Chatterbait. Chatterbait. Chatterbait. Chatterbait. Chatterbait. Chatterbait. Fishhead spin What's up YouTube family Noah from kicking their bass TV here at the first episode of Tackle Tuesdays I told you guys I was gonna do this where I pick one bait Or if I was going over reels if I was going over rods and this week's episode Chatterbaits When you open up the box guys Got a box full of all kinds of chatter baits all kinds of brands. I'm out of my brand This buck eye one right here with the Zeeman the original Zeeman Chatterbait We had the pro chatter baits. We have some of the Zeeman frog chatter baits We have all kinds of chatter baits and if you guys don't know this is actually on one of my favorite baits Just in general the fish all time So right here we got a we got a Zeeman one This one is just regular green pumpkin and this one's a really great one I make one that's really similar. That's really good as well But this one is the black blade the one I make has a silver blade, which I like Personally Here's the buck eye one. Honestly, I haven't really thrown this one too much Really as I was saying before my dad interrupted me about calling my mom You got this buck eye chatter bait. I haven't fished in much and this thing is actually pretty cool I'm really pulled around with it. I mean it has the Has a little wire the hooks bendable with it pretty neat I don't know how that would work I don't know if you get enough power to be honest the hooks at the fish So I got Zeeman got the buck eye Here's a Zeeman pro chatter bait Really neat looking chatter bait as well really crazy. I have a couple colors in this one Right there But the little swim bait on it Honestly, I just like the regular ones the regular small ones. I've been fishing mine lately I've been doing pretty good on it right here. You got tons of skirts Tons of interchangeable skirts so you can throw on it That's Watermelon one's got some green pumpkin. That's some watermelon candy You can get all different kinds of colors to throw on there I personally like white white and short trees is my favorite Here's another one of those different colored Zeeman ones With the weed guard honestly, I just cut it off Here's a couple of mine These aren't the new ones that I've made the new ones which I'll throw a picture on the screen right now The new ones have a different style head This one the new and the newer ones have eyes and they're really neat-looking This is just my first one that we came out with on the other ones are mostly at the house Because I was selling a lot of them so I had to ship some out These are the other normal ones. That's the ones I've been using right now. I'm killing them all Some more of the Zeeman's and yeah guys These are all my chatter baits. I got some custom ones right here. Honestly, I cannot remember who makes these Someone who made us some jigs one time a while back made us some chatter baits as well Pretty neat looking color Caught some on that as well. It's a little similar to mine, but my heads are more fancy the eyes and everything So yeah guys, that's all my chatter baits also actually one more right here. This one's pretty cool. This is Zeeman one It's like a frog. It's pretty neat. You put this that little trailer that has the paddle tails on it So yeah guys, that's all my chatter baits all different kinds of chatter baits Like I said my favorite bait to fish and leave a comment below if you want me To go out there and show you my techniques for a chatter bait What I do to catch fish on a chatter bait because I've been throwing a chatter bait for a while I have a lot of videos if you go watch some of my videos on a lot of them I'm using the chatter bait on if you can tell because most of my not play music too But if you're wanting a how-to video Not just simple trips tips and tricks But the tips and tricks that I use that are really productive and how I catch fish on a chatter bait Pretty much year-round. I mean it doesn't have to be fish out. You can fish out deep There's little tricks that you can do I can show you the rod and reel combo anything you guys want Just leave a comment below and also taking recommendations for next week's tackle Tuesday What do you guys want to see leave a comment below for that and I'll get that video out to you So thank you guys for watching.  I'm gonna go over chatter baits. I'm gonna go over lizards. I'm gonna go over crawls I'm gonna go. I mean just endless stuff. So it's gonna take a while Also, some of you guys have been wanting a boat tour I'm probably gonna come out the video of that of my ranger boat and also how to get sponsors I'm really wanting to get a lot of information for that video. I'm wanting to get the most tips that I can give you I'm really brainstorming and I'm gonna write a lot of ideas down and tips to give you on how to get sponsors The right way the correct way To engage them to come to you just everything to get your name out there in general So I'll have a video on that coming out soon. I'm still thinking of ideas and writing everything down So I hope you guys enjoyed this first tackle Tuesdays Like I said leave a comment below on next week's tackle Tuesday What bait if you want over rods if you want over reels on what bait you want it to be what soft plastic Leave a comment below. So thank you guys for watching Make sure you check out some of my latest videos.


So I guess this paper is titled Authority and Delegation in Online Communities. And what I try to address in this paper is one important question that many platforms face, which is how platforms can incentivize user-generated content. So as you may know, many platforms relies on online communities of users that participate voluntarily. So this is the case of Wikipedia, for example, but many also question and answer websites, product forum support. In all these platforms, there is a community of users that participate voluntarily and provide the content. And this content is useful for the company to survive and to be successful. So there's a lot of literature studying what type of motivations bring these people in and how the platform can incentivize participation. So this paper I'm gonna study one specific channel that could be used by platforms to incentivize participation, which is the delegation of authority over specific tasks that users can make within the platform. And more specifically, I'm gonna look at editing tasks and I'm gonna be specific in a minute. And I'm gonna use for this purpose data from Stack Exchange, which is a question and answering website, well known for computer science questions, but is very much used in many other topics of Q&A. So let me go more specific. So in online communities, mainly people can do two type of things. Either they can contribute with some content. So it can be articles, for example, in Wikipedia, but in the case of Stack Exchange, these are answers that people can provide to other fellow users that have asked some questions, right? And then the second main action that they can take is to edit the existing content. So this editing task is much more diverse across platforms and in particular is diverse the way people can do this task. So in many websites, editing is just a suggestion. So basically people provide a flag, a comment about some content and then other users or managers of the website will be in charge of deciding whether the suggestion is valid or not and then implementing the suggestion. On the contrary, other websites like Wikipedia allow user to directly modify the content, which means that if I'm a user in Wikipedia, I just find that some content is wrong, I directly modify it and publish my modification. So in this case, I said that people have full control and authority over the action of editing because they don't need to wait for a third party to actually confirm that modification and that edit. Okay? And then there is a third type of platforms like Stack Exchange, where people can gain full control and authority over this editing task, but this is conditional on some performance measure. So basically the platform set an observable measure that the pattern can control and once users achieve a certain level of performance, then they are able to fully implement their edits without waiting for third party to approve. So clearly this decision, the pattern has to decide how to allow user to make edits and the objective of the pattern is to find the ways to incentivize users to produce content and to edit content. So they may want to incentivize both content production and editing. So the question is how delegation over this action, so more control over this editing task may indeed help the platform to achieve this purpose and to incentivize participation. So let me explain what type of incentives delegation may create. So consider a situation in which people participating in a community can gain some reputation points. So in Stack Exchange, people answer some questions and then other community members will upvote these answers, for example, if they like it or if they find it useful and then these upvotes will provide points to the author of the answers. So the author will accumulate reputation points and then once a rich at threshold T, then he gains this authority I was mentioning. Okay, so just to recall, before they reach this threshold, people are still able to edit content on Stack Exchange, but these edits are just suggested. Other users or editors have to approve the modification that the user is suggesting. Once they reach this threshold T, then they are able to directly implement the edits. Okay, this doesn't mean that this content can be edited again by others, but they have full control over the actual implementation of their edit. So this creates two possible incentives mechanisms.  If users value to gain authority, so if users value to reach this higher level of authority over editing, then they may be willing to put more effort before the threshold to reach this threshold faster because arriving to that threshold will give them specific higher utility. Okay, so and I call it dynamic incentive effect because if people discount time, this incentive is stronger when people approach the threshold.  