y that might be. I would ask the minister whether she has considered whether a clinically led facility that might not breach existing laws could be looked at as an alternative, and it might be more expensive. I think that it was something that Gordon Lindhurst brought up as well. I also reflect on the Labour position, because it is important not to look at substance misuse from the sole lens of intravenous drug use, from the particular case, as acute as they are of people using heroin and opioids, because the problems of substance misuse are so much wider than that. As Annas Sarwar put it, we must not kid ourselves. Substance misuse and addiction is not something that is confined to a particular demographic or a particular age group. Alison Johnstone I am seeking clarity on that Labour position. Are you advocating that we move away from criminalising users to treating it as a public health issue? Daniel Johnson I am first and foremost that we have to treat addiction as a health issue. I think that the speaker after speaker of the Labour inches has made that very clear. If I have time, I would like to briefly touch on the criminal justice issues, but, just before I do it, Neil Findlay put it very well in terms of how to look at this from a local reality. The vital need to take a global perspective about looking at what works. Indeed, those were comments that were reflected by Jenny Marra. In the weeks and months that lie ahead of us, Scottish Labour is committed to an open, frank discussion using a summit to look at the wide range of policy options and approaches that can be taken to tackle substance and addiction in the round, because there has been a failure of policy. There is a failure in trying to criminalise individuals, because that is just fundamentally flawed logic, because you are not dealing with people who are looking after their rational self-interest—their addicts, their cannot—that is, by definition, something that they are incapable of doing. However, we also have to look at the particular failure in Scotland. We have had a doubling of drug deaths, as many people have pointed out. A level of drug deaths is two and a half times that of the rest of the UK, and eight times that of the rest of the EU. We have to consider why that is, what has happened here. I would just briefly like to touch on the criminal justice, because if you look at criminal justice, you see some of the most acute issues. Recently, the Justice Committee visited Circle, and the experiences there were quite terrific. I do not have time to go into them, but I urge all people in the chamber to examine the experience of addicts in the criminal justice system to look at the issues that they face, why it is not an appropriate context for them and the real changes that we need to make in our prisons, so that we can provide the support that those people need. Addicts will come into contact with the criminal justice system. It is unavoidable. No matter how much you place the emphasis, first and foremost on health and that is right, that is never going to be completely avoided. Just briefly in closing, we must have that broad frank debate, we must have holistic solutions and we must be evidence-led. Thank you very much. A few months ago, I, alongside my Lothian colleague Alison Johnstone, visited the Edinburgh drug and alcohol partnership as part of the substance misuse inquiry that the Parliament's Health and Sport Committee was conducting. It was, for me, one of the most valuable visits that I have undertaken in my time since becoming an MSP, but it also left me concerned that we as a country are failing to address the drug crisis that is facing too many of our fellow citizens. On that visit, we met with a number of service users who were being supported through a peer-led tailored approach to try to stabilise their addiction, as well as delivering counselling and other forms of support. During the conversations that we had with several people, it was clear that early intervention had failed them in the past and that the opportunity to access early pathways to support and recovery was simply not good enough or simply not available. What will stick with me is the story that one individual told Alison and myself about how she had ended up where she was. Now, aged 40 at just 12, her father had introduced her to heroin and that led her on to a spiral of addictions over the course of her life. It was, I think, a real example of the adverse childhood experiences that increasingly we are talking about in this Parliament. As my colleague Brian Whittle spoke about, it is important that we look at this side of how we are stopping addicts in the first place. I asked a specific question about when and how those who saw early help to address their drug addiction had actually occurred. On a number of cases visits to GP surgeries or other support services had been met with a response of individuals not being enough of a problematic drug user to merit a referral to specialist support services. That is why I believe, and we on these benches believe, that we need to see a new approach. Like with the Government's aspiration around mental health, we think that the Scottish Government needs to develop and ask one's get help strategy for drug addiction in Scotland today. Daniel Johnson I think that that is helpful. I do wonder what the Tory position is specifically on safe injection rooms, because it has not been clear from the speeches so far. Can you clarify that one way or the other? Miles Briggs I do not know if you were here for the opening speeches. Annie Wells outlined that quite clearly, that we do not believe that there is a case for them to be put in place now. We think that current services in place are there to support people. I would like to pay tribute to those and praise those who work in our drug and alcohol partnerships across Scotland. No, I want to make time. One programme that I have been hugely impressed with here in Lothian is Lothian and Edinburgh's abstinence project. LEAP is a programme of up to just 20 people who want to stop using drugs. People who take part in the programme can access supported housing, run by the city of Edinburgh council. Access to industry also works with people on the programme to help them to start in training and education or to get a job or part of a tailored recovery plan, and it is delivering those tailored recovery plans, which we need to focus on. Perhaps most importantly, people who complete the programme then get support for up to two years after they finish. Sadly, service users told us just how the very limited number of places available mean that it is very difficult to get on to such programmes, but it was an aspiration and they all wanted to aspire to achieve. Deputy Presiding Officer, that is the sort of investment and expanded initiative that we should be encouraging and delivering in Scotland. No, I want to make progress, I have a lot to say on this issue. I visited a number of drug and alcohol partnerships across Scotland. I am sorry to say that they continue to highlight that they are indeed the Cinderella service of our NHS. As Alex Cole-Hamilton stated, perhaps what really demonstrated that for most of them recently was when the Scottish Government looked to cut £20 million of funding from those partnerships before undertaking what I think we have all welcomed a U-turn on that decision. This Parliament has a record on drugs and substance misuse policy, which it must be judged upon. But I cannot honestly stand here today and say that I think that we as a country have got this right, or that the SNP Scottish Government proposals simply to refresh the strategy is what is needed today or is at all good enough for the most vulnerable people in our society. I think that Jenny Marra and Neil Findlay made excellent speeches, and I agree with the sentiments of what they had to say. We have a national crisis and we need national action, not just one policy area that the Government is interested in. I sat beside Mr Briggs on the health committee for over a year and a half. I have respect for him. I do not believe the position that he has put forward from his front bench is his view. You should be honest, I believe, with the chamber. Tell us what your real view is. Before you do, Mr Briggs, can I just say to everyone in the chamber, both in interventions and in speech contributions, you should always speak through the chair and not directly to each other? I very much welcome the opportunity that the new SNP Government took back in 2008 to develop the road to recovery, which is what we should be debating today. That strategy was intended to focus on recovery. I welcome the fact and pay tribute to the fact that my former party leader, Annabelle Goldie and the Scottish Conservative group at that time put so much work into trying to make the road to recovery a success, but we need to be honest and accept that, by all measures, the strategy has not delivered. It has now been in place for 10 years, during which time, as we have heard, drug deaths have increased by 50 per cent. Recent figures now show that drug deaths in Scotland are running at two and a half times the rate of the rest of the United Kingdom. I have spent a number of months researching and looking at different models of care and support for drug and alcohol addicts, as Neil Findlay has outlined. We, on these benches, want to be part of forming a new national strategy, an overarching national strategy, and that is why I have written to ministers in the past. That is why I have called for this review to be extended. The first time the minister has spoken to me about this was when she phoned me yesterday evening ahead of this debate. In 2007, the then First Minister, Jack McConnell, visited a trial of neuroelectric therapy, a drug-free addiction treatment invented by a Scottish neurosurgeon, Dr Meg Patterson, and saw at first hand how addictions can be treated differently. That treatment is used today in drug rehabilitation services across the world, but not here in Scotland and is only available in private clinics. I accept that the most effective treatment will always depend on the circumstances of the individual. There cannot be and is not one size that fits all, but we need to see a truly recovery-focused strategy that aims to reduce the number of addicts in Scotland today. The use of opiate replacement and heroin-assisted treatment should be limited and only used as a short-term route to recovery. It is clear that we need more than just a policy refresh being proposed by SNP ministers today, and that is what our amendment seeks to deliver. We need a sector-led review of all drugs policies in Scotland. We need to look towards how we can truly create a recovery-focused network. That is the focus that Scottish Conservatives envisaged the road to recovery strategy that would indeed deliver over a decade ago and embed recovery models in all future delivery arrangements. We on these benches believe that it is time for this Parliament to truly make this a major priority and for a full sector-led cross-party review on drugs. I support the motion and amendment in Annabelle Goldie. Annie Wells' name. I call Eileen Campbell to wind up the debate. Can you take us to decision time, please, minister? The debate has been, as Daniel Johnson articulated, been challenging. It has been divided at times, but it has also been incredibly emotional. That is entirely appropriate as we maturely need to consider, as a Parliament, how we bring our collective thoughts in a hyn. Excuse me, minister. Could you pull your microphone in a bit? I apologise. In order to effectively tackle the problems that Scotland is currently facing with substance use. The motion that I have presented to Parliament seeks on the subject of safe drug facilities Parliament's agreement to ask of the UK Government the ability of us here in Scotland to respond to a public health challenge with a public