Good evening, welcome to the fix. My name is Aaron Mestani. I'm joined as is it's not really that frequent anymore. We don't see that much. I don't like you anymore. Ash Sarko the one and only. I see is that we managed to prize Ash away from her numerous speaking engagements. You're always like busy these days. I don't have Tinder fan. I just got to say yes to tell you. So we'll be bringing you the biggest stories over the course of the last seven days this evening. We'll be picking a couple of each and then later on Ash will be talking to Matt Myers about his new book. What's it called? Student revolt voices of the austerity generation out now on Pluto press from all quality book retailers. Can't wait. That's gonna be very good. But first we're gonna talk about a few of like I said the biggest stories of the last week.  So the really big news which just broke a few hours ago. I'm pregnant. Congratulations. No I just ate a ton of noodles. The big news is of course that sentient Glacier Mint David Davis has just announced that when there is a finalized Brexit deal on the table it will have to be enacted by an act of parliament. So that means that MPs can vote on it. That means that they can table amendments and it will have to pass in both houses. Unsurprisingly there is very little consensus on how this news is to be received. You've got Labour figures like Keir Starmer welcoming it as a concession to Labour's ongoing campaign for more parliamentary oversight of the Brexit process. You've got the kind of hardcore remainers like Chika Romana saying well look this is just a kind of facsimile of a vote because if this deal gets voted down by parliament Britain will be exiting the EU on World Trade Organization terms. So it's kind of like saying yeah you can have a vote. There's only really one meaningful outcome because we've got a strap held to the dome of your economy and there's also lots of talk about well will we actually exit on WTO terms or will there just be an extension of Article 50 an extended negotiating period. Will there be a campaign to perhaps withdraw Article 50. All these things are up in the air and I was originally going to talk about the possibility of there being a second referendum today. What campaigning would look like the dangers in trying to frame I think quite a nostalgic or reactive set of political demands and obviously today's statement has shagged it entirely for me. However I think for all the speculation of what's going to happen in 2019 I feel that establishment media coverage has fallen quite short and what it's done is fall into the old trap of perceiving politics as just a series of set pieces of kind of manoeuvring and skull-duggery and one camp trying to take the wind out the sails of another. But don't you think David Davis has played a blinder because it does seem to me that the Tories had their back against the wall on this and because we have the Fixed End Parliament Act if Labour vote this down or if the opposition votes it down they're still in government and obviously things will get terrible pretty damn quickly and they can then put that at the door of the Labour Party, the Lib Dems, the SNP so this seems like a pretty clever move by the Tories. And I'm in agreement though and I think that this comes down to the heart of the matter is that there's actually a real difference between campaigning for more parliamentary oversight and campaigning for effective popular accountability because what we've seen since the June election whether it's been with the Radon pensions funds or whether it's been with the Universal Credit Rollout is that there is very little agreement on what should be voted on and also what an outcome of a government defeat in terms of votes means right no one knows what's going on. So going hand in hand with the kind of you know zombie atrophy and neoliberalism that were all existing under there's also a kind of zombie parliamentarianism and I think that the challenge that Corbyn's Labour Party now has to meet is to get a bit braver because I think one of the great successes of the election campaign was to revive politics itself the idea that what's up for grabs isn't just disaffected consent right but you present a policy platform that you can agree with you can disagree with you can engage with but there's something substantive that's there. The two places where they haven't done that are very closely related it's with Brexit and it's with immigration policy and I think now Corbyn's team has to get a bit braver they can't rely on this kind of schrodinger's Brexit and they kind of have to present a much more robust platform than just laying out a vision of a kind of socialist utopianism so what they need to do is spell out what will it mean if the government collapses in six months 12 months 24 months right at what stage of Brexit negotiations what difference does it make for them to inherit a WTO Brexit as opposed to a kind of high access low control one and I think that that's a really good thing it's not messageable it's messy it's nuanced but trust in the electorate with these issues and this kind of decision making that's what democratic renewal looks like and I think that's what we should all be agitating for. Well from one political dinosaur David Davis to another Tony Blair made one of his now frequent incursions into the popular conversation one of his tri-monthly bi-monthly brain farts he went on a multi-media assault over the last few days I think on Friday he went on a today program in Nick Robinson he did an interview with BuzzFeed to Jim Mortison and then on Sunday he spoke to Sophie Ridge we're going to start with the interview he gave to BuzzFeed very funny and it started with a bit of conversation about centrist staz let me get this quote up he said um I think that's a term invented by people who regard centrism as the status quo place if you define centrism as splitting the difference between right and left then I'm not a centrist I'm not interested in that I define centrism as the place where you want solutions that are radical but still realistic and non-ideological because they're practical ash what the fuck does that mean well I don't think that Tony Blair's a centrist dad either right why is that because my dad left right but can you can you translate this for me or I mean tell you why didn't you give me your gloss on it right because I think what he's trying to do is claw back that neoliberal moment where ideology can present itself as pragmatism which is the most ideological thing of all right exactly and also look centrism the clues in the name Tony you've got right you've got left and then you have a politics which is purely relational on these two peripheries and it calls itself the centre the clue like I say is in the name and yes the idea that a practical politics cannot be coterminous with an ideologically driven or values driven politics is is ridiculous now sometimes values and what has to be done come into conflict that's the nature of politics but I'm ideologically committed to reducing carbon dioxide emissions and if we don't do that guess what half the city is in the fucking world will be underwater in 50 years time so it also turns out that it's practical as well so it's a false binary which I think like you say he's just going through the greatest hits of the last couple of decades and he's not been at the top politics of 10 years he's still talking unadulterated shit then there was the um the today program interview which he gave with Nick Robinson he talked about two things there which I'll briefly touch on the first was that he said that labor should be 15 to 20 points ahead of Tories and I mean okay they were polling mid 20s in April latest part of 43 of the Tories on 40 and everyone laughed at Diana but when she said that they were going to make up that shortfall everyone laughed at her you can't keep on moving the fucking goalposts they would win a significant majority if there was a general election today and here are the facts 1997 2015 every single general election labor lose seats when they won a general election for last time in 2005 they won with 9.5 million votes in June they got 12.5 million votes 2015 general election they lost 50 seats in Scotland it's very clear that Corbyn's labor have turned a corner whatever your beliefs there's a historic change right something's been interrupted and the thing that was interrupted was a flawed understanding of technocratic machine politics conjoined with near liberal policies and the reason why Ed Miliband didn't do the same thing and by the way the Tories in 2015 were just as messy just as fucking crap and useless but that wasn't exposed because Ed Miliband didn't do what Jeremy Corbyn did which was break with that form of technocratic politics and offer a different kind of policy platform but finally Tony Blair chatting shit about polling and about centrism is all kind of funny but then there was the stuff he said about Saudi Arabia so we're just now going to cut to a particular part of that interview on the today's program and Nick Robinson we talked about how Saudi Arabia is now a beacon for human rights and freedom in the Middle East well I think the way I look at the Middle East and I spend an enormous amount of time there is I don't think this really is about a proxy war and I don't think it's although there's elements of this I don't think it's really about Shia versus Sunni or Iran versus Saudi it's essentially a battle for the the heart and soul of the region in which on one side you have people who really want religiously tolerant societies and rule-based economies and those that don't and the new leadership in Saudi Arabia and particularly the crown prince and the program that he's putting forward is a program that is about modernizing the country its society its economy and they see the threat of Iran as a threat that's pushing extremism across the region and destabilizing countries whether it's Yemen or it's Lebanon or it's Iraq or it's Syria well I I mean this is complete nonsense it's kind of entertaining to hear him choke on the Orientalism yeah do you know I mean it's like he's he's trying to speak from underwater it's like Samuel Huntington's trying to escape from his neck yeah I mean look let me get something clear here Carlson's table I'm half Iranian I am not I am not standing for Iran I'm not saying Iran is this sick and like you know it's a major regional power with its own interests it's in Syria it's doing things that nation states do right which is advanced the national interest which is also the interest of the ruling class I'm under no illusions but the truth is in Iran more women graduate than men there are women in parliaments women can vote they've been able to vote for decades Saudi Arabia women could vote for the very first time in 2015 women ran by the way nobody's this is not the executive or for a president this is for counselors you really have no power right it's a it's a it's a despotism it's an absolute monarchy right women could stand for for for public office but because women are legally prohibited from speaking to men who were not their relatives in Saudi Arabia right women who are running for office could only address all women crowds or if they were addressing all men crowds they had to be behind a screen or a man would