What did you do Gearbox? This, this thing is a monster. Wow! How's it going guys? My name's DPJ and today I've been your another BR3 video. If you do enjoy leaving a like, it really helps out and subscribe if you want to see more. So the LUB went from this to this. In the latest Gearbox hotfix, they buffed the LUB by a crazy amount. Now even the patch notes, they didn't actually state exact numbers. They stayed just the following. Increased LUB magazine size from 4 to 12. Greatly increased damage per tick and now fires a burst of 3 magical orbs instead of 1. By the way, if you didn't use this weapon before, it's the orbs that cause that tick damage. Now this LUB are used in the past and to be honest, at that time there were just so many other better shotguns. So as of recent and to be honest since the new levels have been put in, I've ignored hundreds of scenes drop. Now this LUB are used in the past. Now they buff it though people. I farm for absolute ages trying to get one and guess what people? I find one in about 10 hours of farming and that's the one you can see on the screen now, which isn't the best. So thanks to my power baker face 187 for supplying me the variants you can see on the screen now. Perfect for my zane. So the LUB, what effect have these buffs done? While they have turned, a weapon which in my opinion was not worth picking up into an absolute animal of a weapon. A weapon which is up there with the most powerful in the game. In fact, it could be the most powerful in the game and I ain't even joking people. The 3 magical orbs and the tick damage these calls is utterly crazy. I actually don't know if gearbox meant to buff it like they did, but hey, I ain't gonna complain. I hope it stays like this. Now I tested it against a few bosses, it absolutely melts. I tested it in the raid, it melts. I tested it in the slot shaft, it melts. All I'm making for, all just made too easy. Now I know the recursion has been a shotgun many people indeed have been hunting for. Many people think it's one of the best. I can tell you this right now. That hasn't got absolutely anything on this LUB. In fact, I don't think any weapon has. It's that good now. This thing just destroys absolutely all. Now I don't want to say it, but this weapon is all... Actually I ain't gonna say it, as we know what happens when people say that about weapons. Now my favourite weapon in the game at the moment is no doubt the redistributor. This is a fan favourite weapon, the centre of most builds, because the weapon is crazy good. But dare I say it, the LUB is better. I mean it kills just as quick, in fact it kills bosses miles quicker. Me running around in the slot shaft, it's never been that easy. Me running around in the raid, it's never been that easy. And to be honest, the only time I died using this is when I fell off the map during the raid as I'm a go-fast Zane noob and I killed myself. And because I killed myself via shooting the orbs while travelling forward. Because as my Zane is moving quicker than these projectiles, I ran into them and killed myself. So Zane folk out there, be safe with this. Now judging by its new stats, it seems it states the damage is 10 times better. That actually makes sense because it truly feels it. But the tick damage added by two extra magical orbs, if you get them to stick to a target or bypass a big target, it's absolute lights out for sure. I was one shot in big enemies, which takes other weapons, including a redistributor, a few clips. I actually think this might be now my goal to weapon. I have a fully stacked loadout people from my maggie to my wedding invitation to my redistributor and now the LUB. Now what I will do as I am a gentleman, if you join my discord and you play on xbox, I may just troop a certain version for you. Again, obviously xbox only and mine are made for Zane. Also, I do work on UK time, as it's getting late here right now. I won't be handing out many tonight, but over the next few days for sure people I will dupe for you. But there are also many people in my discord and all platforms who will happily trade for you. So welcome in place full of hundreds of Borderlands fans and many many collectors including myself. And no doubt someone on there will have that anointed one for your Vault Hunter. Yeah guys the LUB shotgun, the Torg LUB shotgun is now in my opinion one of if not the most powerful weapons in this game and there is no question about it. It's a must get in my opinion, it's a must try as it is it seems on another level right now. But on that note we have come to the end of the video. If you guys enjoyed it leaving a like really helps out. If you're new around here and want to see more Borderlands be sure to subscribe. And if you never want to miss a video or upload you can turn notifications on by hitting that bell button. Well guys thanks as always for stopping by. Hopefully you enjoyed the video and hopefully I will see you on that next one.


Putting you all into it. Yeah, if you stepping like that, they gonna respect you because of the way that you respect yourself in your Crab, right? Yeah, so what made y'all do that song right there? Let's talk about that for a second before we go to Nick. She just been just knowing how to rap really just you know what I'm saying?  No, for real, we, he really just called me, came over to the house. I called the studio man, I freestyle the verse, he get on there, we made the song.  Yeah.  Yeah, I had made a few songs before that though.  I mean, you need a manager, nigga, I'm a manager, nigga.  He need a manager, nigga, I'm a manager, nigga, we go, we to the top, nigga. Hey, no, no, for real, no, for real, tell him though, hey, look, be for real, so he ain't hard. Yeah, he ain't hard. Come on now. He just needs people behind him, like you can rap, but it's like, you gotta have the image too though. I be telling you that, man. And then people can tell if you really put your all into it. Yeah, if you stepping like that, they gonna respect you because of the way that you respect yourself and your craft. Yeah, they gonna respect me though. No, I'm talking about the music. I'm talking about the music. I ain't done that. And now they gonna respect me though. I'm talking about my music though.  So you gotta show them you serious. Like when I first started boss talk, I was like, oh, these niggas don't think I'm playing. They think I'm playing. Then I said, I'm gonna put out a nigga more than everybody. So now I got like 700, almost 600 to 700 episodes. Yeah, close to 700. In one year, though, in one year, like nobody does that. Yeah. So if you like consistent, they gonna, they gonna love you. It's gonna be undeniable. Like you just said earlier. No, for so. So, so that's, I think that's what it, what it take, man. I think, I think a nigga should be dropping some, like when you got a crew of people like this, some should become every week. Yeah, they be dropping though. He'd be like, if I ain't dropping, he dropping. If he ain't dropping, you see what I'm saying? Everybody just be dropping. Yeah, cause that's what it's gonna take. Cause everybody looking at visuals now, like you gotta happen. Like think about it. It gotta happen. Hey, if y'all do a song together, who's song is it? They can't figure that out. The reason why I said, the reason why I said though, cause like if you drop a song one week, then he drop a song and he drop a song. If y'all all on that same song and really what's in the metal, but it's like, I'll tell you something, if you don't drop that week, he gonna drop that week, but y'all on the same song together. It's the same song. So we'll be like, hey, play the hoe we got with the wood, something like that. Yeah.   And did you just buy a nigga? You ain't even howl at him. You gonna hear later. It ain't even like that, bro. It's like real life, like these niggas do not be wanting to rap. Like none of these niggas don't be wanting to rap. Like I've been telling him to rap so long, like he finally made a song. These niggas, like my cousin back there, like these niggas don't want to rap for real. Blake ain't gonna rap, but Blake got a song too, though. Blake got a song too, but it's just like, don't nobody like don't want to go just full with it. It's just like the rappers like that just be rapping. It's just like me, Flip, Ryo, Wodey, just like that. I'm a barrio, Flip, you. There's no words I see consistently doing it. Like now I guess I'm gonna see y'all. Which one of y'all started last? Started like rapper last? Yeah. He's still having drugs shit? No, he's gonna blow first, watch.   I've been telling... I was in the We Finish U to be a video April 15th. Nah, for sure. Word. Word. What's the concept? In Dallas. In Dallas.  What was you doing on this last video? Why is you in that stoke acting like this? That's our stoke. We was thugging.


