Okay, we have some mics set up. If people have questions that they would like to ask Dr. Caldecott, we'll have a little more music at the close. So don't worry that we're gonna leave you all musicless. But I don't think we should have any more music. I'm intervening. I want people to stay with their feelings. Because when you have music, it makes you feel happy and united. And I want you to stay with what I've told you and hold on to it. Don't lose it, please. Don't lose it. So I think no more music if that's okay with you. Thank you. Hi, Dr. Caldecott. Paul Kangus here. Germany is shutting down all of its nukes. And the way they did it, are doing it, is they passed a solar payment policy that requires the utilities to pay 99 cents a kilowatt hour through homeowners who feed the solar onto the grid. In your talks, do you ever mention the example of Germany creating this massive solar housing project, each house having 100 solar panels? And that way they're able to shut down the nukes. They banned fracking this year using that. Yeah. Well, I didn't talk about nuclear power today. Because actually nuclear power is part and parcel of the nuclear weapons industry. And there was a psychologist in the Pentagon in the 50s, I think, it's in one of my books who said we should get into the peaceful nuclear atom to make Americans accept nuclear weapons more readily.  But the problem is you've got huge quantities of radioactive waste. Some isotopes last for a million years and it's going to seep into the water supply, the food systems for the rest of time and cause epidemics of cancer, leukemia, genetic disease and birth deformities. In all future generations, not just humans but animals and plants as well. To call it clean and green is obscene. So yeah, Germany's been good. They're saddled with a huge amount of waste. They buried a lot of their waste in a salt dome. I think it called even and it's leaking and they're having to dig it up now. It's like at WIP, the facility in Arizona. So, you agree, I mean. I was just hoping you might mention that as a solution since Germany. Well it is, you've got enough wind west of the Mississippi to supply the whole country with electricity if you upgrade your grid. You should have solar panels on every building in California.  On every parking garage.   You should unplug everything at night. San Francisco just passed this law requiring all new homes to have solar panels. Well why not old old homes? Where's Jerry Brown? You should be retrofitting and right now you could supply millions of jobs like FDR with a new deal. You could upgrade the economy if that's important to you. And help to save the planet. You're absolutely right. So get onto it. There's a lot of money to be made if you're only smart. Yeah. I've only been using solar for 26 years. But what I wanted to bring up is the most important, almost nuclear disarmament that we got on September 20, 1963, the day before I was born, John Kennedy went to the United Nations and called off the nuclear arms race, called off the Cold War, called off the space race and said we should go to the moon as a joint effort with the Russians. And one of the people who removed him from office two months later was General Curtis LeMay who bombed Hiroshima. And part of the reason that we haven't dealt with this is the collective PTSD we have as a society knowing that we don't have three branches of government. We have two. We have the overt government we were taught about in school and we have the covert intelligence operatives who are the real government. Obama came from the CIA. The Clintons worked with the CIA under George Bush I. And these are, you will not hear this on NPR. You won't even hear it on Democracy Now. Okay, well, we all understand that. We all know. But it's for a bit? Yeah, we'll take it on and fix it.  Well, there must be a way. I thought, what, you know, Susie and I went for a march on, what's the avenue? Venice with Patch Adams, about 50 people, stark naked. I was talking in the Herb's Lecture Theatre where the United Nations Treaty was signed next door was Gorbachev talking. And Patch Adams, and it was Y2K and there was a real fear that we could have a nuclear war by accident or meltdowns because of the computer rollovers. And the White House, they spent billions of dollars trying to fix it. And Patch went to the microphone and the media were simply uninterested. And so Patch Adams said, I've been telling Helen since August we should take our clothes off and have a naked march. And I thought, oh, God, Patch. And I went to the microphone and I said, who'll go in a naked march? Almost every hand went up. We came into this red velvet foyer. He got his gear off. I left my scarf on, which covered the naughty bits and my pearls. Everyone else stripped Stark naked and we led them out on Venice. It was quite cold, but we didn't feel it. And someone's scarf started chanting, nudes, not nukes. And I realized the human body is beautiful, be it fat, skinny, tall, whatever, beautiful. And how vulnerable the human body is to radiation. And that's how we treat our patients. You know, we get you to undress. It's a sacred profession. And guys were driving by and they go, pull up and start clapping. They didn't even know why we were doing it. We got to the corner, it was cold. So I didn't want to go to an American police station, you know, Stark naked. So we came back and no one wanted to put their clothes on. And you've never seen such a group of joyous people who'd done the right thing. And it was beautiful. And then of course we're in the New York Times the next day because the media like to see the naughty bits. They do.  Do you know what? You'd get in every single publication and television in the world. In the world. And you would embarrass those generals inside and all those others. You know, nudes not nukes. I mean, that's just a thought to get the media involved because they won't touch it otherwise.  I'll come with you. Yes. Dr. Caldecott, I have not so much a question but maybe you can update me. I'm from Albuquerque. Speak loudly. Okay, I'm from Albuquerque. And I remember growing up during the Cold War, the Manzano Mountains is hollowed out as a nuclear facility. And if, rather when they do drop the bomb, it would blow up all of New Mexico, Arizona, part of Colorado, Utah and Western Texas. And it so terrified me growing up, growing under that kind of a threat. Because I thought I was safe. Is there some sort of an update or is it even worse than I'm thinking? No, it's the same. But also know that all nuclear reactors are stationary nuclear weapons. Inside each is the equivalent of 1,000 Hiroshima bombs. And there are 15 large reactors in Ukraine, including Chernobyl. 40% of the land mass in Europe is radioactive and will be for hundreds of years, if not thousands. I don't buy European food. You don't know what's radioactive. Never buy Turkish dried apricots or figs. Turkey got a hell of a fallout and sent all its radioactive tea to Russia because I was so annoyed with them. But there's a war in the Ukraine. Easily you could melt a nuclear power plant down with a missile or a bomb or cutting off the external electricity supply. You can't have nuclear reactors in a country that's at war. If Europe was covered with nuclear reactors as it is now in the Second World War, Europe would be uninhabitable for the rest of time. So just know that you've got sitting time bombs all around in your country. And it's the same, if not worse. Yeah, let's go quickly, yeah. Okay, just quick the observation about the Vietnam era, the China that President Nixon wanted to drop the bomb on Hanoi and he decided for the mass of Christmas bombing. We have all our Navy out there with our nuclear submarines. The ultimate of the Vietnam War was to regain China. Not just Vietnam. My question is the bomb is like the gun. There are both tools and for self-destruction. The question is what is the tool used for? What industry? The industry is war. How did we define war? War, I've come simplified it to that war is the death, destruction, elimination and ultimate annihilation of the enemy. War is butchery. War is butchery. Butchery, I've just been at the Veterans for Peace Conference and these kids are set off as cannon fodder, you know, 18 or 19, hardly with any whiskers on their face. Brought up with our pledge allegiance to the flag and all this rhubarb and they go and they say see pigs rooting around in bodies of dead babies. And it just blows their mind. It's butchery. Thou shalt not kill. And this whole society is based on killing and every congressperson is a corporate prostitute paid for by the military industrial complex. They've got, you know, for an F-35 or whatever these damn killing machines they made, the seats are made in Florida, the straps are made in Massachusetts, the wheels are made and so they put in every congressional district and they say jobs.  You don't have jobs to kill people. I'm sure Hitler said, well, we have to have jobs to make gas islands. Just one last observation. Be quick.  