Sustainable Development Goal number 16, why is peace crucial for economic development? A country in peace can undertake policy for a healthy economy through its supporting institutions. This leads to economic development. These institutions can be harmed in the event of a war, which harms the economy. But how exactly does this work? For example, a country undergoing a war suffers from death, disability, disease, displacement of population, and poverty. Wars also destroy infrastructure as well as financial and human capital. Thus, wars and armed conflicts hinder a country's institutions from contributing to economic progress. Additionally, slow economic development increases the risk of armed conflict. This is because poverty and economic stagnation can marginalize people who could turn to violent activities. On the other hand, a country in peace can strengthen its institutions. This supports sustainable economic growth, which in turn reduces the chances of armed conflict. What we can observe is that peace and economic development are dependent on each other. The absence of peace weakens institutions, which in turn slows down economic development. And slow economic development decreases the likelihood of peace. Peace and economic development cannot exist without each other. This is why the Sustainable Development Goal No. 16 is so important. Peace, justice, and strong institutions are crucial for people's well-being and economic development. Want to learn more about the Sustainable Development Goals? Check out the link below.


The 2022 Top 10 IT Issues is sponsored by Genzabar, an EDUCAUSE Platinum Partner, Microsoft Corporation, an EDUCAUSE Platinum Partner, and AT&T, an EDUCAUSE Bronze Partner. The 2022 Top 10 IT Issues described the way technology is helping to make the higher education we deserve. It begins with developing a shared transformational vision and strategy that guides the digital transformation work of the institution. Two issues relate to this theme. Number two, evolve or become extinct, accelerating digital transformation to improve operational efficiency, agility, and institutional workforce development. Number seven, the shrinking world of higher education or an expanded opportunity, developing a technology-enhanced post-pandemic institutional vision and value proposition. The path from that vision to sustainability involves recognizing that no institution can be successful and sustainable without placing students' success at the center. This theme comprises four issues. Number three, digital faculty for a digital future, ensuring faculty have the digital fluency to provide creative, equitable, and innovative engagement for students. Number four, learning from COVID-19 to build a better future, using digitization and digital transformation to produce technology systems that are more student-centric and equity-minded. Number six, from digital scarcity to digital abundance, achieving full, equitable digital access for students by investing in connectivity, tools and skills. And number 10, radical creativity, helping students prepare for the future by giving them tools and learning spaces that foster creative practices and collaborations. The higher education we deserve needs to be able to operate efficiently and manage risks effectively. It needs to be sustainable for the top 10 IT issues relate to this theme. Number one, cyber everywhere. Are we prepared? Developing processes and controls, institutional infrastructure, and institutional workforce skills to protect and secure data and supply chain integrity. Number five, the digital versus brick-and-mortar balancing game, creating a blended campus to provide digital and physical work and learning spaces. Number eight, weathering the shift to the cloud, creating a cloud strategy that reduces cost and maintains control. Number nine, can we learn from a crisis, creating an actionable disaster preparation plan to capitalize on pandemic-related cultural change and investments? What is the higher education we deserve? It is the higher education that our learners deserve. How do we get there? By beginning with a shared vision and strategy to achieve a sustainable business model that places student success at the center of it all.


