire.  Yeah, green grass. I love green grass. Green grass is a solid barrel. Yeah, very good barrel. I'm surprised they didn't think of a suitor. I know, honestly. It's a good point. It's a good point. It's a good point. They should be good. They should be a sand one. That'd be pretty cool. Hori Rees, nice one there. First base auto for the Angels. Louise. That's a Cuma Rocker site on September. I think they made like a diamond one where it had like two bags on the left, one on the left, one on the right, one on the top. That would be pretty cool. That would be pretty cool. Yeah, I'm all in on new creative parallels. Mervis for Irv, Matt Mervis. Refractor, Hayesus Baez first, 2499. My friend, oh yeah, my friend just called the Joe Burrow one of one NTRPA. I'm sure of that, Forrest. Louise Garcia, base first auto for the Bluejuice and nothing else, yeah. There was one time this, probably assuming it was some kid came in and was like, oh, I just pulled a Jerry Rice Snakeskin field level. I'm like, oh, that's pretty cool. It's the one numbered up two and they're like, no. I'm like, is it numbered at all? They're like, no. I'm like, well, did you get it out of a hobby box? You're like, no. I'm like, okay, I don't think it is. I'm gonna be honest. I don't think it is. I got it out of a Don Russ Blaster. Yeah, right. Like really, dude. What's up, Elucis? Sold out on, we are sold out all the way up until revolution now. That's kind of wild actually. How do you go, guys? Thank you, yeah, thank you, everybody. It's awesome. Hear that, Donny's even pretty pumped about it. Look at that. I never give any kind of a pretty much. Christian Serda, Lunar Glue for the D-Backs. Yeah, give us a backflip, Donny. IRL backflip from Donny. What if one day you'd come in and just hit like the most clean backflip of all time? Yeah, I'd just start practicing. Start practicing? Six months, you guys don't know, right? Plaza romances. Give us a backflip, Donny. I actually do it. Oh, whoa. Bought a macular football hanger pack and pulled a snakeskin bat and a diamond auto paper. Ooh, come on, baby. That is Justin Crawford to $4.99. Refractor Auto. So, that's on that there. Phillies, very nice. Crawford's actually one of the guys I even kind of love people looking at. Yeah. He's a son of a former MLB player, too, which always helps. I didn't even know that. Always helps. Yeah. Like a pretty good former MLB player for the Red Sox legend. What was his dad's name? Carl Crawford. He was very good in Tampa. Great, great, great. Super fast, super good, fielder. Very good, like, contact. Jacob Berry, then got a huge contract from the Red Sox. It was awesome. It was awesome. God, it was awesome. Yeah, see, there you go. There's one. Better stay away from the Red Sox. I bet Forrest loved it. Oh, yeah. Forrest loved it, Vaughn loved it. They're all huge Carl Crawford fans. Huge Carl Crawford, huge Pablo Sandoval as well. Loved Pablo Sandoval. I know you guys loved, who else did you like? Adrian Gonzalez toward the end of his tenure. It was probably really awesome there as well. That's Matt Wollner to 399 Green Paper. I might actually give them heart attacks if I keep going. What's up, Joshua? What's up, Joshua? Yellow Lunar Creator, Yafri Solano to 75. Carl Crawford, bobblehead, did he come up with a trough? Let's go, dude. There's Ambioris Tavares, base auto for the Braves. I know, at the shop I used to work at in Connecticut, my boss had a signed Portland Seedogs helmet of Carl Crawford from like the Miners. Two World Series since those days. So, yeah, yeah, yeah. What's up, Jonathan? At least he didn't pay a broken Chicovielis very. That's true.  Yeah, Pablo Sandoval. Hey, I'm living it now with Aaron Hicks. I'm never going to get over the year in Hicks extension. That was a freaking waste. My god, dude. Blue, you're Donnie. You're Donnie, Pedro Santos. It's a 150. Get it, because you're Donnie. Yeah. So what do you say? There's Bowman Scouts top 100, George Valera to 99 for the Guardians. Nice one there. Someone get this guy out of here. Yeah, look, I didn't realize until now Kyle's actually not here too in personals. Yeah, I was under until I texted him like five minutes ago. So I'll have to change the ticket after this break. Yeah, sorry about that, Pittman. Yeah, no personals over on trip tonight. There's Lime Green, Joshua Baez to 399, Green Paper. I think Kyle will be doing them tomorrow morning. Spencer Jones first. Here we got a opinion on Jackson Merrill. He's good. He's good. Jackson Merrill's good. I just got a refractor, if it's in. I've got three more on the way. Yeah, very good first. Nice. Yeah, he's good. Very good. Yeah, no problem. No problem, Pittman. I'm good. I'm apparently good at prospecting, man. I don't know it. Yeah, no, he's good. Look up. What I would do too is go. It's called MLB Pipeline. I don't know if you've used that. Yeah, I see Matt. I see Matt. Yeah, MLB Pipeline top 100. Just look that up and it gives you every single