So if people value to have authority, like if people specifically have a higher utility by making action when they have more authority on those actions, then to provide more authority over editing would relax the participation constraints on some ways affect that participation constraints and in some ways affect the level of participation of the users. Clearly these two incentive effects are maybe conflicting because if I move this threshold up and down, I may shrink or increase the size of these effects. So in this paper then, what I will do is first of all to identify what type of users are acting in the website. And this is mainly because we know that in platforms, there is a lot of heterogeneity of what type of user participate and incentive systems may be differently affecting different type of users. So my first point of the paper is to identify what type of users are out there. And then I will use a dynamic discreet choice model to estimate those preferences for gaining and having authority. In other words, I will try to use a dynamic model to infer how much people value to gain and to have and then how much they are sensitive to the dynamic incentive effect and to the static incentive effect. Okay, so this is only achievable with a dynamic discreet choice, with a dynamic model and not with a reduced form evidence because of the clearly the time at which users achieve this threshold is endogenous to their decision process. So we really need a forward-looking model that incorporates the decision of the users. That's why I'm using a structural model. I will estimate these preference parameters for each type of user that I identified in the first step so that to understand really who is sensitive to what and potentially which type of users the platform is targeting once implementing one incentive or the other. And finally, once with this preference parameter estimated, I will simulate counterfactual analysis. To, I really understand for the platform from the platform perspective, what is the trade-off that the platform is facing when pushing on the dynamic incentive rather than the static incentive by shifting the threshold level, right? So the idea here is that the platform can move from a Wikipedia extreme case to a Quora extreme case and then we can decide how much challenging side to this threshold by and in this way affecting the size of the static and the dynamic effect. So this is gonna be the purpose of the counterfactual analysis. So the literature that I touch on this paper is three-fold. So first of all, I touch the intrinsic value of authority to the territory that studies experimentally how people may value to help control over decision-making. And in this case, I will kind of confirm these are experimental results with using non-experimental data. I then contribute to the organizational economics with territory by bringing to the empirics the theory that studies how delegation can be used as incentive device. And finally, I contributes to the information system literature that studies non-monetary motives and participation of users in online communities proposing this like starting this novel channel of incentivizing participation. So in this paper, I will first, so for the rest of the talk, I will first show you what type of data I use and how I identify the type of users. I will explain you delegation system in place in Stack Exchange, how I estimated the preference parameter through the structural model and the counter-factual analysis. So if there is any question, I can maybe answer now or no. There is no question in the chat, yeah. Perfect, okay. Okay, so let me go ahead. So Stack Exchange, as many of you know, is a platform that hosts many questions and answering website. And each of these website focuses on a specific topic of Q&A. So the most well-known website is Stack Overflow that is focusing on computer science and programming languages, the questions. But then on this specific paper, I'm gonna focus on the one called the English Language Learners, which is a question and answering website that focuses on question related to the use of English, specifically for foreign learners. The reason why I'm focusing on this website is that the text of this question and answers is mainly textual, so there is no code or other type of features that, and then it's more easy to measure quality of these answers with text measures. So, yeah, go ahead now. Sorry, there's now a question from Oren. Oren, would you like to unmute yourself and ask it directly? Yeah, sure. So, just a question about the courses of the model. So you talked about this fact that there's two tier and you talk about incentives of the users. I was just kind of wondering about the incentive of the platform to have this, this two tier system. So it seems to me like it would be maybe by identifying who are the high-qualityers and then letting them do the edit. So that means that the users that have editing rights are going to be not just in different senses, but are going to be at the type of users. So just wondering if the model kind of speaks to that as well. Yes, so you're mentioning about the idea of quality of users in the editing task, for example, or? Yeah, so I mean it seems that the platform does it because it wants to make sure that your comments or your edit makes sense before they need to do it, you know, without any limitations. So that would be... Yeah, yeah, so that's a good point. And so this is all at the point of, you know, like using the threshold rather than as an incentive device more like as a selection device, right? So this paper focuses more on the first role of selecting the delegation, like selecting the threshold, like potentially it's role in delegation, but clearly I agree with you that that could also have a selection mechanism that I still have not investigated in this paper. Great, thank you. Okay, so as I was saying, I'm using this data from this website for which I observe the full content. So all answers posted from 2013 to 2020 for all active users that are around 10,000 and of which I observe the full history of participation within the website. So how identify user types? So the reason, so one key idea of this paper is that I didn't want to identify type of users from actions that they make because potentially I wanted to observe exposed if the user types identified do differ in terms of actions. What I wanted to find, the idea of finding these types exactly was to recover from the data what the motives somehow that brought users to participate in the website. And with this idea in mind, the way I identify user types is by using information that they display on the user profiles. So I recollect all user profile pages of participating members. And after recovering information of what they displayed in that page, I use a data-driven approach combining a multiple color correspondence analysis with a K-means clustering to cluster these users in different groups. Okay, so this is really like a data-driven approach based on what type of information users display on their user profile page. So for the sake of time, I'm not gonna go in detail on the technique. But if you have a question, let me know. So the... Yeah, couple, sorry. At a high level, I have a question. At a high level, what information do you take into account to cluster individuals? Is it the text? Is it the pictures? I use kind of everything that the people can decide to display or not, which is the picture, which is the presence of a website, the presence of LinkedIn profile, the size of the biography and some text information about the biography they write, whether they have a full name or just a nickname and whether they have location, all this type of information that you're free to use or not when you register on the website. And the idea is that when I register on a website, I decide to disclose what I want based on what type of reason I'm registering. So after this process, I identify three type of users and naturally the identification of these groups is really based on what type of information the group display. So the first group that is the most numerous one, the largest group is what I call anonymous, which is a group that does not display information. So basically, as you can see, they mostly don't have information about themselves, they don't provide the LinkedIn or website information. There is then a second group of users, that is the second largest, which instead provide information, so normally they have a biographical description, they have a full name and website and so on, but do not have information about their external life outside the community. So they miss LinkedIn profile, external links and they have to less degree their personal website. And finally, the informative users are users that provide a lot of information about all dimensions, including information about their life outside of their community. So this is a bit how I identify these three groups and just to quickly give you an overview, these groups are very different also in behavior and anonymous users tend to be the one, so the informative users are the one mostly producing in the platform. So they are very few, but they participate a lot and they are having an important contribution to the final production on the website. And they are also the one that receive more medals and so on. So let's say that there is a correlation between more information and more activity and more productivity in the website. Okay, so let me move to the delegation system and what then variation I used that is affecting how much authority people have in the website. So as I mentioned before, people can accumulate the reputation points in this website and once they reach a threshold, they get more authority. So this is the main first variation that I use that allows me to compare users to histories before and after they reach this more authority level. And before February 25th, this threshold was set at 1,000 points. Anyway, the data allows me to use an extra layer of variation because this threshold has moved in the history of the website. And then I do observe not only people that gained authority before and after the threshold, but also people that potentially lost authority in particularly if they had between 1,000 and 2,000 points at the time of the change of the threshold. So these users that had passed the threshold under the previous and the first threshold set, then they lost authority because they had not yet reached the second threshold. So how the threshold affects user contribution. So the idea then of the structural model is to really try to study and to model the decision process that user make once they decide how much effort they make in the website. And the crucial factor is to incorporate the forward-looking behavior of users that are anticipating the possibility to reach this threshold in the future based on their current effort provision. So this is really modeled as a sort of investment decision with decreasing returns because people make effort today. This effort is gonna produce some reputation points tomorrow and then also in the next days after tomorrow about the decreasing. So this is how I model the investment decision of effort. And then this decision is really based on the idea that these points in the future may lead them to reach this higher level of authority. And clearly if people value reaching this higher level of authority, this preference is gonna affect their today action decision because they will be more willing to put higher effort and to pay higher cost of effort today to reach faster this threshold in the future. So the model then the structural model is like a simple dynamic discreet choice where the choice set is gonna be a discretization of the quantity and quality of effort in answering and editing. So more precisely I have three dimension included in the model like the A correspond to the quantity of answers, E corresponds to the quantity of edits and Q to the quality of answers. So for now, I don't include the quality of edits because since they are very small modifications in general it's hard to measure the quality. So I discretize these three variables and obtain a choice set of 21 options. And clearly combination of these options will lead to expected returns in terms of reputation points for the future. So I don't present here for the sake of time but in the paper I have the modellization of these returns and I estimated in a first stage the arrival of points in the future based on the all rate of arrival of points in the community. So people, users participating make this decision and choose what level of effort to make in these three dimensions such to maximize their expected discounted utility of their participation in the website. And again, let me stress this point like the key identification of the model is really like comparing the different options and the returns that each option is making is giving them in terms of points. So if people value and put high value in reaching the threshold tomorrow, they're gonna, I'm gonna observe today a higher effort level. If instead the people don't change significantly their effort level even if they have a chance to reach the threshold tomorrow, then it means that they put low value in reaching the threshold. So this difference across the, this different implication of the action today let me infer how much they value in reaching the threshold tomorrow. Yeah, people, Kevin has a question about if you can say more about measurement of quality so that Q parameter. Yeah, so I think maybe I don't have a slide. So the measurement quality that I use is to recover text measure of the text. So they generally I use the length of the text how many significant words so I