Every year in the NBA, there's always something different. Players change, decline and evolve. And this year we're seeing a few players that have changed their play style in this year's 2020 NBA season. Just like we saw last year, with certain players like Justice Windsor becoming more of a point guard, Derek Rose changing his style from being more of a slashing point guard to a point guard who now has more of an outside and jump shot game. This season we're seeing a few players and we're going to get into six NBA players that have changed their play style this season. So with that said, if you enjoy these types of videos, please be sure to hit that like button to show your support. Let's aim for 2000 likes for the next video. Why not hit that subscribe button for more NBA content every single week and hit that notification button so you never miss an upload. And also, before I get started with the video, let me know which plays you believe have changed their play style in the 2020 season. I really want to hear, but without further ado, let's get into it. At number 6, Jimmy Bartler. Jimmy Bartler's decision to join the Miami Heat was a weird one. He was leaving a championship level team in the 76ers who had Joellen B, Ben Simmons, Tobias Harris, and he was joining the Miami Heat team who practically had no superstar players. He had Bam Adebayo, who was a young player that was just coming off the bench, but would start in a replacement for Hassan White side, but nobody could have expected Bam to have this good of a jump and turn into an all-star this quick.  So the overall team didn't look like a championship level team, but this season with Jimmy Bartler, the Miami Heat have become one of the better teams in the Eastern Conference, and that is mainly due to getting Jimmy Bartler. He isn't a superstar player like LeBron James, Kevin Durant, James Harden, or James Hunter DeCumpo, but he is an all-star level talent. But the one thing that's impressed me and many Heat fans is that Jimmy Bartler has changed his playstyle dramatically this season. He's become more of a point forward for the Miami Heat, and he's the guy who controls the pace of the offense. We have Kendrick Nunn in the starting lineup alongside Duncan Robinson and Jimmy Bartler as the point guard, shooting guard, and small forwards. Jimmy Bartler plays more of a point forward, Kendrick Nunn plays more of a shooting guard, he's more of a shooter, and he doesn't average a lot of assists, as Kendrick Nunn only averages 3.5 assists in 30 minutes per game. And that's why Jimmy Bartler has taken the reign of the point guard low for the Miami Heat. He's basically the point guard with Kendrick Nunn at the 2, Duncan Robinson at the 3, alongside the Biggs and Bam Adebayo and Myers Leonard. This year with the Miami Heat, Jimmy Bartler is averaging 6 assists, which is the best of his career. And he's only averaging 13 field goal attempts per game, which for the player who's a star of a team, is definitely not a lot of field goal attempts for your star player. For example, when he started to emerge in Chicago, he averaged 14 field goal attempts, 15 field goal attempts, then 16 and a half field goal attempts. Then once he got traded to Minnesota, he still averaged 15.6 field goal attempts alongside Carl Lansney Towns and Andrew Wiggins. And then once he went to Philadelphia, he only averaged 13.6, but he was playing alongside Joelle Mb, Tobias Harris and Ben Simmons. And so it wasn't very unusual for him to only average 13.6 field goal attempts on a team that's so stacked. But with the Miami Heat, he used the star player, he used the main player, and still he only averaged 13.3 field goal attempts, which is the fourth least out of his entire career. And that's including his rookie season where he barely played and his sophomore season. So his overall playmaking for the Miami Heat has definitely been a surprise and it's been amazing to watch for the Miami Heat and of course for Jimmy Butler, who should have been an all-star starter in my opinion. At number five, Malcolm Brogdon. Malcolm Brogdon had previously played for the Bucks and he was a very big loss. Obviously, the Bucks haven't felt it too much as they're the best team in the NBA. And you've got Yarns and Chris Middleton still doing their thing. But a 15.6 point per game player who averaged 4.5 rebounds, three assists shooting 92% from the free throw line, 42% from three, part of the 40-50-90 club, it was still a pretty big loss to lose him. But for the Indiana Pacers, he's played very well and he isn't really playing much of a shooting guard role anymore. And he's changed his playstyle to become more of a point guard. This year, he's gone from 3.2 assists last season to 7.3 assists this season. That's an increase of four assists per game in only two extra minutes per game. He's currently top 10 in assist in the entire NBA, which is a massive jump from his assists per game last season. To go from being ranked 71 last season in assists per game to in the top 10 is a massive jump and it shows how much he's expanded on his game in terms of being able to facilitate the ball. He averages one more point, the same rebounds, the same steals, the same blocks, but he's been able to get his teammates involved and become a great facilitator for the Indiana Pacers, so shout out to Malcolm Brogdon. Number 4, Devon Booker. Devon Booker is surprising because you'd assume that Devon Booker is one of the greatest three-point shooters in the entire NBA, as that's what he was known as coming into the NBA, a great three-point shooter, a guy that could get his shot off from basically anywhere on the court. But surprisingly, Devon Booker has decreased on his field goal attempts for the last two seasons. In his opening season in the NBA, he averaged around four three-point attempts per game, then that increased to five, then to seven, but in the last two years, that's decreased down to 6.5, and now this season, he only averages five, which is exactly the same as what he averaged when he was 20 years old in his second season in the league. Shooting a worse percentage from three than he did two years ago when he averaged seven threes per game, now he averages five threes a game at 36%. In 2017-2018, he averaged seven three-point attempts per game at 38%. And in the last two seasons, he has become more of a facilitator, but we understood why Devon Booker was becoming a facilitator last season, averaging nearly seven assists per game. It was because they basically didn't have a point guard, but this season, the Phoenix fans went out of their way to get Ricky Rubio, who they thought would be a great facilitator for the team, and would help Devon Booker get more shots up for the team. Instead, he's shooting 18 field goal attempts per game, which is the second lowest of his career, even though he is getting to the line more, as he's averaging almost 27 points per game, which is the best of his career. Still, he's averaging six assists, which is surprising considering they do have Ricky Rubio, so now Devon Booker's changed his play style, but he also isn't shooting as many threes as he used to in the past, which is surprising considering he used one of the better three-point shooters in the league, and that's what he was known as coming into the league, too. I do understand that Devon Booker is more of a playmaker now, but his three-point decline is a little bit interesting to me. I'm not sure why he's declined this much, and why he's taking a lot less three-pointers per game. Maybe the opposition defense is adjusted to not let Booker take as many threes per game, but he isn't, and that's interesting to me, considering that it's the second lowest of his entire career. So he's changed his play style to become more of a facilitator and less of a three-point shooter. Number three, Russell Westbrook. Russell Westbrook is having an amazing season for the Houston Rockets. He's averaging 27 points per game, with seven assists, eight rebounds, 1.6 deals per game, shooting a pretty bad 23% from three, and 45% as a field goal percentage. So how has Russell Westbrook adjusted his game? He's always played like this. A pretty bad three-point shooter, but a guy that gets to the cup and finishes around contact and ones, hits a lot of mid-range jumpers. How has Westbrook changed his game? I don't believe he's stat-padding anymore, and I truly believe in the last couple of seasons with Oklahoma City Thunder, where he averaged a triple-double for three straight years. I really do believe at times he was stat-padding. I don't think it was every single game, and that's just personal opinion. And honestly, I just believe it. I really believed he was chasing after those triple-doubles in Oklahoma, but this season with the Houston Rockets, I can definitely say that after watching them, I really don't think he is. I think he's playing within the offense. I think he's playing within the defensive schemes, too. He is athletic, and he does go after rebounds, which is really fun to watch. But at least he's not going after every single rebound. But this season with the Houston Rockets, I feel like he's just getting the rebounds he needs to, same with assists. He's been able to find his open teammates, but in my opinion, he's not stat-padding, and he's not purposely going out there just trying to get heaps of assists. He's averaging what he needs to average at seven assists and eight rebounds, and that's exactly what I expect out of Russell Westbrook. He's averaging almost 27 points as well, and he's playing extremely well for the Houston Rockets as a blade, and they're one of the most interesting teams to