Okay, so the compound carbon disulphide, what did we say the molecular formula was? CS2. Okay, we get that because carbon disulphide, right? That's a covalent compound, right? Because they're two non-methes, right? Two or more. I wanted to say what is the molecular weight? So covalent compounds are molecules, if you recall, right? I wanted to say what's the molecular weight of this? Could I figure that out? Yeah. How would I go about figuring that out? If you're on a table to find the average... Not the average. Yeah, the atomic weights of carbon plus two times the atomic weight of sulfur, right? Yeah. So what would be the units here? They tried it. I know that all of you have calculators out, but don't always try things. Okay, so this is the mass of one molecule. Is everybody okay with me saying that? So what if I wanted to figure out, in AMU, the mass of one mole of molecules? How would I do that? What is one mole? What is that? That's not that number. No. Does anybody remember? What was that? Yeah, so it's Avogadro's number, right? A mole is Avogadro's number. What is Avogadro's number again? Right? So just like a dozen is 12, Avogadro's number is 6.022 times 10 to the 20th. Something I'll give you, okay? So if I have a mole of pencils, right? It's 6.022 times 10 to the 23rd pencils. If I have a mole of carbon disulfide molecules, 6.022 times 10 to the 24th carbon disulfide molecules. Is everybody cool with that? So what if I said, how much does four carbon disulfide molecules weigh? How would I figure that? Avogadro's number? No. No. By the what? Mass of one of these molecules, right? So I multiply that by four and I would get the mass of four, right? What if I wanted to get the mass of a mole of them? What would I do? What would I do? Multiply it by what? Avogadro's number. Does everybody understand that, right? So I need more interaction from you guys. So what I'm trying to do now is figuring out the mass of a mole of these things and I'm going to do that in AMU first, okay? So in order to do that, I have to multiply it by Avogadro's number. Is everybody cool with that? So the one thing I want you to remember about Avogadro's number is there is some units associated with it because it's that per mole. Okay, you don't always see those units associated with it, but it's like if I said I have a dozen pencils, right? It'd be 12 per dozen, okay? 12 pencils per dozen, okay? So just like this is 6.022 times 10 to the 23rd per mole. Okay, is everybody okay with thinking about it like that? Okay, so just one mole equals, so I say, is everybody cool with that? So let's figure that out. So I just multiply it by 6.022 and I get, should I get a big number or a small number? A very big number. 25 AMUs per one mole, okay? Okay, this is a very cumbersome number, right? Why is that? Because moles are a big amount, right? Very big amount relative to AMUs, right?  Does everybody understand what I'm saying? So moles are kind of more on the level of humans being able to see them as opposed to just little molecules or atoms or something like that. So we want to convert this mass into a mass unit that we're more familiar with, okay? So a good mass unit might be grains, right? So there is a conversion factor that I don't expect you guys to remember, but some of you were trying to tell me it when I was asking for Avogadro's number. But it's 1.661 times 10 negative 24 grams equals 1 AMU. Okay, yes. I will give that to you every time. Yes. I looked up how to do it. It basically said just take the Av and then divide it by the amount of grams. Let's just do this, okay? So we've got a conversion here, right? Okay. So we want to take our AMUs to grams. So what are we going to put at the bottom here? AMUs, right? And the number associated with those AMUs? One. And up here? 1.661. Yeah, very good. Right? So when I do that, so cancel, hopefully everybody sees that. Okay? So I'm going to multiply this times this, 0.66188. And I get a number that is 76.15. And look at my unit, grams per mole. Okay? So that's how many grams a mole of carbon disulfide weighs. Okay? If I would have taken these things all the way out to all the digits, this number and this number would be exactly the same. Is everybody okay with that? So a shortcut to do this, instead of doing all of this, which I don't expect you to do every time. In fact, if you're doing this every time, you're missing the point. Okay? We do want a shortcut for this, okay? The shortcut is that whatever this number is in AMU that you get off the periodic table, you can also be the same number for your molecular weight, or your molar mass. Pardon me, your molar mass, okay? So the only difference is what? The unit sort of change. Is everybody cool with that? You got it or no? Yes, yes. Yes, okay, good. So again, do we have to do this every time? No. What can we do? Just look at the cheat sheet up there, right? The periodic table. So you can have that for everything that you do in this class, okay? So can I kill this one?


The $100,000 sponsorship has a new winner today, number two. Was it you? All of your amazing comments that are scrolling by right now from yesterday's episode where we announced the first winner of the sponsorship, there were over 600 of those comments. I couldn't believe how many of you are really getting into this sponsorship and are showing how you're helping the freedom family grow, which is how you win. If you want to know all the details, click that I to see what criteria I use to pick winners. And today's winner was picked by yesterday's winner. That's one of the benefits of getting picked. You get to pick the next winner. If you make a video explaining your choice, that's public on your channel because we want to celebrate these people who help the freedom family in a public way. I will play that video today, but first I want to show you the amazing asset packs. We've also released free for you freedom family. The video factory now has five categories of video assets, not just for gaming, that you can download for free. Anthony mentioned these a few videos ago and you can click the link down there in the description below to get a single 687 megabytes of video goodness in gaming, education, beauty, comedy and auto and vehicles. Tell us what you think of this video asset pack number one down there in the comments below. Try it out for each category. We have a themed subscribe button, comment button, like button and screens and lower thirds all for you. Wait, stop. What are we watching? Hey there guys, welcome to the George show. George, you're doing a very great job on the $100,000 sponsorship.  Thank you, Juggernaug J for introducing the George show. Collaboration like this is the fastest way to grow on YouTube. To check out his channel, click the link down there in the description below. And if you want to submit your video introducing the George show to be featured just like Juggernaug was, simply click the submit your best videos link also down there in the description below. That will take you to a Google form where you can input your video to learn how to collaborate in other ways. Click that I up there where I go over four levels of collaboration like playlist for playlist before announcing today's winner. I want to feature one excellent comment from GFX CWS boss talking about this sponsorship. No, it's not a giveaway because we're not using a random number generator to pick a winner to win. You have to do something that takes a lot of work, which is helping the freedom family grow. He is glad the sponsorship is back, but he worries that it will be taken for granted like last time in round one where we had a lot of people doing copy paste replies of those who were helping people, but they themselves were not helping. He doesn't care for the money and he thinks that people should offer help, not just because there's a prize involved, but because they enjoy helping. I couldn't agree more. That's why we're starting the sponsorship by picking people who have shown to be helpful for many years in the freedom family, not just recently helpful down there in the comments below. He also asks, other than money, is there any way we could get the choice menu back for the prizes? In the past, we gave people the option of, do you want an ASUS monitor? Do you want a mechanical keyboard or gaming mouse or something like that? This time we're starting with cash because it's just simpler, but as this goes on, I would like to offer choices and products that you can get instead of cash. So who won today's sponsorship? Well, let me play the video announcing the winner from Zoustfrags. Roll it! I actually just won the $100,000 sponsorship from Freedom, so I got my cut of $100. I'm very appreciative of it. So let's just watch when they select me, just as proof for my subscribers who don't understand what's going on. Today's winner. I chose the person who I've seen give amazing help for years for Freedom. He's never complained. He's always been active on Discord, in the forums, in these comments, and he is this person right here. Zoustfrags! And I'd really recommend if you guys want to check it out. If you're a content creator and you want to check out Joining Freedom, I'll have my referral link to Join Freedom in the link in the description below. The person I'd like to nominate for the next winner for the sponsorship is IvyYamGaming, or Ibby the Plain on Discord. So he has helped with the FTU gameplay channel, which a lot of people have used, and I've submitted like two, three gameplays on this channel. If you guys haven't checked it out, you can see some of the gameplay on there, if you want any of it for your background. He's also on Discord. So this is what I said how to make your Discord, how to make your Discord better. And with the Mi 6 bot, there's a bot to help with stuff. Oh, he's in Overwatch, oh no.  