Good afternoon, everyone. Welcome to Cooper Hewitt Smithsonian Design Museum. My name is Kim Robledo Diga. I'm the Deputy Director of Education here. We had another, this is actually our fourth of five hidden figure programs. We had one this morning, which was Dorothy Livas, which was fantastic. This program is on Trudy Garamon-Prez and Lynette Sheeling, Breaking Boundaries with Design. This project has received funding from the Smithsonian American Women's History Initiative. The goal of these suite of programs is to bring light to previously under-recognized American women in design represented in Cooper Hewitt's collection. Today's program is three-part. There'll be a talk and an intimate collection viewing with Sarah Vazina, a graduate student in the History of Design and Cultural Studies program here at Cooper Hewitt, and hands-on workshop led by artist Elizabeth Castaldo on the back. So we're going to have a nice suite of programings to really learn about these two designers in very different aspects. But before we get started, I wanted to look forward and share a few upcoming exhibitions at Cooper Hewitt that further the conversation on this untapped or hidden figures theme. The first is Contemporary Muslim Fashion, opening February 28, 2020, and then we also have Willie Smith Street Couture, opening March 13, 2020. Both exhibits explore culture, identity, and design through fashion. So without further ado, let me introduce you to welcome up Sarah Vazina. Thank you, Kim, for organizing this program and for all your help over the past few months. Thanks also to the collection manager Kimberly Randall and curators Gregory Herringshaw, Emily Orr, and Susan Brown for showing me a great number of textiles, wallpapers, and archival items, and for sharing their knowledge with me. I'm very happy to talk to you today about two amazing women who seem to live and breathe art and design. In my research about Trude Guermin Prey and Lynette Shee Line, I found myself continually amazed and inspired by these two prolific designers. Both women were born in 1910 and passionately dedicated their lives to their creative pursuits. Weaver Trude Guermin Prey is on the left measuring threads in preparation to war per loom. On the right is freelance designer Lynette Shee Line in her California studio, meticulously working out a design for one of her distinctive botanical inspired textiles or wallpapers, often completed with her signature stamp designed by Lynette. These women were very serious about their work. For Lynette, a wild night on the town typically involves sketching with her weekly Friday night art group in Mill Valley, California. Here is Lynette in the center, hard at work with a furrowed brow surrounded by her local community of artists with whom she participated in exhibitions and demonstrations at local art fairs. I want to give you a little background on the early lives of these two women. This is Trude Born Gertrude Jalowicz in Germany in 1910. This is a photo of her at age 19. Trude was educated in Germany and grew up in an artistic Jewish family. Her father was a musicologist and conductor, and her mother was a voice teacher and book binder. Though Trude herself did not study at the Bauhaus, several of her teachers were Bauhaus trained. And during college Trude developed a lifelong love of weaving which eventually brought her to Sweden and Finland to study this ancient craft. Weaving eventually drew her to the Netherlands and finally to the United States where she ultimately settled in California. Trude was very cosmopolitan with a strong affinity toward modern Bauhaus philosophy and aesthetics. In contrast to Trude's very international upbringing, Lynette Sheeline was a true Californian through and through. This is Lynette's 1928 yearbook photo from Berkeley High School. She is 18 years old here. Lynette was born in Northern California and her father was a merchant in the Bay Area. Growing up she spent her time in and around San Francisco and at her family's Northern California Ranch. The landscape of California, the colors, hills, flowers and sunshine all had a major impact on Lynette's textile and wallpaper designs. Even after she moved to New York in the 1960s, her vivid designs seemed to shout, you can take the girl out of California but not the California out of the girl. What was Trude up to after completing her studies in Europe? In 1934 she moved to Holland and began working for a commercial weaving studio called Het Papier. Here is a photo of her at work on a loom there. This experience further honed Trude's understanding of technical weaving patterns and structures and she also became savvy in working with clients on their designs. It was during this time in Holland that Trude met her first husband, Paul Germanpre. He was a Bauhaus trained photographer who started an advertising agency in Amsterdam in 1934. This is a photo of Trude taken by her husband Paul in his studio. As the Nazis gained power the agency closed and Trude was forced into hiding as she remained in Amsterdam during the war. Trude's parents had already left Europe in the 1930s to teach music at the experimental Black Mountain College in North Carolina. Meanwhile at this time in sunny California the vibe was more optimistic compared to the darkness that had descended upon Europe. Though California like the rest of the United States have been deeply affected by the depression, thousands of people found jobs working on government projects such as the building of the San Francisco Oakland Bay Bridge and the Golden Gate Bridge pictured here under construction. Both were completed by 1937. These bridges were a symbol of modern living and artists like Lynette Schielein began incorporating images of this new modern lifestyle into their designs. On the left is the cover of the November 1936 issue of Sunset Magazine featuring drapes by Lynette. Her drapes incorporate flat graphic depictions of the newly opened Bay Bridge along with seagulls, buildings and waves. A view of the bridge outside the window complements the modern furnishings. Her two fabric swatches on the right are similar in style to the drapes on the cover of Sunset. They depict bay side scenes like a lighthouse emerging from the hills, boats, buildings and the Bay Bridge. The red, white and blue swatch also pays tribute to the United States with its patriotic color scheme. To celebrate the completion of these bridges, the Golden Gate International Exposition was held in San Francisco in 1939. On the left is the catalog for the Decorative Arts Exhibition that took place at the fair. And this show was curated by Dorothy Liebes, who this morning's program focused on. Lynette Schielein exhibited three of her textiles there. The printed textiles on the right were both made the same year as the fair and they give us a sense of what Lynette was making at this time. The center panel is titled Ranch and it is a landscape with clusters of trees and layers of hills. Perhaps it portrays the Schielein family's own ranch in Northern California. The textile on the far right is called Egyptian Garden. We'll actually see it in person today. Here are suburban folks gardening in their casual California sportswear. The design uses simple geometric forms in the style of ancient Egyptian wall painting. And this paired down style was also embraced by modernism. In the period leading up to World War II, Lynette worked at Luma Handprints, a textile screen printing factory in San Francisco. Here is a fabric of chickens of various shapes and sizes that Lynette produced for Luma. The two smaller images are details of the playful patterning used in this design. On the left is an advertisement that shows a chair upholstered in this fabric and matching drapes. This print was available in 10 different color combinations and I would love to see these chickens in a dazzling rainbow of colors, especially on my chairs and sofa. Lynette's work with Luma ended when the U.S. entered World War II. She got a job at a shipyard and moved to Marin County. After two years of working for Marin Ship, Lynette established her own design studio in Mill Valley. What effect did the war have on Truda's life? Well, besides going into hiding during the war, Truda's husband Paul was tragically killed in 1944 while fighting in the Dutch resistance. Truda remained in Amsterdam for a few more years. In 1947 Truda's father died. He had been teaching at Black Mountain College in North Carolina where Bauhaus weaver Annie Albers taught weaving. Annie Albers invited Truda to substitute teach for her while she went on sabbatical leave. Truda left Amsterdam and joined her mother and sister at Black Mountain to teach weaving. These photos of Truda are from this period and when Annie Albers returned from sabbatical, Truda stayed on to teach with her until the weaving program ended in 1949. While at Black Mountain, Truda produced her first textile graphic weavings in 1948. Using the design drawing for leaf study shown here on the left as a guide, Truda incorporated this design into her tapestry by painting it directly onto the warp threads prior to weaving the piece. A detail is on the right. Equal attention is given to both the vertical and horizontal threads. Traditional tapestries typically obscured the vertical warp thread, but there is a modernist focus on showing the structure and form in Truda's work. While at Black Mountain College, when the weaving program at Black Mountain College ended, Truda moved to Northern California. She joined her former college classmate and Bauhaus train ceramicist Marguerite Vildenhayn at the Fond Farm workshops. It's pictured nestled in these hills. Truda also met her second husband, John Elcesser, here and they're in the photo on the right. This design drawing in tapestry, another example of Truda's textile graphic weavings called Our Mountains, was made in 1971. Here Truda combined the California landscape with the profile of her face and her husband John's face. Their profiles form the mountains in this artwork and notice how the image changes when the watercolor is translated into a weaving. There's a looser quality in the work on paper, but more intricate texture in the tapestry. And this is a detail of one of Truda's painted textile with a barely there metallic weft. The focus is really on the painted warp threads. And where did people encounter Truda and Lanet's designs? Well in California it was on the cutting edge of mid-20th century modern design and exhibitions and magazines like California Arts and Architecture promoted the California look. Here's an issue from 1940 of California Arts and Architecture that featured Lanet's textile depicting stylized pairs of horses running through a forest of fantastical trees. The magazine eventually dropped California from its title and Truda's weavings as well as her philosophical thoughts about weaving were featured in Arts and Architecture in 1949. In 1955 Truda and Lanet exhibited works together in a show called California Designed. On the left is Lanet's wallpaper, pomegranate and pineapple, manufactured by Kotzenbach and Warren. On the right is a rug woven by Truda. This is the first show of its kind to travel around the United States promoting California design. It included approximately 325 items all made in California displayed in home-like settings. Lanet's designs translated well into both textiles and wallpapers. She often repeated motifs but arranged them in different ways for different purposes. On the left is Lois and William Kotzenbach's book, The Practical Book of American Wallpapers from 1951. This page includes a palm design by Lanet. On the right is another palm print, a fabric manufactured by Jofa. Lanet was able to create great depth in these bright naturalistic designs. Lanet's fabric on the right, called Sales, was manufactured by Prince Unlimited. It repeats so many layered sailboats that it forms an almost abstract geometric pattern. On the left is a more open and airy design for wallpaper called Yacht Harbor, manufactured by Kotzenbach and Warren. A 1951 article in the New York Times included this wallpaper and stated, scenic patterns are becoming increasingly popular to supply the view in a room not naturally endowed with one. Lanet certainly provided rooms with interesting views by way of her wallpaper designs. She produced a wonderful series of tree murals for Kotzenbach and Warren. This one on the right features palm trees and is dated 1952. On the left is Lanet's sketchbook from a trip that she took to Hawaii. It is filled with watercolor sketches of countless flowers and trees. These sketches served as inspiration for her commercial designs. It seems that she was always thinking of her next design even while sitting on the beach in Hawaii. Here are two more of Lanet's innovative tree mural designs. On the left is pine tree and on the right is pepper tree. I highlighted the top of the pine tree mural with a dotted line to show you the ceiling paper portion of the design. The ceiling paper could be custom cut and used to decorate the ceiling or extend the tree along the walls to surround the room to create a sort of canopy. This is Lanet's bay tree design and you can see how the ceiling paper was used to extend the tree around the room. I think it's a bit odd that the base of the tree trunk is floating off the floor. It seems that someone could have planted a foot or two down onto the floor but to each his own. I should say to each her own. It's interesting to see the different ways people installed these tree murals. I came across several instances of the bay tree design in newspapers and magazines. Lanet was often not credited in these articles and a few times men were praised by name for their creative innovations and the way they hung the tree murals even though it was Lanet's idea in the first place.  