prospect one to 100. And you can go by team and you can see their prospects one through like 50. And then it gives little blurbs on them too. Would you just stay within the 100 rank and not look outside? No, you can look outside of it too, because there's a lot of good guys who are outside the top 100. There's Ruben Santana. I guess that's a good place to start, though. Yeah, it is a good place to start. And then every time that somebody graduates, AKA goes up to the majors, then everybody moves up and then somebody new comes in too. Gotcha. Somebody new moves to the 100 spot or jumps up or whatever, yeah. Guys will fall out, go up, go down, all that kind of stuff. Cam Collier first. Yeah, personals tomorrow on the daytime on the main channel. 299, Lizandro Rodriguez. Yeah, personals will start again tomorrow on the daytime channel with Kyle. Yeah, that's where you find the bargain. I'm definitely in bargain mode. Yeah, that's where you find the bargain, for sure. So maybe up to 200 and 200. Robert Perez Jr. True Purple to 250. Nice one there for the majors. It's a lot easier too with the newer stuff because there's so many comps on it. It's easy to find somebody who's decent value in 2023 just because everybody's rippin' 2023, everybody's sellin' 2023, everybody's buying 2023. So you can kind of see the fluctuation there. And we're far enough away from a release day where the hype's not super inflated either. So everything has kind of settled out a little bit more, which is good. Because I think like 2019's in my lowest year that I've seen that ball or looked into. Yeah. So. Well, the thing is too, with 2019, a lot of those guys are starting to come up too. And they're going to leave already, you know what I mean? Because that's Ronda and Jay Rod and all them. So those same year guys are starting to make their way up. There's paper. Yeah, this is like with years like this, this is when you pretty much guarantee yourself the most time to get in early. There's Wilson Contreras to 499 for the Cardinals. Tommy Speck, that is a base auto for the Rangers. Ha, ha, ha, top 500, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. Sam felt that amusing. Hilarious one. My sides are hurting. I'm turning the chat off. I'm kicking everybody out. Forrest, you're gone. Vaughn, you're gone. Kyle, you're gone. Everybody's gone. Donnie, IRL, you're gone. Wait, who's on top of it? Bring somebody else in. Well, who will save room when you hit a hit? True. Can't find many of those people out there. Probably not a bad thing. There's Ambiore Stavarez again. That is true blue to 150. Nice one there. Congrats on that one, their brace. True blue, Ambiore Stavarez. Steve, let's test that theory. There's a Yosue de Paula. Zach Jelloff right behind it as well. There's nice. Purple, Jacob Berry to 250. Nice one there for the Marlins. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. I got forces going on a warpath. Oh no. Atomic. It's a 150, Averson, Artega. We opened up a can of worms on that one. There's pink, Ambiore Stavarez to 299. Bleak. All right, I'm blue. Tim taking a spot on each of the Bowman U's. Nick's going in 33, thank you, Justin. I'm gonna be able to see Jake in the shop, that's scary. Oh, you get excited for Monday. It is gonna be Monday Night Madness with Forrest and Sam. I'm already trademarking that. Man, I gotta be here, we'll see who it will be. Oh yeah, from the outside, yeah. Monday Night Madness. I'll be top loading for Forrest at night. Monday Night Madness with Forrest and Sam. So when he pulls like a Poisson, he doesn't do the thing that you'll just do the thing, right? Yes, yes I will. So we can't escape it. No, no. You won't see me do it, but you'll hear me do it. Oh, for cool hearing. Oh, you'll hear me for sure. I'll be sure, I will make sure of that. Thank you, Walt. Walt knows a good employment lawyer for his harassment. Oh boy, is right, Kyle.  There's Colton Couser. I'm gonna have Halle make a thumbnail that says Monday Night Madness with Forrest and Sam. We're just gonna, the players on there, we're gonna have Sean Figgins on that thumbnail. We're gonna have... They should also just be you and Forrest. Yeah, right. There's Arielle Almonte at his base auto for the Reds. Me and Heather got a blaster box of bowmen at Walmart and she pulled that exact auto. I gave her like half the packs and she pulls a freaking blue shimmer and an auto and I got nothing.  