health solution. It is not an easy solution. It is not an easy issue. It may not be immediately popular or comfortable. Therefore, aside from some points that are made by colleagues, I have genuinely appreciated the general tone and articulation of Opposition members on their views on the safe drugs facility, particularly those from colleagues from Labour, Green and the Liberal Democrat benches, and their openness to consider it and to work together on the issue. As Neil Findlay said, the issue is too important to be a party-political dogfight. It requires us to work together to put aside the party-political point-scoring, focus minds and roll-up-er-sleeves to try and tackle the problem. As Neil Findlay and Claire Hawke reminded us, the 167 deaths represent a huge and untimely loss of life, a devastation for the families and loved ones left behind. Those are mothers, their daughters, their sons, their fathers and their friends, and, like many in the chamber, I have met many of the families impacted by problem substance misuse and drug deaths. I have attended the remembering services, seen the trauma caused and listened to the stories of helplessness from families who felt unable to help their loved ones or to keep them safe. Listening to those stories, each and every MSP here should be thinking there but for the grace of God go I. Addiction is not something that only impacts some people some of the time. It can and it does affect us all. Claire Hawke summed it up simply by saying that they are people. Those people deserve the help and support that they need in order to cope or recover from their addiction. That is the premise that we must base our approach, and that is why, as a public health approach, based on respect, tolerance and solidarity is needed. As I said in my own statement, we and the Government have chosen to treat problems substance use as a public health issue, which would naturally imply that we would seek a public health response where possible to address some of the harms posed. What we are currently seeing in Glasgow in terms of rising drug deaths and increasing numbers of individuals infected with HIV, we clearly fall into this category. An evidence-led response would seem not just sensible but would seem absolutely essential. I should be clear, however, that this does not mean that this Government is losing sight of the criminal elements associated with some of the illegal drug trade. In response to Sandra White's points, although we are clear that we want to help and support those affected by problem substance use, we are still committed to doing everything that we can to tackle the scourge of illegal drugs and the dealers who caused the misery that blights the lives of so many. However, let us also remind ourselves of why the safe consumption facility is so necessary. The proposed safer consumption facility is designed to service the needs of an estimated 4 to 500 individuals who inject publicly in the city centre and experience high levels of harm. There have been outbreaks of HIV, more than 100 new cases since 2015, anthrax and botulism. The proposals would help to reduce the risk of future outbreaks. In 2016, 170 drug-related deaths in Glasgow City Council up from 157 in the previous year. In the BMA, the European Monitoring Centre for Drugs and Drug Addiction and the advisory council on the misuse of drugs have indicated their support for pursuing safer drug consumption proposals in order to promote harm reduction. Those are all efforts based on evidence. However, at this time, the misuse of drugs act 1971 is reserved legislation and, as the Lord Advocate indicated in his response to Glasgow HSCP in November last year, the lawful operation of such a facility could only be secured through changes to existing legislative regime. It is on that point that I seek to get the support of Parliament to reach out to colleagues across the chamber to seek agreement from the UK Government to do something on that issue, to enable me to say that we have a united voice, politicians, along with the professionals, practitioners and those people who are most impacted. I am very clear how I want to deal with the constitutional arrangement of Scotland, but I know that view is not shared by the rest of Parliament. That is not what is motivating me on to make this plea. My motivation is to do the right thing, because, as the minister responsible, I do not want to have this chance with the privilege of ministerial office to do nothing or to do the simple thing or just to hope that this issue goes away. We need to unite behind something innovative and bold like this to tackle the problem effectively. Annas Sarwar I want to thank the minister for what she has said and welcome the tone in which she has said it, and I repeat that we will be supporting the Government's motion today, but in that spirit of consensus, we will bring our Parliament together and recognise that we have a challenge that goes historic—not just this Government but previous Labour Governments, too—to ask whether she will be supporting our amendment to this motion. Aileen Campbell I think that, unfortunately, because of the approach that has been taken around calling the existing strategy a failure, I do not think that that sits comfortably with us. I understand and I appreciate absolutely the content of many of your speakers today but, on the basis that the existing strategy is deemed to be a failure, I cannot agree. There has been a number of things achieved, a number of ways in which we have delivered, a number of improvements, but we are not losing sight of the shortfalls and the gaps that need to be plugged, which is why we want to renew our approach. Miles Briggs Minister for taking that intervention. One thing that has come out from today's debate is that a number of members are uncomfortable about the current strategy. Would she agree to a secto-led cross-party review of that strategy, as all parties have now called for? Aileen Campbell I am absolutely willing to work with other MSPs from across the Parliament. I absolutely will continue. In fact, I will continue the dialogue after this debate and make sure that we do seek the ideas, the opinions, the thoughts, the views and the considered opinion that many have expressed today to ensure that that informs our strategy. The reason why we are refreshing it and renewing it is because, exactly, the reasons that have been articulated that there is a need to understand the changing landscape of drug addiction, and there is a need to address the age and group of people who are ultimately becoming the drug of death stats that we have to grapple with each and every year. The safe consumption facility is not the totality of our ambitions to tackle problem substance use. That is why we are renewing our strategy to reflect the changing landscape of drug taking in Scotland, taking on board all the views and opinions today, and making sure that we can consult and engage with those in the sector. To provide reassurance that our approach is far-reaching, our strategy will ensure that wider health and social needs are taken into account as part of people's treatment and support. That will include joining up with a range of work across Government to tackle poor mental health, loneliness, social isolation, employability, homelessness, children affected by parental substance issues, and, in response to the calls from Neil Findlay and Claire Hockey, absolutely tackling the issue of stigma to ensure that we can support those people and make sure that we change the culture, the stories and the articulation around people who are in desperate need. It will recognise that the nature of Scotland's drug problem has changed. There is a need for a greater focus on harm reduction measures for the ageing group of long-term drug users who are the major contributors to the increase in drug-related deaths, but we should recognise that we have seen significant progress made since 2008. Drug taking overall is falling, and the drug use among young people remains low. We have also achieved significant reductions in treatment times for those who need help with drug and alcohol problems. I can board the express concerns by Neil Findlay, Ruth Maguire and others around some of those stats, but we will absolutely continue to build on the achievements that we have made and absolutely intend to plug the gaps that we know need to be plugged. A number of other members have raised issues that I want to address. The motion today is to seek to unite behind safe consumption facilities. In response to points raised by Sandra Warwick and Daniel Johnstone, Glasgow is looking to introduce a combined facility to allow both safer consumption facilities and heroin assisted treatments to coexist location-wise. Glasgow health and social care partners are looking to locate the facility in the city centre of that area, which currently sees the majority of drug-taking behaviour. There will, of course, be a strong consultation with residents and businesses in advance of that. I also share the views that have been expressed around the decision-buying network rail. I absolutely share that disappointment as well. We will continue to work with Glasgow health and social care partnership in order to find ways in which we enable them to cope as best they can. I would like to again thank colleagues for their views and opinions. I understand that there are differences along the edges, but I certainly want to commit today to all parties that I will endeavour to work with everybody on the issue to ensure that we can unite behind a refreshed and renewed drug strategy that deals and copes with the changing landscape of drug-taking in Scotland, but absolutely does not lose sight of the need to be bold, to be innovative, to challenge uncomfortable feelings around some of our approaches, but absolutely always motivated to try and tackle the drug-related deaths. I think that we all feel a sense of real disappointment and devastation about the impact that it causes in our communities. I again reach out to other parties and will continue to work with them to endeavour to make this a success. Thank you. That concludes our debate on safe injection facilities and we move to decision time. The first question is that amendment 11695.2, in the name of Annie Wells, who seeks to amend motion 11695 in the name of Aileen Campbell on safe injection facilities, be agreed? Are we all agreed? No. We are not agreed. We will move to a vote. Members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on amendment 11695.2, in the name of Annie Wells, is yes, 27, no, 80. There were no abstentions. Amendment is therefore not agreed. The next question is that amendment 11695.3, in the name of Anas Sarwar, which seeks to amend the motion in the name of the minister, Aileen Campbell, be agreed? Are we all agreed? No. We are not agreed. We will move to a vote. Members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on amendment 11695.3, in the name of Anas Sarwar, is yes, 47, no, 54. There were six abstentions. The amendment is therefore not agreed. The next question is that amendment 11695.1, in the name of Alex Cole-Hamilton, which seeks to amend the motion in the name of Aileen Campbell, be agreed? Are we all agreed? No. We are not agreed. We will move to a division. Members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on amendment 11695.1, in the name of Alex Cole-Hamilton, is yes, nine, no, 98. There were no abstentions. The amendment is therefore not agreed. The final question is that motion 11695, in the name of Aileen Campbell, on safe injection facilities, be agreed? Are we all agreed? No. We are not agreed. We will move to a vote. Members may cast their votes now. The result of the vote on motion 11695, in the name of Aileen Campbell, is yes, 79, no, 27. There was one abstention. The motion is therefore agreed. And that concludes decision time. I now close this meeting.