Because you eliminate any feeling, any human feeling you have for anyone else. And that is the difficulty of bringing these young soldiers back to life. I know, thank you. Let's be quick. Helen, I'm so delighted to be here. And here you changed my life 33 years ago. A doctor crossed the bed from me and an unconscious patient said, Sharon, come with us. You've got to help us start PSR in the San Francisco area. I did, and of course in the Stanford area and then in San Jose. And this has totally changed my life. I've spent the last 33 years working at the face of where US and Russia has its problems. And I'm still there. And I have created a plan with the help of Jack Matlock, Ambassador Jack Matlock, and yes, the American Committee for East-West Accord and a number of other people that will create a nationwide public awareness campaign in this country. And we must have it and you must be on the front of it. And my question for you is, will you, some way or another, show us how we can have another first, the last epidemic film? Because my friend and I, who's here with me, we paid $75 to get that film so that we could circulate it all over this entire area. And we did. Play it in every church. Yes, but we need a second one. We need one that's today. Why? It's all the same. Nothing's changed. But we need an update. What? We need an update of that. Well, no, let me say there was a film of me giving a lecture in New York with B-52s flying over here. It's half an hour long called If You Love This Planet made by the Canadian Film Board and one in Oscar. Get that from the Canadian Film Board. The only thing that's different is the haircuts. Well, still, I don't, I think it works just as well and people are absolutely numbed at the end of it. Any rate, I would like to give you my book that's about the last 33 years of my life so I don't know what's happened. Thank you. Thank you so much. Okay, next. There's like three obvious... Lift the bike up. I wonder if you could comment, take your pick on the inside job, 9-11, the obvious one, but let's say the sending of the nukes to Cairo Operation Pluto, the BBC documentary dead in the water to cover that one. And then I remember a little over a dozen years ago mentioning to you that I had been arrested on Hiroshima Day where the nukes come from in the 1950s being on the Port of Chicago Highway. That video is in Greg from Tracks and YouTube and I beat them in Federal Court, but that also is a 44 explosion, the first detonation or uranium unless you believe they tested an untested bomb at Hiroshima. So if we call them on their inside jobs, you short circuit these wars, especially 9-11 and that's so obvious with the third skyscraper. So what are you going to do? Well, talk about any of those three that you care to expose our Americans. Yeah, but love, love, I live in Australia. I'm not American. You are. This is your country. I'm not a shrink there in denial and rationalization. Well, don't argue with me. I've given you your marching orders. I'm 78.  I pass the torch to you. You either take it, go. No. Okay, next. My name is Herbert Weiner. I have a simple question. Shouldn't the United States base its foreign policy on the UN Charter? Absolutely. So what are you going to do about it? Well, I was thinking, maybe people could go to the local State Department branches and protest any form of social policy, go in a group, record the discussion, and then publicize it throughout. So will you organize that? If people are interested. No. Will you organize it? They will be interested if you're the leader. They'll follow you.   Just speak your truth. No, wait a minute. Don't go. Do you promise me you'll do it? I have a lot on my plate. No, you've got nothing else that's important. Wait a minute. Wait a minute. How many people in the audience are willing to do this? No, I'm asking you. Don't bifurcate what I'm asking. All right. Let me answer your question. No, I don't want to. No, you answer my question. I will do it in my own way. OK, thank you. Yeah. My name is Marcia Peters-El, and I'm a community activist. I'm 78 also. I'm a great-grandmother. Wonderful. And I'm worried. Yes, so am I. So what I've been reading is the next American Revolution by Grace Lee Boggs, where she talks about how the racism, materialism, and militarism can only be defeated when we're willing to sacrifice.   I've got two consciousnesses. One is an oppressed person, and one is a liberate of whatever. My point. So thank you. So I work with an organization called Community Living Campaign, and what we work with is seniors. And what we're attempting to do is empower seniors so that we can be more engaged and more active. And I want to urge everybody here to do what Grace Lee Boggs tells us to do and what you're telling us to do, which is to be introspective, to look at ourselves. What kind of legacy do I want to leave? What is a message I'm giving to my friends, family, neighbors, church members, synagogue, mosque, whatever? What am I doing every day to make a more peace of a world? Thank you. And I challenge us each to do that. And thank you so much for all your work. Hi there. Could you speak to what's going on at UC Berkeley? I heard they have like a small reactor there, and they're connected to Livermore. Do you know? I think they do, don't they? Who knows? Yeah, they've got a small reactor. MRT's got a small reactor. Yep, should be closed down. They're the nuclear nuts. Hi, Dr. Caldecott. I'm teaching in a San Francisco Public School. The students are mostly refugees from Central America and migrants. And we aim to try to imbue social consciousness through different things that we teach. Speak right into the mic loudly. From in a San Francisco Public School with students who are Central American refugee families. And we do infuse social and political curriculum and do exchange programs with other kids who are refugees in other parts of the world. Do you have any suggestions for us as educators about other ideas we can use with youth to get them involved in what's going on in the world? Thank you. Educate them. Get my film if you love this planet and show it to them. If you love this planet, go to the Canadian Film Board. You can download it and show it to them. You've got it. What you have to do is shock them into reality. Look at what I did with you today. And a lot of people have left, unfortunately. But it's like I'm your doctor. And I've told you you've got pancreatic cancer. You see T-Scan shows it. And that you might have six months to live. It's what I've done. So you've got to understand the gravity, the profound gravity of the situation. And so I mean, I've been driven all my life when I first read on the beach, when I lived in Melbourne and the whole city was annihilated in the nuclear war. And the whole world was. I lost my virginity. I lost my innocence. Then I went to medical school, first year medical school. I learned about genetics, radiation, mutation. And Russia and America were testing bombs like there was no tomorrow in the atmosphere. They knew what they were doing. 114,000 people in America got thyroid cancer. But God knows how many other cancers were caused by that. They're killers. They're murderers. They should be in jail. We don't lock up the criminals.  All drugs should be made legitimate. And we should be treating the people who are drug addicts because they're sick. And we shouldn't have any homeless people in the streets who are psychotics, who are addicts, who are, you know, they need to be in homes cared for and loved and bathed and looked after. After Reagan emptied all mental hospitals, that's what happened. Go. Sorry. Like many people in this world, I grew up learning to duck and cover for the nuclear bomb, you know. For the past 30 years, I've been working with children with art because I think that learning to counteract the effects of the machine are really, really important. Learning that two different colors make a third color or a multitude of colors. Kind of like the woman before me, what can we do for children? Children can be terrified by everything they hear. And of course, all of their hyperactivity is in some sense a reaction to this. What kinds of things have you seen that children themselves are doing? During the 80s, children would say, there won't be a nuclear war because my mommy and daddy go to meetings every night to stop it. If the children see us taking responsibility for them, we can't do anything more for them. That's what we must do. It's our fault. We've brought this on the planet in our lifetime and it's our responsibility, not these dear little innocent things, to fix it for them. So, apart from your lovely teaching and the colors and art, get out at night and do what you have to do. Think about it, okay? Yeah. No more at the queue. That'll be enough, okay? Yeah? Yeah, I remember when John Kennedy and Nikita Khrushchev were about the only people who had the power to kill us all and now it's spread from there. A minute job of Iran, the Kims of Korea, these psychotics have the power to do this. And governments can't be trusted. That's how these people rise to the top. They can't be trusted to get rid of atomic weapons. Somebody's going to hide them. Somebody's going to keep them. One world government, there'll be people, psychotics in charge of that then. One of the biggest boons to all civilization with separation of church and state. So what's your question? My point is this, taxes pay for nuclear weapons, taxes pay for wars, taxes, it's