Chapter 1 of The Lectures of Colonel Robert Green-Ingersall, Volume 2. Chapter 1. Thomas Paine. Delivered in Central Music Hall, Chicago, January 29, 1880, from the Chicago Times Verbatim Report. Ladies and gentlemen, it so happened that the very first speech, the very first public speech I ever made, took occasion to defend the memory of Thomas Paine. I did it because I had read a little something of the history of my country. I did it because I felt indebted to him for the liberty I then enjoyed, and whatever religion may be true, in gratitude is the blackest of crimes. And whether there is any God or not, in every star that shines, gratitude is a virtue. The man who will tell the truth about the dead is a good man, and for one about this man, I intend to tell just as near the truth as I can. Most history consists in giving the details of things that never happened. Most biography is usually the lie coming from the mouth of flattery, or the slander coming from the lips of malice. And whoever attacks the religion of a country will in his turn be attacked. Whoever attacks a superstition will find that superstition defended by all the meanness of ingenuity. Whoever attacks a superstition will find that there is still one weapon left in the arsenal of Jehovah, slander. I was reading yesterday a poem called The Light of Asia, and I read in that how a booed, seeing a Tigris perishing of thirst with her mouth upon the dry stone of a stream, with her two cubs sucking at her dry and empty dugs, this booed took pity upon this wild and famishing beast, and throwing from himself the yellow robe of his order, and stepping naked before this Tigris said, Here is meat for you and your cubs. In one moment the crooked daggers of her claws ran riot in his flesh, and in another he was devoured. Such, during nearly all the history of this world, has been the history of every man who has stood in front of superstition. Thomas Paine, as has been so eloquently said by the gentleman who introduced me, was a friend of man, and whoever is a friend of man is also a friend of God, if there is one. But God has had many friends who were the enemies of their fellow men. There is but one test by which to measure any man who has lived. Did he leave this world better than he found it? Did he leave in this world more liberty? Did he leave in this world more goodness, more humanity than when he was born? That is the test. And whatever may have been the faults of Thomas Paine, no American who appreciates liberty, no American who believes in true democracy and pure republicanism should ever breathe one word against his name. Every American with the divine mantle of charity should cover all his faults and with a never-tiring tongue should recount his virtues. He was a common man. He did not belong to the aristocracy. On the head of his father God had never poured the divine petroleum of authority. He had not the misfortune to belong to the upper classes. He had the fortune to be born among the poor and to feel against his great heart the throb of the toiling and suffering masses. Neither was it his misfortune to have been educated at Oxford. What little sense he had was not squeezed out at Westminster. He got his education from books. He got his education from contact with fellow men. And he thought that a man is worth just what nature impresses upon him. A man standing by the sea or in a forest or looking at a flower or hearing a poem or looking in the eyes of the woman he loves receives all that he is capable of receiving. And if he is a great man, the impression is great. And he uses it for the purpose of benefiting his fellow man. Thomas Paine was not rich. He was poor. And his father before him was poor. And he was raised a sailmaker, a very lowly profession. And yet that man became one of the mainstays of liberty in this world. At one time he was an excise man like Burns. Burns was once, speak it softly, a gaeger. And yet he wrote poems that will wet the cheek of humanity with tears as long as the world travels in its orb around the sun. Poverty was his brother, necessity his master. He had more brains than books, more courage than politeness, more strength than polish. He had no veneration for old mistakes, no admiration for ancient lies. He loved the truth for truth's sake and for man's sake. He saw oppression on every hand, injustice everywhere, hypocrisy at the altar, venality on the beach, tyranny on the throne, and with a splendid courage he espoused the cause of the weak against the strong, of the enslaved, many against the titled few. In England he was nothing. He belonged to the lower classes, that is, the useful people. England depended for her prosperity upon her mechanics and her thinkers, her sailors and her workers, and they are the only men in Europe who are not gentlemen. The only obstacles in the way of progress in Europe were the nobility and the priests, and they are the only gentlemen. This and his native genius constituted his entire capital, and he needed no more. He found the colonies clamoring for justice, whining about their grievances, upon their knees at the foot of the throne imploring that mixture of idiocy and insanity george the third by the grace of God for a restoration of their ancient privileges. They were not endeavouring to become free men, but were trying to soften the heart of their master. They were perfectly willing to make it brick if Pharaoh would furnish the straw. The colonists wished for, hoped for, and prayed for reconciliation. They did not dream of independence. Pain gave to the world his common sense. He was the first argument for separation, the first assault upon the British form of government, the first blow for a republic, and it aroused our fathers like a trumpet's blast. He was the first to perceive the destiny of the new world. No other pamphlet ever accomplished such wonderful results. It was filled with arguments, reasons, persuasions, and unanswerable logic. It opened a new world. It filled the present with hope and the future with honour. Everywhere the people responded, and in a few months the Continental Congress declared the colonies free and independent states. A new nation was born. It is simple justice to say that pain did more to cause the Declaration of Independence than any other man. Neither should it be forgotten that his attacks upon Great Britain were also attacks upon monarchy, and while he convinced the people that the colonies ought to separate from the mother country, he also proved to them that a free government is the best that can be instituted among men. In my judgment Thomas Paine was the best political writer that ever lived. What he wrote was pure nature, and his soul and his pen ever went together. Ceremony, pageantry, and all the paraphernalia of power had no effect upon him. He examined into the why and wherefore of things. He was perfectly radical in his mode of thought. Nothing short of the bedrock satisfied him. His enthusiasm for what he believed to be right knew no bounds. During all the dark scenes of the revolution, never for a moment did he despair. Year after year his brave words were ringing through the land, and by the bifuak fires the weary soldiers read the inspiring words of common sense. Filled with ideas sharper than their swords, and consecrated themselves anew to the cause of freedom. Paine was not content with having aroused the spirit of independence, but he gave every energy of his soul to keep that spirit alive. He was with the army. He shared its defeats, its dangers, and its glory, when the situation became desperate, when gloom settled upon all, he gave them the crisis. It was a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night, leading the way to freedom, honour, and glory. He shouted to them, these are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will in this crisis shrink from the service of his country. But he that stands it now deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. To those who wished to put the war off to some future day, with a lofty and touching spirit of self-sacrifice, he said, every generous parent should say, if there must be war, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace. To the cry that Americans were rebels, he replied, he that rebels against reason is a real rebel, but he that in defense of reason rebels against tyranny has a better title to defender of the faith than George III. Some said it was to the interest of the colonies to be free. Payne answered this by saying, to know whether it be the interest of the continent to be independent, we need ask only this simple easy question. Is it the interest of man to be a boy all his life? He found many who would listen to nothing, and to them he said that to argue with the man who has renounced his reason is like giving medicine to the dead. This sentiment ought to adorn the walls of every orthodox church. There is a world of political wisdom in this. England lost her liberty in a long chain of right reasoning from wrong principles, and there is real discrimination in saying the Greeks and Romans were strongly possessed of the spirit of liberty, but not the principles, for at the time they were determined not to be slaves themselves. They employed their power to enslave the rest of mankind. In his letter to the British people in which he tried to convince them that war was not to their interest, occurs the following passage, brimful of common sense. War never can be the interest of a trading nation any more than quarrelling can be profitable to a man in business. But to make war with those who trade with us is like setting a bulldog upon a customer at the shop door. The writings of Paine fairly glitter with simple, compact, logical statements that carry conviction to the dullest and most prejudicial. He had the happiest possible way of putting the case in asking questions in such a way that they answer themselves. And in stating his premises so clearly that the deduction could not be avoided. Day and night he labored for America, month after month, year after year, he gave himself to the great cause until there was a government of the people and for the people. And until the banner of the stars floated over a continent redeemed and consecrated to the happiness of mankind. At the close of the revolution no one stood higher in America than Thomas Paine. The best, the wisest, the most patriotic were his friends and admirers and had he been thinking only of his own good he might have rested from his toils and spent the remainder of his life in comfort and in ease. He could have been what the world is pleased to call respectable. He would have died surrounded by clergymen, warriors and statesmen and at his death there would have been an imposing funeral miles of carriages, civic societies, salvos of artillery, a nation in mourning and above all a splendid monument covered with lies. He chose rather to benefit mankind. At that time the seeds sown by the great infidels were beginning to bear fruit in France. The 18th century was crowning its gray hairs with the wreath of progress. On every hand science was bearing testimony against the church. Voltaire had filled Europe with light. Dullbach was giving to the elite of Paris the principles contained in his system of nature. The encyclopedists had attacked superstition with information for the masses. The foundation of things began to be examined. If you had the courage to keep their shoes on and let the bush burn, miracles began to get scarce. Everywhere the people began to inquire. America had set an example to the world. The word liberty was in the mouths of men and they began to wipe the dust from their superstitious knees. The dawn of a new day had appeared. Thomas Paine went to France. In the new movement he threw all his energies. His fame had gone before him and he was welcomed as a friend of the human race and as a champion of free government. He had never relinquished his intention of pointing out to his countrymen the defects, absurdities and abuse of