All right. That video was released by Kim.com a week ago. So it's good to see the charges have not slowed him down in any way or make him think twice about anything in any way. All right, welcome. This is Mega Upload. Guilty or not guilty. I'm Jim Rennie. This is Jennifer Granik, if you couldn't tell us apart. We are both former criminal defense attorneys and we are now both internet law-ish people. What's your official title now? I'm a civil liberties director at Stanford Center for Internet and Society. I'm not that fancy. He's very fancy. All right. So today we're going to talk about Mega Upload, kind of talk about the charges against them, the current state of the case, and then we're going to have a little debate slash lawyer argument time. It's going to be more in the style of a closing argument. If you don't know the difference between a closing argument, basically an opening argument is really boring and a closing argument is the stuff you see on TV where lawyers are like, my client is guilty, my client is not guilty. All right. So we're going to have about 10 minutes each for our main argument and three minutes for rebuttal. That's really, really, really, really short. In real life for this case, I think each side would take at least an hour, if not many hours, doing the arguments. So you were getting the very brief version. So we're not going to talk about every aspect of this case, but hopefully we'll enlighten you a little bit about the case, what's going on, and you'll have some fun at the end. You get to vote if you think they'll be found guilty or not guilty or something else entirely. So Jen's going to explain a little bit about the state of the case right now. First I want to give special thanks to Jim for showing up this morning. He is fresh from taking the three-day California bar, and then they delayed his flight, so he got in at five in the morning this morning. So I want to thank him for actually making it. So if I sound a little like Dan Kaminsky while I'm giving this talk, that's why. And then I wanted to just take some time to give you guys a little bit of an update on what's going on in the case. Jim didn't mention this, but he's going to play the prosecutor. He's going to argue that Kim.com is guilty, and I'm going to play the defense attorney, and I'll argue that Kim.com is not guilty. I feel a little bit like I'm in the Matt Blaise role from the last panel, so I'm feeling pretty good about that. But it's a great case with some really interesting legal issues, so hopefully these will elucidate them. So first thing is he's in New Zealand, and the United States government that's prosecuting him is here. How do we get him from there to here? Well, there's extradition, and that is an agreement that countries that are friendly have between each other that when a bad guy lives over there, they're going to send him over here. But certain things generally have to be true, and I'm not an expert in extradition law, but the status of that right now is that the extradition hearing has been put off for a number of months and will not happen anytime soon while they continue to sort of work through the case. One of the major issues in extradition is parity. The thing that the person is accused of doing has to be the same in each jurisdiction or similar in each jurisdiction, because we're not going to export people from the United States to stand trial for things that aren't crimes here in other countries where they might be crimes. So if you badmouth the Thai king here at DEF CON, you can be pretty confident we're not going to extradite you to Thailand to stand trial there for less majesty. It's a crime in Thailand. So one of the major questions in the extradition hearing, and we're going to get an interesting preview of this, is whether copyright infringement that he's charged with here is a crime over there. And it'll be a preview of the argument. So I'm also not super familiar with New Zealand copyright law, but you know, it's not, and I don't know how similar it's going to have to be. Yes, they have criminal copyright law there. Yes, we have criminal copyright law here. But this case, the heart of this case is really based on the idea that mega upload and Kim dot com are criminally liable for the copyright infringement performed by their users. And I have no idea whether New Zealand law even begins to address that. So that's going to be a super interesting hearing. The second thing that's important to note is that just a couple of weeks ago, Kim dot com won a motion to suppress evidence in the New Zealand jurisdiction and motion to suppress their laws similar to ours also a British common law type of country. And that's based on the idea that for searches and seizures, you have to have warrants that are based on probable cause that specifically identify the places to be searched and the things to be seized. And what happened there, the court said is that the people who executed the warrant did not have enough information in the warrant about what information they ought to take. So it said copyright infringement, but it didn't identify that it was that they were looking for evidence of copyright infringement under specific provisions of United States law. They at the very least had to refer to the statutory provisions of United States law. In fact, the warrant didn't even really say that it was about United States law as opposed to New Zealand law. And then there was this whole huge list of things that they could seize. And they basically took whatever they found, including stuff from people who were at Kim dot com's house who were not involved with mega upload like his housekeeper and other kinds of domestic help and that sort of thing. So the warrant needs to specify what the situation is so that I can look and be like, oh, this is the housekeeper's diary. And even though it says books, I'm looking for evidence of this criminal copyright conspiracy. So I'll leave the diary alone that doesn't get seized. So at a certain point, it becomes a general warrant. And the judge in New Zealand was like, this warrant didn't meet these standards. It was too broad. They seized too much stuff. And I'm super pissed because they sent it all over to the United States and it doesn't say they're going to do that in the warrant. And now we can't even get it back to suppress it or return some of the stuff and the privacy of this stuff to people who were affected who were not involved in the mega upload business. So that was a nice success for Kim dot com. But then it was a little bit of a setback because the judge who was overseeing his extradition gave a speech at a conference. And in the speech, he said, we have seen the enemy. And it is us, IE the US, IE the United States and that the United States has an exporter of our copyright law as an enemy to the New Zealand. After making that statement, he had to step down and they'll have to find a new judge to hear his extradition case. So that's the situation there. I'm just going to do a little bit of framing before Jim gets up and makes his argument. We are going to be focused. The case has a couple of charges in it. It has a racketeering charge. It has a money laundering charge. I think he'll be addressing the direct infringement charge. But basically what we're talking about is the criminal copyright infringement for the mega upload business as a whole. I think we both agree there was direct infringement in the case. For example, one of the things that the emails show is that they were basically trying to copy all of YouTube to populate the mega upload service with. And I don't think there's any question that that's direct copyright infringement. But that's not interesting. That's like a five year thing. It's whatever. It was a portion of what was up there. The interesting stuff is what we're going to talk about. And Jim's going to give his closing argument and explain to you the jury, why Kim.com is guilty, then I'm going to get up and try to convince you why he's not guilty. Jim gets a rebuttal because the prosecution always gets to have two times. And then we'll do. I'm going to be nice and give you rebuttal too. I'm going to rebuttal. And then we'll maybe we'll do questions and then we'll vote. And you guys can decide whether he goes free or not. I just want to say as a criminal defense lawyer, when you see your client put out a video where he compares himself to Martin Luther King, you're not feeling that good. But whatever. Okay. In case we care. Okay. I'm assuming you all know what mega upload is. If you don't, here's an extremely brief version. It is slash was a digital storage site where one person could upload a file and then provide URLs, many different URLs that pointed at that content to anyone they chose. Anyone who had a URL that pointed to the content could then download that content. The business model was that it was free to download at first. But it was slow. I mean, we've all used these download sites for various legitimate purposes, I'm sure. But if you want a faster download rate, you have to pay. And then they also sold advertising on the site. So obviously it's in their best interest if you're selling advertising that your site is popular. It's in your best interest when you sell advertising that you have content people want to download. And they learned extremely quickly that the content people want to download is things that infringe other people's copyright like movies, TV shows, software, et cetera. Now, who is being charged? It's not just Kim.com. There's actually a big list of people who are charged. Kim.com is charged personally in his role as the president slash founder of mega upload. Mega upload as a corporation is being charged. Vestor Limited is basically Kim.com shell company that he held his shares of the mega upload stock in is also being charged. And then various mega upload corporate officers who took part in the conspiracy are also charged. Alright, as Jennifer mentioned, they're charged with all manner of stuff, racketeering, fraud, direct copyright infringement. That's going to take a long time to talk about. We're more interested in COUNT 2, which is conspiracy to commit copyright infringement. So I'm going to break that down for everyone so everyone understands what that means. Because if you don't understand what the law is, you're not going to be able to find Kim.com guilty. Alright. A conspiracy is an agreement between at least two people to commit a criminal offense and they have to take an affirmative act toward the commission of that offense. So what that means is if you and your friends are sitting in a room and say, wouldn't it be great if we could rob a bank? We'd have all that money. We could just, you know, retire on an island somewhere. That is not a conspiracy. If the next day one of you goes out and buys a bunch of ski masks and duct tape and maybe some ammo for your gun, we're starting to get toward that affirmative act where now you've indicated that you're really going to carry the conspiracy out. Now what is criminal copyright infringement? It is any person who willfully infringes copyright for the purpose of commercial advantage or financial gain. That is criminal copyright