not paying your taxes. And we- That won't work. Excuse me, no, nothing else has worked. We don't need necessary taxes to pay for sidewalks and streets that always come up or take care of the poor. And that's the best way to keep plutonium and uranium in the ground is when it takes tremendous amount of government interference and influence. Okay, but you didn't ask me a question. We can make comments and you can make comments. No, no, because you've had enough time. Thank you, thank you. Yeah. Hi, Helen. Thank you so much for setting an example for the rest of us. I'm Kay, I would like to also include the San Francisco Grey Panthers to the list. We didn't make it somehow. I, what I'm seeing this year is most of the major books talking about all this really horrible stuff we're doing is why are we letting them do it? Yeah. It's one I ask myself and I look, what can I do? Because the obedience, the silence. It reminds me of something that somebody told me, Cathy, as we were driving in. America's a cult. If you've ever been in a cult and I've been in two cults, everyone follows orders. Everyone is obedient, like the Jim Jones cult where over 900 people committed suicide by drinking the cyanide, laced kool-aid vat. That's what America's doing. It's a cult. Pledge allegiance. You know, at every ball game, there are planes flying over, there are flags. I remember after 9-11, I'd just flown into Eau Claire, Wisconsin to speak at the university. And I got up in the morning and there the planes flew in and I thought, my God. I walked across the campus for a swim and a woman approached me and she said, do you believe in Jesus? And I said, I'm an atheist.  And I thought, what sort of campus is this? Then I got out the Bible because I thought that might be appropriate. All these kids marched in, hundreds of them ashen-faced. And I read to them, shucks, it's from Luke.  And then I got a Greyhound bus across America three days later because there were no planes flying except those to take the Bin Laden family back to Saudi Arabia. And the whole country was swathed in flags and I thought, please, no vengeance. But you could feel this nationalism and the need for vengeance. And I'm afraid that's where people are, aren't they? Unless they're inspired by someone truly great like FDR. Or Jesus, who is a great psychiatrist.  I mean, let's be frank. You might be offended by that, but that's the truth. But he was a great psychiatrist and what he said is lived down the ages and what he preached, if we all lived like that, be pretty damn good. But we need a leader who inspires us with, I don't know, love is not the right word, is it? No, no. Like Joan of Arc, except she fought and killed.  And that's what I've always had. No door remains unlocked. If it's locked, I go through the side door, the back door, or I get in to see whoever I have to see. It's always locked. I get in to see whoever I have to see. It's always a way. There's always a way. There's always a way. But wait and see what your psyche tells you to do. Stay with the pain. Yeah. I want to thank you for giving me the answer when the discussion always turns to the despair. You start going down global warming. You start going down the nuclear thing. And you end up in just, oh my God, how do we get out of this hole?  And your solution was so brilliant. It is absolutely perfect. And I hope you know what I'm referring to. I do. And I would love to hear you say it again. Oh, you put. It was just, it is always the answer. You put birth control pills in the water. And what stimulant, and what else? It was, it was your ephrodisiacs. It was ecstasy in RU 487. That's right. And when it gets down to there, where there's no place left to go, I say, well, this is what Helen Gallagher says. And from there, we can lift it back up. You know, so I want to just say. There is one very important thing that's happening, and it's Trump. And he's starting to say, you know, Trump, we use nuclear weapons. And for the first time, for about 20 years, the New York Times is starting to write Sanger and Broad about the button and the, and the football and how a nuclear war could start. For the first time, because people are getting scared, because Hillary said, what if he gets his finger on the button? Well, what if she gets a finger on the button? And incidentally, I'll have to tell you, there are three alternatives the president has. Counter force is to strike the missile silos. Counter value is to just hit all the cities. And the third one is to hit both cities and missile silos. Three options, all of which would end life on the planet. Yeah, last but not least. Thank you for coming and speaking with us. I have a really basic question that I just don't have an answer to. Okay, just what is it? Why do people make up the word nuclear rather than saying the word nuclear? Because George Bush said it. Is it really that simple? He had a speech defect and he said, nuclear and everyone says, nuclear. How many people in this audience say nuclear? Raise your hand. Nuclear. Okay, that's okay. It's not a word. That's a good point to end on. It could also be the name of your next book too. Okay, so I think I'm signing some books afterwards, right? And I thank you for being such a lovely audience and I pass the flame to you.


What's up guys, mine is Michael and welcome to my YouTube channel. Today I stumbled upon this post 30 days training for beginners on code forces and I have to say, this is actually pretty crazy. Basically, this guy named 710 gave a list of 250 problems. I think yeah, 250 problems to solve for beginners. Okay, and he basically listed them all in here and he had this community link and basically these problems focus on two parts, which is solving these topics of math, strings, number theory, binary search bit, mask, data structures, games, brute force, greedy, geometry, two pointers, constructive algorithms, implementation, combinatorics and they range from 800 to 1,000 to 500 and basically what he's doing is that he's solving 10 problems a day. I just have to say this is actually ridiculously crazy. And basically what I'm doing, I don't know if this actually works, but I'm actually doing this sort of thing. So I actually tried solving 10 problems a day and I actually did end up solving at least 100 for two days. So I was instead of doing like his list, I've been doing a two OJ ladders, which is I think is where he actually got the problems from. So yeah, I've pretty much the past few days, past 10 days, I was just grilling grinding all these problems, trying to do 10 problems a day. And yeah, I feel pretty accomplished. I was able to actually do 100 problems in 10 days. And this was the this is at at at two OJ ladder, the first ladder, which is 100 problems of code forces rating less than 1,300. So I was able I did finish all these things. So I'm not sure if this actually works. Like, I don't know if you could if doing 10 problems a day actually does help you, but might as well try. So he has he has this group, you could you guys could like try to sign into his group. But yeah, he has like, well, not this one.  So like this group, he has like 10 difficult, difficult problems of 1,300, 1,400, 1,500. And he does that that many times per day. There was one thing that he was he also had another group. Let me see an easier group for pure beginners. And yeah, I don't know where that that is. Oh, hold up. I think it was surprisingly, I did solve most of those because apparently those were the same, the same group, the same problems as at two OJ, actually. So I think he got most of them from at two OJ. And let's see contests. No, not this one. So yeah, he has a group for the hard, harder ones. So to try to break from green to green to sign. Oh, yeah. So this is the one where it's the beginner one. Right. So I did, because of some of the problems did overlap. I actually I didn't solve these, right? But so I did, I did all of the at two OJ 100 problems, right? At two OJ in 10 days, which is surprisingly pretty good. So I'm getting the hang of doing like these problems pretty quickly. But yeah, the this is the group that he has. It's if you want to search it up, I'll put the link down below. But he has this group where you're basically solving 10 problems every single day. And you try to, yeah, you try to solve 10 problems every single day. If you, you give each problem, at least 30 minutes, if you can't solve the problem, you look at the editorial and try to code it up yourself. But yeah, because of some of the problems did overlap with at two OJ. It seems like I solved a lot. So it seems like day one, I solved all 10. Day two, I solved seven, day three, I solved six, day four, I solved five, day five, I solved two, day seven, I solved one, day eight, I solved two. So yeah, apparently I think, I think you could. So right now I'm currently gray, because I'm not, I'm not really good. I'm just pure beginner. But I haven't, I did solve all these in 10 days. So that felt pretty good to me. But yeah, I'm going to actually try this out, actually. So I'm actually going to try solving all these problems and see if that actually does work. So but yeah, for the past 10 days, I was just grinding out at two OJ ladders to see if, see if this works. So I'm not sure. I don't