My pleasure to welcome you all here to the Ford School and here to celebrate Bob Axelrod's amazing career and amazing life. Bob is, I guess, officially retired. He is the William Hamilton Distinguished University Professor Emeritus of the University of Michigan. Those of you who know Bob will know that retirement has not really changed very much.  Just back from China, in the middle of negotiating a new set of arrangements for the Chinese to work on cybersecurity, writing, mentoring our students. And so it's wonderful to be able to celebrate a retirement of an individual who is going to remain deeply embedded and engaged in our community for many, many years. So I'm thrilled to be able to celebrate with Bob and with all of you this evening. We have an amazing lineup of speakers. We're going to talk a lot about Bob's life. I want to give a special welcome back to Bob Putnam, to the University of Michigan and to Ann Arbor, and all of our, thank all of our wonderful speakers for their work. Those of you who know a little bit about Bob know that he's a genius. He was told that among others by the MacArthur Fellowship. He is the recipient of the National Science Award, delivered by President Obama. But more than that, he's a caring and wonderful and engaging and thoughtful member of our community. And so I want to begin our evening while you still have a little wine in your glasses while the life says to you about me. And now let me turn things over to our master of ceremonies, Paul Crocker. Thank you, Michael. It's great to see you all here. We are changing the order of the program because, you know, we're optimizers here. And we looked at the program, we printed it, we evaluated it, and said, nah, we're going to make it slightly different. We'll let that evolve as we go. As Bob said, I'll be master of ceremonies. I have the privilege of introducing, moderating, and pacing celebratory remarks by a number of Bob's colleagues and friends. In this case, actually, I think each of our speakers is both colleague and friend. And I include myself in that group as well. Before we get to those remarks, I do want to take a moment to remember Michael Cullen, a friend and colleague and more who died several years ago and who would surely be on this program if he were alive. And we wouldn't know what he would say because you never knew in advance what Michael was going to say. It's impossible to imagine the development of the Ford School and the School of Information and the influence that Bob has had on scholarship and policy without seeing and hearing Michael as he helped everyone around him be smarter and better and kinder. So we miss him. But he's part of the story still. I asked Bob if there was anything in particular that I should attend to from the lectern. He was very clear. He said I should introduce people and make sure that they don't talk for very long. So except for Bob Putnam, who came a long way to be here and therefore gets a longer time to talk. I'm going to hold people to about three minutes and they all say no problem. You know these people. We'll see how that works out. Notwithstanding that each topic that the speakers will address talking about Bob could form the basis of a long symposium or a long book or a full semester course followed by another full semester course. So I will endeavor to take a little less than three minutes. We will change up the order. Following me, Nancy Burns, Chair of Political Science will speak. Then Jim Morrill, a Political Science Professor. Then Carl Simon. And then Scott Page. Is that what you guys have agreed? Are you stuck? Is that stable now for half a day? OK, that's good. We reserved the right decision. I understand that. So all of those worthy will speak about aspects of Bob's work and its impact. And I want to note a few things, too. So claiming the privilege of the lecture. One is that Bob's work repeatedly comes back to the goal of a peaceful or at least more peaceful society, one of reduced conflict. He is exemplary in his ability to use sophisticated methods and his own sophisticated mind to bring science to policy, making sure that he gets the science right, enabling him to get the policy right. This combination of methods and skills has enabled him to develop and use a well-deserved reputation as an honest broker. He understands conflict in ways that allow him to learn from and to teach people who are engaged with conflict, real conflict, in the real world. He's a nice guy, to be sure. But his diplomatic and scientific capability derives not from the fact that he's a nice guy, but from skill and integrity. And it's exemplary of what we would like science in the service of policy to be. Michael talked about Bob's talk yesterday about cybersecurity. It was terrifying. So during the reception, if you want to be terrified, ask Bob to talk to you about those issues. I've known Bob as a friend and colleague since he came to Michigan, about a year after I did. And it was my pleasure on several occasions to negotiate agreements with him that were designed to keep him at Michigan and keep him happy and not bankrupt the organization. Exactly so. There were times when I would ask myself just how could I have gotten to a situation where my job description included bargaining with Bob Axelrod in a zero-sum game. It turned out to help a lot that the game was never quite zero-sum because Bob always wanted to make the place around him better as well as to make his world work well. Indeed, he thought that the place around him was part of his world and he paid a great deal of attention to it. It's striking that with his very successful career and very public career in many ways, if you look through his very long CV, you don't find chair, associate chair, dean, associate dean, provost. You don't find any of those titles there. Instead, the University of Michigan and Bob both figured out that his comparative advantage was in scholarship. Scholarship is what he did and both the University and Bob, and I would say the world, have benefited accordingly. So now, next, Nancy Burns. So I am really thrilled to get to say a few words about Bob. For those of you who know me, you know that I like data. So I went back and read Bob's annual reports from the beginning. Part of the fun of that was seeing the meteoric path of his career through the late 1970s, not in retrospect, but while it was happening each year. Oh my. Jim and Scott and Carl and Bob will, I'm sure, talk about the crazy and inventive power of the ideas that were that path. And by 1978, at least reading my data, you could see the future. You could see the ways that Bob's ideas would shape the world. But what I want to call out is something else, something that echoes part of what Paul talked about. And that is the character of his local citizenship through his nearly 50 years at Michigan. Bob's citizenship, for those of you who've been in a department meeting, in a committee meeting with him, no, that has been marked by worrying over frameworks for thinking through whatever issues or decisions have been facing, whatever body is at hand. And so I'm gonna speak on behalf of the department. A hiring decision, a tenure case, some crazy issue that came out of nowhere, whether it was in a faculty meeting, one of his many terms on the department's executive committee as admissions director, Bob always arrived with a plan. He had a framework to put on the table, an agenda setting framework, one that he had worked out and worried over in the fine grain, and then had sketched on a very tiny piece of paper that care and engagement represented in those decades of tiny pieces of paper. About every important thing that we have done as a department shaped the place. It shaped the character of our decisions, and it set a model for those who are just joining the department. And we are tremendously fortunate in this, fortunate in your time in the department, fortunate for the decades of tiny pieces of paper. And so I just wanna thank you and say that I'm honored to have been your colleague. Thank you, Paul. So when I fast through this, I wanted to come up with a relatively simple, direct, quite important observation on Bob's career. Most of us work on well-defined and accepted questions, aiding the accumulation of knowledge through the accretion of results and insights. One of the hallmarks of Bob's career is his ability to write the first paper rather than another paper. Using simple but elegant mathematics to lay out the essence of a problem that was ill-defined and poorly understood before. Bob's recent paper in the proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on the Timing and Use of Cybervulnerabilities, for example, shows that the exploitation of such weapons is more complicated and contingent than is commonly believed. That paper shows that the persistence and stealth of a vulnerability, along with the distribution of the value of opportunities influences when a natural should use it. Contrary to the common wisdom of use them or lose them that argues for early use. Now, I actually wanna tell a personal story here that's related to another one of these papers. I don't think I've ever told you this one before, Bob. But another paper that's in this vein is The Rational Timing of Surprise, which was published in World Politics in 1979. It also happens to be the first time we met, although neither of us knew it at the time. In those days, all the reviews for World Politics were done in-house by the Princeton faculty. But then they got this paper and it had math in it. And so someone there sent it out to Bruce Kane, who was one of my advisors at the time at Caltech. And he sort of looked and said, oh, it's got math, give it to Moral. And so he gave it to me because I, like Bob, was a math major playing to get a PhD in political science. In fact, Bob did this 15 years before I did. And I read it and I thought the paper was pretty good. And if you ask my students, that's very high praise. And so about this way, we met remotely through the review process without even knowing it. And so here's to Bob, who writes the first paper on topics rather than just another paper. See, Aaron was gonna pass out some pictures, but we'll see him, oh good.  