read their speech for them this is the country which Tony Blair is saying you know is on a path to democracy and a rules-based economy he basically means neoliberalism and human rights and when you compare it to Iran in a number of ways Iran is not a despotism it's a polyarchy you know both formally and informally it has a constitution the two countries are incomparable but what concerns me the most is that the average Brit will be listening to this and they'll be saying well Tony Blair is intervening because he's a former prime minister you know and fine you know he's a prime minister has a role to play you know their views are important Tony Blair was a lobbyist for the Saudis between 2010 2011 he was a lobbyist for a nationally owned oil company he gave them access to politicians Chinese politicians this is on the books Tony Blair associates got i think in excess of 350 000 pounds so he's a lobbyist for these guys he's been a lobbyist in the past for a number of other regimes we find quite problematic he was the prime minister when Hong Kong was given back to China between 2007 he was in the country five times 2007 2008 he then gives a speech in Hong Kong sorry in China he gets 200 000 for that speech and since then he's not criticized the regime once so here's the thing people talk about Brexit they talk about Trump they talk about bots on Twitter we have a former prime minister who is a lobbyist for China and Saudi Arabia who is then trying to set the terms of debate for British foreign policy and where British lives may be lost or where taxpayer money may be spent in regard to foreign policy decisions so we don't need to worry about Twitter we don't need to worry about Cambridge Analytica fixing Brexit when we have absolute clowns fundamentally charlatans like Tony Blair at the center at the forefront of our national conversation he shouldn't be in the labor party and fuck me he shouldn't be on the television he shouldn't be on the mortal coil me i don't know why i'm stopping there but i do want to talk about one more thing if i can yeah because one of the things that i've been really concerned by is that there seems to be a real rebirth and renewal of the platforming of trans exclusionary radical feminists and i feel that while we have been quite effectively demolishing their arguments about how trans women aren't women and how trans women present a danger to cisgender women everywhere and i think that there's been a lot of really great and useful work done to demolishing it there's not been that much time spent on thinking about how and why this kind of revived platforming of these figures like Jermaine Greer or Julie Bindle is happening because this was bigger over the weekend right and this was really big over the weekend because you had Janice Turner's heinous article saying children sacrificed to appease the trans lobby which is just classic scare mongering front page of the sun as well no yeah front page of the sun today which was the skirt and the drag queen go swish swish swish terrible scanning doesn't even go that well with the wheels and the bus but i digress and i think that we can see a lot of parallels between this kind of confected moral panic about you know trans people corrupting our children and taking over our schools we can see a lot of parallels with the kind of section 28 hysteria of the 1980s where we can see a lot of parallels with a kind of homophobic authoritarian populism which came to power i think with thatcher and i think because we can see those parallels weirdly this should give us a little bit of hope because that was a really effective political strategy when it was able to present itself as a counter hegemony so the thatcherite narrative went that i'm going to come and make schools teach common sense curriculum values again like you know the three rs and no more hippie teachers promoting homosexuality and people were able to look at and go yeah that sounds about right whereas actually that kind of orthodoxy is no longer a counter hegemony it's just hegemony and what's more that is completely at odds with the general movement of pop culture now i'm not saying that life is not made often intensely unbearable for in particular trans youth and trans people of color in this country almost half of all trans youth in this country have attempted suicide 84 percent have self-harmed and those are deeply alarming statistics however the kardashians are trans inclusive now can you west of trans inclusive now pop culture is going in one direction and it is in a more inclusive and pathetic and accepting one and that's not the mood of our popular press so that should lead us on to our second question which is how can these figures like julie binda like uh what's her name but chill right like germane greea how can they find friends in the right wing tabloid press because let's be real these were the feminists who were getting smeared as lesbians separatists as bad mothers and all the rest of it in these very rags not that long ago and i was giving it some thoughts and i was thinking about the fact that trans exclusionary radical feminists aren't radical at all because what they've done is they've looked at the foundational feminist premise which is that gender is a set of social norms constructed to dominate women as a class and that women's emancipation is based on the deconstruction and the dismantling of these norms and gone well we can't take that too far we will at some point rely on a biological ascensionism and what they've done is essentially respond to the death of modernity and the kind of utopian potentials of you know modernist meta narratives and kind of accept the conditions of post-modernity that real change isn't really possible and it's not desirable which is the exact position of these right wing tabloid rags they don't want change they don't want political participation the reason why you're able to see this kind of dovetailing of ideologically divergent political interests is because they both want the same thing which is stasis so when people say that identity politics are splitting the left and it's going to interrupt a program of social and economic transformation i kind of present this counterpoint which is no these things are deeply connected trans rights are human rights they are our rights they are political rights and us as cis people need to ride or die for our trans siblings and i think we need to get a lot better at rejecting the framing of mainstream debate and push it on to politically useful territory excellent well we're going to go to a break now i think we're going to show our fundraiser video we wouldn't need to change no we're not we're not showing our fundraiser video we're showing a video of john mcdonnell at the ucl occupation in 2010 my favorite guy and after that you'll be speaking to the one and only matt mayers about his new book great looking forward to it see you in a second first of all just i'm really solidary i've been solidary to jeremy korman mp as well he's in the palestinian region at the moment i just want to congratulate you on what you've done i think it's brilliant and it's happening all over the country and the messages that are coming in from the university and colleges right there across the country is absolute solidarity and i think whatever you're seeing on the tv or whatever what's happening along white hall what's the real world the real world what's happening is large numbers of students are actually saying we're bad enough and we're not willing to take it anymore and it is about it is about the basic freedom of education we thought of the generations people like me were fought for the right of free education and these bastards are going to take it off us and what this is all about is making sure that they don't and i think you're having the effect you're having the effect whatever they say whatever klegg says and it's very difficult not to use physical force on klegg i know but i'm trying to understand myself in the chamber and whatever is said you are having that effect i've been down in the street today down along white hall some of you may have been there but 11 o'clock 12 o'clock large numbers of young people turned up with all the ages school students as well as college students at university students so it was a a joyous absolutely joyous atmosphere when they assemble them climbed up on the lines of to malice square and there was enormous numbers and they spontaneously then marched down white hall and what then happened is the police set up a barrier at the bottom i've filmed some of it there was a barrier set up by a police right way across the road and they did initially did a police search search knocking young people over and pressing them up against safety barriers and i think i filmed some of it because i was worried actually it was almost almost hillbill like you thought someone was going to get injured by a trampoline and then they kettled it they kettled people in and then left a police van in the middle and left it alone it was almost an act of provocation of what was going on and people literally in kettled in had no idea what to do and all sorts of things were breaking out people were asking to leave and they refused to leave some of some of my friends and colleagues are in their trap in there as well they've been there for four or five hours not allowed to leave but when we raised it with the police they said well we're about to supply them with water people just want to protest peacefully and of course some bombers did break down and it's unfortunate but actually some of the violence also came from the police themselves and a large number of people have been hurt too i think that's a disgrace all around you know the whole point of the protest is about the peaceful demonstration of our views of opposition and the the whole message is it got and it's in our long history in this country if governments won't listen and if politicians lie there is no other way but to resort to the streets there's no other way in which we can register our voice if parliament's not listening and that's what people have done i just want to say well done you've restored my position i've got to get back to the the place that um William Morris wanted to turn into a house as you know and use him nowhere it was a storage for um to try this anyway i'll get back there but we we've grown we've grown out of the aversion down to the jeremy and i on the on the agenda of parliament they're not allowed to debate early day motions out of them though but we put it down anyway just as an expression of solidarity congratulated people have been demonstrated not to find universities and colleges right across the country because it is in line with the tradition for peaceful protest in this country when governments refuse to listen people have to take power into their hands themselves and that's what you're demonstrating and what you're doing it isn't just among students you've given courage and determination to trade unionists who are now fighting for their jobs for others that are campaigning for justice in their own fields i think you've sparked off a new generation across the protest in this country but also a new belief that people can assert their rights when politicians ignore solidarity thank you very much for what you're doing so that was