I know it's corny that Crowley's number is 666, but still, it was pretty well delivered by Mark Shepard. Hey guys, this is my review for Episode 22 Clip Show. This is a Andrewdab related episode, and I say that because it has the highs of good Andrewdab episodes, as well as the idiocies. The episode starts with our boy Tommy from the Wendigo episode. Number 2 All of a sudden in a cab and having some PTSD then his head explodes. We then go to the brothers who are finding out about how to cure a demon. There's still some strife between Dean and Castiel, and admittedly the more they talk about it, the more this whole Castiel keeping the tablet away from humans kind of is stupid because it sounded cool at the time, but the more and more you think about it, why did he do it? It felt like it was a storyline that they had, but they never actually did anything with it. But the brothers start to go on this little treasure hunt because they find out about a priest, two priests who were able to figure out how to kind of cure a demon. One's dead, but the other one's still alive and through a film reel that shot like a handheld, but also somehow has sound which would not have worked back then. And then with an audio recording, which I will admit how the brothers listened to the audio, that was good camera work. Slow pull in as the drama of the scene got more and more interesting, the implications of what the father was doing, more and more interesting. I love that. I actually really like how the episode starts and how it keeps going until they come up with the plan of how to cure the demon. Why don't we just summon one? Well, actually we've got one in a box in concrete. You got dad's old sewing kit?  Why would you put one of the most powerful demons, one that you found out that you cannot kill back together again? Sure, you still have the bullet in there, but there are so many other ways this could have been handled.  For instance, the whole idea is that Crowley is killing off people who the brothers have saved, putting them in a bind, making them feel like everything they've done has been pointless, and killing off people higher and higher in regard of people that they liked and that they worked with.  What they could have had is that they were trying to summon demons, but they couldn't do it, and then Crowley would call them saying, hey, we're killing off people. Then they would go to a few of the people whose houses that they've seen die, and then they'd be like, okay, we are in a bind. Let's get Abaddon out. That's a bad idea. It's the only one we've got. And then they'd go, and then you'd have to unfortunately figure out another way to make this happen. And I think the best thing they could have done is she's going to go get killed, the one from the Bloody Mary episode. Great character, by the way. That would have put them in a bind. Maybe then they could have put Castiel in the room with her, but then he gets called in by Abaddon, which that's also a thing in itself. I like how Abaddon coerces Castiel into helping him with the gates.  Hey, there's a Nephilim. There's only one of them on the planet. Got to cut her heart out. What? I get that Metatron is using Castiel at a point where he is desperately trying to amend the wrongs he's made.  However, it is a lot to believe.  The only way it works somewhat is that the Nephilim tries to kill them. And that's kind of the thing. Also, Metatron said Nephilim in a really weird way too. And then there's another bit where Abaddon even talks about how she tore apart the priest who came up with the thing. But I had to kind of think about it and be like, okay, maybe this is Abaddon when she was in a different body. Not the one that's right in front of them, because if I'm correct, she followed the grandfather through the timehole immediately. So there's no way she had time to go and kill priests. But again, correct me if I'm wrong on that part. As I said, I like some of the elements of this episode. The story that I haven't even really talked about is the idea of Crowley killing off these people that Sam and Dean have saved. And the hits from the deaths go up and up and up until we get Sarah Blake from Providence.  A great relationship for Sam that only lasted a very short time and this character has never been brought back since. But that death hits so hard. And I love how they're on the phone with Crowley because I did like the awe of it that it was the phone that had it. This is a very much a dated part of this episode too, because there's no way you could do that now because of just just because of how phones are constructed now. I do like half of this episode. I like the stakes that Crowley is doing. I love the lore behind Curing a Demon.  I do not like how Castiel is so willing to do the most awful thing. I get it. I get that he's trying to atone for what he's done. But it's such a leap for you as an audience member to just believe this. They are trying to do this so quickly. He literally met Abaddon 15 minutes ago. I think that maybe if Maveritron and Castiel had a little bit more, maybe like an episode, one or two more episodes. This would have been more believable, but I can't. I love how the episode ends. I love the stakes that have been laid. But I just hate the giant leaps of idiocy that happened to get there. So in the end, I'm going to give Clip Show a 4 out of 7. I feel that's pretty fair.  Also, yeah, the Clip Show actually, it was a lot of clips from moments throughout the show. That was kind of interesting.  It actually made sense as to why they were doing it. But anyways, that's my long-winded praise slash rant of this episode. What did you guys have to say? I am doing well. Thank you, souvenir. I enjoyed Abaddon's presence in season nine as a reoccurring threat, but how she returned to the show was a stretch, at least for me. Thank you. Would Sam and Dean really leave her unguarded for even a second once she had become conscious? Yes, would her demonic hands be able to simply pull out a bullet that had carved out, especially deep in her skull in a matter of seconds? In what scenario would she not immediately kill them or carry out some sort of gruesome revenge before they had to trap her again? Why wasn't she in a devil's trap as an added precaution? This is not overkill while dealing with a knight of hell. Exactly. That was kind of my thoughts. Like, you were dealing with something you know you cannot kill. Why are you being so brazen? I like how this episode built up Crowley as a villain after already getting us to despise him earlier in the season. The personal vicious attacks against the Winchester's past saves added to the stakes of the season and added an intensity that made Crowley a very worthy opponent for the finale, which I believe was possibly meant to be the series finale. As I've mentioned before, as the show was going along after season six, they basically out-operated that every season was the last season they were going to do. They didn't know until I think like three episodes, until they had to film the last three episodes when the show was going to be renewed or not. Crowley couldn't match the power of a villain like Lucifer, the menace of as the Yellow-eyed Hazel, but he was still one of the better antagonists that the show gave us. Yeah, you see how I enjoyed and did not enjoy this episode. I enjoyed the episode. I like seeing the brothers struggle in this episode. Crowley going after past saves to make a point was a neat idea. Yeah, it was. And I kind of wish it had been a little bit of an earlier thing, maybe. Like, that could have dealt with a lot of the emptiness that the season had. Clip show, in my opinion, is the most underrated second to last episode of the season. Well, my friend, I unfortunately don't agree with you entirely on that one. That's weird, is every time I watch it, I forget it is a second to last episode. That I can agree with. To me, this is the feel of a mid-season finale when Castiel hastily agrees to undergo the trials, which would supposedly seal the pearly gates of heaven. It honestly reminds me of the pace and the quickness of when Sam and Dean got the two horsemen rings from the second to last episode of season 5. It also is an interesting quirk, a quick lore dump that angels in heaven are divided in factions trying to figure out how to fix the hierarchy that maintain the heaven's order of governing the universe. I would have loved to see that explored in the season earlier, but it still makes sense that the Judeo-Christian apocalypse and how helpless they felt after the Leviathans were on earth and that civil war between them got worse. It's a very strategic genius and manipulative idea for Metatron to convince Castiel to seal heaven. Yeah, it does. It's so much of a reach to have it happen so quickly, so the angels wouldn't let the civil war happen on earth. I also love how the spell that involves sealing heaven, again supposedly, involves killing our first on-screen appearance of a Nephilim. Of course, it would be very easy to kill her once we learned that the show's Nephilim's are stronger. See, that's what I mean. Like, it just was such a thrown-in thing. I thought it was so weird. Also, Joe, you went long here, buddy. Like, I like these for the finale. Like, keep it, well, mind you, the next episode is, no, wait, we still have two more. I really enjoy an episode of Lore involved in the Restoring of Demon's Humanity. This I do agree with, after being damned. I love that the brothers think that they can do it to Abaddon. No, I don't.   Her escaping, and pulling the devil's trap, but it was fun to watch, too.  I like how she does it, though. It's really smart, also, for Crowley and his desperation to start killing off people. The Sam and Dean have saved throughout the show. It was a bargaining chip to stop the trials to seal off Hell. I'm really glad the Voiders used cameos sparingly of who Sam saved. I will agree with that. I was happy it wasn't a lot of them. This is also probably some of them that could only, you know, not really appear. This is also the episode where we learned that Crowley was a child, as his mother happened to be a witch, and that they would see that later on in the show. Oh, yeah. Giving his monologue was there, Big Dying was one of the best parts of the episode. I'll agree with that, especially when you realize it was an avalanche.  Absolutely. Very good. Very good notice on there, Joe. The clip show was an okay episode. Having Crowley take the time to kill the people that Sam and Dean saved. I know they did something similar last season with the Leviathans, but Crowley is a bit more gory using witch magic instead of relying on his powers. I like that too. The one thing for this episode was the son of a witch actually was that mommy taught me a few tricks. I'm amazed that they had this line in well before a character would appear, but also poor Sarah. She had a good life going after she and Sam had saved her, and then she dies. So is the fate of returning characters of the show? Yeah, typical of the writers this episode, there's too many stories to follow. Metatron manipulating cast was a good one, and it was fun seeing the introduction of the Nephilim, poor Jane, though thought she would be a great character. The season finale is one of the better ones of the season I have fun watching. The clip show is interesting seeing how some of the people that Sam and Dean rescued, but sad to see what happened to them, especially Sarah Blake in this episode classic move on Crowley due to his desperation. A new Metatron was manipulating Castiel for other reasons other than closing the gates. I feel really bad for Jane as she didn't deserve what happened to her once Castiel was blinded. That's what I mean. It's so quick. If it had been just a little bit more, you know, padded towards it, I would have believed it, but it was just so much.  That didn't bother me so much. It was the logic of it all that bothered me. For reasons why I find this episode so frustrating, Dean had every right to feel angry and hurt by Castiel. Now obviously Dean would have forgiven him for some time past, but Castiel's brilliant idea to make things right with Dean was to ditch him, not tell him where he was going in or all his calls. So all he could do was work with this creepy hermit and kill an old woman. Great plan, Cast. I get bringing Abaddon back, but did they really need to make it the brothers fault? Exactly.  We already had Metatron being their faults for this season. Did we really need another villain rise to power unintentionally to the brothers fault? Crowley's plan and then using Sarah Blake as a fan favorite girl to toy with the fans was diabolically genius. I was never a Sam fanboy, but I acknowledge their chemistry. She had a really good one there. But if fails on rewatch, the whole point of Sarah and others death was to get the brothers, specifically Sam, to have a personal reason to kill Crowley. But we all know that doesn't happen. Hell, after this season, he's basically redeemed. And this was something I was thinking about. Actually, I'm happy you're bringing this up. And the brothers work alongside him and Sarah is just never mentioned. Unlike with Jess, Sarah's death is truly meaningless. And just here for the shock valley. But the worst thing is they repeated what Sarah, what happened to Sarah in season 12. They take place at almost the same time and near at the end of the season to another fan favorite, Sam girl, Eileen.  This is why I couldn't take Sam's breakup feeling seriously. He should have revived, they should have revived the relationship didn't end in death. I only know the two of other surviving Sam girls, one from that hippie in season six, and then Velma from Scooby-Doo. Dear God. Well, that's some bad statistics. All right, guys, that's it. We are now heading into sacrifice. One of the best episodes of the post-Crippy era. As far as I remember it, are you sure about that? Give me your guys's thoughts about that in the comments below and I'll read those off in the next review. For my Patreon supporters, you guys will be seeing the review early, a few days early. Thank you for that. I apologize. Again, I've been meaning to do a follow-up on the Patreon thing. I'm going to do that very, very soon. Thank you again for watching the review. I hope you liked it. If you did, leave a like. And if you're interested in more subscribe, and I will see you guys next week for the last episode review of Supernatural Season 8.