Nice. Like you're better at my job than I am, great. You should, you and Forrest need to remake the, or just put your guys' faces on wedding crashers. Yeah. The cover, you could be on Vaughn and he could, Forrest could be on Wilson, be perfect. That's your thumbnail. Be perfect. And then maybe some players in the background. Yeah. Drew Jones first. Cause I'm sure like Forrest is gonna have to look of a Wilson space on a wedding crashers thing. Right. Working with you. True. We'll give you ideas Forrest. Take them or home with them. Monday Night Madness. There's Mark Vientos to 250. We've got another Arielle Almonte. This time blue lunar crater for the Reds again. Very nice. It's a 150. Like we're opening the packs. Heather goes, I got a signed card. I guess. Were you like, whoa, whoa, what is it? What is it? I told her, like as we're opening up, like, all right, we are looking for Drew Jones. Drew Jones is who we need. If you see any Drew Jones, let me know. What's up, Ty? There's on Hell's Nile to 125. Teal of Shimmer. No, I'm sorry, Joe. There's Jacob Berry. I know, man. I was sad. I felt bad about that. Joe M. There's Roman Anthony. That is nice for Fraktorado to 299, or 499, 499. That's when they're Red Sox. Joe joined one of the tiered. I think tiered number four on release day of Flawless. Got the Thunder. Pulled him a couple. Pulled him like, I think there was a Treyman Auto. There's a Shagel, just Alexander Auto, 10 or 15. And then one of the diamonds was a Thunder as well. But then we pulled the Giddy RPA to 10 or something in the next box. There's a on Hell's Nile to 199, Purple Pattern Paper. How are you, Lee? There's LED Lacroupes to 150, True Blue for the Reds. Got the Nose Dive back in the hobby. Let's go, Ty. What do I like to hear? Do what we got in terms of, Spateroni's coming in now. Some more Foto Breaks. Another Bowman U, some more Bowman U. What are we down to on Bowman U now? I think that's, well, Revolution is the next one we have to sell out. But Bowman U. That's not Bowman U. That's Bowman U. Bowman U is down to seven on the first one. That's awesome. We drop you guys a quick link to the first Revolution is down to six Nets, Pistons, Warriors, Clippers, Sixer, Sons, all on sale. Six to go. Bowman, we got Tier One coming up next. That's gonna be a good time. Love me some Tier One. So he's a very clean product. Overall, it was Lazar Roman says, US way to follow. There's Jackson Cheerio, he's still golfing with me. He goes, I don't go. All caps. It's so funny when Sean tells it, he was like, I get this text from Donnie on all caps. If he goes, I don't go. And I'm like, whoa, I've never seen Donnie get that mad. I wasn't even mad, it was annoyance. There's Anhal's Janam, a base auto for the Guardians. First, Mr. Honey Nut Cheerio. Cam Collier, first for the Reds. They're here other than us tonight now. Serena might still be here, but Jake will still be here too. Yeah, I think Jake will probably still be here as well. Everybody else probably won't at this point though. Well, Jake better be here at this job. Report him to the Better Business Bureau. We'll spam report on Jake. There's Fernando Tautis Jr. 125, blue pattern paper. For the Padres. I've got a place. I went to Arroyo. That is nice. Brock Jones, atomic, two 100. Congrats, Raze on the first auto. Brock Jones. You also have a green grass coming up as well. Of Dion Jorge, two 99 for the Rockies. Green grass. Montez, Zack Nito. What's that? Zack Neto. Amit, Donnie. Tintawa. I just went there two 99s. Tim Tawa. I just went there two 299s for the Diamondbacks on the White Speckla. Tim Tawa. I think like, you're a force holding that.  Matt told me. He was like, want to hear something really disappointing. And I was like, oh god, what? And he goes, Zack Nito. His name is actually from Neto.  That basically nullifies an entire shtick right there. Spencer Jones, sky blue paper to 499. You can still say it. Right. Spencer Jones. Right. Exactly. I don't know, is it worth it? Maybe. We have a Rick Bowman draft in a lot of us. We haven't pulled any of its firsts in a minute. Those are the only really Nito Nitos. Right. Exactly. Theoretically, exactly. Jeff taking the Warriors and some PYTs. Sixers gone. Thank you, Randall. And another photo. Thank you, Addison as well. Came in. Yeah, we got two one boxes. 21 prism first off the line. Football coming up today.  I like being in the know. Yeah, my voice doesn't know that you are. What's up? What's going on? Right. That's what I'm saying. J-Rod's 299. That's one there for the Mariners. Muncie, Cabrera, Serda, Poguero. There's gold. Brandon Davis for the Cubs. 450. That's one there. Bowman Scott's top 100. Josh Young. Sky blue paper. Freiland Carnassio, 2-499. Red Sox. Jacob Berry first. Los Romantes first. And base Edward Cooley in in there as well. Cooley in. Ah, that's why. I thought it was blue auto for a second. I'm like, where is it? But now it's just the back of one of these carts.  Lugo Daniel Guiarte. Baby, give us a good color here. Nice. Gold. Michael Harris. Nice rookie auto for the Braves. 