john mcdonnell all the way back in 2010 addressing the ucl occupation and i know that that's a kind of shaky and unfocused mobile phone video but being a completely sentimental cornball i thought we'd kick off with that because really if it wasn't for that wave of university occupations between 2010 and 2011 i don't think navara media would exist i would never have met aran busani or james butler i would probably be richer happier in a more secure form of employment so you wrote a book um thank you so much for joining us it's a real pleasure to have you here um so this book student revolts voices of the austerity generation i can't recommend it highly enough and i'm not just like gassing you because you're in front of me like a little shit i would probably say but one of the things that felt like a real joy to read was these memories which had kind of gotten a bit fuzzy around the edges for me were just sort of called back with so much clarity and emotional texture and richness and these voices of people who i love dearly or maybe there's some friendships which maybe slipped off they were suddenly called back with um this wonderful clarity and you could just kind of hear these voices ringing um in your ear so i guess my first question is just how did this book come together and what was that process like of gathering all this testimony well it's normal history um so i wanted to create a history of the movement told to the voices of the people who made it um so i did about 60 interviews over a two year period and it was quite a quite an emotional uh really creative process uh in which um telling the historical story is no longer you know the historians not in the archives you're talking to real people with real their memories and the movement because it was defeated left for many i think um right the experience of defeat was very difficult to deal with and so coming five years after seven years after these interviews um i think allowed people to come to terms with the movement and hopefully by constructing this historical story future generations can learn from the experience of the movement and i don't think the 2010 generation had a space in which they could argue um out what's happened in 2010 there was no space there was no space to um create a balance sheet of sorts um and hopefully this historical story this of the 20th century movement this book is their collective um property i mean i'm not asking you to give away the best bits for free but what did happen in 2010 why did the student movement fail to secure a victory if you had to give the kind of you know elevator version of the summary why they lost well i would say well government in transigence and his wonderful george osbourne quote from the book when she says that we expected this we expected resistance against the first rounds of austerity and if we don't defeat the students then the whole of our austerity regime is going to be called into question they saw this as a fundamental battle that they had to win the government um wasn't prepared to let the let the students um get their way the liberal democrats many of whom like vince caper would never um reconcile with the fees policy anyway chose the side of the government and it was faced with a student movement divided between official and unofficial movements um between an n us that was focused on parliamentary action and winning over one or two liberal democrat and peas versus the movement in the streets which was in no mood to make any deals with any politicians but felt betrayed totally by the political system also a student body that was actively demobilized we hadn't had movements for decades especially not as radical as the one that millbank set off mixed i think with tactical mistakes and no space political space anyway to argue out possible tactical changes mixed also with huge police repression um the police actively crushing uh the movement in the streets and the and the students being brought through the courts um and i think we'll all remember alfie meadows who was nearly killed by police baton so i think it's a mix of all these all these reasons i mean one of the things that i think you discussed quite well in the book is that there is a assumed antagonism towards hierarchy and hierarchical forms of organization and there's a great deal of disagreement in terms of the voices that you um interview in terms of should there have been more of an embrace of leadership it's kind of funny that one of the results of 2010 2011 is actually a revival of institutional forms of political organization i.e the labor party it's made a big comeback so one is do you think that this kind of return to institutional politics represents a failure of non-hierarchical organizing and two do you think that corbin would be possible without that kind of mass mobilization first in 2010 2011 well i do think in 2010 there was this proliferation of non-hierarchical organizing some of us are still repping hard for it by the way but i think it was this generalized really generalizable experience and it made sense to people at the time because you had a political class all political parties seemed totally out of touch with what students were students in 2010 had put their faith in the liberal democrats who had framed themselves as a party alternative to new labor they didn't vote for the iraq war they had promised free education students felt totally betrayed by the breaking of their promise that really undergirds the moral economy of the student protests they also have the labor party who had commissioned the brown review had brought intuition fees twice who invaded the rock and you have a conservative party that students generally don't don't support when the liberal democrats portrayed the student the bottom fell out of politics and they were in no mood to make any accord with these politicians who had sold their future down the drain i think as the movements progressed and the social movements it wasn't just the chonest and movement that was interested in non-hierical organizing you had occupy you had uk and cut you had a number of different social movements in the in the streets none of them seemed to break through i don't think it's any surprise that people felt in 2015 that they had put all of this effort over the past five years to very little result the editorial government that was coming in with a larger majority than the coalition and i think people were desperate for change and that i think laid the basis for this shift in many people this return to the institution and many of the 2010 generation have now found themselves in the corbin project i don't think there's i think there is this narrative arc between the 2010 student movement and the present but i think in the movement defeat that it created the conditions in which people have started to think well maybe jerry corbin jerry corbin can break through where we couldn't i mean i don't know about nothing to show for it because i had six months of chest infections mister and that is something to show for you know occupying various cold floors in winter um i mean i i guess this isn't necessarily a question you can answer decisively but maybe it's something that you can sort of tease out an answer from is that in the book you talk about this kind of upsurge and insurrectionist energy and i do want to show a video in just a second um but that actually coded within that was a kind of appeal to power which is almost look how angry we are look how um you know look at what you've riled up something has to change and people weren't prepared for disappointment right not just defeat but actually uh that demonstration of real politic and just how unaccountable their institutions are do you think that we have emerged from that tougher smart and more resilient or inshallah this won't happen but should the corbin project fail are we headed towards another similarly irreparable kind of political disappointment only perhaps a lot more catastrophic in terms of the mood that might engender well i think there's there is that possibility but i would say that the structural economic uh drivers that created the conditions for the movement like 2010 are still there still present um this generational cleavage which is riffing open british politics 2010 was simply the first it was the market was a political touchstone um that signified this new political subjectivity which um was expressed in 2010 when young people took to the streets and in 2017 when they took to the ballot box um it's the experience of young people today um living under austerity living with futures which are looking like they're going to be far worse than their parents with paying almost half their rent on uh half their income on rent um with the job market and with precarious work um huge student debts with six percent interest rates this is creating the conditions um for uh social movements in the streets but also movements of the ballot box and i think we need to continue the student movements um going forward we can't let up the social movements in the streets if corbin's going to succeed i think there's got to be this relationship between the two i mean just before we wrap up i do want to show this great clip which you discussed in the book can we show it we're from the slums of london yeah how do they how do they expect us to pay nine thousand for uni fees you get me and e-mail e-mail the only thing keeping us in college was stopping us from doing drug build on the streets anymore nothing because there's not just one 2010 2011 generation there was kind of one surge of interaction of standards in the streets that was the students but then the kind of coda to this and it's kind of in conversation in the book is the riots of 2011 do you think that that energy has been coordinated and appealed to in the same way by corbin's project as it has kind of courted the remnants of that student movement or is that still something that's kind of pulsing and waiting to blow well i think that the 2010 2011 that's very much a political conjuncture um the 2010 student movement and the 2011 riots i think the spirit of many um of those involved i mean the spirit of both were very much um uh implicated in each other this rebellion total against the system itself no political no politicians represented the students no politicians represented anyone in the streets in 2011 but i do think the current conjuncture is slightly different obviously there are multiple 2010s there were the 2010s of the russell group university students who are occupying there's a russell as the 2010 of those people you saw in the in the video um also within the 2010 generation there's multiple 2010s uh going forward there's those of radical social media people who've made careers in radical media there's those 2010 people who've gone into the radical independence campaign into the corbin campaign it's the green party into uk and cut um they've taken their experiences forward um i do think that the 2010 2011 period is i just get the sense that that was a very very specific conjuncture coming out of 20 2008 financial crisis with a total rebellion against the system and i i do think the conditions are still there for some some explosion like that to emerge again but i think we are in a new conjunction now i think the horizon has has shifted on questions like free education on questions like gentrification on rent controls on building new houses on defending the welfare state i think corbin has shifted the political debate and i think those movements in 2010 2011 i think paved the way for for that to occur so that's i think why we need to return to the experience of 2010 2011 because i think it really did lay the lay the basis for the changes we're currently seeing i mean i will really encourage people cop this book i'm not just saying that because the mate wrote it it's actually really sick and so because we love a good competition at navara i got my first suggestion for a competition question rejected which was guest matt star sign so if you tweet at navara media with um oh what was the question who admitted to spineless dithering over supporting the protest in 2010 if you tweet with your answer one of you will win a copy of this excellent book um i don't have one with me so matt won't sign it but um i'll just like right fuck you or something in it so we'll post it to you uh thank you so much for joining us it's a pleasure all right same time same place next week bye