know what my rating is right now, because I didn't actually participate in the recent contest. So I don't know what my rating is, or how well I could solve these problems, like the rating wise. But yeah, I did, I did solve most, I just solved most of these. Surprisingly, I'd solve most of these without looking at the editorial. Some of them I did. I have to agree, some of them I did. But yeah. So what I'm doing is I'm basically just doing at two OJ ladders. I finished all the less than 1,300 ones. And yeah, and then I might do 1,300 to 1,400. These rankings to see if these would actually work. So yeah, I'm not sure if this actually works. Apparently I did solve most of these actually. Huh. That's strange. I think, I think most of them are, are previous contests. So that's probably a reason why I solved most of them before. But yeah, I have a feeling if you do solve 10 problems every single day, you're going to improve. Okay. At least you're speed, speed wise. Even if they're easy problems, you're your speed wise of implementing will improve. So yeah, that's what I'm basically doing. So yeah, these are the problems you could, I'll put a link in this description down below the post of 710's training. Apparently he did get to green, and which is what I'm trying to go for. I'm trying to get to green. But so yeah, let me see 710's history. Yeah, so he did get to green. Which is surprising. Oh, but he was, he was wavering on green and gray. So maybe he was already green. I don't know. I don't know how many problems he solved. So yeah, this guy's good. This guy's, well, this guy's a pupil, but so he's, he's, he's still, I think he's still pretty much beginner, but he did get to green. So that's something that I'm trying to achieve because right now my rating is pretty bad. My rating is abysmal. Yeah. If you want to see my rating, my rating is like, whoosh. I did, I dropped a lot here in the sense of being in 2019. And then I stopped caring about it when my ranking kept dropping. And then from here I actually started practicing. So I did get a little bit better the last few months and then I started dropping again. And then I got better and I dropped again. So yeah. I'm not sure what my rating is now after solving 100 problems in the past 10 days. So I don't know if that improved me or not, but I'll, and I didn't go in the latest contest. So I'm not sure. But yeah, the next educational round is going to come up and then I'm going to try doing that. And yeah, oh, tomorrow is the ad coder contest. So I might actually do that also. I don't know if, not sure if, well, doing good on code forces does translate to ad code, but ad code is more mathematical. So maybe, maybe, maybe my ranking would improve on ad coder. I'm not sure though, completely not sure. But yeah. That's what I've been doing most of the past few days. I'm sorry I couldn't upload at all. But yeah, maybe I should do a virtual contest. Not sure yet. But yeah, I'm, yeah. We'll see, we'll see, we'll see. So yeah, let me know down in the comment section below what training program you guys are doing. I know there's another training where, for absolutely completely beginners, like you've never coded before at all. And I think it's, is it this one? Is it this one? I don't know. It's not this one. Yeah, I don't know. I can't find it. There's one where it's like, there's an academy of training, where it's like pure, pure like new programmers you've never programmed before. I think it's this one, newcomer group. Yeah, it's this one, this one. Asuit university training newcomers. So if you've never programmed before, you should definitely try this out. So this is, this is like a few 10 problems for just basic functions, arrays, strings, geometry, recursion. Some of these I'm not, I've never actually done before myself. So I don't know if they might make, I know like data types is pretty easy like this. This is just typing words in a code like print hello world, right? So all these 26 problems you should be able to solve is like completely new beginners. Yeah, but then they get like significantly more difficult. And then later on, they get pretty difficult. General easy. So it seems like I solved six of these. I don't know. I don't know if these are difficult or not. Not sure actually. I don't know. But yeah, I'll put links down in the description down below. I'll put them in a comment on these training pages to see if you guys would want to do it. And yeah, great comments to subscribe. I'll check you guys later. Let me know what kind of training you guys are doing to try to improve your competitive programming rating, ranking. And yeah, I'll see you guys later. Peace.


Hello and welcome. I'm Gayatri Garimella from Oregon State University and I'm really happy to be presenting our work Oblivious Key Value Stores and Amplification for Private Set Intersection. This is joint work with my wonderful co-authors, Benny Pinkers, my advisor Mike Roslick, Neetriu Let's get started. In Private Set Intersection, Alice and Bob each have a private set of items as input. They can use a PSI protocol to learn items they have in common. Here, Bob, who learns the output, learns the intersection items, namely letters T, A and L, and learns nothing else about Alice's set. In a large number of PSI protocols, you encounter the following scenario. Alice has a function F. For most keys, she doesn't care what this function evaluates to. For a small number of keys, she wishes to convey a specially crafted random value to Bob. This small set of keys depend on her input and she wants to keep this private. So the goal is for Alice to compactly convey this function to Bob while ensuring that Bob can't distinguish if he's evaluating F on one of these special keys or a key outside of it. In PSI-related applications that we consider, the values associated with the keys are uniformly random. So they end up using polynomials for their task of conveying key value pairs while hiding keys. Polynomials have the property that when you interpolate through values that are random, the resulting polynomial F is uniformly random and ends up hiding the special keys for someone evaluating it. We see polynomials used to obliviously store key value pairs in a host of PSI papers. In this paper, we formalize and study the general notion of oblivious key value stores as a data structure to convey key value pairs obliviously. We catalog various existing constructions including polynomials that could classify as an OKVS. In particular, in the PSI context, we looked at the Paxos data structure which was used to build the most efficient malicious secure PSI in PRTY20. Paxos is a binary OKVS that uses the analysis of cuckoo hashing with two hash functions. PSI protocols need cuckoo hashing to work except with negligible failure probability, something of the order of 2 to the minus 40. The Paxos paper describes an asymptotic analysis of the cuckoo hashing parameters, but it remains non-trivial to translate them into concrete parameters needed to instantiate PSI in practice. They rely on heuristics to instantiate the PSI protocol. Our goal is to build a more efficient OKVS with cuckoo hashing using three hash functions, which is known to be much more efficient. Again, we are not equipped to determine the tight concrete bounds for negligible failure probability. Our first construction is to extrapolate the parameters of Paxos and design a binary OKVS using three hash functions. However, we would still like empirical confidence for our chosen parameters, but empirically verifying negligible failure probabilities like 2 to the minus 40 is infeasible. Our next contribution is to show some amplification techniques. Note that we can easily measure failure probabilities of the order 2 to the minus 15 even on our personal laptops. We design methods to use an OKVS with a fairly large probability and convert it into an OKVS with negligible error. So for some constant c, we show how to compose OKVS with error p into an OKVS with error p to the c with minimal overhead. Thus, we are provably amplifying the failure probability of an empirically verified OKVS. This allows us to choose our concrete parameters for our OKVS with cuckoo hashing with three hash functions. Finally, we show that our improved OKVS gives us the fastest malicious two-party PSI protocol on slow and medium networks by plugging in our better OKVS into the construction of PRTY20. And we also show many applications where OKVS can be a plug-in replacement for polynomials to improve their efficiency. Given a set of n key value pairs, we can encode them into an object s. Later, we can use this data structure s to retrieve our key value pairs. If we probe or call the decode function on any of the special keys, it returns the correct associated value. If we probe s on keys outside the set, we learn some value that we don't care about. When the associated values are random, you cannot distinguish if you probe the object s on an encoded key or some other key outside the set. This makes the key value store oblivious. Let's look at some properties of an OKVS. Given an OKVS s, the first thing that we're interested in is that we want to compactly encode the n key values. So if the OKVS has a size m, then we want m to be as close to n as possible. We