We're going to begin the conference with the Lew Church Memorial Lecture. The Mises Institute is proud to present the Lew Church Memorial Lecture in Religion and Economics. It's made possible by the Lew Church Educational Foundation, whose chairman is Dr. Robert D. Hemholt. This annual lecture seeks to honor the late Lew Church, who was a Florida businessman and advocate of liberty, and the ideas to which he was dedicated. Starting out as a swimming pool cleaner, Mr. Church eventually established successful businesses in swimming pool construction and the restaurant and travel industries. So he was a real entrepreneur. It's Austrian economics in action. Through it all, he dedicated himself to the value of the free market, private property, free association, entrepreneurship, and liberty, realizing that big government threatened not only the free enterprise system, but all that is good about America. Our 2014 Lew Church Memorial Lecture is Judge Andrew P. Napolitano. The title of his lecture will be The Pope, The Constitution, and Economics. Judge Napolitano is a graduate of Princeton University and the University of Notre Dame Law School. He is the youngest, life-tenured, superior court judge in the history of the state of New Jersey. He sat on the bench from 1987 to 1995. Judge Napolitano taught constitutional law and juris prudence at Delaware Law School for two years and at Seton Hall Law School for 11 years. He returned to private practice in 1995 and began television work in the same year. As Fox News senior judicial analyst since 1998, Judge Napolitano broadcast nationwide daily on the Fox News channel and Fox Business Network. He is nationally known for watching and reporting on the government as it interferes with personal liberty and private property. Judge Napolitano has published in The New York Times The Wall Street Journal and numerous other publications. His weekly newspaper column is hosted by The Washington Times and numerous internet venues and is seen by millions every week. The judge is also a distinguished visiting professor of law at Brooklyn Law School, where he teaches advanced courses on the Constitution. He's also, and I'm proud to say this, a distinguished scholar in law and jurisprudence at the Mises Institute in Auburn, Alabama, where he teaches constitutional law to future economists. The judge is the author of seven books on the US Constitution, two of which have been New York Times bestsellers. His most recent book is Theodore and Woodrow, How Two American Presidents Destroyed Constitutional Freedom. His eighth book Suicide Packed, The Radical and Unconstitutional Expansion of Presidential Power After 9-Eleven, will be published by New York University Law School, I'm sorry, as a review article by New York University Law School, and by Harper Collins as a book in the spring of 2014. So please give a warm welcome to my good friend and New Jersey compatriot, Judge Napolitano. Thank you, my dear friends. Very nice to be here. The last time I spoke here at the Mises University in the summer and was giving a series of classes on the Constitution with an emphasis on the commerce clause, there were some people in the room and I didn't know who they were. And Lou Rockwell pulled a little bit of a trick on me. So don't worry about these people in the room because they're townsfolk. There are people that want to audit the class. They want to see what you have to say and maybe you can teach them something really. No, don't pay any attention to them. Now, I was new to the folks who run Mises. So I accepted what he told me. Of course, it turned out that this was a plot between him and Solano because the people in the room were the remaining members of the faculty of Mises University who at the end of the week asked me to join. And I am indeed of the nice things that have happened to me in my life, many of which were just recounted so lovingly by my dear friend and fellow Jerseyite, Joe Solano. Moved more than I can say to be the only non-economist on the faculty here. All right, so I'm walking down the street the other day. I leave a restaurant in Lower Manhattan. This is about two months ago when we had the polar vortex up there. And it was, you know, a single digit weather. And I see this, I'm with a friend who works with me at Fox who just had dinner. And I see a character walking toward me who's wearing three or four coats and a hoodie and a scarf over the mouth. So really it's just the eyes.  And the dog has three legs. I'm thinking myself, now I know somebody with a three-legged dog. Who is this? And the guy is jabbering away on the phone. And I hear him say on the phone, not Boletano like that.  And then I remember, who do I know has a three-legged dog, John Stewart? I ripped the hoodie off. There he is. John, how are you? We hug and kiss in the streets. The other Fox people with me are like, we didn't believe what we're watching. He said, why don't you come on the show in the next couple of weeks? Great, great. What should we do? Let's find something that nobody could disagree on. What? What do you want to talk about? Oh, something that the whole world agrees on. John, you pick the topic. All right, John. How about Lincoln? You expect me to agree with you on Lincoln, John? At this point, we are really freezing because it's five degrees in New York City and this conversation is going on in the street corner. So fast forward about a month later, I don't know if you saw this experience that I had on the Daily Show where they did a quiz show, a game show about Lincoln. They gave us the questions ahead