So Amazon Prime's The Boys has been a major hit over the past two years. It's a pretty good show which kind of pokes fun at the idea of superheroes in general, and also our society's obsession with them over the past like 10 to 15 years in particular. And it's based on a comic series. And so, having seen the show and liked it, I decided, yeah, let's read the comic. And it's genuinely really, really terrible. The show basically just takes the base concept of the comic and rolls with it, but everything else is completely different, and that is 100% for the best, because the comic is worse in basically every way. The show has a better storyline, it has better characters, it just looks better in general, and it has like actual themes and actual messages that it is sending, whereas the comic is just really try-hard edgy, and that's all it has. That's all there is to it. And originally I was just gonna try and make like a review of the comic, but whenever I tried getting my thoughts on it, I kept going back to comparing it to the show and how the show does the similar things, but a lot better. And so I figured, you know what, I'll just make A, the movie is better than the book episode on this, except in this case it's not a movie, and it's not a book, it's a TV show and a comic series, but you know what? Close enough. The Boys TV show is a million times better than the comic. This is the introduction song. It's not very good, but it's not too long. So I will split this into two sections. There'll be spoiler and non-spoiler, but really it's gonna be minor spoiler and major spoiler, because I really can't get into all of the ins and outs of how the show is better without giving away some stuff. So just please be aware of that. My overall thoughts, if you're interested in the show, check it out. You might like it, you might not. It's not for everybody, I'll admit, but I think it's really good. The comic is for nobody. It's like, it's something that I might have liked when I was like 14 or 15, because that's when I wrote Neither Gods Nor Masters, and if you've seen my video on that, you know, just, no, I don't recommend it to anybody. So to start off, the artwork in the comic is just atrocious. I'm not normally a snob about these sort of things, but my god, it is just, it hurts to look at. It's ugly, it's dark, a whole bunch of the characters look exactly the same, like Queen Maeve and Starlight, for example, look almost exactly alike. The only difference between them is their outfits, and that's just, I don't understand how that can happen. Like, I understand how artists have their own style and everything, but when you're drawing something, you're just creating it from up here. You can make it look like whatever you want. I don't understand why you would make them look that similar. All of the characters are just kind of unpleasant to look at, and the backgrounds are usually bland and uninspiring. Like, it's just, here's a house. That's it. There's nothing special about the house. There's nothing special about any of the landscapes, or the city skylines, or anything that we see. It's just a backdrop for the characters, which, if the characters look nicer, then I might be okay with that, but I've already discussed they look terrible.   You know, if you're someone who's like super into gore, then there's only one or two bits in the entire series where it really looks impressive, you know, where it has a whole bunch of detail drawn on it and actually does look a little horrifying. You're like, whoa, that's, but most of the time it's just like, here's some blood, and oh look, here's someone who had their arm cut off, and it just, it doesn't look very good. And considering that comics are a visual medium, you really need the art to be at least passable if you want your audience to be involved, or to be into it. Otherwise, you may as well just write a book. And, well, I'm kind of glad Garth Ennis hasn't written one for the boys, because it would probably be even worse in that case. Next up, the characters are way worse in the comic than they are in the book. So we have this group called The Boys who are just normal people who are going after superheroes that cause trouble. And that's a really, really cool idea. I genuinely mean that, and I think that's the one good thing in the entire comic. It's just that one basic idea, because it's normal people who are angry at beings more powerful than them for very good reasons in many cases, and so they're kind of the underdog going after them. And this is shown off most clearly by Billy Butcher, who is the leader of The Boys, and played by Carl Urban in the show.  Like, he is extremely violent. He's willing to hurt innocent people in his quest for revenge on Homelander. He's willing to lie and manipulate to get what he wants.  He's at least consistent, though. He just wants revenge. And that tends to blind him towards other things. But at the same time, he does have actual relationships with the other members of The Boys. You know, they're his friends. He has relationships with his parents and his brother, who's not really in the show or in the picture, but, you know, he did have a relationship with him, you know? All sorts of stuff like that.   It doesn't make him seem like he actually is out for revenge or anything.  And that's essentially what he is.  For the most part. But not always. And even when he's going after people who deserve it, you get the feeling that he is enjoying himself while doing it. Whereas in the show, maybe you can sense some satisfaction coming off of it, but that's just because, like, yep, it was a job that needed to be done and I did it. And then we move on to Huey, who is the closest thing to a main character this series has. And in the show, he's a grieving kid.  I can't stop. I can't stop. I can't stop. I can't stop. I can't stop. I can't stop.    You know, again, there's dimension to him. In the comic, he's just kind of an unhinged conspiracy theorist who really gets way too into the violence. Like, show Huey, you can maybe say he's a little whiny by being averse to violence in that because he just doesn't like killing people, but I mean, can you really blame him? Whereas in the comic, he gets way too into it and really likes it. I mean, he's a better character than Butcher, admittedly. He's more consistent with it. And he does form relationships with other members of the boys.  