can represent the encoding and decoding of an OKVS in terms of this matrix multiplication. During encoding, we need to determine what each of the rows of the matrix k are. Each row is associated with one key. Then we need to solve for vector s and a multiplication of k times s will be the decoding that gives us the set of values that we're looking for. Though it's useful to have some links, if the values of the OKVS belong to some field and the matrix k consists of the elements of the same field, we end up with a vector s, which is our OKVS, which consists of m field elements. A special case of the linear OKVS is a binary OKVS. Here we restrict that the elements of matrix k consists of binary values of 0 and 1. Now let's look at some existing examples of an OKVS. Our first example is a polynomial. So we can encode a set of n key value pairs into a polynomial say s. That satisfies the constraints of these key value pairs. That is, if you evaluate this polynomial on key k1, then the result of the polynomial evaluation is value 1. To be explicit, the coefficients of this polynomial form the OKVS. And we can represent the OKVS encoding and decoding in terms of this matrix multiplication. To decode a specific key, we look at the row in matrix k associated with that key. We can obtain the right value for that key by computing the dot product of the associated row and the OKVS s. What are the efficiency measures of a polynomial? The polynomials are optimal size. So if we encode n key value pairs, then we obtain n coefficients of the polynomial. However, polynomials have the drawback that the encoding and decoding time for n values requires order n log square n field operations. The next example is the binary OKVS pack source, which is also a starting point to build a more efficient OKVS. Pack source has hash functions h1 and h2 as its parameters. I will present a simplified version and start by showing how to decode or probe a value from s. For a key a, we look at position given by both the hash functions, namely h1 of a, which is 5 in this case, and h2 of a, which is 1. We can decode by computing the xor of the values that are stored in these positions. So we decode a, so decode of a would be s1 xor s5. We know that pack source needs to encode a set of keys. So how do we encode many such keys while ensuring that each of them decodes correctly? I will show a simple example. Suppose you have to encode four keys a, b, c, d. We use a method called peel then fill. First, we compute the hashes h1 and h2 of all the keys a, b, c and d. Next, we recursively identify slots that are constrained by just one key. So here we can see that position 2 is constrained by key c and position 3 is also constrained by just one key, which is key b. So when we have multiple options, we can arbitrarily, when we have more than one option, we can arbitrarily break ties. So I will pick position 2, which is constrained by key c. Then we can delete the constraints associated with key c. Next, we identify that position 4 is also constrained by a single key, which is key d, and then delete the constraints associated with d. Now we see that position 3 is identified by key b and we have only one option, so we delete the constraints associated with key b. Finally, for position, for key a, we have two positions, so we can just delete this key. Once we have successfully peeled the keys, we fill the pack source in a reverse order. So for key a, we have two positions given by slot 1 and 5. So we can pick any values for them as long as s1, xor, s5 matches the value of the value of a. Next, we look at key b. Here, s5 has already been occupied by a value, so we need to assign s3 as s5, xor, the value of b. We follow a similar process. For key b, we notice that s4 is unfilled and s1 has already been filled, so we have to assign s4 as s1, xor, the value of d. Finally, we plug in the value for slot 2, which is given by s4, xor, the value of value c. So this worked out rather nicely, but a natural question is, does encoding always work? Are there any bad events that prevent the successful encoding of keys? Consider a situation like this where no slot is constrained by a single key. How do we resolve the cycle? In pack source, they call the set of all keys that are not solvable as the two-core. Here, the two-core consists of keys a, b and c. In PRTY20, they show that if there's a known a priori bound on the size of the two-core, then they describe a method to resolve it. That is, they will be able to successfully encode the n keys. But I will not delve into those details. But the theorem is as follows. If the size of the two-core is greater than log n with less than epsilon probability, then they increase the size of the pack source from n to n plus log n plus lambda. And this allows them to encode n keys successfully, except with negligible error. To reiterate, the only bad event that happens while encoding is when the pack source two-core overflows. That is, the size of the two-core is greater than the expected size of log n. And this happens with negligible probability. One of our main motivations for this paper is that it's not revealed to translate this asymptotic analysis into concrete parameters while instantiating PSI. In pack source, to encode n items with negligible error, they pick a binary OKVS with size 2.4n. Using the analysis of cuckoo hashing with three hash functions, we can heuristically determine that to encode n items, we need around 1.23n bins. However, to have empirical confidence, we would need to verify statements like, except with probability 2 to the minus 40, can we encode using cuckoo hashing with three hash functions, 1 million keys into say 1.3 million bins of slots with less than 10 keys appearing in the two-core with confidence 0.999. Running experiments to verify something like this is very resource intensive. And even after investing millions of cores of ours, it's not feasible to verify. Further, what if you want to use your OKVS in an application that needs failure probabilities say 2 to the minus 80? Certainly, you can't experimentally verify this. So this is our approach. We can verify statements like, except with probability 2 to the minus 15, can we encode using cuckoo hashing 1,000 keys into 1.3k bins of slots with less than 10 keys appearing in the two-core with high statistical confidence say 0.999. And the answer is yes, we can easily run experiments to verify something like this even on our personal laptops. So our main idea is that we want to compose empirically verified smaller OKVS into a larger OKVS by provably amplifying the correctness guarantee from 2 to the minus 15 to say something like 2 to the minus 40. I will now show our first amplification method called replicated three hash function, garble cuckoo table. To encode n keys, we start with two instances of OKVS, s and s prime. Each of these can encode n key value pairs and s is parametrized by three hash functions h1, h2 and h3 and s prime is parametrized by three different hash functions h1 prime, h2 prime and h3 prime. Let's see how we would decode such an architecture. To decode a single key a, we start by computing the hash values h1a, h2a, h3a and look at the positions that they indicate. Namely 2, 3 and 5 in this case, so we compute the value as s2, xor, s3, xor, s5 when we decode a in the first OKVS. In the second OKVS, again we apply the three different hash functions which point to locations 1, 3 and 5 and compute their xor, s1, xor, s3, xor, s4 to obtain the decoding away with an s prime. We define the decoding of our replicated garble cuckoo table as the xor of the decode within the first OKVS and the second OKVS. Now let's see how we encode the value successfully into this OKVS. Remember that for each of the individual OKVS, successful encoding depends only on the keys and the hash functions. In no way is it related to the associated values of each of the keys. Now suppose you want to encode n key value pairs and let's focus on one of those key value pairs namely a and the value of a. We start by testing if s can successfully encode all the keys or if a bad event happens. Without loss of generality, suppose s is unable to encode all the n keys and it fails. In this case, we sample a random OKVS of the size of the OKVS with random field elements like this with values r1, r2 and so on. And suppose that s prime is successfully able to encode the same set of n keys within its OKVS. Then to encode a specific key and its value, we start by proving that key in OKVS s and we get a set and we obtain the value r2, xor r3, xor r5. And this is the correction that we need to apply within the second OKVS. So, in the second OKVS, we encode the key a with its value xor with r2, xor r3, xor r5 like this. Now, when we decode the key a in this replicated Kabul-Coku table, we xor both these values so that we get the expected value a. Now, each of these OKVSs s and s prime assume that they fail with probability p. The only time this replicated architecture will be unable to encode the set of n keys is when both s and s prime are unable to encode the set of n keys, that is, both of them fail. And these are independent events, so the probability that the encoding fails is p squared. The drawback of this construction is that