This is the Ricoh 35s, but first last week I asked you guys to go ahead and write me any questions you had or anything like that and The response has been kind of crazy I'm actually surprised because I only have one subscriber, but anyway. All right. Let's look at the first letter Dear Mick Your father and I are so proud. Okay, that one's from my mom. We'll skip that one Here we go Dear Mick, I really am enjoying the channel so far. Can you please remember to smile more often? You look so cute when you smile. Okay. Okay. All right.  Love mom. Okay It's kind of embarrassing. Okay, this one's not from my mom Dear Mick, I think you should comb your hair once in a while. It's getting kind of out of hand All right. Well, I didn't need comments on my appearance I meant comments on like the channel. How's it doing? Is are there any cameras? You guys want to see me talk about or go shoot with that kind of thing, but all right. I Would love to see an episode. Okay I would love to see an episode in which you shoot with the Nikon F. Okay, the original one That's kind of cool. I don't actually have that camera, but I will get one. All right continuing on Keep up the good work. I'm so proud of you. P.S. It's your father's Birthday. Are you coming over for dinner?  All right. That's a good one Dear Mick, even though your YouTube isn't very good. I like Seeing people fail. So I keep watching Because it gets worse and worse. How is it that you have actually lost subscribers? Well, the joke's on you because I only had one subscriber. So that's not really a big deal So that was a pretty bad idea. I think we'll stick to camera stuff for now on because that didn't go so well But anyway, so Rico 35s now important to note is this is the 35s Not there is also a regular 35s. I think that came later on so when I first got this camera It actually came bundled in with a bunch of other cameras and right away. I was actually really impressed I'm like, this is a pretty nice camera. It's not a high-end camera. It's a little bit more obscure. They're not really well known But it's actually a surprisingly good camera. The first thing I noticed actually was that the viewfinder is pretty reasonable It's not like a m3 bright patch, but it's pretty good I really liked the build quality. The thing is you go back with these old cameras and even the lower-end cameras had a much Higher build quality than what we have today So build quality pretty decent now. Here's an interesting thing about this camera. It has a Advanced knob at the top here But also built-in is this arm that lets you advance the film as well So what you kind of do is pop it out. It's a nice spot for your thumb and you can go ahead and Advance it that way. It actually is pretty handy what you get used to it when I was shooting I kind of you know Kind of picked up the flow up really quickly. It feels very natural It's interesting that having an advanced lever was actually novel at the time. So interesting Other things has these like gravateers kind of on the side that help you focus it's not the most attractive thing about this camera, but It's actually pretty usable, you know other cameras like let's say the cannonet and a lot of those rangefinders had a little Arm a little knob whatever that let you focus this one has two so you kind of kind of you know You choose what works best for you so in order to open the camera you just move it to the open position on each of these wheels and Then you can pop it open like so. I've shot one roll on this camera I shot in color it's kind of hard to really judge the quality of the images that come out of this camera because I Shot on I didn't shoot on a pro film I shot on a pretty standard Fuji film and then I processed it in expired chemicals with a Not random time, but I kind of guesstimated that seven minutes would do it the thing about color chemicals is every time you use it You exhaust it a little bit more It doesn't make it unusable, but you have to add time to it and what I had done is I had a lot I didn't keep track of how many I processed with those chemicals and I just kind of guessed how many and Compensated for the fact that I was using expired film and that kind of thing so the images aren't spectacular But they came out reasonably well I would note a lot of what appears to be out of focus is because I think of the chemical process You just it doesn't look sharp because of that it doesn't mean I missed my focus when I was shooting with this camera I actually noticed that the rangefinder patch was slightly out of alignment It was an out of alignment. It was out of alignment, but it doesn't mean you couldn't get your focus You just kind of had like the patch was not in alignment basically Vertically horizontally it worked so I could focus with it But once I was focused I kind of had a double image still But it still worked in any case what I did is I just chose to shoot with zone focusing I started to get used to that because I've been shooting with a roly 35 and I've got my my veto, which is also a range a Scale focusing camera So that's pretty much it. I think that's a good rundown of this camera Would I get it? I wouldn't go out of my way getting this camera But if you guys want a really decent rangefinder that's probably not it might be hard to find because I don't think there's that many of them But it's not a high-value camera and you would have a lot of fun shooting with it It's a surprisingly high quality camera So I'll do a full review when I go out and really shoot with this I want to try black and white film on it next I think some of these older lenses look a little bit different when you shoot color So even if they're color corrected they have a different look than a modern lens So that could also be a factor. I might also shoot some studio work with it Then we can really know the quality of what comes out of this camera. I'll shoot studio work I will process it in fresh chemicals and Yeah, it should we'll see we'll get a better idea of how these images look and I'll include that when I fully review it So I'll see you guys on the next one


Hello everyone, so maybe we can start那我们现在可以开始我看到现在大部分的观众都是中国的观众所以我们今天也是有同船的所以我就用中文来去做这个演讲那其他比如说外籍的人是你可以去拿这个同船耳机So let's get started, it's the final session todaySo I think you've had a long daySo I hope I can give you more informationin my session, you've been from Intel and PGWorking on Network Platform GroupYou might know that TLS is a very common application or protocolSo first I want to ask how many of you know anything about TLSSo I can briefly introduce TLSThe logic of my presentationFirst I will introduce TLSSome of you may know itBut some of you may not be familiar with itAnd then I will introduce another topicTLS is a protocolHow could we improve the performance of TLSWe use a quick assist technology to accelerate TLSAnd when we do the accelerationWe found that not only do we need hardwareWe also need softwareSo we designed a synchronous frameworkSo we enabled OpenSLCinema acceleration frameworkAnd we have received a lot of feedback from the usersAnd many users or clientsWe have deployed this frameworkAnd we found that we can enhance this frameworkAnd then we enhanced itAnd then we applied it to VPP frameworkAnd then that's the final stepAnd then we can improve the performanceWe also found that they might have some requestsFor encryption, decryption, etcWe will talk about thisSo we found the problemWe solved the problemWe solved the problemWe found new problemsAnd how could we solve the new problemsAnd then put it in the new applicationThat's the logicSo let's look at the application scenarioNow this network is differentI get this graph from GoogleIt shows the TLS use cases and current statusYou can see TLS accounts for 40%And in this year it accounts for 80% to 90%LikeAppleIt requires all the app can support TLSOtherwise they will not let your app appear on the app storeOr when we do the service meshEnvoy this kind of service meshesYou also need to have the TLSFor certificationSo the application scenarios of TLSAre quite a lotYou convert the internal trafficTo external trafficOr from internal storage trafficTo external network trafficSo TLS protocol was widely appliedOr briefly introduce what is TLSIf we use OSR protocol to describeIt's like the presentation layer of TCPTLS cannot solve the actual problemsIt can make your sessions more secureYou have the handshakeThen you have the TLS sessionsLike clients say helloI need to have a conversation with your serverI will hold TLS versionAnd also encrypted protocolThen I will tell this to serverSo it will give me feedbackAnd then I can talkAnd I will have a random numberI can give you this listSo the server will send the public key to the clientFor example, when you visit Google or AliAli Baba is in the cityYou can catch the authenticationYou need to do the authorizationOr authenticationYou need to know if that's the right personYou need to talk to the right personAnd TLS can recognize this public keyI can get the Ali credential as wellBut the key is whether you have the private keyThe client will send another random numberAnd then it will be encryptedBy the public key the server has givenIt's just too complicatedThis time the client needs to giveHe doesn't need to use a machineThis machine will use the server's public keyThe random number will be encryptedBy the server's public keyAnd then the server has the private keyIt can decrypt itIf you use one formYou can only have limited processing capabilityAfter you have the random numberYou will have TRFAnd then it will create a keyThat enables two parties to talkThat's the process of TLSTLS protocol is very heavyIt needs to transfer a lot of informationMore importantlyIt needs to have a symmetric key calculationAfter they have encryptedHow could they do the decryptionThat involves heavy procedures and stepsIf we use software to do the TLS handshakeOn the current Intel CPUFor one second we can do 1KThat's a very good result alreadyIf we use this CPUThe CPS can be 60KSo it's 60 timesThere's one solution to solve this problemWe can use hardware to accelerateFor some first sample encryption and decryptionWe can let the hardware to do thisCPU is where the true value liesIf you use CPU to do some simple encryptionIt's not worth itSo we have designed a hardwareTo do encryption and decryptionWe can save CPU for more important tasksFor more complicated calculationsAnd because it's a specially designed hardwareIt can save your total cost as wellI will introduce this hardwareWe call it Intel Quick Assist TechnologyMonitor is tired as wellSo the Intel Quick Assist TechnologyCan do the following thingsIt can solve some heavy workloadLike encryption, decryption, compressHere we focus on encryption and decryptionYou have this bulk cryptoAfter TOS handshakeYou will have this symmetric bulk cryptoAnd then you have the public key encryptionDuring the handshake when you need to do theA synchronizeAnd then it can also do compressionWe will work with ClouderaTo compress the dataThose are parallel functionalitiesOn the rightWe can also do secure key managementWe can help you to protect your keyThe Q80Can help you to do encryptionDecryption and accelerationIt can take off the workloadOf encryption and decryptionSo that to improve the performance of the systemBut after you have the hardwareWhether you can fully releaseIt's performanceAnd that will involve the softwareIf you look at the common software architectureYou need to send a request to hardwareAt application layerYou send the request to open SSLAnd then open SSL send the request to Q80 engineWhich is the hardwareAnd thenAfter you have the processYou complete the transfer from software to hardwareWithout changing the softwareThe