But nonetheless, in the show, they took what is a pretty basic character model and they really built him up. And I can only imagine that in later seasons, we're going to keep getting more and more of that. And then there's Homelander, who is pretty much the main villain of the entire series. In the show, he is pretty simple in concept but very complex in execution. He is Superman if he was an absolute psycho. That's about it. And there's a lot of commentary there because Superman in the comics is basically just a god among men. You know, he's it's not conflict where he wonders if he's going to be able to defeat the bad guy. It's conflict over whether or not he's doing the right thing. And I mean, I can see the appeal of that. Like, there's definitely some stuff where Superman's more complex parts come out, like the Injustice comic line, for example. I think that's a pretty solid run. But overall, most writers just don't know how to deal with him very well, so he's not an interesting character. Whereas Homelander is, you know, again, a god among men, but he's an absolute psycho who really just wants what he wants, you know, but we're all just pawns to him. Living a hedonistic lifestyle and if we can provide for that, great. If we get in his way, then we're gone. And also it can provide some commentary on possibly the United States as a whole and American military interventionism. Because, I mean, keep in mind, he literally kills terrorists, but he also kills bystanders by mistake. And he's literally wearing the American flag as a cape. Like, surely that's not a metaphor for something. But anyways, what I'm getting at is Homelander, again, in the show, very complex character with an interesting backstory. And once in a while, he kind of makes a good point, you know, about just the state of the world and how people operate and that sort of thing. And quite frankly, Anthony Starr gives, like, one of the most amazing villain performances I've ever seen come off of somebody. Yeah, words are hard. Whereas in the comic, Homelander just likes killing people, but he also might have dissociative identity disorder, and he's kind of whiny about that, and he's always on the verge of a breakdown. And I'll explain a little more about that in the major spoiler section. But what I'm getting at is, just as a villain, he's not nearly as compelling or nearly as charismatic. And I could go over most of the major characters like this, but I think you get the point by now. All the members of the boys, the side characters, the villains, like, they're just not as interesting in the comic as they are in the show. Because in the comic, they're just, hey, we're superheroes, but we're also kind of evil dicks, and that's about it. Like, in the show, don't get me wrong, a lot of them are evil dicks, but they're also people. And finally, we have the storyline, which is a million times better in the show than it was in the comic. Because in the comic, it's kind of just a series of short adventures where they're dealing with superheroes who cause too much trouble. Like, okay, we'll deal with one group of soups that are causing too much trouble, and we'll move on to the other, and we'll move on to the other. And in addition to getting kind of repetitive, like, it's not totally repetitive. There is an overarching story, but it doesn't get nearly as much advancement as I think it should. But in addition to getting repetitive, the boys are just too powerful, or rather the heroes are just too weak. Because in many cases, the boys, while yes, they do utilize stuff like blackmail and dirty fighting and ambushes and stuff, they can take out groups of superheroes with basically their bare hands or crowbars or just not even firearms, just weapons you could find around your house. Like, there's literally a point in the comic where they're ambushed by Stormfront and his group of heroes, I believe they're called Payout or Payback.   But anyways, they're attacked by Stormfront and the other guys. Stormfront is supposed to be the second most powerful hero in the world other than Homelander, and they fought all these guys with their bare hands and they won. And this was after the boys had been ambushed by them.  So it's like, the superheroes don't feel very powerful. Whereas in the show, like I said, they're gods among men. So the boys are constantly the underdogs. They're constantly at a disadvantage. They have to sneak around. They have to be careful no matter what they're doing because if they get caught, they're dead just like that. And so that brings the entire storyline. Tension. You know, things are tense. Things can go really badly for them.  People could get killed. Whereas in the comic, it never really feels that way. Above all, the comic is just so obnoxiously edgy.  And I know it's written by Garth Ennis. And if you're unfamiliar with him, that's kind of just his shtick. You know, he wrote The Boys.  And he also wrote a series called Crossed. Now, of those three, Crossed is the only one that I actually kind of enjoy because that one, it is just pure edge, but it also doesn't pretend to be anything else. But yes, The Boys show. Yeah, it's edgy, but there's a point to it. You know, in the comic, in the shows, superheroes might rape. Well, in the comic, they cannibalize infants and rape corpses. Like it just everything is a million steps above. In the show, Butcher is filled with rage. Well, in the comic, he just likes killing people. In the show, Starlight has to wear kind of a revealing outfit.  Like both of them are occasionally mean spirited. In fact, I would say overall, the overall tone of both of them is pretty mean spirited. Yeah. But the show has moments of humor to take the edge off, you know, and it has moments of humanity where you're like, oh, yeah, okay, these are real people with real problems. And the comic just lacks most of that. Like even the few parts that are meant to be funny are, well, again, it's just mean spirited. I don't know a better word for it. It's just, ha ha, laugh at this person's pain. And it just doesn't, it never really connected with me. Like I think I was about halfway through the series, like I kept holding out hope that it would get good. And around halfway through the series, we get to the point where we finally meet Stormfront.  And he says, Italians, what the furor was thinking, I'll never know. And I think at that point, I just gave up all hope, because like, there's no subtlety involved here. There's no clever writing.  And granted, the message is Nazis are bad. He's a villain. I'm not saying like Garth Ennis is a racist or anything.  And it's only concerned with being edgy and being risqué. And the show, while again, it is still pretty edgy at times, don't get me wrong. The show makes actual points about stuff. It makes points about power dynamics between different people. It makes points about corporate culture and corporate public relations and how they're really just out to make money, whatever their messaging is. It makes some good points about racism and how it works in the modern day. And they make pretty good points about American intervention. American interventionalism, there we go. Like I said, Homelander sometimes kills innocent people while literally wearing the American flag, like he's, come on, he's, come on guys. The fact that you can read anything into these characters and to these storylines and to these themes speaks volumes about the quality of the show in comparison to its source material. So overall, do I recommend either of these? The show, I think a lot of people would enjoy the show, not, not everybody. Like if you don't have a stomach for violence, then you probably wouldn't like it. If you can't stand, you know, sex, that sort of thing, then you wouldn't like it. As I said, it's just kind of mean spirited. It's, it has a lot of criticism of, you know, corporate culture and American society and that sort of stuff. And it is pretty grim. But overall, it, I find it really enjoyable because it has other stuff to hold me over. The comic is just edge from wall to wall. So overall, I don't recommend it. Like if you're, if you're like me when I was 15 and you just want to see blood and guts and boobs, then maybe, but other than that, I, I can't see anyone liking it. Okay. So the major spoiler section now, I just, I just, I really want to talk about the ending here because it is genuinely one of the worst endings I have ever read in anything ever. Like, I know I said I gave up around halfway through the series, but I was just kind of expecting it to be blandly edgy and kind of stupid. But when you get to the edge, it just completely assassinates most of the character development and all the storylines that have gone up to this point, more or less amount to nothing. So essentially, near the ending, Homelander and a couple of other superheroes lead a coup against the American government.  