watch, considering that they're running the small ball lineup, and Westbrook is a guy that they need to go after rebounds, considering that PJ Tucker is in a very tall player, and he's their starting center now. So, Russell Westbrook, I think, is playing within the offense, and I believe he's changed his playstyle this season for the Houston Rockets as well. Blake Griffin. Blake Griffin's been injured for majority of this season. He's only managed to play 18 games, but he was a very different player over these 18 games than when he first entered the league. You would assume that Blake Griffin would be one of the better rebounders in the league, considering that he's six foot 10 and ultra athletic. Well, he entered the league, averaging 12 rebounds, then 10 rebounds, and it then plateaued around eight to nine rebounds per game whilst he continued his career with the Los Angeles Clippers. Once he got traded to the Pistons, he definitely left open rebounds to Andre Drummond, but he still averaged around 7.5 rebounds per game and 24 and a half points per game, which is what you'd expect out of a power forward who's one of the top power forwards in the league. But what we saw out of Blake Griffin this season through 18 games and 28 minutes per game was that Blake Griffin was becoming a stretch four, and literally did not go after any rebounds. He was becoming a stereotypical 2020 NBA power forward as somebody who doesn't really stay in the paint and only stretches the floor, which is what the Detroit Pistons didn't really need, considering that he only shot 24% from three with six three pointer 10s per game. Have a guess at how many rebounds you suspected Blake Griffin averaged in 28 minutes per game. 4.7, Blake Griffin averages 4.7 rebounds. That is shocking to me as a player who entered the league as a power forward, a dominant guy, who got from 12 rebounds to 4.7, that is shocking to me. And this season in Detroit, even through only 18 games, you can tell they just changed his play style significantly and he's becoming a stretch four in the league when that in my opinion doesn't really suit his play style at all. And at number one, Bam Adebayo. It's weird to say that two players on the same team can be in the same list for players who have changed their play style, but Bam and Jimmy Butler have both definitely changed their play style. Bam entered the league as a backup center and he was a player who would go out there and show heart and hustle. He would average 8.9 points last season along with 7.3 rebounds as well as nearly one still and one block per game. He was playing back up to Hassan White side and once the Miami Heat traded Hassan White side we've seen Bam Adebayo take over for the Miami Heat starting power forward position and he's averaging 16 points with 10 rebounds per game, 1.2 steals, 1.2 blocks shooting 58% as a field goal percentage in 34 minutes per game and he's been named an all-star player for the Miami Heat. The one thing about Bam Adebayo is he's now one of those players who actually takes up the ball for the Miami Heat. He's actually a facilitator averaging around five assists per game which is pretty amazing for a guy who's a powerful center in the league today. Bam's ability to take the ball up the court, get by his defenders with his quick first step and ball handling is something I believe he's really changed this season and he's been able to show off this season what he's able to do with his ball handling on the court which is why his playstyle is so unique at a guy of his size. With that said, let me know what you think about these players and their playstyles in the comment section down below. If you have any other players that you believe have changed their playstyle I want to hear it down below as well. If you enjoyed the video please hit that like to show your support. Subscribe if you're new for more NBA content every single week. Hit that notification button so you never miss an upload. It's been your morning Smith, I'm out. Peace.


Rule number one, fill your mouth up to the top with water. Rule number two, do not spit. Mike spit on it, spit on it, spit on it. Just spit on it. Spit on it. Mike.


I'd like to tell you about voice, so now the words we say, but how we say them, right? The sound of someone's voice has an enormous power on your emotions.  I'm a neuroscientist, so part of my job is to look into your brain and what's going on when you listen to someone's voice. And we know a fair bit about this, we know how voice is treated, we know how it speaks to your emotion centres, to your thoughts. One thing I didn't know until very recently is that we know how the technology, to take your voice and to change the sound of your voice as you speak, so that it can trigger all of these effects. So this technology may only be used in music studios right now, but it's ready basically, and my prediction is we're going to see it applied to our voices in our daily lives very soon. So I'd like to give you a couple of examples of what's going to happen when we have this. My first example is very, very simple, very basic. You know how you can take a record and you can speed it up or slow it down with your finger, right? So if you do this you'll get a sound that's a little bit higher or a little bit lower, right? If you do this someone's voice, that person may end up speaking a bit more happy or a bit more sad. Very simple. So we use that and we ask participants, so I'm doing experimental science, we get human participants, we got them in the lab and we asked them to read the text out loud. And while they were doing that we changed the sound of their voice as they were reading in real time so that they sounded to themselves a bit more happy or a bit more sad. We can do this with this very simple manipulation and what we found out, we measured the emotion of these people before they read and after they read. And we found that the people who listened to themselves with a happier tone of voice manipulated unbeknownst to them without their knowing. These people ended up more happy in the end than they were when they came in. And they thought that what they were reading was also more pleasant so it was the sound of their own voice that tricked them into thinking that. Second example is also fun, if you know this if you're on the phone people can tell if you're smiling or not.  So the same thing we created software that can simulate the sound of smiling on people's voice and we had participants come in the same lab. What we do this time is we fit electrodes on their face, facial electromyography we call it and we played sentences that we manipulated to be more or less smiling. And we found that when you listen to someone smiling you will yourself start smiling in response. What is amazing is that people have no clue that they're doing it. It's completely unconscious even if you ask if the sentences were smiling they say no I don't think so but their muscles say it is. So what we're facing now is that we can turn voice into what I like to call a cognitive technology. Something with algorithms that you can transform sound so that it's selectively activates parts of your brain and we know what to expect in these effects. So this technology is now this is not five years ten years this I have it in the lab you know we can stop using it now. It's going to have a profound effect on our society think of a lawyer say whose voice can be made more convincing as he talks. Think of a business negotiation where your voice is being made more trustworthy. Think of a call center that's certainly sounding a lot friendlier and more understanding to you all of this by the turn of the button. Another sector which I think is going to be impacted there and care for very much is the theater pretty the clinical sector. Think of people with ALS for instance like the regreted Stefan Okins is using a very very dodgy speech synthesizer right. What if this voice this can voice could be made to match his emotion in real time. If he's having a good day you have a happy voice if you're having a bad day you have a sad voice. All of these applications are going to come up very very soon. So we tried something in the context of emergency medical systems you know when you call 911 for a problem. And we had actors giving fake calls to 911 and we manipulated their voice to sound more physically dominant like bigger or smaller. And we found that the doctors send 50% 50% more medical means to these patients than people without the voice manipulation. This is someone working for wired said the visuals biggest casualty to artificial intelligence is not the last job is all of that. It's the loss of trust in anything you hear or see from no one right. This is manipulated images and you know one is real the other one is computer generated you can't tell the difference. So voice has all these problems right the next one the next time you pick up the phone maybe the person you hear is happy or maybe she's just using the happy button. Maybe she's very friendly or maybe she just wants you to think she's very friendly for all we know maybe you're not even talking to the person you think you're talking to on that thing. So my point today is not to be afraid but it's kind of a wake up call it's to be aware of this. The way I see this we've been using voice as a preservation technology for many years. I mean what's you know for great progress and social change this is just a technological upgrade this is voice 2.0. We can use this for great opportunities in socioeconomical word in clinical work could use it for the worst as well. And I guess it's just time we start to conversation about this.