software will be waiting for the hardwareTo complete the workWhile the software is waiting the CPUMaybe sleepThat's not efficientBecause CPU will waste timeSo we need to fully utilizeFully utilize hardwareFor example while hardware is workingThe software should do something elseSimultaneously as wellThen we use this asynchronous modelThe hardware and your softwareCan do the tasks in parallelIt's like this computing unitIf you can make sure your computing unitCan workAnd the CPU will not stopAt the same timeWe hope both the computing unitAnd the CPUCan work very efficientlyAt the same timeAnd then you have more hardware resourcesAnd that's the asynchronous modeSo when the application has a requestFirst it will utilize the functionsAnd these functionsWill be sent to the engineOf the hardwareBut POT engine hereIs a softwareSo the request will beFirst sent to the softwareAnd then to the hardwareSo there will be a new sectionThe hardware is workingIf the software is still waitingThere will be a waste of resourcesSo the software can be sparedTo do other tasksSo here there's some non-blocking callsTo fully utilizedAll the resourcesIn terms of software and hardwareSo if we want to do thisAsynchronous modeWhich should we doSo the advantages for theAsynchronous modeAre that toMake the softwareAnd the hardwareWorks simultaneouslyAnd separatelyFor softwareThe performanceIf we use 14 coresTo run the TSSo it's about 10 IKBut if we use this hardwareThen the performance is not goodBecause the CPU will take longer timeIt's about 6KBut on the other handIf we use a synchronous modeWe can reach 90KSo you can see that the performanceCan be improved to a large scaleAnd how do we do itSo we work with OpenSL CommunityTo achieve a synchronous frogWe use a very basic foundationWhich is the fiberSo the fiber is smallerSo the user can manageLike thisSo this is the main designIn the designSo it's likeAnd the design was achievedBy this Async functionSo it's like thisSo it's like thisSo it's like thisSo it's like thisThere will be a side task generatedSo the sub-tact is generatedAnd created a descriptorFor communicationDoing a lot of thingsAnd then the requestWill be popped to the deviceTo the hardwareAnd we use an Async posturalTo talk to QGTalk to QGAnd thenThe second postural will passThe current taskAnd then the workflowWill retreat from the current jobAnd then go back to the start jobAnd get the F2And the main programCan monitorIf there are any messages comingSo if there's a new messageThey will restart the Async start job againBeing a sync start jobIt's very smartIt can identifyWhether there are previous tasksIf there areThen it will automaticallySwitch toThe Async post job procedureAnd continue with the unfinished taskThis is a very natural processAnd fully automatedSo it's like we start a programAnd then the program is runAccording to certain sequencesAnd then there's a post jobAnd sendingThe request back to main programAnd with these sequencesThere is a full leverageOf all the resources simultaneouslySo we have already realized thisSo based on this logicWe have achieved this on open cellWhich was a synchronized functionSo after thatWe have put it into anEnergicsAnd we have establishedOur own GitHub treeWhich was customizedFor our synchronized demandsEnergics willSo Engex will send requestsAnd this request will be poppedTo open SL stackAnd it works startsFrom thereSo with this GitHubWe will getSeven times better performance Than beforeDuring this processSo the previous imageWas before our adaptionAnd after our adaptionWhere we have addedThe notification mechanismWe need to startThe programSo we need toInitiate the sync moduleTo connect and communicateWith hardwareWe made some adaptionAnd the new programAnd the newSo the new programHas used some F2And which have also given usSome overheadWhere we do the communicationThe applicationAnd Engex will useSo just as I mentionedAbout FDSo this isA data structureIn the Linux kernelSo with thisThere will be some informationSend to kernelSo the kernel based F2Will create some overheadSo when the programsAre switchedSo the kernel readingAnd also writingAnd theTransformation of different statusCan have some problemsBecause the performanceIs not good enoughSo we haveA new mechanismSo when the hardwareFinish this taskIt has to sendSend notificationsTo our per layersOur previous designWas the notifySo why do we need this notificationWhy do we have to use notificationInstead of tellingYou what to doAnd if I gotApprovalI can do it directlySo we have addedThis enhancedCarback mechanismSo theCarbackIs integrated intoThe QAT engineAnd it requestsNo longerSendBut insteadThere will beA callback to be usedAnd there isNo switchBetweenThe storageSo there will beNo writingAnd readingOur kernelThe spaceSo when the QAT engineEncountersSome problemThere should beA callbackIn the new designWe think that the kernelDoes not have to evolveIn the callbackSo we have designedA new statusSo as long asWe design a functionThatCan enable itTo get the statusThenBecause ifThere are too many requestsSend into the hardwareThenThe limitedProcess and powerOf the hardwareWillCreate latencySo the applicationCan getNotificationAnd with this enhancementWe can get20%of improvement performanceAndWe workWith other teamsWith open cellWith open SSLAnd nowWe have the3.0VersionSo it willBe integrated intoThe open SL3.0Master branchAnd alsoIn the GitHubWe have the QAT engineAnd we'll get the codeYou can get the codeFrom this linkAnd also we madeAnother improvementWhich wasInvolved with VPPDo you know VPP?So this is a very goodProjectProcessing vectorThere is a host stackRealizing the VPPThis host stackCan deal withTCP and IPAnd the TLSSoThere is also A TS layerIn the VPPSo we canIntegre this functionInto the VPPWith these new functionsI just mentioned beforeThere is a new TS layerIn the sync supportSo whenVPP is doing TSThe VPP can sendThe request to hardwareSo VPPIs also the firstApplicationIn the callback functionBut we have doneSome modificationsOr changesWe need to doThe application to doEqualIs alsoAs synchronousIf we canRealize these functionsIn VPPWe don't need toChange the code itselfWe canPull the code into a VPPAnd thenI just transferThe normal toolsSo forPlans is still a TLSLinkBut the linkIs doneIn LinuxIt's a normal messageSoAll this canBeAcceleratedBy a signal'sModeLike if you want toAccelerateAppageYou just need toChangeTo VPP stackLastWe'll talk aboutKey Protection TechnologyWe use QATTo actualProduction ScenarioSome clientsWill put their serverAt some knotsAnd thenThey need to doThe handshakeButKey asset ofQSIs the authenticationOr you can sayIs the public keyOr the private keySo in this caseFor exampleYour private keyMight beViolatedOr might beSeen byOthersAnd KptCanProtectYourProbate keySo thatYour private keyWill not bePresentedOr demonstratedInYourSystemWhen you give thisTo your hardwareActuallyIt's not safeBecauseYour private keyMight beExposedIn your memoryAnd thisProbate keyWill appear againBut it's encryptedAnd afterKotLet's see thisProbate keyIt will have some descriptionsAnd will tell youThat thisProbate keyActually is encryptedAnd thenYou put thisProbate key intoPDTAnd thenKot will getTheProbate keyAnd will do theDecryptionSo in the whole processTheProbate keyWill not beExposedIn theMemoryAndKot itselfIs doingDecryptionAnd thenTo protect its privacyBut thisWill not impact its performanceSo thisBasicallyTheSituationSo that'sSummarizedWe provide aTOS modelAnd we found thatTOS need to beAcceleratedAnd thenWe provideSome hardwareSolutionsWe found thatHow we cannotSolve the problemWe need coordinationOf the softwareAnd thenWe provide thisOpenSSLModeAnd we foundMaybe that'sNot the idealSituationThen we enhancedThe codeWe putOpenSSL3.0And thenWe provideSomeKPDTKnowledgeSo thatThePlanet securityPrivacyCould beInsuredThat'sKPDTookawaysThank you


What's up everybody, Jason here for jasperjasecasebreak.com, 20-22 hip parade, jasperjase exclusive multi-sport series 1, 10 box case break, radham player number 8 just sold out. And again guys, this is a radham player break, so here are some of the cells she hits, some of these have already been hit, some of them have not, we only have 3 cases left so I'm not sure which 3 are still lying around here but we'll see right now soon guys. And then of course there's all the players from Christian Pulisic, all the way down to AJ Brown. And of course we added two fillers so from Daniel down to Tim bought those straight up and then Steven Olson from Prism 13 down to Daniel Prism 14 got those in those spots there. There's the players, let's roll the dice. 3-6-9 times, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. 9 times 3-6-9, Tim down to Carl. And then 3-6-9, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. So Tim, you have Carl in the Towns, John with Charles Barkley kind of with Travis Baxley, Danny with Luis Robert Jason Tatum, Barry Roberts with Nathan McKinnon, Carl with Trey Lance, Danny with Colleen Kershaw and Desmond Bain, Stephen Kendrick with AJ Brown. Daniel with Ronald Cooney Jr., Daniel with Cole Anthony, Carl with Jonathan Taze, Steven Olson, Jaylen Watto, Mark Najiaris, Danny with Antu Fati, Carl with Divo Samuel, Mike Zeller with Zach Wilson, Stephen Kendrick with Peter Lonzo, Danny with Tyree Kill, Carl with Jordan Poole, John Paul with Deandre Aiden, Andy Rastell, Aaron Judge, Daniel with Yard on Alvarez, Vladdy Jr. and Jaylen Brown. Carl, you got Ovi, Mark with DK Mecca, Carl with Jonathan Taylor, Tim with Juan Soto, David with Christian Pulisic and Carl with Delvin Cook. I think it's just more like in the chat it may sound like you do and you're just like, man, do you remember this? You know? So I can see where Carl's coming from. It's like you're just kind of reminiscing but also at the same time, you're on something. You were in the airport a few years ago and it was locked down for several hours due to a car chase ending with a person entering the airport grounds. It was interesting to see everyone on their phones or laptop seeing why the lockdown. Oh, scored. Well, flood addict, we obviously have at least one card of all of these players represented. Some of them will have more than others. But just as we've mentioned in the past, obviously some of them might not be available no more, right? To repack products. Some of them might still be available. But of course, we of course represent every single player. I think every single player has hit a couple times, but some more than others as you can see. But I can't guarantee you that in these last two, three cases remaining, every team or every player is still available to hit, right? Because there's only 10 cards in each case, only 30 hits still remaining. So most likely not going to happen. But of course, that's the risk you're taking into trying to potentially maybe... I don't know what you're still there, but let's just say the Tralance was still there. So people want to try to get that to get the Tralance still. Obviously, it doesn't mean that there isn't any other players available. But yeah, as we continue to sell these cases out, there's less hit possibilities for certain players for sure. Alright, TWC then guys. But I don't know. I think I did hit that John the Taylor already though. I don't know which ones are still remaining. Does anybody know? Obviously, there has to be at least three of those sell sheets that are remaining, but I can't remember which ones were the ones remaining still. I know the last time I did this though, I did hit that John the Taylor though. Alright, so I did post up... I'm going to post up the next one I should say, sorry. And I'm only going to post up 12 spots again. And if you guys sell those out, then I can always cancel a filler. But I did grab Case 8 just randomly. I think 8 was remaining and two other numbers I totally forgot. I think it was 1 or something, so... I think we're just grabbing them at random anyways. So break 8 with Case 8. Alright, so 97 of 100. Here we go. There you go. I think this is a sell sheet hit right now. Bam! Ronald Acunia Jr. 13 of 15. I believe that's a Jersey number, right? Is he number 13? Nice three color patch as well. That is a sell sheet hit. So Latter Braves, well that actually is Ronald Acunia Jr., which is Daniel Katz. There you go. First one off the board. So there you go.  