And then the boys show up and try to stop them. And it ends with Butcher confronting Homelander in the Oval Office, where he's also mutilating the president's corpse.  And if you're unfamiliar with the series, the reason Butcher started his campaign against superheroes is because Homelander raped his wife. And in the show, she actually lived and gave birth to a son, but she faked her death and stuff. And that's an interesting storyline. But in the comic, she got pregnant still. But the fetus at a couple of weeks old tore its way out of her and started flying around the room. And Butcher had to kill it. So it killed her. And then he killed it. Okay, sure, we'll go on with that. But Homelander does not actually remember doing that or a bunch of other stuff that they find evidence of him doing.  So when Butcher confronts him about this, one of Homelander's teammates named Black Noir takes off his mask and reveals that, oh, he was a Homelander clone.  It was actually his teammate who was just evil for the sake of being evil. So in addition to this just being kind of a stupid twist that there was never any evidence given for it so we could never guess it or anything, it's again just like super edgy and it kind of takes away most of Homelander's what's the word?  Like all the bad guys are dead within a couple of chapters and it wasn't even very difficult for them to be taken out. That sucked but it gets worse because you see Butcher actually creates this sort of, it's basically a bomb, we'll just go with that.   You know you could tell he cared somewhat about the other members of the boys and then he just kills them in his quest and sure maybe if this had been written more intelligently maybe you could make some sort of point about how he's willing to kill his friends for the sake of revenge and that's super bad and stuff but it just comes so out of nowhere and it's so quick and so without any real emotion that it just it feels not just mean spirited but it feels like everything in his character and everything in the story this far was amounting to nothing like they just threw it all out the window.  As always thanks to all of my patrons including the ten dollar and up patrons Apo Savilainen, Ashley Watson, Bee Quinn, Brother Santotis, Christopher Quinten, Mbis, Emily Miller, Evan Stigall, Joel, Carcat Kitsune, Madison Lewis Bennett, Mike, NB Star, Sad Martigan, Tobacco Crow, Tom Beanie, Vacuous Silas, Vaivictus and all the other names on here you know you guys are great and all of you guys for watching you guys are great if you haven't already subscribed to this channel then do that please I I appreciate it it helps a lot and also like the video share it around you know all that sort of stuff anyways see you next time bye


Have you ever noticed how there are some people in your life that when they walk in the room all heads turn to be on them and it's not just because they're sexy or something like that or because they're famous but it's because they have some kind of charisma that makes people drawn to them. It makes people attracted to them. Now when I was much younger, nicknamed Invisible Boy by a girl I was into who didn't realize we'd gone to school together for 18 years, I had always wondered what this kind of special thing was and in reality what this is is called presence or charisma. Now in this video I want to share what I've noticed about the people that have charisma versus those that do not. What's up guys? Alex Hine, author of the book Master of the Day. Now I've actually included the first link in the description is a goal setting cheat sheet. Now that comes from me wanting to improve all the aspects of my life just like becoming more charismatic and more confident. So if you want, the first link in the description there will not only help you figure out how to set goals to improve all aspects of your life but also how to become more charismatic or more charming at the same time so you can check that out right there in the description. So the first thing that I noticed was that people that are really charismatic or very charming and have that kind of stage presence, they really don't care what you think about them.  When I was in my early twenties and my late teens, very quiet, not very outgoing and not very friendly, I was really reluctant to try to force myself to do something that would make me seem more confident or more charismatic but at the same time I always wanted to fit in because I didn't have a lot of friends. In my late teens I never had a serious girlfriend and you know in general there were things that I kept doing because I wanted to fit in. I would try to be funnier, I would try to one-up people, I would try to have the coolest stories and now like reflecting back on that, when I'm around someone that constantly tries to validate themselves and seem important and draw attention, it is the most annoying thing imaginable because just like that rubber band theory, the more someone comes in and tries to push in on you like, give me love, give me love, the more you just want to stay far away. And I noticed that a lot of charismatic people, they really are just purely themselves. They really walk in the room and they're like, this is me, take it or leave it, I don't really care. And that's ironically that I'm good, I'm secure is what draws people to you and what makes you this kind of irresistible, mysterious kind of personality that people want to learn more about. But obviously you can't just like be yourself if you don't feel comfortable being yourself or if you have weird hobbies and to you they are kind of weird or you don't feel like there's anything that interesting about you so like why would people be interested?  