I am very excited to present our next talk for this evening. Very interesting talk, as you can tell. This project was conceived in our local Tel Aviv hacker slash maker space, together with the Shinkal College in Tel Aviv. So I will pass on the microphone now to Denise Akerra. Yeah, hi. And Jaira Sheff and Zolma Sekofera, please give them a big round of applause for this talk. Hi, everyone. My name is Denise, and I'll try to introduce what's going to happen here. We'll have something of a cooking show or a live demo, and we will switch between the presentation explaining what electrolycables, we changed the name as you noticed, are in between what the guys will do here. Basically they'll try to make this candy slice, and I'm very curious how it will go. So what is the open source hardware for smart candies, and how we connected all these funny uses of candies, which is about canned bitcoin, and you will see internet of candies. So the way we will continue, I'll introduce first something about us, why we are doing this, then I'll explain what will happen during the live demo, and then I'll explain why we are doing it. So in the first part, what's going to happen here, Zohar is creating a mold for the candy. That means it's preparing the shape of the candy. So during the workshops, we usually let people make their own molds and decide on the shape of their candies. But here we will use few of our latest experiment, which is the bitcoin mold, basically, and Immanuel Kant's hat, and we'll explain why. Do you want to say something about the mold? Yeah, basically we are using like an acetic silicone, which is like acetic acid, that's it on, like usually people have this mistake. And it's like actually food grade, you can cook food in it. So we mix the acetic silicone with cornflour, cornstarch, as you know it, at your country. So for first, I've put like the cornstarch on this bowl, I can see the camera is over here. Okay, anyway, I'm putting some cornstarch inside the bowl and then I take out the silicone just on it. Yeah, we got like 10 minutes of like work time actually, so I'll put like some gloves where are the gloves. I think there was some interesting thing about the silicone, you said that people should use not the common one, but some cheaper ones.  Yeah, it's like 100% silicone and acetic acid.  Okay, while he's preparing the mold, I'll tell you something about us and why we're obsessing over it. So first I'll introduce you here, he's actually the real, what can I call him like a candy fanatic, and what you're seeing in the background is his collection of Japanese candies. He has this guy from Japan who sends him curated candies every month, and then he shows these are like the leftovers from the candies basically, and this is an example of such like Japanese candy that's probably inspired a year in this effort. Then there is Zohar, who is just making the mold now, and Zohar is really interested and he works a lot with flexible circuits, so you'll see some interesting things about the circuits inside these candies that are based on these experiments with different like flexible materials, and what I can say about Zohar, he's a real connoisseur and a very good cook, so it's interesting that he's making the candies. Yeah, actually this silicone has got this like steam of acid, like acidic, like acetic acid, so you get some kind of smelly, you know, but it's going away after a few days. So I'm kind of choking in here, but it's okay, I'm used to it. Okay, so something about me, I'm the real sugar of folk in this group. I hate sugar, I believe in all the conspiracies around sugar, that it causes cancer, that it's horrible, and I'm a bit terrified of this, and a place where you would normally find me would be the place with jars, so if I can ask to switch to the presentation for a moment, because this is fascinating, yes, that's me, and my favorite activity, which is wild fermentation, so I'm interested in, I do these hunts for wild lactic bacteria, lately it was in carob trees this summer, so I experiment with healthy stuff normally, I'll explain how I got in contact with them. So this is the kitchen and the hardware studio where all this miracle of smart candy happens, these are the ingredients, these are some of the components, and this is how it usually looks like, it's very messy as you can see, this is just one of the workshops in our place, this was the summer in Slovenia at the PIF camp, this is the usual atmosphere, people soldering, making the candy, and then maybe this is the interesting thing, Zohar actually made a fan sign related to smart candies where you can read how to make them and absorb the whole culture around it, do you want to say something about the fan sign? Actually it's like instructions for the kids of the workshop, it's like step by step, like instructions, and a little bit more, you can say. What's interesting about these fansigns, Zohar does all the culture of fansigns a bit low-tech and one of his ideas is not to tell everything, the fansigns have a special bond with the player that uses them, and it stops you, it even obstructs you from doing the things, so you get it to work, and we have a good ratio, yesterday we had an amazing workshop. Maybe we need a camera now, something interesting is happening on the table, it's basically just... Yeah, I'm actually making the model, I'm actually making the shape of this mold, so we printed like a bitcoin and like Immanuel Kant's head, so now I'm just tucking it inside the silicone, you know, push it like around it. So the bitcoin is made with an open scud, I think? No, actually fused, fused. And then printed, and basically you can take any object and do what you want. Okay, I'll switch back to the presentation and explain a bit the process, so what will happen after the molds? So after you make a mold, and actually this is the second part, because the more important part is the soldering part, and I think you will show more about the process and the components that you use in different circuits, and explain there are three or four interesting circuits here. Actually, a part of it, a part of the circuit is involved with soldering, but the other part is kind of conductive stickers and all of like flexible conductive materials, so it's not all about soldering. Okay, experiments with flexible circuits and materials, conductive, flexible conductive materials, and this is like some images of that process. Then comes the critical moment where we are still struggling, which is the cooking of the corn syrup, it's kind of a very violent chemical reaction I have to say, watching it. And then comes the most interesting part, is where you cut the circuits into the candy, and then you have the candy, the smart candy, and what you do after, you test the circuits and you taste it. So what is happening now? I'm just cleaning a little bit, so I'm moving to the electronics now. So in the next stage, what will happen on the live demo is they'll start cooking the corn syrup, a year will cook the corn syrup and prepare the material for casting the circuits, while Zohar will prepare some of the circuits. Am I right? Yeah, this basically, I'm starting to work on the sugar syrup, it's basically that's the instructions, in grams, 270 grams of sugar, 130 grams of syrup and 90 grams, milligrams of water. The syrup is used to stop the sugar from crystallizing, it's an inhibitor. So this is going to stay here and we have the sugar, now I'm going to take my pot and I'm going to pour 90, wait for this, I'm going to pour 90 milliliters to the turn. I'm going to prepare myself for the soldering stuff. Today we didn't have a good sugar day, you have sugar days, and yesterday was a great sugar day, today we completely messed up, so wish me luck. Something that... Where is the Chinese? Okay, so the best thing to use for sugar, stirring is this guy, and now I need to start adding the sugar. Now waiting for the solution to get a bit hot, we're using an inductive plate, very good source of heat. Okay, so if I would just leave this thing, it will just become caramel and when I add the glucose, the corn syrup, it will stop this process, then it's back to you. Okay, do you want to say something now about the circuits or in a minute? Sorry, this is the fan sign. So the whole thing, from what I see about cooking the corn syrup is the white caramelization, so you really have to be careful with the temperature and follow it exactly. I prepared something on why we are doing it, or I tried to observe why they're doing and I'll explain my interest in these cookies. First of all, the smart candies or these electro-addable, electrolycable, I don't think there are another gustatory technology and interface. So we are not really interested, or I think Zohar a bit is, but I'm not, into this multimodal, synesthetic experience of using your tongue in a new way and I don't know tricking your tongue to experience taste, which is not there. So I don't think this is another digital lollipop that tries to trick you, to heal you from your addictions or I don't know, give you like a cheap food that you can eat with Soylent and so on. So what I think it is, it is a continuation of an experiment that we were told that happened here last year. So we really like these edible soft robotics experiments that Kerry loved it, so it's a bit in that way and this is something I need some help from your side. I think it's basically a hardware fetishist lollipops. It's something about, we love circuits and we want to link them and it's part of a project that Zohar and you are doing for a long time and it's called Idiots. Can you tell us something about the Idiots? The IoT or the lab itself. Idiots, whatever it is. Actually it started like four years ago with this IoT for Idiots. Yeah, you see the violence.  