Ooh, how about Crusade Gold? A.J. Brown, rookies and stars. That's a nice one. That is number 10 of 10, Fresh New Eagle. A.J. Brown's going to Stephen Kendrick who got that from Prism, number 14. And that's a great card right there. I love the Crusades from rookies and stars. They look really nice. Nice one there. A.J. Brown. Alright, 17 out of 100. Nice Desmond Bain playoff ticket. Playoff 58 out of 99. And that's a variation playoff ticket. Very nice. Desmond Bain. Going to Daniel. Nice two out of three for six. Next one. Greated card. And it's Jalen Brown, 1617 contenders draft picks. Greated a BGS 9, 10 autograph. One out of 99. Jalen Brown. That's Daniel again. After this box, 24 will be halfway through. And a Cole Anthony downtown from Prism draft picks. That's a PSA 9, 2020 Prism draft picks. That's technically a rookie as well. And Cole Anthony, that is Daniel K. again. Geez. Every time I break Daniel. 33 out of 100. A little Clayton Kershaw, 4 out of 25. Nice patch autograph there. That's from Museum Collection, 2016 I believe. Clayton Kershaw, another one for Daniel K. Hey. Hey Daniel. I mean I think you won a lot of spots in 13 and 14, but shit. 59 out of 100. Four left guys, four left. Whoa, wow. Beautiful patch autograph of Jonathan Taves. Look at that one, two, three, four color patch. And that is from V Cup Hockey, 2008-2009. It's like that's like a second or third year maybe. I think Kane was 2007-2008, so yeah. That's 38 out of 75. Nice patch autograph there for Carl. There you go, man, on the board. So again, we only have two more cases left. Now we know the Ronald Acuni is off the board. I have no idea who else is left. Juan Soto. Two, fresh new Padre. Juan Soto. Tim, last spot mojo. There you go, Tim on the board as well. 64 out of 100. Oh, Taves was an old rookie in 07082. Isn't Patrick Kane 2007? Or him, is he 607? So that's probably a second year. Jaylen Watto, mosaic rookie scripts, orange PSA9. Very nice. That must be from a blaster box, I assume. Jaylen Watto, that is. Steven Olsen. Last one. Nice. Seeing Rage is doing some tours already. From the ones they canceled two years ago. I think Zach injured his ankle or something. So he's been like singing, rapping, sitting down. I think they were in New York City this week. Last one here, the Tyreek Hill, number to 75. 2020 encased, 9, 5, 10. Tyreek Hill, Daniel K. Wow, really? Yes, sir. All right, guys, well there you go. Nice little mixture there. Nice, nice little mixture there. Soto, Kane Kershaw, Cole Anthony, Jaylen Brown. A little Desmond Bain, nice AJ Brown. And Akunya was the cell she hit there, so. So guys, still two more cases left. Next one, number nine's in the store. Plus some fillers, jaspyscasebricks.com. Guys, thanks.


This 10th year of Daily Tech News show is made possible by you, the listeners. Thanks to every single one of you, including Paul Teeson, Ali Sanjabi, Audrey Stoll Edler's spot and our brand new patron, Michael. On this episode of DTNS is AI coming for math. Is that a good thing? Also, AI is affecting celebrity in every which way. And why self-checkout tech works for nobody, nobody. This is the Daily Tech News for Friday, October 6th, 2023 in Los Angeles. I'm Tom Merritt. And from Studio Sardine, I'm Sarah Lane. I'm the show's producer, Roger Chang. And joining us, data scientist, comedian, circus performer and host of majoring in everything podcast, Andrea Jones-Roy. Welcome back. Thank you so much. I'm glad to be here. I'm not in any of the exciting places you all are. I'm in Drury, New York City. So you're not at Studio Sardine, New York City. No, no, alas. It would be OK if you were. Yeah. I just thought I might eat some sardines later. I had some sardines for lunch. You and I like sardines. Sardines get a bad rap. Free the sardines. This is the most effusive, positive sardine review I've ever heard in my entire life, I think. Yeah, we're Omega fans. Nice. I can see the glowing skin and fur. That's right. That's why our brands are so smart. Nice. What do we do next? All right, the quick hits. Microsoft is heading towards finalizing its sixty eight point seven billion dollar acquisition of the Activision Blizzard on Friday, October 13th. Oh, spooky day. The UK's competition and markets authorities deadline expires today. However, October 6th, which is meant to gather opinions on moving the deal forward. The CMA provisionally approved the deal last month. And unless something pretty big changes, this should let Microsoft close the deal. Epic CEO Tim Sweeney told Unreal Fest that his company will also introduce a per seat or subscription model for Unreal Engine in 2024. Remember, that's thing got unity in trouble. However, only non game commercial developers would be charged. So car makers, video producers, other non game uses. Sweeney clarified in posts on X that they would not be charged and that there would even be a minute or they would be charged. Sorry, but there would be a minimum revenue threshold for commercial products, including independent filmmakers. So if you're making a game, you don't get charged. If you're not making enough revenue, you won't get charged. Basically doing what Unity did, but only for non game uses that make a lot of money. Reuters sources say open A.I. is considering alternatives to Nvidia for the chips that open A.I. uses to run its A.I. models. Options include developing a chip in-house, acquiring a chip company or even just obtaining chips from companies besides Nvidia. Apple, Google, Amazon now all have their own in-chip designed in-house design chips, rather. And Meta is working on a design of its own. So open A.I. might go that route as well. Most Google Pixel users can now download the Magnifier app that Google showed off earlier this week at Made by Google. Magnifier makes small, dim or distant text easier to read, like a magnified glass, like you'd expect. So for example, a menu behind a restaurant counter. You could point your phone, use the Magnifier, be able to read it. A far off road sign. Magnifier is supported on Pixel 5 and newer, so it goes back a ways with the exception of the Pixel Fold and the Pixel tablet. Apple's iOS also offers a similar app. All right, let's talk data breach. It's news time for breaches. Thursday, MGM Resorts said in a regulatory filing with the SEC that the cyber attack last month that took US-based MGM property reservation systems and slot machines offline will cost the company more than $100 million in the third quarter. The company disclosed that some personal information, including names, contacts, gender, dates of birth, driver's license numbers of MGM Resorts customers prior to March of 2019 was stolen and that Social Security numbers and passport details were accessed for a limited number of consumers. All right, that's not it. There's more. Sony Interactive Entertainment notified around 6,800 current and former US employees that an unauthorized party exploited a zero-day vulnerability in the Move It transfer platform, which exposed personal and family member information. The data breach notification notes that the breach occurred on May 28th three days before Sony learned from Progress Software, which is the Move It vendor, about that flaw. But wait, there's more. Oh, no. 23andMe confirmed that due to a credential stuffing attack, some of its customer data has shown up on forums with intent to sell. This includes full names, user names, profile photos, sex, date of birth, genetic ancestry results and geographical location. That is a stuffing attack. So really, one might say, hey, people should have changed their passwords beforehand. But when we're talking about that kind of information, something to know. Yeah, don't use the same password at multiple places or at that kind of thing is going to happen. I use that constantly. Should I say that on this show? I have two passwords. I'm very proud of myself. Which password? Andria. Yeah. Yes. So they are password 123 and then my name.  Oh, no one's ever going to think of that. Yeah, yeah, people don't think that way. That's a good one. Yeah. Well, just today, I did one of those. It was like, answer the security question thing. And they asked my option was, what was your mother's maiden name? And I have a hyphenated last name because it's my mother's maiden name, which is my, my like security answer is in my name. So it's a terrible. Yeah, that's not a good one to ask. Not a good one. Yeah. Well, let's talk about chat bots. Shall we? The information reports that meta is paying millions of dollars to celebrities for the rights to recreate their personalities as chat bots. The bots are currently text only, but reportedly celebrities spent a few hours recording themselves so that their voices could be added later this year. And right in line with that news, the BBC published a feature article about all the companies trying to create celebrities from scratch using AI. So you don't have to pay them millions of dollars to get them to record things. The fine tradition of virtual stars isn't new. It stretches back from Hatsune Miku to gorillas are a kind of virtual celebrity all the way to Alvin and the chipmunks. Yeah, but all of those had humans doing the vocals. That may not be necessary now. And they have some partial examples in that BBC story. Andrea, as a performer, as not just a data scientist, but you're also a performer. Do you think there's a place for generative models in entertainment? Unfortunately, yes. As you were describing it, I was like, oh, yeah, they don't need voice actors anymore.  But knockoff Louis Vuitton is doing great. So I think synthetic voices that sound like Taylor Swift or whoever is on your mind. Hypothetically, I'm thinking about Taylor Swift all the time. Yeah, I think it's a real problem. I think, you know, and that's what we're seeing a lot of the striking about is replacing humans for these sorts of things. And what about the idea of just creating a celebrity that isn't even an imitation, right? That's just like, oh, we're going to we're going to create a singing star or a host of a show. Lil Micaela, that's a good example, you know, of something that I mean, I think a lot of people were very aware that this was all A.I. generated, but has a backstory, personality, you know, unique songs.  Like we get obsessed with people who are, you know, it's a real actor, but it's otherwise a story and it's the character that we're obsessed with more than the actor. And so I think it's completely feasible that we would be obsessed with made up celebrity. It kind of makes me think of like a celebrity version of what was that movie with Scarlett Johansson? Her. Yeah. Yeah. But it's like just a famous person, as opposed to someone you have like a weird phone relationship with. Not to be confused with the singer, her, who I saw, and is a real person. OK, well, now we're going to have to start someone in the in the comments that I'm not a robot, like in the login things. We're going to have to do that in real life. Like, hi, I'm on stage. I'm not like a hologram. I don't know how to prove it to you that this is real. That's a good point. I was sitting pretty far up at the Rose Bowl. Maybe she was totally virtual. Yeah.  