the English government. For this purpose he composed and published his greatest political work, The Rights of Man. This work should be read by every man and woman. It is concise, accurate, rational, convincing and unanswerable. It shows great thought and intimate knowledge of the various forms of government, deep insight into the very springs of human action and a courage that compels respect and admiration. The most difficult political problems are solved in a few sentences. The venerable arguments in favor of wrong are refuted with a question, answered with a word. For forcible illustration, apt comparison, accuracy and clearness of statement and absolute thoroughness, it has never been excelled. The fears of the administration were aroused and Paine was prosecuted for libel and found guilty and yet there is not a sentiment in the entire work that will not challenge the admiration of every civilized man. It is a magazine of political wisdom, an arsenal of ideas and an honor not only to Thomas Paine, but to nature itself. It could have been written only by the man who had the generosity, the exalted patriotism, the goodness to say, the world is my country and to do good my religion. There is in all the utterances of the world no grander, no sublimer sentiment. There is no creed that can be compared with it for a moment. It should be wrought in gold, adorned with jewels, and impressed upon every human heart. The world is my country and to do good my religion. In 1792 Paine was elected by the Department of Calais as their representative in the National Assembly. So great was his popularity in France that he was selected about the same time by the people of no less than four departments. Upon taking his place in the assembly he was appointed as one of a committee to draft a constitution for France. Had the French people taken the advice of Thomas Paine there would have been no rain of terror. The streets of Paris would not have been filled with blood in that rain of terror. There were killed in the city of Paris not less, I think, than seventeen thousand people. And on one night in the massacre of Saint Bartholomew there were killed by assassination over sixty thousand souls, men, women, and children. The revolution would have been the grandest success of the world. The truth is that Paine was too conservative to suit the leaders of the French Revolution. They, to a great extent, were carried away by hatred and a desire to destroy. They had suffered so long, they had borne so much that it was impossible for them to be moderate in the hour of victory. Besides all this the French people had been so robbed by the government, so degraded by the church they were not fit material with which to construct a republic. Many of the leaders longed to establish a beneficent and just government, but the people asked for revenge. Paine was filled with a real love for mankind. His philanthropy was boundless. He wished to destroy monarchy, not the monarch. He voted for the destruction of tyranny and against the death of the tyrant. He wished to establish a government on a new basis, one that would forget the past, one that would give privileges to none and protection to all. In the assembly where all were demanding the execution of the king, where to differ with the majority was to be suspected and where to be suspected was almost certain death, Thomas Paine had the courage, the goodness and the justice to vote against death. To vote against the execution of the king was a vote against his own life. This was the sublimity of devotion to principle. For this he was arrested, imprisoned and doomed to death. There is not a theologian who has ever maligned Thomas Paine that has the courage to do this thing. When Louis Capet was on trial for his life before the French convention, Thomas Paine had the courage to speak and vote against the sentence of death. In his speech I find the following splendid sentiments. My contempt and hatred for monarchical governments are sufficiently well known and my compassion for the unfortunate friends or enemies is equally profound. I have voted to put Louis Capet on trial because it was necessary to prove to the world the perfidy, the corruption and the horror of the monarchical system. To follow the trade of a king destroys all morality just as the trade of a jailer deadens all sensibility. Make a man a king today and tomorrow he will be a brigand. Had Louis Capet been a farmer he might have been held in esteem by his neighbors and his wickedness results from his position rather than from his nature. Let the French nation purge the glory of kings without soiling itself with their impure blood. Let the United States be the asylum of Louis Capet where in spite of the overshadowing miseries and crimes of a royal life he will learn by the continual contemplation of the general prosperity that the true system of government is not that of kings but of the people. I am an enemy of kings but I cannot forget to the human race. It is always delightful to pursue that course where policy and humanity are united as France has been the first of all the nations of Europe to destroy royalty. Let it be the first to abolish the penalty of death. As a true republican I consider kings as more the objects of contempt than of vengeance. Search the records of the world to use sublimer acts than that of Thomas Paine boating against the king's death. He, the hater of despotism the abhorrer of monarchy the champion of the rights of man the republican accepting death to save the life of a deposed tyrant of a thrownless king.  In his life he had been the disinterested friend of man he had labored not for money not for fame but for the general good he had aspired to know office he had no recognition of his services but had ever been content to labor as a common soldier in the army of progress confining his efforts to know country looking upon the world as his field of action filled with a genuine love for the right found himself imprisoned by the very people he had striven to save had his enemies succeeded in bringing him to the block he would have escaped the calamities and the hatred of the christian world and let me tell you how near they came getting him to the block he was in prison there was a door to his cell it had two doors a door that opened in and an iron door that opened out it was a dark passage and whenever they concluded to cut a man's head off the next day an agent went along and made a chalk mark upon the door where the poor prisoner was bound Mr. Barlow the American minister happened to be with him and the outer door was shut that is open against the wall and the inner door was shut and when the man came along whose business it was to mark the door for death he marked this door where Thomas Paine was but he marked the door that was against the wall so when it was shut the mark was inside and the messenger of death passed by on the next day if that had happened in favor of some Methodist preacher they would have clearly seen not simply the hand of God but both hands in this country at least he would have ranked with the proudest names on the anniversary of the declaration his name would have been upon the lips of all orators and his memory in the hearts of all the people Thomas Paine had not finished his career he had spent his life thus far in destroying the power of kings and now turned his attention to the priests he knew that every abuse had been embalmed in scripture that every outrage was in partnership with some holy text he knew that the throne sculpt behind the altar and both behind a pretended revelation of God by this time he had found that it was of little use to free the body and leave the mind in chains he had explored the foundations of despotism and had found them infinitely rotten he had dug under the throne and it occurred to him that he would take a look behind the altar the result of this investigation was given to the world in the age of reason from the moment of its publication he became infamous he was calumniated beyond measure to slander him was to secure the thanks of the church all his services were instantly forgotten, disparaged or denied he was shunned as though he had been a pestilence most of his old friends forsook him he was regarded as a moral plague and at the bare mention of his name the bloody hands of the church were raised in horror he was denounced as the most despicable of men not content with following him to his grave they pursued him after death with redoubled fury and recounted with infinite gusto and satisfaction the supposed horrors of his death bed, gloried in the fact that he was forlorn and friendless and gloated like fiends over what they supposed to be the agonizing remorse of his lonely death it is wonderful that all his services are thus forgotten it is amazing that one kind word did not fall from some pulpit that someone did not accord to him at least honesty strange that in the general denunciation someone did not remember his labor for liberty his devotion to principle his zeal for the rights of his fellow man he had by brave and splendid effort associated his name with the cause of progress he had made it impossible to write the history of political freedom with his name left out he was one of the creators of light one of the heralds of the dawn he hated tyranny in the name of kings and in the name of god with every drop of his noble blood he believed in liberty and justice and in the sacred doctrine of human equality under these divine banners he fought the battle of his life in both worlds he offered his blood for the good of man in the wilderness of america in the french assembly in the somber cell waiting for death he was the same unflinching unwavering friend of his race the same undaunted champion of universal freedom and for this he has been hated for this the church has violated even his grave this is enough to make one believe that nothing is more natural than for men to devour their benefactors the people in all ages have crucified and glorified whoever lifts his voice against abuses whoever arraigns the past at the bar of the present whoever asks the king to show his commission or question the authority of the priest will be denounced as the enemy and god in all ages reason has been regarded as the enemy of religion nothing has been considered so pleasing to the deity as a total denial of the authority of your own mind self-reliance has been thought deadly sin and the idea of living and dying without the aid and consolation of superstition has always horrified the church by some unaccountable infatuation belief has been and still is considered of immense importance all religions have been based upon the idea that god will forever reward the true believer and eternally damn the man who doubts or denies belief is regarded as the one essential thing to practice justice to love mercy is not enough you must believe some incomprehensible creed you must say once one is three and three times one is one the man who practiced every virtue but failed to believe was executed nothing so outrageous the feelings of the church as a moral unbeliever nothing so horrible as a charitable atheist when pain was born the world was religious the pulpit was the real throne and the churches were making every effort to crush out of the brain the idea that it had the right to think he again made up his mind to sacrifice himself he commenced with the assertion that any system of religion that had anything in it that shocks the mind of a child cannot be a true system what a beautiful what a tender sentiment no wonder the church began to hate him he believed in one god and no more after his life he hoped for happiness he believed that the true religion consisted in doing justice loving mercy in endeavoring to make our fellow creatures happy and in offering to god the fruit of the heart he denied the inspiration of the scriptures this was his crime he contended that it is a contradiction in terms to call anything a revelation that comes to us at second hand