So we made this box that you can connect one sensor and control it by a smarter phone application and control it by natural language, like control if I pass the threshold, so light me up the output of the box. We had AC and DC outputs and you can connect one sensor as you like. It's all very old news so it's not relevant anymore. So we are over the Idiots and now into this sugar addiction. So I'll show another slide for a moment if I can get back the presentation. Yeah, I'm starting with the PCB of the candy. Do you want to show something from you now or can I continue, Zohar? If you'd like to. I have something. Finally, why I'm hanging out as a sugar of folk with these candy addicts here, basically for me these lollipops are something of a philosophical prop. I'm looking into how philosophy can use prototypes and I'm thinking can leaking basically teach you philosophy and my idea is that it can basically, that maybe by leaking we can leak a concept so I picked up Kant because he is part of this long tradition between empiricism and rationalism and these discussions in European philosophy about enjoyment and cognition. So this relation between rationality and senses. So I think the lollipop by leaking it and seeing the circuit inside and seeing how it works and seeing like the connection between electricity and your senses. You can achieve something that Kant was trying to say with this principle that basically reason without senses is empty but senses without reason are blind basically. So I actually that figure of Kant in this project is something I asked him to do for me and I believe with this lollipop in the form of Kant's head we can change the bad reputation of tasting and leaking. In philosophy they're considered appetitive low senses, they're beastly inferior in need of control and they're basically enemy of philosophy. So I think these lollipops can reveal the conditions of possibility of our senses, it's something that doesn't satisfy your hunger, it keeps you uncertain if it nourishes you or poisons you, it strips you into this like circuit basically and reveals the possibility of all your experiences which is your physiology but also this electricity that goes behind it. So we have something happening on the table, I'll ask the camera to show something. Okay so you can start seeing that the bubbles are getting slower that means the water is evaporating very fast now, the glucose is just trying to catch up with the sugar and at 146 degrees we have to shut this thing down for two minutes and let it cool and then we'll add the water, the taste if we want to. So ideally you have to have the circuits prepared so you can just pour this disgusting mess of sugar over it but here we will cheat it a bit while Zohar is soldering and making such circuit, can we move here a year or you want to show it? So here what type of circuit are you preparing here? I am making the basically the circuit it's based on the lecometer circuit, it's been used like in Ratch labs and so it's a behavioral research, it's very simple like resistive touch circuit that consists like from your finger or your tongue and your hand, you know your body and one MOSFET transistor and a lead for output or some other stuff and battery so it's completely like... We've been using this circuit for the last four years in most of our work, we can really milk this guy out, it's usually used in psychological behaviors, experiments with mice if they go and the end of the, that's basically our way to communicate with animals in psychological experiments. Like one new one. Okay, I'm getting ready for pouring the sugar. Where are the circuits you want to use? So we're going to use pre-made circuits. Zohar, can you use it? Zohar, can you continue? No, we're at 136, the rise is very high now, there was a lot like 120, it just catches on you, if I don't get it on time it will caramelize and stuff will get really messy, 146, 142. Actually we have here like prepared ones, so we'll take out, now we can see it's taking like 10 minutes to get it dry, like for the mold, as you see now, you can easily take it out, it's pretty fine mold, you know, very cheap DIY mold, which is actually not FDA food grade, but you know, you can, look, we don't care about it, you know, it's not going to be like a shelf product soon, or in the medical industry, or something like that. Actually, I made it a bit thin, so I have like all in the nose, but I guess it will be fine.  Yeah, I punched his nose. Now the bubbles are getting out of the, we're not putting the flavors before the thing cools down to 120, then you can start mixing them. Actually we don't usually mix colors, it's just nice and has a golden thing going on just as well, but it doesn't taste as well. Yeah, I just want to solder some, okay, so now I'm just pouring some drops, this guy is a watermelon, our favorite, and wait a second before you put it in the mold. Now because of the temperature difference, it gathers a bit more air inside. I guess you also have to wait till the bubbles settle a bit, yeah, you don't want too many bubbles in the candy. Is it, or how do you deal with the bubbles? The bubbles will just go away very quickly. This is not something you need with vacuum to get them out, they just like do their thing, but it's really, it's every sugar day, it's a different day, some days it's just everything where it goes wrong, it depends on the humidity, and you even have to calibrate your temperature probe, like it depends on what we are when we boil in piff, it's quite high, so it takes the water at a different temperature to boil. Okay, I'll switch back to my stuff, because it seems like you're still doing something there. Yeah, I'm kind of, I'll just, if I can ask for the presentation for a few minutes, I'll sneak in, so this is the candy I'm interested in, it's the head of Kant, and you will see it, it's doing some interesting things, it teaches you disinterested pleasure, discovered by your intellect, so you lick it and you understand how something works, you see the contraption that triggers your senses, that's the ultimate Kant actually, and you know, in order to get this head, I had to go, I think it's the Bodin Museum, it's this famous Berlin Museum, and I was actually scanning him in order to get this, anyway, I think Kant was very wrong about his critiques, he was interested in pure reason, and also in practical reason, but what he didn't write is something I believe sugar represents, and also lately Bitcoin, it is this thing that drives all our addictions, it is basically the speculative reason, an investment, and sugar from which this candy is 98% is basically just that, it's something that created the slave trade, it created the biggest demographic changes in the world, and I think we need basically a critique of the speculative reason, so it's also, sugar is an interesting example of post-carcity, basically from something that was a luxury product, it became a cheap addiction, so what is the new sugar, it's a Bitcoin, and we are switching back so they'll show what's going on here, okay, the sugar is in a walking state, it's very hot, in a minute we can actually even touch it and mold it, but currently it's very hot, and what we're gonna do is we're gonna pour it into the mold, Zora made the circuits, and now we're gonna pour this, a circuit which doesn't work at the moment, but we prepare in advance some that do work, so we need something to stop the flow, oh here they are, okay, usually now when the circuits work, this thing lights up, the circuits themselves in a professional environment, they get up to 220 degrees usually in a reflow oven, so what we're doing here is not up to this spec, so it can hold the circuits, we are gonna show you now completed circuits that we did 40 minutes ago, and now we put them outside to cool a bit, and the thing is you usually take them out when you can touch it with your hand, and it feels like the same temperature, I think it's good, so let's see one that works, take one like here which is not thick, okay this guy is interesting, this one we can show it, this one has a temperature probe inside and a microcontroller, and you can actually change the temperature and the addressable LED, it's like a thermo to RGB, yeah it's a thermo candy, so this thing you can actually use for kids, but it's hot now because the sugar is still warm, so it's still red, usually it should be green, so we made all the things like one hour ago, so okay this is all, you can come and see some of the circuits or if there are some questions, do we have minutes for that? Okay this one works, okay, so first of all please give a big round of applause to Denice Adenzal for this monstrosity of a talk, and we actually have some few minutes left for questions if you have any for what's going on here, and we have, we'll start from the internet, okay the internet wants to know if you've tried to use the laboratory like heating and storing plates to make the, yeah they call it the sugar mass, actually we use like this induction stove because like induction is like special for boiling stuff, so it's very quick, it's taking like half the time, but we do it in all kinds of way, we usually don't work with laboratories, we don't have access sometimes, yeah we actually invented it in the PIF camp which is like hacking, you know, nature hacking, you know, yeah we only worked at night because the wasps furious during the day, so we walked in a tent, so that's a question from microphone number three I'm curious what program you're using for photogrammetry or 3d scanning to make your camp model, oh yeah we use a reality capture, really good, it's a professional, but they have a trial, go check it out, yeah, also open sky we like very much, it's like very nice to make like gears or like small parts, yeah another question from the internet, yeah the internet wants to know if you use lead free soldering and what about like health concerns regarding the solder embedded in the candy, oh, it might give you, you know, a not really major diarrhea, I don't know, nobody died yet till now, microphone number three, thanks for saying nobody died, can I get one of the candies, sure, come and pick it up and one last question, microphone number one, yeah thanks for the talk, I have actually two questions, number one, do you have a recipe also for fructose intolerant people, and question number two, do you plan other philosophers, for example, island warts, wow, why island warts, like I mean I'm very curious, okay, she's the philosopher, it needs to have something with sugar or senses, it has to have some, you know, connection, but I'm all open to that, so next workshop, okay thanks, okay so that's all the time we have for this talk, again a big round of applause


This theoretical study shows that dissipative processes in solid-state light emitters, such as semiconductor quantum dots, can enhance coherent quantum optical effects, allowing for regular collapse and revival patterns, even in the presence of an incoherent phonon bath. The results deviate significantly from the well-known atomic Jane's Cummings model and suggest a deliberate design of photon quantum effects via specifically engineered solid-state environments. This article was authored by Alexander Carmely, Andreas Norr, and Frank Mild.