And, you know, my parents thought that the whole thing was kind of lame. But I thought it was great. Yeah, I wouldn't. I mean, that was just a cartoon, I would say, that's voiced by a person. We see all sorts of, you know, that sort of thing. You know, anything that isn't live action can be voiced as a person. And that's one thing. I feel like what we're talking about here is something a little bit different, though. Yeah, we're talking about more like Hatsune Miku, who can appear on stage and sing and is the voice is synthesized. It's not an AI making it, but the voice is synthesized with now a generative models. I know there's a lot of Korean companies trying to make a K-pop group that's totally virtual catch on. There have been several attempts at it. None of them have exactly burned up the charts yet, but, you know, keep taking enough swings, eventually get a hit. It is kind of fun to watch from a if I were not a human who cared about the arts and the arts and I'm in the arts. It is fun to watch literally the last year. People like we went from like, well, the arts are the only area that will never be touched by AI to like, well, OK, like I've really it would be more fun if I weren't part of this planet, you know, and it's an interesting thing to watch. Yeah, and I think there's room for both. I think I think we overblow how algorithms and technology can replace people. We tend to catastrophize it a little. So even if we do get full blown virtual celebrities, I don't think it drives humans out of the marketplace. Case in point is our next story. Insider reports that some companies are cooling on the introduction of self-checkout lanes or at least adapting how they're run to include plenty of human help. Costco has humans checking membership cards to stop people from sharing them. Walmart has pulled self-checkout from three of its stores in Albuquerque, New Mexico. It says it has no widespread plans to do that elsewhere. But most Walmart stores are pursuing a hybrid approach. So they haven't reduced staff. You can choose to have as little or as much help from a person as you want as you come up to these little corrals. You can check yourself out or you can ask somebody to help you out. But there's lots of people there looking over, making sure you're not stealing stuff and and being ready to help you with the situation. On the other end of the scale, you've got Kroger, which has all self-checkout lanes, at least one of its stores, but also did not reduce its staff at that store either. Because of what I mentioned before about theft, ECR retail loss, which monitors specifically retail loss, says its research indicates that self-checkout results in a higher percentage of inventory loss. Its numbers are for 2018, but still, it's probable that that has continued. I'd be curious what, including more staff near self-checkout lanes, has done for that, though. Walmart and Kroger rely on video monitoring to track merchandise through the store and into the self-checkout lanes to try to prevent loss. Which makes me wonder, Andrea, should we just skip from self-checkout, which nobody likes, it's like 25 percent of the time I have to get somebody to come over and help because it does something weird. It sounds like it's not actually saving any money or any labor. Maybe we should go right to just check walkout technologies like Amazon wants to do. Well, the walkout technologies or the palm technology, which I guess is the next step before walkout, I will offer a contradictory view, which is I love a self-checkout. I was thinking, as you were describing this story, I was in CVS this morning and there was a human at a regular checkout and there was an open self-checkout. And the human was like, hello, right here. And I was like, I don't think so. And I actively went. I don't like talking to people. I get stressed out. You all are nice, but like in person. And then I get stressed out that they're going to do it wrong. I was buying like one thing. What are they going to do wrong? I get I actually prefer I like to press the buttons. That's probably bad for COVID purposes, but I really prefer it. And I'm glad to hear that they're not losing staff because you're right. Twenty-five percent of the time, if not more, depending on what sorts of things you tend to buy, like if you buy produce, heaven help you, right? With self-checkout. But I actually I prefer it. And I like the people floating as opposed to having to rely on someone because I have strong views. But just walk out would be even better for you. And I should be replaced by a nicer AI. I think that's just walk out sounds like what you're actually I did the other day, watch someone get caught stealing. It was very exciting. That was not just walk out. There wasn't just walk out technology. That wasn't just technology. Just walking out. It was just walking out.  And and that's one of the grocery stores that I go to often. If I have, I don't know, like a bottle of wine, I can't do self-checkout because we're not there yet type thing. That isn't always the case. But I have I have been in self-checkout where I'm like, this will just be easier. And you do. There's a weird thing where I'm like, I am not stealing anything. But I can see the person watching me enter things, looking at my stuff, being like, is she going to say that she got that from the salad bar? Is she going to say it's organic broccoli rather than not? And it is like a weird thing where I'm like, I am stressed. I was bought once. I bought. I was OK. I also go to Whole Foods and I live in Lower Manhattan. Obviously, I go to Whole Foods, but I go to Whole Foods and I was at a machine that didn't have the beeping sound like every time you go through. And then that ruined, first of all, it ruined the experience. I really enjoy the boop sound. That's like half the reason I do it. And it wasn't working. And so it was really hard to tell if something was registering. So I already needed a bunch of help because sometimes I would scan something twice. But then I had raspberries and I I thought I scanned it and it didn't go through. And then I continued. And within seconds, there were two people like, you missed those raspberries. So you're right to be nervous. Like they're watching closely. Right. And it's like, listen, I, you know, believe me or not, I'm not trying to steal food from Whole Foods or any grocery store where there's self-checkout options. But I know that it's kind of easy to do so if the, you know, if they're not kind of vulturing over you. And it makes for an experience that I find stressful. But just walk out is better for everybody. That's what I'm here. Totally. Which is like, they don't have to watch you. The computer is watching you. Yeah. You don't have to think about, did I scan it right? Because you just walk out with it. Like, yeah, no. But I think the problem is Amazon hasn't quite perfected it well enough to convince other companies to adopt it. Because it isn't perfect. I know that the times I've used it. It feels shady, even though I don't quite know why. It's also really limited. I mean, even if someone has heard about this, it's going to be, you know, a little bit of a learning curve to get used to it. The times I've used it to, you don't get your receipt for like hours. Like you should get it immediately, right? If it's working really well. That delay is odd. Like, yeah.  I'm like, yes. And then I stand there and look at it and just make sure it was not overcharged because I'm 95 years old. But if you do self-checkout, any overcharges your own fault, whereas I'll do it. I'm more of an eagle eye when someone else is doing it. Like they didn't they put they rung up the wrong type of apple. That apple was on sale. This is this, my prime, blah, blah, blah. I'm I'm I micromanage. Everyone prefers me doing my own checkout. Well, doing your own checkout is probably wise. Deciding who the top five YouTubers on the Internet are is not a smart move, but I did it anyway. So go watch me go down in flames in the latest episode of Tom's Top Five, where I asked everyone on the Internet who they thought their favorite YouTuber was. And then I present what I found. The top five YouTubers, if you're curious, who's number one or two, three, four or five, go find it at YouTube.com slash Daily Tech News. That's just a magnet for all opinions ever had in the world. It just you've just created a black hole. Tom is a very brave person. Man, taking one for the Internet team right there. I am not that brave. I would write one that's like five people I've seen on YouTube. Like I'm just so afraid of like people just descending. Five people you might like on YouTube. Yeah, I did start the episode by blaming everyone who sent me the YouTubers like, these are mine. Yeah, that's the way out. Yeah, hive mind. Well, listen, we talk a lot about what AI does well, what it doesn't do well and how it will affect business going forward based on both of those parameters. What about math though? The New York Times, Siobhan Robert wrote a story this past summer called AI is coming for math to Andrea, your data scientist. High level math is kind of your lane. What do you make of how AI might help or hinder math? Well, my first reaction to I like that you think that math is my lane. I am a data scientist because I like computers to do the math for me, which is part of why I think this article is exciting. Manipulative math is your lane. Like I couldn't like I'm like an ideas person. Like, what if you multiply it by that? OK, go do it. Minions, AKA computers. But this article when it first came out, AI is coming from mathematics to I didn't read it for like a week because it was too much for me to handle. It was like all the articles coming out about how it's going to replace everything. And I was seeing it in research, you're seeing it in the arts. And it was really a lot to handle. And I was like math math feels like the most sacred spot where you just most untouchable, right?  They're scribbling proofs. It just feels like the most analog field ever. But the article itself actually opened my eyes in two ways. One, apparently, and maybe people watching are more aware of this than I am, apparently mathematicians have been using computers to solve proofs or evaluate the possibility of a proof, whether or not it would be possible. Even if you can't get through the reasoning, you can say, oh, there actually is a solution here. Since like the 1960s, mathematicians have been using computers. So one, computers have been helpful in math way beyond calculators for a long time. But two, it is very much emblematic of the difference, the limits of AI, which is you can use computers to crunch numbers and say, OK, there is a prime number with this many digits or oh, there is a seven dimensional space that you can manipulate. But there's no way to get to that answer. And so we still need humans for the reasoning and the intuition. And, you know, the actors are going to go. The poets are going to go. The K-pop stars are going to go. But someone somewhere is still going to have to sit with a pencil and paper to reason through a mathematical proof. But you might be asking, why do you need to reason through mathematical proof if you can just prove that it exists through brute computational force? And so far, the answer to that is, A, it's kind of fun. And B, it takes a lot of computing power to do some of these proofs. So think of the computing power and the chips that we're thinking about for generative AI and open AI and all these things and multiply that times infinity for the amount of computational power to prove that there's some nth dimensional thing out there that you could rotate in some particular way. But even the mathematicians in the last few years have had to reckon with the fact that AI might be coming for them in a way that the rest of us. So in data science, we think about coding. It's long been the case that that computers were going to start to be able to do more of the coding than we are. So that's sort of we we had it coming, whereas I think the mathematicians have to catch up with the rest of us who've been reckoning with this for a long time. Yeah, I get the sense from reading this article that it's the difference between showing your work and just having an answer. Right. The the the models are great at giving you an answer. I know that's seven. Oh, yeah. Because but because they are black boxes in large part. And we haven't really. That was another part of this article I thought is they're like, mathematicians should be trying to figure out how these things come up with their answers. That'd be a great thing for people to study. But because we don't really know how they come up with their answers, we still need to show the work. And so there's where the mathematicians can come in and say, oh, let me let me prove how it got there.  