either verbally or in writing he asserted that revelation is necessarily limited to the first communication and that after that it is only an account of something which another person says was a revelation to him we have only his word for it as it was never made to us this argument never had been and probably never will be answered he denied the divine origin of christ and showed conclusively that the pretended prophecies of the old testament lead no reference to him whatsoever and yet he believed that christ was a virtuous and amiable man at the morality he taught and practiced was of the most benevolent and elevated character and that it had not been exceeded by any upon this point he entertained the same sentiments now held by the unitarians and in fact by all the most enlightened christians in his time the church believed and taught that every word in the bible was absolutely true since his day it has been proven false in its cosmogony false in its astronomy false in its chronology and geology false in its history so far as the old testament is concerned false in almost everything there are but few if any scientific men who apprehend that the bible is literally true who on earth at this day would pretend to settle any scientific question by a text from the bible the old belief is confined to the ignorant and zealous the church itself will before long be driven to occupy the position of thomas pain the best minds of the orthodox world today are endeavoring to prove the existence of a personal deity all other questions occupy a minor place you are no longer asked to swallow the bible whole whale jona and all you are simply required to believe in god and pay your pure rent there is not now an enlightened minister in the world who will seriously contend that samson's strength was in his hair or that the necromancers of egypt could turn water into blood and pieces of wood into serpents these follies have passed away and the only reason that the religious world can now have for disliking pain is that they have been forced to adopt so many of his opinions pain thought the barbarities of the old testament's inconsistent with what he deemed the real character of god he believed the murder massacre and indiscriminate slaughter had never been commanded by the deity he regarded much of the bible as childish unimportant and foolish the scientific world entertains the same opinion pain attacked the bible precisely in the same spirit in which he had attacked the pretensions of the kings he used the same weapons all the pump in the world could not make him cower his reason knew no holy of holies except the abode of truth the sciences were then in their infancy the attention of the really learned had not been directed to an impartial examination of our pretended revelation it was accepted by most as a matter of course the church was all powerful and no one else unless thoroughly imbued with the spirit of self sacrifice thought for a moment of disputing the fundamental doctrines of christianity the infamous doctrine that participation depends upon belief upon a mere intellectual convention was then believed and preached to doubt was to secure the damn nation of your soul this absurd and devilish doctrine shocked the common sense of thomas pain and he denounced it with the fervor of honest indignation this doctrine although infinitely ridiculous has been nearly universal and has been as hurtful as senseless for the overthrow of this infamous tenet pain exerted all his strength he left few arguments to be used by those who should come after him and he used none that have been refuted the combined wisdom and genius of all mankind cannot possibly conceive of an argument against liberty of thought neither can they show why anyone should be punished either in this world or another for acting honestly in accordance with reason and yet a doctrine with every possible argument against it has been and still is believed and defended by the entire orthodox world can it be possible that we have been endowed with reason simply that our souls may be caught in its toils and snares that we may be led by its false and delusive glare out of the narrow path that leads to way into the broad way of everlasting death is it possible that we have been given reason simply that we may through faith ignore its deductions and avoid its conclusions ought the sailor to throw away his compass and depend entirely upon the fog if reason is not to be depended upon in matters of religion that is to say in respect to our duties to the deity why should it be drawn in matters respecting the rights of our fellows why should we throw away the law given to Moses by God himself and have the audacity to make some of our own how dare we drown the thunders of Sinai by calling the eyes and nays in a petty legislature if reason can determine what is merciful what is just the duties of man to man what more do we want time or eternity down forever down with any religion that requires upon its ignorant altar its sacrifice of the goddess reason that compels her to abdicate forever the shining throne of the soul strips from her form the imperial purple snatches from her hand the scepter of thought and makes her the bond woman of senseless faith if a man should tell you he had the most beautiful painting in the world and after taking you where it was should insist upon having your eyes shot you would likely suspect either that he had no painting or that it was some pitiful dog should he tell you that he was a most excellent performer on the violin and yet refused to play unless your ears were stopped you would think to say the least of it that he had an odd way of convincing you of his musical ability but would this be any more wonderful than that of a religionist who asks that before examining his creed you will have the kindness to throw away your reason the first gentleman says keep your eyes shut my picture will bear everything but being seen keep your ears stopped my music objects to nothing but being heard the last says away with your reason my religion dreads nothing but being understood so far as I am concerned I most cheerfully admit that most Christians are honest and most ministers sincere we do not attack them we attack their creed we accord to them the same rights that we ask for ourselves we believe that their doctrines are hurtful and I am going to do what I can against them we believe that the frightful text he that believes shall be saved and he that believeth not shall be damned has covered the earth with blood you might as well say that all that have red hair shall be damned it has filled the heart with arrogance cruelty and murder it has caused the religious wars bound hundreds of thousands to the stake founded inquisitions filled dungeons invented instruments of torture taught the mother to hate filled the world filled the world with ignorance persecuted the lovers of wisdom built the monasteries and convents made happiness a crime investigation a sin and self-reliance a blasphemy it has poisoned the springs of learning misdirected the energies of the world filled all countries with want housed the people in hovels fed them with common and bought for the efforts of a few brave infidels it would have taken the world back to the midnight of barbarism and left the heavens without a star the maligners of pain say that he had no right to attack this doctrine because he was unacquainted with the dead languages and for this reason it was a piece of pure impudence to investigate the scriptures is it necessary to understand Hebrew in order to know that cruelty is not a virtue that murder is inconsistent with infinite goodness and that eternal punishment can be inflicted upon man only by an eternal fiend is it really essential to conjugate the Greek verbs before you can make up your mind as to the probability of dead people getting out of their graves must one be versed in Latin before he is entitled to express his opinion as to the genuineness of a pretended revelation from God common sense belongs exclusively to no tongue logic is not confirmed to nor has it been buried with the dead languages pain attacked the Bible as it is translated if the translation is wrong let its defenders correct it the Christianity of pains day is not the Christianity of our time there has been a great improvement since it is better now because there is less of it 150 years ago the foremost preachers of our time that gentleman who preaches in this magnificent hall would have perished at the stake lord lord how John Calvin would have liked to have roasted this man and the perfume of his burning flesh would have filled heaven with joy a universalist would have been torn to pieces in England Scotland and America Unitarians would have found themselves in the stocks pelted by the rabble with dead cats after which their ears would have been cut off their tongues bored and their foreheads branded less than 150 years ago the following law was enforced in Maryland be it enacted by the right honourable the lord proprietor by and with the advice and consent of his lordship's honour and the upper and lower houses of the assembly and the authority of the same that if any person shall hereafter within this province willingly maliciously and advisedly by writing or speaking blaspheme or curse god or deny our saviour Jesus Christ to be the son of god or shall deny the holy trinity the father son and the holy ghost or the god head of any of the three persons or the unity of the god head or shall utter any profane words concerning the holy trinity or the persons thereof and shall therefore be convicted by verdict shall for the first offence be bored through the tongue and find 20 pounds to be levied on his body as for the second offence the offender shall be stigmatised by burning in the forehead the letter B and find 40 pounds and that for the third offence the offender shall suffer death without the benefit of clergy. The strange thing about this law is that it has never been repealed and was in force in the District of Columbia up to 1875. Laws like this were in force in most of the colonies and in all countries where the church had power. In the Old Testament the death penalty was attached hundreds of offences. It has been the same in all Christian countries today in civilised governments the death penalty is attached only to murder and treason and in some it has been entirely abolished.  