46 of 50. That's gonna have to start fighting everybody and sorting and chipping, apparently. Yeah, I guess so. All right, so one there. Congrats, Braves. That's awesome. That's the first Michael Harris I pulled out of this. That's awesome. Congrats on that again, Braves. Great card right there. Johan Jalaponte. Refractor to 499 for the Blue Jays. Blue Jays. I feel like we haven't seen a lot of rookies. No. Very little. Like the only one, I think I've only pulled, I pulled a bunch of Leo Perguero, who's on the Pirates. I pulled a lot of his rookie autos, but other than that, I don't think I pulled a single Adley. I pulled like two Brett Babies. That's the first Harris I pulled. It's like it, basically. Spencer Jones. Maybe like, what's his face? Alvarez. Francisco Alvarez on the Mets too. Lunar Glow, Miguel Blaze for the Red Sox. We got Paris. He's a stud, dude. Yeah. Rookie of the year last year. He's a stud. No, are they? Yeah. Yeah, no. What? Did Pena get rookie? No, not rookie of the year. He won World Series MVP. Yeah. I won World Series MVP. I'm not ripping enough. I'm trying. I'm trying, Walt. No, that's weird. That's a weird rule, Vaughn. They had two mound visits in the same inning, so we know how to come out. So you have to take your pitcher out with two in the same inning. Vaughn Brito, base auto for the Rockies. So if you have two, so basically like you can, you're allotted X amount of mound visits. Okay. Which is like where the pitching coach can come out, the manager can come out, the infield pitcher, you know, blah, blah, blah. So apparently if you do one in the same inning now, your pitcher has to come out. I didn't know that. You mean two in the same inning? Or two in the same thing, excuse me. Yeah. Garrett Mitchell. I did not know that was a rule, to be honest. I did not know that was a rule. That is straight, Sweeney, two, four, 99. No, I get the reasoning too, because then you just have, you just, after every three pitches, you'd have a mound visit. In between, for every single batter, you'd have a mound visit and strategize what you're going to throw. Could you do one for inning if you wanted? I don't think so. I think you're only allotted X amount. That makes sense. Yeah. No, I didn't know that until today either. Learned something new every day. Look at that. Wow. Jacob taking the Sixers as well in number 34 for Revolution. See, another ton, not a ton of teams left in Revolution. What's up, Mark? How you doing, man? Yeah, it's been a while. How you been? Doing well, man. All complaints here. All complaints here. Oh, Matt Mervis, Merv the swerve first. Jackson Holiday, Leroy Glow, and Future First, Frayley and Carnassio, the 199. Finally got my eBay back up and running pretty smoothly again. Yeah. You had to, like, ship out, like, 30-thirds. Not only three today, which wasn't bad. Hi, Paula. But Heather's going away for, she's going, Junior Keminaro, she's going up to Virginia to visit her dad and her friends on Monday, and she's going Monday to Monday. So my eBay is going to be kind of nuts. Troy Johnson, First Base Auto for the Marlins. I'll be playing a lot of video games. I sold my Saus Gardener Auto, I think I took too little, but that's like... 399 was that the one you got out of down rough? Yeah, what you're gonna get for it? Like it's 40. It's not terrible That taxes is probably like now like 35. That's not terrible. Honestly. So how like a promotion thing on it? Oh, got you got you got you Yeah, so it's like me That's not bad Take it and put towards something else. Yeah I mean that you got out of your personal that you read. Yeah, so I mean it's kind of like I mean the card itself Was probably averaged like three bucks. So yeah Kim Collier So one nice thing about like getting a huge card out of a box and justify like oh well technically this car's like $4, right? Exactly, exactly. I made a huge problem Colby Thomas We sold your Your optic preview out of that too, right? Yeah, it's awesome. I sold that for about the same or 20 years Oh another Justin Crawford purple this time to 250. Let's go Phills. Who's got the Phillies? That's big time right there Where is Philadelphia? That is gonna be Logan H. There you go Logan. Congrats buddy to Justin Crawford's coming your way Nice little case we got here and a Justin Crawford base on I mean a base base car base car No, no base car base car slow What's up? Yeah, oh, yeah, yeah, Philly's did very well and Jorge Ruiz that is to what one or two ninety nine the white speckle Nice one. That was a good box right there overall overall very good box and last box Blue pattern paper Christian Hernandez see her to 125 and base All right, let's do a quick recap here everybody Very solid overall for show for show for show. We've got autos George Valera base autos Troy Johnson Juan Brito Angel Jenao Ariella Monta Tommy Speck Dambiora Stavarez Luis Garcia Jorge Ruiz Braille and Bishop Refractors to 499 you on jalapante Roman Anthony Nick vote of 299 white speckle Jorge Ruiz Tim Tawa Brandon Walter purple to 250 Robert Perez a blue lunar crater to 150 Ariel Monta true blue and yours Tabares and Mario Shendrick Martinez. We've got Brock Jones atomic to 100 We had a gold Michael Harris Jr. Rookie Auto 250 That's awesome for the Braves and to Justin Crawford's one refractor to 499 one true purple to 250 I'll do it for the break guys. Thanks again for getting this filled up up next. We've got the theater uno