discount from the number of words the number of stop words that are like non meaningful word. So I recover all these text measures and they regress these measures on the points that these posts have received on the first day of publication. And these give me an approximate measure of quality. Is that clear? So in particular, just to double check you don't take into account the votes from others to your answer. I take into account the votes on the first day of the answer. And I use some basically I regress text measure on the votes that the answer receives on the very first day of publication. Because then in the next day is potentially the answer is modified by other people. So I really wanted to capture the quality made by the author. So I'm just taking the exact text characteristics at the time of publication and I regress these variables on the number of up votes and votes that this answer got on the first day of publication and the predicted number of points is like the level of quality of this answer. Okay, so the user preferences that I assume for this model are the follow. So it's like a linear utility function that includes first of all, how many points people have at a given point in time. So in period T, R will capture how many reputation points people have accumulated so far. And then I include these two variables, C A and C E that capture the net utility from answering and editing. So this can be the cost of effort in answering and editing, net of some intrinsic utility of making those answer, those effort decisions. So what I want to display explicitly here is that potentially users may have some intrinsic utility from answering and editing which is then captured from the same variable of the cost. So this is gonna be a net cost of answering and editing. Then I include this variable C U M T that corresponds to the cumulative number of privileges that people can obtain on this website. So I didn't mention that people can get more authority but they can reach also either privileges in the website. And then this one to capture that potentially people just care about accumulating privileges and not specifically about authority. So that's why I want to include it in the utility function. And then I include the Adammi variable equal to one if the user has the reached authority at the time key. So this is gonna be exactly one if people have more authority and zero otherwise. And then I interact this dammi with a constant and with this net utility from answering and editing. C A and C E. And then the utility function is gonna be a random utility. So there is an interesting kind of preference shock, epsilon I T. So yes, I didn't specify but the way I model this net utility from answer is gonna be like a combination of the quality of the answer and the quantity on the answer weighted by the availability of questions. Because to answer is easier if there is a lot of questions out there out there that I can answer potentially but if there are very few potential it's harder for me to answer. So I wanted to capture that. And then I measure, I weight this the cost of answering by how many questions are available. Questions about the utility function? Okay, so, okay, no, I wanted to be more specific actually about that. So what are the parameters of the interest of this utility function? So first of all, this beta file that corresponds to the additional effect that the additional utility that answering will bring to the user once it will have reached this higher level of authority then somehow will measure the sensitivity of the user to the static incentive effect for answering. What I mean is that if this beta five for example is positive it means that people will be having a specifically higher utility in answering once they have reached higher authority on the website. If it's negative it means that it's becoming more costly for users to provide answers once they have more authority on editing. Similarly for beta six it will capture the sensitivity to the static incentive effect on editing. So if beta six again is different from zero significantly it means that the users will have specifically higher or lower utility in editing once they will have reached the higher level of authority. And then the dynamic incentive effect is captured by all the whole interaction without this dummy viable. Because clearly if this whole interaction is positive or negative then it means that the user will anticipate a positive or negative shocking utility once he will have reached the authority level. So this will impact his decision process before reaching the authority threshold because he's looking forward to this higher level or lower utility in the future. Okay, so if there is no question let me move to the results and estimation results. So first of all let me focus on the beta five which is the sensitivity of the static incentive effect on answering. So the estimates shows that only the anonymous users have a significantly different beta five which means that in general users do not, I mean, when users obtain higher authority on editing their utility in answering is not much affected. And in particular only anonymous users receive a higher cost of answering once they pass the threshold but the size of this effect is small. So this would suggest that when allocating authority on editing does not imply some specific negative utility on the other action. So there is no much spillover effect on the other actions that users can take. On the contrary, when people obtain authority on editing they have an increasingly higher value of editing. So as you can see for all users in this case and specifically for the anonymous users when they pass the threshold T then they receive a specifically higher utility in editing. So this suggests that they do have a specific higher preference of editing once they are endowed with authority on editing. And finally, the constant of the authority is kind of suggesting the direction of the dynamic the sensitivity of the dynamic incentive effect which shows that, so it shows that the anonymous users and informative users receives a positive utility from reaching the authority while identifiable users do not. So this already suggests that the dynamic incentive effect will be specifically relevant for the anonymous users. So let me be clear because of the size of the sensitivity. So to give a measure of how much users value to reach authority. So to say it in the word I used in the introduction the value of gaining authority the value for anonymous users correspond to around 250 points which is something that they could be obtaining with the three posts. And similarly for informative users the value that informative users put in acquiring authority is 329 points which is something that they will be able to get published in 28 posts. As suggested before, identifiable user do not really seems to be sensitive to that incentive they don't seems to care about obtaining authority so their value of gaining authority is quite low. So once I bring these preference estimates to the counterfactual simulation this will allow me to simulate how much production in the website will occur under different delegation scenarios. So in this slide I will show you just two types of scenarios. One in which the platform decides to not delegate authority based on performance but to delegate authority from the beginning to everyone. So this will be the extreme case of Wikipedia where people have full control over editing tasks from the very beginning of their participation. And the second scenario is instead more mimicking the stack exchange setup where people receive a full control over editing once they reach a certain performance threshold which is a here set of 500 points. So let me discuss the three types separately. So the most interesting types is the informative users. The informative users as I mentioned before are the ones that are the most sensitive to the dynamic incentive effect. This means that if I delegate authority to edit in editing from the very beginning of their participation they are not so basically I shut down the dynamic incentive effect system then I don't incentivize these users the green slash users, right? So the production in the website is much more slack. If instead I delegate on performance then the informative users are incentivized to produce more at the beginning to be able to reach faster this higher level of authority on editing. And this is why we see this spike of contribution at the very beginning of their history of participation. Differently the informant identifiable users as I mentioned before they are not sensitive to the dynamic incentive effect. So by shutting down the dynamic incentive effect I don't lose much of their participation. Finally. Yeah, for you have five minutes. Okay, yeah, thanks. Finally, you see this anonymous user on the zero line and this is because on the simplified setting of the simulation that the cost of participation for the anonymous users is too high. So in the simplified setting of the simulation they have just so high cost of participation that they don't participate. So even if they would potentially be incentivized by the dynamic incentive effect in practice they are not. For what instead relates to the edits I hear I want to talk about the static incentive effect of editing. So as I mentioned in the preference slide the estimate suggests that the people have a specifically higher value in editing once they reach at a higher level of authority on editing. This means that once I move to scenarios in which the delegation is delayed so I'm waiting time to, I mean people need to reach a certain threshold level of points to be able to have a full control over editing. Then clearly I lose editing activity because now people don't have full control from the beginning and then until they don't have full control they will produce less edits. So every scenarios that increase and delays the delegation would imply a reduction of the amount of edits that the pattern sees on its website. Okay so let me conclude the overall. So in this paper try to study how delegation of authority can be an incentive device and they try to investigate in particular two type of incentives. First the static incentive effect. So this is the idea that people may value to have authority and what the data shows is that indeed the people are more willing to participate in editing once they have more control on editing. At the same time doesn't seem to be important spillover effect on other tasks like answering. The other incentive effect that I study in this paper is the dynamic incentive effect that show and in the estimation shows that indeed people value to gain authority and in particular informative users and then they increase their participation in answering to be able to reach this threshold faster. As I said that this is in a way very much relevant relative to the type of users that the pattern is targeting. Informative users are very sensitive and they increase much their production to reach the threshold. But for example, identifiable users do not. And anonymous users, even if they would they have very high cost of production so they are not really responsive to the site use anyway. So just to draw some policy implication the optimal design of the website clearly depends on what type of users the platform is targeting and then on the composition of the community and then also on the objective of the platform. Clearly if the platform wants to maximize the quantity of edits on the website is better off in delegating from the very beginning because that will maximize the editing activity of the users. If instead the platform wants as well to maximize other tasks we may want to delegate the editing based on performance over other tasks. And this is the case of Spark Exchange. For example, Spark Exchange for sure cares about editing and improving the quality of answers but as Q and A's website are two sided platforms