infringement. And the key word here is willfully. You cannot accidentally commit copyright infringement. If you remember back to the Sony Betamax case, the Supreme Court found that the Betamax VCR device did not contribute to copyright infringement because Sony was not willfully trying to make that happen. They took no role in the copyright infringement. And you'll see it's very different from this case here. So we combine those together and we get conspiracy to commit copyright infringement. An agreement between two or people to willfully infringe copyright for commercial advantage or financial gain. Now what is the evidence that Meg upload has done this? As they went over the business model a little bit earlier, they definitely had reason to want to infringe copyright. They wanted to drive traffic. They knew what was popular. I also want to go over how content is shared on Meg upload. As I said, there's the green box there, which is the content and the blue boxes are URLs pointing to the content. Now, you may have heard of the DMCA before, the Millennium Copyright Act. And under that act copyright holders can submit a notice to a site and say, hey, you appear to have content that belongs to me. I would like you to take it down. And Meg upload did have people in charge of responding to DMCA notices. So what happened is there's all these pointers to this content and the copyright holder would say, hey, Meg upload, this is pointing at content that's mine. I have not authorized this to be on Meg upload. Please take the content down. And what Meg upload would do was say, great. We'll take your content down and remove the link that the copyright holder sent them and leave all the other links to the content intact and tell the copyright holder, look, it's gone. Go check the link. We removed your content. When in reality, many people were still sharing and downloading the copyright holders material. This is a willful act that is assisting users in infringing copyright. They've just been told that they don't have permission to have this material on their site. They've been asked to take it down. And instead of actually taking the content down as they're supposed to do under the law, they have allowed, instead they can gain shenanigans and allow the content to keep being shared. I want to go over a few emails and a large part of the indictment, which is in your DEF CON materials by the way, a large part of the indictment is emails between Mr. Vander Kolk who's the lead programmer and Mr. Ortman. Unfortunately for everyone at Meg upload, Mr. Vander Kolk did not do a very good job of deleting his emails in a timely manner. But it's fortunate for us because we get to read all sorts of things like him saying, him sending messages to the CTO of Meg upload saying, we have a funny business. We're modern day pirates. And the CTO of Meg upload responds, oh we're not pirates, we're just providing shipping services to pirates. Smitey face. So I think it's pretty clear that everyone at Meg upload knows what's going on. They know what their service is doing. They want it to succeed. As part of their business model as well, they would give reward payments to users who uploaded content that was popular because popular content drives advertising. They cut those users in on a share of the advertising. And they did not have a sophisticated system for sending out these reward payments. It was not automated, it was manual. So Mr. Vander Kolk would get emails containing lists of who to send payments to. And next to the amounts would be descriptions of why they were sending payments to those users. The description said things like 10 full popular DVD rips or key generators or porn movies. Popular DVD rips, PDF files that look like scanned magazines and they would send money based on the popularity of these items. Again, it's very clear here that everyone knows what's going on. Everyone is willfully helping the users engage in copyright infringement by paying them to upload the copyrighted material. And then we have an email here from Mr. Kim dot com. Actually a mega upload user sent this email in. I guess he didn't have a very cloaked email address. It was probably Kim dot com at mega upload. But anyway, the user sends an email saying I've been trying to watch Dexter, but the sound doesn't match up with the visual. You know, I don't really like your site, but you guys seem to have episode six and seven and no one else does. So I'm watching them on your site. Kim dot com knows he doesn't have permission to show Dexter, which is a show time show. He knows that that's copyrighted material. And what does he do? Does he tell the user, I'm sorry, can't help you out, you know, or does he send an email to anyone saying, looks like we have some copyrighted material, we don't have permission, we should take it down? No. He sends an email to the technical team and says, oh man, people are complaining about audio and visual being out of sync. We need to fix that right away because we're pissing off our customers. So even Kim dot com knows exactly what's going on. He knows there's copyright infringement going on. And instead of trying to stop it, he tries to help people have a lovely experience on mega upload, helps them watch copyright material without the rights holder permission. So again, this is a conspiracy because there's an agreement not only between mega upload and its officers, but also with the users of mega upload to engage in copyright infringement in a systematic way. And again, as Jennifer mentioned earlier, they had, they were systematically ripping off YouTube videos as well.  We want to rip them off now so we can have them for later and decide how we're going to benefit from all these videos. So now if we go back ladies and gentlemen to the elements of conspiracy commit copyright infringement, we have agreement between two or more people that's easy to see from the emails between the officers and the users of mega upload. They're clearly willing, willfully engaging in copyright infringement. This isn't some accident. This isn't like a sharing site where they're not even looking at what's being uploaded. They're sending emails back and forth. They know what's being uploaded. Users are telling them that they're looking at copyrighted content and they do nothing about it. And finally, it's clearly for commercial advantage or financial gain. You saw that as part of the YouTube emails and also because it's driving advertising to the site. That's why they cut in users in their referral programs. Therefore I think it's pretty clear from just that evidence and there's many more emails and I'm sure as the case evolves there will be many, many more emails that show that, whoops, that shows I don't know how to use PowerPoint.  That's his car. And if you can't see it, the license plate says guilty. He also had many other cards say mafia and things like that. And from the video you saw he doesn't take any of it seriously. He doesn't care. He's just after money. And ladies and gentlemen, remember it's not about whether you think copyright infringement law is the greatest thing ever. If you think the law is terrible, petition your congress people, give money to groups like the EFF. But the question here is about whether they broke US law and I think it's pretty clear they did. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I'm here to tell you that mega upload and Kim.com are not guilty. First let me remind you of the prosecutor's responsibility in this trial. Prosecution must prove to you beyond a reasonable doubt that Kim.com is guilty of conspiracy to commit criminal copyright infringement. Now there's a couple important things in there and the important thing is here. There has to be a conspiracy or an agreement to commit a crime. Okay? Not an agreement that copyright infringement is happening on the system. Not an agreement that somebody is civilly committing an infringement for which they might be civilly liable. There has to be an agreement for a crime that is willful copyright infringement. Okay? So the important thing to look at in this is what mega upload is. And mega upload was a cyber locker service just like any other cyber locker service that you can go and find on the internet today. You can go to Google Drive, to Dropbox, to any other number of services, and it is a place where people can store and share extremely large files. And people did on mega upload and on all these other services. Where filmmakers store works in progress, where people use to distribute things that they don't have home hosting for. Increasingly, as regular people are using the internet, they store and host these files and share them in the cloud. And there are lots of businesses that have this service. Maybe the people who are the heads of these businesses are less colorful than Kim.com.  But that is not a crime. So we need to remember that what we're looking at here is what they did, not the style in which they did it. Okay? We don't want people going to jail because they have on DEF CON t-shirts. We don't want people going to jail because their cars say guilty or mafia and they think that's funny. That's not what we're judging people. That's not what we're judging this on. We're judging this on whether there's beyond reasonable doubt evidence of criminal activity. Now what the prosecution only vaguely mentioned, but which you have to understand for this case, is the Digital Millennium Copyright Act and the Safe Harbor provided by the United States Congress for businesses that deal with user-generated content. Okay? Now, who here thinks that there's infringement on the internet? Everybody knows there's infringement on the internet. There's also porn out there. But as I explained to a reporter just the other day, but the infringement on the internet, if you were responsible as a service provider for seeking out and finding and policing every instance of infringement, we wouldn't have a commercial internet with user-generated content on it. It's just nobody can do that. Nobody can afford to do that. And it's not just me saying this. It's the United States Congress that said this. And what Congress held, what Congress ruled, issued a statute which said that. If you have a policy that, if you have user-generated content, people are putting stuff up on your site. And you have a policy. And the policy is when somebody notifies you that they are the copyright holder and that that particular content is infringing. And if you take it down, then you will not be liable for the infringement. Okay? They also have a provision in there about red flag knowledge, which says, again, if you come upon this red flag knowledge that there's infringing material on your system and you take it down, then again, you have no copyright liability. Now let me make a point here. You have no civil copyright liability. Never mind something you could go to prison for. You don't even have to pay for that copyright infringement if you follow the DMCA. The other thing that the courts have said about the DMCA is that this knowledge, this red flag knowledge or the knowledge when somebody writes in and says my infringement, my copyrighted materials on your service and it's infringing, it's