On the right is a page from Town and Country magazine from October 1954 titled Portraits and Backgrounds. The spread featured well-dressed women all going by their husband's names posing in various interiors. Here is Mrs. Miguel Acoca with Lanet's bay tree wallpaper and I feel as though this is actually a portrait of the tree with the woman off to the side almost starting to fade into the background. It struck me how important it was that Lanet as a freelancer was always able to stamp her name on her designs and she refused to be anonymous or to fade into the background. She put her name on her work wherever she could and I found evidence that she copyrighted many of her designs. Here is a collage of selvedge edges printed with her name and I get such a kick out of seeing all these together. Trudy also made her voice heard with her published writings about weaving. Again she was very thoughtful about her craft. In a booklet from a 1953 arts festival in San Francisco Trudy wrote, At the loom we coordinate body motion and thought placing thread to thread in a fashion which links them into new life of fabric. And remember this is also not her native language. So she was a good writer I thought. Here is Trudy teaching a haystack mountain school of crafts in Maine the summer of 1956 and a detail of one of her weavings which you will see today upstairs. As a teacher Trudy made a huge impression on weaver K Sakamachi a former student and very successful weaver. Here is Trudy at the loom with K looking on with a smile and I have a short video clip of K Sakamachi talking about studying with Trudy. It's from KCET in California from their art bound series. Let's see if it works. It wasn't until the summer of 1954 that I got to study with Trudy German Prey. She was such an extraordinary teacher. The way she taught she had a thinking. She would talk about a so-called a primitive weavers who worked on backstrap looms about being one with the loom. Her interest in the development of abstract form is something that comes through Trudy German Prey who was actually in hiding during the war and then fled to the United States and she had actually trained with a Bauhaus weaver. Trudy taught us how to do double weaving and then I tried a piece in nylon monofilament of which lengths were given to me. I put the monofilament on the loom and tried my double weaving and by golly when I cut it off the loom I had a monofilament hanging. Trudy taught her students about the formal structure of weaving including double weave technique. This is when two clots are woven at once on the loom and are structurally connected depending on how they are woven. On the left is Trudy at the loom next to her colorful silk space hanging called Banner from 1962. On the right is Keisei Kamachi at the loom next to her more biomorphic monofilament weaving called Nagare 7 from 1970. Trudy also experimented with word hangings that incorporated symbols and texts. Notes to John 1 and 2 made in 1966 were exhibited in the show Objects USA an exhibition of crafts that opened at the Smithsonian American Art Museum and traveled across the USA and Europe. Throughout her career, even as her weavings were considered part of the burgeoning fiber art movement, Trudy Gariman Prey continued producing designs for industry as well as commissions for various clients. Here are a few designs that she completed for synagogues in California and the Midwest. These are all works on paper. Trudy designed this Hebrew inscription for the art curtain of Beth Aum Synagogue in Los Altos, California. It is dated 1968 to 69. Among the Hebrew letters and symbols of Jewish life, you can see two hands which seem to reference hands raised in a traditional priestly blessing. The hand gesture also entered popular culture in the 1960s in California when Leonard Nimoy's character Spock on Star Trek was filmed performing his live-long and prosper Vulcan salute. Here is the same design of Trudy's in woven form installed at the synagogue. Back to Lynette. Around 1960, Lynette moved to New York and designed this Delphinium mural on vinyl. Lynette always kept up with design trends and she easily embraced the bright, bold colors of the 1960s. The image on the right is from Lynette's archive and I love how this woman is dressed to match her groovy wallpaper as she's such a fashionista. I love it. Lynette's giant poppy's wallpaper of 1966 was perhaps her boldest and brightest design. I wonder if Lynette designed this in New York while longing for her home in California.  And in 2011, the Los Angeles County Museum of Art exhibited both Trudy and Lynette's textiles in an exhibition called California Design 1930 to 1965. Here is Lynette's piece on display. That is Egyptian Garden. We'll see this later. And also Trudy Garamon-Prey's art curtain trial for Road of Shalom, which is a synagogue in San Rafael, California. And we'll see this as well. These were two books that came out with that exhibition and if you're interested in this topic, they were wonderful with lots of information about California design at this time. And I want to end with a 1974 quote of Trudy's. This is near the end of her life as she died in 1976. I could relate to it today and maybe you will too. She writes, I would just like to know one thing. Why is it that this present generation is so hip on crafts? I see in weaving a very, very ancient technique. Perhaps involvement with this helps to offset a crazy world. These ancients survived. Maybe that is reassuring. Thank you.


Okay, so today we're going to take a look at go-to statements and go-to statements basically act like this. First we have to define a label, then we're going to have a go-to and then specify which label you want to go to. That's pretty much it. So basically what happens here is we have a label, we define a label up here and this go-to basically what it does is it transfers the execution back to this point in code. So for example if I see out, as you can see we've got an infinite loop and that is because, so basically what happens here is we begin this main function. This main function comes in here, it does this print statement, so it seeouts hello loop, then it comes down here and sees a go-to statement and says okay, so this go-to statement is telling me to go to the label, call the label and it comes up here. You can call the label anything you want. So if you want you can call it for example food and it pretty much does the same thing. The one reason you may want to use a go-to is to break out of nested for loops or nested loops in general. So for example if we wanted to break out of this loop, so let's say we do something, so let's say on this line here, this is a contrived example but basically let's say we define a new function, so we define a function boo or int boo and it takes int i and j and k and then it adds everything up and says, let's see, or should I say return i plus j plus k is equal to let's say five. So if we add i, j and k together, if it equals five we're going to return one, oops, we're going to return one, otherwise we're going to return zero, okay, so what we can do here is we can say boo and we're going to pass in i, j, then k and we're going to do something like if boo. So basically what would happen if I do like this, what's going to happen is it's going to break out of this loop, so it's going to break out of this nested loop. But it would not break out of this one or this one, so if you break out of this, it's still going to execute the remainder of the outer loop and if you break out of this loop it's going to execute the remainder of this loop. So basically what we have to do is instead of doing a break, so instead of doing a a break statement like this. What we would want to instead is we want to say go to exit loop. And then down here, just to make it a little more clear as to what I'm doing. Okay, so basically what we're doing here is exiting this for loop. So I want to exit this for loop and the end of this for loop is right down here. So we can define a new label and we can say exit loop. And this is going to be our exit loop label. So basically what's going to happen is when we, maybe I should make this a little smaller so you guys can see better. Okay, so basically what's going to happen here is when we execute this for loop, we're going to go from i0 to 0 to i is 99. Then we're going to do the same for j. I'm going to do the same for k. And here what I'm doing is basically I'm testing if foo, i, j and k, if they're equal to five, then we're returning one. Otherwise we're returning zero. So again, i plus j plus k is equal to five. If it is one, otherwise zero. So basically I'm doing something fairly simple here. And I'm using the go to to step out of this loop. And this is a lot cleaner than having to check the exit here and then checking the exit here and then or should I say checking the exit here here and then here to jump out of it. So I think this is the only example of using go to is that makes code cleaner than it would otherwise be. So let's actually print that out and see what happens. So okay, so basically what we got here is 9 is equal to zero, j is equal to zero, k is equal to zero. So as soon as k reaches five, so I guess this makes sense, right? So basically what we did here is we returned is i plus j plus k equal to five, returned one if it is and turned zero if it's not. Let's do something else. Let's do something like, okay, let's just change this value to 123 and see what happens. Okay, so let's see. So j is equal to 24 and then k is equal to 99 and then we get 123 from that. If you want to see what this would look like if we didn't use go to, we would have to do something like this. Okay, so as an example, if we were to remove this go to statement here and replace with a break, this code would not work anymore. So for example, if we do break I think I also have to remove this exit loop also. Okay, so the problem that's happening here is that we are looping through this nested for loop. And when we loop through this, when we call break, what this does is it breaks out of this for loop, but it does not break out of the nested for loop or should I say the outer for loop so this outer for loop continues running, even though we broke out of this one. So what we are doing is we're breaking out of this, but we're not breaking or should I say we're breaking out of this for loop, but we're not breaking out of this for loop or this for loop. So in order for you to be able to do that, the only way I think the only way I think you can break out of these three nested for loops is by setting a flag if you don't want to use a go to. So for example, you can say int, so we can say int bin zero. So if it's finished, I'm going to set it to let's see, I'm going to set it to one. And what we do here is we're going to break out of this. And then in this outer for loop what we're going to do is going to say if bin, then we're going to break as well. And then in the outer for loop again, if bin, break. So this isn't as clean. And because we didn't use a go to statement, and instead we relied on it's kind of like flag systems, we have fin variable, when this fin variable, when I'm happy with whatever I get, I set it to one, and then break out. And then I have to check this fin variable down here, I have to check this fin variable down here. And this is not clean whatsoever. This is like this code is a lot uglier than if I just simply used the go to. So for example, if I use a go to. So I can just do go to exit loop. I can delete this. I can delete this. Uncomment this. And as you can see, we get the same result. And we yeah, so we get the same result and the code is a lot cleaner with the go to than it is otherwise. But again, you will probably never have to use a go to like professionally.  The only use case for a go to is just jumping out of nested for loop. So like this, if you have a triple enested for loop quad triple least nested for loop or whatever, just use a go to to jump out of it instead of having to check on every nesting of the for loop if you should jump out or not. That's how you use go to statements in C++. And I will see you later.