Hi everybody, Joe for jaspyscasebreaks.com coming at you with jaspys three box quick hit Football mixer pick your team number one Featuring two gold standard boxes from 2023 and 2023 panini black Big thanks to this group for making it happen on a Wednesday hump day December the 6th appreciate everybody Kylie got triple last spot module You grab those three teams before I pulled the remaining teams for that filler that mosaic pack congrats again To the people who won teams in that mosaic pack. That's in a different video. I'll go black and then gold All right, so we got Dorian Thompson Robinson rookie card. I think he's gonna get another start this week former UCLA guy Just stop the just stop the 405 UCLA All right, and my homes is gonna help us out to 75 and there's his teammate Rishi rice 28 out of 50 some nice color the three-color dual relic silver ink autograph Kansas City that will be for Fred picked up the chief straight up and we got midnight signature sauce gardener Nice 59 out of 99 Who's got the Jets that'll be for Shane Midnight singers do look pretty sharp Should be a relic. It's a dual relic and it's a randomizer We've got will levis and hendon hooker 27 out of 150. We'll do that at the end Gold standard see what we got in here use this a blank card right here. We've got Jamal Williams to 99 Saints Omar We've got five out of 14 it's kind of a weird number right five out of 14 Garrett Williams Cardinals Ryan and Hits Micah Parsons. Oh nice six out of 24 a lot of nice colors here.  That's gonna be For the Dolphins that's gonna go to Matt Arnold won that team in the filler and the last one here is Rishi rice Two-color dual relic and autograph 56 out of 149 another reek I with that Rishi rice from Panini black Just a box ago Fred starting your Rishi rice PC whether you intended to or not quick hit break. It is very quick one more gold standard Good luck. I've got Sam howl 58 out of 99 for the commanders Kyle Collegiate can see two out of 30 for the Buccaneers Kyle And your hits we've got Cole Comet Gold Rush Relic 229 out of 299 Da Bears Richard O with Chicago Quentin Johnston newly minted relic 76 out of 399 that is for the Bolts. That's gonna go to Michael and the Chargers Hooper Cup Gold Rush Relic 60 out of 299 It'll be for Jeffrey and the Rams right a couple more here. They should be the autos. There's Alec Pierce Big touchdown for him the other week 35 out of 199 the other day earlier this week That's for the Colts Evan With the Colts Won that in the filler And the last one here. Good luck everybody is gonna be Zay flowers Aaron Billingsley with the Ravens Jersey and autograph 181 out of 199 All right, nice quick little three box break. Thanks everybody for getting in I appreciate you And let's do this dual relic randomizer. So let's flip over to random.org That's some old dice here's some new dice new list We got Will Leviss for Tennessee on one side and then Hendon Hooker for Detroit on the other side Let's roll it randomize it four and a one five times Detroit is Shane Tennessee is Josh. Good luck to the both of you four and one five times team on top one two three four and Fifth and final time Detroit gets it. There you go Shane Shane won that team in the filler. Sorry Josh We'll get him next time, but Shane getting the lines in the filler gets a dual relic 27 out of 150 I think he's starting to practice again. Keep an eye on On him in his progress. Maybe we'll see him in people Maron api on Jared Goff next year might seem into action after that There you go gang. I'm Joe for jaspskates breaks.com. Thanks for watching. Thanks for breaking with us And I'll see you next time for the next one. Bye. Bye


Karen and I are talking about something that I bet those of you who are writers and creators deal with, which is perfectionism. So Karen's example is, you know, Karen, you said you spent a long time writing two paragraphs like longer than you would have liked, and you still felt like it's not good enough to put out there, right? How do I deal with that? Well, by the way, I want to welcome everyone watching this to comment below for how you deal with something like that. But here's how I deal with it. I create temporary limits for myself, and I do my best to practice those limits. There are two limits, okay? One is time spent on any creative project like a blog post. For example, with blog writing, this is my process. I basically do every blog post in two, actually, nowadays I do it in three sessions. So let me explain. The first session is just a few minutes where I tweet out the beginnings of an idea for blog posts. If you find me on Twitter, just twitter.com. It literally says, my about says, using Twitter to store ideas for potential blog posts, and you'll see my Twitter threads are basically like, and of course I practice creating so much that even my random ideas are okay probably now, but at least better than when I was new to creating. Anyway, so that's really my first session is sometime, I actually do this during the lunch hour. I'll take five minutes during lunch to just tweet out a potential blog post idea. And then the next couple of lunches, I will add to that thread any other ideas that are related to that topic. So that's my first session is kind of brainstorming. So every, every week I basically give myself two Twitter threads, two ideas that I'm adding to anyway. And then next week is two more ideas anyway, so that's for, and then the second session is taking my Twitter thread, or whatever brainstorming I've done, and put it into a really rough draft of, you know, in tech in the writing world, there's a technical term. It's FD, shitty first draft. Look it up. A lot of people use that term, shitty first draft. So that's the second session is just shitty first draft. You know, there's no formatting of any kind, no subheadings, you know, some paragraphs are super long, some are like one cent, nothing, just type it out as fast as I can. What could I say about this? What objections that does a reader might have? How could I address that? Is there an example I could share? Is there a related question that I might, you know, whatever. Okay. Second session. And that second session I give myself half an hour. That's a key. 30 minutes to just shitty first draft it out. And I know, by the way, that you can do this too. In 30 minutes, you know why? Because whenever I've hosted a writing class, and I give my students, I get this, seven minute timer to write a social media post. Seven minute timer. I bet you if I did this right now, you would do it too. Just about every student posts something in seven minutes. And it's usually better than what I come up with in seven minutes, which is, which is why I know you all can do it. Because I can almost assure that you are a faster writer than me, because it's just what I've noticed in my attendees and what they can do in seven minutes. English is my second language, number one. So, in a way, I've struggled off and on with English, just my whole life. So that's why I feel like most of you, if some of you English is your second issue, but if English is not your second language, you probably write faster than me just because of its through and through your bones, even more than mine. Anyway, so that's my second session is 30 minutes city first draft. And then my third session, which is another day. My fourth session, also half an hour is Polish and Polish actually so I'm sorry there is a fourth session, which is to publish it. So, fourth session takes another 30 minutes of like just putting the logistics of like putting it on my website on here or on there that kind of thing doesn't take me 30 minutes it takes its editing and publishing takes my 15 minutes. So, so I really want to encourage you to have that kind of process for yourself a workflow for your writing. And so that's one limit I set on myself. The second limit I set on myself is a work count limit. Now, that helps. And work count limits should be a range. It shouldn't just be maximum because if there's no maximum work count limit 1000 words or whatever. Yeah, technically I guess even one word is good enough for a blog post. I don't know, you know, poets, but I have a range. So I said well blog post I'd like it to be like my nose between 600 to 1500 words somewhere around there. 700 ish. I usually land somewhere around seven to 700 to 1000 words. So like when I, when I keep my word count and by the way, I show you on Google, Google document. Right.  Check that box and click OK. And then I, you know, you can set up when you click on the menu and sit on words. And now that you're typing, you know, give give it a second to count all the words that you're typing. And, you know, and so this is really helpful for like work count limit to say hey, I'm at 700 now or whatever you know what I mean. So you see on the bottom left. So anyway, I hope that helps as a way to practice. That's how I do it is to keep keep limits, have a clear have a clear flow and then finally I'll say this. You know, ultimately, none of us know what's good enough in terms of our creations. And I would say, we ourselves are not the right judge for the quality of our content. Only the audience is the right judge for the quality of our content. All we can do is judge ourselves based on quantity. By quantity, I mean how many things did we put out there and not judge. I don't mean to harshly judge yourself. I just mean to evaluate ourselves or to plan or to set that as a goal. I'm going to set a goal of quantity. I'll let the audience tell me about the quality.    Let me look at the data to say, well, this has this many views and this many likes versus this one has, you know, this many views and this many likes well now I know which one made more of an impact so I'll do more. So I hope that helps with, you know, so with perfectionism and creativity. Thanks. Thank you. Yes, another a gentler way of saying half ass, a more euphemism I guess a good enough. Yes, good enough. Now for me, even good enough is not good enough of a word because I tend to still berate myself or beat myself with what good enough means.  And that's the that's the main idea, use whatever mantra helps you to just stick to your time limit, get it out there.