It's pretty good. You guys can check it out. It's on Amazon. So this is what I'm buying is on Amazon. And I forgot to say that Ibby has been helpful in the Freedom comments on the main channel, on Discord and in the forums, as well. And he's been in Freedom for longer than me. Congratulations, Ibby. You are the second winner of the $100,000 sponsorship. And I just sent you $100 by PayPal to the PayPal email address you have in your Shiny Freedom dashboard. Tell us down there in the comments below when you get it, how it makes you feel. And I would love to see a video by you, IBM, just like Zausfrages did talking about the people you've helped. Give them a shout out. Give them a spotlight. I will feature that video in a future episode of The George Show. And you can submit it by clicking the submit your videos link down there in the description below. Who should be the next winner? Number three. Tell me down there in the comments below if it's who should be the next winner? Number three. Tell me down there in the comments below if you think you should win and why, or if you nominate someone else to win and why. And always give each other channel reviews, helpful feedback, share your best practices on how we can help each other grow together as a family, because that is the spirit of freedom. We all help each other grow together as a family, the freedom family. And who am I? I am Papa George, George Sunpai, and many other names you, the beautiful freedom family has given me. I am George, CEO and founder of Freedom. For freedom and the freedom family. And I'm almost over my cold. It's still lingering, but I hope by the next episode of The George Show, it'll be gone. I will not miss it.  Is it like a cold that's going around or is it just me? I'd love to know. I am George and you've been watching. Click that I to partner with freedom and join the freedom family so we can all grow together. You get many perks like position music, you also get epidemic sound, a lot of other access to royalty free videos, sponsorships, many things to help you grow. Just click the links down there in the description below to get involved in our community, our forums, our discord chat servers, meet our graphics team, meet our community team, all of that on discord and the forums. What are you waiting for? Get started. And we will grow together as a family because this is the freedom family. You are part of it, we are all part of it, and we're all growing together. To get more George, click that big F. That will subscribe you to Freedom Central, home of The George Show. And PewDiePie gave one of you, Freedom Family, a big shout out. Click that video to see the shout out and to see our new 3D sets for you. And click that video to see what YouTube recommends you watch next.


Rob Winger reporting live from the Stevenson Mustang Gala the first annual here joined with our first guest of the evening Stevenson men's volleyball junior Alex Klunk Alex welcome to the show. Thank you Rob. Appreciate it So just give us your opening impressions from the gal. We've had the athletic banquet in the past I know you've been tuned been a part of Gals got a little bit of a different feel to it. Why don't you talk on that for a second? Well, it's a great opportunity for the students to get together of course, which is really nice and seeing everybody dressed up in Their great dresses and suits like yourself is really enjoyable Thank you Alex now I know you've had the chance to do some different formal events like this in the past last year You actually had the chance to go to the NFL Draft and do a little bit behind the scenes stuff so Stevenson's division 3 institution obviously doesn't always get spot in the limelight But they try to give their student athletes a chance to feel that they are in the limelight during events like these and Just tell me what it means to as a student athlete to have that kind of recognition from your university Well getting the backing from a university is great. Brett Adams our athletic director does an amazing job Backing every student athlete in all the programs. So getting that assistance from the faculty definitely helps the athletes in their track Yeah, I mean Having been a student athlete here I can certainly say you you receive a ton of support from the faculty and staff especially our athletics department If you could have one suggestion something you want to see from the gal tonight What's your goal that you could you would like to see accomplished tonight from the gal a Goal, I wouldn't always say a goal. I mean, it's just a great opportunity for everyone to come together But I will say I'm very happy to have you back here with us Rob It was it's great to see you again.  I appreciate it Alex Make sure you go enjoy the night with your friends and celebrate the great year of Stevenson athletics Of course. Thank you Rob. Yeah


I mean, I guess you could say my track record with my vegan girlfriends has it been so great The first three blocked me on Instagram before I could even DM them and the last one I didn't even bother So, you know who told me was a little, you know, Michael Deco too much to deal with second girl Victoria Little rough around the edges didn't really want to talk to me and that astrology chick was just complete freak-a-zoid The most recent girl I mean she spent half the day eating and the other half of the day Walking back and forth to the bathroom. So we didn't really have time to talk let alone do anything fun so maybe Maybe Frankie boy should switch over to the vegan fairy boys instead of girls But I guess we could give it one more shot, right? Let's see what's up with this one.  You know your skin is made of protein amino acids B vitamins That's the primary component and they don't consume any of that in their diet you know considering the lack of dietary protein for vegans Especially like highly bioavailable animal-based sources. How come no one has come up with an idea to sell vegan men's sperm? It's kind of crude and gross, but I'm genuinely surprised. It hasn't happened yet Oh wait now that then again vegan men's sperm probably has no protein or minerals in it And I guess you can't really call it. You can't call them vegan men, but we're getting off track a little bit So it's oatmeal with a bunch of seeds and sugar very typical what we see vegans usually have in the morning just full of anti-nutrients full of sugar full of agrochemicals and Hypothetically if there weren't any pollutant concerns with this meal and the seeds and the grains were sprouted and fermented properly It wouldn't be too horrendous, but you know we're far stretch away from that You know from the tap water to the coffee to this not a great start to the day As you know it is winter and I just want to quickly talk about a supplement that I take every single day in the winter Because I think it's so important having my fridge actually because it stays fresh for longer. So Vitamin D in the summer your body can Produce vitamin D by absorbing sunshine or sunlight through your skin in the winter you cannot so vitamin We got a real thinker here, but Yeah, how much stuff did they put in the water over the past dozens of years to? To make people have to think this hard about a vitamin D supplement The supplements is something that I take every single day in the winter And I actually don't take it in summer because I feel like I get enough Sunlight so this vitamin D from we've life is made from algae It has a vitamin K2 for better absorb if you're gonna sell a supplement Can you at least understand the correct dosage to get your blood levels to a moderate amount? You know 2,000 IU per day, which I'm assuming she's taking just during the winter months Isn't going to even get you into the minimum range that doctors think is healthy Realistically, you have to take you know seven to eight thousand IU per day consistently for a year or two just to fix Deficiencies that most people have This specific one algae oil K2 probably an MK7 is a very low-quality supplement. I'm sure it's oxidized There's much pure stuff you can get out there You know the ones I have on organ supplements and I certainly don't expect these vegans to start talking about the fats I have a vitamin synergy the need for magnesium and all the other stuff for this and For faster absorption it is in liquid form. I also take vegan B12 every day And this is also in liquid form for fast absorption. It has the most active forms of vitamin B12 Now vegans really are paper value warriors You know they'll eat quinoa which has all the amino acid if you combine it with brown rice or some nonsense like that I don't know the specifics point is they think on paper. They're getting amino acids They're getting protein when it's going in one end and out the other the exact same way and that all they need To take is a couple little supplements here and there and they're still wondering why their skin is peeling off And why they need to get half their colon cut out after five years of following the diet Box you can check them out if you want to so my initial thought was actually to show you my morning routine in like winter fall edition, but to be honest the time was just Creeping on me and we have a lot of things that we are gonna do today. So that video I will save that for later one of the things I'm gonna do is to Brow lift like lift my brows if you have ever heard of that. I think it's called brow lamination as well. And so Depending on how I look afterwards if I look like a freak. I will not film but if it looks good I will show you know from what I've seen a lot of these women are very superficial and Care so much about their appearance that if they actually had an understanding of what made you healthy Every single girl on the planet would be eating two pounds of steak every day. No questions asked But you know with all of the conventional health wisdom being fruit and veggies are good for you whole grains healthy You're gonna look good. It's the opposite.  I'm also gonna cook some quinoa and Then make dressing so everything should go in about 30 minutes or so so I also added some Brussels sprouts and Chickpeas which I have just rinsed from a can so now I'm just gonna add some spices Which is I mean it is easy to do it is marketable.  So now I'm just gonna combine these and bake them in the oven.  