I think there's intentionality behind the sweaters. Yes, I'm a very large person, you know, I'm a big physical person, and if I put a suit and tie on, it's more intimidating. And so I like the channel Mr. Rogers, who was probably the most accessible person that I could imagine. I'm proud to be a boilermaker for many, many reasons. Big one is just being part of this mission of what Purdue is for the state and for the students. It's a place that there's very little barriers. You can get anything done that you want to get done. If you can dream it, you can do it here. My childhood had a number of different seasons in it. I grew up in a rural place in northern Michigan in a family that was working to make the best of it. It was tough. We were just trying to get by day by day. And I had always been doing just fine in school, but didn't really know what the next steps were, how to take those next steps. In my community where I was growing up, this woman as pediatrician became good friends of my mom, and I remember very distinctly wanting to apply to the University of Michigan. And she really strongly encouraged me to do so, to apply to college, to try for the harder places. And she guided me through that process, helped me with the application, helped me get in. Once I was in, I realized just how underprepared I really was. And I just really had a lot of pull to think about stopping and going back home. But not only did it make help me get in, she gave me her number so I could call her if I had a crisis. And she picked up every time, right away. And just said, just don't matter what, just stay with it. It's okay if you don't get a perfect A, if you fail at this, but just stay with it, keep at it. Mentorship is not just teaching, it's being there after the teaching is done. I want to be known as one who focused first on serving the people of the school. I try to be as accessible as I can to make the faculty extremely successful, to have the students have amazing opportunities and to strategically use those in a way that can really help the people of Indiana and those that are in our community around us. He has this ability to relate to everyone in such a unique way, playful, and joyous manner, but also being able to get his experiences across, to get new ideas implemented. It was tough. I remember being four years in as an assistant professor and not had really much success in getting grant funding going and kind of having the same kinds of questions and lingering doubts until finally starting to keep going at it and making some sense of the process. Being strategic about how to write the grants and developing a color-coded matrix, because I'm a very visual type of learner, to share with my colleagues, to say, you write this sentence for this particular reason, you have to write this sentence for this exact particular reason, and all these things map directly to how this is reviewed. And that has helped a lot of faculty, it helped me get out of the rut and helped a lot of others to be successful as well. You can really tell how much he cares about the school and about the people in it. He doesn't come across as somebody who is overthinking his words, he tells you exactly what he thinks. I think of David as a jokester, someone who is very charismatic, someone who naturally has this ability to teach and motivate. That's what makes David great. Love this opportunity to make, was that person for me. There are many, many times now, when I am that person for a faculty member or a student, when I need a little push to stay with it, to persist and pursue what they're trying to accomplish. Many people in the department are mentors and feel like mentors, whether they're official or not, there's such a great informal mentoring network here. That ability to reach out and know that somebody's got your back is really special. It's been a great place to think about how to do science in a big way, how to grow. My next step is to leverage this opportunity as head of the school to make it known for how great of a place it really is. We have the best faculty, the best students, the best staff and we have great partners across the state to really address problems of human health relevance that are important for the state. And I want to be somebody who really helps make that grow, makes that really turn into something. You know, I love the metaphor of a Boilermaker, a tradesperson who's part of a bigger team working on something that's so big you can't do it by yourself. So I always think about Boilermakers and what it's like to be a Boilermaker is being part of this team that's just trying to go out and do bigger things but doing it together.


Ever feel like you're being watched? Well, sometimes you are, or sometimes you need to do some watching. This is another Synology Spanelization project for a client. People ask because they do a lot of videos about Synology. Do I just use it at home? And the answer is well, not only do I use it at home, but yes, we use it for clients. Yes, we will set these up and package them for people. So that's what this is here. It is a whole system that we've got set up. This laptop is tied to here and tied to all this. We're going to package it up for a client. But yes, it is completely a commercial solution. We use where we will prepackage and configure it, or sometimes also prepackage, configure, and then do the install, depending on if it's a location we install. I have links down below to my other Synology videos. If you have questions and comments, leave them down below. Thanks.


Hi everybody and welcome to tonight's episode, I guess, of the Ideas Live. We're going to be talking about what you can learn from a city neighborhood. And I'm here tonight with Dr. Sandy Aquetta from Stuni Purchase College, where he's an associate professor of economics at the School of Natural and Social Sciences, which is a cool sounding place. So thanks so much for being on tonight, Sandy. Oh, my pleasure. Yeah, I'm looking forward to this. Me too. I was telling Sandy earlier today when we were talking about going through this that this is the event that one of the events that I've been really looking forward to. And the reason is that I met Sandy a couple of years ago, just as I was starting to read the works of Jane Jacobs. And Sandy is also a big fan of Jacobs. And so I was at a actually I was at a fee seminar. And somebody said, Oh, make sure that you meet Sandy. So he's been responsible for getting me really excited about Jane Jacobs. I'm now reading all of her work. And my favorite thing that I've learned from her is the topic of this webinar, what you can learn from a city neighborhood. So I'm going to let Sandy tell us a little bit about Jane Jacobs and why she's helped to make him an urbanist. So tell us a little bit about one of your favorite people. Yeah, sure. Yeah, she's one of my heroes. My other heroes, of course, are Ludwig Van Mises, F.A. Hayek, Ezra Kirzner. But she really fits right in there because when I read her, her first book, which is the Death and Life of Great American City, there was a residence. It was she was talking about processes, social processes, she was talking about discovery in ways that were at the same time familiar, but also a little bit different because she was reaching a lot of the same conclusions about the failure of central planning, this time at the local level. But using insights that were very similar to that of Mises and Hayek, for example, the failure of planners to take into local knowledge, she used the term locality knowledge, but really the same thing and how difficult it is really impossible for them to acquire that knowledge to the extent that they would need in order to plan the kinds of cities that they wanted to. So she's, you know, arrives at a lot of conclusions that were resonating with the kind of social theory that I was interested in. But Jacobs herself, if you want to know something about her, she's really interesting because a lot of people, not only on the libertarian side, but also on the more leftist side, are inspired by her. Because I think she, for a couple of reasons, one I think is because she was an activist. She fought the kind of entrenched interest and power elites in the New York area who wanted to, Robert Moses in particular, but others who wanted to sort of impose a vision without really understanding how the city works. And so she got on the street, she organized, she knew how to organize, she knew how to talk to people. So that's part of it. She's sort of part of that 1960s, late 1950s, early 1960s activism. And she got in touch with a lot of the local activists, you know, most of whom were on the left. And she's very successful. But at the same time, she preached what she practiced. In other words, she's writing about what she's observing and doing. And the result of that was the life, the death and life of great American cities, which again cast suspicion on central planning, on heavy handed intervention. I mean, she was not a libertarian, but she was hitting on all these, you know, points that were really important to people in the Austrian tradition of economics and a lot of libertarians. So she appeals to both left and right. She herself was not an academic. She attended, she was born and raised in Scranton, Pennsylvania. But what's that? I've been through there, actually. I've never been there. It's like I should make a pilgrimage. Yeah, I've been to where she lived in the West Village, 55 Hudson Street. But I've never been to Scranton. So she left there after high school. She was a young woman and came to New York, lived with her sister. Actually, I think she lived in my neighborhood, which is Brooklyn Heights, for a little while, and attended Columbia University for like a semester and then sort of dropped out. She didn't like it. So she never got a, you know, graduated from college. There's some suspicion that she may never have actually graduated from high school, which is the kind of person who got bored, you know, in school. Then she got held various journalism jobs, particularly with architectural forum. She married someone who was an architect and so she learned a lot about design and things of that nature from him. And then she met William H. White, people like that, who were doing the sociology of cities and a lot of architects. So long story short, she kind of is an autodidact in terms of studying cities. She once told me that she, her technique was to read everything about a subject, just immerse herself in the literature, but at the same time observe. She considered herself a pragmatist who, you know, was empirical, very empirical in developed her ideas in that way. So that's kind of her in a nutshell. She raised a family in New York when she was writing, death and life. She had children. She was married. She was a housewife also, you know, she worked, and then came to Vietnam War and she said that in order to keep her sons from being drafted, among other reasons, but I think the main reason was that they moved to Toronto. And that's where she spent the last part of her life. And actually that's where I eventually got to meet her. Okay. Yeah. And she's famous for starting or stopping, I should say, a parkway through a really vibrant neighborhood in Toronto. So the activism did not end in New York. No, in fact, well, she was very reluctant to get involved in that again. I mean, she kind of left New York in order, I mean, as I said, to save her sons from being drafted, but at the same time, you know, people were asking her to do this and that. She was a real community leader and very effective and she just could, she couldn't write. I mean, that was her passion as well. And so just when I finally did get to meet her, it was through my friend and colleague, Pierre de Rocher, who's there in Toronto, and actually who may be listening, hi Pierre. And we went to her house and it just so happened that she was between books, because when she worked on a book, she cut everything out.  