Hey survivors and thrivers, in this video I am going to be talking about how the narcissist feels once you have moved on, once you have rebuilt your self-worth, self-esteem, self-assurance, self-belief and self-respect. Please like, comment, share and subscribe. Click the bell icon to receive notifications for my future videos. If you would like to make a donation, my paypal link is in the video description. If you are interested in a one-on-one coaching session, please contact me at NarcisfiverCoaching at gmail.com. How does the narcissist feel once you've moved on? How does the narcissist feel once you are no longer confused about what you were dealing with? Once you no longer desire to be around them, how do they feel once you have rebuilt your qualities, talents and positive traits? How do they feel once you have developed a successful career or met someone who gives you the love and care that they always talked about but never followed up with action? I'm talking about your personal development, which is probably what you were looking to accomplish even before you met the narcissist.  You already desire to build a successful career or meet an ideal relationship partner. When you met the narcissist, this is when those qualities, talents and positive traits began to depreciate. Everything good about you began to strip away. The reason for this is because narcissists feed off your energy and capabilities.  They are emotionally immature. They do not self-reflect or lock within. They do not accept responsibility or accountability for anything that they do. So in their minds it's your fault for not being up to the standard that they expect from you. Remember they have a sense of entitlement and arrogance. Also nothing can satisfy or fulfill them anyway. They are like buckets with a leak. Anything you put into them will just leak out. Nothing could ever sustain them.  Now that they have used up all of your resources, everything that you had to offer, you are seen as trash.  You don't need it. It's trash. You've ate the food, used it up to replenish yourself. That's how the narcissist sees you at this point. They have used up everything that you had to offer, used all of your qualities, talents and positive traits, your positive energy and at this point all that's left is the empty packaging. They don't need you anymore. This is when they will discard the empty packaging. They will discard you. After they have used up all of your resources and taken your energy, you would assume that they have something to offer you in return. They have something to give back. This is when the narcissist disappears and idealizes someone else who has fresh resources and energy. So they can do the same thing all over again. They do not appreciate anything that you gave them. They do not appreciate anything that you have done for them. They are ungrateful and have taken you for granted. The very things that they were so desperately seeking from you are the very things that they never give back. Your attention, validation, approval and admiration. They never attend to you. They never validate or approve of you. They never admire you. They never replenish your energy. The reason for this is because they can't, even if they wanted to. You can't really provide those things until your own cup is full and the problem with the narcissist is no matter how much you pour into them, it's never enough. It never sustains them. They cannot experience satisfaction or fulfillment. That's why they are stuck in this endless chase going from one thing to the next, trying to get whatever they can out of the situation. They are self-absorbed and lack empathy because their cup can never be full. So they are basically stuck in an endless cycle where they run from one individual to the next, trying to obtain whatever energy, whatever attention, validation, approval and admiration they can get in that moment. And once that person is used up and has nothing left to give, they are on to the next person. If there was a perfect human being, they wouldn't be able to satisfy or fulfill these narcissists. No matter what you give or how much you give, it will never sustain them. You can try, but you will be destroyed in the process and this is likely what you have experienced. The narcissist almost destroyed you. You are no longer able to provide them with the same standard they were accustomed to in the beginning. This is when the narcissist will leave you at the lowest point in your life, sometimes even suicidal or dead. In many situations you are left with nothing. You have been stripped away of all of your qualities, talents and positive traits. Your positive vibe or energy has been completely depleted. They may have targeted you financially, your job, family members and friends. Many victims of narcissistic abuse lose everything. Some even end up homeless in a mental hospital, prison or even dead.  You are able to motivate yourself from within. You can start achieving and obtaining all over again. You can start smiling and experiencing happiness. This soon becomes a problem for the narcissist. It confirms that they are not the people they said they were. They are not the grandiose people that they made themselves out to be once you have moved on and done better without them. It becomes indeniable of who was really about anything.  All the while making you believe that you weren't about any of that. You weren't good enough or something was wrong with you. But then you leave and do better without them. They mirrored you, appealed to your own ideals. You thought they were really about that.  Remember all of those things they told you were developing time? All of those plans or dreams for the future? What happened to all of that?  They were good at manipulating you, but they didn't even have the capabilities to manifest what you want. They played this game with you to secure you as a source of supply, making you believe that they had what you want. They had the capabilities to manifest everything you desired. Maybe in their little fantasies in their mind they did. But none of that ever actualizes with them because they don't even have the belief. They don't even believe in themselves. So the best you will ever get from them is an illusion. But then you leave them and move on and start doing better without them. You start doing all of the things they talked about on your own after they had devalued, degraded, publicly humiliated and exploited you. As though you were nothing, worthless and insignificant once you have moved on.   It really proves to everyone that you are not the problem in that situation. It really becomes indeniable at that point. All of those devaluing comments and backhanded compliments they said about you. It really was just a projection. All along they tried to make you believe that you are not good enough for them or something was wrong with you. They tried to get you to believe that you're not about anything then they would tell you things or create illusions to display a false sense of superiority over you but once you've moved on and you see through those illusions you can see that nothing ever actualised with them. They weren't about anything and yet you have moved on and manifested everything that you always talked about. It becomes indeniable proof that they are the ones that are not good enough. They are the ones that aren't about anything and that's why nothing great ever manifested while you were around them. When you move on and start to achieve success and happiness it confirms that they were holding you back preventing you from achieving your true potential. They were weighing you down. This causes a huge narcissistic injury which can often ripple to all of the narcissists around them too because they had to criticise or devalue you to make themselves feel better because they were insecure and felt envious and jealous towards you. They had to make you believe as though you were not good enough for them or something was not right with you but then you move on and do better without them. So it proves that they are the ones that were not good enough for you. It destroys the false narrative that they had created in their minds about them being these amazing people and all of their coping and defence mechanisms which they heavily depend on to regulate their feelings of envy and jealousy. They had this defence mechanism of acting as though they are so great and you are nothing. So the more that they have to watch you progress and become successful in every aspect of your life it really gets to them. If you can move on and be happier and more successful without them it really confirms who was the problem in that situation. Once you have done this they get really mad. They get really envious and jealous. They are forced to accept that all along they were the defective ones. They were not good enough for you and the story that they made up in their minds really was just a defence mechanism although they will be hateful, angry, envious and jealous. They might still try to hoover you but this isn't to try and make things right. They will only come back to make you believe that you're not doing good without them. You're not happy without them and if you entertain this belief the cycle world will repeat itself. They will have an opportunity to destroy everything that you have built since leaving them. So please keep this in mind. Remember all these narcissists do is destroy. They use up everything you have to offer and then leave you with nothing. They will come back just to try and prove to you that you are not happy or what you are doing is not that great. They don't really believe that. It's just a defence mechanism and their way of dealing with their intense feelings of envy and jealousy. So to conclude this video how does the narcissist feel once you've moved on? They feel inferior. They feel worthless and insignificant. They feel hatred, anger, envy and jealousy towards you and anything that you have achieved or obtained. Thank you for watching. I hope this video has resonated with you. Please like, comment, share and subscribe. Talk to you soon.


Ladies and gentlemen, sadly the time has come for a farewell. I hope it will only be an auroir and that we will be meeting again soon. My meetings with President Siddharth have now ended and I want to say how valuable our exchanges have been and how encouraged I am with the progress that has been made and how much I personally have learned from President Siddharth about the complexities of the problems that we all face in seeking a just and lasting peace in the Middle East. I am greatly impressed with his intimate knowledge and his passionate concern. Our talks covered three general areas. First, the growing strategic threat to the region posed by the growth of Soviet military power and the activities of Soviet surrogates in the Near East, Southwest Asia and Africa. The second issue, discussed in great detail, was the peace process. And here to be completely candid, I was a willing listener. We are both anxious to ensure that the negotiating process stemming from the Camp David agreements will resume and succeed. President Siddharth has urged that the United States continue to play an important role in this process and this we will do. I will be meeting with other Middle East leaders in the coming months to continue the process of sharing views with our friends about our common goals of peace, stability and security in the area. The third area we discussed, Congress isn't in session, is it? The third area we discussed had to do with the growing bilateral relations between the United States and Egypt. We covered issues of mutual security, military cooperation and economic matters. President Siddharth shares our belief that a strong defense and a strong economy go hand in hand. We will work closely with Egypt as full partners in our search for peace and stability in the Middle East. And finally, let me add another personal note. I had, of course, heard a great deal about President Siddharth and was optimistic that we would establish a close rapport. My optimism was justified. I respected him for all that he has done and getting to know him has vastly increased that respect. I share his belief that with courage, determination and foresight and a bold vision of the future, we can succeed in our common endeavors. We've been delighted to have President Siddharth and his family here with us and we look forward to meeting again. I have a few words after the President. I quite agree, full agreement with what President Reagan said. If I am to add anything, it is expressing my deep gratitude to President Reagan for this kind invitation to meet with him and to survey all the problems that we are facing together and then to meet again with the American people with whom I cherish really the full pride to be friends, to be understanding and I'm happy to tell the American people as always as I told them. I'm very happy because after this visit, I can say that I enjoy the friendship of President Reagan as a great leader of a great nation. Again, I shall end like I have always ended. I shall never let you down. Thank you very much.