In Scotland the Kirk was at the summit of its power. It was a full sister of the Spanish Inquisition. It waged war upon human nature. It was the enemy of happiness, the hater of joy and the despiser of liberty. It taught parents to murder their children rather than to allow them to propagate error. If the mother held opinions of which the infamous Kirk disapproved her children were taken from her arms her babe from her very bosom and she was not allowed to see them or write them a word. It would not allow shipwrecked sailors to be rescued from drowning on Sunday. Oh, you have no idea what a must it kicks up in heaven to have anybody swim on Sunday. It fills all the wheeling worlds with sadness to see a boy in a boat and the attention of the recording secretary is called to it. In a voice of thunder they say upset him. It sought to annihilate pleasure to pollute the heart by filling it with religious cruelty and gloom and to change mankind into a vast horde of pious heartless fiends. One of the most famous scotch divines said the Kirk holds that religious toleration is not far from blasphemy and this same scotch Kirk denounced beyond measure the man who had the moral grandeur to say a world is my country and to do good my religion. And this same Kirk abhorred the man who said any system of religion that shocks the mind of a child cannot be a true system. At that time nothing so delighted the church as the beauties of endless torment and listening to the weak wailing of damned infants struggling in the slimy coils and poison folds of the worm that never dies. About the beginning of the 19th century a boy by the name of Thomas Aikenhead was indicted and tried at Edinburgh for having denied the inspiration of the scriptures and for having on several occasions the scaffold wished himself in hell that he might get warm notwithstanding the poor boy recanted and begged for mercy he was found guilty and hanged his body was thrown in a hole at the foot of the scaffold and covered with stones and though his mother came with her face covered with tears begging for the corpse she was denied and driven away in the name of charity. That is religion and in the velvet of their tiger just give them the power and see how quick I would leave this part of the country they know I am going to be burned forever they know I am going to hell but that don't satisfy them they want to give me a little foretaste here prosecutions and executions like these were common in every Christian country and all of them based upon the belief that an intellectual conviction is a crime no wonder the church hated and traduced the author of the reason. England was filled with Puritan gloom and Episcopal ceremony the ideas of crazy fanatics and extravagant poets were taken as sober facts Milton had clothed Christianity in the soiled and faded finery of the gods had added to the story of Christ the fables of mythology he gave to the Protestant church the most outrageously material ideas of the deity he turned all the angels into soldiers put heaven a battlefield put Christ in uniform and describe God as a militia general his works were considered by the Protestants nearly as sacred as the Bible itself and the imagination of the people was thoroughly polluted by the horrible imagery the sublime absurdity of the blind Milton heaven and hell were realities the judgment day was expected books of accounts would be opened every man would hear the charges God was supposed to sit upon a golden throne surrounded by the tallest angels with harps in their hands and crowns on their heads the goats would be thrust into eternal fire on the left while the Orthodox sheep on the right were to gamble on sunny slopes forever and ever so all the priests were willing to save the sheep for half the wall the nation was profoundly ignorant and consequently extremely religious so far the belief was concerned in Europe liberty was lying chained up in the inquisition a white bosom stained with blood in the new world the Puritans had been hanging and burning in the name of God and selling white Quaker children into slavery in the name of Christ who said suffer little children to come unto me under such conditions progress was impossible someone had to lead the way the church is and always has capable of a forward movement religion always looks back the church has already reduced Spain to a guitar Italy to a hand organ and Ireland to exile someone not connected with the church had to attack the monster that was eating out the heart of the world someone had to sacrifice himself for the good of all the people were in the most abject slavery their manhood had been taken from them by pump by pageantry and power progress is born of doubt and inquiry the church never doubt never inquires to doubt is heresy to inquire is to admit that you do not know the church does neither more than a century ago Catholicism wrapped in robes red with the innocent blood of millions holding in her frantic clutch crowns and sceptres honors and gold the keys of heaven and hell tramping beneath her feet the liberties of nations in the proud movement of almost universal dominion felt within her heartless breast the deadly dagger of Voltaire from that blow the church can never recover livid with hatred she launched her eternal anathema at the great destroyer and ignorant Protestants have echoed the curse of Rome in our country the church was all powerful and although divided into many sects would instantly unite to repel a common foe pain did for Protestantism what Voltaire did for Catholicism pain struck the first blow the age of reason did more to undermine the power of the Protestant church than all other books then known it furnished an immense amount of food for thought it was written for the average mind and is a straightforward honest investigation of the bible and of the Christian system pain did not falter from the first page to the last he gives you his candid thought and candid thoughts are always valuable the age of reason has liberalized us all it put arguments in the mouths of the people it put the church on the defensive it enabled somebody in every village to corner the person it made the world wiser and the church better it took power from help it and divided it among the pews just in proportion that the human race has advanced the church has lost its power there is no exception to this rule no nation ever materially advanced that held strictly to the religion of its founders no nation ever gave itself wholly to the control of the church without losing its power its honor and existence every church pretends to have found the exact truth this is the end of progress why pursue that which you have why investigate when you know every creed is a rock in running water humanity sweeps by it every creed cries to the universe halt a creed is the ignorant past bullying the enlightened presence the ignorant are not satisfied with what can be demonstrated science too slow for them so they invent creeds they demand completeness a sublime segment a grand fragment are of no value to them they demand the complete circle the entire structure in music they want a melody with a recurring accent at measured periods in religion they insist upon immediate answers to the questions of creation and destiny the alpha and omega of all things must be in the alphabet of their superstition a religion that cannot answer every question and guess every conundrum is in their estimation worse than worthless they desire a kind of theological dictionary a religious ready rekenner together with guide boards at all crossings and turns they mistake impudence for authority solemnity for wisdom and pathos for inspiration the beginning and the end are what they demand the grand flight of the eagle is nothing to them they want the nest in which he was hatched and especially the dry limb upon which he roosts anything that can be learned is hardly worth knowing the present is considered of no value in itself happiness must not be expected this side of the clouds and can only be attained by self denial and faith not self denial for the good of others but for the salvation of your own sweet self pain denied the authority of bibles and creeds this was his crime and for this the world shut the door in his face and emptied its slops upon him from the windows I challenge the world to show that Thomas Payne ever wrote one one word in favor of tyranny in favor of immorality one line one word against what he believed to be for the highest and best interest of mankind one line one word against justice charity or liberty and yet he has been pursued as though he had been a fiend from hell his memory has been execrated as though he had murdered some Uriah for his wife driven some Hagar into the desert to starve with his child upon her bosom defiled his own daughters ripped open with the sword the sweet bodies of loving and innocent women advised one brother to assassinate another kept a harem with 700 wives and 300 concubines or had persecuted Christians even unto strange cities the church has pursued pain to deter others the church used painting music and architecture simply to degrade mankind but there are men that nothing can or there have been at all times brave spirits that dared even the gods some proud head has always been above the waves old diogenes with his mantle upon him stiff and trembling with age caught a small animal bred upon people went into the pantheon the temple of the gods and took the animal upon his thumbnail and pressing it with the other he sacrificed diogenes to all the gods just as good as anything in every age some diogenes has sacrificed to all the gods true genius never cowers and there is always some samson feeling for the pillars of authority cathedrals and domes and chimes and chants temples frescoed and grained and carved and gilded with gold altars and tapers and paintings of virgin and babe censer and chalice chasable pattern and alb organs and anthems and incense rising to the winged and blessed manifold anise and stole crosses and crojures tiaras and crowns mitres and missiles and masses rosaries relics and robes and saints and windows stained as with the blood of Christ never never for one moment awed the brave proud spirit of the infidel he knew that all the pomp and glitter had been purchased with liberty that priceless jewel of the soul in looking at the cathedral he remembered the dungeon the music of the organ was not loud enough to drown the clank of fetters he could not forget that the taper had lighted the faggot he knew that the cross adorned the hilt of the sword and so where others worshipped he wept and scorned he knew that across the open bible lay the sword of war and so where others worshipped he looked with scorn and wept and so it has been through all the ages gone the doubter the investigator the infidel have been the saviors of liberty the truth is beginning to be realized and the truly intellectual are honoring the brave thinker of the past but the church is as unforgiving as ever and still wonders why any infidel should be wicked enough to attempt to destroy her power I will tell the church why I hate it you have imprisoned the human mind you have been the enemy of liberty you have burned us at the stake roasted us before slow fires torn our flesh with irons you have covered us with chains treated us as outcasts you have filled the world with fear you have taken our wives and children from our arms you have confiscated our property you have denied us the right to testify in courts of justice you have branded us with infamy you have torn out our tongues you have refused us burial in the name of your religion you have robbed us of every right and after having inflicted upon us every evil that can be inflicted in this world you have fallen upon your knees and with clasped hands implored your god to finish the holy work in hell can you wonder that we hate your doctrines that we despise your creeds that we feel proud to know that we are beyond your power that we are free in spite of you that we can express our honest thought and that the whole world is gradually rising into the blessed light can you wonder that we point with pride to the fact that infidelity has ever been found battling for the rights of man for the liberty of conscience and for the happiness of all can you wonder that we are proud to know that we have always been disciples of reason and soldiers of freedom that we have denounced tyranny and superstition and have kept our hands unstained with human blood I deny that religion is the end or object of this life when it is so considered it becomes destructive happiness the real end of life is happiness it becomes a hydra headed monster reaching in terrible coils from the heavens and thrusting its thousand fangs into the bleeding quivering hearts of men it devours their substance builds palaces for god who dwells not in temples made with hands and allows his children to die in huts and hovels it fills the earth with mourning heaven with hatred the present with fear and all the future with fear and despair virtue is a subordination of the passion of the intellect it is to act in accordance with your highest convictions it does not consist in believing but in doing this is the sublime truth that the infidels in all ages have uttered they have handed the torch from to the other through all the years that have fled upon the altar of reason they have kept the sacred fire and through the long midnight of faith they fed the divine flame infidelity is liberty all superstition is slavery in every creed man is the slave of god woman is the slave of man and the sweet children