But she just finished what turned out to be her last book. And I think she had two more books on the contract. She was in her 80s at the time. So we spent about three and a half, four hours, one afternoon just talking. We're just an amazing, amazing experience at that time. Yeah, she was a very inspiring lady. And if I'd only known, she only passed away, I think in 2003, or something like that, fairly recently. So had I only known, I probably could have met her. It'll be one of my regrets that I didn't. Okay, so moving forward, Jacobs loved great cities. And I know that you do too. You love New York and was, especially Brooklyn Heights, your neighborhood. Sandy gives a great tour of his own neighborhood because he does James walks, which are kind of a tour that tell you about the history of the neighborhood. And I love cities too. There's just something about all of those people working together and the achievements that we can accomplish. So what is so great about cities? Why should everybody love cities? Well, I mean, you can appreciate cities on different levels. I think people just, you know, like the experience of being in a city that that's, you know, I've come to appreciate cities in that way. I guess I've always wanted to live in a big city, a group in a small town in the West, in Southwest, and, you know, finally, just, you know, by luck ended up here. But, you know, my when I really got passionate about cities, was sort of intellectually when I really when I read Jacobs, I, I started to understand why I like them in a way, just at a, you know, at a kind of a visual level, just what experiential level. But like I said earlier, when I read her, she really resonated with this other stuff that I was doing. At the time, I was working on the dynamics of interventionism. That's something I still keep in touch with. And then I think it's Pete Betke, who recommended that I do something on urban interventionism. And Pierre also suggested that I read Jacobs to do this. So when I, when I did it just, it was when I read the book, I think you have the same experience. You read Death and Life, Great American Cities. And it's just, it's a really an eye opener. It's one of those books that makes you see things in a completely different way. I mean, you take things for granted, and you like a city sidewalk, or some, some urban design, some design of public space, and it just, you know, oh, so that's why it's this way. That's why she gave, she gave me a vocabulary and a sort of a framework to understand how things are working. So, so that was sort of the beginning of it. But from that came an interest in social networks, in the concept of trust, and how that's important, in the history of the first cities, going back to like Jericho, Chattahuyuk, and others, the Natufians, who were the first settlers, who had the first settlements in the Middle East, and all of that. Just, it's kind of, she really opened a lot of doors for me. And just intellectually, it's just been a lot of fun. And I'm still interested in interventionism. I'm still interested in economics, obviously. I still consider myself an economist, however, when people ask me, you know, what kind of economics I do, I think I've got an answer down. But I have to pause because I realize it's not a, it's, I'm not an urban economist. That's a certain thing. In fact, you know, truth and advertising here, I've never taken a course in urban economics. And I really never have taught a course, strictly speaking, in urban economics, although my course is on, my course in cities, culture, and economy at purchase, you know, I draw on urban economics. You know, what I do, I guess, is sort of urban, sorry, is economic sociology. I look at cities as a dynamic generator of economic development. I guess that's one thing I have to add to what I was saying before, but why I'm interested. I'm a big fan of Visio Kersner and the idea of entrepreneurship. And what Jacobs did was helped me to see what the mechanisms of entrepreneurship are. And not only that, to see cities as places where people who are, who are interested in market processes really need to study. Cities are embody a lot of the things that economists, whether you're Austrian or whatever, are interested in like markets, prices, money, property rights, public goods, externalities, these things are all urban phenomena. And so if you, if you really want to understand how those work, you have to understand cities. And again, this is sort of on top of the social network theory stuff that I think bring, for me, brings everything together, kind of makes it all cohere. Yeah. If you're, if you're somebody who cares about, I think, the way that people cooperate in human freedom and flourishing, there's a really rich history in cities. My family background is German and Tom Palmer told the story at a seminar I went to a long time ago. And about the German works where they used to put on the, the sign for the plaque over the door to the city, Stadlitz-Machtfri, which is city air makes one free. And it used to be that if you could, if you could, if you were a surf and you could make it into the city for a year and a day, you would become part of the community and they would protect your freedom. It's just kind of that, that cool sense of community. And history, I, I, yeah, it's really, I don't know, there's something about it. You know what I mean? It's really interesting once you get it. I think the origins of that is, it's not because people, you know, the, the, the, the burger meisters or whatever were nice guys, but they realized it was these people who were being attracted to cities were really useful.  And, you know, they didn't have much wealth, but these are what are responsible for the economic development. And I think that this idea that, that, you know, we have a city that welcomes strangers. I mean, it's a nice, it's one of those things, it's, yeah, it's a nice thing, but it has a very practical side to it, right? They wanted, they wanted people to stay, you know, they want, they had to modify the, you know, the, the lords of the manners that we're asking might be concerned about their service. Go ahead. Go ahead. Oh, I was going to say, we're going to talk a little bit more about trust in a little bit, too, because I think it's an important topic. Just one last thing. A lot of the people who moved to the cities, I think this is, I mean, this is particularly true with the rebirth of cities after the middle ages. But I mean, this is sort of true in general, that the growth of cities, the most dynamic part of the cities tended to be on the outskirts, what we would take today called the suburbs, the Fobar, the places where, strictly speaking, we're outside the control of the, of the, of the crafts, gills, and, you know, the, the, the Burgermeisters and everything. So people would settle kind of just outside that district where they could do their own thing. And so, you know, we think of the suburbs today as being kind of the anti-city. And, you know, we'll talk about that later. When they're, when they're artificially accelerated, their growth is, they can be. But historically, you know, the dynamism of cities have really come about as a result of development on the, that, the penumbra of cities, the outskirts. Okay. So very briefly, because I want to give everybody a chance for questions. A lot of people have a bad opinion of cities. Why do you, why do you think that is? I'm saying a lot of people have what? A bad opinion of cities. They don't like cities, if you're like, Oh, I mean, you know, I guess the different reasons people may have had a bad experience. My father, for example, just hated big cities. And he grew up on a farm and all that.  So that's one thing. But I think cities have gotten a bad reputation. People associate it with crime, for example, you know, the dangerous city. They associate it with pollution, for example, congestion, and, and all of that. Now, crime aside, cities are places where, you know, there is congestion. Also, cities are places where you see weird things.  Things that you don't see so often in a small town. Well, yeah, that's kind of hidden away in the small town. Cities are kind of out in the open and there's a lot of it and stuff that you can't even have imagined existed. And so that, that strangeness is very scary to a lot of people. And, you know, it's there. It is smelly. It is noisy, congested. You know, that's, so I think that's, that kind of, that side of the city is something that one reason why it gets a bad rep. Now, the crime thing is, is another thing. And that, you know, high crimes is an indicator of a failure of the city. Yeah, which is something that we're going to get to. But I want to pause to give everybody a chance to ask questions. And I'm going to launch one of our polls. If you haven't done an event with us before, I will occasionally pop up one of these. So just let me know how you think there's no right answer or wrong answer. Well, it's kind of discussed it a little bit. And if you have any questions, you can type them at any time, but I'll encourage you to type them now. We have been throwing around a little bit of economic jargon, which is okay. But if you didn't know some of it, for instance, externalities, ask about it, and we will do our best to explain it before going forward, because we don't want you to feel lost. But I haven't got anything about that. So if I don't, I'm going to assume that everything's okay. That's the other thing, you know, people don't like getting lost. Yeah. And often in cities, that's what happens to you, you get lost and it's kind of scary. They're definitely much bigger. Okay, so I don't have any questions yet. And I've got a bunch of people, almost everybody has voted. So I'm going to close the poll. But I will let you know that 59% of people who responded love cities, and 41% can take them or leave them. Nobody hates cities who's on here today, which is maybe a little bit unsurprising. Well, there's a selection bias sample here. All right. Oh, actually, I do have one quick question. Somebody said, what about the high cost of living in cities? The high cost of living? Yeah. Yeah. I mean, that that can be a problem, you know, for cities to be incubators of ideas and, and sort of engines of economic development, there have to be opportunities for people without a lot of money, but with good ideas to to live in or near cities. And so, yeah, the high cost of living high price of real estate is a problem. Now, in most cities, there are districts that are not high price. These are places that may not have good transportation. They may have a bad reputation. They may in fact be dangerous. Or they may feel insecure. And that's where typically people tend to move who don't have much money. You know, the docklands in London, which are now fabulously expensive, were not so much like 20 years ago or 25 years ago here in New York, Williamsburg, right? I remember when I was a graduate student, many, many years ago, looking for a place to live, I checked out Williamsburg and it was a, and still is a very large, acidic Jewish community there and not much else. And now, as, as you know, it's like the center of hipster. So things like that happen. So, I mean, and New York is kind of a weird case because it really is difficult in the city to find affordable housing that's not, you know, subsidized by the government. Strange enough, you can find housing that subsidized privately for, you know, development. That's a little bit weird. There are places in the outskirts, Brownsville and Brooklyn and elsewhere and Queens and the Bronx that are still relatively affordable. But yeah, that is, now the thing is cities are not monolithic. I guess that's the point I'm trying to make, that there's some neighborhoods and districts that are economically vibrant and therefore you see the real estate prices rising in other places that aren't. And so over time, you see this, this kind of shift from one to another, the prices rising and falling and then falling and then rising elsewhere. Okay. So I have a couple of questions, but knowing where the conversation is going, I think that we might handle them a little bit later. So if everybody will bear with me, I am not forgetting about you. I just, we're going to move forward and I will ask your questions in a little bit. So before we go any further, I just wanted to quickly talk about a subject that I think is kind of the root of the insights that you can gain from a city. And that's this topic called spontaneous order is the sort of jargony name for it. Emergent order is another term that people like. And the technical definition is it's an order that comes about as a result of human action, but not as a result of human design.  