we double the size of the OKVS and we are looking to be more efficient than that. So, our goal is to amplify the failure probability with minimal increase in the size of the OKVS. I will show a simplified version of our construction and then generalize it when I'm presenting the concrete parameters later. So, suppose you want to encode n key value pairs. You choose a hash function h1 and say you hash it into three bins. Now, you associate a single OKVS with each of the bins and one OKVS as a central OKVS. And each of these OKVS has parameters to encode n over three items and not n items. Let's see how we would decode a key a in this construction. Suppose you want to decode a, you first apply the hash function h1 to see which of the bins it falls into. Suppose it falls into bin 1, then you can decode key a by decoding a within the central OKVS n0 and the OKVS n1 and XOR both these values. Suppose a fell into bin 3 instead, then you would decode the key a within the central OKVS and within the third OKVS and XOR both these values. So, let's see how we would encode values into such an OKVS such that the encoding works correct, such that all the decoding works correctly. We start by testing each of the leaf and central OKVSs. We start by testing each of the leaf OKVSs and see if say n1 can encode all the keys that have been assigned to its bin, n2 can encode all the keys assigned to its bin and so on. Suppose one of the leaves is unable to encode the keys, say n1 can't encode all the keys that it has. In this case, we need to fix the central node such that it allows to successfully encode all the keys that lie in bin 1. So, we update the values of n0 so that n1 XOR n0 allows us to get the correct decode values for all the bins in bin 1. Since n2 and n3 can successfully encode their keys, they just adjust their values according to this OKVS n0. Similarly, if only n3 failed, then you first fix the central node n0 to decode correctly all the keys that lie in bin 3. And then, once the central OKVS is fixed, n1 and n2 can successfully encode all the keys in their bin. If n1, n2 and n3 can successfully encode, you just pick a random OKVS for n0 and adjust the values of n1, n2 and n3 so that when you decode, you get the expected value for each key. If only one leaf fails, say n1, then you adjust n0 to match n1 and then you adjust n2 and n3 to match n0. So, the bad event is when two or more nodes fail. Assume, let's calculate the probability of this bad event occurring. If each of these individual nodes fails with probability p, then we compute the probability as a summation of more than two nodes failing. And this almost squares the failure probability. Now, I will show the concrete parameters that we obtained for our OKVS that can encode a million key value pairs. We had Q bins where Q is 160 and by standard balls and bins analysis, we obtain that each of the bins has maximum load 7163 keys except with negligible probability. So, each of the OKVS leaves and the central OKVS needs to encode 7163 keys each. We plug this into our formula to compute the OKVS for a 3 hash carbon cocoa table and we found that we need an OKVS of size 8622. We ran empirical experiments and saw that only one bad event occurred in two to the 23 runs of the small OKVS. Each which holds 7163 keys each and each of them was parameterized by different random hash functions. And we saw that the probability that an encode fails was 2 to the minus 29.35 with confidence level 0.999. We obtained that the probability that encoding a million items fails is 2 to the minus 45.05 which is negligible. And our encoding time was around 2.915 seconds and the decoding time for all the million items was 1.625 seconds. And the size of the OKVS was q plus 1 times the size of each of the smaller OKVS's which was around 1.38 times million. In our paper, we describe many applications or use cases for our OKVS construction. Our 3 hash garble cocoa table construction with a star architecture can replace any random encoding task. We can replace the use of polynomials in the following use cases. The first one is the SPARS OT extension which was used to design a communication efficient semi-honest PSI protocol in PRTY-19. One of their construction relies on the interpolation of a large polynomial and our OKVS can replace this. Oblivious programmable PRFs are an important building block in many PSI constructions. Many OPRFs rely again on the use of a polynomial to encode key value pairs and we can replace their use of polynomials by our OKVS. OPPRFs are used to build circuit PSI protocols. They were also used to design the private set union protocol in KRTW-19 and they also form a major building block for multi-party private set intersection protocols. Described in the paper KMPRT-17. While exploring the multi-party PSI protocols in KMPRT-17, we realize that one of their constructions which is augmented semi-honest secure is actually efficient against malicious adversaries with a small modification. So we obtain the most efficient malicious secure multi-party PSI protocol and describe this in our paper. We show a qualitative analysis of why this is the most efficient protocol to date. Our OKVS can also replace the role of PAXOS in the following papers. As a flagship example, we consider the OT-based PAXOS PSI protocol that was presented in PRTY-20. By replacing the PAXOS with our OKVS, we obtain the fastest malicious two-party PSI protocol to date with the added advantage that this is empirically verified. We also present a new PSI protocol by generalizing the OT-based PAXOS PSI protocol to admit a linear OKVS. We show that we obtain a new vector OLE-based OKVS PSI protocol. Concurrently, in RS-21, they showed a vector OLE-PAXOS PSI protocol and we suggest that you can replace the PAXOS by OKVS in their paper as well. Finally, I'd like to provide some takeaways from our experimental results. While computing the intersection on a million items, we saw that our constructions the three-hash garble cocoa table based on heuristic parameters and the three-hash garble cocoa table based on the star amplification had about 1.61 times and 1.43 times less communication than PAXOS PSI. This means that on slow and medium networks, we have the fastest malicious secure PSI protocol. And on slow networks, we have the fastest semi-honest PSI protocol. With that, I would like to thank you for your attention.


Jobs involving tasks in front of a keyboard, such as programming, data science, marketing, secretarial activities, are going to be much more susceptible to automation, and they are going to see a decrease in demand, and therefore they are going to see a decrease in salaries, which can be problematic for a lot of people. But conversely, jobs requiring, I would say, interpersonal skills, creativity, problem solving, emotional intelligence, jobs such as consulting, sales, people management, those jobs that are related to people are less likely to be automated, and they might see an increase in demand, and therefore they're going to see an increase in salaries. And obviously, we also have the new jobs required to actually implement the eye, and those are going to be very much in demand, and people working in those areas will have very competitive salaries.


So I want to pick up where we left off last week we were having this conversation about corporate rainbow washing of LGBTQ plus pride and I discussed how Irritating it was to me that all of these large multi-billion dollar corporations are changing their logos to rainbows in order to celebrate Plot pride as they literally donate to anti LGBTQ plus politicians like it's it's absolutely Infuriating it's hypocritical and I hate it right But there is honestly a difference between some companies and others like McDonald's for example when they change Their logo to a rainbow flag. That's offensive to me, but it's less offensive than companies like Boeing Changing their logos to you know, the rainbow flag or Atheon because you're literally Manufacturing bombs that we're murdering children with in the Middle East and North Africa So like sit this one out when we're talking about civil rights Just stay silent because we don't want your support. We reject your support again Don't speak for every single LGBTQ plus person, but I think that obviously a murderous company Like I don't want your endorsement.  So ice. Yes that ice that Torments immigrants tweeted out during Pride month. We recognize our LGBTQ plus employees Reflect on the trials that their community has endured and rejoice with them in the triumphs of those who have bravely fought and Continue to fight for full equality Okay, so the first thing you're gonna notice is that ratio Oof, that's a big ratio But ice is is tweeting this out. The American Gestapo is tweeting this out I mean, I don't even know where to begin But thankfully I didn't have to formulate a response because I mean my reaction was just to feel Disgusted at this but the left they absolutely did not hesitate They pounced and they dragged ice for this because if anyone is gonna talk about human rights and pride The last should be ice.  Totally agree This shoe and they point to an article from Rolling Stone That reads a trans woman died in ice custody then ice deleted video footage of her.