are the slaves of all we do not want creeds we want some knowledge we want happiness and yet we are told by the church that we have accomplished nothing that we are simply destroyers that we tear down without building again is it nothing to free the mind is it nothing to civilize mankind is it nothing to fill the world with light, with discovery with science is it nothing to dignify man and exalt the intellect is it nothing to grope your way into the dreary prisons the damp and dropping dungeons the dark and silent cells of superstition where the souls of men are chained to floors of stone to greet them like a ray of light like the song of a bird the murmur of a stream to see the dull eyes open and grow slowly right to feel yourself grasped by the shrunken and unused hands and hear yourself thanked by a strange and hollow voice is it nothing to conduct these souls gradually into the blessed light of day to let them see again the happy fields the sweet green earth and hear the everlasting music of the waves is it nothing to make men wipe the dust from their swollen knees from their blanched and furrowed cheeks is it a small thing to reave the heavens of an insatiate monster and write upon the eternal dome glittering with stars the grand word liberty is it a small thing to quench the thirst of hell with the holy tears of piety break all the chains put out the fires of civil war stay the sword of the fanatic and tear the bloody hands of the church from the white throat of progress is it a small thing to make men truly free to destroy the dogmas of ignorance, prejudice and power the poisoned fables of superstition and drive from the beautiful face of the earth the fiend of fear it does seem as though the most zealous christians must at times entertain some doubt as to the divine origin of his religion for 1800 years the doctrine has been preached for more than 1000 years the church had to a great extent control of the civilized world and what has been the result are the christian nations patterns of charity and forbearance on the contrary their principal business is to destroy each other more than 5 millions of christians are trained and educated and drilled to murder their fellow christians every nation is groaning under a vast debt incurred in carrying on a war against other christians or defending itself from christian assault the world is covered with forts to protect christians from christians and every sea is covered with iron monsters ready to blow christian brains into eternal froth millions upon millions are annually expended in the effort to construct still more civil engines of death industry is crippled honest toil is robbed and even beggary is taxed to defray the expenses of christian murder there must be some other way to reform this world we have tried creed and dogma and fable and they have failed and they have failed in all the nations dead nothing but education scientific education find out the laws of nature and conform to them we need free bodies and free minds free labor and free thought chainless hands and fetterless brains free labor will give us wealth free thought will give us truth we need men with moral courage to speak and write their real thoughts and to stand by their convictions even to the very death we need have no fear of being too radical the future will verify all grand and brave predictions pain was splendidly in advance of his time but he was orthodox compared to the infidels of today science the great iconoclast has been very busy since 1809 and by the highway of progress are the broken images of the past on every hand the people advance the vicar of god has been accomplished from the throne of the caesars and upon the roofs of the eternal city falls once more the shadow of the eagle all has been accomplished by the heroic few the men of science have explored heaven and earth and with infinite patience have furnished the facts the brave thinkers have aided them the gloomy caverns of superstition have been transformed into temples of thought and the demons of the past are the angels of today science took a handful of sand constructed a telescope and with it explored the starry depths of heaven science rested from the gods their thunderbolts and now the electric spark freighted with thought and love flashes under all the waves of the sea science took a tear from the cheek of unpaid labor converted it into steam and created a giant that turns the countless arm the countless wheels of toil thomas pain was one of the intellectual heroes one of the men to whom we are indebted his name is associated forever with the great republic he lived a long laborious and useful life the world is better for his having lived for the sake of truth he accepted hatred and reproach for his portion he ate the bitter bread neglect and sorrow his friends were untrue to him because he was true to himself and true to them he lost the respect of what is called society but kept his own his life is what the world calls failure and what history calls success if to love your fellow men more than self is goodness thomas pain was good if to be in advance of your time to be a pioneer in the direction of right is greatness thomas pain was great if to avow your principles and discharge your duty in the presence of death is heroic thomas pain was a hero at the age of 73 death touched his tired heart he died in the land his genius defended under the flag he gave to the skies slander cannot touch him now hatred reach him more he sleeps in the sanctuary of the tomb beneath the quiet of the stars a few more years a few more brave men a few more rays of light and mankind will venerate the memory of him who said any system of religion that shocks the mind of a child cannot be a true system the world is my country and to do good my religion end of part one of Ingersoll's lecture on thomas pain this has been a LibriVox recording all LibriVox recordings are in the public domain chapter one of the lectures of colonel robert green Ingersoll volume two read for you by ted delorm in fort mill south carolina during july 2008


Greetings friends! This is Survival Doc. Today I'm going to talk about growing a few plants that you might not think about. This is my ginger plant. You can see I've got it growing in a large pot here. Now I grew this ginger from ginger roots from the roots that I bought at the grocery store. I bought some roots at the Whole Foods Market because they were organically grown as opposed to roots that you might buy in some grocery store. All you have to do is just break off a few pieces of roots, plant them in soil, and they grow. And then when it comes time to harvest it, you just dig up the roots and you've got ginger. Here's some aloe vera. My idea is that if I'm growing something it's either going to be used for food or for medicine or for some other purpose. I don't grow plants strictly as ornamentals. Of course aloe vera I've done other videos on aloe vera in the past. It has a lot of medicinal value. It's good for digestive problems and of course it's also good externally. It's known as a burn plant because it is good for burns. These plants right here are airplane plants. They're also called spider plants because looking at it from the side there they kind of look like spider legs. Now I'm growing them outside because we're in the summer here. In the winter time I will move these indoors and the reason that I'm growing these is these plants, the spider plant or airplane plant is about the best plant that there is for removing toxins from the air. Here's a larger one over here and another large one. These plants are excellent for growing indoors to purify your air. Here's another aloe vera plant. This one is quite large. This is my pepper plant but the reason we're looking at this is not for the pepper plant but for these little guys growing down here. These are turmeric root grown in a similar fashion as the ginger that I showed you. Just break off little pieces of the turmeric root. You buy the whole root at the grocery store. Break off little pieces, plant them in the soil and you get turmeric plants. When it comes time to harvest you can dig it up and you have turmeric roots. Turmeric is a great herb for many purposes. It has great medicinal value but also has great culinary value. Turmeric is one of the most important herbs there is for preserving meat. If you want to smoke your meat or you want to dry your meat you can add some spices to the meat to make it keep better. These plants here are Jerusalem artichokes. We can get a good shot there. Jerusalem artichokes are great survival food. You eat the root, the tuber. Here's the main part of my garden. There's some more stevia growing there. I've dumped some manure in there getting ready to tell that into the garden. My greenhouse frame. I've got the plastic. I'm getting ready to put the plastic on the greenhouse so I can extend my growing season. Here's my tomato plants winding down. Here are the plants winding down. Lots of squash, zucchini over here. Okra, zucchini, squash, bean plants. What's left of my swiss chard. Here's some fruit trees that I planted here when we moved in a year ago. It's apricot. Over here we have apple. Most trees take three or four years before they start producing fruit. An exception is fig. Fig will produce fruit after a year. This is a Chicago fig. It's a cold hardy fig that I can grow here in Missouri. This is the first year for this fig tree. I've gotten lots of figs off of it for such a small tree. Delicious Chicago figs. Really good figs. Here's a peach tree. Here's another little strip of my garden here. Some herbs, lettuce. These are young plants. A little bit more stevia. I put down this black cloth to keep the weeds down. I don't like weeding. As a result, a lot of times weeds take over my garden. This year I'm trying something new with this ground cloth. I'm watering this with a soaker hose which runs underneath it. There's some basil. More basil. More young fruit trees. Apple, pear. Another one of those tires. This is a cherry tomato plant. We've got lots of cherry tomatoes off of this plant this year. It's winding down. We're approaching the fall here so it's winding down. But this plant did real well. This is again putting a tire in a spot here next to my drive. I can't really put the garden here but I can extend my growing area with these tire planters around here. Here's a little catnip herb that I put right here in this shady corner. I'm trying to see how it would grow in this spot. It seems to have done fairly well. Here's a little persimmon tree. I bought these from the conservation department. By buying 25 of these little trees, I got them for 50 cents a piece. I planted these little persimmon trees all throughout my wooded five acres here. You'll find spots where they would get enough sun to grow and fruit. Not only do I like persimmons but persimmons are a favorite food for deer. If you plant fruit trees like this on your property, what you will find is that the deer will come through your property quite often. When hunting season comes, you'll have plenty of deer to choose from. This is part of my rain collection system that I talked about in another video. What do you do when your rain collection system is on lower ground than your garden? You see my garden way up there next to the road. How do you get the water to go uphill? Here's the solution. A little four horsepower swimming pool pump. A little pump I bought at an estate sale for not very much money at all. I said four horsepower, I meant one quarter. One quarter horsepower swimming pool pump, which works quite well at getting that water up the hill here to my water storage up there on top of the hill, which I connect to my gravity feed soaker hose watering system for my garden up there. Here's the rabbit tree. I have other videos on YouTube that I did about growing rabbits for food and a little shelter that I built off the side of my garage. This is Survival Duck, reminding you to be prepared or be prepared to be fleeced.