And for me, when I read Death and Life of Great American Cities, I had, it was just this amazing, she didn't, Jacobs didn't know what spontaneous order was. She didn't use that word. No. And I don't think, well, maybe she had heard it, but she, she didn't, she wasn't using that jargon. But that's what she was describing in the way that her neighborhood works. So do you have anything that you want to say about spontaneous order that might be useful to the people listening before we go forward? And then we're going to jump right into talking about what makes a good city neighborhood work. Yeah, it's an important concept. I think it holds the key to understanding a lot of, you know, about society, about the social order. But I think what some people find confusing about it is that at some level, there's always some conscious planning. It's not spontaneous. At some level of some social order, you know, if you take a, if you take a city, for example, people always say, well, you know, it is a manmade creation because it, you know, these buildings were designed by an architect, and they were constructed according to fairly meticulous plans and, you know, it was very well fought out. And so that's, that's certainly true. Moreover, they'll point out that, well, there are highways, there are roads, you know, who will build the roads? There's infrastructure there that is definitely the result of somebody's overarching plan. But that's undeniable. The question is whether you can have a city, a vibrant city without that kind of central planning from, you know, top down. You know, that's one issue. I think more germane would be to ask, you know, given, given we have some central planning, we have a government that governs these things. To what extent is that a hell or a hindrance? I guess we'll talk about that in more detail later. Let me just say that even where the government, the local government plans an infrastructural thing, like subways, for example, that over time is also a spontaneous order. For example, when the first subways in New York were established in 1904, I don't think anyone could have foreseen exactly how it would have not only developed but how it would have affected the city. I wrote about this in a column not too long ago, how the subways were an attempt to create urban sprawl. That is to say, the, the Lower East Side and places like that where they were working, working people tended to be very overcrowded. And one of the justifications for the subways at the time was to allow people to live outside the city and commute to the city, right? So they wanted to subsidize suburbanization or at least go out to the outer boroughs, you know, outer boroughs of Brooklyn, Queens, et cetera. And so the subways would go out to where people weren't. And it was, it was kind of like the interstate highway system, you know, in a small scale. You're deliberately trying to, to lower the density of the cities. And what happened was then that the city built up around the transport hubs, built up around where the subways stopped. And the city infilled to the point now where, you know, it's the subway runs in some of the densest places on earth, or at least in the United States. So, I mean, nobody predicted that would, well, no, somebody might have predicted it, but I don't think the planners were intending for that to happen when it was initially designed. So that's an example of a pattern that is a result of human action, but was not, it's a stable pattern that nobody had intended to create. Yeah. And we have, I have a lot of resources on spontaneous order that I'll make available to everybody afterwards. So if you're hearing this and thinking, oh, that's interesting, but I don't quite get it, or you think this sounds great, and you want to learn more, I'm going to try and make a lot of, a lot of resources available to you. So, what can we learn from a city neighborhood? This is the question that I've been so excited to ask. So first, let's talk about cities at their best. When you're walking around a neighborhood, and it's a, you know, the kind of neighborhood you want to walk around, it's vibrant, it's safe, there's a lot of stuff going on. People are generally pretty friendly, although people have different definitions of what that means. Like you said, some people don't like being attacked could be friendly. Yes. Right, right. So what can we, what can we learn when we look around a neighborhood like that? Well, you know, the main indicator is are there people around, right? That's the first thing. If there aren't, that's the first thing you notice, right?  You're surrounded by tall buildings and, you know, parking garages and things of that nature. And you walk, where the heck is everybody? You notice that when a city or neighborhood is not functioning, there just aren't many people. On the other hand, you know, if you leave your hotel and the people walking on the sidewalk, it's something you don't notice. You kind of take for granted.  Obviously, there's vehicular traffic too, but it's mainly the foot traffic that would attract you. Okay, let's, let's see if I can find a restaurant, came nearby, and, you know, where there are people on the street, typically there are restaurants that you can find that aren't too far away. So, you know, that's probably the main indicator is, you know, whatever it is you go out of the hotel, whether it's in the morning or afternoon or after dark, there are people there. That gives you a sense of security and comfort that then frees you to explore, to find kinds of alternatives or find things that you, you know, might not have expected. Yeah, for, and this is, I don't know if it's silly, I definitely noticed since reading Jacob, she calls them eyes on the street, and they're kind of like an unofficial security source. The fact that you know that there are people around who are seeing what's happening is a way that we make each other safer. Yeah, I'll just say the heavy lifting of, of, of security. See, the thing is, the main thing is you have to feel secure. Yes. Clearly, there has to be security, but if there's security, when you don't feel secure, then it's no good. You have to sort of feel comfortable. And one of the things that does that is, is seeing other people, and, and, you know, they could be ignoring you, they don't have to be friendly or approach you or anything like that. But just the idea that, that somebody is watching, you know, not the creepy kind of watching where there's this sort of staring at you. But, you know, if you were to fall or somebody bumped into you or you lose something, somebody would actually see that. That is, so I think what Jacob means by eyes on the street, you, the heavy lifting of security is done just by having people on the street. You know, and on the margins, you need to have some sort of enforcement of the local rules or things like that. But as she said, if in, if in order, as Jacob said, if in order to, to maintain a sense of security, you have to have a police moment in every corner, that's a, that's an indication of failure. Yeah. And I don't think it feels safe when you have a policeman. No, not at all. It seems like something's wrong. Yeah. I mean, if there's a uniform person there, whether it's police or military is, we're seeing more and more military people in, you know, fatigues and things.  I think he's on my side, whatever. But I, it's a little strange. It's not, you know, what you're used to seeing in a comfortable environment. Yeah. And I mean, that's what's really interesting to me is it's, you can't, you said you don't notice when there are people on the street. And it's a lot of stuff that you don't notice, I think is what made, or at least unless you know to look for it, you don't notice things. One story that I like to tell is I used to jog down, I live in Ottawa in Canada, and I used to jog down the canal. There's a big canal that goes right down the middle of Ottawa in the winter. It's the world's largest outdoor skating rink. It's a fun fact that you all now know about Ottawa. And you go through very different neighborhoods, excuse me. And the things that you notice are kind of when there's only one sort of thing, when there's just homes, there's not really very many people out. They might be out in the evenings or they might be out in the mornings, but during the day and at night, nobody's outside. If the sidewalks are very straight and there's not stuff going on, there aren't too many people out. But if there's a kind of, you know, just little things like just the sidewalk curves, there's more likely to be people. And then especially when you get into the city and there are different, you know, there's a restaurant and a shopping and a bar. And especially in the summer, there are houseboats parked along the canal as well. So you've got people really out at all times of day. And that's the stuff that I never knew to look for. And I think it's cool. And I really like the way that you said it that you probably don't notice it. And yeah, if it works well, you probably don't notice it unless you know to look. And it's such a cool story when you know to look for it. At the time, Jacobs wrote her Death and Life of Great American Cities, her target was a certain kind of urban planning, which emphasized separating uses, sort of zoning in a very strict sense. You had residential, you had commercial, you had like manufacturing, etc. And these things had to be kept separate. Why? Well, because it was some person's idea that these had to be separate. Somebody's notion of order that they were trying to impose on a city. What Jacobs' basic argument was, that's not the order that's important in the city. The order that's important is the one that emerges as a result of people having contact. And if you look closely enough, you can see these patterns. And her argument was the very things that you try to do to maintain this artificial order, destroy the emergent order, she didn't use that term, but this order that comes about as a result of unintended consequence, that is really the life of the city. She says, when you think of a city, typically your impression is gained at the street level, what you see going on at that level. And that's a spontaneous order. She says that the book is about the interaction between the design of public space, streets, sidewalks, plazas, that sort of thing. Public spaces I define as places where you would expect to see strangers. We're seeing a stranger is not a weird thing. So the design of those spaces and the social interaction that goes on in them. And that was a big point in her book. She was saying that the way that planners of her era imagined a city should be were at odds with that kind of order that emerges spontaneously. But if you read more deeply into that, I think what she was opposed to was the idea that architects or planners could impose any kind of order. It's the imposition of a particular vision that's the problem because cities are much more complex than an individual mind. Cities are the result of many minds operating. And so when you try to impose a particular plan, even if it's in some geniuses plan, it's just a single mind. It's like a market, right? Market functions because a lot of people who are operating in it and are able to use their, not only their intelligence, but their local knowledge. And so, I mean, that's something she definitely emphasized. Yeah, so, you know, this emergent order that we're talking about earlier is really a central theme in that book and really in all her work. Can I just say one thing? Oh yeah, of course. You know, I asked her once what she thought her main contribution was, and she answered immediately the fractal. Okay. And what she meant by that, I think, is that things scale up. The principles that operate at the level of the neighborhood operate at the level of the district, operate at the level of cities, at the level of regions, and then the relationships between cities. The same kind of complexity that she was writing about and analyzing at the neighborhood level that generate diversity of land use, that encourage diversity of knowledge and skills and tastes. Those things scale up.  