Think about that, we gonna go back to that But I don't really like talking about the hair, cause I ain't got no hair once again It's a real personal issue with me But shout out to our sponsors Diva Glam Diva Glam Everything DivaGlam.com If you had any good hair lately, I haven't had some So I don't really like saying that no more But shout out to our sponsor, also shout out to our other sponsor LouisvilleTiowaMoney L-O-M-ClovenStore.com Check them out man, LouisvilleTiowaMoney man Look at the t-shirt Oh look, you see the logo right there Look at the t-shirt And let's talk about LouisvilleTiowaMoney Let's talk about it You the type of nigga that across me for a couple dollars, wouldn't you? No, no, I wouldn't do that Yes you would You ain't shit I wouldn't do such a thing Nigga off you $500,000 right now, you be on the goddamn Duck and Duck podcast No, no, I start my own martial artist one I will do that I'm really thinking about starting a martial artist one You're gonna start a Bruce Flea podcast Because a lot of martial artists have been reaching out to me Telling me we need to start a podcast to speak about the arts Okay, I could tell Would you cross me over money?   And then He'd get a million followers A label would give him a deal Right? Yup they will For his following But I would say this though It comes to a point Where it's like this I told somebody the other day Somebody hit me up Yeah well I'm ready to I'm ready to do that thing I'm ready to get back in I said get back in What you talking about Get back in where?   I'm just saying That was a reflex You know Ricky's still out here That was a reflex See this is why he was so mad at Ricky Right? That was a reflex He had this girl He loved this broad I'm talking about No I didn't even understand love then So don't say I love her I didn't even understand She had your fucking heart break dancing Like she's brown I didn't even understand I didn't even know that love was a love then I was a young boy I didn't care about that That was tears on the phone right?         So that's just The story from the cell Chemical warfare Okay, so now let's get to Who would you be? Do you want to ask me Who would I be?  I'm gonna ask you Who would you be and why? Okay I'd like to ask you Could you think you a sporty?  Bernard Hopkins, Roy Jones Or Pranell Whitaker And why? Yeah, it got you With that one, didn't it? Say that one more time Who would I be, what? Bernard Hopkins Roy Jones Or Pranell Whitaker Mmm And why? And why? I would be Bernard Hopkins Why is that? Because he's from Philly? Yup And not only just because He's from Philly But because his bounce back Was notorious and glorious We talking about a We talking about a boxer Who discovered his boxing In jail Like me, I discovered I do a little boxing I'm sorry, I was in the boxing In jail before You know what I mean? So to be a boxer And you know I think he won all the Penitentiary Accolades that you could possibly win I can't comment on that I can't comment on that But go ahead You know what I mean?  No, I'm just saying You gotta make that You gotta make sure You separate that So people will know Because people know That I got belts too Right, you had that Gene belt for ever I'll give that to you Gene belt, the denim belt You had that motherfucker forever I got real black belts In the lines and cases But The way he came home from prison And activated his plan And was And preserved himself Why he was in prison Because I think Bernard Box He was 111 Right? Yeah, he went from the Well, was it the executioner First And then it became The alien I think that's a Danny Garcia pop Gave him that name Right Because the man Was just in crazy shape For his age Absolutely I mean Anytime you can retire From anything At 111 I think his last fight He was 111, right?   So To be able to do it That long And be as successful As he was To make as much money As he's made And, you know To then transfer him To transfer from being a Prisoner To a boxer To an exceptional boxer To moving on To being a promoter A promoter That was legendary That's a huge promoter You know, I think I think I probably would Pick Bernard Hopkins That's everything That's great You know what I mean?    I got another one for you I want to know who would you be Would you be Biggie, Tupac Or EZE? I need to know We know the answer And I need to know why Let me know why you would be there A lot of people tell me I look like Tupac What?  He already put it out there You would be EZE Stop Man, listen, I wear hats, man I wear them hats I'ma say this I'ma say this I'ma say this Hey, you definitely be You be BBK I'ma say this I'll be Pac No, but I'm not going to put that dirt on EZE I'm not going to allow you No, I think they knocked EZE off I'm not going to allow you To put that dirt on EZE He owned all the masters They be trying to get him But you don't think he was going Bear back, too?   Wouldn't that be considered A horror tendency?


So, und jetzt begrüßt bitte Rainer, ein Informatiker in Philosoph, der mit uns darüber reden wird, was die Informatik nicht kann. Okay, we have a sound back. Ja, herzlichen Dank für diese... Ich hab noch ganz diese Einführung.  Man kann das göttliche natürlich auch an Gänsefüßchen stellen. Das ist so ein bisschen ein Experiment, wo ich so ein paar Sachen mal zusammenbringen will. Wenn ihr nach dem Talk rausgeht und sagt, die eine Hälfte wusste ich schon, und bei der anderen Hälfte war alles komplett falsch, aber diesen einen Gedanken, den fand ich spannend, dann habe ich meine Mission heute erfüllt. Wenn wir mal sehen, wie wir das hinkriegen. Ich finde es immer ganz wichtig zu wissen, wenn man jemanden hat, der davon steht, zu wissen, aus welcher Position er spricht, besonders weil wir... Okay, we have audio problems. And we're going to find a laptop and start a stream, and I'll translate from the stream. And so we'll need, by the way, welcome to this talk. As much as we can translate of it, it's about divine computer science. And your translators are Zebalis and Nengvi. And we're trying to get the stream started as soon as we can. We're talking about information and some amnesty international, so as the claimer. Ich spreche aber jetzt quasi für jemanden da. Selber, ich habe Philosophie studiert, habe ein bisschen Philosophie der Wissenschaft gemacht, Sprachphilosophie, Philosophie of mind, habe mich dann die politische Philosophie begeben, habe mich mit Informatikgeschäften gemerkt, das ist sehr interessant, da gibt es ganz schön viele Überschneidungen. Und habe jetzt einfach mal das Zitat, was hier auch am Eingang des Saals steht, rangeworfen Computer science is no more about computers than astronomy is about telescopes. Das heißt, der Computer ist an der Stelle eben ein Werkzeug, um Dinge zu tun, der, und dieses Werkzeug hat bestimmte Eigenschaften. Und diese Eigenschaften sorgen dafür, dass man es auf bestimmte Arten verwenden kann und auf andere Arten wiederum nicht. Ich will mal auch noch darauf hinweisen, dass insbesondere Ada Loveless im 18.  Es war meine eigene literaturische Herr, so eins der ersten Überlegungen, wie man quasi mit Computer nicht nur rechnen, sondern auch Sachverhalte irgendwie bearbeiten kann.  Und ich als Informatiker bin da so ein bisschen kritisch, welche Wünsche da herangetragen werden und auch welche Kolleginnen und Kollegen aus meiner Zunft auch aktiv daran mitarbeiten, diese Wünsche aufrecht zu erhalten.  Gerade in der Physik ändert sich vielleicht der eine und die andere so an Bildern, wo gerade das nukleare Zeitalter ausgerufen wurde und selbst der Herd in der Küche wurde mit kleinen nuklearreaktoren betrieben.   Jetzt sprechen wir eben über das Internet, künstliche Intelligenz, Blockchain und so weiter. Ich habe das mal als Informatik so ein bisschen zusammengefasst. Der Vortrag soll bestimmte Denkweisen explizieren. Wie gesagt, wenn ihr sozusagen protestiert, dann protestiert, also ich würde ungern mit sozusagen brennenden Holzscheiten aus dem Haus gejagt werden. So, Investigations are continuing as to why the sound has dropped. It's apparently the mixing board for the whole room upstairs that has to be checked and then our switchboards here in the translation cabinet. And we're trying to get an alternative source going and we'll translate from that. So, now we're talking about the Internet, artificial intelligence, the Blockchain and what not. Just talk, it's going to make clear some thoughts. So please don't, you know, run me out of this building with pitchforks. I'm just gonna, I'd like to point out some alternative modes of thought. And yeah, so I'm gonna try to navigate this topic the way I see it. So, with quick steps we're going to go through computer science and then we're gonna talk about ideas and images of the world and of human people. Then we're gonna talk about economies, about unholy alliances and the role that politics plays within all of that.  So, computer science. Well, the basic of computer science is the computer, you know, the universal machine. It's not the technical device necessarily, but it's a Turing machine that can emulate other machines. And so you write software, for example, Algorithms, that define certain heuristics. So computer science is interesting because this sort of science, after it built all of those structures, it says, oh, this is interesting, you know, how does this work? How, you know, we have networks that scale and we have black box testing as though we wouldn't know what we've built. So this is some sort of, you know, Mesh-Science, das doesn't actually know about itself all too well. So this is part of computer science, as well as reflecting its own theoretical base. So there's theoretical computer science, you know, Effectivity, data structures, what can be computed, what sort of claims can be made about applications, what can we say about programs, but also this theoretical aspect also contains the social effects of computers. And so within computer science, there's also, there's always this figure of the freak, you know, someone who reads books and you know, it's always like, ah, don't do databases like this, you know, just think about the consequences and everything. And so the promise that computer science makes is always that well put problems can be solved by computers and then the results will get better and better using computers. And the products that at the end come out of that on the other side. I'm not going to talk about this whole, you know, knowledge, this scientific approach, maybe a little bit. These products, you know, they're tools for all different sorts of applications. For example, image processing up to AlphaGo, you know, autonomous cars, Facebookbots and the basis of social scarring that we've already heard about today. And also climate simulations and emission testing, that's all sort of connected. No, that's the sort of bandwidth we're talking about here. And so our current modes of operation that