it really needs to incentivize production of answers because otherwise we don't have the dynamics that increase the production in the website. And then for that case, Spark Exchange may be a better off in trading off some editing activity to incentivize production of answers. And with this I conclude, thank you very much. Wonderful, you anticipated me. Thank you, Jacopo, Kevin, take it away. Great, thanks, Jacopo. Lovely presentation, you know, quite clear and the paper and the phenomena themselves quite rich and interesting. I'll have about a moment to discuss some of these things. I will disclose, I'm pretty, I'm somewhat biased towards the topic of, you know I've written on granting access and devolving control and looking at non-pecuniary motivations and their effects on network effects and industrial evolution in these contexts. So what I'd like to begin by stating is that I do believe this is a very important topic. It's a first order topic. There was a time when we studied platforms, systems competition in which we could model complementors as profit-seeking firms or in some sort of simple produced form. And over the past 20 years, really the many of the complementors on the on platforms, contributors on platforms have become behaviorally motivated, non-pecuniary motivated agents and certainly there's profit-seeking as well, but these are increasingly first order topics and what great scale and value in these contexts. A couple of elements of this I'd like to especially welcome. You know, I believe there's an element and this doesn't come out as much in the presentation as in the paper, but there's an attempt to kind of begin to frame this relationship between these complementors and the platform along the lines of what we've seen in the flavor of organizational economics and thinking about this as something analogous to a principal agent problem where there's a design of, in this case, control rights where that's, I think, a fresh and useful perspective that we can take. The industry organization buys us a lot of traction in these contexts, but I do believe the organizational economics perspective adds more. And also, although these are behavioral phenomena and in some sense difficult to fully model, I do believe there's no place for strong modeling in making sense of what's going on in these contexts. So these are all sort of important elements of the paper I wish to highlight. And just before, you know, there are only gonna be so many comments I can make, I would like to also say that Jacopo makes some efforts in the paper quite nicely to tie this to, you know, beyond platforms to literatures on delegation in their papers by Baker Gibbons, Murphy, Aguillon du Attrapin. There's this notion in that literature of a tradeoff in that agents somehow have some kind of special attribute. In much of that literature, it could be an issue of their privilege and information. Or in this case, we're looking at privileged or unique motivations that come through delegation. And I wish to just highlight that the tradeoffs in those literatures are in some sense, the decision to delegate or not, or under what conditions. And the heart of this paper is really a different kind of tradeoff. And I do think that, you know, I'll try to add suggestions as I go through this, but I think the paper could probably be clearer that in fact the tradeoff that Jacopo is intending to bring to the fore here is there will be delegation. This is not a question. There will be in some sense, the devolution of control to external agents to these complimenters. The tradeoff is whether to in some sense delay or create a threshold for delegating, or in fact, just to open it up more widely. And at the same time, which as you said, that even that is not sort of the first order goal of this paper as I read it. In some sense, the first order goal is really an establishment of existence that in fact the delegation of authority is a source of motivation that has economically consequential results. And there's an establishment that basic establishment of fact even precedes anything of describing this tradeoff. There's this question of, is there in fact an existence of this issue at all? And I'd like to just, you know, and I think the paper could probably go farther in distinguishing, you know, as we have all these thresholds that are being crossed, we're looking at one particular threshold that relates to editing privileges. And there could be any number of motivations related to crossing these thresholds or gaining these reputation points, as it were, it could be reputation and status. It could be in going through the system of various thresholds and gaining points. There's an element of gamification and intrinsic motivation. There are a lot of other possible explanations going on here. And I think sort of the core message of this being a motivation of achieving autonomy which has appeared in other literatures, whether that could be better established at its core. And I'll just make a couple of comments now on within the empirical analysis itself. In one minute, sorry. Yeah. The, there are, well, it goes straight to the structural model. The structural model gives a sense of dealing with endogeneity. However, it should be mentioned that, you know, in some sense it's allowing for there to be a distribution of responses to various variables, but there's enormous complexity in what brings somebody onto the platform, what makes them transition from sort of one observed type as it's defined to another observed type to what's leading them. There's just a lot of detail that I think is missing in the model itself which doesn't necessarily allow us to fully discern what is the source of the actual behavioral mechanisms and relating those to some source of exogenous variation. I'll share some more notes, but let's just do a quick kickoff of issues.


Live from San Jose, in the heart of Silicon Valley. It's theCUBE, covering DataWorks Summit 2018. Brought to you by Hortonworks. Welcome back to theCUBE's live coverage of DataWorks here in San Jose, California. I'm your host, along with my co-host, James Kobilis. We're joined by Tendu Yogarchu. She is the CTO of Syncsort. Thanks so much for returning to theCUBE, I should say. Thank you, Rebecca, and James, it's always a pleasure to be here. So you've been on theCUBE before, and the last time you were talking about Syncsort's growth. So can you give our viewers a company update, where you are now? Absolutely, Syncsort has seen extraordinary growth within the last year. We tripled our revenue, doubled our employees, and expanded the product portfolio significantly. Because of this phenomenal growth that we have seen, we also embarked on a new initiative refreshing our brand. We rebranded, and this was necessitated by the fact that we have such a broad portfolio of products, and we are actually showing our new brand here, articulating the value our products bring with optimizing existing infrastructure, assuring data security and availability, and advancing the data by integrating into next generation analytics platforms. So it's very exciting times in terms of Syncsort's growth. So the last time you were on the show was pre-GDPR, but we were talking before the cameras are rolling in, you were explaining the kinds of adoption you're seeing and what in this new era you're seeing from customers and hearing from customers. Can you tell our viewers a little bit about it? When we were discussing last time, I talked about four megatrends we are seeing, and those megatrends were primarily driven by the advanced business and operation analytics, data governance, cloud, streaming, and data science, artificial intelligence. And we talked, and we really made a lot of announcement and focus on the use cases around data governance, primarily helping our customers for the GDPR Global Data Protection Regulation initiatives and how we can create that visibility in the enterprise through the data by security and lineage and delivering trust data sets. Now we are talking about the cloud primarily, and the keynotes, this event, and our focus is around cloud, primarily driven by, again, the use cases, right? How the business are adapting to the new era. One of the challenges that we see with our enterprise customers and our over 7,000 customers, by the way, is the ability to future-proof their applications. Because this is a very rapidly changing stack. We have seen the keynotes talking about the importance of how do you connect your existing infrastructure with the future, modern, next-generation platforms? How do you future-proof the platform, make it agnostic about whether it's Amazon, Microsoft, or Google Cloud, whether it's on-premise in legacy platforms today that the data has to be available in the next-generation platforms? So the challenge we are seeing is how do we keep the data fresh? How do we create that abstraction that the applications are future-proofed? Because organizations, even financial services customers, banking, insurance, they now have at least one cluster running in the public cloud. And there's private implementations, hybrid becomes the new standard. So our focus and most recent announcements have been around really helping our customers with real-time resilient changes and capture, keeping the data fresh, feeding into the downstream applications with the streaming and messaging data frames, for example Kafka, Amazon Kinesis, as well as keeping the persistent stores and Hadoop data lake on-premise or in the cloud fresh. Put you into great alignment with your partner, Hortonworks. So, Tendu, I wonder if we are here at DataWorks, as Hortonworks has showed, if you can break out for our viewers what is the nature, the levels of your relationship, your partnership with Hortonworks, and how the Syncsort portfolio plays with HDP 3.0, with Hortonworks Dataflow, the data plain services, at a high level. Absolutely. So we have been a long-time partner with Hortonworks, and a couple of years back, we're strengthening our partnership. Hortonworks is reselling Syncsort, and we have actually a prescriptive solution for Hadoop and ETL onboarding in Hadoop jointly. And it's very complementary. Our strategy is very complementary because what Hortonworks is trying and achieving is creating that abstraction and future-proofing and interaction consistency, I don't refer this this morning, across the platform, whether it's on-premise or in the cloud, or across multiple clouds. We are providing the application, data application layer consistency and future-proofing on top of the platform, leveraging the tools in the platform for orchestration, integrating with HDP, certifying with Ranger, HDP, all of the tools Dataflow and Atlas, of course, for lineage. The theme of this conference is ideas, insights, and innovation. And as a partner of Hortonworks, can you describe what it means for you to be at this conference? What kinds of community and deepening existing relationships forming new ones? Can you talk about what happens here? This is one of the major events around data, and it's data works as opposed to being more specific to the Hadoop itself, right? Because the stack is evolving and data challenges are evolving. For us, it means really the interactions with the customers, the organizations, and the partners here, because the dynamics of the use cases is also evolving. For example, data lake implementations started in US, and we started EMEA, European organizations, moving to streaming, data streaming applications faster than US. Why are the Europeans moving faster to streaming than we are in North America? I think a couple of different things might participate. The open source is really enabling organizations to move fast. When the data lake initiative started, we have seen a little bit slow start in Europe, but more experimentation with the open source stack. And by that, the more transformative use cases started really evolving, like how do I manage