It shows you understanding, but it also can be applied to other things in a way that just having the answer doesn't. Right. And that's exactly the the core of the problem that we've seen with machine learning and algorithms since way before generative AI, which is, you know, we have these machines that are really good at predicting, wow, this person might become sick. This person is a great candidate for whatever. Also, there are tons of biases and it's not perfect predictions, but but they're there, right? Big, complicated models to predict the weather, all those sorts of things. But if you don't know the why behind it, you're sort of limited in what you can do with that information, right? Just like if you're like told that, oh, a year from now, you're going to be in Spain. You're like, is that helpful to me? Like I'd rather know why I'm going to be in Spain. Like did something go wrong and something going right or whatever? I'm how did I get here? I'm crowdfunding to go to Spain, if that's not obvious from my appearance here. But the other thing that's interesting about this, though, to me is that there's another way in with the mathematical proofs. And I've started toying with this piece of it a little bit more in my own life, not nearly in a sophisticated of form as like Terence Tao, the world famous mathematician, but is a pedagogical way of working with generative AI. So there's an algorithm. I want to say it's from Microsoft. It's I might be wrong about that, but it's called Lean. And it's it's generative AI for mathematicians. And the way that it works is you describe your proof to it. And it tells you whether or not your reasoning is sound. So you're still doing the work. It's just going to say, yeah, this makes sense. Or, oh, you're missing something. A lot of times, apparently, Lean is very bad at understanding. You almost have to write your own kind of mathematics pseudocode to convey it. So humans are still doing a coding of translating the mathematical proof into something that computer can understand. But lots of times the computer won't understand it.  And mathematicians are saying that actually going through that process of explaining it in a variety of different ways to the computer, because it's doing what's called proof whining, makes you better at your own proof. You see it in a different and anyone who's done any teaching knows. I got much better at data science when I started teaching data science, because the student says, wait, why do you do it that way? And you're like, why do we do it that way? And so there's this sort of iterative interactive component to using generative AI and mathematics that's intriguing. And of course, we could use that in other domains as well. I did a practice the other day after thinking about this. I did a practice to prepare for coding. I was like, all right, I just use chat GPTI. I said, all right, pretend you're a student of data science who knows no coding, no math. I'm going to describe to you how computer programming works. And I want you to just keep asking me questions. And it asked me some really interesting questions that helped me improve my lecture that I then gave. So that's kind of cool, I feel like. And it feels less terrifying than the brute force oracles that we're working on, on the other hand. Yeah, to my way of thinking, this is a great example of how these models are best going to be used, not by replacing people, but replacing the parts of people that are tedious or we're not very good at leaving us to do the part we are good at and actually helping us get better. That system lean, which was, you're right, developed at Microsoft, it's open source now, that is a great example of the kind of tools I want. Something that helps me along, catches my mistakes. So like, hey, it seems like you missed a step. Makes me explain things because the easier and simpler you can explain something the more you understand it. I love all of that, yeah.  And ultimately I walked away thinking, oh, it really boils down a lot of what we're talking about with the, can we replace artists? Can we replace this? Can we replace that? And sort of in the most optimistic way, there's still this kernel of human, metacognition, reason, intuition that is, and ultimately we still, at least for now, are still telling the computer what to do. It's not like the computer is like turning on and saying, I did a proof that I thought of myself, right? Like we're still steering the ship. We're still saying I need a K-pop star that does this and I need a K-pop star that does that and maybe the career is less about the K-pop stars and more about the computer engineers who generate the K-pop stars. I mean, they become in the way that like a Pixar animator could be a celebrity in a way, I don't know. But it ultimately gave me hope that there's still this kind of kernel of human glow that's keeping us all going. Yeah, I have that hope as well. So keep hope alive. Yes, let's keep it alive. The other fun fact, though, is, I don't know if you saw this in the article, is that back in the 60s, 70s, when they started using computers to do the brute force piece, the finding that you can color a map with, you need at least four colors for a map so that none of the countries have the same color touching. That was the first mathematical proof that was solved through computational brute force. I imagine that that's one that since people have reasoned through sort of backwards induction or reverse engineering, but that finding, which is something that I think a lot of us learn when we start drawing maps or labeling maps, at least in middle and high school, is back in the 60s, they used a computer to figure that out. So Big Maps has been using AI this whole time. Well, Big Maps might be needed for big ships. Andrea. Yeah. Let me tell you a little bit about the industry of ship breaking. Germany's Leviathan and the Netherlands elegant exits to examples of companies that are trying to change the ship breaking industry for the better. Now, currently when a big cargo ship, maybe is taking cars to and fro or oil or that sort of thing, big, big ships, when they retire from their seafaring lives, they often end up on a beach somewhere, often in Southeast Asia, polluting the environment, harming the workers that are dismantling them for parts to be sold later. Like so many retirees. I was literally just thinking that. I was like, yeah, we just kind of wandered to Southeast Asia and ruined the local client. Yes. In this case, you're like a very large steel ship. Cargo ship, yeah. Leviathan has a huge robotic arm, kind of interesting in this BBC article, which we'll have in our show notes, that can slice through steel with something called a water jet, which is a combination of water and sand. It's so strong, it just slices through that thing, breaking the ship up into parts, letting the steel be recycled, keeping people from being harmed by trying to do that in other ways that are somewhat archaic at this point. The technology is precise, can also be used by bomb disposal experts to cut the fuses out of bombs. Currently in use in Ukraine, so says the company. Elegant Exit, a Netherlands company, uses gas-fueled cutters at its facility in Bahrain. It also says it removes hazardous materials before processing ships into large pieces of steel, up to 25 tons for transportation to be used elsewhere. Yeah, I know. That's impressive. I learned a little something today. A little water and sand, and you can slice up steel ships. Weekend plans are set, all right? I have everything set up, let's go.  And I'll just start slicing up stuff. Not people. I got some stuff to slice up. But, you know, just things that should be really hard to slice. Stuff you don't need anymore, you know? Just wanna fit it in the recycling bin and then you can. I mean, that's where we're getting to the, we're using AI to augment human cognition. We'll use it to augment our slicing powers, right? Like I'm all about the sci-fi modular enhancements to my hands and so on, I'll take two. Yeah, yeah. 100%. Well, Andrea Jones, thank you so much for being with us and telling us a little bit about the future of math, talking about slicing up steel cargo ships and everything in between. Let folks know where they can keep up with the rest of your work. Always a joy to be here. Thank you so much for having me back. Loved having this discussion. I can be found on the various social medias, Jonesroy, J-O-N-E-S, no-hyphen, R-O-O-Y. So Jonesroy1word and Jonesroy.com. There it is. Patrons, guess, go, do it now. Patrons, stick around for the extended show, Good Day Internet, where we will be talking some more. It's a Friday. So we do some lighthearted fun stuff on Fridays and it's time again for the great GDI debates. Join us as we tackle some of the most hotly debated questions of the internet. And in fact, we let the chat pick one of the topics this time, which is perfect for October. Well done, chat room. Why is it perfect for October? You'll see why. Stick around. Yeah, I'm really, crowd sourcing is an October thing. That's good, all right. Andrea, I'm historically bad at these games. So you've got the upper hand already. But just a reminder, everybody, you can catch DTNS Live Monday through Friday at 4 p.m. Eastern, 2100 UTC. Find out more at dailytechnewshow.com slash live. We'll be off Monday for the U.S. holiday. We'll see you back on Tuesday. Have a great weekend. This week's episode of Daily Tech News Show were created by the following people, host producer and writer, Tom Merritt, host producer and writer, Sarah Lane, executive producer and booker, Roger Chang, producer, writer and co-host, Rob Dunwood, video producer and Twitch producer, Joe Coontz, technical producer, Anthony Lemos, Spanish language host, writer and producer, Dan Campos. Science correspondent, Dr. Nicky Ackermans, social media producer and moderator, Zoe Detterding. Our mods, Beatmaster, W. Scottus1, Biocow, Captain Kipper, Steve Guadarrama, Paul Rees, Matthew J. Stevens, aka Gadget Virtuoso and J.D. Galloway. Modern video hosting by Dan Christensen. Music and art provided by Martin Bell, Dan Looters, Mustafa A, Acast and Len Peralta. Acast adds support from Tatiana Matias, Patreon support from Tom McNeil. Contributors for this week's show included Justin Robert Young. Our guests this week were Michelle Raman and Andrea Jones Roy. And thanks to all the patrons who make the show possible. This show is part of the Frog Pants Network. Get more at frogpants.com. The Diamond Club hopes you have enjoyed this program.