I want to talk about today, it's not very technical, it's like machine learning, just the databases, blockchain, you know, can we have smart contracts, cryptocurrency and whatnot and voting. The question that, you know, I want to deal with in this talk are the models that computer science uses and then applies their tools to do with these models. So, what gets modeled and what are the limits of set modulation? So, I want to talk about the limits of computer science. And then a further question is the application of those tools and then we need to talk about de-contextualizing and recontextualizing. We're talking about technical systems that have inputs and outputs and of course we can, you know, have phone calls together in some sort of club and record them. And for example, we can measure time within a sprint and then use that information in all sorts of different contexts. But of course, the application is very important. So, for example, a police database, you know, that's a prominent example. So, there was a database in Germany called a politically motivated left and so the data privacy person back then, he was concerned with that. And there was two viewpoints, so the security agencies, they thought that, you know, if there are people protesting nuclear power, they are already a danger to the state. Different people, you know, put different models to these databases. And so the data itself through all of these different use cases could get us quite different outputs. So, for example, the due registry in the Netherlands, when the Nazis came, they were like, oh, yeah, thank you very much for, you know, preparing all of the data for us. So, for example, funny story, actually, the introduction of SAP software, you know, they always say that free computer scientists get sent there and then 30 advisors go to the company to restructure the company so it fits the software. So, again, recon textualizing. So, the question again is how do we build models and what sort of systems do we build. And now to part two, how do we view the world and how do we view humans. So, I've said that, you know, computer science is about, you know, modeling objects, modeling simple states, so a computer can deal with it. And so, basically, we have two problems with that.  So, maybe the core of all of this is abstraction, abstraction of distinctive features. So, for example, I want to build a system that models friendships, human behavior, human relationships. So, what is a human person? What is friendship? How can they connect with each other? And, for example, are there only like two genders available for choosing and, or is it, you know, is it a free input field. So, all of that affects how people use a certain system. I'm sorry, but not just in Papua New Guinea going to people asking questions about their cottages and questions like, what can you see on this photo? The size doesn't matter, the response is no idea, we don't know. But, well, that's your cottage, isn't it? But my cottage isn't as shiny as that is out of wood. And they went on to the next person asking things like, what does this picture tell you? Does that tell you anything? The size and the material should not matter. And the response then was, well, still we don't know and confronted with the statement that this is your cottage, the response was, well, I can't go into it, so it can't be my cottage. So, you can take this further and say the realization was that the example of natural depiction was clear to those ethnologists because they knew what was relevant and what size in a photo is not relevant. The material is not either, but what is important, how many windows are there, color is important, think like that. So, in this place, it's not so simple to really find an appropriate model. There are many aspects linked to it and the modeling is quite decisive and the question, what is interesting and what's not, are relevant. The activity simply isn't there. It's not objectively clear what is to be considered relevant. Although in computer scientific systems that is often quite well defined. The second pointer or thought about how you build models of the world to then process these models is a nice thought experiment from the colorblind, about the colorblind neurobiologist, neurobiologist. Now, if this neurobiologist knows everything about the brain, what does she know about the perception of red if she is colorblind herself. So, how can you model facts or relationships that you don't know about yourself and that is quite important for systems that you build and that might be used in different cultural contexts. So, the thing is this shift of meaning or shift of aspects that we want to process and that we don't want to process towards models that a computer, a universal machine could handle is a very difficult one. And the terms we use in computer science itself are the machine learns or she knows something or it has recognized a symbol, that football or it thinks, it is thinking if the spinning symbol is shown. So, systems decide something, they feel something and that is something you have to be very careful with for the reasons that I've just talked about. Now, this all sounds very soft and vague and the question is what do we all make of all this and there are two or three current trends that are very clear with the answers to these questions and that is why I'm calling this computer science the one is the transhumanism and just briefly going to touch upon that. Transhumanism has very clear answers we just hack everything into the system and then say, faster is better, longer life is better and remembering more is better. So, not what is the cottage made of but we simply define this everyone wants to live longer, everyone wants to memorize or remember more. So, this human improvement that of course is the question you have to pose isn't really there anymore the question what is better isn't really there anymore but a lot is lost that way also. Then, artificial intelligence I will not distinguish between general or domain specific AI has answers to those modeling questions which are quite interesting too one is well, human is an information machine and everything is quantifiable information with a certain finite resolution and all aspects of human lives are computable so it's kind of from the other way around from behind you get to the statement that everything that we can model in a quantifiable way all the other way around the world ultimately consists of this information so everything is quantifiable and what's quantifiable is mathematically modellable so there's nothing really that does not fit in so these questions are just choices between A, B and C but it's no real decision at this point and these viewpoints both kind of taste like cybernetics perhaps that one of the other of you will still have in mind and that had signals like the whole world consists of control circuits and there was that slogan of Mathematizing Biology you would hear well we all know a thermostat at the radiator you set a certain temperature thermostat will open and close depending on the room temperature so it will approach some kind of equilibrium and this image was then going to be used for the human circuit as well and for human thinking as well and you realize at this point that it approaches it goes in a somewhat similar direction to those approaches that I talked about but there have not been any satisfactory consequences so ultimately the interesting results would have come at a point where the real world would have been too complex to be modeled with these circuits and that means because at this point totalitarian approaches remember everything is information, everything is describable these are totalitarian approaches to modeling that seem to provide a closed answer, a final answer and everyone that contradicts those are just simply nonbelievers or not yet believers so what they have in common is the reduction to what is computable and what is computable is then supposed to be real and processable and then of course you have to take care of the difference between computability and precision, you can be very precise but calculate the wrong thing so if you have an example a result that is exactly 15 digits behind the decimal point it could be completely wrong still so these totalitarian approaches mostly um menschliche Sachverhalte modellieren kann ist dann die Physik das Beispiel, das man mit Modellen ist ist Physik das ist eine Kollektion von Partikeln die man modellieren kann das ist das ultimitale Modell das man in der Computing-Maschine modellieren kann also als eine die Gemeinsamkeit dieser Ansätze die approaches die approaches die approaches die technologische Community ist die Reduktion das ist das was sie haben in common nicht in dem Sinne, dass wir ein komplexes Welt haben ein komplexes Staat und wir projekten das auf Modellen aber was ich hier übernimmt, ist die Information von den Fakten selbst bevor sie das Modell mapen also eine unerwartete Ignoranz von Dingen, die wir überwinden was wir überwinden, die ich ein Data-Fetisch nenne weil die Dinge, die du modellierst sind letztendlich mapend in Daten und die Komplexität ist dann weiter reduziert wenn du die Information, die technologische Systeme mit Freunden oder in der Gesellschaft haben dann ist es also nicht ganz fit in diesen Modellen, mit denen du arbeitest weil oft die Gesellschaft wie ein Set von Individuen oder für sie selbst und dann fit in Modellen und dann natürlich mit Objektivismen und das Modell es klingt ein bisschen weig und flotend aber du kannst es runterbauen mehr Data bedeutet mehr Knowledge um mehr Data zu haben und zu linken, mehr Informationen, mit denen du accessest mit denen du dich als menschliches Data als menschliches Data ist dann eine syntaktische Existenz und an diesem Punkt zu haben mehr Data ist natürlich ein Ende itself jetzt, weil du die Systeme feeden und die Dinge kombinieren und wenn du viele Versuche von Gedanken hast ich weiß nicht, wer von dir sagt ok, ich sehe es so die Welt besteht aus welch definierter Information jetzt, please hand up everyone who believes that ultimately everything is defined informational structure and there is nothing else there ok, the courageous ones have shown up of those that believe it i mean thanks very much anyway and between these reduced data objects the context of human use is kind of losing color if you consider an old fairy tale about a village society the way these people interact and the symbols that are exchanged to define group membership and things like that that you can interpret in different ways and you can more or less reduce it further to what the robotist Holrashi Ishiguro said he said that when he builds his robots if he is at home he is so tired once he gets home from that he will just watch TV and that of course a robot could do for me because for the children doesn't matter whether I or a robot is not