not a general thing like I know probably somebody uploaded some Warner Brothers movies, I know this is probably whatever, this is knowledge of specific files and where they're located. Okay? So that's what the Congress said. A lot of companies may choose to do more than that, but you don't have to do more than that just to avoid having to pay money. Okay? And mega upload had lawyers and they had a policy and they took stuff down. Okay? They may not have taken the whole file down and took down the URL. Well, a lot of services do that. They call it, they basically what they do is if two people upload the same file and it's the same, they do something called de-duplication and it's a way to save space because server space is valuable and you know it may be, if I upload something and the prosecutor uploads something and it's my thing, well he might be infringing. So if somebody writes in or I write in and I say hey, he's infringing, he's not allowed to have a link to that. If they took the whole file down, then me, the legitimate user, I would lose the file. I don't want that and so they don't want that to happen. So when somebody's infringing and that link is bad or if you use a service that is de-duplication, they cut the link. They cut the infringing path. If there's another infringing path, then the copyright owner says hey, these are other ways that people are accessing this information without authorization, cut those links too. It's just a basic way to make the computer systems work efficiently so that companies can afford to provide us with these services. And this is what mega upload did. Okay? Maybe they made mistakes. Maybe there were times when they had red flag knowledge and there were particular files that they didn't take down. Maybe they didn't take stuff down. Quick enough, maybe there were problems like that. But mistakes mean at the very most that you fall outside of the DMCA safe harbor. And if you fall outside of the DMCA safe harbor, that means the copyright owner can sue you for money. It's not willful infringement. Willful means something very specific. Willful means that you had the intent to violate the law. Okay? And mega upload had a ton of lawyers. They wanted to offer this service. They knew, like anybody who operates in the world of user-generated content, that there was going to be some piracy as a general matter, that they were going to be working in this area. Everybody knows that's going to be true. But did they have specific intent along with their users? Did they agree with their users to violate the law? Well, first of all, remember, a lot of these users aren't in the United States. They don't have any intent or intention or desire to violate United States copyright law. They're just doing whatever they're doing in their countries which have their own laws. Okay, so that's thing number one. Thing number two is, was there an agreement? It can't be an agreement for copyright infringement. It can't be an agreement just to provide a service that people could use for copyright infringement. It has to be a specific agreement between Kim dot com and somebody else. You're going to intend to violate United States law and I'm going to help you do it. That's what it's got to be. There's no evidence of that. There's no evidence of anything here other than a bunch of guys trying to create this service and make it very, very popular. Okay, so another, so really what this case is about is about trying to impose criminal liability for something that you can't even, they don't even have civil liability for. Now in rebuttal, I think what you're going to hear the prosecutor get up and say is he's going to talk about copyright inducement and the doctrine of copyright inducement. It's not in any of the copyright statutes. It's judge created law and copyright infringement, direct copyright infringement means you copied, you distributed, you did public performance, something like that. And that's not what we're talking about here. There may have been some of that but we're not focused on it. What we're focused on here is whether there was this criminal copyrighted conspiracy and what the, what the government might argue is oh well DMCA safe harbor or whatever, that was just a cover. They were actually trying to induce their users to violate the law. And they are therefore, even though they're not the ones with the fingers on the keyboard doing the copyright infringement, secondarily liable, responsible for those users infringement and responsible for not stopping it. So this was something that the courts have addressed in a series of cases. One of the first of them where we talked about civil liability in this context was the, what I call the beta max case and a case involving VCRs and, or VDRs, other kinds of video recorders where people could record shows in their home. And the, the, the movie studios and TV, TV channel said this is an infringement and we blame beta max for giving people the technology that allows them to record this stuff. How many people have a thing in their home where they record stuff off the TV? It's pretty cool, right? Well, they tried to stop that back in 1984. They said that that was as bad as the Boston Strangler. And what the Supreme Court said is, if you have something that is capable of sub, of non infringing uses, capable of substantial non infringing uses, even if some people are using it for illegal uses, we're going to let it be out there because we know that that's valuable to the public and we want to let that technology evolve. Okay. And that was the law for many, many years. And then more recently, the Supreme Court sort of narrowed that law in the Groxter case. And what they said in the Groxter case was, yes, but if you have bad intent and your intent is to induce the users to infringe copyright, then you don't get to take advantage of this substantial non infringing uses rule. Then you're responsible for that.  It's not criminally liable. So, in order to find them not guilty, or in order to find them guilty, you have to believe beyond a reasonable doubt that Kim.com conspired and agreed with these users to knowing all of this stuff I just told you about US law willfully and intentionally violate US law as part of using this service, as opposed to just using the service because they wanted to host their stuff whether it be infringing or not. And so I think when we come back and you guys after your deliberations that you will return a verdict of not guilty. Thank you. Ladies and gentlemen, just a few brief comments in rebuttal. First, when council refers to an agreement between all the parties and how there's a lack of an agreement here, just keep in mind an agreement doesn't mean that they have to have like a written contract saying, yes, we're going to violate US law. This is our objective. Agreement you can imply from their actions. And I think in this case it's very clear that the make upload conspiracy agreed that this was their function was to commit copyright infringement and make money. As far as inducement goes and whether there's inducement in this case, I think there clearly is when you combine two elements that we already talked about. One is the way they treated the DMCA takedowns. When if there was hundreds, thousands of links pointing at a piece of content, the copyright holder says take the content down and they play whack-a-mole with taking down one link. It turns DMCA into a joke. It turns the copyright holder having to police every single link pointing at their content. That cannot possibly be what Congress intended. And I don't think it is. So combine their non-village of the DMCA enforcement with the payments to their users. Remember they pay users based on how popular the content is. That is the inducement, ladies and gentlemen, for them to infringe copyright. If you know you're going to get paid possibly hundreds of dollars if you have a popular video and you know that they don't really enforce copyright takedowns anyway, why wouldn't you if you're out to make a quick buck upload some videos they're copyrighted? It seems very clear from that the combination of payments and their lack of enforcement of DMCA, that that is the inducement we're talking about here. That is what's driving people uploading all the content. Now counsel did refer again to the Betamax case. And it's true, the Supreme Court says, and this is still law, that substantial non-infringing uses means that a technology company is not liable. But in the Sony Betamax case, a key factor was Sony did not know and did not encourage people to infringe. Basically Sony sold VCRs and whatever happened once someone got ahold of the VCR, they didn't have any part of and they had no way particularly of controlling it back then either. Here's very different. They know exactly what's going on with their systems. Again, refer back to the emails where they're all talking about it inside mega upload. And although there's substantial non-infringing use, the main use and the use that makes them money was the copyright infringement. And so because of that knowledge, this makes this case different from Sony Betamax and makes it much more like Rockster who were found liable for inducement. And that's my three minutes, ladies and gentlemen. So again, because they've met all of the elements and I think it's clear beyond a reasonable doubt, mega upload, Kim dot com, et cetera, are guilty of conspiracy to commit criminal copyright infringement. Thank you. This would never happen. The defense attorneys never get a rebuttal, but Jim's nice. So first of all, willfulness means you intend to violate United States law. If you find that mega upload believed that they were complying with the DMCA safe harbor, whether they actually were compliant or not, you must find them not guilty. Number two, the safe harbor, if you mess up the safe harbor and you fall outside, it's civil liability. It's not criminal liability. This is a very different thing. Number three, with Sony and the Betamax machine, they had a record button. They knew people were making copies and they knew it connected to the TV. They knew what people were doing with it. They designed it for that. And they had advertisements that told people here's all the great things you can record on your new video recorder. So they knew what was happening and that is exactly why they chose to sue them. But because there were substantial non-infringing uses, even if the majority of the uses for this technology were copyright infringing, it's still you were still allowed to distribute the technology. You're still allowed, mega upload, still allowed to distribute the service even if a lot of its users, even if most of its users decide to use it for criminal, or decide to use it for copyright infringing purposes. What they have to show is that the users knew they were violating United States law, that the users wanted to violate United States law, and that mega upload had an agreement with these users that they were going to help them intentionally and knowingly violate United States law. It's not a question of whether they felt like they were, you know, making something that was kind of edgy or cool. It's not a question of whether they knew that people were using it for infringement. It's not a question of whether, you know, they made jokes among themselves, or wore strange t-shirts, or had funny license plates. The question is, did they think they were complying with the law, and were they offering a service that has some substantial non-infringing uses where people could make something valuable but out of it, whether filmmakers or whatever. And the answer to those questions is clearly yes, and that is why you must find them not guilty. So yeah, we're going to give you like a minute to deliberate. Please be social and talk to your neighbors. I know it's DEF CON, but be social anyway. Talk amongst yourselves. I'll be back in a minute. It's still DEF CON, so we don't want to be too social. Hang on.  