of time. Of course, they didn't ask all the questions they gave us and they asked some questions they hadn't given us and they had three Marxists who hold themselves out as experts in the Civil War era as a panel to decide whether or not my answers were correct. And at the end of this gig, one of them, a real, real notorious, the fantasist who actually at one point suggested to Mikhail Gorbachev that he should kill people in the streets in Eastern Europe before he would let them secede from the Soviet Union. So you know where this guy's coming from. He looks at me and he goes, do you know Tom DeLorenzo? And I said, well, yes, I do, professor. He's the foremost Lincoln scholar in the country right now. And before he came along, that nonsense that you just spouted on the show went unchecked. And now you have to find footnotes and you can't find them. Anyway, it's an interesting experience every time you're with John. I saw some people cringe a little bit when Salerno said the Pope. I mean, I put the Pope in the title of this talk because I planned to talk about religion and economic freedom. And the present occupant of what we Catholics call the Petrine Ministry, one of the many, many titles for the Holy Father is not exactly a fan of free market economics. So much so that I'm gonna tell you what happened to me. Normally, if you're Catholic, you don't reveal this but I will reveal what happened to me in a confessional booth. Now Catholics believe that what used to be called confession and now it's a progressive name like the sacrament of reconciliation. Not only wipes out mortal sin but returns grace to the soul which the soul enjoyed prior to the sin. And I am making my confession to a priest that has known me for 40 years and in the old pre-Vatican to tradition, it's face to face, there's no screen there. So he gave me a penance which I really thought was a little stiff. Now normally a penance, some little bit of mortification to atone for your sins is typically one our father, two Hail Marys, go smile and be happy at somebody you hate. Something to sort of amend your ways a little bit.  Now to say the rosary 15 times on your knees probably consumes if you do it right about an hour and a half. So this is really, really brutal. What the heck could I have confessed that would have justified 15 rosaries? Here's what it was. I said, father, I have been praying that when the pope dies, he goes directly to heaven. Priest said to me, well, that's wonderful but why do you confess this? This is hardly a sin. This is something that is meritorious. He scratches his head. Unless, dear Andrew, there was a time element in your prayer. When do you want the pope to go directly to heaven? Tonight. 15 rosaries before you can receive the Blessed Sacrament. Now why did I say that about the pope?  Fox Judge calls for the pope to die.  I say this as a pre-Vatican to Roman Catholic who recognizes that he is the vicar of Christ on earth, juridically authorized to speak infallibly. Thank God, so to speak, he can only speak infallibly on faith and morals and not on economics. Because when he has spoken on economics, what he said doesn't make sense. Now I wrote a piece about this and in the piece I referred to the pope's statement as an encyclical. Now leave it to David Gordon, a practicing Jew, to remind me that it wasn't an encyclical, it was a papal exhortation. And I took great delight in being corrected on this by my dear friend and brilliant superstar, David Gordon, who knows more about Catholicism than half the Roman Catholic hierarchy in the United States. But in this papal exhortation, the pope said things like, it is taking the poor too long to become rich. They have been waiting too long. Whereupon I said, well, if all they do is wait, they will never become rich. Your holiness, more of them have become rich by the capitalist system than by any other system devised by man. And your holiness, the fewer government regulations, the faster they can become rich. I mean, I'm not making this up, this is basic economics. I really do want you to go to heaven and I want you to save souls and not pocketbooks. If you read more of this exhortation, you get the impression that the pope is very interested in a relationship between the government and the free market, which the government calls taxation and which I call theft, so that the income can be redistributed and somehow he, and it's not just him, I'm not just picking on him, but he did issue this exhortation, believes that by redistribution of wealth, somehow the recipients of the redistributed wealth will add to the wealth and themselves become wealthy. Obviously, we know this doesn't work at all. He seemed more enamored with a system of government in which there is private ownership and government control. Well, that's called fascism or government ownership and government control. Well, that's called socialism. I mean, when he was asked by an interviewer what is the worst problem in the world, now think about it, what is the worst problem in the world? The pope answered, youth unemployment. Well, now that is a problem. In certain cities in the United States, certain inner city areas, youth unemployment is 25 and 30%, but can't you think of a problem that is worse in the world? Obviously, the pope eventually thought of one because this statement, youth unemployment, was removed from the Vatican website. How about moral relativism? How about sectarian violence? How about war? How about Vladimir Putin? I mean, you can think of many things that are a worse problem in the world than youth unemployment. But