In a way, I feel like I've been doing the same career all along.  Like, I don't know. I'm as surprised as anybody. Hello, welcome to Top of Mind. I'm here at the FQ lounge with Andrea Mallard. She's the chief marketing officer of Pinterest. Andrea, I'm so happy you're here with us today. Thank you for including me. So what's going on at Pinterest? What are you excited about right now? So I'm excited about building an iconic global brand. Pinterest has been growing, obviously, very successfully for a long, long time. And now I think it's important for us to get our point of view out a little more emphatically into the world. So I'm most excited about really crafting the stories to articulate what the brand is really all about. Who do you see your core community as being right now? So we're so grateful to that early, really excited base of people who are using it for design, for creativity, for craft. But it's expanded so dramatically. What's interesting is we are meeting more and more people who are using it to inspire really interesting cultural work that you and I would both be familiar with. That's interesting. So do you see people using it for business? Absolutely. People are using it not just as a personal tool, but as a business tool as well more and more. What innovations are happening in the industry coming down the pike that you think are most going to change the way Pinterest sort of does business? Our mission is actually not to keep people online at all. It's to get people offline and doing things in the real world. So I think the biggest threat might be for a platform like Pinterest is people getting more and more addicted to online life and losing sight of where true happiness comes from, which is actually in the offline world. What keeps you up at night? What gets me excited? I wouldn't say it's keeping me up at night. It's actually motivating me is to say, how can companies like Pinterest, how can the advertisers on our platform use these tools to be a bigger catalyst for change? In service of their business, absolutely. But also realizing that a really important stakeholder is humanity. A really important stakeholder is the planet. And we actually can't ignore our role in those issues anymore. So I just want to make sure Pinterest is always doing well by doing good and that we're enabling other companies to do the same. What type of traits are you looking for when you're hiring? The most important trait for us is diversity. So it is really important, especially in tech, that you have as many diverse opinions as you can because what got us from A to B is not going to get us from B to C. I'll be honest, as I've gotten older, pedigree, education, all those things are seeming less and less important to me. I haven't seen a huge correlation necessarily between those things and success on the job. Not everyone has to get into these jobs through the same way. So for me, what I'm looking for is just someone who knows what they don't know and is willing to learn and is excited to do what it takes. That's kind of all the CV I need to get them excited. I hear that so much that there used to be this one path to become a marketer. That's right, for example. Well, and I didn't take that path myself. So I know it's completely untrue. Oh, really? What was, can you tell me what was untraditional? Well, I mean, I was a journalist. I, you know, I wanted to do your job. You know, I wanted to do his job and I started it as a journalist. And, you know, for me, it was like, I have a love of storytelling and that's what it sort of became. And then I moved into design and then I moved into brand. And all of a sudden, brand morphed into marketing. If there's a red thread, it is the love of story. And I think that's what great marketing is. In a way, I feel like I've been doing the same career all along. But if you were to look at my CV, you'd be like, wow, how does she end up as a CM? I'm like, I don't know. I'm as surprised as anybody. We're talking about careers. What is the best piece of advice that a mentor ever gave you or that you've passed on to someone else? One of my very first bosses said to me, you have as much right to success as anyone else. I remember being 12 years old and my dad took me to like take your daughter to work day. And I remember thinking to myself like, wow, if I work really hard one day, maybe I too can be the secretary to one of these men. And so at 20 years old when I was getting into the workforce to have someone say to me, actually you have as much right to that success as anybody was actually very transformative. People aren't necessarily better or smarter or more talented. They just believe in themselves a little differently than I did at the time. You're getting yourself permission to go for it. That's right. That's right. And it's amazing how deeply rooted that was in me that maybe I didn't have the right to it, which is ridiculous.  Like, are you here for my job? I hope so. Like, and I don't, you know, you can be 21 years old. But if you want my job, let's figure out how to give it to you. Let's craft a path to get you there. That makes me, nothing excites me more than that. I love that. Andrea, thank you so much for being here today. This was great. And thank you for tuning in to Top of Mind. We'll see you next time.


What's the best business to start today? I can tell you this, two things. If you're super introverted, don't wanna talk to any people, learn how to write code. That's number one. Number two, learn the e-com game, which I would include social media in that. And I would put myself up on websites like Upwork. If you can charge 2,500 bucks a month for consulting, 1,000 to 2,500 even as a beginner, pick up 10 clients, you're making $25,000 a month, man. And you can live anywhere. And you don't have to be as good at it as you think. You just need to be smarter than them.


Welcome to CN Live's daily video report on the resumption of the extradition hearing of Julian Assange at Old Bailey in London. I'm Joe Laurier. Well, the technical problems of the last couple of days were fewer today. We only had the morning's defense witness Eric Lewis speaking about 40% of the time as if he were under the Pacific Ocean. And it was also a very key moment so we couldn't understand what he was saying, which has made reporting this hearing quite difficult. In the afternoon, Thomas Durkin, the second defense witness of the day, his screen froze twice, forcing Vanessa, it's a default from her chair into a side room, presumably where she's speaking to technical people. She came back to announce that the problem was at his end, it was fixed, but it happened twice. She didn't warn him that while frozen he was still under oath and couldn't discuss the case with anyone. There was some very serious matters discussed in court today and it was the first time since the beginning of the hearing back in February that the government addressed what I have been saying for a long time now is the only real crime that they have on Assange. And it's a technical one and it's in my view and many people and all the defense witnesses. An unconstitutional part of the espionage act, which simply states that any person journalist or otherwise, who has unauthorized possession of classified material, and also and or disseminates it has broken the espionage act. So at this point in the early morning proceedings, James Lewis, the prosecutor for the US government, questioning Eric Lewis, the attorney who was a defense witness for the defense, Lewis, the prosecutor pointedly asked him at one point, whether it was any precedent against publishing, sorry, against prosecuting a publisher under the espionage act. And he said, Lewis that the right of free speech and the public's right to know we're not absolutes. This could be restricted if national defense information could threaten the security of the nation. Can journalists be prosecuted, he asked Lewis, the defense witness, who said in response that had never been done before, because of the First Amendment. He said the courts have to strike a balance between national security and the interests of free speech. And he turned by saying that this was very far from his original opinion in his written testimony in which witness Lewis wrote that legal precedents precluded prosecuting Assange. And in fact, the prosecutor is correct. Assange can be prosecuted. And the fact that no publisher ever hasn't, has never been prosecuted before is is key to the defense's argument. But it is not illegal one technically because this part of the espionage act does apply to any of us, not just a journalist that we possess and disseminate classified information that would even mean emailing a weak index document that's still considered classified to your friend you've broken the espionage act as well. This is how broad and ridiculous, basically, that part of the espionage act is, but it's still in there. It hasn't been challenged. Daniel Ellsberg, who I know is fond of saying the United States does not have an official secret act because of the First Amendment. Well, I think I would rephrase that as it shouldn't have an official secret act because of the First Amendment. It is still in there and it's not been challenged constitutionally. It's not been removed from the espionage act. So in fact, in effect, the US does have an official secret act. This can punish a journalist if it wants for disseminating classified information. This is the espionage act in its history. There have been journalists who've been prosecuted only for defying calling on the public to defy the military draft in the First World War. But there have been instances where FDR and Richard Nixon who actually imparned a grand jury in Boston, they tried to prosecute the two New York Times journalists published depending on papers that Dan Ellsberg had given them. And it was only when Ellsberg's psychiatrist office was broken into by Nixon's plumbers to try to get dirt on Ellsberg. And it was also revealed that his phones, Ellsberg's phones had been tapped that these two New York Times journals asked the government, and I got this story from Ellsberg himself, that the those two Times journals asked the government, Well, if you're tapping Ellsberg's phone, we've been talking to him on the phone. So are you tapping us case was dropped. Mike Revelle, Senator Mike Revelle, who I know and I've written a book with about his political career, was the senator that Ellsberg gave depending on papers to read them and put them in the congressional record at a committee hearing that Mike held the basement of the Capitol Building. And Mike told me back then when we were working on the book in 2008 that he feared at the time that he could be prosecuted. What the New York Times versus the US case that the Supreme Court ruled in the favor of the New York Times said was that the government could not exercise prior restraint, without telling me this paper you cannot publish this information, which is what the Justice, the Attorney General Nixon did sent an injunction to both the Times and the Washington Post saying you can't publish this. That was unconstitutional screw the Supreme Court decided, but they never said that after publication, someone could not be prosecuted on the espionage act for possessing and disseminating information that's why Nixon set up that grand jury panel. And Mike Revelle was a sitting senator was frightened when the in he he was able to release that information under the sixth clause, I can't remember the exact part of the Constitution but the speech and debate clause, which says that a no member of the legislature in the middle of a legislative act can be questioned about anything that he did either going to or from the Capitol or during the act it doesn't have to even be in the Capitol. If long as Congress is meeting somewhere. A senator could say anything he wants on the record any classified information. He cannot be prosecuted for that. There was an instance during the lead up to the war. After the invasion of Iraq that Dick Durbin the