That's going to be a clusterfuck. Okay. All right. Let us wrap up, and we're going to vote. So, hands up all those who think Kim.com and make upload are guilty. Ooh, I got a few people. Hey, all right. Hands up all those who think they are not guilty. I think there's more people who say not guilty, but it is actually pretty close from up here. All right. So on that vote, they win at not guilty. But I have one more question.  Yeah, that's like everybody. Okay. So, yeah. We all know the jury they're going to get is not the people in this room. They're going to get your mothers and grandmothers and stuff like that. So, and now we have like 10 minutes for questions and I hope lots of people have questions. That's good. And there are lots of questions. Yes. No preponderance. It's a criminal case. I'll repeat the question. Yeah. Right. So let me let me repeat his question for those of you in here. He's saying given so much of the evidences in email and that you have to show an agreement, what would that look like? So first, let me say to show the agreement you do not necessarily need direct evidence. And this is what Jim was saying about they don't need a written contract. You can show an agreement through circumstantial evidence and the contents of the email could be circumstantial evidence that there was an agreement. So that is possible. What would that look like? That's up to the jury. And certainly there are going to be cases out there where they say this was not enough evidence of an agreement. This will be to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. This was enough, but it's going to be very fact-based. And I'm not sure I could give you an answer in this case. But Jim's argument, the prosecution's argument is going to be given the way they designed the bonus problem, but the bonus thing. Given the way that the service was designed, given what their conversations were internally, they and their users knew what was going on. And they were basically sending these people money for posting popular files. Are you going to call them? I suppose. Yes. Yes. This question is, they violated the intent of the law. You have to violate the, not the spirit of the law, but the law itself. So that's not a good argument. He's saying that you violated the intent of the law. That is true, but it's a closing argument. And in arguments, you often, you often argue things like they're violating the intent of the law. I mean, you also have to show that they violate the actual elements of the crime.  When one of the elements is willful, and very often in criminal law an element is willful, what you have to show is that people intended to violate the law. And I think that's, so it's, you know, you're really are trying to show that they knew what the law was and they wanted to violate it because they're bad. So that is kind of part of it when they have a willfulness thing. But the rest of what you said is totally right. Let's go to the guy in the back. You know, yes, you. So the question is, the evidence that the users are being paid for infringing content was quite convincing for him. Were there cases where users were paid for content that was not infringing? I would assume so. I'm not aware of it right now, but we haven't seen all the evidence. But those of us who are lawyers are writing that down and being like, if you represent to the new people in this case, find stuff where non infringing people were paid. And you know, what you're looking for there is like a filmmaker who puts up something or like Louis C.K., you know how he put up his stuff. People are beginning to sort of get rid of the middle man and put out their content themselves and get paid directly and these kinds of cyber lock services are great for that and then people will get paid based on that. So, you know, they're gonna have to look for that. What I would say is the defense attorney was it's totally susceptible to being used for that, especially as the entertainment industry evolves. So don't hold it against them that right now people didn't come up on it. Yeah, I was gonna say that the evidence we have right now is based on the indictment from the government and so they don't really concentrate on when they did good things in it. So we don't know yet. That'll come out as the case progresses. I demand the red shirt here. So the question is given that the New Zealand courts have already found that the warring execution was improper, what are the chances he's really gonna get executed or executed? Extra dieted, given how New Zealand already feels about the seizure. You know, we were talking about this a couple days, a couple weeks ago about the warrant and what effect finding that the warrant for the house was bad and the evidence suppressed. What the effect of that will be? I'm not convinced that they found a lot of good stuff with that warrant anyway. Like most of the evidence in this case is gonna be emails and conversations and things that have backups elsewhere. And so I'm not really, I mean who knows? There could have been some smoking gun in this house. But I think most of the evidence is gonna come from other places anyway. And so I don't know that that's really fatal to the case and I don't know if I have a big problem with extradition because of that. Say again? I vote not guilty. As you all should have. You always believe your own argument. Yes? One question. If it's about local copper violation, how could this seize his assets on the services? Okay, so the first question, the first comment was that Dropbox and some other services don't advertise the content. Like Mega Upload did. Although Mega Upload did advertise non-infringing content and didn't have infringing content links on its website. And then your second question was, how do they seize the assets? They have to show that the assets were the proceeds of illegal activity in order to keep, in order to seize them. You can seize them and then you move against them to forfeit them and if you show that they're the product of illegal activity then the United States government keeps it but it's a civil for forfeiture usually and not that it was the result of illegal activity. So it's a tool for the civil forfeiture is a tool that the United States government developed during the 80s drug wars. They used prolifer, like proliferatively. And I also want to mention because I forgot to mention my argument that a bunch of their servers were in the U.S. and that's one of causing the big problem right now is their servers in the U.S. were seized and now no one can get their data out of there. Carpathia still has the servers. Yes but they're being jerks but yeah. Yes so the way New Zealand were copied and sent to the United States but let's Yeah I was going to say the way seizures work like across international borders is you know it's kind of a scratch my back I'll scratch yours kind of a thing if New Zealand starts running around saying no we're not going to enforce your seizure order the next time they're there for obvious reasons you know they all want to catch bad guys and so they try not to second guess each other when it comes to those kind of things you can pick someone go ahead let's go for this gentleman there in the red shirt in the back the question is whether they were starting to do deals with content owners on mega upload and how does that go for the case and I'm not familiar with specific things like that and so often on the internet is build your user base like crazy and then figure out how to monetize it later and this is what YouTube did they had tons of stuff up there including infringing videos for many years they built this user base and then as the services evolved now they have a lot of deals with you know copyright owners who view that as a legitimate outlet for those videos it may well be in the no enterprise and that it was racketeering and that the whole thing should be taken down I'm not sure it's going to answer the question of you know mega upload practices in the past necessarily I was going to say I know the video you were talking about there's right before they got taken down there's that big video where like a bunch of music artists were like we use mega upload and it's awesome blah blah blah the thing with musical artists though he actually owns the copyrights to that song I mean just because he's on some video saying yeah share my stuff and mega upload I mean there's people who wrote the song there's his label they may actually own the copyrights so yeah I might indicate there's some non infringing uses but I don't think it's great evidence that there was some sort of permission that they could share that kind of thing okay so we have time no no no what he was saying is that musical copyright is complicated and there are many different copyrights in it and the fact that the artist gave you the video doesn't mean you have rights to all the copyright so let's take one more we'll take this gentleman right here in the front direct is you yourself did the copy did the reproduction did the distribution and the conspiracy is that you are responsible for all the copyright infringements of everybody else they would do something illegal you're responsible for all of their illegal conduct I would argue I argue there's evidence of also account too that they were some sort of overall conspiracy well maybe that's an agreement among the mega people as opposed to agreement between mega and their users the indictment's not really clear and we agreed that they probably are guilty of direct infringement in a deeper room across the way for people who still have other stuff they want to talk about thank you for coming and thank you for voting particularly for those of you who voted for me thank you very much