interactions of the users with the remote controls as they are watching live TV type of transformative use cases became important. And as we move to the transformative use cases, streaming is also very critical because lots of data is available and being able to keep the cloud data stores as well as on-premise data stores and downstream applications with fresh data becomes important. We, in fact, in early June, announced that Syncios now is part of Microsoft's one commercial partner program. With that, our integrated solutions with data integration and data quality are Azure Gold certified and Azure ready. We are in COSAL agreement and we are helping jointly, a lot of customers, moving data and workloads to Azure and keeping those data stores across the platforms in sync. So lots of exciting things. I mean, there's a lot happening with the application space. There's also lots of still happening connected to the governance cases that we have seen feeding security and IT operations data into, again, modern next generation analytics platforms is key, whether it's Splunk, whether it's Elastic as part of the Hadoop stack. So we are still focused on governance as part of this multi-cloud and on-premise the cloud implementations as well. We, in fact, launched our iron stream for IBMI product to help customers, not just making this data available for mainframes, but also from IBMI into Splunk, Elastic and other security information and event management platforms. And today we announced workflow optimization across on-premise and multi-cloud and cloud platforms. So lots of focus across to optimize, ensure and integrate the portfolio of products, helping customers with the business use cases. That's really our focus as we innovate organically and also acquire technologies and solutions. What are the problems we are solving and how we can help our customers with the business and operation analytics, targeting those mega trends around data governance, clouds, streaming and also data science. What is the biggest trend, do you think, that is sort of driving all of these changes? As you said, the data is evolving, the use cases are evolving. What is it that is keeping your customers up at night? It's still, right now it's still governance keeping them up at night because this evolving architecture is also making governance more complex, right? If we are looking at financial services, banking, insurance, healthcare, there are lots of existing infrastructures on main data, critical, mission critical data stores on mainframe, IBMI, in addition to this gravity of data changing and lots of data with the online businesses generated in the cloud. So how to govern that also while optimizing and making those data stores available for next generation analytics makes the governance quite complex. So that really keeps and creates a lot of opportunity for the community, right? All of us here to address those challenges. Because it sounds to me, I'm hearing Splunk, that's machine data, I think of the internet of things and sensor grids. I'm hearing IBM mainframes, that's transactional data, that's your customer data and so forth. It seems like much of this data that you're describing that customers are trying to cleanse and consolidate and provide strict governance on is absolutely essential for them to drive more artificial intelligence into end applications and mobile devices that are being used to drive the customer experience. Do you see more of your customers using your tools to massage the data sets as it were, that data scientists then use to build and train their models for deployment into edge applications? Is that an emerging area where your customers are deploying sync sort? Thank you for asking that question. Absolutely. And thanks for unpacking it and giving it to me. It is a complex question, but it's a very important question. Yes, and in the previous discussions we have seen and this morning also Rob Thomas from IBM mentioned as well, that machine learning and artificial intelligence, the data science really relies on high-quality data, right?  When we are using artificial intelligence and machine learning, the implications, the impact of bad data multiplies, multiplies with the training of historical data, multiplies with the insights that we are getting out of that. So data scientists today are still spending significant time on preparing the data for the AI pipeline and the data science pipeline. That's where we shine, because our integrate portfolio accesses the data from all enterprise data stores and cleanses and matches and prepares that in a trusted manner for use for advanced analytics with machine learning, artificial intelligence. Because the magic of machine learning for predictive analytics is that you build a statistical model based on the most valid data set for the domain of interest. If the data is junk, then you're going to be building a junk model that will not be able to do this job. So for want of a nail, the kingdom was lost, for want of a sink sort, data cleansing and governance tool, the whole AI superstructure will fall down. That's really, yeah. Absolutely. Yeah. Oh, great. Well, thank you so much, Tantu, for coming on theCUBE and for giving us a lot of background and information. Thank you for having me. Thank you. Always a pleasure. I'm Rebecca Knight for James Kobielus. We will have more from theCUBE's live coverage of DataWorks 2018 just after this.


Genetic diseases are due to inherited changes in our DNA sequence, which we call mutations. Our DNA is organized in genes that produce specific proteins. Some mutations prevent the production of a functional protein, and this may cause disease. In the nucleus of our cells, we have two copies of most DNA sequences. One of the copies comes from our father and another one comes from our mother. So an affected parent can pass along a disease-causing mutation to their child. Diseases that are caused by DNA mutations that can be passed on from parent to child are called genetic diseases. Today we're going to focus on ALD, which stands for X-linked adrenal leukodystrophy. ALD affects 1 in 17,000 people of all ethnic backgrounds. This disease is caused by a mutation in the ABCD1 gene that produces the ALD protein. Mutations in the ABCD1 gene prevent the production of a functional ALD protein. The disease affects men more than women, who experience a less severe disease later in life. This is because of a very interesting genetic fact. I just mentioned that we have two DNA copies of all genes. Well, that's not entirely true. Men only have one copy of the genes found on chromosome X, while women have two copies. That is what determines whether you are male or female. It turns out that the ABCD1 gene is located on the X chromosome. So women with a mutation in one copy of the ABCD1 gene still have a normal copy of the gene that can make a functional ALD protein. Men, however, only have one copy of the ABCD1 gene, so if this copy is mutated, there is no normal ALD protein produced. So what effect does an ABCD1 mutation have on the cell? In the cell, ALD is normally present on the surface of structures that we call peroxisomes. ALD is responsible for transporting specific kinds of fats called very long-chain fatty acids, or VLCFAs, into the peroxisome where they are broken down. When a cell doesn't produce functional ALD protein, very long-chain fatty acids can't get broken down in the peroxisomes, so they accumulate. The very large quantities of VLCFAs can be toxic to certain cells, including cells that produce blood cells, cells that produce hormones, and cells that produce myelin in the nervous system, which is required for neurons to function. Therefore, patients with ALD develop very severe symptoms associated with the malfunction of these cells. Although all ALD patients share a genetic problem, or a genotype, the symptoms ALD patients experience can vary greatly, and are grouped into phenotypes. The ALD genotype has four unique phenotypes, which can overlap during lifetime. The four phenotypes are asymptomatic, adrenal myeloneuropathy, AMN, adrenal insufficiency, and cerebral demyelination. The onset and severity of the phenotypes can vary from patient to patient. Let's explain how this works by talking about each of the ALD phenotypes in more detail. Let's start with the asymptomatic phenotype. All patients with ALD are completely asymptomatic for the first few years of life. During childhood and adolescence, men may begin developing symptoms, and by age 50 essentially 100% of men with the ALD genotype will have developed at least one of the ALD phenotypes, or symptoms. On the other hand, women with the ALD genotype rarely develop symptoms before reaching adulthood, and then the symptoms are usually limited only to one phenotype, adrenal myeloneuropathy, or AMN. Adrenal myeloneuropathy, or AMN, is the most common ALD phenotype. It affects all men and most women by the time they reach their late 40s. In this sense, it is considered the default form of ALD. In other words, whether you are a man or a woman with ALD, if you live long enough, you will eventually develop AMN. AMN results from slow and progressive injury to the myelin and axons of the spinal cord and nerves because of VLCFA accumulation. Myelin serves as a sheath to protect and insulate the axons of neurons in the spinal cord responsible for movement and sensation, which are among the largest and longest cells in the body, leaving them vulnerable and harder for the body to repair. When myelin is damaged in ALD, neurons in the spinal cord and nerves malfunction. As a result, symptoms often begin as stiffness or tingling in the feet, but they always worsen over time and result in difficulty with walking, balance, and strength, as well as bowel, bladder, and sexual functions. Fortunately, the AMN phenotype appears to spare brain function. Unfortunately, we don't yet have an effective treatment for AMN. The next most common phenotype is adrenal insufficiency, which eventually affects most men with the ALD genotype, but is rare in women. Symptoms include weakness and fatigue, nausea, and lobular pressure. In ALD, adrenal insufficiency occurs when the cells that produce hormones in their adrenal gland are injured. This injury is irreversible and the resulting symptoms of low blood pressure and fatigue can be life-threatening if untreated. Fortunately, if diagnosed promptly, adrenal insufficiency can be safely and easily treated using daily hormone supplements. This is why all boys and men with the ALD genotype should be tested regularly for adrenal insufficiency. The most dreaded symptom of ALD is cerebral demyelinating ALD, or cerebral ALD. About two-thirds of men with ALD will experience cerebral ALD. It is very rare in women. This is the most devastating of all ALD symptoms and is lethal unless it is promptly diagnosed and treated. The biology underlying cerebral ALD is similar to AMN in that damages myelin and axons. However, whereas AMN progresses slowly and affects the spinal cord and nerves, cerebral ALD progresses much more rapidly and affects the brain. The damage to axons in cerebral ALD appears to originate with this function of the white blood cells in the brain, which become injured when VLCFAs accumulate in ALD. This leads to massive inflammation that typically starts near the center of the brain and radiates outward. This inflammation damages the brain's myelin, axons, and eventually the neurons. This leads to myriad of different symptoms that may include problems with vision, attention, behavior, and coordination. Unfortunately, many boys with ALD are diagnosed late because symptoms do not appear until the damage to the brain is already quite large.  When diagnosed early, cerebral ALD can be stopped with a bone marrow transplant from a matched donor. The donor's bone marrow contains stem cells that don't have an ABCD1 mutation.  