Didn't that girl last week have a gold spoon. They must be some sort of inside secret club Well, all of these vegan meals look similar. They have a ton of starch a ton of cooked food Ton of fat. They're clearly craving calories, but it's all low quality. It's full of agrochemicals. It's not organic It's not prepared properly. You know, they douse it in 15 different spices and there's no semblance of animal protein or Omega-3 fatty acids After this lunch, I made some errands and I also fixed my eyebrows. So here you have a sneak peek And they are pretty intense, but they will calm down All right boys, who has better eyebrows? I'm gonna have to be honest today. Her eyebrows look pretty good. I Also had a snack, which is a cinnamon then again. I don't spend a Half the day or I don't spend any time actually fix on my eyebrows Roll I share the recipes on my stories a few days ago and now it's time for dinner So this is a recipe that I just came up with a size to do that. That was a very quick skip through the cinnamon roll but yeast vegan butter plant milk sugar Regular flour vegan butter super super high Omega-6 super inflammatory If you just used butter and milk, you know, these actually would be not bad for you They'd have animal fats animal protein and maybe just a bit high in sugar and refined carbohydrates But when you make this vegan with the plant oils Makes people very very sick The recipe that I just came up with a size to do there So I'm putting sweet potatoes in the oven and I'm preparing lentil mix so red Bell peppers and it's just insane.  They're not eating meat Smart city slave diet and some red onion and then I'm mixing everything together with some Corn and also some black canned lentils and I'm adding cumin salt and lime juice body literally can't digest any of the foods in that dish and then I'm just adding on top and Avocado and also some coconut yogurt mixed with some lime juice and some chili flakes on top I I guarantee you that it goes out the same way it goes in and so many people like sweet potatoes But you know with myself and with a lot of people I've worked with The digestibility it's just so low. No one ever really seems to do well on them You know white potatoes like russet or ripe potatoes or even way better off And you know you could add stuff like peppers and onions seasonings for flavor You know if they're high quality and they sit well with your stomach But when they compose the whole meal, like what's your body actually absorbing? You know you're not getting caloric nutrition.  I hope you enjoyed this video and give it a thumbs up if you did And don't forget to subscribe on my channel, and then we see you in the next one Is this the Is this the best that big broccoli could recruit I don't know what to think of this anymore Are some of them just naive enough to believe this? I know some of them are really smart and they just go along with it and they're good actors But who knows? Maybe they're all just a bunch of liars at least they could be a little creative and happy and engaging with it But I guess after you deprive yourself of food for multiple years And all you think about is steak and pizza and burgers then it's hard to focus on anything else So thank you guys for joining me today Let me know if there is any lovely vegan ladies out there that I have it reviewed or taken a look at If you could please drop a like on the video leave a comment down below Subscribe so that YouTube can unsubscribe you next week and click that notification bell so that YouTube doesn't notify you of my videos I'll see you guys tomorrow


QuickBooks Online 2023. New vendors set up and accounts payable beginning balances. Get ready to start moving on up with QuickBooks Online. Here we are in our Get Great Guitars practice file. We started up in a prior presentation using the 30 day free trial. We also have the free support accounting instruction by clicking the link below giving you a free month membership to all of the content on our website. Broken out by category further broken out by course each course then organized in a logical reasonable fashion making it much more easy to find what you need than can be done on a YouTube page. We also include added resources such as Excel practice problems PDF files and more like QuickBooks backup files when applicable. So once again click the link below for a free month membership to our website and all the content on it. QuickBooks Online Test Drive sample company open if you want to have the two open at the same time we suggest using the incognito window or another browser to do so. If using Google Chrome you can open an incognito window by selecting the three dots up top in the browser and new incognito window then type into the search engine QuickBooks Online Test Drive. We're going to be using the sample company to compare and contrast the accountant view the view that get great guitars is in and the business view the view the sample company is going to be in. We're going to duplicate a couple tabs up top so we can put reports in them by right clicking the tab up top and duplicating it. We're going to do this every time right click on the duplicator tapped open again because we're working on building the financial statements the balance sheet and the income statement as the tab to the right is thinking. I'm going to tab to the middle go to the reports on the left hand side open up the balance sheet report. If you were in the business view the reports are located under the business overview and then the reports then we're in the same location and then if I tab to the right. We're going to open up the reports on the left hand side again this time the profit and loss closing the hamburger up top doing a range change from 010122 to 123122. We're have the cutoff date of December 31st 22 that's what we're going to enter our beginning balances starting the new data in January 1st 2023 tab to the middle. Scroll up close the burger and change the range from 010122 to 123122 and run it. So there is our balances thus far we've been entering the beginning balances from our sheet over here imagining that these are the balances as of 1231 22 that we want to have our beginning balances of so we can start in January 1st 2023 with new data input. We're entering them one at a time and applying any further needs to the accounts as we enter them the other side washing out to owner's equity as we go which we will then adjust at the end of this process. So before we did the inventory accounts which had another need of tracking the inventories by unit in a sub ledger we like that accounts receivable which tracked a sub ledger by customer which had a special need. Now we're going to go to the accounts payable another account that has like a sub ledger that we need to be tracking accounts payable represents money that we owe to a vendor. So we can't just put a journal entry in place because I need to know the vendor that we owe. So we're going to put the beginning balance into a new vendor and QuickBooks will create basically a bill form as we enter that the bill form being the form used by QuickBooks to enter an increase accounts payable. So again at first glance just like with the receivable you might think hey I'll just enter a transaction a journal entry to do this so you might say hey I'm just going to go over here. I'll go to the first tab hit the plus button go to a journal entry and I'll just credit the accounts payable and then the other side will go to opening balance equity or whatever. And then QuickBooks won't let you post it because every time you post something to accounts payable you need to add a name. So then you might say well that's fine I'll just add a name to the vendor that I need to have and I happen to have who I owe here which is Epiphone. So I can add that but even that's going to cause a problem because now you're going to have in the vendor balance detail a journal entry which messes up the next step. The next step is to pay the bill that you owe. So what we want is it to be in place as a bill. So we could actually enter a bill. I could say OK I'm just going to enter the bill here for the vendor. I'm going to open up a bill and we could enter a bill but we're going to use the QuickBooks system to do it. Which means we're going to enter the beginning balance and then tell QuickBooks that that vendor Epiphone has a beginning balance. QuickBooks will then create a bill related to it. Not the actual bill that we input in the prior accounting system but kind of a generic bill which will serve the purpose of receiving the payment and everything should roll forward smoothly from that point as we enter it. So it's a bit faster of a process. Now note as you're entering bills you could of course enter the vendors as you enter a bill. And when we add new vendors this is often the way we do it because remember the vendors for most companies we don't need a lot of information about them. Many companies want a lot of information about their customers. Some don't because you might be selling selling at a food truck or something in that case you probably don't get your customers names even or at least don't record them. But some customers if you have repeat customers you want detail and you want to foster a relationship with them get their address and what not. On the payable side of things usually we're just paying things like the phone bill the electric bill all I need is the name in order to facilitate the electronic transfer or the check. But sometimes we might want to facilitate a relationship with our vendors where we want more information especially if we have shipping information such as when we're purchasing the inventory that we're selling. So keep that in mind so we're often going to be adding the vendors as we enter bills as we enter the checks or as we enter the expense forms. If I want to add a vendor to the vendor center then I'm going to go to the left hand side under the expenses which is kind of like the vendor center and then vendors on the left. If you were under the business view it would be under the get paid and pay area and then you've got the pay area and vendors on the left. So then if I was to add a vendor we can import the vendors or add one. Let's just add a vendor so you can kind of see the screen with when it has a vendor in it. So I'm going to add like a generic vendor. I'm just going to call it you know BBB vendor here and let's just tap through the screens. These are these are the data input screens you can use this screen is the only one that is a required field that has the asterisk everything else you may not need title first name middle name looks a lot like the customers. Email phone number mobile obviously the contact information the website and then at the address we have the address which might be could be necessary. If you're dealing with inventory possibly with the vendor although your destination address where they're going to ship the inventory is probably the more and the thing that's more necessary and then tax information. This is going to be if you have to give them a 1099 in the United States that's an added burden if they're not incorporated for