The second thing I've noticed is that the most charismatic people I know are genuinely interested in other people. You know, I was once at this party at my aunt's house and she invited me because there was someone she wanted me to meet but I ended up hanging out with these people in their 50s and 60s and I found that I didn't have that much in common. So I was worried because there was nothing really to talk about until I bumped in this woman who was Filipino and at the time I'd been dating a Filipino girl for five years. After that I just started asking her all these questions about like I made Filipino jokes and asked her about these places she had been and where she was from and learned that she was an artist and I'd been creating all these kinds of crafts and at the end of the night I didn't think much about it and I didn't even end up talking that much myself. I was just asking her about things because I wasn't really sure what we had in common. And then about a day or two in by and my aunt had actually texted me or called me or something and she was like, she absolutely loved you. She said you were the most interesting person at the party and I was like what? Literally the only thing she probably knew about me was my name and that I had a Filipino girlfriend but how did she find me so interesting because ironically I spent all night interested in her and what she was saying and her goals and her interests. So there's something that happens when you embody the first principle of Dale Carnegie, how to win friends and influence people. It's be genuinely interested in other people and ask about them because when you think that we live in a world where people, even good people are genuinely only concerned with themselves and everyone wants self-esteem and validation and ego but being into someone else gives them that core need that they want which is them feeling significant. The third thing is to come up with belief structures that make you feel good about yourself. Now the reason I say this is because anyone of course can be confident. Anyone can not feel like they need validation from the world if they get that self-worth from themselves. But what happens if we don't have this? What happens if you don't feel like you're that cool or that interesting or that fit or that worthy or that attractive or that? Why would someone talk to you? That might be the thought that you have. For me what I did at the start was besides the obvious tactical stuff that I talk about here which is dedicating yourself to personal growth and personal development until you become the kind of person that you respect the most besides that come up with beliefs that help you thrive and feel confident. So you may say things like because I'm fat, skinny, look this way, look that way, people will not find me interesting, funny, attractive, worth talking to. But you could say you know what there are all of these things that I want to work on but I think this is one trait about me that I'm really good at. I'm really insightful or I really know a lot about literature. Try to find a belief structure that's not like what do I have to offer but instead I'm sure I can find something that we can both bond on and are valuable. Because there are people that may be like let's say you go to a party and you literally meet Jeff Bezos and he's a billionaire or trillionaire now. And you're like what on earth can I offer Jeff Bezos? I have nothing to give. But chances are there is a piece of his life that he's not doing 10 out of 10 at that you can offer something even if it's just insight.  But maybe those people aren't too successful financially and you are. Or maybe you have some insights about relationships that could help them. Or you have some insights about reading or self growth that could help them. There's always something you may have as a superpower or a special insight that other even really successful people are fulfilled or happy whatever that they don't have. So try to find that silver lining because there's always something valuable you can offer. So I hope that helps guys and of course for me the starting point of getting self esteem and self worth and becoming more of that interesting charming happy person was goal setting and journaling. So the first link in the description I've included a one page how to plan out your best year of your life worksheet. Right there the first link in the description you can check that out. And again you can check out my last two videos right there and right there.


So hey guys welcome to come again if you're new make sure you hit the subscribe button and the little bell Comment below hit the like button. I mean even share with your friends Good job. We have cookies and milk Might be seeming not sure Hey guys welcome back to come again today on the show. We're gonna be going over action vitals and loyal subjects masters of the universe mini figs Now as you can see I have already opened this But we'll wait for the reveal As you can see on the box. It's got he-man Holding up his power sword castle grayscale around him. It's got that 1980s style Masters of the universe logo on it on the left hand side or on one side You can see fully poseable modern action vinyls. We've got trap jaw triclops and he-man on The back we've got a few rarer figures We have the gold edition he-man. We have anti-eternia he-man we have Teela and we have beast man now beast man looks like he's a little bit different than the Version that John reviewed a few weeks ago. I think the colors might be different Then on the other side we have Skeletor Evil Lynn and Once again beast man on the bottom. It's just the copyright with the loyal subjects wave to LLC and They're at manufacturing address made in China on The top you've got the masters of the universe logo action vinyls and loyal subjects logo same on The inside flap and now let's get into the figure as you can see the figure does come in a sealed Blind bag So you never know even if you pop the box open at the store You never know which one you're gonna get it is a Silver style bag Aluminum foil it appears all right guys welcome back to comic again today I'm gonna be reviewing the loyal subjects masters of the universe vinyl mini figures, so let's go ahead and start off with Evil Lynn as you can see she does have her same yellow color scheme for her skin as the Original vintage figures. She does come with her Magic staff and it's a little rough trying to get it at pulling it straight out But You can do it all right as you can see There is the dark shade of blue for her Little helmet to pee or headpiece with the lighter blue for the spikes You have to excuse me today. I do have a little bit of a cold. I woke up with a green eyeshadow Looks like she's got purple eyes some black eyeliner and Kind of a Melon colored lipstick as you can see she does have the dark blue shirt and Bottoms with the light blue ram horns along around her breasts and Collar as well as belt and the cuff links and arm bands. Let's go into some articulation here Her head is on a ball joint. It can move side to side up and down. However, it is kind of inhibited because of the helmet and the collar so The helmet does not come off the arms to move up and down They go out slightly Go all the way around Her hands They do come On a ball joint. They can rotate all the way around Same with the other side waist articulation all the way around Legs on a standard ball joint And her feet are on a ball joints as well. They can move Slightly up and down as well as all the way around Like I said, she did come with her magical staff Which has a nice orb in the center They could have done a little bit better job gluing this piece together Um But overall not too bad And it does just fit right into her hand just like so Um, I am not seeing Much in the way of paint blemishes at all She does have a little trouble standing. You got to kind of rest her against her Magical staff Just like so Now let's go on to triclops As you can see triclops did come with his sword Let's go ahead and take that out He has His different eyes You can rotate his visor And it just snaps into place Um, I get once again ball joints His head can pop off just like all the others from loyal subjects Pops right back on um It looks like his uh His little hardest thing it can come off Uh, but I'm sure it'd probably be