So I wanna talk a little more about Bob's work and how exciting it has been to be even close to it. My talk has four characters and the pictures you're about to see has those four characters in them. The four characters are Bill Hamilton. Bob is the William D. Hamilton professor. Bill, how do you describe Bill? I think Bob would agree with this. In the 1860s, there was Darwin. In the 1980s, there was Hamilton and everyone else's comes afterwards. Is that fair? I think that's fair. John Holland, John Holland and Marita Holland is here. John was the very first computer science PhD in Michigan. He invented something called the genetic algorithms and that really was a catalyst of many of the things that we did here. First computer science. First, in the world. Whoa, okay, thank you. Can you see from those pictures roughly who's who? The guy, and then Michael Cohen. We've mentioned Michael Cohen. Paul mentioned Michael. Michael was, in some ways, Bob may be other family closest friends, my other family closest friend and just incredibly great to work with. He was one of the co-founders of the School of Information here and played a big role. So those are the four characters and there are four on the left side of that picture. Both Exorod and Holland have MacArthur Genius Awards, for example. I told you what I thought of Hamilton. I just came back from an Oxford meeting about Hamilton's rule, which I must say was pretty impressive. So, my story starts around 1980, okay? In my two hours I have now only 40 years to cover, right? So nobody talked about the prisoner's dilemma. How can you talk about Bob Axelraub without mentioning the prisoner's dilemma, okay? I'll assume everyone knows about arms races and cooperation and defecting and that in a one-shot game, defecting is the only feasible strategy. And the question is, what if we had a, what if people played over and over again, a repeated prisoner's dilemma? No one had an idea of what the solution was and Bob's ingenious idea was, let's ask the experts. So we had tournament in which all the experts in game theory submitted their favorite strategies for solving repeated prisoner's dilemma oh, you know the story. The winner was the simplest, Annapol Rappaport's tit for tat, which was do unto your opponent what your opponent done did to you last time. This was a little too simple, Bob ran it again with the same, more sophisticated group and the same results, okay? And so this was, and most of this was beginning sort of focused on political science, Bob was really eager to understand how this might reflect biology and more of the biological. So he asked one of the participants, a guy named Richard Dawkins who's written a few books and Richard said, well, you had the very best person in the area down the street at the University of Michigan, check with Bill Hamilton. They did, the partnership was incredibly productive and exciting, I wish I was there. They're sort of two quiet people but I bet the room buzzed when they talk. They wrote a paper talking about whose title was The Emergence of Cooperation. It won the best picture, best paper in science in 1981, of the Cleveland Prize, and Bob later wrote a book based with the same title, which I brought and sitting there at my desk. Meanwhile, Michael and Michael Cohen and Bob are working together writing a paper on something economists couldn't dream of, preferences might change and adapt. And they at one point asked me to interact with them and look over their shoulders, which I did. We began a friendship. Meanwhile, this is all around 1981 and 82, Michael Cohen is sitting in John Holland's genetic algorithm course. So I'm gonna take 30 seconds for a lesson on genetic algorithms, okay Paul? You'll be unattested. So imagine you're teaching a computer how to play a game of chess, checkers, tic-tac-till and it's got a bunch of rules to follow and each rule says given this board situation here's what you do, okay? These are about sequences of zeros and ones and you could, for a game like tic-tac-till you can put every rule in but not through checkers or chess, okay? And so you could teach your computer but how do you, what rules are you gonna put in? Well, John figured out how to put sex into the story by having rules mate with each other in a sense. So every rule got some points every time it was part of a winning game and it would take the strongest rules and mate them with each other so that maybe the best parts of one would make, these are again strings of zeros and ones, okay? To form new rules which hopefully would be stronger. They weren't, they'd fall by the wayside if not they would make it a much better program. They also mutate every now and then and this genetic algorithm has sort of been one of the things that has been the focus of what I wanna talk to you about. Michael's excited. He talked to John Howland about getting together. Let's bring some of the ideas and the rules we may play. Michael brought his good friend Bob Axelrod. Howland brought his mentor Arthur Berks who was a co-inventor of the computer with John von Neumann and Howland's thesis advisor and the four of them got together every week, every two weeks actually. They named the group after their initials, BACH, the Bach Group and it was brainstorming heaven, okay? They felt at some point they needed to expand. Bob brought Bill Hamilton into the picture. They also brought John Howland's computer assistant and post-doc Rick Riala and I was brought in as sort of a math, you know, in-house math modeler. Those were, and we would still be together every two weeks for a few hours. Nobody ever missed, we wouldn't want to miss. It was so exciting. What did we do? Okay, we talked about sex. Of course. Yeah, well, that knows it. I got the hang of it, right? So the genetic algorithm, how to use, how to work with, we critique each other's books. Bob wrote two books at the time. John wrote three or four. Michael and Bob wrote Harnessing Complexities, still the best book on complex systems that had to exist. Most of these were dedicated to the Bach Group. In fact, John's book had a subtitle. How complexity, you know, how adaptation helps complexity. Okay, H, C, A, anyway, say C, A, B, whatever you got. Okay, anyway, we critique, and then we talked about the genetic algorithm. When does it work? When does it not work? And how can we make it a powerful tool? And so, I mean, in a course with two very short descriptions of the two projects that really took a lot of our time. Bob took the prisoner's dilemma and asked, what would the genetic algorithm do? Do, you know, here's a computer learning system. Could it, could it teach your computer to protect it? So you've got three who put in the rules for prisoner's dilemma.  The, and then the rules evolved over time and there's not too many rules. The computer was playing to protect that. It worked on its own, okay? Bob, my vision of this is Bob went to have some champagne with Amy, okay? And when he came back, the computer had kept going and it figured out that he rules and took the test. On its own, okay? It figured out who was playing and what's the best strategy against that player. The last thing I want to mention is Bob's work with Bill Hamilton. Bill, and this is where sex really enters the picture. Bill had this wild idea. The question is, why is there sex? We all think about this all the time, right? That's all. There's a vision that takes two to make one.  Why is there sex? Hamilton's idea was it's parasite avoidance. Yeah, think about that next time. I don't know what to do with my notes. The idea was that there's an arms race going on between individuals and the parasite. And if you stood still, your body stood still, the parasite would figure out how to take advantage of that. So by mixing the gene pool, every coupling goes deep, okay? The parasite, we're taking on this, aren't we? A great idea, but is it right? Hamilton argued, well, look at the cardinals. Their bright red is assigned to show that they're parasite free. Look at the places where there are trees that are mono, whatever, okay? Don't have sex. Most of those trees are non-parasite areas. And so the great goal was to take Hamilton's work and see what the genetic outcome could be.  And months and years went by, okay? But it was kind of what we did, what they did. Eventually it worked, it was now considered one of the main theories, explanations of the theory was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy in, what, 1999? And just as an indication of the excitement that the foxes made. Thank you, Bob, for that. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. You're welcome. Thank you. Who's that face? You have made a career of following Carl, which is not easy. I wanna echo what Paul said, and for all of Bob's personal accolades, I think the fact that the university is a better place because of him is something that we really should celebrate. And I wanna just give four quick snapshots. Bob is mentor, Bob is scientist, Bob is colleague, and Bob is role model. So as mentor, Bob is like, when you meet with Bob, it's like meeting with a Zen master. So let me just give one example of something I call the Axelrod rule that I've taught thousands of undergraduates. That is one time I said to Bob, Bob, how do you manage your schedule? And he says, I use something called the next Thursday rule. If somebody invites me to do something, at some point, it's gonna be next Thursday, right? And so you think about it, would I do this next Thursday? And if you wouldn't, don't do it now. So to the people of Fargo and the people of Lexington, Kentucky, I'm sorry I didn't go, but it's Bob's fault. Second thing, Bob is scientist. Bob, again, had all these sort of rules, like one of the things amazing about Bob is he writes and speaks and thinks with such clarity. He talks about keeping it simple, stupid in the context of his models, but that actually takes a lot of bravery to write articles that are clear and simple and to the point and don't obfuscate. And I think that as a scientist, whether you look at his work on Tit for Tat as culture model, his optimal timing of surprises, each of those projects could have been made so complicated, so sophisticated, with fancy language that no one could have understood him. And instead, Bob had the bravery and the courage, I think, to write work and to do work that other people could understand. Third is a colleague, Clark Kerr, former president of Houston, California, said that universities exist for three purposes. Football for the alumni, sex for the students, parking for the faculty. And while that's partly true, I think that what's most important with all the committees and everything else is that these are places of ideas. And one of the things that I actually did, a small amount of empirical work, Nancy, don't faint. And I look back at the last 80 emails I got from Bob, 61 had academic content, that's a three to one ratio. If you think about how much we communicate with one another and how much of it's actually really about ideas, read this paper, have you seen this thing? If we could live to that ratio, I just could only imagine what an amazing intellectual place that would be. And then last, Bob's exemplar, my wife, Jen and I, often ask ourselves what we call the Mary Oliver question, which is, I'm gonna show that recently, to see spot Mary Oliver, what will you do with your one wild and precious life, right? And that's a big question. And one of the things I've always looked up to Bob for is that again, he's had the courage to say, I'm just gonna work on this small problem of world peace. And so every day when you get up, Bob sets sort of a very high bar and has just been a huge role model for me and I know for many other people. And part of the reason this is a great public university is because Bob Axelrod has been here for almost five decades, making it one. So next for a longer talk will be Bob Putnam of Harvard, although Bob Putnam, some of us remember, at least I do, is really from Michigan, but has detoured to Harvard for 40 odd years. It's a pleasure to be, really is a pleasure for Rosemary and me to be back here. I think I can share this secret. Now where's Rosemary sitting? For the last, no, I got it. For the last 50 years, including the last 40 years, the password of our bank account has been gold blue. And I want to say to the Dean, this is a marvelous institution. I think I am the only person maybe in the room and possibly in the world who is actually in the small group of people who founded the predecessor of this institution. Because I remember coming to Michigan to be one of the founding members of the Ips Institute of Public Policy Studies. I'm not sure there are people even, do people know the term Ips anymore? Probably, okay, well it's a great university. It is a fabulous university. And this institution is a fabulous institution. I have a lot of things I want to say. I'm going to cut some of it because it's getting a little long. Bob has an extraordinary record of professional achievement, as we've already heard. And I'll maybe say a little bit about that later, although because people have talked about that already, I'm going to cut a little bit of what I was going to say about his public record. The reason is because I know Bob really well. There are probably only two people in this room who've known Bob longer than I have, his brother and my wife. I first met Bob 55 years ago this month as we began our graduate studies together at Yale in the fall of 1964. We met because my wife, Rosemary, back there, and Bob's brother, Dave, who is here, were in Sunday school together in Evanston, Illinois in the 1950s. And so my relationship with Bob had really deep roots. And because of that connection, Bob and I happened to make connections the first week of graduate school in New Haven. Bob is the only person outside of our immediate family who still calls Rosemary by her childhood name, Ro. So if somebody calls and they're asked for Ro, I'm sure it's Bob. I mean, I'm sure it's Bob that's asking for Ro or a bill collector or something. As it happened, Bob and I, that fall, the fall of 1964, were both students in Bob Dahl's seminar on democratic theory. And my first impression was that Bob was the smartest person I had ever met. Now you may want to discount that comparative evaluation.  