playing with them I'm not going to say that this automatically fits together but if a world view or a world model looks that way then of course it becomes very simple the world image that is something that is very easy to model and build a computer that processes it and I am also not talking as I was alluding to in the introduction which we probably missed as translators because the sound was gone now these purely philosophical thoughts and this technology belief is spreading rapidly the singularity university in Silicon Valley trains out a class of well-funded brainwashed entrepreneurs each year to build the technologies needed for the transhumanistic vision so there is a lot of money involved and these kinds of thinking the kinds of thought approaches are well monetized and put into existing software system which then unfolds their effect on society now to put it in a less drastic way and a less critical example I am kind of jumping ahead with the context now to show you the parallels the blockchain technology as a concrete technology calls itself a trustless ledger so it is a general database that anyone could look at and there is no central authority involved that you have to trust and currently it seems to be the solution for just everything and anything from Microsoft up to banks everyone is doing research on it what I found very nice was this little chart here where you can think what you want to do, what is blockchain something useful for that or is it just something you can deal with with a normal database so these flowcharts that brings it back to the earlier point the interesting question of course is to work with the blockchain in a reasonable way and to really distribute that trust you have to make sure that the people that work with that blockchain are more or less similar in computing power as we see with bitcoin at the moment if one company in one country simply buys so many strong systems they can then determine what the future for that system should be so the question is has the trust simply shifted outside of the technological view through that technology and now located elsewhere this trustless ledger refers to the technology but which other actors do you have to trust in what ways so the question is who controls the machines and how strong are they so now an outlook on business so a few people in the room might not like this but I am going to talk about neoliberalism nice introduction in the last century there was a fight between various modes of economies and so communism liberalism I am going to pick neoliberalism and point out why so we have the Chicago Boys in Chile during Pinochet's rule and then Thatcher in the UK starting in the 70s after Britain Woods and monetary value wasn't bound to the gold standard anymore so what I mean by this is austerity and privatisation as modes of this economic model and the subservation of all sorts of areas of life under this economic rule so we have individualisation psychological influences so we have game theory rational choice approaches inputs that make a human being do something and there is always rational choices that these human beings come up with to produce a certain output so you can already see that there are certain parallels in this mode of thought how we can influence human behaviour but this trend spread globally throughout the 80s this understanding of economies and governance so Chile was sort of laboratory for neoliberalism it was privatisation of the health insurance system privatisation of retirement funds privatisation of the school system in Chile they made it a lot harder they even outlawed workers unions so the idea was to get more investments into the country but the result was that the economic output rose a little bit but the middle class was reduced there was a growing gap between poor and rich growing a number of people out of work we can of course talk about what that means degradation of the overall level of people's health and we can also see this sort of development in Germany and a lot more in other countries so maybe as an aside this is way more important in the UK and the US because in the last few years we can see Jeremy Corbyn, Bernie Sanders grüß daily struggling with democracy world view world view world view thank you thank you thank you thank you viele Finances zu handeln, nach all diesen Neoliberalismen Reduktionen.   Sie haben gar keine Räume, sie haben gar keine Autos. All das kann nicht falsch sein.   Wir können bestmöglich Produkte kaufen, wenn wir auch einen positiven Ausdruck auf die Welt nennen. Das ist etwas, das Harley-Davidson hat gesagt. Es ist eine digitale Revolution, das ist, was sie sagen.  Sie haben alles verletzt.   Die Welt wird besser werden. Aber wie genau? Und für wen? Was ist das mit dem Staatspenden?   Diese Frage ist, ob wir eine bessere Welt haben wollen. Es raises eine sehr wichtige Frage. Wie wollen wir leben?  Wie wollen wir Hunger umgehen? Wie wollen wir Hunger umgehen? Das raises eine Frage, wie wollen wir Hunger umgehen?   Die Frage ist aber so ein bisschen... Hunger und Lobster, das war eine kleine Konfusion.  Es ist ein Toolfettisch. Die Frage ist, welches Problem unseres Lösungen fit? Die Antwort ist, dass es eine App gibt.     Aber das Funnste ist, dass es ökonomisch funktioniert. Google, Facebook, Amazon sind einfach Hewikitas in unserer everyday life now und Start-ups, mit diesem Weltvielfalt, das ich gesprochen habe, sind strong capitalists, venture capitalists, und bekommen eine politische Unterstützung oder eine businesspolitische Unterstützung. Und sie können dann diese Businessmodelle backed by a lot of finance into the world. And when you then have issues like the German law coming into the picture, you will have swastikas being pixelated. But the question also, on the other hand, is what is being blocked, although it would be allowed in Germany by German law, such as Nippo images, when will people demand their rights for those. But don't quote me on that, please. And the description, therefore, is at least according to some theorists who call Silicon Valley the useful idiots, thinking that these people build interesting things, but simply door openers for much more interesting people like insurances or other finances. So the question is, what remains of the disrupt ideology? Also, ultimately, this means that public bodies use products that were initially made for commercial use. And that is, of course, quite handy, because you have a quantifiable measure for success. But the public bodies work somewhat differently. Public infrastructure like public broadcasters, storing things at YouTube, because they don't have storage capacity. And simply have those restrictions that the commercial vendors impose. You have other things like public infrastructure, sidewalk apps being developed, health system optimized up to the improvements of care for the elderly. And that, of course, is often cheap or even free, because a lot of data is generated and the smart city becomes the city as a service. And I squip there. Now, sometimes I believe that politics, if that's an entity, is becoming somewhat lazy and maybe even on a global scale and then may have people that say, okay, I have solutions and everything seems to fit together. And even secret services are restricted by a certain logic and that says the world is getting more and more dangerous and we need more data. But the people that actually work with this data and try to extract useful information, in other words knowledge out of that, say that we are drowning in ever more data, but no one is stopping that flow. Okay, I'll continue to this. Now, with these ever stronger coupling, there are questions because businesses that you more and more tightly integrate into the public space, these businesses, of course, have to fulfill certain criteria or properties that they do not have. They are not democratic for one thing. They have certain internal processes in their own Dynamics. For example, if Waze, a routing service says, okay, well, there's a building site here, we'll just reroute traffic because it looks nice on the map, but then you notice these are very small residential streets that are not supposed to be used in this way and which are not able to carry the weight of a lot of traffic. So you have certain things that public policy and self-administration would be aware of, but they do not exist in those businesses. And the question then is who makes decisions and who has the final say. And with the power of the companies, the overwhelming power of these companies, the question is how do you deal with that? What are the consequences? And that is where the role of politics comes in. If you now return to the divine computer science and ask what can computer science do or what is it afraid of, or what are you afraid of? Wofür hat man vielleicht, what are you afraid of, then I would say, are you afraid of AI or are you afraid of businesses that enforce their own goals through AI? So the things that I've said that you apply to these is control slipping out of our hands. Is it control of technology or is it the control of organizations that use that technology? And then of course the whole thing fits together in a very different way and you can think of it differently. Because, and that is where the circle somewhat closes, games or economy are something that is nice to model because it's clear what is good. You win the game or you make a profit in businesses. A-B testing, things like that, it's very easy to cover with criteria. But if you have things like social involvement, conceptions, transparency, fundamental rights, then suddenly it gets very, very difficult to say has this been adhered to or not? It's a very complex question or answers to these questions are very, very complex, which we see in the European Data Protection Regulation, for example. Yeah, and the purpose of politics then is of course to have an option to make decisions and clarify responsibilities and discuss these. And it is about the systems that we use to talk about the design of the systems that we use and not just their results. So, if we say that, hang on, if we say that we want to protect the weak, then it's a very complex thing at this point to define what that actually means, what the goal is and to then deal with that, deal with the fact that systems can become inefficient, because you want to take everyone with you, because it's not all just about efficiency and profit. So that means, at this point, I have to make computer scientists deal with the issue that the requirements to their systems are towards inefficiency sometimes, about distributing power, which is always there, to ensure that it's not inhuman or against society. So it's not just about if you have a position where the limits of technology are to be looked at. It's not about being hostile towards technology, but about technology serving the humans and the