example. Then you got to so the general rules are this with a 1099 or the general rules are this when you pay somebody then you're likely to get an expense which is a deduction for taxes it's actually good for taxes. The IRS is going to try to get you to give them information about who you're paying because they want to track the income side of things. So they might do that if you have employees by requiring you to withhold money and so on and so forth. If you're paying a company like the telephone company you don't typically have any reporting requirements because they feel like they've got their fish hooks into those big companies already. So they don't really need your reporting on them to verify their taxes. But if you're paying a little guy like a sole proprietor they don't feel like they got their fish hooks deep enough into those people that's when you might have to issue a 1099. So if you're adding a vendor that it's a sole proprietor then you might have this added 1099 requirement which will help you to track and possibly create the 1099s. And then you got the expense rate if there's a billing rate the payment terms down here if there's a standard payment terms meaning when it's going to be due if you enter a bill how far past the bill is it going to be due for. And then the default expense account which is kind of nice because you can then allocate like an expense account per a particular vendor. And there might be situations where you might use a slightly different vendor name for different even though it's the same company so that you can allocate each time you use that vendor name to its own particular expense account. But also note that as you memorize transactions after entering data in the first month when you enter a second bill for example it will usually memorize the transaction from the prior bill or expense form or check. And therefore you'll have an ability to see what happened in the prior period and here's the opening balance. That's the thing that we're going to enter which when we do QuickBooks this is the opening balance for Epiphone QuickBooks will then create a balance for us related to it. It'll enter a journal entry increase in the accounts payable and the other side will probably go to an uncategorized expense form because it'll make a bill basically. That means we want to enter it make sure we enter it as of the last period of the prior period 1231 to 2 which was what we will do. So I'm going to save this just so we can see what it looks like when we have a vendor in it. So here's the normal vendor situation. Now you've got your BBB. Now we could then add our list of vendors which is a similar process that we did with the customers where you could export all your vendors from the prior accounting system and then add them. However we're just going to add one vendor that we happen to owe money to because I'm really concerned with entering this beginning balance and all the other vendors I might not need to add them from my prior accounting system because I'll just add them as I start paying them. So that's one method that you can use. So you could add all your prior vendors or you might just add your vendors again as you start entering expense forms and what you might do through the bank feeds. As the bank feeds come through you might just create your vendors as you're going in that way. And in that way you might be able to slim down the number of vendors because if you've been doing business for some time from a prior accounting system you might have a whole lot of vendors that you did business with in the past. That you don't plan on doing business with in the future and which are not really helpful for you possibly to add them into your QuickBooks system if you're not entering all that prior data in terms of the dollar amounts that you paid them in the past. So we could do the importing process just like we did before. I could go here and import all the vendors. So if we were to export our vendors and we wanted to import them as we did with the customers we could do that. We can look at the the form that they give us on the vendors match out our titles just as we did with the customers. So I'll just take a look at it here. We won't actually do it but let's take a look at it and there's your headers up top. You've got the same kind of problem with the names of the vendors where you might have your name in two different cells or you might have the last name comma first name. And then you want to switch it to first and then last or then you might want to break it out into one cell or then put it into two cells right all those little Excel tricks. You can usually find a nice way to to format the data the way you want it by searching in like a YouTube search for for Excel trick on how to separate a name that's separated by a comma or separated by a space or combine two names that are in two cells into one cell. So I won't go into that in detail here but just be aware of that. But we're just going to add we're just going to add since we did this before we're just going to add this one item and not imported. I'm just going to add another another vendor. So I'll just close this out and I'm just going to say new vendor and then I'm just going to call it epiphone. That's who we buy our guitars from. So we have epiphone this outstanding balance of 15000 boom and then I'm not going to enter any added data for them. So that's all I really need from them. I'm not going to 1099 them. That's the only one that's really often kind of you want to think about if you have a small vendor that you're paying. But I want to add the opening balance which I would only do when entering the opening balance when started a new company file. Otherwise you don't really want to use that pretty much ever after that point in time. So then I'm going to hit the plus button and or the calendar and make sure that I enter this as of the last day of the prior year. 1231 1231. It won't let me enter it as of the last day what is going on. Oh, hold on a second. Yeah, let me do it. Here we go 1231 222. I don't know what I was doing. So there it is. And so that should be good so it'll create a transaction. So I'm going to enter that. And then you could see there's Epiphone right there. So the next step in the process would be for us to to to make a payment right in the make a payment will tie out perfectly because if I go into Epiphone here it created a bill. And you're like, yeah, I didn't enter a bill. I just entered the beginning balance. Yeah, but I still want to bill even though it's not the actual bill I created in the prior accounting system because the next step is to pay the bill. And so the next natural step in the accounting department would be boom bill pay bill. And I want to be able to have that bill to pay. Notice that if I entered it with a journal entry, if I entered this with a journal entry, I would I might be able to apply it here. But it would be in the form of a journal entry, which doesn't easily tie out to the next step, which is for me to make a payment that ties out to the journal entry so the journal entry would be closed. I want the bill to be closed after we pay it. That's why we don't just enter it with a journal entry form, even though from just an accounts standpoint, that would work. It doesn't work with the next step in the accounting process. We want to use the form in that case. Let's look at the forms here or the financials run it to refresh it. So now we've got our liability account of accounts payable at 15,000. If I go into that drilling down, it made a bill form. If I go into the bill form, it's just a generic bill form that it made. The other side went into other miscellaneous expense, which is a generic expense account.  I'm going to go back and so then the other side is going to wash out to net income on the balance sheet on the income statement, run it to refresh it. There it is. Now we've got this services income. I kind of wish they used to like sometimes they used to put it into uncategorized income, which I feel like would be a better category when they force this thing to happen. But it doesn't matter because they're on the income statement. They put the other side into other miscellaneous expense. But I'm not worried about that because it's in there as of December 2022. And I only want things to be correct as of January 1st, 2023. So all this data doesn't matter because the 2022 numbers are in my prior year accounting software, not the current year. I'm just adding the beginning balances. So if I change this to 010123, 123123 and run it, there's nothing in it. That's good. That's so I'm good to go going forward on the balance sheet. I've got this amount in net income now, which represents the invoices that entered with the accounts receivable and bills that we entered with the accounts payable. But it'll roll into retained earnings in the next period. So if I go from 010123 to 123123, it rolls into retained earnings. So our strategy is working in essence because my total equity here is correct. Everything's going to wash out to equity as of January 1st, 2023. And then I'll just make a journal entry for equity to be correct balance as of that day into the correct account, which I'll change the retained earnings to owner's equity and we'll get rid of the opening balance equity at that point in time. Now, again, if I go back to the income statement, if for whatever reason 010122 to 123122, you don't want this information on the income statement, even though it's in the prior period or whatever venue, of course, you could do a journal entry at this time. Once this has been recorded to just take it out of here and put it into the opening balance equity until we adjust opening balance equity. If you want to do that, you could do that by going to the plus button, journal entry. And then you could just take it out of the service items and put the other side into, you know, opening balance equity. In this case, you'd credit the miscellaneous expense account and you would debit, you know, opening balance equity as of 123122. But it's not a problem for us because it's in the prior period. So the worries are none. No worries. The worries are none for us. And so that's that. So we'll continue on. We've done some of the most difficult ones thus far that have these sub ledgers. So some of the other ones will be a little bit more easy to enter because we don't have to have that issue with these sub ledger problems.