OK, let's get started. This is API microversions for operators, what, why, and how. We're going to talk about what is a microversion. Why would someone want to use microversions? How to use microversions? And then we'll leave a little time at the end for some Q&A. So my name is Clinton Knight. I'm a software engineer at NetApp, focusing primarily on our Manila and Cinder drivers. I've been in the application storage management space for about 17 years. The last two and a half, having a great time in OpenStack. I'm a core developer in the Manila project, and I did the port of microversions from Nova to Manila. And I'm Scott D'Angelo. I'm a software engineer with Hewlett Packard Enterprise. Started off with our HP public cloud as a DevOps engineer and a deployer. Moved on to be a distro maintainer with our Helian product, and I'm an OpenStack Cinder core. And I did the port of microversions to Cinder. And I'll say that the heavy lifting was done in Nova by Christopher Yeo, who's no longer with us. He gets all the credit for the cleverness of microversions and the hard work. We just ported it. So why use microversions? Sean Degg, when they rolled this out in Nova, put out a blog post that sort of described several actors and why they would care about microversions. Jackson, Emma, Sophia, Aiden, and Olivia. And hopefully, these actors will represent some or most of you here. So Jackson, the absent, is the developer who writes an app and disappears. The app lives on in production, and it needs to continue to work as we bump the API versions. We can't break those existing apps. So this is a big deal today. We've argued for years in Cinder that we can't do things in our API that we'd like to do because it's going to break existing apps written years ago, perhaps. So we needed a mechanism to be able to change our API and still maintain backwards compatibility. Then there's the opposite end of the spectrum. We call Emma the active. That's someone who's consuming new APIs as they come out, very interested in the new APIs, willing to write the code, to toggle on the logic. Sophia is similar to Emma, although in her case, she's writing a cloud application that has to run against multiple clouds. So she needs, for her application, at runtime to be able to inspect what it's talking to and react appropriately. So she needs to understand what all the different versions are, what features are available from each of the clouds that she's interacting with. Aiden is a cloud operator. So he's the one that's deploying the OpenStack services, managing the users. He needs to understand who is using the features of his cloud or conversely who's not using certain features when they get old enough. He needs to know when it's safe enough to upgrade in such a way that some really old features might change in an incompatible way or disappear altogether. And then finally, like Scott and myself, Olivia is a contributor to the OpenStack projects. So historically, the major API versions in the projects only happened once every few years because it was a significant effort to do that. But she doesn't wanna have to wait months or years for the next major version to get her feature into the projects. So she needs a way to do that more quickly. So what are API versions? Many of you are probably familiar with semantic versioning, major dot minor dot patch release. OpenStack doesn't use the patch release idea, but we've traditionally done major versions when you make an incompatible API change. Minor version would just be a new feature added that didn't break it. But micro versions, they're kinda like minor versions within major versions. In Cinderware, we're at three dot 17. We'll keep incrementing that second minor version number. But it breaks Sember. We will never add a new major number. We will never go to a 4.0. And with Manila and Nova, it's the same. They're at two dot X, two dot 22. They will never go to a 3.0. But we will be able to make a backwards incompatible change within the major version by using micro versions. So Cinder originally had an API endpoint, Cinder URL, port and V1. We added a V2 endpoint in Grizzly and it took until Juno for Nova to start using this new V2 endpoint. So that in of itself was a bit of a problem for us. We wanted to make some changes. We wanted Nova to be able to pick them up in less than a year and a half. What happens if we need to keep adding breaking changes and versions? Well, you end up with a proliferation of endpoints and this drives the service catalog people crazy. We were begged not to add a V3 endpoint, which we did for micro versions. But this is a bit of a problem to keep adding endpoints for deployers and the catalog maintainers. So the answer is micro versions. We added the V3 endpoint, which is exactly semantically compatible with a V2 endpoint. And the reason we did that is we want people to know specifically that they're getting micro versions. So you'll always hit this V3 endpoint and we'll get to the guts of how micro versions work. One other driver for this was we needed to make some changes in the API that Nova consumes. We wanted some new semantics for attaching and detaching volumes. We want to add volume multi-attach. So we needed some way for Nova to be able to discover what version sender's at without having to see which endpoints are there and hit different endpoints. So this also solves that problem for us. So how does it solve the problem? So micro versions are fundamentally different than some of the previous mechanism where you had just a V1 or a V2 in that a micro version rest endpoint actually supports multiple versions of that API at the same time. See with Manila V1 or sender V2, you get V2 and that's it. And so the projects did have some rationale for making compatible changes within V2, but their hands were really tied for making breaking changes. If with micro versions, since you can have an endpoint, say the Manila V2 endpoint as of Newton can actually service API requests from version 2.0 all the way up through 2.22 and everything in between. And yes, as Scott said, there are potentially breaking changes along the way, but that's okay because if something breaks you but you're asking for an earlier micro version, you're not gonna have a problem. Not only that, but each API within a given micro version is independently versioned. So theoretically, you could write an application to list the sender volumes at version 3.5 and create a new sender volume at 3.10. There's probably not a good reason to do that, but it's theoretically possible. These things are all independently versioned. So if you got one endpoint supporting all these versions, well, how does it know what to give you? And the answer is it's all up to the caller. A specific version of an API is requested by whoever is calling the REST endpoint. So how does that happen? So REST APIs from OpenStack are bound to HTTP. And so what the Nova guy said was, we'll define an HTTP header that you can send along with your REST request and specify that the API version that you want to interact with. And when I say version, that's all of the arguments, all of the return values, all of the semantics within the server are supposed to be preserved correctly for each micro version that that server purports to support. So what you see here is Nova defined this header, X OpenStack Nova API version, followed by a version string. A Manila followed suit with OpenStack Manila API version. Ironic, I also did, I think they were the second project to implement micro versions. After Manila did it, as the third project, the OpenStack API working group got a hold of this idea and recommended some changes to the header. So, and that was in time for Cinder to pick up the new version. So you see the header for Cinder is OpenStack API version, followed by the service name, volume, and the micro version. So just be aware of that minor difference there. All right. So with a little bit more detail, and we'll see this in a live demo a little bit later. But, and if you didn't know, you can use the debug switch for some of the clients, including Cinder and Manila. It'll spit out the curl semantics for actually invoking something. So if you wanna re-issue the command yourself or tweak it or call a different API fairly easily, this is a good way to start. But you can see here, this is a get call to Cinder v3 and in large font there, you can see the header, OpenStack API version, asking for volume micro version 3.2. All right. So just because we have micro versions and there's never gonna be a Cinder v4, there should never be a Manila v3, that doesn't necessarily mean that deprecation is a thing of the past. We still have to talk about that. API deprecation within OpenStack has been something that's been pretty uncommon and is itself a controversial topic. You know, there are some folks in the community who believe that once you've released an API, it should be there forever, so that any application written to an API will never break. There are others in the community that understand that forever is a very long time. And after some period of years, the weight of the baggage of carrying around really old semantics from old APIs begins to impede forward progress. So I think that's a tug of war that's probably gonna go on indefinitely. But specific to Cinder and Manila, Cinder's a v3 with microversions. I think the Cinder community understands they've still got a lot of folks using the v1 API with Cinder. So I think they don't feel the freedom at this point to deprecate and remove v1. Manila being a little bit younger and behind Cinder and the adoption curve and having gone to microversions in v2, v2.0 being functionally identical to v1. Manila community, we do feel like we have the freedom to deprecate and ultimately remove v1 without causing any harm. Even if several years from now, we've deprecated and potentially even removed the older non-microversion endpoints, that does not necessarily mean that the deprecation is a thing of the past at that point. So again, that's gonna be something that's subject to a lot of decision and discussion. But nevertheless, deprecation within a microversion endpoint would be accomplished by just raising the minimum version that a given endpoint accepts. And that mechanism is already in the code. That's not a technical problem. That's purely a social one once most folks aren't using the really old microversions. A few comments about experimental APIs. So I think a lot of the project teams have realized that sometimes six months just isn't enough to develop a really complicated feature. On the middle side, we've been working on things like migration of file systems and replication and other things. And we've needed multiple releases to get to a point where we're comfortable enough with the API, supporting it long-term. So one of the things that I did when I did the port from Nova was to introduce the concept of an experimental API. The way that works is you simply, the developer specifies in the code the microversion for a new API, but you can also set a Boolean flag that says this is experimental. And so the benefit for users with that is that they get early access to features that are in development, beta level stuff, if you will. So they can kick the tires, give the project team feedback before it's set in stone and subject to long-term support. But of course we don't want anyone to be surprised and develop an application calling an experimental API without realizing that. And so to invoke something that's experimental, you have to provide this additional header, OpenStack and LAPI experimental as an explicit acknowledgement that you know what you're doing, but you wanna try this out. So on the other hand, the benefit to the project teams are is that an experimental API is defined as something that can change or even be removed without being subject to the deprecation rules of OpenStack. So there's a win-win on both sides and we would love to hear from you guys, from the employers and end users if you find that notion valuable, the ability to try stuff before it's fully baked and offer feedback and be able to affect change. So just to give you an example between Cinder and Manila that we work on, both projects have been working on replication features for quite some time. Cinder has actually had a couple of fault starts along the way and at least one point decided that they needed to make a breaking change to the API for replication and they did so without regard for the deprecation rules in OpenStack. I think in the position that they were in that they did what they had to do, but