senator from Illinois said in the well of the Senate that if it weren't for the fact that we were bound by the classification of this information and the Senate intelligence community. I would have said that this war was a mistake and we shouldn't have done it well he was wrong he could have said it. He was protected. And he didn't tell that to the public. He feared that when he published the Pentagon papers as a book with beacon press in Boston, that Nixon go out could go after him and in fact that was the case by Richard Nixon decided not to go after sitting senator is that probably wouldn't look very good. I'm not telling you all the story because it's directly related to the Assange case in that the US can prosecute now they've been trying to hide this part of it because it's so controversial because it is conflicting with the First Amendment there's no As Dan Ellsberg said we we don't have an official secrets act because of the First Amendment well I say we we do have one because it's still part of the espionage act so Assange is being prosecuted for that and the government has been trying to evade that because it's so controversial and they tried to make this an issue of the only documents that he's being prosecuted for were the ones in which he revealed the names of informants. And as the defense witness last week Trevor Tim the president the executive director of the freedom of the press foundation, which was founded with Dan Ellsberg pointed out that there's, as I've been saying and writing for some time now there is no law against naming informants It's not ethical could be a terrible thing to do. It's not illegal these senator Joe Lieberman at the time of those leaks in 2010 the Afghan leaks tried to put a bill in the Senate to criminalize revealing names of informants, and it was defeated the Senate did not pass it if we're against the law there would be no need to introduce a bill making it against the law and the Senate rejected that but that's what the government has been going after. So today they finally brought up the issue of can be prosecuted journalists and unfortunately the answer to that is yes. So of course, a big part of today's testimony was about the ongoing issue of the politicization of this case. As you know probably the tradition act between the United Kingdom and the United States prohibits the tradition of a suspect based in a criminal. political trial. So, for the Assange defense team to establish for the benefit of Vanessa parades of the magistrate will ultimately decide this case that this is indeed a political case is is crucial to the defense so that's why this has come up several years ago during the resumption of this hearing and if both witnesses today dealt with this. And I thought that was a very strong point where Eric Lewis the attorney defense witness made a strong intervention by testifying about a memo that Attorney General William Barr has written a 19 page memo in which he is espousing this what what Lewis called a fringe theory the unitary investigative theory that goes that dates back to Cheney in the Bush administration promulgating this and he based that on his ideas from the Nixon administration that the President, according to this memo by bar it's really shocking, the the bar said the Attorney General's lawyers are the president's hand that the prosecutorial decisions are solely that of the president. This is King like powers that bill bar thinks any president should have in particular this one, Donald Trump, that Trump gets to decide who's prosecuted and who was not. And this is not as Lewis testify this goes against the entire history of the Department of Justice, where there's been always presumed to be a wall between the White House and the DOJ. So that the Department of Justice works based only on criminal law, not a political case where the president of course is not most senior political officer in the nation, and he's politically motivated. And we also heard I must say from Durkin in the afternoon he reinforced this idea by batting down in US. This assistant attorney Gordon Cromberg was named comes up every day. It's thrown in the face of the defense witness by prosecutor Lewis because that nobody has included in their testimony to 36 page affidavit that Cromberg put into this and one of the Cromberg was saying is that a grand jury is a protection against abuses of the system of political abuse of the judicial system. This is something that Durkin the lawyer from Chicago was on the stand in the afternoon said was not his experience and he's had 40 years experience 47 years experience as a lawyer, including six years I believe, working at the Department of Justice that they had it's very rare for a grand jury not to bring back an indictment he says it only happens every four or five years, and then especially in a national security case that a grand jury is not a protection against legalization of cases, and he, as well as Lewis and other witnesses for the defense have stated that this is a hierarchical system, and that the pressure comes down from and even Jeff sessions has on the record when he was attorney general said that this is not the case after Assange they've made no secret of this is a politically motivated prosecution of a journalist for publishing embarrassing damaging information to the reputation of the United States, revealing even criminal behavior and it was established for both witnesses that this decision is not this grand jury legal process and not just current this is my view, but that it is a decision that came from the White House to go after him, after the Obama prosecution decided not to prosecute Assange because they were they felt they would he was doing journalistic activity that the New York Times published the same material that WikiLeaks the exact same material. That's more or less the same time that's another story we can get into. And therefore they'd have to prosecute the New York Times it would not be proper to just go after Assange and they didn't do it. Of this whole issue about whether the case was closed or not is something that Lewis keeps harping on, and it's a semantic argument was their decision not to prosecute or not or was the grand jury it was left open. Why was it left open. He's trying to show that they never really dropped the case where all the defense witnesses pointing to a particular New York Times article from the sorry Washington Post article from the member November 2013, which quotes, Eric Holder and another the former spokesman for holder as saying explicitly that they did not prosecute Assange because he was engaged in journalistic journalistic activity that they considered protected by the First Amendment even though they could because it's still in the as I've been saying, they could do it, but they didn't because they knew that this really is an unconstitutional part of the espionage act and they didn't want to open that up where the Trump administration has clearly made a political decision to prosecute Assange, given the hostility that the Trump administration has to the press that's part of it. And there were other issues involved about Trump going after Assange because of the 2016 election. So let's move on now to the issue of the prison conditions for Assange and the sentencing just took up a lot of the testimony is also for the defense important to establish that Assange will not get a fair trial now Nils Meltzer, who I was not on the witness list but he has said numerous times that he will not get a fair trial, but you know to establish that in the court is a separate matter than even a UN special repertoire. So we saw a lot of testimony today about a sentencing and the defense trying to show that he will get a very long and unfair sentence for this, whereas the prosecutor Lewis on cross examination made clear that he said at one point that the longest sentence anyone has ever served in the United States for an unauthorized disclosure to the media was 63 months. He didn't cite what case that was, or if you did I missed it, but he then decided a case of Terry Albury a former FBI agent who share class right information with the press, and he received a four year sentence. So Lewis is also pointed out that Assange is only being charged with leaking secret information not top secret information. So he's trying to say that, and even called what Lewis had written what many have repeated, as we've reported that he's facing 175 years. So there was a lot of the testimony that dealt with the federal sentencing guidelines in the United States, and how they come up with the numbers of years that the guidelines recommend and there's always a minimum and a maximum that's recommended. So there was a lot of arcane discussion of that. But the idea of 175 years is the one that most people writing about this case have said even in the mainstream media that Assange faces, whereas Lewis was saying that that was just a defense sound bite, and that they know how much of a sentencing could get. And he cited these cases to show that people in similar cases to Assange only got four years or six years. So I don't know if the defense should rest sleep well tonight thinking that, oh, there are, he, Assange is only going to get four years or something because that's not something one should bank on, but that's the argument of the press here to say he'll get a fair trial. He's not going to be sentenced to a life imprisonment, which is what an 175 year sentence would in effect be for a 50 year old man. And then the issue came up of the conditions of the prisons. Lewis, the defense witness was talking about the presence of COVID-19 in the federal prison system. It's a huge problem in the United States right now, whereas Lewis shot back the prosecutor. He was asking how many cases are there in the Alexandria detention center where everyone agrees. Johnny Assange will be held if he's extradited to Virginia. And it turns out, according to Lewis the prosecutor, there are zero cases right now. There have been one by a new inmate and then it came back to, he was got a false negative, a false positive. So the prison conditions is an issue the defense wants to establish as being why he should not be extradited, sentencing the prison conditions. And of course, the whole issue of the First Amendment which finally came out into the open. We will resume tomorrow with two witnesses for the defense and they're going to be really interesting ones. One of them is John Goetz. He's a German journalist for the Spiegel. I don't know if he still works for the Spiegel, but he was at this dinner in London when they were working the Guardian and WikiLeaks and Julian who was there in London putting together the publication of the Afghan war diaries. And the prosecution is alleging that Assange made a statement at a dinner that the informants deserve to die because they were ratting on their own government or something to that effect. Goetz was present at that dinner. He has stated on the record in press reports that that was not true that Assange never said that. So we can expect for him to speak about that. And then in the afternoon, Daniel Ellsberg himself will be on the witness stand, the virtual witness stand from his home in Berkeley, California, and hopefully they won't be the same technical problems. This is what it's like to have a trial in a courtroom in London in the age of the coronavirus where there has to be a great distance from the witnesses could not travel to London to sit on the stand as they would have had there not been the virus. So we're going to look forward to Goetz and Ellsberg's testimony tomorrow and we look forward to bringing you a report on that. And before I go just want to please remind you to go to patreon.com backslash cn live and become a patron. Donate if you can't $5 a month. It's about the cost of a Starbucks cafe latte to keep CN live going. These video reports are regular shows. We're going to have another one on the weekend. So please support us if you like these videos. So until tomorrow, this is Joe Laurier for CN live.