Welcome to the future of democracy, a show about the trends, ideas and disruptions changing the face of our democracy. I'm your host, Sam Gill. A central topic on this program has been not simply the role of technology in our democracy, but the unique cultural moment we seem to be in regarding how we feel about technology at a time in which we are relying on digital technology and especially social media more than ever. And when a handful of technology companies are driving ever increasing returns in public markets, we are also coming face to face with the potential challenges that technology poses uniquely to democratic society. Many of these challenges have to do with what sort of in the parlance of the day is called content, the things we say, post, express, upload for others to see. So much of our contemporary anxiety about the role of technology in our democracy has to do with content we don't like, hateful content, misleading content, erroneous content, polarizing content. It seems as if the future of the internet turns on the idea of content, what it is, what makes it good or bad, and how we can manage it. Olivier Sylvain is at the leading edge of these debates. A legal scholar, he has been a persistent and thoughtful critic of an approach to technology in the internet that abdicates responsibility for the consequences of so much content and how it's managed. It's my absolute delight to welcome to the program Olivier Sylvain. Thanks for joining us. I think you're still on mute. Thanks for having me, Sam. Great pleasure to be here. So just to help our audience get up to speed, I'd like to start with just hearing from you about the sort of legal, the regulatory and legal apparatus that shapes where we are. It's a moment where everyone's learning about what section 230 is and what exactly governs or doesn't govern content moderation. Can you tell us a little bit about what are the rules or not that are governing the space and what were some of the key ideas animating those rules when they were first formulated? Sure. I'm happy to answer that. I don't want to sound like a stereotypical academic, but I feel like the answer to that question is a long one. Before I get to that, though, I want to thank you, Sam and John Sands, for supporting my work. I'm grateful for it. So what is the regulatory apparatus that sets up where we are today? I think it actually doesn't start with what I think you suggest, and that is section 230 in 1996 when Congress amended the Communications Act with the Telecom Act. I think to help think about the current problems today, we do have the First Amendment as a kind of backdrop, and that's why I say this. It's a longer answer only because there are a long line of cases involving, and you know, and Knight knows these cases well, involving the prerogative that newspapers have to make decisions about what kinds of content in their op-ed pages and in their news stories allowed to produce. So I think that there's a ground level constitutional interest that does suggest that set up by the courts, one case involving the Miami Herald in particular, set up by the courts that says that publishers of a certain kind, most of them have the prerogative to make decisions about what kind of content appears on their pages, even if it originates or the author for others from somewhere else.  But with section 230 in 1996, at the commercial birth of the Internet, right, when afterwards becomes the Congress effectively commercializes the public Internet in 1995, Congress decides that it has to take care about, it has to tend to the content that's appearing. And a lot of that stuff they're really worried about is pornography, right, and their kids access to pornography. So section 230 is part of a reform associated with the Communications Decency Act. And section 223, which precedes 230 in the U.S. Code, is addressed to making sure that there were mechanisms and safe harbors for intermediaries that were trafficking in pornography and obscenity. Those provisions get struck down in the case of ACLU-B Reno in 1997. What survives is what governs stuff today, right, section 230. And Congress in section 230 sought to create an incentive for platforms, I use the term platforms loosely, maybe we'll get a chance to talk more about this, but for online intermediaries to attend to the content that users are posting, but without doing it through positive or affirmative government regulation, right, to promote self-regulation. And the way to do that is to create an immunity, a safe harbor. And I read 230c12 as the mechanism for the safe harbor. If you take voluntary steps in good faith to take down bad stuff, you get the immunity. The courts, however, didn't do not agree with my common sense reading the statute. 1997, the Fourth Circuit, in the case involving AOL, said that this is actually a more, a broader protection. And section 230c1 immunizes online intermediaries as publishers or distributors. And the argument that Congress sought to put forward in the Fourth Circuit ratifies is that these entities that have emerged, like you, at the time, you might think of AOL with Craigslist a little bit later, are trafficking so much content to impose liability on them for anything that users post would create a disincentive for innovation and would stifle speech online. So the intermediaries are ought to be free, ought to be unfettered in the language of the statute to allow all kinds of content and not be beholden for the bad stuff that users post. And so, you know, there's concepts happening in that debate, both in the judicial context and the original statutory context, that we haven't lost even as the internet's evolved, right? Innovation being a critical priority and opportunity of the internet, that the internet allows innovation at a pace, at a scale, that's different. An idea that the beauty of the internet is the content, is the stuff that we can produce so much stuff and share it with each other. And you've talked about, I think in an essay you contributed to us, that there's a kind of romanticism about some of the ideas that maybe that we have continued to traffic in about what the internet is. Could you talk about that? Why is this a romantic kind of sensibility? Well, so I do think there's a romanticism about content and the proliferation of all kinds of content, right? And lurking under there is a normative faith that precedes the internet. And that is that in the open free market of discourse, right? There's a kind of marketplace of discourse that the best ideas will prevail. And the best relief for harmful content is responsive content, right? So that more speeches is better than less speech. So I think there is a fetishization of that for sure. I associate this with a kind of, it's a small L, liberal conception of what a communications or speech market looks like. I actually don't, I don't just think it's about the fetishization of content for its own sake. It's also a fetishization of innovation. And, you know, and this kind of fascination with upstarts and emerging companies coming out of Northern California to change the world, to shake things up and democratize our markets and democracy and political system. And I'm very cynical about that. I think that those are rhetorical tools that actually mask what is the power dynamics and the structural dynamics that actually precede and lurk under the rhetoric. Say more about that. Well, so, I mean, so everyone wants to be the next innovative startup, not everyone, but, you know, a lot of the startups coming out of Northern California for the past two and a half decades, they, you know, they all want to be the next Craigslist, the next Facebook. And there's, and I'm not, I don't want to be the one to shut down that vibe. But on the other hand, that eagerness, that energy is inattentive, insufficiently attentive to a whole set of problems and consequences of the things that they create and the costs that they engender for communities that have always been overlooked. It kind of entrenched power and under the guise of this kind of happy story about innovation. I know that's a kind of abstract way of putting it. I mean, I've written about intermediaries that purport to be sharing, you know, enabling the distribution of information, but as in the process have made life far more difficult for historically disadvantaged groups. Yeah, let's talk, let's talk more about that, because that really is, that is the ethos, right?  