How many smart people I could I have met? So to say that he was the smartest person I've ever met. And it was Ohio at that. But in the ensuing half century, I've been lucky enough to meet lots of really smart people, many of them in this room, and Bob has never lost that title for me. We soon discovered in Bob Dahl's class that we shared many intellectual interests, but that our minds were somehow wired differently. And I've long struggled to figure out how to put into words, because you'll see in a second, I've spent a lot of time thinking and talking with Bob. And therefore I've been trying to figure out how, because our minds are not wired the same. We're both reasonably successful as academics, but I think I want to say my mind is wide and Bob's is deep. That is, I'm pretty good at seeing patterns across a wide array of things. I notice things that I've seen in some other part of this, of data, actually, especially data. I'm pretty good at that. But Bob is even better at pursuing a theoretical issue deeply, deeply, deeply into its core. And discerning some fundamental, often mathematical truth that people hadn't ever gotten to before. And it turns out to have lots of unexpected implications in an astonishingly wide array of applications. So he's not narrow at all, I don't mean that, but he got to all this other stuff, cancer and world peace and all that, by going really deep. And when Bob is focused on some theoretical puzzle, he's like a terrier. He just digs deeper and deeper and deeper, just never letting go until he's figured it out in a deep way. And you know, Bob, this is true, because every time we get together, you're working on something and you're never satisfied until you've got down really deeply. Now, it may have been because of this mental complementarity that our minds are somehow different, but we share a lot of substantive interest in democratic theory initially, that Bob and I got into the, and this is really the topic sentence for what I wanna say, Bob and I got into the practice that fall, the fall of 1964, of getting together regularly, just to talk. We began in the tumbledown apartment where Rosemary and I lived, and we would just get together. Roughly once a week, as I remember, it may have been one of our other couple of weeks, and we would talk. And sometimes we talk about public affairs. This is, it's so old, that's so long ago that I remember spending hours with Bob chewing over the Vietnam War. This was the early days of the Vietnam War. Everybody in this room knows about the Vietnam War from after the fact, and what I mean therefore is, you know what was the right or wrong, but when you approached it from the other direction, at the beginning it was not quite so clear what the right, at least it wasn't clear to a lot of people what the right answer was, and I remember Bob and I talking a lot about that, but mostly we focused on scholarship, and mostly we focused on big, basic issues of basic democratic theory that Bob Doll's seminar was exploring that fall. For example, how big should a democracy be? Turns out that's actually, that's a complicated question if you think deeply about it. It's not at all clear how big a democracy should be, or what enabled democracy to work? Now, unlike lots of other people in this room, Bob and I have never worked or lived together in the same place ever. He's my closest professional colleague, and I've never lived in the same town as he had, because I worked hard to get him to Michigan, we worked hard together to get Bob to Michigan, and then the very year he arrived here, I left and went elsewhere, not because of Bob, obviously, but other things. But for decades now, almost every year, Bob and I have scheduled a visit of several days in which we take turns describing our current interests, our future interests, and offering deep, incisive, no holds barred, but affectionate criticism of one another's ideas. It's very rare to have that relationship with someone. In my experience, I've never experienced that, in which I felt so comfortable with somebody else that I would say really dumb ideas, and get back really thoughtful criticism. In my experience, this sort of relationship, I think is extremely rare, I actually don't know of any other examples of it, but I think both of us, certainly I would say, and I think Bob would say, that it's been essential to our own academic successes, because that's a terrific privilege to have, as you all can imagine. Let me give a couple of examples, and I apologize for being personal here, but this is supposed to be personal. I've never taken a course in game theory ever, except learning from Bob, as he explained his own research, and that goes back actually to the very beginning, because in the very beginning, Bob was even, certainly well before evolution of cooperation, actually even before his dissertation, he was talking about game theory and conflict and so on, and he stayed in touch with game theory, the rest of his career, and I have, therefore, just because all the time I'd be talking to him about it. And but I've never, never, ever studied game theory, I'm sorry, I'm embarrassed to say, but in nearly every project of my career, if you look at the projects in my career, from my dissertation, to my work on two level games, international affairs, to my discovery of the idea of social capital, at all those stages, game theory, as I learned from Bob in these private seminars, has always played a critical role. When I late one night in Oxford, stumbled onto Jim Coleman's book about social capital, I'd never heard of Jim Coleman, and I'd never heard of social capital, but I was up late and I was looking for a book to put me to sleep, and there was a big book on social theory, that sounded like just a ticket, and I turned to this chapter on social capital and I sat down and read it, and I, I'm not talking about me, because I had worked with Bob so long, I saw instantly what social capital was about and that it would be worth spending really the rest of my career on, and that was because just as repeat play games that Bob had talked about, embody the shadow of the future, it turns out that social capital embodies the shadow of the neighborhood. I'm not gonna give you the whole lecture here, but it turns out deep, deep underneath, the math of those two problems, that is the math of how the shadow of the neighborhood influences, can help you solve prisoner's limits, is almost identical to the math that Bob had worked out of why repeat play.  Of course, repeat play doesn't always have work, it's magic, and networks don't always work their magic. What I'm trying to say is it's only because Bob had been insistent about teaching me about game theory all those years that I ever stumbled, understood the idea of social capital. Let me give a different example. In the early 1970s, while I was a young assistant professor working at that point at Haven Hall, I don't know, does Haven Hall still exist? Maybe it's been torn down. In, as I remember, room 624 in Haven Hall, pardon, that doesn't exist, there should be a metal there. I had begun, while there, I'd begun more or less by accident a study of regional government in Italy. Don't ask why I'd done it, it was not clear. And 20 years later, I had long gone from Ann Arbor, and the study was still unfinished. And because a study of Italian local government, it turned out, was of interest only to the four academics in the world who cared about Italian local government. And I was in that frustrated frame of mind one fall when I returned to Ann Arbor for one of my regular meetings with Bob. Bob will remember this dinner. Over a long dinner at a restaurant, I couldn't remember the name of the restaurant, but it was on Packard Avenue, I could take it to where the restaurant was. I explained to Bob that I'd gotten into this dead end of this decades long by then investment that I'd made. And Bob summarized the problem very succinctly. He said, I remember what he said, don't publish until whatever you have to say will it be of interest to people who couldn't care less about Italian government. Now that seems obvious, right? But I was in a frame of mind in which I could see I could get out of this mess if I just raised my sights a little bit. And then we considered how to raise the sights of this project. And Bob harkened back to this seminar with Bob Dahl on democratic theory and on, as I remember I told you, part of that study was what makes democracy work. And I left Ann Arbor that next day with a clarified mission and within four years I published a book called Making Democracy Work, which turned out to work out okay. And that was Bob, not just the title, but I wouldn't have gotten there without Bob's, without this intellectual friendship. I know that he's a great collaborator with everybody, but I'm just trying to tell you that goes back really deeply in his career. And then while I'm in still in this mode of personal reflection, let me add a lecture lecture from Rosemary that every time Bob, who was then still single, would visit us, remember he came often, he invariably brought a very thoughtful, exceptionally intelligent gift for our two kids who are now in their early fifties, but at that point weren't. They were in their early, not even their early teens, they were in their early, their early whatever, odds. Bob was, and it was often a brain teasing toy. Bob, you remember all this? I hope you remember this. And he was like a doting uncle when he arrived. And knowing, we know therefore, we knew he was gonna be a great dad. And there, but you know, it takes two to tangle. We've heard that already. And therefore we rejoice when Bob met Amy. Where's Amy sitting? When Bob met Amy because, and they had two brilliant dollars of their own. And as we fully expected, Bob became a doting parent himself, and is now doubtless, a doting grandfather. And then when these two families are very interconnected, I'm gonna stop with the personal stuff in a second. But this is relevant. When this little daughter of ours, when she grew up, she came back to Michigan and became a PhD in history here, moved here with her husband who was from Costa Rica. And the two people in Ann Arbor who welcomed our daughter were of course, Bob and Amy.  