a pain to get back on As you can see there is a place for his sword in the back of his uh vest Goes in just like that Very nice Nice paint job not much in the way of paint for triclops Just green and black and a little bit of orange Once again his arms just like evil ends They move up just about that far there on a ball joint and go all the way around His wrists On a ball joints as well his legs his waist And his feet once again on a ball joint And his sword Not much in the way of detail a little bit of detail A nice little detail on the hilt Uh, but overall it's just a green piece of plastic But not too bad And now we jump into Trap jaw Very nice piece very articulated his mouth does open and close For those of you who want to know more about trap jaw, I do have a video on come again The origins of trap jaw according to image comics Um But once again his head is on a ball joint pops right off Pop right back on his arm Same thing ball joints Hand legs Move up about that far Um, it looks like his armor might kind of hinder The articulation of the legs a little bit same with the feet And now for his special action feature His mechanical arm can rotate all the way around it I have the blaster in there right now. Let's go ahead and pop that off He comes with a number of arms, which just attach To the back of his belt Come with these little hooks just hang right on there and They do just pop in pretty easily Not bad But my overall favorite is the blaster It's the one that doesn't look as ridiculous as the others So Let's go ahead and put those back in there Paint job is really nice. Got the maroon colored helmet and jaw green flesh tone As well as blue flesh tone Or actually, I believe that's a green skull. I'm sorry with blue flesh tone green belt maroon colored loincloth and armor and black boots Not much in the way of paint blemishes Overall pretty good figure So overall I really like these figures nice little throwback to the 80s figures Same paint jobs and everything So yeah, these these go right up on my shelf with my funko pop and my dragon ball z Mini figure so Yeah, I believe they're available. I got these at walmart Um, I believe they're also available at target and you can get to them on amazon. They are mystery blind bags. So You may want to order a case just to make sure you get them all So that's the toy review for this week.  Hit that subscribe button. Make sure you hit the like


So, who am I? I started using Linux about 97, so I'm a late bloomer, I started writing on Linux in 2002, senior editor for a few publications a week, internet news, server watch, enterprise, networking, planet, and I run a small site called LinuxToday.com and I recommend anybody that's interested in Linux to submit, look, and see what we have going on there. In the beginning, the first time I met Jim Zenlin, the executive director of the Linux Foundation, was back in 2006. In Toronto at a small event called Linux World Canada long since gone, at the time he was the leader of a group called the Free Standards Group. At the time in 2006 he was speaking about fighting Linux fragmentation. The Free Standards Group was driven by an effort called the Linux Standards Base, which was an API and a set of baseline things that would enable software developers to target Linux as a platform as opposed to just individual Linux distributions. The theory was that Unix broke apart because of fragmentation and the whole idea was he was trying to prevent that with the Free Standards Group. What he said at the time in this session in 2006 was that open source is a development methodology, choice is not guaranteed by that and you could still get locked in and that was what the Free Standards Group is all about. There was a rival group at the time called the Open Source Development Labs and they were the home of Linus Torvalds at the time. They ran into financial trouble 2006, running out of money. January 2007, the Linux Foundation was formed as a merger or a buyout of the OSDL and the Free Software Group started out with about 70 members. The Linux Foundation at the time defined itself as the new center of gravity for Linux because OSDL was the center of gravity for Linux and as all engineers know you cannot change the laws of physics. I don't do a good Scottish accent and physics gravity always pulls things in. This is the first tax return because I'm a journalist so I have to hunt for returns and numbers. The Linux Foundation filed 2007, about 7.5 million. This is just after the OSDL was pretty much done. A couple years later, Jim said in the Collaboration Summit 2009, one of the first events was that the role of the Linux Foundation was about standardizing, promoting and protecting Linux by focusing on those goals. You could advance Linux and ultimately the OS market. Skip ahead. A couple years 2011, that's the last time Linux con, that's the predecessor event for this event, was here in Vancouver and Jim said the lesson of Linux is that Linux is on the right side of history. Expect that you will hear him say that again tomorrow. You heard that here first because he said that many times in the seven years since 2012. We talked a little bit about competition that the competition needs to embrace open source and keep up and here we are 2018 and Microsoft has listened to him. Jim has said the Linux is awesome more than once in particular in 2013 and I think that was a particularly great year. That was the year that Steam decided to embrace Linux and for all you gamers out there that was fantastic. In 2013 there was a big shift. That's when the Linux Foundation started to be about a whole lot more than just Linux. Open Daylight Project started. That's first of a collaboration projects and was a networking effort. Jim at the time said that Open Daylight relies on this essential organizational framework and this is what the Linux Foundation can help to provide. In the time since that Open Daylight started there's been a whole lot of other projects and this is just a few and there's more that the Linux Foundation has added. So many so that in 2014 Jim said that he's just Linus Torvalds janitor. I mean he just cleans up and make sure that the place is a good place for people to do development work which is really what the Linux Foundation is all about. By 2015 there was already conversations maybe the Linux Foundation should be renamed. Jim said no because Linux has a brand name and a reputation. By 2016 he was already talking about sharing and altruistic goals how it makes the world a better place and as everybody knows 2017 was the year of the Linux desktop. No other year previous or future will be and that was that. There is no resistance. We will all be assimilated and that is what it's going to be. Fundamentally the real question that the Linux Foundation asks Jim always says is which are the projects that really matters which are the ones that will provide security agility and that will meet these requirements and the thing that you have to have is sustainable ecosystems and that's what the Linux Foundation provides. In the 10 seconds I've got last the Linux Foundation has grown from the ashes of the OSDL and the promise of the Free Software Group. It's grown from 70 members grown to many open source projects also grown from 7.5 million to about 61 million in 2016. Linux is awesome. Thank you.