How challenging is it for one to start this up-skilling process because some people will say you'll hear people say no I haven't done school in such a long time so they feel you know it gets it's going to be tedious for them and they're not going to be able to cope. Talk to us through the challenges and what are some of those things that the people could do to overcome them. Okay so some of the challenges it's very common so for example we don't see them as pitfalls at all but we more see them as like restraints so a lot of the time you're soloing care for to somebody and they'll say to you how many hours a day do I need to study and that's something that is impossible for me to answer because you know I can have two learners sitting at a table and I'll never forget they both had to answer the same question one took two hours and the other person took 30 minutes so it really depends on the person's knowledge that they've gained their experience their dedication to it. Good evening and welcome to the private property podcast right here on our Facebook page thank you so much for joining us it is a weekday and it's 7 p.m. so you know what we what time it is it's time for us to talk anything and everything property so tonight I have two special guests who are going to talk to us about how to up-skill and improve your property knowledge as you know this is the one of the reasons why we have this podcast to bring you on the past information and to help you to up-skill your knowledge and your skills so Courtney and Janet are joining us tonight from proper Academy Courtney and Janet good evening hi good evening to me thank you for having us on the show and I just can't hear you just give me a minute there can you guys hear me I can hear you perfectly perfect I can hear you now so let's just really jump into the conversation tonight and let's talk reskilling up-skilling what does this mean and how does it look when we are in an industry such as property okay so sorry I'll explain the difference between the two and then jank and jump in a little bit so we've got reskilling which is something that we do throughout our career so as we go through our day to day jobs we get a new duty something's added on child is to do this is your daily work life so you're constantly having to reskill as you go through and you can do that with some courses like your CPT courses skill enhancing courses that we've got whereas when you look at up-skilling that's more like when you've done your compulsory studies and you want things to get a promotion we're looking at your higher qualifications so up-skilling is more when you're putting that extra effort into getting your higher qualification so from your in-care for you would then go to your in-care five you can even go to in-care level six and facilities manager or you can side jump into commercial property management but that's when you're actually doing something in order to grow with a higher education use them and I'll really throw this question to Courtney and say with the new technological advancements that you guys are seeing how different has the your offerings your training offerings and your up-skilling and reskilling offerings been for for the different players in the market. So when lockdown happened everybody freaked out completely and I think Pop Academy was the only really excited company because we finally got to do everything online you know we're not wasting reams and reams of paper and having our learners send three or four files through Postnet so from that point of view we were very blessed to have got our learning CETA certification and we put everything on to a new platform we've actually been through two platforms because of them allowing us to do more and more online and it's been such a great learning curve for all of us what the nice thing is is if you are busy answering a question you can push save and you maybe haven't finished the next five questions but you need to go into a meeting so you don't have to worry about a thing you can come back later carry on and once you happy you can push submit and only once you submit your assessors also answering I mean walking your work online so from that point of view it's just been amazing it has been a learning curve and the older agents have surprised us by their willingness to actually get this kind of you know take on this challenge it hasn't scared them as much and you know the younger guys they used to have the iPad at school they come out of school so they're very on top they're on top form but we've also got a good support channel to help everybody through these new learning challenges but it is way better and so from that point of view from a technology point of view I see it just as us absolutely improving a little bit more you I like the fact that you would you were touching on the adoption you know in terms of people coming in and actually using these technological advancement so is are there any specific systems that have improved your the offerings that that may be whether either paid or free services that people can take advantage of if you if someone is watching us tonight and really wants to to upskill themselves and wants to learn these new skills are they any are they any specific ones that you can mention that one can start taking advantage of immediately of course all of our courses start when the learners read you so that's one of the things that proper Academy is very proud of and we are property practitioners and always have been I think since I was seven my mom had me working on sites on a off-site development trying to help with sales agreements so what happened was when all of the the regulations came through that we had to start studying you could take a week off of your sales for that month because you were spending so much time in class trying to get your studies done so now with it all being online I mean if somebody was interested in doing a course say that you are not an estate or a broker or an estate agent property practitioner and you just want to see you know you're obviously selling your house and they might be doing it personally and there's a few things you need to look out for you can go into our skill enhancing courses they're really affordable and they give you excellent information and you can pick any of them and as soon as your payment reflects you get started straight away thank you so much for that you know so informative if you just joined us we are talking how to upskill and improve your property knowledge and I'm joined by Courtney McKenna who's the operations manager at Prop Academy as well as Janet Alexandra who is the director at Prop Academy thank you so much for tuning in and thank you so much for coming through on the socials we see those those different green hearts coming through and everybody sharing how much this this information is so precise and is right what they needed so through the week we asked everyone on on Facebook to come through on the poll and the poll we had have you always wanted to improve your property knowledge and of course it was a given everybody said yes but they they did not know where to start and I think that is where I'm going to to pick it again Janet to say where does one start with with this what in terms of which course or which which offering do I take you know I am I don't know how to upskill myself I don't know where to go where do I start what is that offering that I can say this is the one whether online or on site you know to me Courtney does this all day long I'm going to pass it over to her okay so it's a brilliant question that you have and it's actually directed at two target markets again you've got your property practitioner who's wondering you know I've got my fidelity fund certificate what do I do next what do I need to do first of all we'll definitely advise you if you go into the proper Academy website and you click on the contact us page you can send us your details and we'll phone you in the morning and go through it with you but what's nice about that contact us page is it it also has two new videos that we've put on recently and the one video is for somebody who has a fidelity fund certificate and wants to know what is their next step and the other video is for somebody who wants to get into the industry but wants to be ahead of the pack you know they want to wait until they've got a job because it's really tough out there to get a job if you don't have any sort of certificates behind your name in real estate so for the guys who have nothing behind their name and they're still trying to get a job you'll kick them off with the logbook knowledge course okay you don't need a fidelity fund certificate to do it and it's a brilliant stepping stone into the NQF level four now both of those will be compulsory down the line so as soon as they get the FFCs those will be compulsory for them so they're actually just getting it out the way so that when they do start working they can actually make money selling or renting or doing whatever they do instead of studying and then for the guys who do have their FFCs it's your standard three steps you've got your intern logbook that you need to do you've got your NQF level four in real estate that you need to do and then your PDE for exam and all of that needs to be done in a total of 24 months your logbook needs to be done in the first 12 months and where we also advise them to do your NQF four and then you've got your extra 12 months to write and pass your PDE for so we know in the industry there's been a lot of confusion as to the new regulations and how they're going to affect us that is far away we wouldn't put it out there and as we believed Janet is luckily on the board helping design the new material so for now as it as it stands and for the next at least 12 months you're going to be doing the same path of your logbook NQF four and PDE four that's to become a proxy practitioner. A couple of episodes ago we spoke on the podcast on how an estate agent can really pivot their career and make more sales you know and I believe that upskilling and reskilling is one of those ways that they'll be able to make more sales. What are the other advantages that come with upskilling and reskilling yourself from perspective of you being in the industry and being a practitioner already? What are those things that help you to become better at your work? So I found because like I mentioned earlier we are property practitioners and I'll never forget walking in a property with somebody who wants to purchase that's a purchaser and we were walking through and I have just been through so much knowledge so many courses and I have a mother who's been in real estate forever so constantly knowing about real estate and when I was talking to the clients I remember that he was a CA and he asked me a financial question and I was able to answer him correctly and it was almost as if he was testing me and I think what I've always learned from that is the more you know, this is a normal saying knowledge is power but the more you know then you gain that trust of your clients and once you've done that they will come back to you time and time again for advice if it's to buy to rent for their friends referrals so for me part of upskilling is yes great you know the knowledge but just also having that confidence to go out there and sell or rent more and really the confidence is important because at the end of the day it's sales and that's one of the things that Janet said earlier that this is at the core of it it's really sales and I want to now jump into the biggest challenges because we know nothing really comes easy not everything has its challenges how challenging is it for one to start this upskilling process because some people will say you'll hear people say no I haven't done school in such a long time so they feel you know it gets it's going to be tedious for them and they're not going to be