In place of Fiverr McGee, usually heard at this time, we present a rebroadcast of the Abbot and Costello show with music by Freddie Rich and his orchestra and songs by Connie Haynes. And an answer to the many requests from new men and women in the armed forces of the United Nations, you'll hear that famous baseball routine starring Bud Abbott and Lou Costello. The program with I Know That You Know. How well have you been? And just look at your face. When did you get that black eye? I got that black eye in the restaurant down the street. How could you get a black eye in the restaurant? Oh, they had a sign over the counter that said, ladies, served here. Yes. So I ordered a blanc. Oh. You were injured in the fracas. Well, me in the fracas? Yeah. You're in no condition for that, Lou. Who's not in condition? You. Who is? At least they're in shape, so am I, Abbott. Jumping out of bed and taking a ice cold shower. Then I felt like punching a bag. Then I felt like skipping a rope. Then I... And what did you do? I stayed in bed until a feeling went away. Well, now that's very commendable. But you must be careful picking strawberries or you'll get poison ivy. No, I won't. I got a system. The minute I get up to Uncle Artie to wrap myself up and top paper bag, then I'm going to hang myself in the closet. But you can pick strawberries. That way. I know, but I can't get poison ivy. Eat it.  You know that, don't you?  And I think you're an imbecile.  Now, just a minute, boys. What's all the arguing, Father? Now, you keep out of this, Niles.  It's just between us, Niles. It's just between us, Imbecile. What do you expect to get along with people? How do you expect anyone to like you? You certainly are. Mrs. Niles will be here any second. And just watch what you say. Try to be decent for once. Okay, Evan. Oh, hey, quiet. Here she comes. Oh, I heard that remark, Castello. I didn't say anything, Mrs. Niles. Oh, that's right. I didn't say anything. Castello isn't going... I'm trying to be so nice. Absolutely, Mrs. Niles. He's not going to insult you. He's going to be a good boy. Aren't you, Lou? Yes, Mr. Rabbit. See that? Gee, Mrs. Niles, I sure am glad to see you. And by the by, can this be me talking? Did you ever collect the insurance for the accident you had? Why didn't I have an accident?  But I'm sorry. Go ahead. Wash my mouth out with soap. I said a bad thing. You chivalry. He had the most empty space in his head. Another had five square inches and another had ten square inches of empty space in his head. I'll bet you did see my head there. See it? That's where they were holding the conch. It's only more that time, darling. Oh, you're so refreshing.  Just heard from a couple of old squirts. There you are. Now you've done it again, Castello. Now the only way you can square things is to buy a farewell present or a gift for the entire cast. Rabbit, don't talk so loud. That's what you'll have to do. I did that very thing this morning, Rabbit. I bought farewell presents for everybody on the show. I got some dandy presents in the department store. Why are you talking so low? I bought them in a basement. Stop whispering, Castello. What kind of presents did you get? I got a big box of candy for the boys in a band and Connie Haynes and Mr. and Mrs. Niles and everybody. Just look at it, Rabbit. Isn't that fine-looking candy? For heaven's sakes. I've never seen such big pieces of candy. What are they? Chocolate-covered bananas. Dummy, I should have known better but I trust you to buy presents for the cast. Now we're in a fine pickle. Where are we going to buy anything at this late hour? Oh, come in. Come in. Full-friend Kitzel, the salesman. I haven't seen you in a long distance. You're just the man I'm looking at and you're just the guy I'm looking at, Kitzel. You know, you showed me an electric razor two weeks ago and it's no good. Oh, Pispasch, no good. Oh, Pispasch, it's no good. Well, for you information, my little man, that was not an electricizer. That was a riveting machine. Hammer's my whiskers in and I have to fight... Never mind that, Castello. Look, have you got anything to sell us today, Mr. Kitzel? Have I got anything to sell? Yeah. Body boy, cheap, that's possible. Why, I don't know. No, today I'm in the mansion business. What was that called? I'm not lost. What are you in? I'm in the mansion business. The mansion business? Yes, anything you mention, I got it. Oh. I got a beautiful line of musical instruments. I got trombones, saxophones, a violin, a trumpet. Wait a minute. Have you got a pipe? Yes, and a couple of keys. No. Oh, you don't understand. A pipe is a long, skinny thing. Yes, yes, that's my thing. We don't want no musical instruments. What else have you got in your sample case? Wait a minute. Have you got a potato clock? A potato clock? Mm-hmm. Doesn't he talk at peculiar angles? Castello, don't be silly. What in heaven's name is a potato clock?  I don't like it. That second, don't push me. What am I? A baby carriage. Look, Mr. Kitzel. We have no time for foolishness. What have you got to sell us now? Quick. What have I got to sell you? Why, in this little satchel, I got gold rings, old rings, earrings, earrings, golf rings, studlings, golf rings, and bubbling sports shoes, suede shoes, golf shoes, and look at you. Starks, starks, socks, and smart. Not to mention. Jacks, suits, swimsuits, blue suede shoes, top coat, sport coats, overcoats, and any coats, old ties, silk ties, home ties, rail ties, quirts, shirts, assorted, nerds. After all, you see some of these guys on the team I'd like to know. Well, I... If I'm gonna join your team... Introduce. I'd like to know what's in here. I'll introduce the boys. Do you suppose they do that?  You know strangers may seem to give these ball players nowadays very peculiar names. You know, like Dizzy Dean, and Daffy... Daffy Dean. I'm your cousin. Who are you? Let's see, we have on the bags, we have who's on first, who's on third. That's what I want to find out. That's what I'm telling you. Go ahead. Who's on first? What's on second? I don't know who's on third. Are you the manager? Yes. You know the fellas' names? Well, I should. Well, who's on first? Yes. I mean the fellas' names. Who? The guy on first. Who? The first baseman. Who is on first? What are you asking me for? I'm not asking you. I'm telling you. Who is on first? I'm asking you who's on first. That's the man's name. That's who's name. Yes. Well, go ahead and tell me. Who? Who signed the contract? Well, naturally he signed it. Wouldn't be any good unless he signed it. Well, that's who signed it. Absolutely not. So who signed it? He did. He did. Oh, positively. When you pay off the first baseman every month, who gets the money? Every dollar of it. After all, I mean the man worked for it. He did. Yes. Who did? Absolutely. So who got the money? He did. Sometimes his wife comes down and collects it. Whose wife? Yes. Well, I'm trying to find out what's the guy's name on first baseman. Oh, no. He signed up. Hi. The play is around. I'm not changing anybody. I'm asking you, what's the fellas' name on first base? What's the fellas' name on second base? I'm not asking you who's on second base. Now, who's on first? Who's on first? That's right. Okay. He is the fellas' name on first base. Listen, what is the fellas' name on second base? I'm not asking you who's on second base. Who is on first? I don't know. He's on third. Now, we're not talking about it. That's entirely different. How did I get on third base? Well, you mentioned his name. If I mentioned a third base with his name, tell me who's playing third. Now, who's playing first? Never mind first. I don't know. What's the guy's name on third? What's on second? Who's on second? Who's on third? I don't know. He's on third. Third base again, man. That's you and I stay over there.   Now, who's playing third base? Why do you insist on putting who on third base? Who am I putting on third base? Yes, but we don't want them there. You know what? His name belongs there. What belongs on second? I'm not asking you who's on second base. Who's on third? I don't know. Third base. Third base. Field is named. Why? I don't know. What's on first? What's on second? I don't know. Third base. Fourth. Oh, he's center field. It wouldn't be a fine team without a pitcher. The pitcher's name. Tamara. You don't want to tell me today? I'm telling you, man. Tomorrow. What time? What time tomorrow? You're going to tell me who's pitching. Now, listen, who is not pitching? I'll break your arm, you say? Who's on third base? I'd have it your own way. I want to know what's the pitcher's name. What's on second? I don't know. Third base. Today. So they tell me. Now, I'll get behind the plate. I'll do some pitching. Tamara's pitching on my team. Now when he puts the ball, me being a good pitcher, I want to throw Freddie out of first base. So I pick up the ball and throw it to the hole. Now that's the first thing you've said right. That's all you have to do. Throw it to first base. Now who's got it? That's right. If I throw the ball. Naturally. Who has it? Naturally. Naturally. So I pick up the ball and I throw it to naturally.  You throw the ball to first base. Then who gets it? Naturally. That's different. Now tell her folks. So I pick up the ball and I throw it to naturally. You do nothing of the kind. I throw it to who? Naturally. That's what I'm saying. They're not saying that. Who gets it? Naturally. They'll tell them that. Who gets it? Naturally. They'll say it. Naturally. Now ask me. Who's got it? Naturally. All right. Tell them. Same as you. But now here's the man with the band, so kick it off, Bob.