society. So, from an IT point of view or from a computer science point of view, we do like efficiency, but it's not the ultimate goal. And lastly, I just want to say that there are positive examples, because I largely had this large approach. Small examples of the smart city strategy in Barcelona, for example, it functions in a very participatory way. Highly participatory systems remain in the control of the people affected and because the systems are operated by the city, there are no operational secrets and you can look at this very easily. GNU TALA, which I think is still at experimental stage, it's a payment method, which is anonymous. The people that makes the payment is anonymous, but the dealer that takes the payment can cryptographically prove that the payment has been made, which makes it taxable. So that is the anti-model to those Cypher punks that say we don't want any state at all or ask the freedom of information portal where you can demand your rights. The other one is called Sue the state. So if you document what the power structures are and how you want to deal with them, that kind of reflection lowers computer science from that divine state into a very mundane but very fertile tool. Thank you. Okay, we have a quarter of an hour left for questions. If you do need to leave now, please do so quietly and try not to walk in front of the cameras. And otherwise we have 13 minutes to stay here and think of questions. You know the game for microphones Q and we have questions from the internet too and we'll start directly with a question from the internet. The question is to what extent simulation models are a basis for political decision making? Das ist eine sehr, sehr gute Frage. Oh, that's a very good question. It really depends on what is modeled, what is simulated. So there's a lot of social science models that try to figure out who do I look at when there's a question from the internet. All right. So that try to model individual human people but that for me as a computer scientist I'd like to talk to social scientists and see what they have to say about my methods and work together with them to find adequate models for their views. And so really talk to the people that deal with these problems and not repeat their mistakes. So this might be a clue and the right way to deal with that. Person at microphone 4, are you looking at your smartphone or a Q-ing? Okay, well I am both actually, but I can ask a question. Nerdwise, I am a bit of an Asimov fan and you have these three robot laws there. You talked about how machine logic and biological logic are not completely agreeable or compatible and I agree with you there. But there are theoretical approaches with which psychology can be described quite well and psychological interventions can be made. For example in psychotherapy, organization psychology you can make progress there. So in a way the person viewed as a system of personality traits or an organization as a system of various stakeholders. So I do concur that this atomization is counterproductive for a cool societal development. So the question now, I am looking forward to the question, says Rainer Reak. How do you view this? And hang on, hang on. And which approaches, what approaches of... of cybernetics in a global view of both biology and technology, which of these do you still find productive? So, what you said at the beginning, that was quite interesting and I would have said something even if you hadn't posed the question afterwards. But I believe the crucial point here is to always ask what effects do I hope to achieve with this model. So if we talk about psychoanalysis, psychology and using that, that's not wrong. But what I'm talking about is this works on some level but we don't use it everywhere. So, here it's also about using certain models but keeping in mind that we're dealing with models. And if problems arise and we're all the time we're in some sort of critical feedback loop, is the model still adequate for our purposes. And if it's not, then maybe it's, you know, there might not be an adequate model to... model to talk about the thing that we were trying to look at. And so that's the end of that totality finally. So this, we can end this complex question. And regarding cybernetics, I believe I can make a general statement about that. We'd have to have some sort of concrete example if I understood your question correctly to critically reflect these requirements and that's not some sort of one-size-fits-all answer. Microphone number one, please. I had a certain problem of certain problems with your talk because it had an extreme amount of detail depressed into it. Philosophy, early examples, ecology, you kind of put everything in there and I was missing the kind of main point. And to be honest, I would have hoped that you would say something about, focused on the limits of technology, of informational technology, because you said it was a mixed science that gets involved in every other science. So is it about the general limits of science as a whole and you talked about consciousness, can you model that? But ultimately isn't it about the fact that so many people are now talking about superintelligence and these are very serious scientists that say in 25 years we'll have that and what's the point about that? Aren't these the real threats that we have with this kind of talk too? This is a very interesting point. Superintelligence in 25 years, that's been the case for quite a few decades by now. Yeah, I don't want to water this down, but the limits I've tried to show here, they depend on how the things we want to look at, that we want to work on, how can we model them mathematically. So if we have A-B-Tests, if we have click rates, we can do all of that, if we want to measure that. But if I want to measure customer satisfaction, then I have to critically think about if somebody clicked five stars. Is that really customer satisfaction or did I really only measure how often people click on five stars because that'll make the window go away as soon as possible on my computer. So this sort of critical distance for me is the limit of computer science, where we have to ask ourselves, are there decisions for what we can make, for what belongs to the model, what we can model and what we can't. Regarding your second point, I had, so thanks for your question, that's exactly the reason why, why I can't find the slide right now. Okay, here it is. Why on this slide up top, it's not slide 42. So fear of AI or fear of corporations that use AI to achieve their goals. So is there some sort of super intelligence, but after, with all the knowledge I have of computers, of course there's the possibility, but right now I don't see any reasons to believe in the coming super intelligence. So I like to ask, I get the concept of super intelligence, but what are really the signs of its coming. So improvements on the hardware side and the possibilities of AI, that always grows in a linear fashion. And so people always feel that we're, just a step short of exponential growth, also records well, of course. But if people can provide proof, show me some signs for this being the case, I'd like to be convinced of that, but until I see any signs for that, I really, I'm more afraid of corporations using AI to achieve their selfish goals. And so this is a political question. This is not a technical question. We've had that throughout history, savory child labor, until someone politically put us up to it. Okay, the internet please. Are there plans to have the most important results of cybernetics involved in a kind of poly contextual logic? What does to access mean? I didn't quite get that context. Are there plans to have the most important results of cybernetics involved with relation to poly contextual logic? So I'm not really familiar with this topic, but again, I'd say if there are adequate models to model the things that we care about, then these limits of computer science that I've talked about, it only ever applies to singular individual solutions, but we can't apply one size fits all model and expect to have great results on all ends. Number four, please. Hello and thank you for the talk. And I come from a somewhat constructivist context and ask what can actually be done. And I realized that the term power was pervasive throughout the talk, and that could mean that everyone has a feeling that they have a freedom of decision, but still certain power is being applied. And the question therefore to you is, firstly, do you know any kind of views of information technology systems from that point of view, or do you consider it a correct approach? Das finde ich eine sehr, sehr schöne. This is a very interesting question. In fact, there are these sort of principles. So I've named them here, right? There's small or even large projects that raise these exact questions. For example, Christian Kühner, once coined the term power of cooperative systems without power. Without power. Without power. Without power. Without power. This sort of distribution of power should be inscribed into hardware and software. And it shouldn't be, then you shouldn't be able to take this distribution out again afterwards. So that's, you know, when we use IT systems, that's something to think about. And in my opinion, within the political context, we always have to be able to understand what happens and we always have to have the ability to influence a certain system. So maybe, well, it depends on the application, but in general we might talk about a peer-to-peer system, but in general we might talk about a peer-to-peer system, so that might be my first hint here, or like Knuthaler, the example I gave, there's a verification from one side, but not from the other. So, yeah, there's approaches there, definitely. Okay, that was it. An applause for Reina, please. And hopefully an applause for us interpreters too. This was interesting, thank you.


The study found that exclusive breastfeeding among infants zero to five months of age, and any breastfeeding among infants and young children six to 23 months of age are associated with a protective effect against diarrhea incidents, prevalence, hospitalizations, diarrhea mortality, and all-cause mortality. The study also found that not breastfeeding resulted in an excess risk of diarrhea mortality in comparison to exclusive breastfeeding among infants zero to five months of age, and any breastfeeding among children aged six to 23 months. These findings support the current WHO recommendation for exclusive breastfeeding during the first six months of life as a key child survival intervention, and highlight the importance of breastfeeding to protect against diarrhea-specific morbidity and mortality throughout the first two years of life. This article was offered by Victoria Caesar, Neumannadie, Fisher Walker-Christarelle, and others. We are article.tv, links in the description below.