But it goes back a long way. I wanna say one more enduring recollection from our earliest days. This has been already referred to, but I can take it back quite early. Bob's mind as we all know, is dauntingly theoretical and even abstract. But it was also clear from the very first encounters that we had, when he was probably still a teenager at that point when we were in graduate school because he'd gone, you know, rushed ahead, it was clear that his most fundamental drive was not academic, he wanted to change the world. And he wanted to avert nuclear war. That was, that's not something he came to him later. That was actually even before the academic stuff. I'm not sure it was even before the math, but it was certainly even before the poli sci. Bob and I were just having disagreement about this. I think he was in the summer of 1964 that he worked in McNamara's Pentagon. Bob thinks it was in 1965. We'll work about that later. But Bob came away from that work in the Pentagon, convinced that his gifts would be best deployed, not in government, but in the academy. And he always, whenever he would later in his career and some of you will know later events like this, Bob would spend a little time in Washington and then decide that wasn't for him, that this was, I mean, the academy was the right place. And that was true even that first encounter. And you know how far afield from nuclear strategy that motivation, but it's still the same motivation. He wants to make the world a safer place. And so ethnic conflict in the Balkans or confidence building between the Palestinians and Israelis or negotiations with the Soviet intellectuals as the Cold War was ending or cancer research or most recently cyber security and cyber warfare, all of those were aimed at putting this incredible mind to work on a very specific, sounds like it's not right to say it's very specific, but it's very clear topic, can we make the world safer? And some of the most enjoyable hours I've ever spent in my life have been in conversation with Bob about those real world problems. I was sort of serving as a sounding board and sometimes a sparring partner as he would try out new theoretical perspectives. Only once have actually I had the pleasure of accompanying Bob into the field on those policy journeys of his. I'm not sure, Bob, whether you remember this, but that led unexpectedly in the last years of the Soviet Union, I'm compressing a much longer story, to an unforgettable, long, sadden late evening, sauna in a KGB manner in the Estonian countryside with a group of completely drunk Soviet defense intellectuals. Bob will do nothing, solves it nothing to make this world a safer place. I had some more things here about the most cited work of social science in the last half century and the Wall Street Journal saying our ideas of cooperation will never be the same and I do wanna say just one thing about evolution of cooperation. Among the reasons for the extraordinary impact of this book is that it combines this deeply rigorous, logical and mathematical and empirical analysis with exceptionally accessible prose. Who will ever forget the chapter on the Christmas truce in World War I? And if you don't know what I'm talking about, it's because you have not read Bob's book. I'm skipping over these raft of things he's done. The youngest political scientist and maybe the youngest social scientist in the National Academy of Sciences, the MacArthur Fellow, the National Academy of Sciences Award for behavioral research, the Cleveland Prize that was mentioned, President of the APSR, the Johan, I'm gonna pronounce this correctly, the Johan Shitta Prize. Most people don't pronounce it correctly but that's what it's called, for that's our discipline's closest equivalent to the Nobel Prize. And of course, the National Medal of Science. I could go on, of course, but it would be simpler just to name the major awards for scholarly excellence that Bob has not won. I just did. What's truly amazing about Bob's career from the perspective of someone who's been hanging around him, my good fortune since that career began 55 years ago, is that instead of resting on his laurels, which any sane person would have done, he's continued to stay at least a decade ahead of the mainstream work in conflict resolution, in governance, in the use of technology and teaching, in cyber warfare and computer-based analytic models and so on. He's left an enormous legacy, as has been said by other people here, so I'm gonna not say it here, but again, but it's certainly true, that the role that he's played as a mentor here and elsewhere is pretty extraordinary. But I want to just want to close, because I thought you might like to hear, I happen to know this, what the world's undisputed arbiter of academic excellence, that is, Harvard, what Harvard thinks of Bob. I had the immense pleasure of witnessing close-up, really close-up, the ceremony in which Bob Harvard awarded Bob an honorary degree four years ago. And one useful way to summarize what the rest of the world thinks of Bob is to repeat verbatim what was said about him at that ceremony. I did not take notes at the time, but I've gone back and listened to the whole. So I'm gonna impersonate the Harvard provost. What leads us to cooperate, the provost began? An illustrious political scientist, Robert Axelrod, has shaped our understanding of what induces us to come together rather than go our separate ways. Remember, you have to imagine, there are thousands of people in Harvard Yard and across the world listening, and the provost is saying this. His publications on the evolution and complexity of cooperation stand among the world's most frequently cited writings in the social sciences, and he has brought his theoretical insights to bear on a sweeping range of problems, the avoidance of nuclear war, the nature of biological evolution, international trade, cybersecurity, cooperation among cancer cells. His methods draw on complexity theory and game theory and computer modeling, the provost said, in ways that have continually reshaped the frontiers of these fields. In an extraordinarily rare tribute for a social scientist, he was awarded the National Medal of Science. As a pair of colleagues recently wrote, it is hard to name an active, this is the provost now quoting several unnamed people, to name an active political scientist anywhere in the world whose ideas have had such a powerful effect on such a wide range of human inquiry and action. It's not only academics who have felt his touch, the provost continued, when Bono was asked the secret of U2's longevity as a rock band, he reportedly named Professor Axelrod's seminal book on the evolution of cooperation. I'm continuing to quote here. We proudly recognize a rock star of social science, the Walgreen Professor for the Study of Human Understanding at the University of Michigan, Robert Axelrod. I don't have a glass, but I ask you to join me in a celebratory toast to Bob Axelrod, rock star. Rock on, Bob. Now most of you have never seen me in a suit. And here I am. And I suppose most of you have never seen me blushing, but that's what I'm doing. What I really want to say is thank you. And last week I started to make a list of all the things I should thank you for as individuals, as friends, as colleagues, as relatives, and as representatives of the university, the Department of Political Science, the Ford School. And after thinking about the list, I realized that if I read it today, we'd be here till Monday morning. So instead I'll just give you a couple of bullet points. But first, to stick with the classiness of the event, of the wine and the music, let me quote Cicero. He said that gratitude is not only the greatest of all virtues, it's the parent of all the others. I feel that I've been remiss in not expressing often enough, or fully enough, the gratitude I feel. And today it's been brought home to me once more in so many ways from what you've just heard. Let me start with the gratitude I feel toward Michigan for having hired me when Berkeley turned me down for tenure. It was a difficult moment to say the least. People here could have said, well, Berkeley knew Bob better than they did. And if they didn't think he was worthy of tenure, then why should Michigan make a lifelong commitment? But Michigan did, and I'm always grateful. The Ford School and the Political Science Department have been my home since I arrived 45 years ago. And I'm grateful for the many ways they've supported me. Nancy Burns and Michael Barr follow a long line of previous chairs and deans, all of whom did so much to empower my work to the generosity of the resources they provided. And by letting me teach pretty much whatever I wanted, even when it was a bizarre subject like sense making. I appreciate too that you've never pressured me to be a candidate for dean or department chair. Maybe you know that I just wasn't cut out for it. After all, I'm better at candor than attacked. And so I'm grateful for those of you who did step up to the plate and work so hard to hire great colleagues and to make life as easy as possible for all the rest of us. I'm grateful for being at the university, which is arguably the best collection of social science departments and related professional schools of any place in the world. I've certainly taken advantage of lots of them. Moreover, Michigan is where people really walk the walk of interdisciplinarity. The Institute for Social Research has set the gold standard for interdisciplinarity in the social sciences. And for me, the interdisciplinary Bach group that you've heard about has been central. I was gonna say a little about it, but you've already heard about it, so I don't have to repeat that. But it was met for 30 years, included beloved Michael Cohn and Scott Page and Carl Simon that you've heard from today. Now, as you know, I'm best known for my book on the evolution of cooperation. And I just wanna express my gratitude to Amy, who among so many other things played a major role in making that book as accessible. And even if I dare say so, as inviting to read as it is. Now here's the thing, I'm not really retiring. Yeah, I'm no longer teaching. And you can use my salary to hire other people. But I do intend to continue my research and public engagement. For example, I'm working to confront Russia's hostile influence campaigns, and you've heard I'm working with the Chinese to see if we can get along with them, especially in the area of potential cyber conflict. I'm gonna leave climate change and racial and gender prejudice to others. But I reserve the right to take up other challenges that I might be able to contribute to. Meanwhile, thanks for being there for me.


Human societies have been in close contact with their environments since the beginning of their formation and use the ingredients of the environment to obtain food and medicine. Through trial and error, humans eventually became able to meet their needs from their surroundings. The gradual transmission of information about medicinal plants has led to the development of civilization and the provision of more facilities. Medicinal plants are used as a medical resource in almost all cultures. To ensure the safety, quality and effectiveness of medicinal plants and herbal drugs, the health of active plant derived compounds must be evaluated. This will lead to the emergence of a new era of the healthcare system to treat human diseases in the future. Awareness of traditional knowledge and medicinal plants can play a key role in the exploration and discovery of natural plant resources. In order to preserve this knowledge, a comprehensive approach and collaboration are necessary to maintain historical records on medicinal plants and use them for the benefit of humankind. This article was authored by Fatemay Jamshidi Kiya, Zara Loragwani and Hosein Aminikoi. We are article.tv, links in the description below.