Okay, Joey, so tell me what we've done today and what has been the purpose of the two different forms of activism we've taken apart in. Okay, so the different forms of activism we've taken apart in today are both peaceful forms of activism, especially the save movement. It's a love-based approach and we are just there to see the animals. The idea behind it is we're there to bear witness and today, these days, we have technology like iPhones. We can bring the photos of these animals' faces out to the public and we can say, these animals are innocent beings. They obviously don't want to go into a slaughterhouse and we can say, this is where your food comes from. We get people to connect with the animals. Also, as an activist, it helps you realize that these are the animals you're fighting for and speaking for. And then you take the conviction that you get from doing bearing witness and you come to outreach, AV, and we educate the public as to why animals have moral value and why we can eat plant-based alternatives, which are healthier so it's unnecessary to put them into slaughterhouses. I mean, some days you'll wait hours to get a van that comes past to pay tribute to the animals before they go in. What do you feel like you achieve with that and why does it keep you coming out day in and day out? I think it gives you perspective doing this. You realize that you're not the one who's suffering, the animals are. So to be out there for a couple of hours is nothing compared to what the animals are going through or about to go through inside that slaughterhouse. What we gain is a lot because we are spreading the message out there. I mean, it's pretty hard to get 50,000 people out to the front of a slaughterhouse to see what's going on with the animals, but we have our phones, we have our Facebook accounts and we've all got about 1,000 people on our Facebook, 50 people at a slaughterhouse and we can spread it like that. And this is how we curve animal consumption and hopefully phase out these industries. What do you think to those people that say the way you behave is almost like an extremist? An extremist. I would say as vegans we want peace, okay? Now, UK is already a country who cares about animals, okay? People in this country care about animals. We just live in alignment with that. Now, people might say they might honestly believe, and I believe people are good people that they truly do care about animals, but their actions don't reflect that.  So we can't love animals while we're consuming their flesh or paying for them to go into a slaughterhouse. And all we're doing is politely educating people on connecting these dots.  Do you feel that you're maybe blaming the wrong people there? Blaming the wrong people? Okay, so I don't place blame on slaughterhouse workers and I've said that to them.  Now, as consumers, we have to understand that we're making slaughterhouse workers work in horrific conditions. In a slaughterhouse, it smells like blood and feces and fear, okay?  That'll be a perfect job. Sometimes it's the only job they can get, or sometimes they're pushed into it, and it's only because of society. Now, do they have responsibility for stabbing animals in the throat? Yeah, they do. But do the consumers have even more so of a responsibility? Yeah, they do. So you can't just point the finger at slaughterhouse workers, and the reason that we're having sometimes they're getting aggressive is because I'm challenging their belief systems. I'm challenging people's belief systems, deeply ingrained belief systems, okay? Of course, people are going to be a little bit uncomfortable about that. They've been taught eating animals is the way for their whole lives. They think they love animals. They're consuming their flesh. I'm telling them that animals have moral value. It's got to rustle up some emotions. But I'll always remain polite to them, okay? I understand it's not any of the consumer's fault that they've been programmed to believe that we need to eat animals for protein. It's not their fault. I used to eat animals four years ago. So I understand all of this, and I've interwoven that into my advocacy. So today, for example, some of the activists actually trespassed on the avatar property. Do you sometimes think that the movement is pushing limits that shouldn't be pushed? I think desperate times, sometimes things like this happen. Okay, that's not my personal way of advocating the message, but we have to understand that what's going on in there is extreme. What's happening to these animals is extreme. If there were dogs in there, people's pet dogs that they care about, they'd be helping us. The public would be helping us stop those trucks. The public would be trespassing too. Now, am I saying we should be breaking the law to help animals? No, I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that when we weigh up what's actually happening to those animals in there, I think that they have a pretty solid reason for being