Hi, welcome to this another episode of NewsClick where we are doing a series on the central Vista. And as we had pointed out in our last episode that the central Vista issue has popped up once again. And it is very pertinent to mention that when the entire country is grappling with the pandemic and when the resources must and ought to be diverted to mitigate the disaster that we are actually facing because of the pandemic, our supreme leader and the government actually focuses on the construction of the central Vista. And as we mentioned, it comprises the house of the prime minister, new parliament building and many more buildings to come. And at the same time, when the workers should have actually gone back either to their homes or should have been protected, the same workers are being forced to work in the pandemic. So in continuation of that series, today we have Shana Zatalia who would be discussing what is wrong with the entire central Vista with the process or the way the central Vista has been designed. And above all, let me also introduce that Shana's was and she is still a film producer who's worked in many films, especially films that were produced by Mead Anayar. So we are very glad to have Shana's here and she loves to be called as Shani. So Shani, are you there? Can we just start the discussion? Yes, I'm here. Oh, great.  And so what is it? What is it that you feel is not good with this internal Vista or this entire project? Though the government boasts and claims of many things that are going to change once the project is done. See, I think that various people who you've spoken to have given you facts and figures and numbers. So I'm not going to go into that. I think what I want to go into is what, and I would like, as Mukul Keswan had written in his article in the telegraph, to say that I'm talking about India Gate. Okay. I am not talking about its new avatar, which is the central Vista. I mean, you know, you refer to the central Vista when you're talking about any capital city, whether it be London, whether it be Washington, whether it be Canberra, whether it be India, blah, blah, blah, so on and so forth. So for me, the central Vista, when you mentioned something like central Vista, it basically means a parliament, government offices, and a broad avenue. Now, to me, in Delhi, the central Vista doesn't hold that meaning. India Gate, for me, is what central Vista is. Okay, okay. Right, so, A, I'm very born and bred. Anybody who was born in Delhi in the 50s and the 60s learnt cycling at India Gate. There was no one. You must stay broad. And if you learnt how to keep your balance, your father or your brother would take you on top of rice in a hill and push you down. And hope that you managed on that slope to keep cycling. It's where you had your first ice cream. It's where you had chana. It's where, oh, come on, this is a new thing. It's like that. It's part of my growing up. Okay, so how would that be ficted? I mean, tell me. Because I don't feel that there's any change required. Okay. What do you want to do? Yeah. There's a road, there are government offices. The parliament building exists and for heaven's sake, from when it was constructed to now, we haven't increased the numbers of people in parliament, have we? I mean, we haven't doubled it to 10,000 people that we need another ginormous parliament building. Everybody has their chambers. As a teenager growing up, I've gone and sat in parliament. Right at that time, in the early 70s, you could go. You could, layman could go sit in parliament, watch a debate, nobody didn't have million and want whatever security that you had. But above all, what Indiagate and, let me use the word central vista since it's what you all use at the moment, means for me is the street dogs who live there. Okay. Right? We feed animals from Connaught Place to Jampath to Indiagate. There are about four of us who combine together, take various sections and do this. And we specifically look after the area which is at the intersection of Rajpath and Jampath. Now again, Rajpath, I don't even know whether it's gonna have that meaning. Jampath used to be called Queensway. Yeah, Queensway. The name is changed to Jampath. Yeah. Rajpath was Kingsway, it's still Rajpath. So that hasn't changed. Now there are lots of, now as you know, Debbie has a lot of street dogs. What we have been trying to do and have succeeded, especially in this area, is to sterilize all the animals as much as we can. So that no more puppies come and so the population of street dogs is controlled. They are inoculated. When they are well fed, they're not gonna chase people. And really, you will not find any dog at Indiagate chasing traffic ever. And that's why even on Republic Day, previously, this habit of taking dogs and putting them away for one month while they do their rehearsals is really quite idiotic because they don't bother with the people on Rajpath. They sit in the, what they needed to do was to clean it, was to make sure that the grass is always green, was to make sure that the channels are full of water and clean water.  You don't need to build up your wings. I mean, and the other very critical thing is when they talk about the fact, now who do you want to nuclear bunker for, may I ask? It'll be eating in the summer camp.  I can have appeal, please don't waste money on whether it's not required. What is beautiful? Leave it. Use that money, inoculate people, give oxygen, this is a capital city, we've become a laughing stock internationally. Yeah, Shahnaz I remember actually one of our discussions pointing it out earlier in a discussion that you may have the same kind of open spaces still available, but at the same time, you find a sniper pointing a gun at you with all these buildings coming up, so don't you think that was the kind of encroachment on the privacy of the people and all? It is, I mean any gate is where the armed army went, not everybody is a member of Jim Khanna club, not everybody is a member of the IIC, so where do you go? Not everybody lives in colonies that have parks. In your gate is our space, it is the general humanity's space. Yeah, yeah and but because during a discussion and in one of the previous discussions we learned that you mentioned about dogs but I mean if you see the trees around, so I think we were able to calculate maybe a hundred different species of birds in fact who come and yeah, so it's not this, I mean animals on the ground but even on the trees. On the trees and also don't forget the jamons, right and also now palsa is not a fruit that many people know about, it's a specific north Indian summer fruit which comes for a month. Right, so eating jamon, eating palsa, you know all that was part of India's gate. Yeah, yeah, yeah, so yeah, yeah, please, please, please go ahead, go ahead. Sorry, all I was saying was that you don't need, you don't need red sandstone to walk on, you don't need pathways. Yeah, you don't. The hands are beautiful red sand, true, part of you know, yeah, yeah, yeah and please let's not forget those absolutely gorgeous lampposts. Yeah, let me tell you that chain which they are happily taking out, the black heavy rota and chain. Yeah, you have no idea about the value of that. You know, it's just panty and it'll never rust nor will the lampposts. You know these are things that people don't know about, they're just throwing it away. It's in a sense what happened partly in Connaught Place, when they wanted to remove the railings on the balcony, that is also rota.  And I'm glad I did, because all the ones who allowed that balcony rota and need to be removed, it became rust. Yeah, I think you brought an important aspect because you know, most of the people are talking about, you know, the design, non-transparency in the central Vista, air pollution, you know, and all already Delhi's air is choking. I mean, it's really affecting the lungs of people and especially the young ones and with this new Vista, I think it's going to further accentuate the problem. But yeah, the new aspect about dogs, about animals, you know, for all they are also part and parcel of this planet, aren't they? So, but what do you think is now required? Because you have a Supreme Court dictum, they've said, no, we justify it. It's a judicially decided central Vista that has to go ahead. But at the same time, there are many voices coming from different corners, I mean, which we, I mean, which we never heard in earlier discussions. So what do you think should be done to amplify these voices to kind of, you know, bring together many such people so that, you know, we make the government, listen, I mean, even if it's deaf. Yes, we have to keep tripping away. And that means more civilian voices and certainly not channels like yours. And we also very, very definitely need to get this out in the vernacular, not only English, because frankly, it's the languages that reach out.    Yeah, true.    You're building a palace of death. There's no need for that. No need. Shani, thank you for sparing your time and talking to us. And it's been really nice talking to you. And especially when you brought out the new aspect of Central Vista. Hey, dogs also listen. They also have a heart. They also feel so do birds, you know. And I mean, and even for human beings, I think, I think it's always a better place to be, you know, in an environment that is, I mean, that we have been witnessing now instead to have a sniper pointing a gun at you and then eating your popcorns and ice creams there. I think that's yeah. Yeah. So thank you so much, Shani. Thank you very much.


Good morning cyber traders happy Monday welcome back everybody nine o'clock this morning here in New York Hopefully everybody's enjoying their day get ready to start a new week. Good to see you Grant Norman Good to see you John mark everybody everybody here on YouTube Facebook. Welcome back What we got going on here we got We got two we got four Wonderful weeks coming up. We're probably gonna run out of market movement Probably going into the third week. I'm just turning around looking at my calendar behind me But probably right where we get around the 20 of things gonna probably start slowing down a little bit Going into the Christmas holiday, you know Christmas today Christmas falls on a Saturday So we got you know, you got Christmas Eve. That's gonna be on On that Friday. So you see things start slowing down right around there. All right, so anyway We're gonna do some we're talking about what happened last week a couple of things made some nice moves You saw the volatility that we had last week. Bitcoin's taking a nasty hit I can't wait to you know, I love to see what Josh's thoughts are on that but um, you know, listen That is a very volatile, you know stock. Let me You know a market and you have to explain to you why it's no different than the stock market You know, we see stocks go up like huge CD short squeezes everything like that Get remember, there's only X amount of coins out there, right? So what happens? It keeps changing hands When you have a stock that has a lot of shares out there like for example like Ford we traded Ford last week All right to move Ford takes a lot. I mean already traded one point one point two million shares If you look on the volume, which by the way, they really ever talk about that much I'm gonna X Josh about that. He knows more about it. They don't really talk about the volume that really trailing talk about what he's doing But when it keeps changing hands if it changed a lot, it makes it more volatile So that's because there's only X amount of coins out there stocks are exactly the same Somebody stocks that don't have that many outstanding shares out there And we don't have that many outstanding shares It makes that much more volatile and it makes that that much more, you know Crazy as much as it dropped even gold went down and and oil looks like it's up a little bit, too But about what's going on last week. Let's talk about that really quick And then we'll go through some of the stocks this morning because we have phase three today Which we always look excited for we're gonna go out there and take what we learned and put it