nevertheless, Manila released its replication feature with the experimental flag turned on those APIs and we've been able to mature that feature over a couple of releases and we've really enjoyed the freedom of doing so while still being able to talk about the feature, get folks using it, demo it here at Summit and so forth. So anyway, if this is something that you find valuable, we'd love to hear from you. So how does this affect our actors? The Cinder API version three is identical to the V2 semantically, so we'll always have V2 and in fact we'll always have V1. We've made that decision not to deprecate. So if you write an app and you disappear and your app lives on in production for years, it will always still work. There will be no breakage of anything no matter how far you advance the API. For our Emma the active user, we have version discovery at the endpoint so you can find out the highest version supported by the server and she can use logic within her apps to decide whether to use these new semantics or not. So for the multicloud integrator, similarly they can probe the cloud using the version discovery and see if they need to do anything that involves changing their apps. Our own infra is happy with this model because that's what they do. They run against, I don't know how many different clouds it is now, but five, six different clouds. Cloud operators can actually look at the inbound requests and see what their users are using. If the users are still using older versions, they know that they have to support it. If users are upgrading their apps and they're using the newer APIs, they'll be able to determine that programmatically. And then as contributors, we can put new API features in much more quickly. The core teams are much easier, much happier to approve of changes to the API if they know that it's versioned in this way and it's not gonna break anybody. So it's changed the speed of development tremendously for new APIs. All right, so let's switch gears here and look at a demo of how microversions work. So when applications that are acting with a microversion endpoint, the first thing it's gonna wanna do is call the versions API to learn what versions are available from that project. All right, so I'm gonna do a Manila list command here with the debug switch so we can see what's happening. So there's a couple of things here. First of all, we see a get to the Manila root without anything else there. No V1, no V2, no resource name or anything. So this is the versions endpoint. Works the same way in Cinder. You can just send a get to the root of the endpoint. And what you get back is a 300, which means multiple options, and the body is a version structure. So we can see a couple of things here. We can see that the current version is available at the Manila root slash V2. So the current Manila version is version two. And if we look at the version fields, we can see the minimum version. This endpoint is happy to work with as 2.0 up to 2.22. There's also in this structure a supported value, which is the V1 endpoint. And the version fields are empty. So we can learn a number of things here. There's two different Manila endpoints, V1 and V2. V1 is not microversion aware, but it's still supported. V2 is microversion aware, happy to speak all the way up to 2.22. So but we asked for a list of shares. So here's the get to the V2 endpoint for shares. And here is that magic header that we talked about. API version 2.22. So this is us requesting from the Manila endpoint that the shares using the 2.22 version semantics, okay? Well, the server says, okay, no problem, 200. But it echoes back in the response headers, the same thing, 2.22. This is the server's acknowledgement that I understood what you asked for. I'm giving you the version that you want. And I'll interject that Cinder CLI does not do this automatic version negotiation. You'll have to say, I would like version 3.7, 3.10. We're working on that for O-Kata release. I'm sorry, I always get it, O-Taka. For O-Kata release, we hope to have the same identical version negotiation where it'll automatically determine this highest supported version. But as of now, you have to manually add the choice of which API version you're asking for. Okay, so what happens if you don't send the header? Okay, so I'm gonna do the same thing here, but not send the header. So here we see the get, okay, to the V2 endpoint. But nowhere in here is the version request. Well, it's not an error condition. I still got a 200 back. And, but the server says, hey, you didn't ask for me for anything. So I'm gonna give you 2.0. So that's the defined behavior of microversions. If a specific request is not made, the microversion endpoint will respond with the oldest version that it knows how to deal with. So the theory being is that that would be the one that's most compatible with the most clouds. You could have clouds with multiple, different versions, different releases, different newest versions. But if the oldest ones are all at 2.0, your applications should work across all of them. Okay, what if I send a microversion request to an endpoint that doesn't know anything about microversions? All right, so here I'm gonna specifically ask for the middle of 1.0 endpoint, which we know we saw was not microversioned, okay? So here's the V1 request. Here's the header asking for 2.22, okay? That's not a problem. So I said that the V1 endpoint is not microversion aware. Actually, it's just microversion aware enough to echo the header back. You ask me for 2.22, but you've sent it to a 1.0 endpoint. I don't know anything about microversions. So I'm giving you 1.0, have a nice day, okay? All right, so it's important to understand as features are added to the projects, the version, the microversion, at which the features were added or potentially a breaking change was made. So let's do another call, okay? So Manila being the shared file services project can provide the network export location list for shares, all right? So I asked for this at microversion 2.8, okay? And the server came back with 4.4. I don't know anything about that endpoint at microversion 2.8. I'm sorry, I can't help you. Well, turns out that API was added at 2.9. So as the application author, you need to review the release notes for a given release. If there's a new feature that you wanna use because you'll have to specifically ask for a microversion add or newer than where it was added. So if I repeat the command with 2.9, it works fine. But you'll notice that there's an empty thing here, okay? Well, with network access to file systems, sometimes one path is more efficient than another, but the data's not coming back. That's because the preferred path field was added at 2.14. So one more time, if I shoot the command with 2.14, we get the data. And so some of our developers have asked, well, I just need to add a field to the response of an API. It's a compatible change. Do I really have to bump the microversion? And our answer is, well, yes, you do because if someone is depending on this new field that you're asking, they need to be able to request the microversion and be guaranteed that it's gonna come back so that they can use it. So virtually any change to the API would require a microversion bump. But the beauty of it is, is bumping a microversion typically doesn't require hardly any code change, certainly no code duplication.  All right, so Scott mentioned a little bit about version negotiation. So I'll show you how that works, okay? So I've been using the Minel client, which is happy to work with version 2.22, same as the server. But what if we have a newer client? I'm actually gonna go into the client and change its version to 2.30. And then issue a list command. So we can see when we go to the versions command, this is when we go and get the version. We actually send a microversion header. The version's API itself is not, in fact, versioned at all. But we can see that the client is starting with 2.30. Well, but the server comes back, like we saw before, well, I'm good 2.0 to 2.22. And so it's the responsibility of the client, not to stray outside of what the server can handle. And so the client says, okay, fine, I see what you can do server. So I'll talk to you on 2.22. The server responds on 2.22 and everything's fine. All right, conversely, if I have an older client, I can reduce this number to say 2.15. And same thing's gonna happen. We start out with 2.15, but the server says, hey, whatever, I'm good 2.0 to 2.22. But the client says, well, I'm not. I would really prefer to stick with 2.15. That's the best I can do. And the server says, okay, fine. I'll talk to you on the 2.15 version semantics, no problem. All right, so with that, I think we're happy to take some questions. 22 versions in like two years or one year. What happens after 10 years? You will have 200 microversions. And these expand the code base enormously? Well, it doesn't expand the code base much. You really version different functions or even different code paths within a method with a simple wrapper. And so what you're really doing as you bump these versions is you're indicating that you've added a change, which is often a backwards compatible change. So in the past, every time we would add a new feature, we would write the same code. We just didn't bump a minor version. In other words, Cinder was at 1.0 for several years, then they went to 2.0. But we didn't have any minor versions within it. So just because we're bumping these versions for every addition to the API or every new field we're adding, doesn't necessarily, I mean, if we were using strict semver, we would have been bumping that version for these changes. So the code itself is always gonna be in there anyway. It's just got a simple wrapper saying, API version 2.17, you execute here. It doesn't bloat the code. If you look at the Cinder code or the Manila has a lot more in it, you can see that it's just a wrapper around different methods or different logic within the method. Yeah, to answer your question, Manila released micro versions in Liberty. And so after three releases, we're up to 2.22. So it's not something that we're gonna see bumping very, very quickly. But like Scott said, it's not something, like it used to be with V1 and V2, you tended to have a significant duplication of code between the major API version bumps. With micro versions, there's virtually no duplication. So the hardest thing that a developer would need to do is to make sure that when he's adding the functional tests as well as unit tests to make sure that he tests the semantics of the API right on either side of the micro version bump that he made to make sure that he preserved the older semantics of the API as well as the new one. The second thing is our API compatibility. Basically, let's assume we have some tester who decide to run script, test script, increasing API version one by one on each call. It would pass test or not if all those calls are available in all APIs. I mean, when you have one request going to API number 10 and second going to API number 15, is internals of project would be consistent with those changes in different versions? So I think I understand what you're saying. Your test will have to understand what those API versions are gonna return and what they should expect. Yes, yes, client side is okay.  You are doing something more and you can get some records and database different depending on a P code and this can lead to untested scenarios. Well, it's the same old testing problem, right? You're adding more complexity. You have to have more complex matrix. Complexity is 22 versions now. I completely understand. But if you think about it this way, let's say we didn't have micro versions and we just added CinderManageList to see what manageable volumes are on a backend array. Well, you'd still have to test whether or not CinderManageList works. If you have an older version, a Liberty version, it doesn't have that. So how do you know as a tester what whether you should test CinderManageList? Well, you know whether your server's running Liberty or whether it's running Newton. In this way, you can program the logic. You can say if the server says it supports 3.17, I know that CinderManageList will work. I could run my test. If it doesn't, I can't. But in the past, you would have to know manually that you're running Liberty or you're running Newton. I mean, there was no programmatic way to discover what you were doing unless you'd try to run the command and you'd get back a 404. This way, you can anticipate whether or not the method is supported, the API is supported by hitting the version endpoint and seeing the version. So I don't know that it changes anything in tests. In the past, you still had to figure out whether or not it was supported.  