So, this same kind of principle of some sort of patterns emerge. And so, she was sort of, she thought she'd done that, discovered something at the social level that these things do scale up. Yeah. Yeah, that's cool. I would never have thought of putting it that way. I'm going to jump ahead just a little bit. We were going to talk specifically about trust, but I hope that we've sort of covered that. We can come back to it if we have time, but I have a lot of really great questions, so I want to give people a chance to ask them. So, well, one that kind of, you've talked a little bit about zoning now, and we were talking about housing prices before, Tate asks, how much do zoning laws affect housing prices? How much do you think that factors into the expensiveness of cities? Zoning, that's a very complex issue. Zoning tends to exclude, right? And sometimes that's their function. Other times zoning is not enforced. And so, it's a way of handing out political favors at the local level. I know this because I have some, not direct personal experience, but I know that this sort of thing goes on, that you petition the zoning board for exceptions and things of that nature. But if you think of zoning as it's supposed to be, as it's supposed to be practiced, it's usually, as I said, it sort of excludes people or uses that you don't like. So, let me give an example of my own neighborhood here, Brooklyn Heights. It's actually beyond zoning. It's a landmarked district. That means that if you want to change anything on the exterior of your building, for example, let alone if you want to build a new building, it has to get permission from the Landmarks Preservation Commission here in New York. And the result of that is that this is a very pretty neighborhood. Most of the buildings were built pre-civil war. Sorry, I should say a lot of them. Townhouses built pre-civil war. It's a charming, charming. You've been here, right? Yeah, I can recommend Brooklyn Heights to anybody who wants a cool place to go in New York.  So it's nice for people who live here. But the prices as the questioner is indicating tend to really, really go up. On the other hand, you have places that are zoned industrial and those, you know, tend to be, you know, their exception to this, of course, those tend to be low-value real estate. And not only that, but the places that are around them, because of the sort of what Jacobs would call a border vacuum, because you have a massive single use in these industrial districts. So that there are a lot of people there, let's say from nine to five, but after that, there's nobody. They tend to be kind of dead zones, not only inside, but surrounding them. And that tends to bring down real estate values and just economic activity in general. That concept of border vacuums I think is very important to understanding a lot of what goes on. Well, so yeah, it can go both ways. It really depends on how the zoning is done. I've got one more question. And while I ask it, I'm going to run my second poll. So I'm going to launch it. We'll disappear for a second for everybody. But the second question that I've got, it's an interesting one from Thomas says, I'm watching this webinar with my five-year-old son who recently informed me that what wants to be when he grows up is a guy who decides where skate parks are built. With that in mind, what insights can you give with regard to cities that master their community recreational spaces and those that allow community members to develop them on their own, such as the Burnside Skate Park in Portland, which I'm not familiar with, but it's... I'm not familiar with that either. But I guess, you know, Jacob said things to say about parks and things of the nature. She called, she described parks as volatile, as volatile places. And she said that parks, as a rule, draw their life from cities, and that parks do not give life to cities. You know, parks by nature are empty spaces, or that is to say where there's no commercial or residential use there. And that means that if you plot this empty space in an area that is already kind of troubled, where people don't go, or that's just sort of on the edge, you know, thinking maybe, well, what these people who live here really need is open space in a park, which is something that Robert Moses did a lot of, and Jacob's complained about, is it can really bring neighborhood down because these places can be very scary. That is to say, you know, what we're saying earlier about people eyes on the street, people attracting people, if there's no reason for people to be in the park, then people aren't going to go there unless they don't want to be seen.  And so they can, that's the volatility of parks. Now, if you put a park where there's already, you know, residential commercial, there's a diversity of uses of space, then they could be successful. And, you know, she gave you an example. You know, if you take a, say a park is put in a residential area, put a skating rink in a residential area, where there is no commercial development, say, then, you know, there's no restaurants, there's no McDonald's or anything like that. What happens when you have to go to the bathroom? Right. Maybe you know somebody next door, you knock on the door and say, excuse me, can I use the bathroom? That's a very difficult thing to do. You'd never do it, unless you're into a stranger, unless it's like an emergency or something. So, you know, your stay would be short term and it would discourage you from going.  If the park is surrounded by not only residential, but also some commercial place and get a bite to eat and maybe use the bathroom, then people will hang around the park. People stay there, though. So, this diversity of land use was very important to her as a principle of attracting people to those spaces, making them feel comfortable, and in turn laying the foundation for economic development. So, yeah, I think skating rinks are great. I don't skate myself. Actually, I fall. But you have to be very careful, okay, five-year-old, that you put those skating rinks where they're going to be used and where people who use them are able to feel comfortable and have good bathrooms. So, I'm not sure, but he also may have been talking about skateboarding. And if he was, then I have kind of a story. My old neighborhood, I used to live in Windsor, which is right across the river from Detroit, Michigan. But I was in Canada. And there was a park where kids were skateboarding. They would all get together and they would skateboard. And so, they put one of these, I don't know what it's called, but you can skate back and forth on it. And everybody was there all the time. It was right in the neighborhood where people already were. And now I live in Ottawa. And in Ottawa, there's a skate park. And it's kind of, they've obviously tried to take the kids on the skateboards out of the neighborhood and put them somewhere else. And I only ever see kids skateboarding there on the weekend.  You have to make a special trip. So, I think that there's a role for taking cues, like looking for hints in the neighborhood for what people want already. So, if you do become somebody who decides where skate parks go, maybe try to keep those things in mind. Yeah.  You have to supply bathrooms. These are additional expenses, which may discourage you from doing it in the first place. I don't know if you've been to London, the South Bank of London near, I guess, it's near the National Theater. Anyway, there's this place that's underneath an overhang. And there's like a cement bench that was put there by the architect. And it's kind of out of the public. And what happens is it's, you know, 24-7, there are guys on skateboards going up and down this ramp. It's probably, I don't know, but it's not that big. And the police sort of let that happen. I saw the policeman reprimanding one skateboarder for, I don't know, playing music or something. He says, you know, you're not supposed to do the skate, but don't do that. So, there are these rules, these sort of unwritten rules that they can do. And it's right there. And it's really, you know, people go to London, they know this, but it's, you can see some really fantastic skateboarding there. And why? Well, because there's like a cafe nearby. It's just a lot of people. It's a nice setting. Anyway. Yeah, I should say in Windsor, the skateboarding park was across from the All You Can Eat Diner, or not All You Can Eat, but breakfast all the time diner. So there were some things nearby. I mean, there are these complementarities that exist in cities that were unplanned, right? This is the spontaneous nature of cities again, that you get this complementarity that is, you know, promotes comfort and eventually, hopefully, economic development. I'm going to fold a couple of good questions in. I want to talk about poorly functioning neighborhoods. And a couple of questions might help with that. So somebody asked about extreme poverty and crime and projects with poor schools and poor children, for poor children, and larger cities don't seem to care about them. Is this inevitable in great cities? And the other question is, what is your view on the self-destruction of diversity, which is a little bit of Jacob's jargon? She kind of says that cities that are doing well are destined to become too expensive to be diverse or have other things go wrong, and they can lead to neighborhoods that used to be good, but no longer function well. So let's talk a little bit about neighborhoods that don't function terribly well. And then I've got a tough question for you, and we're going to wrap up. Okay. Yeah, poor people are attracted to cities. You go to any great city today, or throughout history, there'll be a lot of poor people, which is, you know, Ed Glazer, who published a book in 2012 called The Triumph of the City, says that that is actually a sign of success in the city, where you see poor people. Because that means, well, of a certain kind, that there are poor people without much money, immigrants maybe from outside the city, they could be from foreign countries, too. We see opportunity in cities, and so they move there hoping to do better. Jacob distinguishes between slumming and unslumming neighborhoods. That is, she says not all slums are the same. Slums are basically where poor people live. Okay, live in one place because the rents are cheap. But there are neighborhoods that are slums that are vibrant and that are on the way up, and then there are neighborhoods that are slums that are dying. And there are certain indicators you should use. You know, she has fairly specific indicators of which and when you tell one from the other. But that's an important distinction to make between not all slums are the same. Now, why are some slums persistent? By the way, Harlem in a day day was a slum, and it was one of the most creative places on earth for a long time. Maybe not so much anymore, but it's actually on its way back up. So, you know, what happens is, you know, there's a combination of all kinds of government inventions that contribute to this redistribution, which, you know, I'm not saying I'm not making any broad statement against redistribution or the welfare state and that thing here. Yeah, no, I mean, let's not fool ourselves that this has not had a disincentive effect or an incentive effect on people not being able to to emerge from the slum. All kinds of public policies, public schools, as opposed to private schools, you know, exacerbate the problem. I mean, if you look back in the history of cities, as I say, there always been poor people, there always been slums, but the sort of great society welfare programs, subsidized housing, other kinds of interventions with respect to wages and that kind of thing didn't exist and, you know, maybe that would have helped in some cases. But, you know, New York rose to be a great city without those things. New York probably is heyday. Maybe it's golden age was 1930s, 40s, and 50s in terms of creativity, economic dynamism. It also reached the zenith of its population at that time. It's approaching that again. But anyway, this is before the great society programs. This is before massive housing projects. So that's something to consider. Okay, so yeah. Oh, sorry, you want me to say a little about self-destruction? Yeah, if you if you've got a little bit. Just very briefly, I know we're in short of time. But the idea behind that is that the neighborhood becomes so successful that real estate values, for example, are skyrocketing, that only large firms and very rich people can live there. Something like New York Soho is a good example of that, which was Light Industrial in the 1950s, then it kind of declined. Artists moved in, and now it's like Madison Avenue. And Jacobs' complaint about that was that we're not complaining. Her observation was that because only the wealthy, both businesses and residents can live there or operate there, the kind of experimentation, kind of diversity that is necessary for these tools of resources that are necessary for innovation and dynamic growth disappear.  