When I invite the special guest of honor of this session, the public policy advocate, international corporate and commissioner's lawyer, and vice president of Saqla and the special TV host guest anchor at Sunset TV. It is indeed our honor and privilege to welcome the special guest of honor, advocate Hemanth Bhattraji. But before I invite advocate Hemanth Bhattraji to address the gathering, I would like to request my technical team to please delay a small film made on life and work of advocate Hemanth Bhattraji. Advocate Hemanth Bhattra is a globally recognized lawyer with almost 30 years of experience in the areas of constitutional, civil, criminal, corporate, commercial and transactional laws, as well as laws dealing with the white-collared and economic offenses. His experience ranges from policy formulation, legislation and regulations drafting to preparing global reports on diverse subjects complemented by hands-on legal advisory and law practices in these areas at transnational level and domestically in India. He is qualified with professional degrees as well as official certificate courses. He has achieved a first-class score through his academic career. He has obtained distinctions in diverse subjects. He is an elected lifetime member of the General Assembly of the Union of International Association, a research institute and documentation center based in Brussels. He was appointed chairperson of IICLAM International Infrastructure and Construction Law Arbitration Moot. It was founded by National University of Singapore, Singapore International Arbitration Center and National Law University, Delhi. He was appointed to the leadership committee of ICAAP by the Ministry of Public Health, Thailand. We warmly welcome Advocate Hemanth Bhattra. Indeed, so it is our honor and privilege to have you here today. Over to you, sir. Thank you. Honorable Justice Deepak Mishra, former Chief Justice of India and other justices on the panel. Dr. Lalit Basin, one of our senior leaders at the bar, notable dignitaries, Professor Karad, Rahul Karad, distinguished guests, teaching staff, students, ladies and gentlemen. It gives me immense pleasure being part of this inaugural session of the first International Symposium on Law and Peace, organized by the MIT World Peace Institutions University. I've been asked to address the gathering on the topic regarding reforms required in the judiciary and the time slot allocated to me is about 15 minutes. So I'll get straight to the topic as time is short and brief. If I was to say this from the perspective of a lawyer because lawyers love their voices, but here there are defined timelines, so I'll respect that. Let us first discuss broadly as to why are reforms required at all in the society. Let me begin by quoting William O. Douglas, a judge of the Supreme Court of the United States in the 20th century. He said that the search for static security in the law and elsewhere is misguided. The fact is security can only be achieved through constant change. Adapting old ideas that have outlived their usefulness to the current facts. What are the current facts if one was to talk about the Indian judiciary? Well, there are about 73,000 cases pending before the Supreme Court and about 44 million cases, that is 4.4 crore cases pending in all the courts put together in India. And quoting from an online source, in 2018, Neethi Ayog had brought out a strategy paper where it was concluded that at the then prevailing rate of disposal of cases in our courts, it would take more than 324 years to clear the backlog. 324 years to clear the backlog. And the pendency at that time was 29 million cases and today it is almost the double. Now cases that had been in the courts for more than 30 years numbered more than 65,000 to be precise 65,695 in December 2018. By January 2021, which is this year, it had risen more than 60% to 1 lakh plus cases pending for more than 30 years. Now what do these facts and statistics demonstrate? Well, it demonstrates that something is seriously wrong somewhere. And we must acknowledge it with all honesty, candidness and magnanimity. We won't become small by any means by this sincere confession. Now before suggesting the kinds of reforms required in the Indian judiciary, let me first compliment the Indian judiciary with all genuineness. And Justice Deepak Mishra has been one of the best example, I would say, in our justice dispensation. Our system of governance is based on the separation of powers with a concept of checks and balances. Legislature makes laws and public policies whereas the executive enforces it and both these organs have enormous powers and wide domain of public dealings and administration. These powers and mandates make them vulnerable and susceptible to excesses or if I may say unrestrained exercise of authority, whether knowingly or unknowingly. Judiciary in India has played a significant role since India's independence as a custodian of the constitution of India and the rule of law. They have constantly checked the other organs of the governance and I'm sure Justice Deepak Mishra will touch upon that because when he was heading the Supreme Court we have had some landmark judgments in that regard. The judiciary has overwhelmingly prevented excesses and breaches of the fundamental rights, human rights and laws. Now having said that somewhere I feel that judiciary could not, I would not say did not could not reform itself as much as was the need of the time and society. The judiciary obviously cannot survive in vacuum it must change and recast itself so as to meet the changing norms and values of the society. Lack of reforms stifle growth because separation of powers in India is not a model of watertight chambers. Lack of reforms in one organ of governance causes collateral damage and dampens overall development of a nation. Let me now quickly touch upon the kinds of reforms which can be rapidly introduced in the judicial dispensation. This is my thought process. I am not a very active litigation lawyer but from a public policy perspective. First and foremost the reform which has been effectively suggested and mooted even by the current Chief Justice of India Honorable Chief Justice Ramanna is about mediation that the reform is about introducing an effective system of alternative dispute resolution. I am not talking about arbitration nor was he to my understanding. I am talking about conciliatory mediation. Before filing any dispute or case in a court of law or tribunal one must mandatory