It's my feel-good breakfast show. Welcome back. You tune into your feel-good breakfast show. This is expressed only on S-A-B-C-3. Thank you for choosing to start your Thursday morning with us, right here on S-A-B-C-3. Now, we've been running a very exciting series here on your feel-good breakfast show with regards to property, especially if you are a first-time home buyer. Now, this morning's episode is all about your wish list. What do you want your property to look like? And also, the excitement around those houses that's on show. Well, if you're looking for properties, you probably have your wish list set up already. But once you've got your wish list set up with properties you're interested in, how do you now narrow it down to make sure that you are choosing the right properties? Now, once this is done, there is an exciting journey of viewing houses. Now, we have private property CEO Simon Bray in studio to tell us a little bit more. Simon, I'm so excited to talk through the different properties I've chosen.  Well, this is the best part. This is the fun part. You know, you start with thousands and thousands of properties. You get to choose which one suits your lifestyle, which suits your budget, and then you slowly narrow down the list and you pick the features that are perfect for you. So this is the exciting part. This is the exciting part, and I have to say I went on to Private Property's website. I saw two different ones that I'm interested in. And for me, location is key. So I thought, perhaps you can shed some light. This is, for example, a three-bedroom apartment in Morningside. Beautiful. What are some of the things we need to look out for? Location is the most important thing about property because you can't move it. So you've got to pick the right neighbourhood. You've got to pick the right suburb. Morningside's a beautiful suburb in Johannesburg. Nice value option. I mean, talking about a three-bedroom apartment, all of the right features in a property like this. 2.2, you might get it a bit better than that if you negotiate well. So I'd say that's a good price for the area. Is that something you can do is negotiate on a price that's advertised? Of course. Of course. You know, these are the asking prices for the property. And the South African property market is fascinating in that respect. You'll advertise it at a price, but ultimately, it's a willing buyer, a willing seller. Now, let's talk about some of these hidden things we see now. I'm seeing rates and I'm seeing a levy fee. What does that mean? Well, those are critically important components of what you're going to end up spending as a new owner of that property. So, of course, there's the purchase price, and you're probably going to fund that through some sort of home loan. And then you've got other costs, the rates which you're paying counsel, which is effectively the tax on the property, and the levy, which is what you're paying to maintain and upkeep this in the block. So that's something you need to keep in mind, because that will be a monthly expense. Exactly. Yeah. OK. Now, the second one I saw is... This one's actually a one-bedroom apartment. It's in Sandown, but the price is a lot more than the previous one. It's $2.7 million. No, this is a beautiful apartment. Sandown is a lovely area. I mean, you can't go wrong when you're right in the middle of Sandown. For working professionals, this is perfect. You know, you're going to be close to the countrain, close to your office, presumably. Really good investment property down the line. We've narrowed it down to two properties. I want to now go and view them. What's the best way to go about it? One of the things that people forget is that a lot of these properties are on show, or they open them up over the weekend, and the real estate agent will be there to meet with you, and you can go at your leisure on a Sunday and view the property. So, we've got a section on the site specifically for on-show listings, and so it's worth, you know, spending a Sunday morning, have a little breakfast, and then hit the road and go and see a few of these houses. Alternatively, you can call the agent, you know, click the big button at the bottom... Big red button. ...and set an appointment, and then they'll take you through the property with a private viewing, which is always good. It's always better to go and actually see what it's like to walk through the door. Do you have that emotional connection with the space? Is that ultimately your property? OK. Well, Simon, thank you so much for this information. We'll definitely keep it all in mind. Now, next week, we will be talking through the process of viewing properties, along with agents, and exactly how to go about it and what you should be looking for. Now, are you looking for your dream home? Well, visit privateproperty.co.z and explore and discover a house you can call home. Whether it's your first apartment in the city, a trendy suburban townhouse, or that dream family home on a gulf estate, there's a home for everyone on private property.


session of time. So my name is Montauan, I'm the cryptography of Diplomatix and today I'm going to talk to you about this which is our work, ongoing work on integrating serocational theory. So well I guess everyone here knows about, thirdly, you guys know that these platforms are amazing, we have this EVM which is a perfect, which is a well, a very elite intersection environment, but the thing is, well it's pretty bad for privacy, right? You can go to smart contracts, but you need to go for a gas and so on and so forth. So, well, we thought about, okay, well, can we leverage this intersection environment to actually do seronal registration initiatives, right? And many people have been talking about that throughout the conference, and basically the idea is, okay, well, we have an encrypted state in some way, and we'd like to be able to prove in zero-knowledge that we end up in another state, which is also encrypted, like with encrypted data or committed data, and we want to prove in zero-knowledge that we're not creating value in this state condition. So, not double spending, not creating money out of tenure, of course. This is going to be our goal throughout this talk. So, let's first recap briefly what is a proof system. So, what is a proof? Well, a proof is just something that convinces someone that statement is true. So, if I want to prove to you, if I want to prove to me that you have a phone, just show me your phone, and well, now I'm convinced. The problem is that now I can see actually that you have an iPhone, and then actually I'm going to see a wallpaper and so forth, so I'm going to learn more information in the midst. So, we're going to be interested in zero-knowledge proof throughout this talk, and if you actually look into the literature, you may stumble upon the notion of a language, so you basically want to prove that X, which is some sort of instance that belongs to a language, and this is equivalent to say that there exists a witness W such that X and W are like satisfies a vital relationship. So, it's just like some formal jargon just to make sure we're all in the same vision. It's not super important for the professor to talk. What is a proof system? So, a proof system is just a set of procedures which enable you to actually generate proofs and define the rules of acceptance for proof and that should tell Verify what to reject the proof. Again, it's pretty informal, but I just want to make sure we kind of understand the same jargon. And you have many different settings of interest when you talk about a proof system. So, you can be interested in adding interactions back and forth with a prover. So, as a verifier, you're going to ask a lot of questions to a prover, receive the answer, and then decide whether you want to accept the proof or maybe you don't want these kind of interactions to happen and you just want the prover to send you a proof and then do the like see whether you want to accept it by yourself or not. And you also have the zero knowledge property which is basically showing that, well, as a prover, you know, as a verifier, you know, nothing except that my experience to the language. So, I don't, I'm just trying to do that some condition holds, but I don't want to tell you about my private information. So, what's very important to properly kind of understand these notions of pro-systems is to understand that when we talk about proofs, we are not going to refer to traditional mathematical proofs. Like, if I want to prove a theory, then you need to check it, like to check my proof line by line to make sure that I'm not violating any inference, any rules in the inference process, right? I'm not dividing by zero and I'm not doing probed it stuff. But in the context of probabilistic proofs, we are basically going to use randomness to only check very few locations in the proof and the proof system is going to ensure that the verifier is going to be tricked with very small probabilities. It's going to be negligible in the security parameter, something on the lines of one divided by two to the one by three. So, it's just like zero basically. Okay.  Snarks have been talked through, like, a lot throughout the conference. But, like, the key takeaways, well, snarks are not perfect but they are pretty good in the blockchain setting because they are very fast to verify and in general, you want the verification to work on a chain, not to violate the consensus rules. The proofs are pretty small. Again, in general, the proofs are going to be set up on a chain, so you'd better have them small. Otherwise, your blockchain storage is going to skyrocket. And they can support NP, meaning that you can basically prove whatever you want working on it. But, well, anything is not perfect. Like, there is nothing perfect in this world and the CK Snarks have some drawbacks, one of which being that they are trap-lord. So, you need to, like, generate this kind of toxic waste, which is quite annoying. So, you call it NPC to generate this common reference string thing and so on. And, well, you have an source, you have an source per volition. But, you're going to stir this here because, well, like, universal source snarks is a pretty active way of research area. And people have been publishing long, sonic, and global item of these things. So, it looks like we're making tremendous progress in this area. The thing is, well, the most efficient snark remains Pro 16. And, again, if you want to have very small proofs, very fast verification time, and so on and so forth, sometimes for big statements, you just better stick to Pro 16. Okay. So, in general, when you want to use a snark, well, first, you need to want when you want to prove. And then, this, well, this is just an English statement. So, I want to prove to you that I got a primitive edge or something boring like that. The thing is, well, I mean, this is not very nice. I mean, you need to have an algebraic structure in order to be able to actually do your mathematical operation to generate the proof and so on, right? To reason about it. So, basically, what you need to do is to represent your proposition. So, what you want to prove as an arithmetic circuit, which is defined over a finite field. So, this is like, I'm sure some of you guys are familiar with R1CS and all these things. And this is basically doing this kind of representation of your statement into algebraic constraints. And basically, the idea is that you are going to reduce your problem into an instance of circuit SAT, which is an empty complete problem, so which represents the empty class. This is what I said, snark support can be. And the idea is going to show that you have this relation that holds on your X and W. So, your public and your private input satisfy by your relation. But what you want to make sure is that you only use your private information inside the circuit. And you don't want to say anything about the state of your circuit. So, this might seem a little bit abstract, but let's see this with an example. And please stick around, because this is a very packed slide and potentially a little bit overwhelming, but I'm not going to go through it. I mean, this is boring. I just want to convey the idea here. So, let's first start by your statement. So, I want to, well, as a prover, I want to prove that I know the root of a polynomial. Okay, just an arbitrary example. So, well, this is actually quite nice. My polynomial is public, so A, B, C, and D are the coefficients of my polynomial. And they're going to constitute the input of my arithmetic circuit here. But, of course, I don't want to tell you the root I know because maybe it took me ages to compute it, right? So, what I'm going to do is, well, this arithmetic circuit is actually a representation of my statement.  