This procedure only stops the progression of cerebral ALD and it is started very early in the course of disease, within a few months. This is why monitoring for cerebral ALD in boys and men is very important. Lastly, because bone marrow transplant carries the potential for serious side effects, it should only be used in patients with cerebral ALD. Unfortunately, there is no definitive cure for ALD, although some effective treatments do exist for cerebral ALD, bone marrow transplant, and adrenal insufficiency, hormone supplements. We can also treat individual symptoms like muscle stiffness and fatigue depending on the patient's condition. In ALD, earlier diagnosis allows for better treatment. To diagnose ALD, we begin by measuring blood levels of very long-chain fatty acids, which accumulate in ALD patients. This test can easily be performed at birth and is being added to the newborn screening panel in a growing number of states. The final diagnosis of ALD is made by identifying mutations in the ABCD1 gene, which can be done after birth or as part of a prenatal diagnosis. So what lies ahead for ALD patients? There are many exciting advances already in progress. Newborn screening for ALD is being implemented in a growing number of US states. Scientists have found several drugs that may reduce levels of VLCFAs. There are also several exciting treatments currently in clinical trials. In fact, ALD is one of the first diseases to show promising results to a gene therapy in clinical trials. But there's still much we don't know about ALD. For example, we still cannot predict which patients will develop cerebral ALD or adrenal insufficiency. Researchers are trying to identify biological markers that can predict which patients are more likely to experience each symptom. This video has been produced by Eureka Science in collaboration with ALD Connect. Visit ALDconnect.org to learn more about how you can build a better future for the ALD community. To stay in touch with Eureka Science, like us on Facebook, follow us on Twitter, or subscribe to our YouTube channel, or visit us at Eurekascience.com. Thank you for watching!


This is a great day for Canada and it's part of a long series of milestones this country has hit over the years. It hasn't been easy, it hasn't been automatic, a lot of people fought for a long time for this day and for the many days that led up to this day to happen. And it's absolutely wonderful to be celebrating in such a significant way as to raise the pride flag on Parliament Hill for the very, very first time. And it's wonderful you're all here for this. Canada is united in its defensive rights and it's standing up for LGBTQ rights. This is what we are truly celebrating today. And quite frankly, it's something that we recognize we still have more work to do. That's why, as Randy mentioned, we introduced a few weeks ago a bill to give full rights and protections to trans people across this country as well. The trans rights are human rights. Our approach is always to understand that we have progress to make in this country. We have done a great deal in many spheres, but there is always work to be done. We can always work for a better acceptance, better opening, better support. People around us, people who are facing discrimination, bullying, challenges. Again today, too many young people in their secondary schools are facing discrimination because of their sexual identity. And we still have a lot of work to do here. By raising this flag today, we can help to push this reality of acceptance, of love for the future here in Canada. Well, that would be a very good thing. I am so proud to be here today. I am so looking forward to being the first Prime Minister to attend Pride Parades across this country this summer. I mean, it's not going to be my first time at all these Pride Parades, but the first time for a Prime Minister, which is a wonderful step forward. But like I say, we have more work to do in the coming years, and I'm so glad to see so many people here to mark this moment and the many moments to come. Thank you very, very much.


Welcome to Tick Mill Weekly Market Outlook for week 20th August with me, Patrick Munley. Dollar heads into August after being under considerable pressure in July, having seen its largest monthly decline in three years. The nature of the sell-off suggests a different dynamic is at play. This is not the benign dollar decline we did market envisaged but instead one seemingly being driven on a new risk premium being inserted into US asset markets on the back of a resurgence in the US COVID-19 cases and perhaps as well as November's presidential elections that are starting to make their mark. The dollar did not appreciate President Trump's suggestion of delaying the November 3rd election. The US week ahead will be about jobs and benefits. Expect July bounce back in jobs with ADP and AFP that will not be quite as strong as consensus believes. The non-farm payrolls could actually decline in August. Markets will also be focusing on Congress where the $600 per month unemployment benefit boost has now expired and the parties are wrangling over the design of the Phase 4 stimulus package. Delays here may upset asset markets which typically tend to struggle a little in August as I discussed in last week's live analysis session. The US data calendar will also see some encouraging ISN numbers but the market is now more wary about the US lockdowns rather than the modest uptick in business optimism. From a technical perspective, the dollar index tested the projected ascending trendline support at the 9250 area and we saw a key day reversal on Friday with profit taking and buyers stepping into the market. What we'll be looking for now as we head into Monday is some follow-through price action and I'll be looking initially for a counter trend corrective move to target this symmetry swing resistance at 9450. However, if we take out Friday's lows then I'll be looking for a move down to the 91 level as the next downside objective. But the preferred scenario at this stage is that we see some corrective action now and we're going to move up to this 9450 area. The speed of the Euro rally has surprised many and embodies what I think is a positive reassessment of the Eurozone project as well as a reconsideration of US risk. Speculators looked to have been positioned for the rally but not for its speed. The need to hold dollars is now less acute as evidenced by the just $107 billion dollar being drawn on the Fed's dollar swap lines versus the peak of $450 billion dollars in late May. Typically the month of August is slightly friendlier to the dollar which may generate some consolidation in the Euro rally. However, it's a long three months until the US election and with US dollar hedging costs so cheap we can suspect that the dollar will stay on the back foot. For the week ahead in terms of data we'll see some German real sector data for June, industrial production and factory goods data but markets suspect the US story will continue to dominate with fewer fears over dollar liquidity. The big question is whether the weaker US data and relatively weaker US equities now actually may be dollar negative rather than positive as the risk on dollar off paradigm starts to change. The technical perspective of Euro dollar has tested its projected descending trend line resistance and we did see a key day reversal closing below near term volume wasted average price. So I'll be looking for follow-through early in the week to get a move down initially testing 116.50. If we don't see sufficient bids come into the market there then I'll be looking for a deeper pullback to test the midpoint of the channel and the 161 extension of the symmetry swing move which would have us testing 114.90. The highlights of the week in terms of sterling will be the Thursday's Bank of England meeting negative interest rate policy is under active review at the BOE but I think it's probably a little too early for BOE to make any decisive moves here. The BOE will probably prefer to hold off on the use of negative interest rate policy until some clarity emerges on the UK-EU relationship from 2021. Currently in money market futures price the bank rate currently it's 0.1% moving into negative territory early next year. Also there are no expectations at this meeting for a change of BOE's $745 billion APP target. From a technical perspective whilst we hold Friday's highs I'll be looking for a symmetry swing pullback to test ascending trendline support back to the 126 area. Obviously if you take out Friday's highs then the upside objective is going to become 135.20 which is the projected ascending trendline resistance. It's been, market's been surprised really to see the dolly entered under 105 and the move a reminder of a new perceived flaws in the dollar. We can assume that some of the Japan's largest fund managers including the GPIF will be using the opportunity to buy US debt securities unherged thereby slowing this decline. The move under 105 also prompted remarks from the Japanese authorities over vigilance on these FX moves. The Japanese week ahead sees final first quarter GDP Tokyo July CPI and some final July PMI numbers. Nothing to independently really move the yen. Instead the market may focus on the latest chapter in SoftBank's divestment strategy. A reported $32 billion sale of its UK arm tech holding. Divestments proceeds finally the way into the end could limit the upside over the coming months. From technical perspective as we discussed in the live analysis session last week we were looking for this 104-15 area to be tested and we saw a sharp bounce on Friday key reversal pattern but we're now sitting right at resistance here this 106 area prior support and if we can't get follow through here then I think we're likely to retest the current lows but if we can get a move through this 106 area then I'm looking for a symmetry swing upside objective at 108. The Australian state of Victoria remains in full emergency mode as the lockdown restrictions are failing to flatten the contagion curve. Now the risk is that even stricter measures will be imposed in the state which keeps the balance of risks for the already uncertain economic recovery tilted to the downside. As the RBA announced his monetary policy next week investors will specifically be looking at how the bank will factor the flare-up in Victoria cases in their monetary policy stance. The most straightforward move could be to simply reiterate the correct accommodative stance and the determination to do more if needed. At this stage further tapering comments will hardly find any space in the statement. Likely in the previous meeting markets will be very sensitive to any currency comments to track any change the currently very relaxed stance on the Aussie dollar strength. With markets likely positioned for such a scenario the Aussie may see somewhat limited impact from the meeting. The week in Australia is packed with other releases with trade and retail sales data from June and the RBA statement of monetary policy later in the week. Markets however may look beyond such data given the recent developments in Victoria and having given fresh concerns on the economic outlook and the Aussie may only marginally benefit from any upside surprise in the data. From a technical perspective like the other majors here we saw a key reversal on Friday in the Australian dollar from that 72 area that we talked about in the live analysis session and now what I'm looking for is a symmetry swing pullback to initially test the 6930 area and again if we don't find sufficient bids here then I'd be looking for a deeper pullback to test this 6750 as the interim downside objective and that concludes the weekly market outlook for week commencing the 3rd of August. Like I said be sure to join me on Thursdays at 1 p.m. UK time where I will be giving live market analysis sessions, overviewing trades and developing opportunities in the market so be sure to join me then on Thursday at 1 p.m. Thanks very much and have a good week.