At Audiology Associates at Prestonsburg, you can live your life the way you want and find the freedom of better hearing. You'll experience patient care that is specific to you with exceptional follow-up care that ensures your hearing and balance needs are being met. Audiology Associates at 1428 Northlake Drive in Prestonsburg. Floyd County's farmer market will host its first autumn fest celebration this Saturday October 15th. Tuesday Mountain Top spoke with Farmers Market President Gary Gerhart about the fun and what they have in store. Our main objective with the Farmers Market is to get people interested in the vegetables and the fruits and gardening and not just the food but the whole gardening experience. So we had good luck with, like I said, so we're doing another one and we have Main Street players from Johnson County, from Painesville, the actors and they're doing a play now called Rainbow Fish so some of their actors are coming in and that will help draw the kids out we hope. We did Wizard of Oz like it's a month ago and it really helps. So they're bringing their characters out and we've got a music plan from a local duo called Dempsey and Hall. During the festival, visitors can browse a selection of local vendors ranging from crafts to food. Those participating can also take part in the festival's pet costume contest. Gary Gerhart also expands on the importance of local vendors. We try to give big support to our local farmers and what they have to offer first going to the grocery store. It's fresh. The stuff's usually picked the day before they sell it at the market and our prices are always pretty good and competitive with the grocery stores where it's always not so fresh or comes from another country. Our rule here at Floyd County is it has to come from within the county or a county touching our county because one of our vendors is from Johnson County and so we stick to the rules pretty good about raising local, selling local. The Autumn Fest is this Saturday, October 15th from 9am to 1pm located on 155 Northlake Drive in Prestonsburg. For Mountain Top News, I'm Joel Forgell.


Hi, today we're going to talk about analog, digital and PWM signals. When it comes to signals, all signals are either analog or digital signals. A great example is video signals. HDMI signals are digital signals while something like a composite signal is an analog signal. Both signals are similar in the sense that they use voltages to carry information, but how they use voltages to carry the information is how they're different. Firstly, let's talk about analog signals. These were commonly used in the 1900s before microcontrollers and microprocessors were invented. They're still used today, but the reason they were used so often back then is because the way analog signals work is that they carry information through different voltages. So let's look at an analog signal here. As you can see, the analog signal here is a voltage over time graph. This means that a 0 volt signal versus a 1 volt signal versus a 2 volt signal all carry different information. Now, the advantage to this is it's very easy to change the information you're sending just by changing the voltage. So if we feed one of these analog signals into our microcontroller or microprocessor such as, you know, our Arduino or Raspberry Pi, then what these devices do is that they break down the analog signal into 1024 bits. That means imagine we're working with a 0 to 5 volt range. It'll break that down into a range from 0 to 1024. That means roughly 512 will be 2.5 volts, 0 will be 0 volts and 1023 will be 5 volts. If your range is from 0 to 3 volts, then you know your 0 to 1023 will appropriately be cropped to that manner. So that's how digital devices understand analog signals. Next, let's talk about digital signals. Digital signals became mainstream ever since the invention of transistors, microprocessors and microcontrollers. Digital signals originates from the term digits which is discrete integers. And unlike analog signals which rely on smooth voltage graphs to communicate information, digital signals communicate information through discrete values. A good way to think of the difference between digital and analog signals is to think of a slide ruler and an abacus. An abacus has strict digits and positions for these digits while a slide ruler has a smooth transition between the different values. Computers use digital signals in the form of binary. Binary is different from our regular base 10 number system in that it's a base 2 number system. That means binary only has the digits 0 and 1 which are off for 0 and on for 1. So if you wanted to represent binary signals or digital signals through an analog curve, what we could do is actually assign the 0 volts to 0 and 5 volts to 1 in the case of Arduino or Raspberry Pi. Now, you might be thinking analog voltages can carry any signal from 0 to 5 volts. That means they can carry 1024 increments of this voltage while digital signals can only carry 2 increments either an off or an on value. So why don't we use analog signals when they can carry so much more information? Well, digital signals work around this limitation by using clever timing techniques such as PWM pulse with modulation to carry a lot of data. PWM works by basically injecting these tiny little gaps of 0 or off digital signals into a digital signal and by injecting these off signals at a very high rate it can effectively emulate something like an analog voltage graph. So as you can see here over here you have a peak voltage and as you can see the very little gaps where the digital signals turned off. As you can see here the voltage kind of drops a little bit so there are more gaps and as you can see here the analog voltage that's emulated is even lower you know the gaps the physical gaps between the digital high signals are greater in length. So basically in injecting these gaps at a very high rate what happens is that you flip the digital signal on and off very quickly that you can emulate an analog voltage signal like this. Servos like these are one great example of a device that uses a PWM signal to function. Let's do a very quick demo to actually understand how PWM signals like these can emulate analog signals. So all we need for this demo is an LED and a Raspberry Pi and an Arduino with a PWM compatible pen. I'll just use the Arduino since it's convenient for a simple demo such as this. What I'm going to do is actually wire up the LED to a PWM compatible pen and then I'm going to use this code. In fact this code is available on the examples tab of the Arduino. So what this code over here does is uses PWM signals to emulate an analog right that means emulate the voltages going up and down that means fading the light on fading the light up and then fading the light down using different voltages but we're going to emulate that using PWM signals. So let's actually flash this code and actually test out what it looks like. So I'm going to plug it in as you can see the brightness goes up and then comes back down goes up comes back down. It's very straightforward as you can see when the brightness is very high the PWM signal looks something like this that means very few gaps between the the high voltage and then when the brightness is very low something like now then the gaps between the PWM signals are quite high. So by basically flicking the light switch on and off very quickly you can vary the brightness of the LED. Now this has to be done fast enough so it looks like a continuous motion. If you slow this down using a slow motion camera you will actually see that it's flickering and it's not smooth like it looks like to our eyes. Just like PWM signals there are other digital signals such as SPI and I2C that also use these delays or time gaps to you know standardize what the information means and lastly. The reason why the Arduino and the Raspberry Pi work so well and seamlessly with both analog and digital signals is because of this little device called the analog to digital converter. This device allows the Arduino and the Raspberry Pi to receive analog signals convert them into digital signals to be processed and in the case of outputting an analog signal they can output a digital signal to the analog to digital converter and the analog to digital converter will convert it into an analog signal to be outputted to a different device. Now if you enjoyed this tutorial and want to watch more tutorials like this do subscribe down below. If you have any questions or comments you can leave them down in the comment section and if you like this video do drop me a like. Thanks for watching.


On the stage, Congress workers, brothers and sisters, I would like to welcome all of you here today. Mathiyo Kulunadana, our Sannarthi translator. 10% of UDF candidates are here. Eethavanai, 58% of Sannarthis are here. So we also have experienced people. We have experienced people in Sannarthis. But this mix of young people and experienced people is going to give Kerala a different attitude. Yesterday I have been campaigning for one of the candidates who is 27 years old. Yesterday I went to Sannarthi to talk to them. They said that they are 27 years old. They have a very powerful family. So these young people will have a different impact on the Vidhansabha. And we are sending these young people into the Vidhansabha because we want to change the way Kerala is governed. We want to try one or two very big ideas. We want to test them. And if they work in Kerala then we want to apply them to the rest of the country. If you look at our country today and specially Kerala, you will find that we cannot get jobs for youngsters. The economy that used to grow at 9-10% is now stuck. We have a Prime Minister who keeps going to make in India, make in India and now no one listens to him. So he is distracting people with new appearances. Bengal election is going on so he has got a new face. He wants to remind Bengal about Ravindranath Tagore. Basically, hollowness. No substance. And so I want to tell you what our analysis of the problem is. We feel that the best way to start the economy of Kerala and then India is to put money into people's hands. And our logic is quite simple. We believe that if we put money into people's hands, people will spend that money. How will they spend that money? How will they spend that money? They will buy things, they will do things. When they buy things, other people will need to produce those things. And when they need to produce those things, they will hire people in their factories to do the work of producing those things. And when they need to produce those things, they will hire people in their factories to do the work of producing those things. It's like a car. If you don't have fuel in the car, you can keep turning the key and nothing will happen. So we want to put fuel into the Kerala economy. We want to put petrol into the engine. So now you will ask, okay, so how will you put petrol into the engine? How will you put petrol into the economy of Kerala? What we are going to do is we are going to take 6000 rupees a month, 17000 rupees a year. And we are going to give it to every 4 persons in Kerala. Doesn't matter what religion, where you come from, you are going to get 70-1000 rupees a month. There are also lot of rubber farmers. We are going to give you 250 rupees per kg of rubber. Now you think about it, if you imagine of people in Kerala who have 0 or close to 0 rupees in their bank account. Every time they look at their bank account, they get scared. They worry about how will they educate their children. They get scared, what happens if someone I love falls sick? How will they pay for that? If someone falls sick, what will we do? We will eliminate all that fear. After Nyaayi, when you look at the bank accounts of Kerala's people, there will be no one who will have no money. Not a single person will have 0 in their bank account. It will start with 70-2000 rupees a year. After that they can do what they want. After that they can do what they want. After 70-2000 rupees a year, what will happen? There is nothing happening in the car. Because there is no control. There is no control in that car. Even if there is no control in the car, even if there is no control in the car, if we say that we will not control, we will not be able to control. Chief Minister will sit in the car, he will turn the key and the economy of Kerala will start. There will be a Chief Minister of the Kerala. When we sit in the driving seat of Chief Minister, we will be able to control the economy of Kerala. We will be able to control the economy of Kerala. We will be able to control the economy of Kerala.  Not a single one.  We will never ever allow the future of Kerala to lie in front of the Vidhamsa. Our Chief Minister would have gone, picked up those boys and said, don't worry, we will be able to help you. Why should LDF people get those jobs when youngster's young carolites deserve those jobs? The reason the Chief Minister is not able to go and speak to those boys and girls is because he is scared to face them. And he is scared to face them because he has taken something away from them. This is a difficult job, but easy job. So, you have seen three new farm laws designed to destroy the agricultural system in India. We believe in the farmers of Kerala. So we are going to give you your own separate budget. Every single thing that we are going to do for you, we are going to tell you in the beginning of the job. Every rupee that we are going to spend because we believe in it. I want to conclude with one, any clue. Help me understand the people of Kerala. I still don't understand them. That well, but it's a start. I was in the Middle East some years ago. And they invited me to a hospital. Government very proudly invited me to a hospital. So I saw the hospital, very impressive hospital. High technology, all the machines, very clean, expensive, very impressive. Nice garden in front of the hospital. We sat down, we sat down, we sat down, we sat down, we sat down, we sat down, we sat down. Nice garden in front of the hospital. We sat down after the visit. So I said to them, you are running a fantastic hospital. What is the secret of your success? I was expecting he'll say, we have very high technology machines. We understand the medical business. We have a good strategy. And he answers me, he says the secret of our success is Kerala nurses. So I said, what is so special about these Kerala nurses? You can get nurses from many states in India. You can get nurses from other countries. Why Kerala? He looks at me and says, Mr. Gandhi, Kerala nurses understand the suffering of the patient's best. He says, I don't know what it is. But our patients, they love Kerala nurses. He says, I don't know what it is. But our patients, they love Kerala nurses. He says, I don't know what it is. But our patients, they love Kerala nurses. Because these nurses look after them like they are their own family. So that is the spirit of this land. Kerala nurses does not say, which religion are you from? She does not say, where do you come from? She does not say, are you a man or a woman? She does not say, are you old? Are you poor? Are you rich? She says, you are suffering. I am here to help you. This is the spirit of your state and this is what Kerala teaches the rest of India. And this is the type of government that we should be running. Government that is empathetic, government that listens to people, government that understands that people are in difficulty, people are suffering. Government that does not differentiate between our organization and others. Government that understands the suffering and the pain of everybody. And I am confident that the UDF government will have the empathy, will have the sensitivity to run such a government. And I am confident that Mathew here is going to be one of the people who is going to bring these type of ideas to India. And our second candidate Shibu is going to do the same. So I want you to support them fully and send them to the Vedhansa. And I want Kerala to make an example to the rest of the country to start the Kerala economy using Gaya. Nya is going to erase poverty from this land. Don't underestimate the revolutionary nature of this step. And it will help fire up the economy and bring jobs to our youngsters. And it will help change the world.