And it's that the combination of technology and the engineering mind, the neutrality of the engineering mind will truly allow us to escape this. And that hasn't been abandoned. I mean, in fact, COVID, you see more of the high priests of Silicon Valley talking about just doing away with institutions and building new institutions. You know, the whole problem is the rubble of the past, the proceeding to millennia, and we can clear it away with technology. But it seems we're also now coming face to face with more vivid examples of what you're talking about, of the way in which we have imported, in some cases, accelerated, just moved over all of the same disparities that we had before. Where are some of the places where you, where we're starting to see attention to this that you think will be promising? So great. I mean, in the COVID world, now that we're all kind of where we are in the context of COVID, I think of Zoom a little bit. I'm going to talk more substantively about what I've written about in the context of targeted advertising and discrimination. But when I mean, Zoom is a remarkable platform, and we're using it here. I use it for my classes. But early on, it wasn't a service that thought of itself as consumer oriented, and they had to shift. It was an enterprise line of business. So they didn't tend to things like privacy. They didn't tend to things like Zoom bombing. You don't have to really worry about that when you're doing a conference with your colleagues over a meeting. And the only reason I mentioned that is because there are a whole set of public law priorities and norms that we do generally attend to, but that in pursuit of this business model, this company was just neglectful of. With regards to the things that people are now thinking about, and the disparities that current application services entrench, I've talked a lot about Facebook's ad manager and the ways in which people can use proxies for race, what Facebook calls a multicultural affinity groups in advertising, in markets where it's unlawful to do it. And what we've seen in a set of cases that settled ultimately in March 2019, Facebook settled, by the way, in recognition that they were enabling discrimination. And ways are arguably more pernicious than they were before. And just last week, Facebook, even in spite of the settlement and the way in which they would restructure their ad manager, is only last week pursuant to a lot of research that a Politico and the Markup have done as journalists, that Facebook decided they would not allow any proxies for race. They would not allow the use of multicultural affinity groups on the ad manager because it does entrench discrimination across markets, not just in housing and education. So one of the shifts we have seen during a time of COVID is it's not clear to me that some of the platform, particularly social media companies, are yet willing to publicly espouse a standard of responsibility for content. But they have been taking new steps. We've seen some new steps taken around health information, including statements about representations about health made by public officials, which is a place that for a long time the companies really would not go. And we've also seen some steps taken around election-related information, including with regard to the President of the United States. But we see, but even in that moment, we've seen the same hesitation around statements made by public officials that could be considered racial incitements, for example. And to what extent is this difference in treatment reflect a materially challenging decision about how to intervene in content online? And to what extent is this exactly what you're talking about? Which is that when the implied victim is everybody, and therefore kind of a homogenous idea of a white person, we can take down the health misinformation, but when the implied victim represents a marginalized community, we don't seem to be willing to go there. We don't seem to be willing to take a stance that would be accused of being non-neutral, even if it is perhaps more just. What do you think is going on? Well, Sam, the easy answer to that question is racism. But I think we can impact this some more. I don't want me to glib about it, but the question of why is it that attention to harm to historically marginalized groups is not as urgent as a generalized harm. Racism is the reason for that. Or gender bias is the reason for it. And how do we get at that? Great question. I think that a lot of young people are wrestling with this far more closely than many of us have this past summer. How else can we unpack this? I very much appreciate the question because it helps us think about the role that the language we use to talk about the law and policy in this area is enabling of mechanisms of oppression. So it would be great if intermediaries, whereas a matter of course, while developing a design for an application, were attentive to the potential harms of any automated decision-making system or any service on historically disadvantaged groups. We do something similar in the environmental law setting. We require environmental impact statements. Andrew Selst, who is at UCLA and AI now, based out of New York, led by Kate Crawford and Merrick Whitaker, have argued for something like algorithmic impact statements, similar sort of thing. In the first instance, before you deploy something and put it on the market, you evaluate what its impact is on certain historically disadvantaged groups. So I think that would get us closer. And I do think we're in 2020, we're as close to that as we've ever been. But my glib answer to your question is racism is the reason for that. And if we want to address racism, we need tools that are explicit about its existence. So let's imagine, though, that we started to push toward a regime like that, so that there was an examination before the fact of wide adoption. And we included in it these sorts of criteria, that we really determined specified kinds of social harm, some of which would be the kind of harm around health, this information, sort of vital, vital life issues, and some of it might be some articulation, however, imperfect around discrimination, things that we see, for example, in housing law. It strikes me the rejoinder, and this is an issue I struggle with and think about the companies, the rejoinder is always a management rejoinder. It's that the scale of the network, the speed and scale of the network, which itself is generative of the conduct, is too vast. My joke is always that when the companies testify in Congress, they always open their statements the same way. They say something like, as a company, as a platform that has one billion new videos per nanosecond, we are always at the forefront of new challenges when it comes to providing a safe, enjoyable environment. And so are the systems just too big and fast? Are they just indemnically difficult to manage in the way that an industrial manufacturer can, at great expense, undertake an environmental impact assessment? So good.  This is your point. And it is their choice to be that fast. And they have every incentive to do it. I'm not an economist, but I just assume that there are a whole set of reasons why a company want to externalize a lot of costs and not internalize them. And then getting bigger is just part of what that entails in some ways. I agree. So I don't know if you're suggesting a one fix would be to attend to how big these companies are or whether this is about attending to how fast they're getting content out. I actually, I mean, part of me just wants to stay clear of that because I mean, I do think that there are advantages for us to be able to do this Zoom stuff as though we're contemporaneously speaking to each other in real time. So I'm not allergic to the possibility of speed, but are there mechanisms, and I'm not a technologist, far from it, but are there mechanisms that keep these companies in check? So Facebook just today announced that they will, in the week before the election, will develop automated decision making systems that attend to the kinds of content that get distributed. They clearly, in spite of the massive amounts of content, Sam, they clearly have the capacity to do this kind of self-regulation. And they chose it not to until now, right? It was kind of this Facebook has done a lot of hand-wringing about it. So there are technological mechanisms that get them there, but the argument I made is that we have already tools that would create an incentive and it's called law. Section 230, and you know, often people want to stay clear of the 230 debate because it is an explosive one, but the immunity under Section 230 basically absolves, it's a pretty broad immunity, absolves Facebook from the costs associated with making decisions about this and the social costs. And so they've never really had the incentive every other company, every other business has in this country, the incentive of getting prosecuted or getting sued for the ways in which they enable bad conduct. So I think one possibility is to just, is to unleash law in the Senate. What are some alternative formulations that you've argued for that you think regulators should consider around this particular issue? Well, I mean, there are a lot of, there are different proposals out there. Daniel Citron, who I know, you know, and many people do, she's a leader in this area, along with Mary and Franks and Ben Wittes in different papers have argued for a kind of reasonableness standard where you evaluate whether or not an entity is entitled to an immunity. If they take reasonable steps in good faith to take stuff down, right? It's actually what the statute, the Section 230 says, but you know, they would, that's how you would think about it. And so Facebook is actually in earnest and taking reasonable steps to take harmful, dangerous law on lawful content down, they might be entitled to immunity. In some ways, I'm on board with that. Another way is that we, you can continue to amend the statute so that whenever a public law addressed to the protection of historically disadvantaged groups saying voting or elections or housing or education, that any public law that is alleged in a complaint would, is not, any allegation under such a law would not entitle an immunity, an intermediary to an immunity. That's one possibility. The PACT Act, which is something I testified about in Congress over the summer, and that it is just the Senate version of a reform coming from Senator Schatz and Senator Thune, a bipartisan effort, would actually assert that we can go further, that any civil enforcement of federal law and other things would not entitle the company to immunity. That is, any allegation of a violation of federal law would not entitle an entity to an immunity. And if that enforcement action were brought by a governmental agency. And I think that gets closer to vindicating core public law priorities that historically in the past 25 years, interactive computer services online intermediaries have not been subject to. Are there other doctrines in the, in the, Spencer Overton and I have talked a bit about applying just long standing civil rights doctrines to, to, to certain kinds of content. Are there other doctrines in the law that we should be recovering for the purpose of, because part of my takeaway from what you're saying is, let's not be beguiled by quite how different the internet is. It's different in some important ways and it's just not different in some pretty important ways. Right.  