Appalachian Wireless now has new forward pay prices where you can pay up front and get the data and features you desire. 5 gigabytes of data, just $39.99, unlimited just $79.99, better service, bigger savings. That's today's Appalachian Wireless. The Kentucky Department of Agriculture made a stop at the University of Pikeville Tuesday to host a farmer's round table. It's so important that we get out across the state and talk about the state of farming and here in Pike County you basically have a renaissance happen. Local food movement is real, you have a wonderful state of the art farmer's market and today I was here to help share some ideas and also listen about the needs of Eastern Kentucky Agriculture. After the round table discussion, Commissioner Ryan Quarles and his team visited different farms and agricultural sites in the county starting at App Harvest in Pikeville. Today I brought my work boots so we're going to be getting out onto some Eastern Kentucky farms to see how you all have proven that you can be successful on small acreage and that's something that I can relate to. I grew up on a small family farm in central Kentucky and so I like to remind people briefly in Frankfurt that agriculture is thriving and it exists east of I-75. Members of the Pikeville Farmers Market and the Pike County Cooperative Extension Office were in attendance during Tuesday's discussion. From the market this year we've picked up four or five more farms, you know, people that wasn't in raising to sale, that they saw examples of how other people have done it.  Down turn in the coal market, that's kind of what led to a bunch of what we did. Senator Quarles says he is impressed by local farmers and how local restaurants are linked to Kentucky proud products. He says his department is hoping to grow the economy by using agriculture as its catalyst. In Pikeville, Shelby Porter, EKB News.


Next up on our lightning round sessions is Joanne Mancuso, who's from our Bennington Public Library here in Bennington, Nebraska. She's going to talk about their preschool steam that they've been doing. That's an awesome idea. Go ahead, Joanne. Thank you so much, Chris, for having me. I am very excited to be here and to talk to you about our preschool steam science. It started, let me get to the next slide. It started when we closed down like everyone else with COVID and we lost that connection with our preschool kids, well, with everyone. And we did the summer reading take home kits, but when school was starting, we decided that we needed something else to reconnect with our preschoolers. We found a lot of parents were not sending their kids to preschool and they were kind of at a loss as to what to do with them. They didn't have a plan. So we started these preschool steam boxes. We started off with 20 of them. And inside were just a month's worth of activities for them to do with their child that had specific instructions on how to do it, counting, letter recognition, stacking cups with different numbers, scissor practice, all different kinds of things, a lot of shape recognition. And also we included science and what we were going to, we were trying to figure out how we could bring this online. And science was the only activity that we could think of that would be a virtual. So what we did is we made up kits and this first picture up at the top right is one of the first kits that we did after the initial four week one. And we went out to Facebook, well, each kit had items that they would not necessarily find at home. They had lard, which most people might have, pipettes. We included those, Elka Seltzer, candy canes, gummy worms, penguin erasers. We even had biodegradable packing peanuts for one of our latest science things.  And the first time we made 20, the second time we made 20 and we ran out. So we added five more. And this last session would last seven weeks. We gave out 30 and we still didn't have enough. So it was very successful. Next, we decided to do it on Facebook Live. We were doing preschool story time on Facebook Live and they were doing very well. So we chose Facebook Live as our form. And what I would do is do an event. And I would take pictures of the books we were going to be reading, all the supplies that they would need from their kits. And a lot of people didn't get kits. So this was a good way for them to see what items that they would need at home. Each session is 20 minutes long at the most. Our science experiments were very simple, very easy. If they didn't get a kit, they could find most of the products themselves. And sometimes they worked, sometimes they didn't. We used, oh, and since we were reading on Facebook Live, we did ask permission. We did go to each publisher and asked permission to use their books. Whether it was the nonfiction or the fiction. That was really important to us. And we used scientific terms. Always made sure we used scientific terms so that when the kids started school, they were familiar with a lot of the terms. And some of them I actually had to look up myself because I had forgotten what they were. So it was a learning experience for me as well. The science experiments, they've been really cool. This one where it says how to catch a snowman. That was our biodegradable packing peanuts. We made into little snowmen. This was our winter science. And that was a lot of fun. We melted it with just water. And the kids really seemed to enjoy that. And then we did a walking rainbow experiment. And that worked very, very well. That was very exciting. And the one that didn't go well was the one with the gummy franken worms. The gummy worms were very heavy. They did not float. So they were supposed to float when you mix the vinegar and the baking soda. And yeah, they did not work at all. And so I discovered that you had to cut the gummy worms in forts. And so they weren't so heavy. And then they started dancing around. And later I did put that in the comments of the video so that people doing the video later on could see that yes, it actually did work. Like I said, they were very. Not everything will be a success, especially for the kids. Yes. And that was one of the points. And we always have said that science, it's all about doing and redoing and constantly trying things again. And things fail all the time. And sometimes the failure comes up with something else. And it ends up being a success, just not the success that we were thinking it was going to be. So it's been a lot of fun. And we get a lot of feedback from it. It's been a very good success. And we have pictures sent to us, emails, comments, and how much the kids really are enjoying the simple science. Not everyone gets on live. We have a lot of families that do it later after school for their other kids, school-aged kids. And so it's a lot of fun for the whole family. And like I said, it's simple, very, very simple science experiment, most of which you could find on Pinterest. Or some that they'll do later on in school at a more difficult level. But it's basic, and it's a lot of fun. And the kids seem to really enjoy it. And it's been very successful. And here are some of the pictures of our kids enjoying it. At the top right, you'll see this little guy. This is the original steam box that we gave out. We decided to just end it after about four weeks. We were not going to give out all of those items again. And we just strictly went with the science. But that's some of the items that we included. Simple things, candy, fruit loops, sacking cups. It was a lot of fun. And then over on the left, we have a little boy, one of our patrons who decided to become a real scientist. And he had his little goggles and everything. And that one was, we were doing, trying to make the ice crack like it does in the Arctic. And so you just put ice cubes in and then cover it with baking soda, freeze it again, and then you take vinegar. Anything that's vinegar and baking soda, the kids go nuts over. So that was a good one. And the middle one was one of our first experiments that was in that original box. And we did a comparison between pop rocks and nerves, candy. And so they had to provide their own coke bottles, but we provided the balloons in the candy. And they dropped them in there, put the balloons on top, and we needed to see which balloon would get bigger with which candy, whichever one worked. Nerds definitely worked better, surprisingly. We thought it was going to be the pop rocks, but it was the nerds. I'm guessing that's good too. All right, yo, it learned something new. Science. That's right. Yeah, it was, it's right. And at first I started to practice the science experiments numerous times before I would do it online with the kids. And then I decided, no, I needed to just do it for the first time with the kids so that they can see that mistakes really do happen. And some funny things have really happened online. The kids are used to seeing me, you know, making mistakes online. So, and then the bottom right is that was to our two little guys, actually two kids of our staff. And they were melting the snowmen. So they had a really good time. Those biodegradable packing peanuts, that was a really neat, that was a neat one. And the little faces, so they would melt and you would just see a tiny bit of the white packing material, but you could still see the sharpie face. So that was a lot of fun. And then we also expanded that one where I brought an extra, well, besides water, different liquids. And one was hand