Yeah, and we wrestled with how to test this thing. We'd give an infinite resources. We run Tempest against every microversion we have. But we're not doing that. We don't feel the need to do that. But like I said, every time we bump them to the version, the tests around whatever changed. We'll test it before and after that particular version to make sure. If I had a field at a given microversion, we'll actually add code to strip that field out for previous microversions so the API appears to work the same. Thank you. I wanted to get your opinion on an issue we had in Nova. Recently, we removed the Nova network functionality. And we used a microversion bump simply as an announcement that after this point, now that this is out, you can no longer call Nova network functions. You can still call the old microversions for any of the other previous things that changed. But this idea that microversions make everything backwards compatible, it raised some controversy. Should we do this or should we bump everything up past that level, raise the minimum, but then all that old functionality is gone. So I was wondering if you guys had run into anything like that and how you approached it. So in Cinder, we haven't run into it, but we started to discuss it, and people are very hostile to the idea of removing something in the way that Nova did. We know Nova did it and Manila has done this, and there's definitely people in Cinder community that are completely against this. Now, there's a deprecation cycle, so we floated the idea of if we follow the standard deprecation, can we remove stuff? Well, yes, but we would probably be very hesitant to do what Nova has done, and Manila has done the same thing in Cinder. People are pretty adamant against it. Even with the deprecation cycle. Well, with the deprecation cycle maybe, because we've deprecated things that are clearly not being used, but to remove something in the way that you guys have, I don't know that we would do that. I mean, we're still supporting V1 forever. People raise their arms in protest when we talked about it in Tokyo, including infra mainly, we're still using V1. So, in Cinder people are very much more conservative about removing things. Yeah, your question is very relevant to Manila, because with Manila we're providing file systems, network file systems, directly to instances, and so we do so with Nova Network, with Neutron, with standalone config options, and so the removal of Nova Network was definitely of interest to us, and so we blame you just to be clear, but you guys followed a clear deprecation policy for that feature, and we chose to do exactly the same thing. So, with a certain microversion, we will strip out Nova Network support, but we are following deprecation rules in that case. So I guess the removal is one thing, the other part of it is a microversion change that doesn't give a changed functionality, it's just a marker saying, this is where we remove this functionality. Is that consistent with your understanding of how microversions work? Well, yeah, so as far as we can, we'll try and preserve older semantics, but you gave an example where it's just not gonna be possible for us to continue to support something, in this case we couldn't if we wanted to, and Nova Network is gone, right, and so in that case we have no choice, we can't provide that functionality in older microversions, so we'll announce it to the world with the deprecation announcement and then strip it out at a given microversion. So the unfortunate thing is that when, I don't know who first added this second endpoint, Cinder maybe or somebody, they shouldn't have done that. And if we'd had a microversion from the start and we wanted to use Sember, you could just bump up to 2.0 and go from there, and then you can go bump up to 3.0 as long as you didn't have this proliferation of endpoints if you'd have just kept it all at the root endpoint. But since we started down that path, we'd confuse users if we ever bump the major version without adding a new endpoint, is sort of the conventional wisdom. I don't know if that's true, but so now we can't say, hey, breaking change, Nova, we just removed Nova networking, we'll just bump to 3.0, well, because people expect of slash V3 endpoint, and so that's unfortunate because everything would be great if we had this from the start and you could just bump the major version, have no endpoint, and just use the microversions to figure out what you want. Good, all right, thanks. Yeah, I don't think there's an easy answer there. I just wanted to ask you if you rely on the common framework to implement the micro version? No, which framework? Common framework, I mean, ultimately this all should get moved to Oslo, there's a lot of commonality, there's some subtle differences in how people do it between Manila and Nova, and Ironic actually isn't even using WisG, so they've got quite a bit of different code. So ultimately it should be, I mean it's, but we're very, since Manila was forked from Cinder, we're already very code compatible, and so these two are very similar. Nova, we ported from originally, so it's very possible to do, at least with those three services, and should be done someday, I mean it's a typical, somebody does something, someone else does, sooner or later it goes to Oslo when someone wants to do the work, but it's not there yet. Other questions, who else? All right, thanks everyone.


Finals it's a big day for him and he goes off the inside gate can he get only a second Grand Prix victory He's off the inside Greg Hancock goes off gate number two in the blue helmet color It's his 51st final in his career Jason Krupp now victory today And he would really close that gap on Thomas Scholl over the top of the world championship because your points count for devil here and Frederick Lindgren He goes off the outside. He's had a great week Already secure for next year in the series because he's qualified by the Grand Prix challenge and he's in the final here in Croatia It's a great week's work from fast Freddy Lindgren A lot of focus on that man Chris Harris and Jason Krupp off gate number three Desperate to close that gap on the series leader Thomas Scholl have all been moving to start the team stay down a long time And Hancock has made the drop into that first turn Chris Harris is second watch out for Krupp is third Lindgren is training in the back now Greg Hancock looking superb here Hancock holds second place the tapes were held down for a long long time But Hancock gets his goal that pressure was on the referee was not gonna let the tapes go up until he said go And everybody settled down. The focus was there. It was great Hancock. They kept it together He's in front. Yeah, and he's on the verge of an 11th Grand Prix victory in his glorious career His 130th Grand Prix today is written in everyone and he's down the back straight and looking simply stunning ahead of Chris Harris This would clean six points to Greg Hancock Four points to Chris Harris and Jason Krupp would pick up a couple towards his world championship results Harris is working it. Harris is looking for a hole. Can Greg be unsettled in this corner? Harris goes high. He's looking for an upset. It's a repeat of Cardiff three years ago But this time Hancock holds on no repeats of the Millennium Stadium when Harris passed Hancock on the last turn That time Hancock delivers the goods and those two how they needed a result like that today Wonderful stuff from 40 year old Greg Hancock hats off to the Californian superstar Hancock the winner Harris was second Krupp was third Lindgren trailing it at the back there and this is what it means on the day Hancock wins on 22. Harris 21 points a big day for him Krupp on 17 claims back seven points on Thomas Gullop in the race for the world championship and Greg Hancock Will have a massive grin under that crash helmet and Sam What's it like for a rider when this happens at the start? Experience comes through. Greg did not flinch. He stood there and waited waited waited Chris Harris was nicheing to go for it As soon as the tapes you got to be absolutely 100% focused just as Greg was Superb stuff as the tapes were held for a long time But it was Greg Hancock who kept his call superbly and the Chris Harris will be lighted with second spot If you often in that before the meeting he'd have taken it Jason third on the day, but more importantly for you the gaps down to 10 points was three to go Hey, that's awesome. I just wish I could have taken six in the final instead of two But it's a bit of a rugged start. I don't know if something happened with Lindgren's bike there But I thought he'd actually touch the tapes and a Grand Prix here or a Grand Prix there. You can pick up or lose a load of points and Today I picked a few up. Let's hope I do in the next couple as well Chris Harris a tremendous performance on the day from you. Yeah, perfect Always knew he'd be tricky off gate one with Greg off two But he just got the drop out quick in a given race before that's pretty easy Got the experience just to keep in front not like card a few years ago Greg for you 40 years of age oldest man in it all the cliches, but a fantastic performance Yeah, thanks a lot, you know, I mean it's being on the speedy bike. It doesn't matter how old you are You know, you just did it brings out the best in yen for me This is this is another good boost to to my Grand Prix campaign. So I feel great


I'm First Lieutenant Kelsey Krause. I am the 3rd platoon first-ever M-Shorad Striker platoon leader. So we came to test out the first tables that we created, not only with the Fire Center of Excellence but with Battalion Master Gunners, our soldiers and soldiers who have actually left our unit that were at White Sands Missile Range to determine the best gunnery tables that we could come up with, not only general knowledge, crew drills, but the actual gunnery portion that we came out and did this week with the 240 and the Stinger missiles. It went perfect. I am so proud of my soldiers. I was very confident in them from the beginning. They all executed perfectly. They were confident, knowledgeable. They asked questions when they needed to, but we didn't really have to answer any because they knew their job and they came out here and they killed it. This is light years better than the Avenger. We can maneuver. We can keep up with the forces that we're integrating with. We can use multiple weapon systems. We're not worried about a bullet going through our little box in the back. We are armored. We can keep up. We can radiate on our own. We're not relying on other forces to protect us. We can protect ourselves and do our job. This is the future of our branch. I'm very excited to see where it goes. I think Air Defense kind of fell off the face of the Army's page really past 20 years and we're making a comeback and it's very cool to be part of history. My soldiers are worthy and definitely the people to do it. I'm very proud of myself and my team for what we did out here this week. My name is Specialist Stephen Webster and I am a Shryker M. Shorat gunner. I'm with 5488 out of Ansbach, Germany. Hometown is Detroit, Michigan. This thing can take a beaten way better than an Avenger can. So I think it's years ahead of what the Avenger is. If it flies it dies. A favorite event would be the Stinger Li-Fire because it's not something that happens very often across any unit. So to be able to be a part of that is a big deal, especially on the new M. Shorat system is something amazing. I am Specialist Lily Allen and I am a gunner on the M. Shorat. As a gunner I fire the M240 Charlie Stinger missiles and a 30 millimeter. The Stinger was amazing. It was the first time firing it. Everything was squared away. I think the Stryker system overall is the one of the greatest things it could have added to ADA. The maneuverability of it, the capabilities, everything is definitely an upper hand now for ADA. This week for the first time Alphabatter tested the capabilities of the M. Shorat Stryker. We were able to fire the 7-6-2 at ground targets and then we fired three Stinger missiles out of the M. Shorat at Outlaw UAS. I think M. Shorat is a key capability moving forward. Short in general our job is to protect the maneuver force and being on a Stryker platform allows us that capability to maneuver with them, to keep up with them, and then ultimately protect them from enemy UAS, rotary ring, and fixed wing assets.