I, you know, Spencer's work on, on voting and the ways in which platforms online intermediaries perpetuate election arms is useful for thinking about this because there are remedies. You know, if you target a community in particular and give them disinformation about an election, that is the sort of thing that public law creates a remedy for. So I agree. I mean, there are long standing principles that are in law that we might resuscitate. For me, it doesn't take a lot of imagination though on this. It's really just about lifting aspects of the immunity. You know, it's, it's this, this law exists with regards to every other company. It's not old stuff. This is live real law. We just don't ever apply it to online intermediaries who act as the least cost avoider, you know, to invoke the law school term. The entities most capable of protecting against harm are the ones that are somehow immune from being held to account. So if we look at immunity, all those traditional mechanisms which are in place today with regards to every other company would be available. And what about, what do you make of, of, of efforts by other countries to address this issue? EU countries have taken different approaches than the, than the US. Do you have a view on the efficacy of some of those approaches? I don't questions we're getting. Yeah, yeah, it's a good question. And I, I unfortunately don't feel expert enough to kind of opine on that. I mean, I know the general ethos in Europe is to be pretty is to be more skeptical about intermediaries. But they do have something like something similar to section 230 in Europe. So, so I don't want to, I don't want to say it's kind of outside of my wheels. I don't want to opine. I have some views on it, but I, I don't think they'll be, I don't think I'll get move the ball forward on that. The one thing I've, I mean, one thing I do encounter on a gift, in spite of what I just said, I do get invited to give talks in Europe. And, and, and one of the points that people in Europe make about you, about US law is that is that these, these are platforms that are based here, headquartered here. And so the ethos, the term you use, which I think is very useful that that kind of powers the political economy and law in this area has an outsized influence around the world. And so Europe has an approach, Brazil has actually been very creative in thinking about the enforcement of civil rights norms on network platforms. But, you know, I think a lot of people are waiting to hear what the US will do in the coming year or two. And I do think reform is coming. I think that's substantively true. I mean, I think it's substantively true that the fact that they're based here and reflect a very sort of American sensibility is you outlined at the very beginning about the ideas of expression, a philosophy of expression is true. I do think that like there, there, I do find that that that the global argument is shifts according to what's convenient. I mean, I think you hear some of these platforms say, well, we wouldn't want to adopt a Chinese standard of speech. So that that's why we need to operate this way. But then when it's convenient, they'll say it's actually really hard to have standards that work for every country. And so we need to, you know, we need to tailor sometimes in order to have the, in order to be able to operate a number of different countries. Like I, you know, there's like, there's a couple of places where there's a lot of equivocation that I think that that I think contributes to sort of deliberate confusion in this debate. I think that's one, I think the point you've made that to sort of assume that we haven't imported that we haven't brought over all kinds of forms of differential treatment and discrimination is another. I think the way in which the content malation costs are externalized to other countries, physically, you know, when the people that actually is sort of another one, there are a lot of places where I think, where I think the confusion we find ourselves in is our own in some ways. I think you're generous to call it a confusion, Sam. I actually think it's a deliberate way of mobilizing an interest in protecting the prerogatives of powerful intermediaries. And, you know, I don't want to overstate that. I mean, I think I could be more careful about that. But, but I, at a minimum, it's a confusion, right? And, and I think those three ways of thinking about it are, are exactly right. But I do think that this is, it's of a piece with a general, general and colorable concern about governmental localized government and any governmental regulation of information flows. I mean, that's a healthy skepticism, right? So, I mean, I mean, maybe I'm going a little off topic on this, but I do want to make the observation that even in the United States where we have a robust free speech doctrine, there are categories of speech and there are categories of people who are the targets of speech, who are, who are, for which there's law. And, and that's, so that not all content, and you started this way, kind of got fetish of speech and content, not all content is protected. All kinds of communicative acts are, are deemed dangerous. And, and I think we can allow that countries around the world can exert their sovereign authority to do that. I mean, there are limits how far they should be able to go of it. But anyway, so that's not a general reaction to what you said. Yeah, I think what I, I think that, that clearly, that seems to be a part of, one of the things I was going to ask you about is, you know, you've made the point early in this conversation that there are really, the steps that we can take are not, they're not hard to imagine, I think you said, you know, they're practical, we can, we've articulated them, we're not searching for a new legal theory, we've got legal, we've got theories in law, we've got theories of conduct, we've got theories of business management. I mean, I think environmental impact assessments are as much a theory of laws, they are a theory of business management, that we can be, that we can be applying to this. But it, I guess it strikes me that we, we, when, when we get stuck on these ways of articulating a philosophy of expression, ways of articulating a culture of expression. And so what if we, if we, you know, I'm asking you more of a political question in a way than a legal question, but what do you, what do you think we need to do to kind of get past these, these, these sort of high-minded arguments that make it very difficult to talk about reasonable control over, over content and expression? To talk about specific harms, talk about real harms. And, and I very much appreciate the observation you made, which I was, you know, I had a glib answer to, you know, just need to return to it. So, so we have to tell the story about how people are harmed.  I think you're right about that. And I, I'm, I'm okay with keep telling the stories, if this, you know, to be completely strategic about it, keep telling the story about people getting harmed, whether they're white or black. And because that's where we are. I mean, this, this immunity is not, it perpetuates and entrenches structural disparities, but this is an immunity that exposes all of us, right? The current governing logic exposes all of us to harms that would otherwise not be happening. So, keep telling the stories. But more than that, I, I do think that we're at a special moment in 2020, when we can talk about the ways in which rhetorical forms, legal forms perpetuate entrenched disparities, right? Where the discourse of neutrality is actually a discourse of oppression, when you don't recognize histories of oppression and disparity. So, but I don't think we need, I actually, you know, I don't strategically, I don't think we need to go that far. I think that we have enough stories of, of young white women who are harmed because of an immunity of, and maybe we need just needs to be frank, maybe these more stories of white men beginning harmed as a result of the immunity, which, and there, there are those as well. The story that out of the, the grinder case, out of New York heritage grinder case. I don't know. I mean, I don't know how far we can go on this. You asked me this question, not as a legal question, but as a kind of strategic question. And I can be cynical about it. And we just need to tell stories about people that are more, that look more like most people in America, or we can just keep telling stories about harm and injury. And in year, in 2020, I think we have an opening to talk