upset. It's interesting that you choose to call them slaughterhouses rather than abattoirs, which is the term many people use here in the UK. What is their thought process behind that? Abattoir is like a fancy French name, and we like to use euphemisms. We like to call flesh meat. We like to call cow flesh, beef. So we use these euphemisms, okay? And this is what tricks us. This is what hypnotizes us. That is a place of slaughter that we're murdering animals against their will. If you don't like the word murder, we're killing animals against their will in a place that is legal. This is legal. So, yeah, of course it's a slaughterhouse. I mean, my words don't even do what the animals go through justice. I mean, we know that many people that work in abattoirs are low paid, often migrant workers here in the UK. Do you think really kind of insinuating that they're inhumane helps anything? Are the people that work in there inhumane? I think the people that work in there are conditioned to violence. Was that their choice? No. This is culture. This is society is violent.  And they didn't choose to work in there. That wasn't their first choice when they were in school.   And this is human rights violation. And an animal rights violation. I don't want them working in there. I'd rather them picking strawberries or working in some plant-based milk factory helping us create vegan products, which are ethical. They don't cause post-traumatic stress disorder. They have to take drugs to work in these places because it's so horrible in there. The rates of domestic violence in regions that have slaughterhouses slaughterhouse workers are higher. So it's conditioning them to violence. If you're kicking cows around all day, stabbing pigs to death, slapping animals around all day, you think you're not going to, you know, it's not a fast step to hit a human, is it? I mean here in the UK they have some of the kind of highest welfare standards for animals. Does it really feel fair to be targeting? The UK's high welfare standards. I'll tell you something about high welfare standards in the UK. And in Australia, RSPCA approve and monitor gas chambers where they lower pigs in a dungeon, in a cage, down into gas. And they thrash around in there and scream for their lives and suffocate in CO2 gas. The gas reacts with mucous membranes inside their body and they cause something called carbonic acid. And they thrash and suffocate in their last moments. It's horrible. Now this is RSPCA approve. So I mean we've seen footage of activists standing in supermarkets blocking kind of families and kids from getting to the meetiles. It does kind of all feel a little bit of a step too far sometimes. A step too far. If they'd seen what was happening to these animals in the slaughterhouse they'd probably be on our side. To politely educate the public is not as extreme as what's happening to animals in slaughterhouses. So you have been to a kosher source house and actually confronted rabbis there asking if do they feel what they're doing is religious. I mean some people could take that as quite offensive and almost maybe targeting a particular religion for that reason. No, no, see I don't target any particular religion or any particular person who slaughters animals. I think it's all bad across the board. Now people who justify killing animals in the name of God are questioned. I say do you think God really wants this? Because I don't. I don't think God wants that. And I ask them do you think a slaughterhouse is a place of God?  These are the questions I ask religious people. I've got nothing against their religion but when you use your religion to justify an immoral act like abusing human beings or killing innocent animals then I step in and ask people. Do you feel like that's your place to question such a person? Okay, so I'm defending animals. I'm speaking for animals. So yes, it is my place. These animals can't speak for themselves.  I'm not in it about that. I'm in it to defend animals, to speak up for those who can't speak for themselves. Okay, if I don't, who's gonna?  They can't. So you've compared the animal rights movement to me. You've likened it to the slave trade and applied in South Africa. Talk me through the thought process there because that feels quite extreme. Okay, so baseless discrimination is what allowed the transatlantic slave trade to happen. Baseless discrimination, they are different to us. So we use that baseless discrimination to justify immoral treatment in the same way that we discriminate against different species of animals. Okay, which is baseless discrimination. We're saying pigs, cows, chickens and fish look differently to us. They're not my pet dog. So it's okay to treat them as objects, as products. We're talking about sentient beings. Am I saying a pig is the same as a human being? No. I'm saying that the baseless discrimination is what's the same. Speciesism is where we discriminate against animals based on their species. So dogs we care for. Inherently, dogs and pigs are the same.   