to the test Remember, it's about not controlling the winners. It's controlling the losers. So a couple of stocks out there We're gonna talk about from last week. Let's start off with the Cf vi. All right. So that stock, which may changes to a two-day chart right here So you could see that stock gapped up again this morning I'm gonna put this back on the watch list the the the Cf vi Just be very careful. It's got a big spread. It already traded on 11 million shares and we're not even rolling like Jeez, but even marks that got 25 minutes to go But it had a great push in the afternoon You could see it right here started around $10 shot up to about 12 went up to 16 The stock just you know a couple of days ago was literally at you could see it was at 9 So nice little move on that stock, but once again very very volatile, okay? So want to be careful with that see why? Cyd another stock That was a pretty good mover had a couple of nasty shakes out there That was a little bit more of a more of a controllable stock What else we had? Oh, yeah, all the you know, these also are taking big hits I mean the you know now with it with the new virus said there's another strain out there Travels as stocks are getting really hit you could see it happened over here with Carnival cruise lines You could see what's happening with you know a lot of the airlines So on they're trying to come back a little bit. I told you this be very careful Going into this month on thinking about I want to position myself in some swing trades And so on I got out of pretty much all my short-term swing trades And it took a little bit of a loss there too. I'm not gonna lie You know because I'm getting this rally and you could see the you know the market same thing It goes up it goes down and it's been on a downtrend So don't be fooled by seeing the market at 250 points You need to see consistency of two like three four days before you could really justify it But one day we're up one day we're down big one day we're up next day we're down big Would you know how many times have we seen the market? We're up in the morning and and then we get around 10 o'clock and we're at your negative So it's just it's a lot of head fakes going on. What else we got? Yeah, Ford's doing pretty good. Bill says You I'm moving forward build. Yeah, I wish have that would be that would be the day Right and all those stocks are taking very very big hits too because of Bitcoin You could see that right was at $40. You know just in the beginning of December. Look. It's already down to 25 Mara Same thing, you know great run up stock was at 30 back in October ran 80 really taken a very big hit And it all started from Friday. You could see how it's gapping down pretty big all those stocks And then also another big thing, you know, I was talking to have a couple of family members of mine Like my nephews and stuff and they're all part of the the Wall Street bet stocks and they're looking at this they're looking at the AMC and You know, they still believe it's gonna come back. I said listen when that stock breaks 30 Major support levels the stock can go down. You could see it where it was at 10 It really doesn't have support levels there been trained there last couple of days But gotta be careful with this AMC stock had a big hit more from 31 down to 26 It's a major hit, but it made a big recovery. That was a fun stock also to trade But once again, it was Friday it's not a typical type of day to trade with days like that so we really didn't have that much of Activity going on when it comes to that afternoon, but I'm AMC's games over probably Norman saying, you know what I The people is still out there believing on this crazy short squeeze out there, you know, they still believe it in that So listen the volatility is there now thinking of that play game.  Anyway, let's move on. We got a bunch of new stocks out of trading this morning and Wish they would have shorted to draft came Let me tell you something, I'm glad I got out of that stock my god, you know I really took a I would have took a huge hit on that stock right there on Draft King so I we made a lot of money on draft King But you know, what's what's once I broke that 45 and I'm like and then we tested You know, we didn't have problem breaking that 50 says, you know what nuts enough I got out of it and look where it is right now. That's the big thing that you have to learn here at It's not about the winners nobody talks. No one likes to talk about how what a great job you did They always when you're in any job or if it's the police department a fire department a teacher They always critique you what could you do to be better? She'll make those mistakes And you know what when you look at something like that you like damn Thank God we did get out of that position because that really took a big hit Anyway, let's look at some stocks that are moving this morning because there are some things that are moving pretty nicely You got this one stock right here TACO you could see how it literally was at $7 now The stock is literally right now at up 64 percent This is what you call a buyout without even looking stock went up about 25 cents in the past You know, I don't know. I don't maybe didn't find out what the root true buyout is but I could just yeah right away Michael I want to buy out is but when you see something like that right away, you know, it's a buyout so Can you make a little money on that? You probably still can depending on what the buyout price is, but it's not going to go anywhere So just be very good. That's like on the sea list. Okay? ACET so this one moved up pretty nicely this morning. It's up about 42 percent 5 million shares Tier size is very very small. It's got some nice support levels here around 1350 So I like that little support levels there 1450 is some major resistance levels We'll we'll see how that thing goes where it comes to that Got a couple iceberg orders. I could see right around those price range It's not really going anywhere right now since 745 this morning Yeah, I guess that's trading within that ball of range and it's starting to build more looking at it more of a I would say a funnel, you know, but 1350 is a big support level. So we'll keep an eye on that one To MZ another one nice big pop cheap stock Nice tier sizes. It started just around, you know, 830 went from like this $60 went up to 240 starting to come back down. You could see back here has resistance levels Right here back in when was that September 8th kind of tested it came right back down It looks like a pretty volatile stock though. I mean for the stock to go I mean that one candlestick right there that thing moved about almost 20 cents. That's a lot With a tier size like that, you know, it doesn't look like a level one stock I tell you that right now definitely to probably even a three that volatile But but you know what volatility is there and we're gonna trade that AR DX Nice little trend. I was I liked this stock earlier. I don't know what happened Had a really nice push had went from a buck 55 shot up They're a little shake right here went to a buck 70 came right back down looks like it's testing support levels I like this stock because right here you could see it if it fills in the gap This is stock who we've trained the last couple of days went from a dollar has been doing up pretty nicely But if it could break this listen if it gets past this This high right here 215. I mean this thing is a bit could be a big gap fill right there So that could be off to the races. So that one I like that stock also to see how it opens up See at VI is another one I found this morning This stock also like I said is when we trade on Friday. It looks like she's gapped up pretty nicely this morning It is on the volatile side. It looks like she's starting to make our lows So, you know, it's got some support levels from 6 a.m. Up until about 7 if it breaks this the stock could probably break down a lot Don't really like I'm not really a big fan of trade stocks are up that big this morning from especially from a Friday But today is a Monday and we know Mondays and Fridays and not the best days to trade I've made the rules remind you so don't get cocky. Don't get greedy, but But other than that markets up about 270 Don't Just try to focus on nickels and dimes. Alright now we got phase 3 today and remember today is gonna be exciting part of the phase 3 I know you guys just finished phase 2 if you're a student if you're a golden platinum If you want to get into the classes talk to education advisors If you're in if you're in the cyber if you're from YouTube and you want to know more about them Just just do the trial and get into the trading room but but we're gonna focus a lot on these entries and exits and You know and having more of that game plan that's really we're gonna look at alright guys But other than that let's go out there make some money and and try to control those losses so you got about a little bit more than 15 minutes before the market opens up let's get into class and You know Josh will be running the room and rich will be back on Wednesday He's on vacation if you haven't noticed so we gave him the day off gave some days off to enjoy before we get You know this is really kind of slow time of the year So really don't want to get too crazy when it comes to trading. Alright guys. Good luck. Happy trading. We'll see you on class


So historically, I mean are we talking about one of the all-time great staffs here do you think well I think you're talking about it's a nice start right and you know Frank and I we were discussing this earlier It's They're uncomfortable. That's what they are as a as a hitter Look, it's way too early to say they're an all-time great staff And you want to compare them to maybe some of those staffs of the Braves in the mid 90s But the difference is when you're looking at this Houston staff, especially as a right-handed hitter You know you're trying to find out like where am I gonna get my hits? What game am I gonna be able to you know do? Okay, there's nothing comfortable there I mean the most comfortable at bat for one of those right-handed pitchers is probably against McCullers And that's a nasty curveball in a 93 94 mile an hour fastball like there's nothing fun about playing those guys at all It's amazing for me. I'm just thinking about yesterday when Verland is a little off And as he already went to 1.08 and then Morton was you know He still has other weapons you a lot of ground ball to get through he's a little off when he's seven and no right? Yeah, but a bottom line like he said this is an uncomfortable staff to face these guys are power pitchers They strike you out. It's not like they give you a comfortable 0 for 3 I mean you're up there fight for your life on every pitch with these guys because that's how vicious They're repertoire pitchers are so I can see a lot of guys in a weekend.  You've got Smoltz and Maddox and Glavin, but with Glavin and with Maddox. I mean they're They're not intimidating right they're gonna get you out But you didn't feel like oh man and Smoltz was gonna throw you know fastballs and sliders away every single time So it wasn't anything where you just went you may not have had success, but it wasn't oh Man, I just don't know what I'm gonna do up here.  That's just not happening just go and then Dallas Kaiko in the fifth day, right? Like then your face in Sayang award winner the fifth day But just to put it in perspective right now and we showed you the era so they've got the best era They've got the best strike I write and they also have the top three ground ball producers as starters in the league. That's pretty good That's what the Astros are doing right now historic stuff with their starting rotation We're talking what's coming this weekend for the Red Sox and that's the return of Dustin Badroia. So how the Red Sox gonna handle getting peaty back in the lineup Couple things Kevin first and foremost of course Padreia plays every day at second base Which means that the Red Sox bench gets better Eduardo Nunez goes more into that super utility role In which he has excelled for so long in the major leagues and the roster moved to get Padreia on the roster likely to be a trade or designation for assignment of former top prospect Blake Swyhearth Swyhearth had only a bit of a part-time role this year for the Red Sox hitting below 200 probably time for him to Move on maybe the White Sox a spot for him with the Castillo suspension So again, Swyhearth lightly moving out in Padreia who was mentored by Alex Cora as a young major league Or that was gonna play for Alex Cora in Boston JP appreciate it. We'll see you a little bit later in the show. So hang in so dry coming back this weekend Ekay, he's obviously gonna play right? I'm just curious how a core is gonna work him in and how this all fits in the Red Sox Rotation here. So just his production basically his health is gonna dictate how often he's in there, right?  