This is stock number 9J350AA. We are here at Summit Automotive in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin. You're new and used. SUV headquarters, today we are checking out this super clean 2015 GMC terrain. This vehicle has the 2.4-liter four-cylinder motor, pumps out 182 horsepower, and it has been fully safety and inspected by our service shop. It has a fresh oil and filter change. All the fluids have been checked and topped off. It has four brand new tires and it is 100% ready to go. Summit White is the color we shoot all of our videos in 1080p, 60 frames per second, so if you have HD capabilities on your computer, tablet, or smartphone device, turn them on right now because it is definitely your best way to ensure the quality and condition of the vehicle before seeing it in person. If you want to check out all the photos of this vehicle in the upper right hand part of your screen, there's a link right to our website. Click that, check us out there. This vehicle comes with the factory alloy painted rims. It has brand new Uniroil Tiger Paw tires on here. These are 225-65R17s. You can still see a little wear knobs on them. We put those on in our safety inspection. It has the projector lamp headlamps, the projector lamp fog lamps. That front bumper is exceptionally clean. I didn't see any dents, dings, or cracks on it. And the hood is in really nice shape as well. I didn't see any dents or dings on there. The passenger side fender is in nice shape as well. No major dents or dings. And that passenger side front rim is in excellent shape as well. As you go down this side of the vehicle, you can see just how clean the body is, how reflective and mirror-like that paint is. We take these HD videos so if you are far away, or even if you're close by and just cannot make the trip down but you're still interested in purchasing the vehicle, you can see the vehicle, hear the vehicle, and have confidence in what you're looking at before you even get here. So that when you do get here, there's absolutely no surprises and you're all ready to go. And that's why we offer the Summit Auto Fastpass option in the upper right-hand part of your screen. It links right to our website. You can apply for financing, get pre-approved, see a payment quote, even appraise a trade, all from the comfort of your own home. That way when you get here, all you've got to do is drive the vehicle, love it, and you're all set to go. Back tires are brand new as well. And it does have four-wheel disc brakes on here. As we come around to the back, you'll notice that it does have the all-wheel drive badge and that that rear bumper is in excellent condition. No denser dings on that rear gate either. Back storage area is very clean and I believe that's a speaker back here or a subwoofer, has a spare tire and jack tools. And you can see those rear shocks are holding that gate up nicely. Some manual gate. And as you go down the driver's side, just as clean as that passenger's side. Didn't see any denser dings on that rear quarter. It does come with the roof rack rails. And this back rim is in excellent shape as well and that back tire is brand new too. Down the rest of this side of the car, very, very clean. It does come with the heated mirrors. I wanted to show you the bottom of the doors here. They all look really good. Equinoxes, you got to always look at that. Inside the SLE2 package gives you the black and gray cloth interior. Power driver's seat with lumbar. We have weather tech floor mats in the front here. Pioneer sound system, power windows, power locks and power mirrors. As you hop inside the vehicle here, you can see that this one has 60,322 miles. You get a digital speedometer as well as an outside or as well as a compass display. Leather wrap steering wheel, cruise controls on the left, Bluetooth and audio controls on the right. And it does have auto headlamps as well. You get the GMC and Telolink system, AM, FM and Sirius XM radio capabilities. This is also where your backup camera shows up. And you can do a multitude of different apps and stuff on there. It does have a CD player down here and your climate controls are right there. Automatic transmission, weather tech format on the passenger side as well. And that passenger side seat, no rips, no tears. Very, very clean. This vehicle has never been smoked and smells very clean inside. The headliner is in really nice shape. You do get map lights up there, on-star capabilities in the mirror. And we'll take a quick look at the back seats and then check out under the hood. Back seats are in nice condition as well. No rips or tears back here.  And you do get the factory floor mats back here. These seats do fold down for extra storage. And they got a little plastic piece so that stuff doesn't fall behind there.  And lastly here, as soon as my microphone gets uncaught. Lastly, we have to take a look at the bottom of the doors back here. They all look good as well. We'll take a quick look under the hood. I would personally like to thank you for checking out the video today. And hopefully from this HD video, you will have been able to tell just how clean this terrain is all the way around. Under the hood, we have the 2.4 liter four-cylinder motor, 182 horsepower engine base. Very clean, runs very smooth. This car has been fully safety and inspected by our service shop. Has a fresh oil and filter change. All the fluids have been checked and topped off. Exceptionally clean under here. Really a nice vehicle all the way around. Four brand new tires. And to see more pictures of this terrain or one of our other 450 new and used cars, trucks, SUVs, minivans, Wranglers. Half tons, three quarter tons, one tons. You name it, we got it.  All at summitauto.com. If you'd like to check out more HD videos, you can go to youtube.com slash summitauto. Remember to like, subscribe, and share on this video and all the videos that you see there. In fact, in a second you will see a link to subscribe to our YouTube channel on your left. A link to more terrains and equinoxes on your right. If you've not been to our website, on the bottom link to this vehicle on our website. Click those, check us out. And we really look forward to helping you with this super clean 2015 GMC terrain all wheel drive. SLE2 with brand new tires and Summit White. Thanks again.


Welcome to Mrs. Price's 2017. This year's winner in the category Enabling Environment comes from Egypt, the Ministry of the Information and Communication Technology. With us, Dr. Shakir will tell us more about the project and how it was established. The ICT Accessibility and Education for Persons with Disabilities is a national project in Egypt to improve the quality of education for students with disabilities by making the education process more accessible, more interactive and tailored to their needs. Through the project we managed to access more than 500 schools by providing them with the ICT tools with the assistive technologies tailored to the needs of students with different disabilities. We also trained 6,000 teachers to use such technologies and we actually got a very positive feedback from the students and teachers as well. The project started as part of a comprehensive strategy launched by the Ministry of Communications and Information Technology to tackle different angles to make the society education, employment and everything more accessible to students with disabilities in Egypt. What is the future of your project? Well, actually the project became part of a presidential initiative and now the target was tripled. Our target was 1,000 schools. Now the target is 3,000 schools and the target for students' training was 10,000 teachers but now there are 30,000 teachers. This is still the year 2019 and we are working very hard to achieve the goals. This amazing achievement was also recognized by the VISTA community awarding you with this prize. Could you please tell us a bit more how is VISTA's process perceived within your entity and your community? Well, actually this is the second consecutive year that we got a prize and it was very hardly recognized not only in the Ministry but also in the whole ICT community and I think this is very important because it encourages everyone to work towards the inclusive of persons with disabilities. Sustainable development goals are very popular since last year when they were established by United Nations. ICTs are helping advance SDGs. Would you tell us what is the linkage between your project and the Sustainable Development Goals? There is a direct link because education and inclusive education for students with disabilities was mentioned explicitly in the SDGs and of course our project is working on the accessibility of schools, of curriculum and for making the education process more accessible. The project is also linked with other SDGs like employment, like poverty alleviation because it's an indirect impact of the project. Welcome back to VISTA's forum 2017 and again congratulations for your achievement. We hope to see you and welcome you next year for the forum as well. Thank you, you are very interested to come next year and maybe we will be our winners once again. Maybe, thank you. Thank you.