about entrenched power disparities and racial subordination. I, you know, one of the things I like about the idea of environmental impact assessments is that I, there, there is something to those as storytelling devices. They're, now they're, it's a rehearsal of harm on the terms of the company, but there are, you know, for most of these, you know, I mean, a lot of people who are listening to this have seen these kinds of things. There's, there are technical standards for what you have to report. So there's only so much you can fudge. There's kind of a common language to what we're talking about happening. It creates the opportunity for discussion. I think I used to do a lot of work in voting rights around the time that section five of the Voting Rights Act was invalidated by the Supreme Court, which is the pre, is the, is the provision that for certain districts, as you know, but sort of for our audience, that certain districts with really historically disparate rates of vote registration by race had to get permission if they wanted to change election laws. And it always struck me that obviously a part of this sort of encroachment in state sovereignty was to protect people because the losing the right to vote is impossible to regain in a given election, but it also had the advantage of this storytelling, you know, it was documenting the way in which acts of oppression were being enacted and in some cases resisted. And, and, and, and the kind of clinical dispassion was actually an aid. It allowed us to sort of bureaucratize our response to that, to that kind of, that kind of oppression. So I don't, you know, I wonder maybe, maybe part of the moment of 2020 is that, is that we have these opportunities to say, you know, you need to be issuing racial impact statements. You need to have a civil rights audit every two years. You need to do these things that don't strike us as storytelling, but are really the elevation of, and the documentation of, you know, vulnerability and opportunity for harm. I don't, I don't know if you feel the same way, but that's certainly how I react to your idea. I very much like it. And I like the point and it's consistent with people who've made arguments about the importance of narrative in law. And I do, I don't know enough about the discussion involving environmental impact statements, although I didn't refer to them to know what the alignment is with this account of narrative. But story, it is about storytelling and in some ways means to destabilize or reorient the way we think about what companies do. I, but I am, I mentioned it, but I have to say I'm also a little skeptical about their relative impact. I mean, they're kind of check the box sorts of, so an algorithmic impact statement or an environmental impact statement, one impact statements that addressed a disparate impact of any automated decision making system or social media application would be, would be good for the accounting of the thing. But then what, right? But then what? And, and I, you know, I tend to think good old fashioned liability rules are, are, are as strong and useful a mechanism for putting people online as simple storytelling. Right. I mean, listen, I love a good story. And I think stories when that haven't been told should be told. Right. So, but, but, but I think, I think we need more than that. And another regulatory regime just to get at this is, is pre-clearance. So you, you mentioned the Voting Rights Act. We have a variety of public laws that are addressed to pre-approval that require government agency approval of some deployment of a system. Voting is one of them. The FDA operates another one. Right. And Andrew Tutt wrote this piece three years ago. I'm fascinated by it. My current project is focused on in the context of drugs and devices, the FDA for certain kinds of class three devices has to pre-clear before, before market deployment. Not for all. Right. So there are some categories of a product that are dangerous enough. And you suggested it actually in the way that you were describing things. So there's certain things in public law that we worry so much about. Maybe it's racial discrimination. Maybe it's consumer fraud. You know, maybe it's health care related information. Maybe it's election information. But there's certain kinds of information we worry so much about that, that we should have an accounting before the deployment, before the harm is under, happens. And so, so an algorithmic impact statement or environmental impact statement would be good. But I think we could do more. Right. We can, we can invoke the power of a public interest agent, a public interested agency to attend to this. Yeah, I think, I mean, another regulatory regime that comes to mind sort of the thinking of your both and approach is, you know, auto safety, which is kind of birth of a lot of public interest laws around this period. But you've got, you know, you have huge issue with auto deaths, 30s, 40s, 50s. And it's because the things we like about cars are the things that make them dangerous. If a car is bigger and faster, you are more likely to be in a fatal accident. The accident you're in is more likely to be a fatal one. And it seems to me we've, we've combined on the front end that you have to, that there are check the box exercises. There's a common language about what the harm is. You've got to, you have to have the safety engineers working at your company. They're empowered to do that.  And there's still were legal doctrines for remediation. That was a great example, I think, where the, the check the box system was covering up other ways in which engineering decisions were enabling harm. And so it strikes me part of the problem on the internet is that you still don't have that clarity about the harm. We still don't have enough clarity to haul the person. And you see that in the hearings with the, with the CEOs, I thought members of Congress were much more sophisticated this summer with technology CEOs than certainly than the Mark Zuckerberg hearing, but there's not a moral clarity. It seems to me yet about what the, what the harm is and whether that's sort of willful or, or to be developed, I don't know. So I'm curious about this point, Sam, that you make. So I mean, for me, there's a lot of moral clarity. And I think there's a lot of moral clarity for you. And I think, actually, I think a lot of people recognize that these intermediaries occupy a privileged place in ways in which we, in society. So I actually do think that there's a kind of normative interest that people are channeling. And maybe the confusion is in how to articulate it. That confusion, I think, is born from a strategy that means to confuse us, that fetishizes content, that fetishizes innovation. And, and, but, but the tools are, everything is, it's right, right before us. We see how powerful these companies are. So, I mean, it's, I guess I want to, I want to agree with you, but I want to say that maybe we can be far more aggressive in thinking about regulatory intervention, in spite of what we is presented as confusing. So let just last question, because we got to let you go. Are you, are you an optimist on this topic or a pessimist?  I tend to be an optimist about things. And I, and about things generally. And so I don't know if that's going to be helpful. But, but I do think I sense that people want some change. They do envision, I say people, I think most, most Americans are attentive to the possibility of changes coming with regards to what intermediaries must do. Even Facebook recognizes it when, when Mark Zuckerberg a year and a half ago, or was it two years ago said that we, you know, tell us how to be regulated. We want to regulate. Please regulate us. I think it's an admission that, that something is happening. So I'm, I'm hopeful that the challenging part is, are we going to end up in a place that is productive? I worry about stifling speech. I don't, I think that I know Knight worries about stifling speech. But our, so, so I mean, I do worry about that, but we are not even close to that place yet. Right. So I'm hopeful that some change happens. And, and I just, I worry to the extent is worried that we, we get it right. Fair enough. Well, this debate is not going away anytime soon. You can follow Olivia on Twitter at Olivia Sylvain. And as always, we'll send that out to you after the show with some of his writing. Olivia, thank you so much for joining us. Thanks very much, Sam. I very much appreciate it. All right, folks, before we go, just a quick note on some of our upcoming shows. September 10th next week, we'll have Nicole Austin-Hillary from Human Rights Watch to talk about civil rights in voting in election 2020. On September 17th, we'll welcome Professor Kathy Cohen from the University of Chicago to talk about race in America. And on September 24th, we'll have Alondra Nelson, president of the Social Science Research Council. As a reminder, this episode will be up on the website later. You can see this episode in any episode on demand at kf.org slash fdshow. You can also subscribe to the future of Democracy podcast on Apple, Google, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts. Email us at fdshow at kf.org. Or if you have questions for me, just send me a note on Twitter at TheSamGill. Please stay as always for 30 seconds to take a two-question survey, and we will end the show to the sounds of Miami songwriter Nick County. You can always find his music on Spotify. Until next week, thanks for joining us and stay safe.