make a professional and legitimate an authentic endeavor to resolve the conflict or dispute amicably by mediation. In many developed countries of the world which I have even recorded in one of my books in many developed countries of the world including Australia the lawyer who files the case must also sign a declaration with the case as a prerequisite that he or she has made all possible efforts to resolve and settle the dispute before filing the case and the lawyer can be reprimanded by the court reprimanded by the court if the declaration is found to be false or misleading. Now second reform is about usage of technology and this reform has also been strongly propagated by another judge of the Supreme Court one of the senior most judges of the Supreme Court Dhananjay Chandra Chul he has been propagating about introducing technology in the dispensation of justice and definitely technology is a rapid reform as well because I feel there are many reforms one can talk about which I can think of myself but we have to discuss the ones which can be executed rapidly or swiftly I mean if I was to tell you that let us invest hugely in the judicial civil infrastructure like having more and more court rooms and buildings and chambers I feel that would in the Indian context take years and years together to have that kind of infrastructure in place and here I am reminded of a French poet and novelist Victor Hugo many of you would have read that very famous phrase of his which goes as nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come that holds very true in today's time for technology and not only technology I would say even artificial intelligence both of these aspects of technology they are unstoppable now and there is nothing wrong in it I feel artificial intelligence has been subject matter of discussion, debate, criticism as well but it is born out of natural intelligence artificial intelligence has not come out of the space that has been created by human intelligence so why can't petty disputes and issues like traffic violations cases of small consumer disputes conflicts or refunds from service providers can be settled by artificial intelligence why not I mean you put in the details in an automated form and matter gets instantly resolved if our income tax returns can get scrutinized by software and artificial intelligence which is financially sort of a complicated structure or phenomena then why not introduce some similar segments of judicial dispensation I am talking about smaller conflicts and disputes which are quite sort of run of the mill and easy to resolve I would not like to touch the debate about the faceless adjudication because that is something which will take a lot of time to discuss and can be kept for some other day I am not too much in favor of faceless adjudication of serious disputes globally talking about companies they have resorted to ODR online dispute resolution for instance eBay, PayPal and ICANN they are the front runners in online dispute resolutions eBay's ODR system is a high volume ODR process that addresses disputes from a system perspective angle eBay handles over 60 million disputes every year through their online dispute resolution system and predominantly disputes are like items have not been received or items have not been received as described or the items are unpaid and so on, these are regular disputes but solving 6 crore disputes every year now related to technology is the point and reform regarding online and virtual hearings and we have seen during COVID times virtual hearings, online hearings and most people have embraced it with open mind, it's a global phenomenon now and we all have come so close to one another through this medium of virtuality I am addressing an event in Pune while sitting in Delhi that is productivity and efficiency that's big convenience I would say and we need a big number of new judges to be appointed undoubtedly but why not engage judges on contractual terms why can't we have law professors senior lawyers and even former judges adjudicating matters for instance respected Justice Deepak Mishra is so active even today why can't he still continue to hold court and if not the physical virtual court, why can't he hold virtual court because it is not easy to find judges of his stature and with his caliber why are we wasting such judges and another reform which comes to my mind is about training of judges and training of judges by the academicians and by law teachers with regard to precy writing of the judgements today we find judgements which are thesis in itself you need 10 sets of lawyers to interpret that judgment you know we need to exercise compression in judgements you know judgment should be written like a gist why do judgements lay out such long chronology etc they can be made annexures the chronology or the written submissions why do we have to record all those in the judgment just put them as annexures and your verdict should be maybe 2-3 pages that's it and we should not need lawyers to explain these judgements to litigants you know litigants should be able to just go through the judgment and understand you know we don't need to use Shakespearean English in our judgment you know because we know a person who is sitting on the bench he has to be a learned brilliant analytical and a person of judicious mind so we all have to have faith in our judges when we will have faith trust and confidence in our judges even if they will give a 2 page or 3 page order we will respect that you know we will value that so that reform also will need to come not only vis-a-vis judiciary but also people who are using the judicial system they also need a lot of orientation you can't just go on criticising judgements sweepingly we all need to trust the judiciary now this I feel is an important reform so I will be by and large closing my address now there are several other reforms you know if you go through research papers you know people talk about decriminalisation of regulatory offences and more there are lot many reforms but I think time is short and perhaps we will keep other reforms for some other time as professor Karad said that why don't you people visit so maybe when we get an occasion to visit we can physically we can sort of you know we will have more time to interact with the students so I will close my address by quoting Lou Wallace a famous American lawyer a famous diplomat and politician you know he said to begin a reform to begin a reform go not go into the places of the great and