Hey guys, how are you today? Okay today? I bring you another video, and I'm we're doing a second book review this week I Actually was gonna try to do three, but I don't think I'm gonna get the third one read before the end of the week but I did get this one read and while While I didn't want to like it Obviously, I did if you look at all the post-it sticky notes in here that I put in here This is called the four agreements a toll-tech wisdom book by Don Miguel Ruiz and I Loved this book. There is some great practical advice about life and living. I am going to read you one or two quotes 95% of the beliefs we have stored in our minds are nothing but lies and we suffer because we believe those lies The whole dream is based on a false law I find that interesting and probably if you take it in context, it might be more interesting We are already in hell including the people who tell us that no human can condemn another to hell because we are Already there others can put us into a deeper hell true, but only if we allow this to happen I love this book and there's lots of other little jewels of wisdom in here There is one I think I'm going to actually put in my journal and it's one on death 2016 we saw a lot of famous people pass Some had long very well-lived lives Also, you know, most of us have had One or two people we know in real life pass and my husband and I are no exception to that rule Death is not the biggest fear we have our biggest fear is taking the risk to be alive the risk to be alive and express What we really are That's pretty profound to me and so I'm going to I'm going to do some writing in my book on this in my journal And then I have to take all the sticky notes out because this book actually doesn't belong to me Which is why I put sticky notes and didn't get in there with highlighter pen Which I was tempted to do all right I did take a picture of the cover of the book and I printed it here with my little LG pocket photo printer Which is now charging because it's almost dead And this printer I got on eBay I'm not eBay. Sorry on Amazon and I'll put the exact name of it into the January materials list so go to the file section in the Facebook group to look for that the link to the group will be in the description below the video if you're not already a member and The printer is operated with an app on your smartphone and it prints these little small prints and This particular paper happens to be sticky back Which I love and I take this with me on vacations and traveling when I go because it is so small It fits great in my art bag or my backpack If my art bag is too full which is sometimes is and I just have to remember to bring the charging cable in case it runs out of juice and usually extra paper, so Let's go in here and this is what I have so far for January I put my word of the year in here Jerry Malini had us all doing words of the year So I put my word in And we on the last art video created some Sparkle and bling with some candy wrapper papers and some embossing folders So that was fun. So let's go back here And let's put our book in and I'm going to take my copy of my Cover and stick the paper, which is sometimes tricky It doesn't always want to come off stick it here and we're gonna take one of our quotes I might do the death one, but there's a lot of other quotes in here This is another good one. We create this image, but this image is not real We are never going to be perfect from this point of view How much how many of us have that problem with perfection? Probably a lot I'm gonna do this one because this is this one's resonating with me this morning, so Okay, our image of perfection is the reason we reject ourselves It is why we don't accept ourselves the way we are and why we don't accept others the way they are I Find that pretty profound So the four agreements it is definitely a book. I recommend it was a it was a fairly easy read I found it really interesting and I think you might too so look it up in your library or Buy a copy of it on Amazon I will add it to my book review list and I will put the link to this video there, too And yeah, that's it for right now. I hope you have a great day Don't forget to like share and subscribe if you can support my YouTube channel by shopping at my Etsy shop The link is in the description below or going to the YouTube channel's main page and hit that fan funding button Don't forget the most important thing though Go out and have a great day and do something nice for yourself because you know you deserve it I know you do too and that's it. All right. I'll talk to you later. Bye guys


The Army Navy uniforms for this year's game have been released and great news for fans. We got a bit of a color rush vibe, if you will. Army's gone with the Desert Camo tan vibe in honor of the 3rd Infantry Division and their role in the Iraq War, and the group used a Rocky the Bulldog mascot, which will be the helmet logo. It's pretty sweet. Navy's gone with the Silent Service uniform in honor of the U.S. Submarine Force. Helmets absolutely incredible. There's obviously a submarine, looks like they're underwater. Insane look for a football helmet, but I love it. The 124th meeting between these teams is December 9th. Which uniforms do you like best and who are you rocking with to win the game?


First of all, how are you feeling at this point this spring, particularly when it comes to your health, please? Marley feeling great. Always feeling good. This is one of the first springs coming in. No injuries from the season before, really, or injuries in the offseason. So it's feeling great. Seeing the ball well, feeling like I'm having great at bat, swinging the pitches I want to. And now it's just time to kind of ramp it up and play more innings, play more innings on defense, play back to back, and get three or four at bats a game. And as we continue to do that throughout the spring, we'll be ready for the season. Ernest, it's easy to move on from all these three last years, the frustration of the last three years of injuries and focus on what you have to do right now to stay healthy into a 1-62 season. Yeah, I got a short memory. So I move on from things pretty quickly. I know the family doesn't like that too much. But with baseball, playing every single day and ups and downs of the seasons, it's sometimes tough. And you kind of linger on certain things. But if you're going to succeed in this game and play for a long time, you've got to have a short memory and learn how to move on and get ready for the next day. We can go next to Pete Caldera. Pete, go ahead. Ernest, I understand this is the season for optimism, but can you not help get excited about what you've seen from the starting pitching that you guys have put out through this spring? Yeah, Pete. It's been a, this is, I don't think I've been on a team yet that's had this much depth, this much, not only depth, but some really quality starters with depth. That's one thing that's pretty impressive. It's going to be interesting going down the stretch to see what our rotation is going to end up being, because I was going to be probably one or two guys that might have to go to triple A that should be on a, should make a rotation somewhere. So it's going to be pretty interesting, but I'm looking forward to it, and especially since we're going to get Severino back during the summer, that's going to be a huge, huge boost for us. And it's exciting. I know it's early in the spring training, but I'm looking forward to getting the season going and rolling with these guys.


When you're pregnant, most women don't need to change their beauty routine per se. We recommend all women look at what products that they're using and are using products that aren't harmful to or toxic to themselves or the environment. Many women do ask about hair dye and other cosmetics and I would tell anyone that there is no evidence that says dyeing your hair is harmful to your pregnancy. In terms of things like, can I get my nails done while I'm pregnant, yes you can certainly get your nails done while you're pregnant. The main thing to keep in mind is if you do get your hair or nails done to be in a salon that has a well ventilated area to make sure that you're not breathing in some of those fumes. If you're worried, the best thing to do is wait until you're outside of the first trimester. And then often we get questions about tanning during pregnancy and I think women often, you know, their body's going through changes and they think about maybe using some tanning products or going tanning and we really recommend to all women, whether you're pregnant or not, to avoid tanning. You can damage your skin and so we would recommend avoiding that during all times.