So, basically, I'm going to fit my witness inside of my circuit to be able to compute, like, to actually assign values to my input wires in my circuit and actually show that the output of the circuit is one. So, the key takeaway here is that in the zero-notch setting, as a prover, you just want to tell about your public input, the topology of your circuit, which expresses computation you want to generate proof for, but you don't want to tell anything about the integral state of the circuit because it carries some information about your witness. And, basically, all the, yeah, so, basically, all the left-hand side of this slide, which is a weighted path, is just showing that, well, this graphical representation of your arithmetic circuit can actually be represented as constraints. Like, this is equivalent, actually. And then you can massage a little bit this constraint system by using some vector notation and matrix representation to infinitely check the satisfiability of all this constraint into a single check using matrix notation, right? So, it's just like some massaging which is done. And, at the end of the day, what matters, and I think this is what's important because people potentially tend not to focus on this while it's underpinning all the modern proof systems. At the end of the day, what the verifier is going to do is just verify some properties on body models. So, whether you're interested in starks and snacks and whatever, bullet proof or whatever, like, all the, like, the mechanisms underpinning this proof system is just about checking the relationship of body models. So, now, all these proof systems are going to kind of become tied down into a relationship, into a set of conditions on polynomials. And you just want to make sure that the polynomials equals zero on a given domain. So, this process is basically called a representation. Again, this is underpinning, like, modern general purpose proof system. And, like, in this process, basically, the, like, the verifier is going to randomly query the proof system at some random places. And the reason why we want to do that is because we want to have success, right? I've just told you, we are not going to check the proofs line by line, but just at some random locations. So, you need to make sure that you catch any, any, any mistakes done by the prover with all the well-meaning probability, right? And this is why polynomials are used in the first place, because they are beautiful error-correcting codes. So, in this setting, the, like, the verifier is going to query the polynomials of the prover at some random places, and they decide whether to accept the proof. And because, because we're in the non-interactive setting, we need to have a way to actually encode the verifier queries, right? I mean, we don't want the verifier and the prover to communicate back and forth with each other. So, all these queries are, basically, we're going to institute toxic waste, and they're going to be encoded in the SRS in the context of smacks. And you have some extra condition that needs to be satisfied for keep on the sound of the SRS and so on, but I'm not going to go into these details in the topic for another day or four, just outside the room and that. So, with all this knowledge, let's go back to the initial problem. So, what we're going to have is we have some encrypted knowledge here, a zero-knowledge proof, and some other encrypted state here, and we're going to show, okay, we'll have just one something that does not violate the root of the system, but, like, believe me, I'm not creating value and so on. So, now, let's look at the code and see what is this encrypted knowledge. So, what if this, this encrypted thing is actually encrypting a pool of nodes, like, you know, just like a data structure, I think a value or recipient and many other attributes as you will, and what if my proof is actually proving that I, well, I own a node in this pool. So, I am one of the recipient or one of the owner, and I'm deciding to spend it to create another node of the same value, but maybe I'm going to change the recipient, and if I do so, then I just do a big, right? So, this kind of IT is encapsulated by the, by the zero-cash protocol, which is a, which is a, well, not really a very, a fantastic protocol, which has been released in 2014 by World Class Academics, and which aim to, like, present a decentralized and new spending scheme sitting on the whole Bitcoin. And more importantly, like, what makes zero-cash so powerful is that this is kind of like the evolution of zero-coin. In zero-coin, you have, like, fixed elimination, but in the context of zero-cash, you can actually, you can actually spend a set of nodes and create another set of nodes and show that the sum of the values of this node you spend is equal to some of the values of the newly created node. And if you do that, then, well, you might be, you might be realizing, well, this is kind of like enabling to do arbitraried and vanishing payments, right?  And now you actually end up with a very flexible solution to do, like, payments of arbitraried elimination. So you basically reduce the, like, now your mixing system is as expressive as your underlying platform, which is not necessarily the case for the mixers designed to fix the elimination, say. The only issue, if I can say it's an issue of the zero-cash protocol is that it introduced new payment semantics to communicate with the shielded pool and this recorded out for it. So this is why Zcash, I assume, was actually creating the first place. Well, the good news is that, you know, analysis was provided to integrate zero-cash and theorem and my colleague, Mikhail Naik, decided to bridge this gap and actually do the analysis. Is zero-cash a viable solution for privacy and theorem? The answer seems to be yes, and I'm going to run you through some of our reasoning. And what's pretty good is that, okay, we have this exception environment, which is, which is, well, the AVM student group, so we can do whatever we want, basically. And, well, we need to pay for the gas to execute the state transition, that's for sure. But what's good is that we can include payment semantics or so, so we will not, we can just deploy and represent the shielded pool as a smart contract, and then we won't need to actually for it from Ethernet anymore, it's just going to be a smart contract. So it's actually a pretty good news. And this is how it works. So the goal is to deploy a smart contract, which is going to represent the shielded pool in chain, and we will be able to interact with this smart contract to actually, like, deposit some value, do some transfers, and actually do some restores. The only issue is that, well, when you hear about, like, the design of various midsers, in general, this tip was if three functions deposit transfer restores, but they actually need a ton of information. I mean, if I see deposit four as an observer, I know you just deposited four. I mean, I get exact information about what's going on. Well, in our case, what we decided to do is to have a single function on the midser, so we followed the same approach as Ccash. We actually, like, modified the statement, which was used in Ccash route, in order to have a single function on the shielded pool, which is called mix. So whatever action you want to undertake on the shielded pool, you're just going to call the mix function. So it's going to have a V in input, which is going to correspond to the value you actually want to make enter the mix, V out, some potential value that you want to retrieve out of the mix, and some commitments to actually represent the nodes that you want to actually spend inside the mixer. So what's really nice now is that if you, for instance, mix with a public value m of four, then an observer cannot really know whether you're actually depositing four for yourself, or whether you are depositing four and mixing it with some of the nodes you own on the midser to pay someone else eight or something like that. And because we support nodes of arbitrary value, if you deposit four, no one knows whether you are creating a node of value two and two, or a node of value three point two and zero point eight, I mean it's just not, it's just not given to the attacker, so we reduce the number of leakages by, by, by, by a lot, basically. And now you may be wondering, okay, well that's perfect, but if at least it starts to pay Bob and creates a node, a node on the midser on on ISP, so basically like destroy one of our nodes and create another one for Bob, then how is Bob supposed to be able to spend his node, right, because Bob needs to get some information about the node. And well, that's true actually, we will need to have some communication between Alice and Bob and you have two scenarios here. The first scenario is to do off-chain communication and no problems whatsoever, but you need to have an extra infrastructure to be able to have like a communication channel between a sender and recipient, you need to make sure this one is secure and so on, so you need to have a little bit more infrastructure. In our case we decided to go for an entry, a broadcast mechanism, which leverages the firm events, so basically what Alice is going to do, Alice is going to encrypt the node which is dedicated to Bob, so all this data, with Bob's key, and add the safer text of this node as another attribute to the midser. Now the midser is actually going to verify the zero college proof, is Alice actually not creating money, not spending a node twice and carrying out a double spend, and is Alice basically respecting the result of the system, if yes, the proof passes, and the midser edits the event on the network. The thing is, okay everyone is going to receive the safer text, but no one, all of them, the recipient should be able to actually encrypt it, so you may be a little bit worried and say, well wait a minute, what if a content attacker comes in and just writes everything well, that's right, that's a legitimate concern, and well, who answers to that?   What if in this scenario, you just need to have backup of your viewing key, and you just scan the chain again, try to put all the sacred text, and if you manage to decrypt them, they were supposed to be for you, and then you repopulate your wallet that way, so you have a pretty nice feature here. So something which is important to say though, is that this does not provide an enmity, because we still need to pay for the gas of the state transition, right? In the scenario, you still need to call the mix function, and well, you need to have a founded account here, and it's kind of like a well-known heuristic in the worst scenario to assume that if your account is founded, then it's known by at least one person, as soon as you're not a miner, and this person can be adversarial, and just say to everyone the knowledge they have about you, and everyone knows you. So this is like a very adversarial setting. So you can distinguish between users who are using this, or users of the network using this and users who are not. So if you're in a country that is prohibiting the use of privacy enhancing technologies, for instance, this is pretty much an issue. So do study like various solutions that maybe you can use really services, but in my personal opinion, this is not a very long solution. You need to have some mechanism against censorship resistance, so you need to have some incentive structure to incentivize delay, and so on. But maybe one more vital solution is just to do some changes in the protocol and potentially investigate a kind of structure or something like that. So if anyone here is up to date with that and more than a bigger discussion about this. So what about the software? Like I'm running out of time, so I'm going to go quickly about that. So we just follow this approach of concerned approach. I mean designing a secure protocol is pretty hard, and doing secure implementation is even harder, like there's a ton of things that can go wrong. So we decided to isolate, make sure to isolate the sensitive components to like to to focus all our attention on that and so on. And basically what's quite important is that our solution is plan technostics.  It's actually working on any like blockchain which is equipped with a virtual machine which is as expressive as one of the 30. And of course well it's already ready for its requirement. This is kind of like the architecture, I'm not going to go into these details because I'm genuinely running out of time, but well I mean we can talk about that later. This is just like the architecture and the different components. So that is pretty much working progress. We published a paper in April this year. So six months ago we were here. Please consult the paper but be aware that we are working on implementation and we've made a lot of optimization and security fixes. So now the implementation is not a perfect mapping of the paper anymore. We've made a ton of optimization and so on. So if you want to track the latest development please consult the data branch or the npc branch on which we have well implemented the npc and on which we're still fixing a few things and so on. Like master is a little bit old because we took back everything that we released in a couple of weeks, the release of the views. All right so well I don't have time to go through that but please don't use fixed elimination in services. It's pretty bad and it makes a ton of information and well thanks for your attention and if you have any questions well either we take them here but I think I'm out of time or maybe wait for me at the end of the group. Thanks.