I'm Jay from Forest Ethics, and I'm going to tell you about Shell Oil's master plan to turn the Pacific Northwest into an extreme oil beep show, and what you can do right now to stop it. Okay, it's not hard to understand Shell's master plan, or why it needs to be shut down. You just need a map. The first part of Shell's master plan was to stage their new Arctic drilling fleet in Puget Sound, probably to bring in oil from Arctic drilling. But thanks to some awesome organizing, phase one of Shell's plan is dead on arrival. The second part of the master plan is an oil train terminal at the Anacor's refinery. That would mean building tank car parking there to take six oil trains. That's 18 million gallons of toxic, explosive crude per week. That sounds like a lot of crude. It is. Each mile long, 100-plus car train would bring explosive Bakken crude, or toxic, and also explosive tar sands from Alberta, Canada, or North Dakota. They come across the Rockies to Spokane, where the rail lines run right through the center of town. From there, they were traveled down the Columbia River Valley along the Oregon border and the north to Olympia. Next stop? You guessed it. Right on through downtown Seattle, past Safeco Arena and Sentry Link Field during games and north along Puget Sound to the Anacortes refinery. Remember, every town and community along the route, drinking water, fisheries, and the 821,000 people living in the one-mile blast zone, which is pretty much as bad as it sounds, would face the threat of an oil train derailment and explosion. Also as bad as they sound. Now, when they get to Puget Sound, these trains would have some great scenery because Anacortes refinery sits on the shore of a national S-G-R-I reserve. Yeah, I just said S-G-R-I. That's like Latin for you shouldn't put oil trains here. Here's the deal. Shell wants to replace their oil tankers with trains and they've told people that there's basically no difference, which just doesn't pass the smell test. In February, a judge rejected Shell's attempt to sneak this plan through and required them to draft a full environmental review of their plans for Anacortes. That's where you come in. We fought ourselves into a great opportunity to tell Shell and our public officials exactly what we think of this plan for the Northwest. But try to keep it PG. Okay. Bottom line is that Shell's extreme oil scheme impacts all of us. It means more potential exploding, leaky trains in our cities and on our waterways. But Shell is on the ropes and we know how to beat them. So write to the officials in charge of the plan right now and let us keep you updated. And like and share this video. Shell no. Shell no. Shell no. Shell no. Shell no. Shell no.


Before your child starts writing letters or numbers, it's important for them to learn how to hold a pencil. Between the ages of 1 and 7, a child's writing ability goes through four stages. They start by holding a pencil with their fist and moving their whole arm to make marks. This works for scribbling, but not for making controlled lines. Next, they hold the pencil with their thumb and all four fingers, and then with the thumb and the first three fingers. Eventually, they learn to use their thumb and first two fingers only. This allows them to make small movements for more controlled lines. An easy way to help your child develop the skill is to break their crayons, pencils, or chalk into small pieces.  This skill will prepare your child to make the controlled lines necessary to write letters and numbers.


I don't think in any circumstance you should take on a caring role in an autistic, neurotypical relationship. Sure, there are going to be things that they find hard, but it's a reciprocal relationship. You're in love, you're in a long-term relationship, you're dating. It's not a disabled person, carer dynamic.


Hello, I am Dr. Bhaskar Ashanayi, Head of the Department of Pediatrics and Chief of Division of Pediatric Infectious Diseases at Manipal Hospital, Bangalore. See, olden days they didn't have the facility to protect against the disease. When the disease comes, they had to suffer. And many children have died because of these illnesses, polio, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus and the number of diseases goes on. So many diseases which claimed the lives of millions of children all over the world. Now we have been able to save those children because of the vaccination. Definitely, it has helped in saving the lives of children and making their lives more comfortable reducing the disability.


Payback is the length of time it takes to recover the cost of the initial capital outlay. All else being equal, a shorter payback period is preferred. We will look at two different scenarios for capital project payback. An example where the cash inflows are equal amounts, and an example where the cash inflows are unequal amounts. The formula for calculating payback with equal net cash inflows couldn't be easier. It is the amount invested divided by the expected annual net cash inflows. Let's look at an example. The fine young cannibals make a $100,000 investment in recording equipment, which will save them $25,000 per year. So the $100,000 of initial investment divided by $25,000 of net annual savings is four. It will take four years to recover the initial investment. For payback with unequal net cash inflows, there's no formula. We need to accumulate net cash inflows until the amount of investment is recovered. So let's look at the example. The fine young cannibals make a $100,000 investment in recording equipment, which will save them the following each year, $30,000, $40,000, $30,000, and $25,000. So the way I determine payback is to make a table like this. I made this one in Excel. I list the years, the amount of initial investment, which happens in year zero, or in other words, at the beginning, the yearly net cash inflows and the accumulated net cash inflows. In this example, I recover $100,000 in year three. So payback is three years. Often the unequal cash flows will pay back during part of a year, rather than at the end. When this happens, we need to use this formula for the partial year. It is the remaining unrecovered amount divided by the expected cash inflow in the next year. In this updated example, I recovered $110,000 of initial investment sometime during year four. Using the formula, I have $10,000 still unrecovered after year three and expect to recover $25,000 in year four. So $10,000 divided by $25,000 is .4. Payback is three full years plus .4 of the next year, or in other words, 3.4 years. The decision guideline for the payback method is pretty basic. Investments or capital projects with shorter payback periods are more desirable, all things being equal. Let's conclude with some criticisms of the payback method. The first problem is that it focuses only on time, not on profitability. We have no idea how profitable any of the projects were in the examples I've shown. Also, it considers only the cash flows that occurred during the payback period. Again, in the examples, it was possible that net cash inflows could have gone on for many years, but that isn't considered with this method. Finally, it doesn't consider the time value of money. It assumes that the value of money today and the value of future cash inflows are the same. They aren't. If you're wondering why that is, watch the next video.


Hi everyone, Joe for jaspyscasebreaks.com doing a quick random number block randomizer. For these two teams right here, Charter Spangles, for Flawless, pick your team 26. If you're watching live, we just have to do a couple more of these number block randomizers. And then we're in Brakesville on a full case of Flawless football. So check that out on jaspyscasebreaks.com. Big thanks to Paul, Matthew, and Joshua for getting into this one. There are the numbers here. Let's roll it. Let's randomize it. One and a three, four times for names and numbers. One, two, three, and four. We've got Josh down to Matthew after four times. One and a three, four times for the numbers. One, two, three, and fourth and final time. Eight down to one. All right, Joshua with eight, seven, five, and nine. Paul with three, Joshua with four, Matthew with six, zero, two, and one. Remember, zero gets any and all redemptions. There's no traditional redemptions in Flawless though. They're good about that. But there are all those blockchain redemptions. So any blockchain redemptions for those two teams will go to you. Let's sort by number and we'll see you in a different video for the break itself next time. A little bit later tonight at jaspyscasebreaks.com. Bye-bye.