Yes, I'm probably one of the household objectivists at ESI over the years, having spoken on about a nine-nineteen-hundredth anniversary, what do you regard as the role of government in an objectivist society, but in particular foreign policy and the sense? So I think the role of government is police, to protect us against criminals and to protect against fought. A judicial system, a judiciary that obitrates disputes and of course prosecutes those who committed fought and committed crimes. And a military that has protect us from foreign invasion, from terrorist attacks, from, you know, from violation of our property rights. I think there's an open debate at which point violation of American, let's say we're talking about America, of America's property rights overseas would justify a military intervention. I think that's a debatable issue at what point that happens, but I certainly think there is a point at which massive confiscation by foreign government of American property is justification enough for U.S. to use a military force to protect the individual rights of its citizens. So the overarching idea is the role of government is to protect the individual rights. The individual rights of its citizens, that's why we have nations, rather than the individual rights of all citizens all over the world. American government is said to protect the individual rights of Americans. The U.K. government is said to protect the individual rights of the British. Now if all governments are doing a good job at that, then, you know, they all look the same and there's not much difference between them. Unfortunately, we don't have that kind of circumstances. I'm not sure, you know, I get a sense that you're asking more in terms of the foreign policy. But I think the aid government is said to protect its citizens. So if it's attacked, its job is to defeat the enemy as thoroughly, as quickly with as few casualties to itself as possible and then bring the troops home. So my view is crush the enemy and come back home. No nation building, no martial plans, no helping established democracy in the world as, you know, Bush would have liked, no setting up puppet governments overseas.  Again, the criteria for all those actions is, what is the action necessary to protect the individual rights of your citizens while minimizing the risk to your citizens?


All right, let's get to the questions. First, what is your view on NXP semiconductor and the pending tender offer for the portfolio? This is from Phyllis and Joe B. in Los Angeles. Okay, so let's look at NXP. Remember, this is in real time. I know there'll be a lot of stories in the site about on the street site, but about it. But NXP is at $112.57. The tender offer from Qualcomm is for $110. So what's it doing in 112? Well, it's comp, what it's valued as, like it's Skywork Solutions, Corvo, Broadcom, which remember I told you is a buy here if you didn't know in any 246. Those stocks are all now highly valued. More highly valued than what Qualcomm's willing to pay. So I have said don't tender. Now I am in league with Elliot Partners, which is a terrific firm and almost always gets its way, got its way in our conic, that you've got to pay more if you're Qualcomm. Pay up for this. Now, Qualcomm need to pay up for it because they're in a battle right now with pretty much everybody, especially they're in a battle with Apple. They need to get the darn thing bought at a higher, you know, if they have to pay a higher price, then they will. They need to diversify away from cell phones. This gives them Internet of Things, gives them near-fuel communications, give them auto, so we're not tendering. We think that they're going to have to pay up. Okay, second question. When do you think the Alpine High value will be reflected in Apache stock price? This is from Frank Pete and Charles since that time. When I talk to management, they're driving me crazy. They're just driving me crazy. And I think that they have to tell a better story. I now think that they're finally under-promising and over-delivering. I am confident. I am confident to speak to management that Alpine High has a lot more oil than people realize that just it takes time. It takes time. It's got lots of natural gas. Maybe one-third of the natural gas in the Permian. That's why I'm not giving up. I know, I know, I know. Should have sold some at 49. Should have would have could have. I didn't. If the stock falls below 40 again, we're going to buy some. If you don't any, own any. I blessed it by taking it up to a two. Am I disappointed? I'm horrified. I'm horrified. You ever see a manager come on TV and say, they're horrified? I'm saying it to you. All right. Number three. Does adding Broadcom when owning Apple's a core holding weakened diversification? John S. asks a great question. Absolutely they are together. Broadcom trades. If you go to the conference school for Broadcom, Hawk Tan, the brilliant guys put this come together. He later, he didn't really give you good guidance. And now we know why. Because a lot of their technology is going to be in later editions of the Apple that they're not, of the new iPhones that they're not ready to put out yet. But you know what? That's the opportunity. You think Broadcom will be trading at this level? If they're about to have those chips right now, trade on, be selling a mouse with Apple, is it diversified? No, it's not. It's very much linked to Apple. So you could say, well, Jim, why did you buy it? Periodically, like Western Digital, I sense that there's something that must be bought. I think that Broadcom is an amazing company. I think that they have, by the way, they're Samsung's provider too. They have 5G. And if you listen to Lowell McAddon talking this morning with my friend David Faber, you would realize, 5G's the future. And Broadcom is the way to play it. So yes, they are linked to Apple. Yes, it may not be the perfect diversification if you own Apple like we do for the trust. But I think it's going higher. Sometimes when you think it's going higher, you got to buy it. All right, number four. Can you please comment on the recent foreign Comcast talk prices from Larry B? Oh, Larry. I know you, Larry. Sharon Massachusetts. OK. Now, Comcast, long-term holding for us up nicely, down again today, even though my friend's at Moffat, Nathanson, upgraded the other day. Here's the problem with Comcast. When your court-cutting people freak out. Now, they gave you some numbers earlier this week and last week, which said, hey, listen, our video units are down. Our sign-ups are down. Well, first, they have a big business in Texas. Second, there is court-cutting. But remember, this is really a Wi-Fi play. It's a broadband play. And they basically confirm their numbers, which means to me, if you don't own any and we have it as a one, you should be buying Comcast right here at $37.50. Right here. I think Comcast is a great buy. Full disclosure. I'm from Philadelphia. I know them personally. Full disclosure. I own stock. I work for them. That is obviously not why I'm recommending the stock. I'm recommending because of this major cash flow. It's got profitable growth. And every time it's been down, it's been a buy. Stock is down more than 10% of its high. Stock like this pullback is more than 10%. You've got to buy it. All right. What is a good pullback price to initiative position DWDP, which is Dow Dupont? OK. You know I spoke with both Ed Breen and with Andrew Livers this week. Andrew is the CEO of Dow. Ed Breen's the CEO of Dupont. Now the companies. I'm very close to both of these gentlemen. When I say I'm very close to you, if they're standing, let me get this straight. It doesn't mean I have any information. Just go to the meetings and talk. I ask the questions. I've done enough work that they answer the questions. As people saw this week when I interviewed both of them. Good price to pay it back. When it gets to 3% yield, I mean right now it's a 2.63. I think I would buy it. This is going to be not just three companies. It's going to be four. I think it's going to be like Tycho, where you got a 900% return from Ed Breen. I was joking around with Ed. Ed went to Council Rock High School. I went to Springfield High, our joining area, Montgomery County. And I think you remember his great athlete. At least I hope he did. All right. I think that the company is fantastic. When they divided the three companies, I think you're going to see 85 in the value. It's at 69. Frank Mitch, by the way, if you use Wells Fargo as a broker, I think he's got the best report. Frank does really high quality work. One by one, the analysts are recommending it. I don't know. The Barclays guy put it in a cell. I think he's going to be buried. When Ed starts breaking this company up, you're going to get a specialty company. You're going to get a really what I regard as being. A specialty company is going to be a lot like 3M. You're going to get the same multiple. You have a materials company that is going to trade not that high a multiple. And then you're going to get an ag company. I think it's going to be the class. Ag company is best in the class. All right. Now, number six. The new iPhone X will be a success at the $999 price. It's from Harriet A. Yes. I think that it's going to have, that it will be one of those cameras that you will just, I mean, the camera is the most important part, that people will want. It's going to have a lot more than people say it does. You should run a real money piece this morning. I wrote anticipation of this. But the main thing you have to understand is that we don't know all the power that it has. But younger people do. They know that they can do a lot with this. You can trade in for it. I think people are going to upgrade. I have the seven. I'm going to upgrade. And I think the battery life really matters. I think the quality matters. And I think who's going to write for it matters. I'm also going to get the new watch, by the way. Well, at least I hope if my wife's watching, she'll buy it for me. All right. Number seven. Do you have an update on the Arconic CEO search Tom M? You know, I don't. What I will tell you is that I think Arconic, which by the way was down off of that tragedy in Britain because their structured aluminum was in there. And by the way, it's been great. I wish we would hold out hell on more to it. But Arconic, we brought it all the way down. Arconic, I think, what's going on there. It would not shock me if within the next year it's acquired. Think about, there was a piece out this morning about the greatness of Berkshire Hathaway. They own precision casports. We just saw an acquisition from United Technologies, bullpen name, which we're thinking about adding, but it was up today, for Rockwell Collins. Well, this is the logical play. The next largest, the next aerospace play that's the logical play, $11 billion. I think that maybe whoever comes in, first of all, wouldn't mind Mr. Hess being the CEO. He's very good. But whoever comes in, I think that the story might be to sell