It was not a day like any other in her life. A 17 years old girl standing alone in the middle of the room, 20 eyes staring at her with severe looks, demanding a response. Her answer is short and simple. No. That moment changed the rest of her life. She was beaten, abused, threatened, and kept enclosed in a Quranic madrasa. Even her own family plotted against her. There was no escape, nowhere to flee. If you're now wondering why I'm telling you the story, it's because this is my story. I was born in Pakistan in a small village called Dedar. I lived there with my two brothers, with my sister, and my mother. When I was 10 years old, my father brought us to Austria, where he already lived. And the freedom that I experienced in the West, it was both on the one hand very exciting and fascinating. On the other hand, shocking. I asked myself questions like, why is my neighbor not married but having kids still alive? But although I had these questions, I knew that I don't have to adjust to these people's lifestyle. This is how my mother used to call them. But over the years I realized that in order to be accepted by my Austrian classmates, I had to integrate to their culture to some extent. So my problem started when I was 15 years old. I loved my new life, the lipstick and the jeans, the makeup. And my parents didn't. They didn't want me to adjust to the Western lifestyle so for them, the Western culture was evil. And we were in Europe only to be educated and to go to school. So we fought about swimming lessons, we fought about acting classes, which my father thought were only for prostitutes.  In traditional Islamic families, like in mine, we are not accepted as daughters. We are seen as a source of honor. And it's not the fathers who are mostly to blame. It's the mothers.  When my mother was my age, she was settling into an arranged marriage. And she thought it was time for me to do the same. But I refused to marry my cousin in Pakistan that they had chosen for me. That was extremely a shaming and embarrassing for my parents. They lost their face in the Pakistani community. And so they wanted to restore the family's honor and tricked me with a holiday to my relatives in Pakistan. What happened when we got there, I already told you at the beginning. But it even got worse when my father threatened me with death, when I left Islam and converted to Christianity. I fled to Germany in 2004 with the decision to help girls and women who, in order to be free, lose their families and have death threats on their lives. We help those victims of honor-based violence. Every year, 5,000 women are killed by their fathers and brothers in the name of honor. We give those women their dignity. We help them find shelters, give them legal advice. And since 2006, I'm under police protection in Germany. I rarely go out alone. And so I have fought for my freedom and paid a very high price. But if you're now asking yourself, was it really worth it? My answer is short and simple. Yes, thank you.


Since ancient times, mother nature has been a fertile source for drugs used to treat human disease. One such remedy is the spiced turmeric, which has been used for at least 2,500 years. In light of the long and established experience with curcumin, the natural yellow pigment compound in turmeric, as the foodstuff and natural medicine is low-cost, proven disease-preventing and treating potential and safety, curcumin is rapidly moving from the kitchen self toward the clinic. Curcumin has shown some promising effects against a wide range of diseases. So well, in fact, the curcumin appears to possess all the desirable features of a designed-from-scratch, multi-purpose drug. If it's so safe and effective, why aren't more studies being done? Part of the delay is attributable to a U.S. patent, granted in 1995 to researchers at the University of Mississippi Medical Center for Curcumin's Wound Healing Properties that prevented its development as a therapeutic. In a landmark case, the Indian Council of Scientific Industrial Research spent years arguing and finally proving that curcumin has been part of Indian traditional system of medicines for centuries, and so should be considered to be in the public domain. It's like patenting broccoli. The patent was finally overturned in 1997, a triumph for those trying to stop the misappropriation of traditional knowledge by multinational corporations. But if no one profits off it, how's anyone going to hear about it? Who's going to pay for the research? Given that public knowledge does not involve any intellectual property, drug companies are not interested in its commercialization. You can buy turmeric in any grocery store for pennies a dose, unless there's intellectual property to make money, nobody will come forward instead of leading turmeric researcher. How's his research being funded? Although curcumin itself is no longer patentable, derivatives, formulations, delivery systems, and synthetic methods can be patented, so if you take some turmeric molecule and tweak it a little bit, then you can patent it for your investors. Unless a lot of nutrients can be converted into new chemical entities for which more specific medical claims are possible, the development of these plants seems unlikely. Sure, they're extensively exploited as acting ingredients of innumerable products on ill-regulated food supplement markets, but apart from this, progress through clinical trials remains sluggish. Such waste of resources on the way of transformation from renewable materials to high-tech, high-value products is deplorable, these research scientists write. Such wasted potential since nobody profits. So maybe it'd be good if Frito-Lay did own the patent to broccoli. There's a reason we don't see Super Bowl ads on TV for vegetables.


Hello Hello everybody so my teeth whitening technician training courses now open you learn everything about teeth whitening and a full business component as well, so you can actually succeed in your new business.  Well, let me just show you guys what we learned about in our live class today if you're curious how online teeth whitening classes work, so we actually talked about different conditions of the teeth, as you guys can see. And I talked about what teeth, you can wait and what teeth, you can't and, for example, how would you want in somebody's teeth like this, so just a quick example here. This is the before picture, this is the after, but this is before and after a teeth cleaning, so this is not whitening heavy stain like this, you cannot what in the teeth, because the proxies won't penetrate.  But then I did also show a picture like this, so would you guys see the thin red lines here, so on the top, if you look above the red line. That is called a gingival recession, which I talked about in my course fully. But basically what that is is that is the second layer of the tooth showing through you do not want to whiten you don't want to put proxies on those areas because that will make the patients teeth very sensitive, so you would lighten. Under, of course, or sorry over under over the red line here so natural tooth enamel like this can whiten but you would just be careful not to put the proxies on these areas of gingival recession. On the bottom it's under the red line so notice the off yellow color you kind of see towards the gunline that's gingival recession, so I talked about all of that in my course. But notice the back teeth you guys those are called porcelain fused to metal crowns to be specific, so I teach about crowns crowns bridges. porcelain veneers anything that's not your natural tooth will not whiten. There are some claims out there that some toothpaste can whiten crowns and things. No, it cannot any professional teeth whining product cannot do it either a lot of people don't realize that so I teach you guys about that I teach you guys also let's say you have a client that has generalized. gingival recession or sensitive teeth, how do you talk to your client about that I tell them to use a sense of dying type of toothpaste.  Actually have a desensitizer built in so their teeth won't be sensitive so it's really good to use the right product, so if you are thinking of having your own business. Starting your own teeth whitening business, I can help you in some states provinces you don't have to be a dental professional to open up your own teeth whitening business, as long as you have the training so I train you all online. You can have a successful teeth whitening business i've had mine for two years if I can do it you guys can definitely do it. You can make $200 per client if done right, so I teach you guys how to do that i'll leave the link for you guys down below classes are now starting it is learn at your own pace. We have live classes once a month, where we go through everything that month it's learn at your own pace it's about 80 hours of learning materials so it's not your typical two hour teeth whitening course four hours. This is a full certified teeth whitening course, so you will be the best tech teeth whitening technician out there, if you guys have questions comment below and i'll see you guys in the next video.