They might go to Dumbo, or they might go to, she didn't mention these names, but to Williamsburg or to some other place, Silicon Alley. And so it's sort of a cycle that happens. And I mean, this is where she said there may be a role for government policy that, you know, is mainly kind of government staying out of the way that you allow neighborhoods where there are possibilities for people to move in that haven't done so, that haven't become vibrant yet. At least don't do, you know, don't build massive projects there. Don't create wide streets that would block the flow of traffic and cut off the social networking that's necessary. You know, maybe if you're going to plan something, plan for there to be more intricate streets and things of that nature there where people could run into each other and this move more complicated than that, but she had some role for government planning to help foster this kind of natural cyclical development that occurs in cities. Yeah, she had a tough question. Very complicated ideas of how to deal with this. I really recommend Death and Life, Great American Cities to anybody who's interested in this stuff. It's a really great book. Can I ask you one more before you ask your tough question? There's one thing. In the last chapter of that book, she says, what kind of problem is a city? She doesn't use the term spontaneous order, but that's the chapter where she deals with, you know, looking back and asks, you know, what is the nature of this thing we're looking at? And she calls a city a problem of complexity. Yeah. Right? That was my favorite chapter. Yeah. I wouldn't judge anyone who reads that chapter second, maybe. Maybe not first. It's a very Hayekian kind of chapter. Again, she doesn't use the term spontaneous order, but that's what she's really talking about in that chapter. What is the nature of the city? Well, it's a problem of organized complexity. Yeah, it's a very human problem because we react when people try to do things to us. And like a lot of nature or inanimate objects. So, as Sandy knows, I have a tough question for as I mentioned, I grew up across the river from Detroit. And if you've never been to Detroit, it's an interesting place to go. And it's an interesting place to read the history of because Detroit was a really great city. And now there are literally skyscrapers that are empty. The Michigan Central Skit Station is this really amazing train station. It's got office towers on top of it. And you can see through it because it's empty and the windows are broken. And actually, part of Transformers 3 was filmed there. This is how bad it was. It looked like whatever city there. I don't think it's supposed to be Detroit in that movie, but it looks like it's been attacked by Decepticons basically. So this is like a real failure of a city. Like it's really, really sad. So what do you think can be done to help a failed city? Detroit might be, we were talking about this, Detroit might be the only example of a whole city that's failed, but also neighborhoods that are having a really hard time. Do you think there's anything that can be done in terms of policy that we can pursue? We can make it easier to start a business there. Yep. You can do things at least in the short run that would increase safety, which may involve police, but it could be something else as simple as adding, allowing businesses to come and so that there are more people on the street. Again, I haven't studied it very closely. I know in general what the problems are. Given the situation now, there are limited things one can do. What you don't want, but what you can do is sort of learn from Detroit because as you say, there was a time when Detroit was very vibrant, was one of the great cities in the United States fueled by the automobile industry. And it's a very complicated, as all urban problems are, it's a very complicated problem because Jacobs and others might point to the fact that it was a sort of a monoculture, a monoculture, a single industry dominating everything and all of that. Others would point to perhaps quite rightly that back in the 70s when Chrysler and other these large corporations were beginning to fail, the government bailed them out. Well, maybe they should have failed then. And by this time, 40 years later, right, it's been 40 years, something else would have emerged and taken its place. But instead, we propped up the corporations, we propped up the UAW, which in some cases is really the same thing. And all of that, we've sustained this monoculture in Detroit way beyond what it probably should have been its life expectancy.  That's the Detroit monorail for anyone who doesn't know. Detroit has a monorail. There's like nobody on it. It just goes in a circle. It's a terrible failure, and it takes up space, and it creates dead zones, and nobody uses it, and it's just very costly. So don't do that. Don't do that. So sometimes cities decline. I mean, the main indicator of a declining city is loss of population. New Orleans is another example of that. So you have to, sometimes cities, cities like Detroit don't disappear entirely. They've been, if you look at the history of cities from like 1500 to today, very few cities have actually disappeared from here.  It's a great opportunity. And maybe that's what Detroit is. It's, for somebody, it's a great opportunity. For somebody, all this empty space is someplace they can camp out and start a little bit. Maybe they should have like Burning Man. Burning Man, so I'm not kidding. A dangerous proposition in Detroit. Yeah, I mean, just, you know, promote, maybe the city could promote something like that, or promote, I was just in Austin, Texas, where they had this motorcycle rally, the Republic of Texas, you know, like the Republic of Michigan, you know, some kind of rally, then bring in a devil, the space, you could use it for something another, and some bright person will see an opportunity to put two and two together, but then you have to allow that to happen. Yeah, I will say there are some cool art projects in Detroit. There's a neighborhood that's been made into one big art project called the Heidelberg Project. It's a little weird, but it's cool, I guess, that it's there. So yeah, and it's just, I think that you're right, like, let things happen, let people take advantage of opportunities. I hope that's what we see. I get a little misty-eyed when I think about Detroit, because it's sort of home.  I mean, that you have to let them go so that some other parts can do better. I mean, I think Detroit will come back. I hope so. So I have one more poll that I'm going to launch, and I've got a question that I think you'll find interesting. Oh, this poll, by the way, you can answer, if you think every single option is right, you can pick every single one. But just kind of a quick question. Do you think there's an ideal size for a city that balances good and bad? That's from William. He asked you pretty early on, and I thought I would tackle it right. No, I don't. I don't. Cities are one of, you know, they say that, you know, Nassim Taleb, the Black Swan guy, is a mathematician who wrote about many things, but I asked him, well, he came to a colloquium once, and he was talking about sea creatures. He said, like whale, they can grow to, they're almost unlimited in size because the buoyancy of the ocean, and remember, as long as they live, they'll just keep on growing. That's why, that's why very old whales are so huge, octopuses, too. In other words, they're scale-free, and cities are like that. Cities are scale-free.  Now, the largest urbanized area in the world, probably Tokyo, Yokohama, you know, close to 20 million people, there's no upper limit to what a city can be, as long as, you know, the conditions that enable the kinds of things we're talking about, economic development, spontaneous order, emergent social networks, and that sort of thing to make people safe and secure, give different neighborhoods, different districts and identity that they can live with, promote and live with. I mean, there's no limit to the maximum size. There's no maximum size of the city. Yeah, and that's kind of cool for those of us who love cities. I think that's just neat for reasons that I can't articulate. I wanted to share very quickly the results of the poll. I tried to think of a few things that might help, and as you can see, everybody thinks decentralizing decision-making to districts and neighborhoods might be a good idea to help utilize that local knowledge or local wallage, which is what I was about to say. And then some people don't like zoning. Some people think that better city plans might have a role to play, and I mean, I guess we don't know. The great thing about cities is that they are places for experimentation, so hopefully we get to see a lot of these things tried out. Unfortunately, not only economic experimentation, but somebody had community organizations, that kind of experimentation too, local governance, it's an amazing possibility there. Yeah, oh, I could talk about it for another hour, but I won't do that to everybody. Unfortunately, we've got a little bit over time. There were a few other things we wanted to talk about. I'm going to try and make the resources available online. One of them is, Sandy has this great talk called A City Cannot Be a Work of Art, which is a really intriguing statement, I think, so I'll see if I can make something like that available through the website. And the website, of course, is fee.org slash big ideas. It's on all of our graphics, so hopefully you've seen it by now. Sandy has a column with the Freeman, which is Fees Magazine, and it's called Wabi Sabi, which is, oh, remind me what it means. Yeah, it's a Zen Buddhist term that one interpretation is that you see the beauty in imperfection, in impermanence, and that sort of thing. So I want to recommend it. It's maybe my favorite column, only partly because he writes often about cities, and I'm really enthusiastic about them right now. I will be sharing a few columns from that. Like us on Facebook, so that you can keep up with us. We're going to make this video available, so if you know anyone who wanted to attend but couldn't, I know there's a World Cup match tonight, and that the USA is playing, I'm sorry, there's just a lot of things going on. So if you know anybody who maybe had national loyalties that couldn't be broken to join us tonight, follow us on Facebook. I share a lot of articles, and I will share the videos as well. And join us again. My next event will be with, he's not on here, but Don Boudreau from George Mason University, and the name of the event is What Does It Cost to Keep Them Out? So we're going to be talking about trade restrictions and immigration restrictions, and why they don't always work out exactly the way that we think that they might. But I really want to thank Sandy for being on. Yeah, so much we can talk about there too. I want to thank Sandy so much for being on tonight. Like I said, I've been looking forward to this for a long time. I think it's been really great. And I want to thank everybody for joining us as well. Yes, thank you everybody. My pleasure. Janet, take care. You too. Bye, everyone.