the pope persisted in this apostolic exhortation to criticize the virtues of Catholicism and to do so making an argument from Catholic social justice teaching. Now, Catholic social justice teaching teaches that I am my brother's keeper, that it is my responsibility to part with my wealth, that I do have an obligation to help the less fortunate, that I should give wealth or instruction to the poor, whether I give them cash or whether I give them a fishing rod and teach them how to fish. But every single one of the pope's predecessors who made these arguments argued that this should be done from my heart and not by the command of the government. I mean, what merit is it if the government takes tax dollars from me against my will and gives that money away? That's no credit to me, but if I voluntarily comply with the Judeo-Christian obligation of sharing my wealth, I do so voluntarily, there's the merit. One should not boast about it, but one should do it privately. All right, holy father, before you were the pope, you were Archbishop of Buenos Aires, so you're home one night and there's a knock at the door and a guy shows up and he's got a gun and he says, give me your money. I wanna give it away. You think to yourself, this is a crackpot. Who the heck wants to steal my money to give it away? I'm gonna call the government.  He is there to perpetuate the system of stealing from those who produce wealth and distributing to those who don't produce wealth as if the perpetuation of that somehow has a positive economic benefit. As if after all the years government has been doing that, we would learn that it has a negative economic benefit to the self-motivation of the recipient and to the wealth of the recipient. I wrote a piece about this called The Pope and Basic Economics. I write these columns every Thursday they're on lourockwell.com and the print version is at the Washington Times and I usually get a lot of comments from all over the country and other way people weigh in today on the internet. And I got more comments on this piece than any other that I've written including, and you gotta remember, emails never died, including from some members of the Catholic hierarchy, including from some archbishops whose name underpain of something far worse than 15 Rosaries, I have agreed never, ever, ever to reveal. But in this piece, I made what I thought are pretty simple arguments about capitalism generating opportunity, about capitalism elevating hardworking people from the poor to the middle class and from the middle class to more wealth, about the essence of capitalism being freedom, freedom to risk, freedom to work, freedom to save, freedom to create and freedom to retain the wealth that you have acquired and to distribute it as you see fit. Because charity, and here the Holy Father agrees with me, must come from the heart, not from a gun, not from the government, but from the heart. And I get a phone call from a friend of mine who was a colleague of mine at Fox and it was our Rome correspondent and during the papacy of Benedict the 16th, this friend of mine left Fox and became the head of the PR office for the Vatican. And he's still the head of the PR office for the Vatican, even though Benedict the 16th is now Pope Emeritus. And he called me, he said, I don't want you to tell anybody this, but your piece about the Pope was translated into Spanish and I saw it on his desk. What do you want me to do? He says, well, this Pope is a little like Bill Clinton. I said, what? No, no, no, no, no, no, no. This Pope was a little like Bill Clinton in that he'll pick up the telephone at any time day or night and make a phone call. So look, judge, if you get a phone call in broken Spanish and the guy claims to be the Pope, it probably is him.  I'm still waiting for the phone call. I don't expect the phone call. I said the 15 Rosaries and then went to my orthopedic surgeon to have my knees examined and my therapist to have my legs stretched out. I'm being a little cavalier. I am enormously respectful of Holy Mother Church and of the papacy, but I'm also respectful of the concept of freedom and to suggest that we should divest ourselves of freedom by some unholy, bizarre, perverse regressive alliance with the government and to suggest that that even remotely would alleviate poverty is itself a poverty of understanding of basic economics. Not too long ago, Timothy Cardinal Dolan was celebrating Mass at St. Patrick's Cathedral when all of a sudden he felt a drop of water on his right shoulder. Now he looked up and of course you can barely see the roof. It's 65 feet from the altar to the roof of St. Patrick's, but he thought, well, all right, there's not a person up there, there's not a bird up there. There must be a leak. So they dispatched some engineers up there to find the leak and they found it and they found a lot more leaks and they dispatched another crew of engineers up there and they found more leaks and they gave his eminence an estimate that it would cost about 150 to 175 million dollars to repair the roof. And then as they began to repair the roof, they found other structural deficiencies in this magnificent cathedral and the bill was a slightly north of 200 million dollars. The bill has been paid. Cardinal Dolan raised the money in six months. Now we're back to his holiness and the papal exhortation against capitalism. Where do you think that money came from? Come on. Decidedly not from the government. It came from rich Catholic and non-Catholic capitalists. And where did the money go to? To mainly blue collar, hardworking people