So why should we treat each other differently based on some superficial difference? So this is what I'm saying. Animals are not free. Are they? So if they're not free and they're a sentient being who values freedom, liberty just like us, what are they? They're a slave. We're exploiting innocent beings for their body. Human beings can voice their suffering. They've got a chance to escape. Animals have no chance. They are vulnerable. They cannot speak up for themselves. They cannot form and mobilize as activists and form a coalition against the dairy industry. That's what we're here for. We can speak for them. And it might make people uncomfortable to be speaking up for animals. But we're not here to make people comfortable. I mean, I can be polite. I can be polite, but I'm not going to betray the animals. If abolitionists didn't speak up for what happened back then with slaves, it would have never been abolished. And I'm sure it made some slave owners a little bit angry to not have their slaves picking their cotton for them. But it's not about the slave owners. In the same way, it's not about the animal farmers. Now they can move into more ethical industries. There will be a demand for vegan products. And the farmers, we don't want farmers out of a job. We want them to change the job. We want their job not to involve, directly involve a victim. I'm pretty sure farmers don't see themselves as slave drivers. And obviously it's a huge source of income in the UK. What do you say to those farmers that say, this movement is trying to put us out of a job. This is our livelihood. This is how we live. Now the reason farmers don't see themselves as slave owners is because they don't see animals as victims. We victimized animals to the degree that they're not even considered victims. As for there being money in owning animals and objectifying and exploiting them and killing them, money should not, we should not value money over life. Okay, this is the root of all that's wrong with the world. Farmers aren't going to be out of a job when they move into vegan products.  And there is a massive demand for plant-based milk alternatives. Meat-free alternatives have gone up 987% in the UK alone. Just last year, okay. So there's going to be room for plant farming moving into other industries. I mean, we have to think of it from the victim's perspective, not from the oppressor's perspective, which is human beings, okay.  I think they might be a little bit nervous because the conditions on their farms they know how bad they are. Free-range farms, I've seen them. And when activists go in there and bring footage out and show it to the public, you know, they look guilty, don't they? And this is what I'm talking about. This isn't about the farmers feeling a certain way. There's beings in there who are being persecuted sent on slaughterhouses, trucks and killed, okay. What role do you think young people play in all this and how much of an explosion in this movement, have you seen? Well, the thing is with young people, they are less conditioned. So they are less indoctrinated to society. They're more free thinkers, okay. The longer that you've been in this society, the more heavily conditioned you are to it. They want to make a change. They want to do something good in the world. And the best thing you can do is change yourself. If you want to change the world, you change yourself. Your lifestyle habits and the youth are the future, aren't they? They really are.  In the same way now, this movement believes that animals deserve the same rights. Now, do they deserve the right to drive a car? No. We're just basically asking for fundamental rights of freedom and liberty. The right to walk around and not be harmed or exploited or viewed out as a product. And this is what this movement's about. The exponential growth of the movement is the slow it cannot be measured. It's growing faster and faster by the year. There's something called a snowball effect where something happens painfully slow and what we're seeing is it picking up and it's starting to explode.  Vegans everywhere are standing up. People are going vegan en masse. Plant-based milk industries are raking in the money. Dairy is going down, which is good. Dairy farmers can find some soybeans to farm and leave the cows alone. Do you feel like you've got a kind of property that you need to fulfill? Do you feel like there's an aim that you won't rest en masse you've achieved? Well, I've always had a desire to speak for animals when I realised I wanted to help someone.  Now, what's that pig supposed to do when no one even cares about them? This is what fuels my fire.  What is the end goal of all this? What type of world would you like to see us live in? I don't want to see a world where animals are treated nicely before they are savagely killed. I want to see a world where animals are free and liberated. That's the world I want to see.