He plays hard to play the game right every day I love to watch him plays one of my favorites over the last decade also So it's not gonna be a mismatch get him back in that lineup because they need him He's a veteran they gonna need his presence in the lineup. He's been there and he's done that knee surgery seven months ago And I think I think they're actually better with Nunez. I think Nunez is better when he's chance around filming, don't you? You know kind of here one day here another day. I mean it makes Cora's job now. I'm not gonna say it becomes easier, but it allows him to do a lot of different things Yeah, he can mix and match so let's it'll be great to see but draw you back out on the field that will be very cool Let's welcome in our insider JP Marosi who's back JP Manny Machado. That's what we're talking about here We know he's a free agent at the end of the year, but forget that. Where is he going at the trade deadline? Of course Kevin only two players in the major leagues with a better OPS than Manny right now bets and trout are their names He's been pretty good this year as he usually is the two teams to watch from Machado I believe the Cubs and the Indians now the Cubs interestingly Theo Epstein today on 670 the score radio in Chicago was asked about this possibility He said it was something that is quote-unquote in fantasy land at this point So again trying to tamp down that speculation but with the Indians Kevin Interestingly because Manny can play multiple positions on the infield you could put Machado at third Move Jose or mirrors to second base because the Jason Kippens of course has been struggling so much over there So again, stay true to that Cleveland possibility Of course Machado's brother-in-law yonder Alonso plays first base on that team and speaking of Ohio one last note on the Aohanio Suarez Fact that he's tied for the NL lead and RBI. He missed 17 games this year with a broken thumb He's still tied for the NL lead and RBI remarkable the year there for Suarez and again here as we near midnight I'm gonna have some of the same coffee that Frank had earlier today because I actually haven't flown out from the studio to my house here in Michigan So it's never too late in the night to have some of that great studio coffee there on the Fox You know what I love about JP even when he's not here. He's watching this. Yes He's paying attention JP. We love you great stuff tonight. We'll send the coffee via Phoenix. My pleasure guys. Thank you I can't wait He's the best. Yes. So Manny Machado So we were banning about before you know kind of saying all the nationals because it wouldn't make sense But it'll never happen because those two teams just hate each other So give me a realistic of where you think he could go other than what JP said he said Cubs Indians What do you think I'd go Atlanta Braves? Oh if Atlanta is still around and they're still playing well Make all the sense in the world because again, there's no national league team that stands out This may be the Braves window if they are there this year you get Machado you add him to this lineup I mean why can't they win the National League and then you get into the World Series and you take your chances against one of those Big three Red Sox Yankees or Astros now. It's as good a time as any right But if you're gonna waste prospects you better be able to sign this guy and the best destination for me is Chicago White Sox a lot of prospects to for a major trade a lot of money's been saved. They're ready to go to the next level He's a perfect fit in Chicago because they got some great pieces around him that will make him better And and he could help lead his ball club. So you say and trade him and sign it a long-term deal right then and there No doubt about it. He has only one a sign though, doesn't he? Well, show me the money


Russia's foreign minister, Sergey Lavrov, has disclosed that Wagner operations will continue in Mali and the Central African Republic, C.A.R. They have been questioned over the future of those African diplomats, which were seen by many as unofficially representing Russia. Lavrov said the aborted rebellion would not change Russia's relationship with those he called partners and friends. Please do subscribe to our YouTube channel and don't forget to hit the notification button so you get notified about fresh news updates.


My name is Kenyatta Mouton, working for the RMSS Substance Team. It's a great pleasure for me to have a presentation today. Today's my topic is history of the RSA as a framework and it's a generic sound card. How many people are working for the RSA, or framework, driver, leading lighting? OK, good. Thank you. Thank you so much. Today's topic is a framework of generic sound card drivers. We have three drivers, three generic drivers. Today is why this generic card is added and how this is added. To be honest, it's three generic cards. Why we have three generic cards? This is a topic. It's history. Why this kind of thing is happening? So what is RSA? RSA SOC. RENAX is now using the RSA sound system with the sound. RSA is embedded RENAX sound architecture. Before RSA, we used OSS, open sound system before. I don't explain it yet here. But the original RSA is assuming this kind of systems. It is one type of one system, which is controlling the RSA system, sorry, sound system. It's very normal, not special, very easy. But in these days, the hardware is becoming more specific, having more specific features. So we need to create a more complex system like this. In this system, we need to control all chips. And this means we need to have many drivers. Handling this system is RSA SOC, which is a topic. And each device has a role, like here is a CPU chip and a codec chip. And in other words, here, the one is called a digital data handling. And here, one is another good data handling. We need to control these kind of chips and drivers. And handling this total handling is a generic sound cloud. And the background, I want to explain the background work concept of the RSA. Otherwise, it is very difficult to understand the topic. In normal RSA's case, I will explain the normal RSA's behavior. If you play back the sound, and your sound player will code RSA libraries. And the RSA library is called the RSA subsystems through the Linux kernel. And it will select the specified drivers. And this driver calls a handling device. And you can play back or capturing the sound. This is very similar. Sorry, this is very common, not special. And this is RSA normal concept. But if you want to use a more complex system like RSA SOC, you need to use the RSA SOC framework, subframework. And from a user side point of view, it is nothing changed in RSA and RSA SOC, of course. If you play back the RSA SOC drivers, you have to play out the RSA libraries, and it will call the RSA through the Linux kernel. Nothing changes so far, same as before. Now, to be honest, RSA SOC framework looks like normal RSA from the RSA point of view. But the inside was different. And it selected the RSA SOC drivers selected. It will code each drivers inside. And it will select the same command to each drivers, like play, play, play, stop, stop, or something like that. And each driver controls each devices. And you can control all systems in this system. This is not so super special, not common, but not special. Maybe the video side is using a similar system, before the time. This card driver, using RSA SOC, you need to create, you need to handle the GenX sound card drivers, sorry, the SOC card drivers, and platform and CPU codec drivers, total four drivers you need to prepare. Now, one note is this is almost 10 years ago, not currently, not almost 10 years ago. And the biggest main point isn't here, die. This is digital audio interface. This is not common, RSA specific name, not common name. This is the main things, and it is controlling here, handling this, how to send the digital data, how to receive the digital data from another two devices. And this is data structure. And this platform, what does the platform means is this is handling the DMA transfer, and here is the DMA transfer to CPU from the memories. In general, the CPU chips is also handling the DMA by itself. But some chips or some system need to, a special DMA transfer solution is required. And this platform is used for such kind of purposes. And the platform, as you can see, in the platform and the codec, has each own special data structures. I don't know why this kind of, oh, sorry. But the CPU doesn't have its own data structure. I don't know why, but maybe, I guess, the super beginning was, only die was added to the SOC. And maybe people added the codec after that. And maybe people added platform. But no one added the CPU data structures. So maybe, I don't know the idea, but maybe such kind of things happened before. Now, again, this is, no, 10 years ago. The handling of the SOC, you need to control four drivers, like card, platform, CPU, but how to connect and select the drivers is, if you can boot the kernels, it is including the main drivers. And this is indicating the main, such kind of things. It is probing the two codec drivers, two CPU drivers, two platform drivers. For example, if you were to probe each drivers, the probe driver is listed into the RSI SOC framework. And as you can see, each drivers on each data structure is including its own name, like this.  Such kind of naming all drivers have. And when you select and connect each necessary drivers into the kernels, this is, the user is name matching. For example, this case, and this card request, this platform, find it from the listed RSI SOC, and find it is unconnected. And a similar thing happened here, like this is a required CPU name, and find it from the listed one, unconnected and codec one. And this kind of thing. Because of this data structures and concept, this layer allows us to create a platform. As you can see, each platform has different style, different codecs are used. So because of that, necessary driver name is of course different for each platforms. In such case, in 10 years ago, in such case, we need to create each sound card driver for each boot. So this case, we need to create a three sound card drivers. But what is the difference is, just the required driver naming only, nothing changes, but we need to create such kind of drivers. So this is waste of the disk or waste of the time. Make no sense for me. This is a background. So I wanted to create a more common or generic drivers. So the first time I have created a RuneSense common sound card drivers. And this driver is required, the parameter for each drivers. This can be the parameters. Well, if we can use this kind of system, we can share the same drivers, but using the different parameters, that's make sense. I have created this kind of systems and posted the patches to the mailing list. But there are some maintainers, and the Mac Brown said, oh, sorry, this is a good idea. But this is not only RuneSense issues, it's common issues. So please share it to the more generic part, not only RuneSense. Okay, I can do this. But as you know, I'm Japanese, not English speakers, native speakers, so I have asked to Mark, what is a good name? Okay, so how about a simple audio card? It's very simple. Okay, I can do that. That's the reason why this driver's name does a simple audio card. This is a history. Name owner is not me, Mac Brown. So I have created this. I'm very happy, and people started to use this because I'm a giant. I was very happy about that, but something happened after that. It's a device tree. As you know, RuneSense requests using a device tree, especially for the armed peoples. But using the device tree, switch to the device tree style, we need to update the drivers, for each driver, of course, this simple card too. Of course, I created such kind of patch and posted it. It was very small one patch, as a first step, but something happened. The problem is, this kind of data mismatching was very big issues. As you know, the device tree is indicating the device connections. It is not for software configurations, but from our side, data structure is this kind of unbalanced connection is used because of that. Getting each driver naming from the device connection is was impossible, was super difficult, mainly impossible. One RSS was the expert pointing it, and my positive patch was not good for the device tree design, so we need to solve the issues. But it was very difficult. We have discussed how to solve it, what is required data, and how to switch it, how to solve it, it is almost one year we have discussed on the mailing list. And the final answer is, let's merge each specific, special data structure, like codec and platform into the one data structure, new data structure, because some features are duplicated between these two. Let's name it as a component, and let's use this new component to this CPU, because we are missing it. Because of this, we have discussed on this, and we created, we merged it, and created a switch to the new style we decided, but that's how it should happen.  