sanitizer since we have so much everywhere. And I had dipped the hand sanitizer onto one of those packing peanuts. And what happened, it didn't dissolve. It just shrunk in on itself and made this tiny, tiny little snowman when you still see the face. But it just shrunk all the moisture out of it and it was hard and a little. So the kids got a kick out of that. But I do encourage them to keep going at home and finding other things that will work on the science experiments. So this is my information. If anyone has any questions, feel free to contact my library. Great, yes. Thank you, Duanne. I do have a couple of questions that we'll do here quickly. How did you distribute the colors, your colors for your walking rainbow? How did that? Well, I did not. We just assumed that most people had markers. So we did give them, well, actually, I don't think I gave them anything for that one. I just told them to make sure they had good working washable markers and then paper towel and a water. And that's all they really needed. And did you have any limit to the number of kids per family? Did you have any sort of like one kid per family or anything like that or? It was one kid per family. It was one kid per family. And some, they just shared everything. It didn't seem to be an issue. There's multiple kids that all do it together. And then a question here, which we'll see about the answer. What about the copyright laws of reading the books and then posting them for watching later? So at the moment, we know that many publishers have relaxed their restrictions on copyright and reading and recording and doing all these live things because of COVID. Right now it's actually just looking at extended through June 30th, the last time I saw. But I know it does depend on publisher, whether or not you can save the videos or not or if it's live only, it varies. But it has been relaxed at the moment because of COVID. Now I don't know, you looked into that as well, Joanne. Yeah, since I had been doing storytime on Facebook Live, I'm always very careful to make sure I ask for permission. I've only had, I think once since COVID began, so in about a year, I've only had one publisher not letting me use their book and that was at the very beginning. But I do follow what they ask and we usually take down the storytime we took down after a month. But the science videos, we ask to make sure that they know they will stay on our Facebook and it hasn't been a problem yet. Yeah, they're being very helpful. If you just look up, I just Googled, I know School Library Journal has been keeping track of this. So look up School Library Journal, Publishers, COVID, whatever, you'll find articles about it and about just trying to gather what all the different publishers are saying or permissions they're giving. All right, thank you so much, Joanne. We're gonna get right into our last.


It's not because the cup is bigger. It's because I like the character in the film better film however Hey guys Batman the Superman dawn of justice now This is a film that I honestly never thought would ever see the light of day I always knew that I would see it tons of times in the animated films because animated films can make that sort of thing work I even thought that maybe we would see a CG version of it at the most Never thought I'd see it in live-action. Oh, I liked Man of Steel I admitted there was problems with it And I didn't think it was the godsend that a lot of people thought it was but I didn't think it was the absolute Trainwreck that a lot of people thought it was as well. I enjoyed it. It's flawed, but I still enjoyed it as a film Batman v Superman is hard to get along with now I know that the critics have torn this apart, but the fans of love that I understand why the fans love it because There's a lot of fan homage to DC the whole DC universe all the characters the people who they talk about this film is basically the entire Marvel universe, but in reverse we're basically getting an overload of DC mythology characters new introductions all this and It's too much That is the biggest complaint this film has it's the biggest issue is there's too much going on We have too many characters to talk about we have too many events happening. We have too many Future events happening.  It's very shifting which is kind of something we would expect We're trying to be introduced to these new versions of these characters as though we already know them and then be just very You know adapt to them which we can be to an extent But the problem is there's just too much going on and probably the biggest waste in this film is Gail Goddow I was skeptical about her, but she kicked ass as Wonder Woman hell her music was different from the same Don't we got in the film except he's only there for ten bloody minutes and we just She's just thrown in I want to see more time with these characters. I want to see more interactions I want to see more of this conflict and the whole part of the film the whole beginning half is the idea that Superman should be held a held accountable for what he's done except he's not being held accountable for stuff like Say what happened with Metropolis? He's being held accountable for stuff that clearly was not his fault It's clearly a setup that is the focus of his whole you should be kept in check and it's so obvious that it's just stupid because that's the point the whole point that we were getting from the trailers is that Superman was being a held accountable for the stuff that happened in Metropolis and the fact that he has so much power that people are scared shitless of him and then Bruce Wayne was doing it because he thought he had to be held in check We had to take him down more if not take him down We had to have a means of which to take him down at least that's what's been in the comics Batman's always had a way to take down Superman except in this film the reason why the two go at each other is so moronically Simple that everything that we got from the trailers Is half-assed and that's another thing too if you have seen the trailers in essence We have seen every good part of the film in those trailers now Okay, I've ragged on now. Let me get to the good Henry Cavill is once again awesome as the man in blue because we actually in the limited amount of bloody time We have with him We do see that he is conflicted that he is trying to still be good in a world that clearly doesn't like him is hating him For what he's doing, but he's still trying to prove that I'm here to help you I'm not here to be a God, but then he starts to see what he's Becoming to these people and he starts to have the weight on his shoulders And then comes a moment where he's just like I can't do it I can't be the good guy, but the problem is it's not as well executed as it could have been because the script is not as Good because it's written by this fucking hack.  He's made in the past Baffles me, but the big question is how was the fight scene between the two and at least to say it was pretty good It was actually much betterly executed than I thought it would be Considering how complete opposite the two are and it was also filmed in IMAX It was filming the wife's the the full screen, which was great However, here's the thing when you have superhero films when you have two heroes and they're supposedly building up towards this big fight You have them display their skills beforehand You have them do stuff that kind of builds up who they are Batman. We don't really see like he literally the first Theoretical fight that he has is with Superman.  I'm Ragging on this. I know I'm being hateful. I don't want to be but I'm literally left with no option The climax of the film is actually the best part because we actually get to see layers of characters Albeit brief, but we see some different sides, especially with Henry Keveil and with Ben Affleck's Batman, but The thing is it's just too much.   I actually do enjoy how the film ends, but Up until the ending I wasn't entertained. I was very Anxious in my seat and that's the worst part of this film It's that we have so much leading up to what we wanted, but we have so many other elements instead of getting these pieces Being the epic set piece.  I know even better.  You thought that Kevin Spacey was too much and Superman returns.  I'm not buying it.  I am dead serious I Can't believe I'm giving it that but I just did not enjoy this movie until the final part For every element that was good. It was layered on by five elements that were bad. Anyway guys I'm sorry if I piss you off, but that's just my opinion. I can't believe I'm agreeing with Alex Ledbetter from Whatculture.com, but I'm actually agreeing with that guy. I can't I'm mad at myself right now for these thoughts. But anyway guys, it's all for me. Let me know what you think of it I'm off to forget about it


We are a resilient people. We can. We will. We can. We will. We are resilient people. We can. We will provide opportunities for students to develop the new skills and make life long friendships, all in an inclusive and supportive environment for our service clubs on campus. We are committed to train healthcare providers at the highest level to deliver quality care. Your help is our concern. We are a resilient nation. We can. We will ensure that our students have access to quality information resources. Feliz dia de la independencia. Que viva Santa Lucia. Happy 42nd Independence Anniversary Saint Lucia for the board, management and staff of the Sir