rich don't go to the places of great and rich go rather to those whose cups of happiness are empty go to the poor and humble they are the ones who need reforms thank you so much God bless all of you thank you justice Deepak Mishra it's great to see you indeed indeed so the pleasure was all ours thank you very much for taking time thank you advocate Bhatraj I think you really passionately shared your mind and this is what really when we were considering the conference the truly solution based approach how do we adopt while building up this institution the first is international symposium of peace and law so I'm very very thankful you give so many ideas I think we can pursue it together you are already at important position there and various international bodies and we at our center here at the educational group many such activities we are doing and our education system is always particularly private institutions they shy away the academy also carry little fear of you know our political system social system they generally never comment like the western world we all have to really learn that we we can really make a difference as a change makers thank you so much for all that wonderful input thank you


In the hardest to reach parts of planet Earth, something has been discovered that might just blow your minds. So grab a tinfoil hat, perk up your ears, because what we're about to unleash to you here is another stunning discovery of a pyramid complex that's been hidden in plain sight for thousands of years. Okay fair enough, we say plain sight even though it's the most remote part of the world and you've got to get there first to see them, and it's easier said than done. We are of course referring to the stunning discovery of at least three massive pyramid structures in Antarctica. We know, we know, pyramids again, but they are everywhere on this Earth, and we all need to become more aware of the ancient empire that was here before our modern thinking and religious corruptive fanaticism that blinds the human race for at least 12,000 years now. We have to consciously rediscover this world with open minds, and forget about a lot of the false teachings in order to truly learn the truth. And we all seek it after all, right? Now wait till we hear this, satellite imagery has revealed what appears to be man-made pyramids in Antarctica.   Anyway, basically the Earth got wobbled and global earthquakes occurred, destroying many ancient sites. There were tsunamis that buried many things deep with mud, and of course the Great Flood as loosely foretold in the Bible, it caused pole shifts in all sorts of upset to every region of our world, including that of Antarctica. Up until this point, Antarctica would have been just as habitable as the Americas are today. Although it is completely covered with snow and ice today, you can clearly see the massive pyramids outlined. Just imagine what treasures and secrets might be under all that covering, could it be on a scale as that of Egypt? But absolutely impossible to get into, you know, sub-zero temperatures etc. Ok, so according to the rumours, a team of European and American scientists had found three ancient pyramids, two of which were 16 kilometres inland and one near the coast. The details in the stories were always very sparse and the names of the explorers weren't shared and more details were never available, so of course the story just fizzled out when it was never backed up by anything, until now. The satellite images could prove to be the ultimate evidence of pyramid structures located on the main ridge of Antarctica. This would mean that in the distant past, when Antarctica was much different than it is today, ancient civilizations could have developed on a now frozen continent, leaving behind wondrous constructions, telling the story of a time when our planet was inhabited by different civilizations and a completely different time was force fed to us by history and mainstream researchers. So the idea that Antarctica might not have always been covered on ice is backed up by the ancient Periris maps that shows the coastline of Antarctica without ice. The Periris map is a world map made in 1513 based on military intelligence from the Ottoman admiral Periris. About a third of the map still survives and it shows prehistoric exploration of Antarctica, along with notes that the climate was warm and a good destination for expansion of an empire. You could be forgiven for thinking an expedition to the bizarre structures would answer the intriguing question whether they are artificial or natural, but it would take a lot more than a group of explorers with sophisticated equipment to come to such conclusions. You would need an army with heavy-duty tools and machinery to scrape the surface. When you consider the effort involved to dig out the great sphinx from the sand and the fact we can't find the hidden chambers in these easily accessible sites, then it puts the task of uncovering the pyramids in Antarctica into perspective. All we can really do for now is study the images from the ground and from space. It makes you wonder what secrets we'll still have to uncover. We think we've not even scratched the surface. I mean, the discovery of these pyramids has caused speculation regarding what Antarctica was like in the distant past. Scientific research seems to prove that theory. In 2009, scientists doing research and collecting samples came across pollen particles in Antarctica, suggesting that the ecosystem of Antarctica was very different in the past, suggesting that the summer temperature reached around 20 degrees Celsius at one point. In 2012, another team of researchers identified 32 species of bacteria and a 2800 year old halophile microbes in water samples from Lake Vida and East Antarctica. The permanent surface ice on the lake is the thickest non-glacial ice on Earth. So there you have it. There, a greater history on the continent than what mainstream scholars would have us believe. Around the 1930s, Nazis famously made expeditions to Antarctica in search of lost civilization, perhaps hidden beneath the ice of this frozen continent, lies the truth about our origin as a species. We told you the truth may be stranger than you think, but of course we don't have all the answers. But for now, at least we have questions. Small shockwaves can have a big impact after all. Thanks for watching and remember, the ways by which we arrive at knowledge are hardly less wonderful than the discovery of these things themselves.