able to cope and talk to us through the challenges and what are some of those things that the people could do to overcome them okay so some of the challenges it's very common so for example we don't see them as pitfalls at all but we more see them as like restraints so a lot of the time you're selling in care for to somebody and they'll say to you how many hours a day do I need to study and that's something that is impossible for me to answer because you know I can have two learners sitting at a table and I'll never forget they both had to answer the same question one took two hours and the other person took 30 minutes so it really depends on the person's knowledge that they've gained their experience their dedication to it so we do battle with trying to help with time management which is why we have a course on our side as well for time management because everybody's life is different somebody might live with their grand their times are different somebody might have five people in their home they can't find quiet time so everybody's got those challenges to look at but what they've just got to do is find out what works for them and then stick to it and for us the most common solution and a lot of our learners have said it to us is just to make sure no matter what happens you complete one full question a day so if it's question one a b and c no matter what happens that is what you need to do some people want to start off with it before they open their laptop and look at work because we know what happens once that happens you just get so into it so um that's one of the challenges is also just to be self disciplined enough in order to do that you've got to make personal sacrifices in order to get your qualification because you might now have less personal time with your family and work sacrifices and then the last one that we have is obviously your cost of your qualification so not everybody has you know a seven or eight grand lying in the bank and found to do their national qualifications so what we do offer is um we offer EFT debit or credit card payments and then we've gone a step further and we've um let uh pages now offer their service on our website as well so that they can break their payments into three months if they do qualify for it and um it just helps a lot of a lot of people so that is not one bulk payment i was thinking at the top of my mind was already choosing you know choosing the right provider choosing the right 100 percent choosing 100 percent you know that about one seventh of our learners are actually redoing their course because they chose price over quality um so then they end up buying their course through the cheaper provider and like you say actually choosing the course they've been advised incorrectly or they decided to purchase incorrectly without advice and they've gone down this route they've realized they're on the wrong course so that's also why we're very specific with our clients if they are going to buy we have checklists to make sure they really are on the right step right from the beginning because you don't want to have those problems down the line um an excellent thing we also do is called an agency assessment so if you have an agency and you've got five agents or 50 agents you send us specific information and we will tell you what that learner needs to do when they need to do it buy and how much time they have because we know what we're doing and um often your problem comes about where the the learner will say to you i need x you need to double short make sure that they really do need that course so many providers and so many so much information i mean we live in the in the age of big data so a lot of times it gets so difficult for someone to choose the right thing at the right time yes and also sometimes they could they could be exempted for you know for the court quite often people are doing a course when they're actually exempted for it and some people opt for that they say you know i know i'm exempt but i want the knowledge from the course because i've never been in real estate that's up to them but as long as they understand what the options are right from the beginning sure no thank you so much for that um i i just want to bring janet back in here and ask um let's talk about how the delivery and the mode of some of the the courses that you offer how do they look and i i know that um i know that we also just spoke a bit about um how one can really manage their time but let's let's talk a practical experience of somebody who's already in the course or who's looking out for the course how does it look for them okay so basically um what has happened is the education has been recently legislated with at the board and it was legislated in 2008 i think it was that all agents had to become compliant in education and this was quite a big step for for agents that had been in the marketplace for some time and it resulted in them gradually buying their course and they bought it not for the knowledge that they could attain from the course but because of the requirement of legislation so that in itself was was a bit of a problem but what we have done with our courses and it's quite amazing because when we started we um art as proper academy our um focus was on e-learning and online delivery and where everybody else was focusing on the classroom and the blackboard and the chalk and the chalk duster or whatever that thing it's called so we were totally into e-learning and what we did is we have designed our courses so that they are simple for our learners our learners go onto our platform and they will go through each module and each module will first have an explainer video it will have the learning manual that they can learn from it will have quizzes the quizzes are in the form of multiple choice um and true and you know true and false types of questions and then there are assignments as well um so our courses are very very easy to manoeuvre through and um our learners are just loving it I'm glad I'm really glad that everyone is loving it because you don't really want to go into um uh starting a qualification and it's absolutely grueling for you thank you so much for that um any advice that you would give um different property players and both of you can really come in here as well to say what advice would you give um to property players people who are in different categories in terms of uh buyers sellers uh people who are in bond convincing and the different ones what what uh advice would you give them about upskilling and reskilling in the in the field do it we've got you you have you have to you can't go into these things blindsided you can get um you really can get taken advantage of and um my very little bit of advice I'll let Jenna take over but do the short courses do the skill enhancing courses gain that little bit of advice and knowledge and then always remember when you're purchasing a course from if you have more questions about it we all property professionals so you just give us a shout and we can advise you further and that's also aimed at people who aren't agents um but just take the time to do it properly my advice is that as an agent out there um you have to earn the trust of your clients I think Courtney said that previously and now to do that you should have a wild a wide array of knowledge now what we're offering over and above the residential courses our commercial property management course and that gives you an insight into that commercial space and um it's well worthwhile doing that type of course we've also got facilities management courses there for the facilities managers out there for the portfolio managers out there there is no better thing than knowledge honestly if you want to earn the trust of your clients if you want to be the cream of the crop as an estate agent or property practitioner you need the knowledge and as we've been saying throughout the episode tonight knowledge is power but knowledge executed is even more powerful Courtney can you just talk to anyone who's watching and who's prospective students to where can they find you guys and what would they be coming for like what are your top or flagship programs that you are currently offering so we offer everything from the start to the end which is why we do what we do okay so you can go all the way from internship to full uh so property practitioner or principal property practitioner and then everything on the sides your cpd is your extra knowledge courses your fico your ppr a so we give you we've made it we've developed our company to make sure that we're not just selling you one course we're looking after you throughout your entire real estate career and as new things happen we are making sure that we're the first to get out there with the correct information put it into a course for your staff and handed out subscribe to our website on our website you'll see a little subscribe button subscribe to the news and updates because we won't be the first to tell you what happens but we'll be the first to tell you the the truth in what is happening so we won't rush out they will make sure everything is perfect and and advise them if anybody wants to know which courses to do what we've done is on our website we have a contact us button which I spoke about earlier all you have to do is send us your details and then in the morning we will call you and we'll go through it verbally discuss what your needs are and then after that we'll send you an email to confirm everything and assist you through the entire process all right thank you so much ladies for taking our time to talk to us today and giving us such important information that the the facebook family and everybody listening to us can actually action in in order to upskill themselves and gain that knowledge around the property industry thank you so much and enjoy your evening thank you thank you it's definitely a pleasure thank you so much and just like that we have reached the end of our conversation tonight in our episode thank you so much for joining us and staying to to the actual end of the conversation tonight thank you so much and have an absolute splendid evening till the next time we see you right here on the private property podcast have a good one


Hello everybody and welcome back to another tactical ASMR video. I'm very, very excited about this video because it's going to be one of my first unboxing videos. This, I've been waiting for this box for a little bit now. You're probably wondering, Johnny, what's inside the box? Good question. This is the Dara Battle Belt and Dara Holster. Let's just jump right into the unboxing before we begin. Hold on, before we get started, if you've been liking my content, please make sure to like and subscribe to the channel. This is my 13th, 14th tactical ASMR video and you guys have been enjoying it. So thank you very much. It comes in some really great ASMR packaging. Perfect for ASMR. This next bag, this is the Coyote Battle Belt with the inner belt. Let's open up, is the inner belt to the side for now? That's what I'm going to have to do is take the belt and fit it to my waist, fit it to my needs. When I go to the range, fit it to my holster and the magazines. So that in due time.