All right, everybody, welcome to this lovely Wednesday. Nice little day here in June 19. How's everybody doing? Good to see you, Susan J. Look at that. Look at those beautiful traders. Good to see you all. Well, listen, what a great morning already, MLNT. Look what we got going on here. If you got in here, Early Bird gets the money, guys. Early Bird gets the money. Look at that. Chik-ching, chik-ching, chik-ching. You guys did pretty well. I want to do a quick shout-out, though. I mean, let's talk, let Neil Harkinus did unbelievable. Let's give Neil a round of applause. He made $0.45 in MLNT. They made another $0.16, got in, got out, made another $0.34, and another $0.26. Let's give him a big round of applause. That's what I love to hear. Nice. Beautiful. And you know what? Neil, how long have you been a trader at cyber trading? How long have you been a part of the team? You know, been a, I think you've been almost about a year, two years now or something like that. Look at that. That's what you're trained for. That's what you're trained for. Well, good for you. Well, anyway, can't go broke, take a profit. You can see that stock's still going up there. And you know what? She was the top of my list. And I got a little nervous a little bit earlier. She was doing a little bit of shake here. Let me just, let me just share what's going on over here. And we'll get into it a little bit. But she did a little bit of a shake right here.  So up 119%. If you were here at eight o'clock this morning, everyone should have got in right around 320. You're looking pretty damn well right now. So anyways, it's never too late to make money. Mark made 44 cents in it. Good for him. Let's give him a round of applause. All right. John Dee from United UK made 50 cents. I just love hearing the ching-chings all you guys. Nice guys. What did I say earlier? There's a little phrase I always go by, just trade one share. Just trade one share of the stock just to have the glory. If you feel nervous, you feel scared, you think you're chasing to trade one share. And if you did that, you did pretty well. But before we go out and talk about the picks and talk about this nice winner, let's go over and talk about what happened yesterday because yesterday also was a great day to trade. First of all, MGI. Let's start off with that one. Shockingly, hold on, let me fix the timeframe on this thing so you can see a little bit better. All right, so this stock had a really, really nice pop going right into the close right there. This stock went from 340 all the way to $4. Nice, nice mover. Shockingly, it's also not, I think it's still a good trade today. Not hard to borrow if you want to short if it tanks. So one thing you want to look at it, whatever goes up, must come down crashing down. So we've done that really well too. SPWR, let's bring up that one too. That one was awesome. That one went from 850 right out of the gate at 10 o'clock, shot all of it in almost 10, and then it had a nice push trickling all the way up. Another nice little winner in that one too. Snap, not only has it been a good day trade, but it had been a good swing trade also. You know, not as fun as the other ones, a little bit more of a brand name, every no snap chat, that one did really well. And then the Chewy, oh my God, Chewy, we're cleaning up right now. That was that IPO. I told you I did a swing trade on that one, even though I had a day trade on it.  And you know what? I'm gonna talk a lot about it today. Remember guys, today I'm gonna be doing a, we're doing Open House on Wednesday. We got a couple of, a lot of marketing partners, friends of ours, trading accounting, egg corn, they're gonna be help promoting and have some of their traders come in and listen in. I'm gonna talk about futures, works and options, everybody's like, wants to know what the hell there's difference and why people lose money on one or versus the other. I'm gonna talk a little bit about that. So don't get to be there at 12.30. But the big thing is about the Chewy, that's one of the reasons why I wanna talk about it, is that, you know, listen, it's not everybody. It's a, you know, you gotta know how to trade IPOs. I was just out last night, met a couple of friends of mine into trading business. And we were actually talking about Uber, Chewy, what's it called, the meat stock that we were looking at was at the meat one that we were trading, that other IPO that did great, was the best meats or something like that. So that one was doing pretty beyond meats, yeah, beyond BYND, that one did great too, we were talking about that. And it's just amazing, you know, when you surround yourself with people in the industry, it's amazing how other people make money because as so impressed as they were what we do, I was very impressed on how they target and how they make money. And the funny story is not, you know, cause I wanna get right into trading and tell you what's moving, but here's somebody I was talking to that buys public IPOs before they go public, meaning, you know, the VPs, you know, they need money and they need money now and they don't know what's gonna happen when the company goes public, but they did the private placement and they go out there and they trade the stock, they buy it from them and they sell it at the open. There's just a whole business in trading, it's just amazing. But anyway, at the end of the day, that's what we all do, that's why people love it, but you gotta know how to play the game and that's why we're all here. So anyway, I got to swing on the chew, I got to swing on the Uber, so we're doing pretty well on that one, but let's go back and talk about what's moving this morning cause there are a couple of stocks that we're doing well. Let's go hop over there back to that MLNT trade. Looks like it's doing a little bit of a shake right now, lot of orders out there. I'm looking on my level four, you see these guys we're getting taken out on the offer. So just be, listen, the stock was a $24 stock, it's $4, it's only up 118% so far. Listen, we see some of these things go up 300, 400%, but just remember everybody, just remember something very important. It's okay to take a profit, okay? Here at Cybertrain University, we're not here to teach you to make the stock go from four to five. If you got it at 350 and you sold it at four, you made your 50 cents, you made your 500, you do that every day, we do it every day, there's your six figure salary. So don't get cocky because we know what happens with these stocks, just like we just talked about, the one I just told you earlier is the MGI, we see it all the time. But let's do a quick little shout out, Mike McRain, he just made 41 cents on it. All right, Mike, here we go. Isn't that awesome, isn't it fun to making money? Great. Anyway, that one's on the watch list. And we got another, a couple other ones that are also gonna pop up there. FRSX is another one right there that's moving pretty well. Kind of flat line, very cheap little stock. What's it busted out of it's, in it's below a dollar now it's trading and right there at 160, you could see the stocks are pretty nicely. 300,000 shares of 54%, not as still, still not as nice as MLNT. AKTX, that one, you guys remember this very, very well, okay?  Listen, you're looking at MLNT up about 100%. This one was up, what, 400, 500%, the stock went from $2,089, remember that one? That was awesome. You know, anyway, I don't know, something's going on. I see it's already up 15%, 64,000 shares popped up on my radar. We'll see what happens when it opens up. But she's already there, C-A-L-A. Listen, she's on your short list. Listen, you want to hold over nights. Listen, we know this stock went from five, all the way to 650, look where it is now now, back down to four. I do want to keep an eye right here and see if it holds its support levels right here. A lot of huge orders, almost 700,000 shares traded. Look at those iceberg orders out there, 10,000, 4,000, had a couple of hundreds, which is perfect, so those guys are being exposed. Make sure you learn and do what you were taught by following the orders. I know classes started this week, hopefully you guys have been enjoying them. Remember, those are the classes where they don't teach you how to make money, that's where we teach you how to stop losing it because the winners take care of themselves. So you got that C-A-L-A, A-X-T-A, another one popped up on the radar right there. Look at that one, just total, just shot up. I don't know if it's a buyout, whatever, but coding company systems, that one looks like it's doing pretty nicely. It's kind of holding right here, I think it's a buyout, so it's not really going anywhere, so I'm probably gonna scratch, I'll see what happens. I gotta look up the news on that one. B-A-L-E, there's another one right here, did really well yesterday, had a nice little pop from 1290 all the way to about 1350, she just gapped up to $14. You got some resistance levels back in the early of this year, so we can know where we're at. One big problem about that, remember, look at the orders, 6,000, 6,000, 6,000, got a couple of 12,000, seems like everybody's trained 6,000 shares of this stock right here. So be very careful on this stock right here, okay? On Val. Last from the past, Ken Thor, here you are, buddy. Here's your famous US Steel, looks like she's moving today, huh? Maybe it was from, maybe Trump said something in an Israeli yesterday about Steel again, you know how he loves US Steel? Maybe he made the market move yesterday, but anyway, here's the stock that's moving. It's got a nice little move. We all know with this stock though, it is a little bit more of a brand name, it does trade a little crazy once in a while, so be very, very careful on it, but US Steel is on the move. So we got it, we had a good list, listen, honestly, if you made your money already on the MLNT, you should be done already. I mean, honestly, we all should be done. Can it do, and do what AKTA went to $9? Eh, it could, but you know what? Who cares? Because you know what? We're gonna find another one in the pre-market again, because that's really what we do here. So if you made your money, enjoy it, take the rest of the day off, you know, otherwise you really can't, you got class today, but if you're still thinking of jumping into it, if it still looks strong, you know, we'll see what happens, but remember, 99.30 is a very, very tough time to trade, okay? Eight to nine is where realistically we make more money, but we'll see how she opens up. Just be careful, because she started going from a level one type of stock, and then she's starting to getting into threes. And remember, when you trade a stock that has that type of volatility, if you're not at that level yet, which we taught you how to journally yourself in the monthly journals, if you're not at that level, don't trade it, because the stock will do some nasty shakes. Actually, if you see right here, and before we go, it did do a nasty shake right here. You could see it right there. If this stock went from 320, it just dropped to 240. So, you know, just be very, very careful on that, all right? Guys, good luck today. Happy trading. We'll see you in class. Josh will be doing the new classes as we started, you know, from yesterday going into today. We got open house too. Also, you know, I'll be doing an event at 12.30. So we'll see you there. And then once again, don't forget to trading summit, a live onsite trading summit we do in September, right guys? Hopefully you guys will register for that one. Good luck everyone. We'll see you back at 2.30 for the afternoon meeting. Good luck. Happy trading.