it. And I think you get a lot of money. Please do not sell Arconic. It's a two-rated. People that goes down will be able to recommend more. Okay. Now, number eight. If I wanted to add one tech name today, which one would you recommend? Lori W in London. Fantastic London. Okay. Well, I guess you can tell from my several times prodding, it would be Broadcom. I like this stock. I think a lot of people are really petrified that Apple's not going to have good sales. They're looking at Apple stock and saying that, wow, I guess it's not going to sell well. I think that's quite wrong. I think that the stock at $245 is a buy. And I want to emphasize that I think that it is one of the cheaper stocks than portfolio. Okay. Now, number nine. What do you think could cost some upward price movement in Newcore? Kevin G from Tampa rights. Well, it did get upgraded today. Look, Newcore's the stock that I recommend. You know, I recommended Newcore first when I met with Mr. Iverson who founded the company back in the 80s when I was a Goldman. I always, I was kind of waiting for the stock to come down and lose all of the upside from the election of President Trump. I obviously pulled the trigger too early. We just bought some the other day. It's a very big position for us. It yields 2.8%. Obviously people were let down. One that there's been no infrastructure bill, trillion dollar infrastructure. But the second is a lot of people felt that perhaps the president would get tough on China and invoke 232, which would have said that, listen, we need to have our own steel because of industry, because of national defense. When Bannon was fired, that took away that story. So when Bannon got fired and we didn't get infrastructure, the stock got hammered. It's down so low. I mean, what John Furrier was doing a pretty good job. And I know John pretty well. John comes on the show the same way that Dan Tomico came on the show. This is the only steel company that is an investable steel company, people. And do I think it's right here? It's down 9% for the year. That's highly unusual to be able to get it at discount. I'm pounding the table in Newquart, right here. All right. Number 10, how deep do you scale into a position during your initial purchases? Christian B. Brazil. All right. Well, this is a good example. Sometimes we need to be bigger than we should be. First data. I would be a buyer of first data right here. I'm hoping it comes to 17. It's dipped to 17.75 today off the underwriting. Haven't been able to get in. I like to buy in scale. Look at the ITW, the way we bought that one down and how right that was at. That's going to be. Look at the way we did. That's Illinois Tool Works Buy. Look the way we did Keycorp. We didn't want to be any bigger in banks because the Fed, we don't think it's going to be able to tighten again. But we went in there and just bought it when it got knocked down. The best one to focus on is how much we bought in Eli Lilly. And why is that? Well, here's something. Why did I say about Eli Lilly? What happens is that you get good news and people don't expect it. And that's why I've always said people understand the broad portfolio of Eli Lilly. Eli Lilly is now at $80 feet and 70 cents. It's up a buck 30. Why? Because this morning they put out a release that it's Barrist Synodib, which is Barrist Synodib. We've been talking about that on their money. And we also have a lot of stuff about it with RA, with Rheumatoid Arthritis. Barrist Synodib meets primary endpoint. This release just came out this morning. In phase two study of patients with moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. Atopic dermatitis is unfortunately a huge, huge market. Ask Regeneron. Remember, we've always been like Regeneron. And they just came out with their data showed new safety and efficacy data from phase two, moderate to severe atopic dermatitis. I think this is going to sail through. This is a combination of insight. So here we go again. Stock's back at 83. We bought this big as it went down. I hope you did with us. All right. Number 11, what's the typical time horizon for price targets and AAP holdings? Very difficult. Very difficult. So look at Apple. We've owned it forever. Google, now we own it forever. I think the answer to the question is, is that it's not arbitrary and mercurial, but it's more just trying to be as disciplined as can. Like we took off some Facebook. When we downgraded Apple to, you know, we're up so big on some of these. We don't want to give it back. We've downgraded Citigroup on two because we're up so big. We've downgraded Dow, Dupont on two because we're up so big. And we just don't want you to come in and buy it. Now, remember what I did earlier? I upgraded Apache. Didn't do Newell. Because I just feel like, you know what? Enough is enough. I do feel like that you have to just say, OK, it's probably, if you wanted to buy it, let's say 200 shares. You buy 100 here, and 100 if it goes below 40. Will it go below 40? I mean, if oil does what it's done time and again, which is stopped at 50, it will do that. OK, and by the way, the oil stocks are trading as if it will fail right here, because they all opened up much stronger. OK, number 12. At what percentage game would you recommend Trim Position has already been sold down to House Money? That's Jane H. Boseman from Montana. No, when we got House Money, we don't sell. When you get a position down to House Money, that is the end. You keep the rest, even if it means just putting it aside, put it aside mentally. OK, number 13. Do tax liability considerations such as long term versus short term implicate your selling strategy to all Dave M. You know what? We weren't a club always. And I didn't think, obviously, it's a charitable trust. I got to give away all the gains. OK? I give away the dividends and I give away the gains. Any realized gains. So the answer is it's not been a factor as much, but ever since we came a club, we've been much more oriented toward not trading at all. We've got, you know, we add to positions if we really have a big game. We did that with Western Digital, because we knew Western Digital was inexpensive, and we felt that it could possibly have huge numbers. It did. We took our profits. We left. It was a great trade. We identified it as a trade. I think that, you know, it's very, you know, if you are worried about these kinds of things, if we identify as a trade, be aware that, well, we're going to trade out of it if it goes up. All right, but because it's a charitable trust, it's not been a major focus. Or number 14, what is your typical strategy during down market days? Joe and Naples Farta. OK, we have our bullpen list. Visa, ATT, United Technologies, I'm worried about ATT's quarter, just be aware. 3M, United Health, American Express Expedia, we're just going to take off. I was going over with my team this morning, because the CEO left to go to be at Uber, Flex and Altria, and these don't come down. They're absolutely killing me that they don't come down. They don't come down. I look for stocks in the portfolio that come down that I think are right. I mean, notice we bought some Starbucks. And I think that it's really, really clear that I think that Starbucks is very much solving its problems. I think it's solving its problems with mobile pay. I do very much want to make a point here that as I look at Starbucks and look at the stock, that that's one I think you can buy right here. I think it's in very good shape because I have spent some time with the mobile pay people and I have seen it in action. And I've got to tell you, I think it's going to solve the problems of what I call the mosh pit. Just like, remember we made all that money in Panera? I think this is going to be like Panera. Now, was it going to be this quarter? I have been holding off getting really big because I think they may have to do a guy down. But by this point, I think the guy down is in the stock. I like the stock of Starbucks here. And I think that KJ, Kevin Johnson, who I've known for, I don't know, two decades, is doing a good job. Howard Schultz is still in there. I like it. And most importantly, I am no longer as concerned about the mobile pay problems. All right? Number 15, how do you think the Fed's plans on winding down the balance sheet will affect bond prices? Is this from Rick B. in Atlanta, Georgia? All right, Rick, you know, when there was that problem with Gary Cohn and Bannon, hey, Bannon, I'm not a political guy, saying that Cohn's comments about what happened in Charles, let's put it this way. Cohn spoke his mind. Gary is a friend. He's a friend. You know, I say it's not about friends, about money, but I know Gary for years and years and years, okay? His wife's a friend of my way. And I think that I want Gary very much to be the head of the Fed. People say, oh, Jim, he's not an economist. Well, you know what? He's one of the greatest. He understands bonds.  They have to do it. Now, as my friend Matt Horween writes to me, he's saying they should wind it down first. I mean, they shouldn't raise rates and then wind it down like take big losses. They should be winding down now. So far, I'm not right. Look, I went to, you know, I went to the previous to, well, I've gone to the Treasury. I did it again recently. I said, listen, please, please, please, issue long bonds here. I said to Tim Geithner, you know, I did them and his book came out and I interviewed him at Barnes & Noble in Union Square. I said, please do it. I also want savings bonds. I want a trillion-dollar savings bond issue where we can buy them and have infrastructure. But they've got to wind it down before they raise rates. That makes no sense otherwise. So that's what I'm thinking. All right. Now, you know, I'm always canning these things. I want to go over my losers again. I like going over the losers. It's important. Allergan, below 220. Okay. I think that, oh, by the way, remember when you guys asked the question about buying down? Look at what we did with Dan. That's a good example. I, by the way, I also think the easy U can go higher. It's been very slow. GE, again, I'm candid. I got to wait and see. I want to see what Flannery says in November. I am worried about the dividend. How can you not be? It looks like the number is going to come down to $1.50. Lily shows you what you do when you have conviction you buy. So does Magellan midstream. Newcore right now is a buy. Okay, it's too low. I talked about NVIDIA and how I think it could break out here. Starbucks, I have determined that they've gotten the mobile pay, but they may not have. We still have to guide down. But if they do buy some here and then buy some more if they guide down. So let me just say nothing I can do right here at this level. By the way, look at the way we bought TJX again. I think TJX, by the way, is screaming by here and spent a lot of time on that stock. This new home-sense unit is very good. And then finally, really difficult. Newell, don't bother. Maybe 42 will bother. And Apache, some here and some below 40.