Hi folks once again welcome to this session on the number system in this session We are taking up another question and the question is to that root 2 minus root 2 is an irrational number Okay, so to prove that root 3 minus root 2 is an irrational number So in the previous sessions if you have gone through them, you would have noticed that we have done proving on how how root 2 is an irrational number we have proved that and And we discussed a method of proving in that particular session and that method is called method of contradiction, isn't it? So we discussed method of contradiction and using this method of contradiction when we know that Only two possibilities of outcomes are there for an event Then we can use the method and prove the given theorem. So hence We start with an assertion in this case also that let root 3 minus root 2 be an irrational number instead of an irrational number And we will eventually Contradict our assertion, right? So we will come up with some result where it contradicts our assertion that it is an it is a rational number Hence automatically it will become an irrational number. So we start with an assertion saying let us say Let us assume let us assume root 3 minus root 2 to be to be a Rational number to be a rational number. Okay Why we are doing it so that you know, uh, we will eventually contradict this assertion and then By logic it will automatically become an irrational number. So the moment we say It is a rational number. We know that a rational number will be having three criteria One is it must be expressed in the form of p by q where p and q are integers And q must not be equal to zero. That's condition number two and condition number three is Gcd or hcf of p and q is equal to 1 Right. So hence since root 3 minus root 2 is uh, is a rational number. So hence we can say p upon q Is equal to root 3 minus root 2 So since root 3 minus root 2 is a rational number what we are asserting Then therefore There must exist p and q two integers such that p by q is 3 minus root 3 minus root 2 So squaring both sides squaring Both sides and when we square We get rid of the root signs, isn't it? So let us square. So we'll get p square by q square Is equal to root 3 Minus root 2 whole square Which is equal to if you know the identity a plus or sorry in this case a minus b whole square is a square That is root 3 square Plus b square. That is root 2 square minus twice of ab. So root 3 into root 2 correct Simplifying what will you get you will get You will get p square upon q square is equal to 3 plus 2 minus 2 into under root 3 times 2 that is 6 correct Simplifying further you will get p square by q square Minus 5 is equal to minus root 2 by root 6. That means this implies simply 5 Minus p square by q square is equal to 2 root 6 So I just removed the negative sign from the right hand side So on the left hand side the order of the terms will change And hence now I can say 5 minus p square upon q square by 2 Is equal to root 6 Isn't it after simplification now? Let us let us see LHS. What is LHS? In LHS my dear friends if you see what is LHS LHS is 5 minus p square by q square by 2 Okay, now p and q are integers Are integers So if p and q are integers that mean that means p by q Is a p square by q square is a rational number Is a rational number isn't it that means 5 minus a rational number Will be a rational number is a Rational number Why because rational plus rational or rational minus rational is always a rational number that means 5 minus p square by q square upon 2 Is a rational number why because I am multiplying by 1 by 2 Rational number So by this logic LHS is a LHS is a Rational number but RHS my dear friends if you see RHS RHS is Root 6 and it doesn't take much time to prove that Root 6 is a irrational irrational Number that means we are trying to equate a rational number into in Rational number to irrational number that is not correct. Hence LHS will never be equal to RHS hence we contradict our own assertion What is our own our assertion was that that Root 3 minus root 2 is a Rational number that cannot be possible because it is leading to a result Which is not valid right this particular assumption led to this result that An irrational number is equal to rational number. Hence we say hence Hence we declare that root 3 minus root 2 is not a Rational not a Rational number and something is not a rational number and it is real then root 3 minus root 2 is An Irrational number guys irrational number Understood. So what did we learn in this process again an example of method of contradiction? We start with an assertion and eventually Eventually prove that it's not going to be True and hence whatever we have started as an assertion was wrong Hence the other outcome of the assertion will be true, right? So in this case again root 3 minus root 2 is an irrational number. Thank you


I like chairs, whether they are meant to enhance gaming, lounging or working. And so when we released our very first chair review back in March 18, I was surprised by all the requests for us to review a very specific chair brand I had never heard of before. So when TW offered to send us the Sihu M57 for us to review, we immediately said yes. However, I will admit that there was a part of me which didn't want to get up from the comfortable nest which is my air-on, but for purposes of science and our viewers, I got my ass off. You can learn a lot about a chair by scrutinizing parts you only see during the unboxing and assembly process. I'm Rafael from Hardware Sugar, the only PC shop in the Philippines with no BS warranty, and this is our unboxing of the Sihu M57 and our first impressions. Is this chair worth 8,500 pesos to 9,000 pesos? This is the first step to finding out. Again, special shout out to TW for being awesome when they realized we share a chair obsession. If you guys are interested in buying the Sihu M57, you can check out their Lazada store to which I'll leave a link in the video description. They seem genuinely excited about the products they sell and care enough to even follow up if you are enjoying your purchase, something we strive for in our own business. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who is concerned about paying 8,500 or 9,500 pesos for a chair that is difficult or impossible to assemble out of the box. This is not a sponsored video from TW or Sihu and so I can be as candid as I want to be, including the fact that it took me two weeks to build up the courage to unbox this guy. It's not that I wasn't excited, it's just I'm always apprehensive about assembling a chair because the instructions manual might be missing, there won't be English instructions, a part is missing or I embarrass myself by needing to have to call the supplier to teach me on how to assemble it like what I did with the Ethan chair. Packaging wise, the parts are well cushioned and individually wrapped in plastic. Some of the items are actually cushioned in boxes and a thin layer of styrofoam. Worthy to note however is that nothing beats my unpacking experience with the Charcoon chair. But that kind of excessive packaging however comes with its own problems. I respect companies that minimize package wastage and Sihu should get points for wasting less while successfully protecting their product. Keep in mind that almost every chair you buy is made in China. It does needs to make the trip from China to the Philippines or wherever you live and then a whole host of other places such as a warehouse or store in Balakan before it even gets shipped to you maybe in Cebu. So yes, how items are wrapped are important because it dictates how much of the product is left when it actually gets to you. Yes, it came with an instructions manual. However, the instructions aren't in English but the picture directions are very clear and I don't think anyone should worry about being confused during the assembly process. Alright, M620, M620, six pieces, four plus one, which one do we use? Well, six pieces because it means there are three holes for each arm so we open up the six pieces. Alright, let's do that. I now understand why chair companies place all the tools inside one transparent plastic packet. Like an action figure, it's so when the chair is being packed they literally just get one pack containing all the screws and the allen wrench rather than peeking out the exact number of screws of different screw types. Why is this important to you? Because it greatly reduces the chances that you will get a chair with missing parts. If you're ever gonna buy this chair, feel free to follow me along. First we start out by attaching the wheels to the base of the chair. I'm not using the wheels that come with the chair, instead I bought the 600 peso roller blade casters which I highly recommend everyone gets for their chair regardless of their buying a new one because it seriously upgrades the rolling functionality of the chair and it protects wood flooring and the carpet. I talked about this in almost every chair video we've done so far. Let's just go get it. Second, we attach the two arms to the seat of the chair. I like how it's just one type of allen wrench and just two types of screws. Sometimes chair companies ship several different kinds of wrenches and screws. The less the better. As I screw these in, I couldn't help but notice how this matted plastic feels and looks.  Something which I couldn't unsee when I was putting together the Ethan chair. There were no visible bumps or imperfections worth noting except maybe one. Another thing that I liked was the use of the shiny metal on the arms. Even if you can't see most of this metal as it sits underneath the chair, I like knowing it's there because it reminds me of how sturdy these arms must be. Third, we attach the chair chassis which holds a reclining lever. This left one, right one. I believe the instructions are referring to these holes. And these little dots must refer to these dots. Fits. Yeah, I guess we just start here. Fourth, we need to attach the chair seat to the backrest which was difficult to do on the floor without scratching the floor. I recommend you place it on a carpet or a bed or get a second person to help you out with this part. Lastly, it's time to attach the base to the body of the chair. And here we go. Huh, hold on. These arms don't seem right. Ah! Balik tad! Alright, in case this happens to you, you can remove and reinstall each arm without having to remove any of the other parts. Thankfully, there was just enough space for the Allen wrench to maneuver next to the recline lever. I have been using the C-HOO M57 for two weeks now and I'm still in the court-chip phase or the getting-to-know part of the relationship. For me, the M57 is like a crush I just met who I found attractive right away. It checks off all the things I should like about the chair. And as a mesh build, thus, I hardly sweat in this. And I don't need to worry about any material falling off unlike fake leather chairs. It has a headrest which I missed very much when I moved to the air on. It has armrests which move up and down and even twists from side to side, a feature which I didn't have in my favorite eight-year-old chair. It has a variety of reclining levels which you can choose to freestyle move with or choose to lock in place entirely.  And because of the wheels I got, it rolls beautifully while at the same time taking care of my wood flooring. I guess the best way to summarize my first impression of the M57 is that it's like a stormtrooper, white, smooth, clean, factory-produced and equipped with everything you might need in the battlefield or, in our case, the work environment. However, despite all that clean armor, stormtroopers die with one shot and they also miss almost every shot. The things which make the M57 so appealing are also the things which have me a little concerned. Two weeks have passed and I often find myself still readjusting my headdress to various positions over and over in order to find the ultimate complete position. Every time I think I've found it, I end up readjusting it again an hour later. Readjusting the headdress all the time isn't something that I did my old Ergo chair, which was relatively straightforward when it comes to reclining and finding the ultimate comfortable spot. And then there's my concern with the... Don't get me wrong, there is seriously a lot to like about this chair and I can say as early as now that it is priced reasonably well for what you get. However, check out our full review of the Siho M57 in our upcoming video where I get into even more specific details on everything from how the M57 compares to chairs within the same price range, how it compares to a gaming chair, how it compares with the throne of all chairs. I'll also talk about the long-term arm comfort, ergonomics, lower back support and my final conclusion if I would buy it for my own PC setup. Till then, stay safe, everyone. We want to give an extremely special thanks to our top fans who helped make all of our work possible. ITX addict Rafael James, Ian Meru, Liam Magnaje, Richard Rungkinko, John Rubin Otia and Christian Espinosa. It's good seeing all of you so regularly during our streams and again, thank you so much for the support.