All the people love is the small change patch set. This is understandable, but if I did it to the framework, the RSI source is already used from almost 200 drivers. So this means if I use a small patch set, small changes, one patch, one framework patch, becoming almost 200 drivers patches, it is not so good, patch bone coming to the mailing list. People don't like it. So how to switch to the new style is, we decided it's inside RSI source C, start to use a new style, but the interface to the drivers is keep the compatibility or nothing changed, but inside we switch it to the new style. And we created and merged the new platform and codec into a new component one by one, and maybe, I don't remember, but maybe 100 or 200 patches require to switch to the new style. And if the old framework or new feature, all features are switched to new style inside RSI source C, finally we started, I started sending a patch to folder each drivers to switch to the new style. Of course, from the one drivers point of view, everything changed in one patches, but it can't help. But we can keep the very small patch sets in the mailing list with the people. So now we can use, now we could switch to the new device on the simple card. Now people, I was a bit happy and people may be also happy, and people started to use the simple card, but there are issues kind. So I needed to create a new drivers, new generic card. So what's happened? It is HDMI. As you know, the HDMI, Ronasas want to use HDMI support in the kernel. Of course it is already working, nothing special. No problems, but the problem is, oh sorry, the HDMI needs, as you know, video and sound, V4 sound is also required. But what is the problem is, that's the best way. Because V4, too, and the other are using a completely different style for each, especially video side is already using an over graph style. This is very new ideas. I don't explain detail no matter what is the over graph today, but the basic idea is like this. If you have a system and you can connect to the panel, and through this common connectors, in such cases, of course you can try many kind of panels, but how to indicate it in the device tree? In the device tree, it is possible to use a P-handle style. But if we are indicating this kind of connection in the P-handle, it is very difficult to understand. It is switchable or required, or how to know to switch on the existing P-handle. This is mainly the video people's side issues. So they created a new over graph style. It is possible to selecting and indicating this kind of system on the device tree. Because the device tree is indicating the device connections, the HDMI issues use the same style with the other side to see the device issues for all the video or boyfriend to side style. This means over graph. But supporting the over graph on the simple car driver was very difficult or impossible. The reason is binary compatibility. Because the over graph style and original sound, simple sound and car style are completely different. And of course, adding such kind of feature on the simple car itself is not so super difficult, but it is very difficult to the binary compatibility. And creating such kind of very complex system and complex drivers, it is easy to have a bug inside. So I don't like it. So I decided to create a new style, a new driver, new genetic driver, new genetic drivers. The creating like this is not difficult. The difference between the simple car and the new drivers is passing a device tree only. After that is everything, nothing change it. So I created a shared library, sorry, a shared code as a utility, a simple car utility. And the passing part and the main part are separated. And the passing part is a new one. So I have created such kind of new drivers and posted it as a simple graph card. But how they should come in? It's over graph maintainer said, no, this is not a good name. I have explained why this is called as a simple audio card is what I explained because we already have a simple audio card. So I want to follow that similar naming. But the over graph maintainer said, no, I don't like it. So what is a good name? I asked him, he said, how about the audio graph card? Okay, I can accept. Well, this is the reason why it is named as an audio graph card. The name owner is not me, but the over graph maintainer. Now there's a simple card is putting normal platform data style and device to the style. And the audio graph card is supporting the device to the style, sorry, over graph style. As I already explained, the difference is only the passing part only, the device to the passing part only. Now everything is very similar or almost same. So if you compare these two drivers, it is easy to understand what is the difference of what is the difference. And maybe you can understand it is very similar each drivers. So this is, I'm happy, I have created, I'm very happy about that. But something other issue happens. So what is that? Yes, RSI SOC connections. Now to be honest, RSI SOC framework is supporting too many device connections. Very complex one is included. This is very normal. It is included a normal style connection that I have already explained. And this is already supported in the post existing simple card and audio graph card. It's a very common, very basic style, but RSI SOC is supporting more complex one like multi CPU or multi codecs. This picture is indicating is this, is for example, if we want to play it a six channel sound on some chip is possible to output three or two channels like this. In this style, you need to use a special format in RSI SOC, but it is not supported on the existing drivers. It is very difficult to update it to support it on existing one. Or like this is DPCM. This is in some chips is having the DSP inside. And sometimes you can use like mixing, like two input mixing to one output. Or you can switch the output like from here or from here, from here you can switch it by using this DSP. But in supporting this, supporting to use this, you need to use a special feature which is called as DPCM. But this is not supported in the previous genic card. Here is a more complex one. DPCM with a multi CPU or multi codecs. If you want to use six channels with mixing, you need to use a more complex system. Sometimes people want to use a codec input sound to directly connect to the playback side. Loop back. And this kind of system is not assumed in the normal RSI SOC system, but it is supported. But to use this system, you need to use a very special handling as required. More complex one is codec to codec with multi system. This is nightmare for me, but some of them want to use this. But the RSI SOC are supporting this kind of systems but existing the generic card, simple card and audio or graph card doesn't support this complex system. But people want to use the generic card to support it. So I have, yes, supporting this with keeping a binary compatibility for the device today is very difficult or impossible. Or maybe possible, but it can be a buggy and I don't like it and people don't like it. So I decided to create a new one, new drivers. I have created such kind of drivers named as audio graph card two. And post it in the mailing list. But the RSI SOC maintainer didn't accept it, reject it. Now he mentioned this, how about to use that? And then this was the naming. He said how about to use the rich graph card? That's okay. But the RSI SOC, some expert claim it. So does it mean if the known rich graph card is poor? Of course not. So the naming was not so good. And I have explained that the reason why I have added the audio graph card two was because we don't know in the future. Maybe some other feature are added in the future and maybe it is difficult to keep the compatibility. In such cases, we shouldn't hesitate to add a new device style. So because of us, I have added, it is named as sound audio graph card two. So this means in the future, if the more complex hardware are coming or new ideas are coming into the RSI SOC CSM, maybe we want to have like card three or card four in the future. I have explained this to the maintainer and understand my idea and accepted it. So this is the reason why it is named as audio graph card two. One of the big problem in the genetics card is customizing because it is very genetic but some board or some platform or some board want to have, want to handling the board specific features somehow. But it is implementing on the genetic card is very difficult or impossible. So the audio graph card and graph card two is supporting the customization of features. And I added that it's sample code into the GeneX counter. You can find it. And you can find it. And this is in the sample of the customizing. It is easy to use. Normal GeneX and card style. And you can add new customization features in here. And as I have indicated, the RSI SOC is supporting the very complex connections and card two is supporting it. But this means that the device style is becoming more complex. So I have added sample code, sample device DT settings here. You can see that each image is and how to handle it into this sample of code. It is a bit complex, but better than nothing. You can use it, please use this. And of course you can test it without a specific hardware. It works by using dummy drivers. If you don't have any special reasons, they're using a simple genetic card like a simple audio card or audio graph card is required by the main channel. Please use it, it's very useful to the people. Thank you for listening. This is my presentation. Thank you. And it's time to end. Any questions? No? Okay, thank you. Thank you very much.


The East Kentucky Dream Center will be holding a summer splash party at the Johnson Bottom Pool in Freeburn, Kentucky on Monday, July 31. We're celebrating our fifth year of serving Eastern Kentucky what better way to celebrate than with a huge giveaway, said Rachel Campbell-Dotzen, executive director of the East Kentucky Dream Center. The splash party will have free swimming, free pizza, and there will be a limited number of school supplies to give away to children in the Phelps and Freeburn areas. With the summer winding down to a close and schools beginning to reopen for the year, the summer splash party is an excellent way to blow off steam, cool down, and get much needed school supplies to start the year off. For more information, you can visit the East Kentucky Dream Center Facebook page. For Mountain Top News, I'm Kelsea Dean.