This just in August is hotter than ever at Appalachian Wireless as they are slashing all normal contract pricing on all smartphones by 50% when you sign up for service. Better service, bigger saving, serving you for the last 25 years at Appalachian Wireless. The face of the Hillbilly arm drop drag races, 51-year-old Kent Rose, who had been battling cancer for the past few months, passed away early Sunday. As is with any extended illness, Kent's family is left with many medical bills and one local business in Prestonsburg is trying to help ease that burden. Sign guys in Prestonsburg is printing and selling decals that say Kent Rose is a friend of mine for only $5. Sign guys owner Brandon Patton says he owes his livelihood to Kent Rose. Without him we wouldn't be standing here because he pushed my father who was the one who helped me get started over the edge to start sign guys by explaining to him how he was going to help me with getting a lot of business through the arm drops, through his garage, through his friends and that letting my dad know I would make it and that's what pushed my dad over the edge and I've told Kent that and he knows that and without him we wouldn't be here and he meant a lot to him. Kent's passion for racing was only matched with his passion for helping people of these mountains. Kent I think did as a single person did more for this area than probably any other person. When he had the arm drop races down at Combs Airport it attracted thousands of people, race car drivers from almost 30 states and he was just such an advocate for Eastern Kentucky and the tourism of this area. He loved Prestonsburg. He loved Pinesville. He loved the kids. Nothing meant more to him than to make sure everybody had a good time and have a successful clean event. If you would like to help Kent's family with his medical bills you can attend the last event Kent Rose helped organize. The stars of the TV show Street Outlaws will be at Pops Chevrolet Monday in Prestonsburg from 12 to 4 p.m. They'll be signing autographs and selling merchandise where all the proceeds will be donated to help with Kent's medical bills. Reporting from Prestonsburg for EKB News, I'm Sean Allen.


And now our featured presentation was written by Nuka Kola Quantum. You can find it on the SCP Wiki in a link in the description below. It is under a Creative Commons 3.0 share-alike attribution license. Hello everyone! If you could please take a seat we can get started. Right. For a few minutes on the 27th of April 1986, a Floridian satellite operator pissed at the cost of HBO's pricing was able to hijack their eastern coast feed with a message of protest threatening to do the same to show time. He was caught by the Federal Trade Commission before he could make good on this threat. A year later, on the 22nd of November 1987, the signals of two Chicago television affiliates were taken over, subjecting people to a man in a rubber-max headroom mask dancing in front of sheet metal making pop culture references before having his rear-end smacked with a flyswatter by a French maid. Despite the FCC and federal investigators' best efforts, no one knows who did it to this day. Broadcast signal intrusion, pirate television, radio jamming, these have all been concerns ever since the public was first able to afford the equipment necessary to do these things. Normally it was left in the hands of the FCC or OFCOM, whichever regulator outside the Vale has jurisdiction over the affected territories. However, there are always the incidents that, obviously, they cannot handle. Take, for example, a fiasco that took place in 2003 in Parker, Arizona. Hundreds of children expecting to see the premiere of a new episode of SpongeBob SquarePants instead literally lose half an hour of their lives when the transmission is overridden and shows a new spheric info-hazard that briefly, but mercifully, leaves them comatose. Or in 2014 when a cross-dimensional bleed results in emergency alert systems across Utica, New York's radio waves, warning its citizens that the sun is about to go supernova within 24 hours, causing widespread riots and hundreds of millions of dollars in property damage before the foundation is able to intervene. Or how an advertising war between West Head media and Vikander need in the greater Wisconsin-Ontarian area across TV and radio in 2019 nearly culminates in a broken masquerade scenario. These aren't things that can simply be dealt with with viewer complaints or fines, and that is where suppression and archival site 247 and by extension the Department of Anomalous Broadcasting steps in. With the cooperation of numerous broadcasting regulators across the globe, some of the most powerful signal retrieval equipment on and off the market, and the tireless work of stationery task force Pi 247 calling all stations. Hey, why do we name it after the worst genesis album? I'm sorry, what? I said why did we name it after the worst genesis album? Because the Department of Viralology's task force already called dibs on in the air tonight. I guess formality is out the window now. Anyway, we aren't just paid to sit around and watch TV or listen to the top 40 all day, on the off chance of finding something anomalous. Broadcasting also extends as the web, so we also cooperate with site 15 in suppressing anything weird that crops up on YouTube, Twitch, TikTok, you name it. Don't even get me started on how many urban exploration channels nearly stumble upon old foundation bases. And while I can't say too much about it, given most of the details are above even my clearance level, Dr. erstwhile and the fine folks in the peratella communications are making amazing progress on something that will revolutionize interfoundation correspondence and encryption. So for those of you assigned to that sector, you lucky bastards. Hmm? Oh, speaking of the good doctor, allow me to introduce you to some of the other key members of staff you'll become acquainted with during your tenure at the department. Gaston, you Kyrie are esteemed director and who to report your coworker to if they're watching the game instead of looking for veiled breaches. Let me nip two buds right away for everyone. One. Yes, he has heard all of the jokes about his first name. Every single one. So if you're being clever, asking if he's good at expectorating, you're not too. We don't know what the U stands for. He said every single one of our guesses is wrong and he's not going to correct us. Emily Nica is our lead researcher for those of you have transferred from site 15. And yes, they're related. No, she does not think jock's band is good either. If director Kyrie is not available for you to inform about your colleagues slacking off, she is your next best bet. And of course, if it weren't for her negotiations between the foundation and the French Arkham would have been much more difficult. Don't worry, folks. We're almost done. I just need to give a quick rundown of our site sectors. We're on the ground floor right now. It doesn't really serve much of a purpose in the grand scheme of things other than for us to use as part of our cover as a radio tower station. But the view up here to the rest of the Aspen Mountains is gorgeous. Floor B1 is where our research is focused. Hundreds of us scanning signals, tapping into satellite feeds, acting off of online tips and reports and sending things off to our boys in Pi 247 when needed. 247 pun is intended. A meal's office is in the corner where it smells the most like herbal cigarettes. You couldn't miss it even if you wanted to. Floor B2 is our archival area where we keep copies of all the recordings from our investigations. From one-off, extra-normal events to ongoing groups of interest campaigns. It's not just short clips here and there either. We actually have all of Dr. Who's missing episodes intact with no cuts tucked away in a filing cabinet somewhere. Because by pure luck, a public access television channel in Boston had been broadcasting them nonstop for years. And they'd all been meticulously taped by someone who was trying to get millions from the Beebe in exchange for returning them. Preservationists would have had a field day if we hadn't got to the guy first. Oh well. Floor B3 houses our peritellic communications division. It's because of their efforts that our comms have only milliseconds of delay. Are crystal clear and don't get fucked up by all the Faraday cages that we have laying around here. There's a bunch of more technical information that I could give you about what's down there and their duties, but that's a conversation that's better given by Ray. And finally, there's Floor B4. That's where we contain the physical skips that fall under our purview. There's not that many given the majority of what we handle are suppressed, recorded or archived. But it's plenty spacious just in case. Most of them are just old CRT televisions that kept receiving analog signals even after the digital switchover. But we've also got a Fox News satellite that became sentient and nearly made a town in rural California a crater. Yes, it can communicate. And yes, it's just as racist as you'd expect. Emile's giving me the rapid up gesture, so that'll do for our little primer. Welcome to site 24-7 and the Department of Anomalous Broadcasting. What will we pick up next? Well, you'll have to stay tuned for that. Thank you very much for watching. If you enjoyed the video, hit the subscribe button and then hit the notification bell next to that, so you're notified when I upload new videos. And then head on over to patreon.com forward slash decimarian and pledge at any level, like everybody here on the screen already has, including Sinjeriki, who has pledged at $100. With luck, I have two new cables coming in today because my camera still technically works and my computer works fine, but they're not communicating with each other anymore. So I figured the problem that I was having was cables. So on the first one, I actually had some money from Patreon. I bought two sets of new cables of different kinds, USB and a HDMI, and we're going to see if they work. If so, you'll be able to see me in the next video. If not, I will have to come up with other solutions. Either way, it's nice to know that I'm not alone out here and I will see you all again on Tuesday.