that went up on the roof to repair it and the small business people who sold them the materials necessary to effectuate the repair. It was an almost perfect system and as a result, almost anybody, Catholic, non-Catholic, traditionalist Catholic, progressive Catholic can now attend mass in this magnificent cathedral without water coming down on their shoulder because of capitalism. All right, so that's the sort of church side of what I wanna talk about and I'll try and tie it in at the end to the constitutional side. Scholars have typically pointed to two areas, two clauses in the constitution to demonstrate the textual support for the belief that the framers were laissez-faire capitalists. There's a lot of history under the Articles of Confederation that we could go through and it's an ugly history from the point of view of capitalism because it is a history centered around monopolies and cartels and tariffs. And one of the reasons for the constitution was to remove monopolies and cartels and tariffs, which as you know cannot come about without the government because the individual 13 colonies now states had set these up. So if I'm making a barrel or a wooden wheelbarrow or barrels that you would store goods in in Hoboken, I can sell them and make a profit in Hoboken. But if I wanna put them on a boat and sell them in New York City, the tariff is so high that nobody in New York would buy from me, they would buy it from a barrel maker in New York City. And the purpose of the tariff of course is protectionist to protect the local industry. We all know what happens when there's tariffs, there's retaliation and the price of everything goes up. This really got out of control at about the time of the Articles of Confederation. And even though the Articles provided a mechanism for their own amendment, instead of amending them, we are, the Framers met in Philadelphia in the summer of eight 1787 and disregarded why they were sent there and wrote an entirely new constitution. Now we all have some problems with the constitution. It recognized slavery, it recognized the slave trade. It continued to repress women. It used certain elastic language from which we suffer egregiously today as a result of the inordinate aggrandizement of power, the hands of the federal government. But there are several clauses in the constitution which I have argued and many agree with me, manifest a determination by the Framers to have a free market capitalism protected by the government. One of those is the ninth amendment which basically says, hey, we've listed a lot of rights in the eight amendments that preceded this, but we know we couldn't possibly list all the rights. So just because we've listed some freedom of speech, freedom of the press, the right to self-defense, second amendment as an aside, not written to protect your right to shoot deer, but written to protect your right to shoot at the government when it is taken over by tyrants. The enumeration of these rights in the first eight amendments, the ninth tells us is not an exclusive enumeration. And the ninth addresses the inherent rights that people have by virtue of their humanity. Scholars today refer to that as the natural law, which basically says we have certain gifts as a result of our humanity, either because if you don't believe in God, we are the highest and greatest living, existing creatures on the planet, or if you do believe in God, as I do, because we receive them as gifts from him. And as he made us in his image and likeness, he gave us the same thing that he is endowed with which is freedom. So when I teach law school in the first day, I always say if the states ratified an amendment to repeal the first amendment, Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech. If that was gone, do we still have the freedom of speech? And of course, every hand goes up and says, no, if the first amendment is gone, we don't. And I say, well, you gotta read some history and a little bit of philosophy. You certainly have to read the ninth amendment because the freedom of speech is a natural right which comes from our humanity. It's also a negative right in that the document doesn't say Congress shall grant freedom of speech. It's not Congress is to grant. It says Congress shall not infringe the freedom of speech which of course suggests that the framers knew it existed before the government did. Among the rights not enumerated in the first eight amendments is the right to trade, the right to sell a good or service and the right to do so consensually, unimpeded by the government. I have a good or service that I want to sell. You have a need for that good or service and we agree upon the price. You pay me the price, I give you the good or service. We both go home. We both believe that we are richer. I have money in the bank or in my pocket or in a shoebox under my bed. You have the good or the service with which to fulfill your needs or your family's needs or your business's needs. So the Ninth Amendment is one place to which we look for support for the argument of free market capitalism. We would also look to the contracts clause which is a clause in the pushing of the Constitution talking about the authority of the states and the contracts clause says the states may not impair contracts. Well, think of what's become of that today. The leading case is one called Homebuilding and Loan versus Blaisdell, a 1934 case out of Minnesota in which we're in the height of the Depression now so it's the early 1930s and the Minnesota legislature in its infinite wisdom enacted legislation that prohibited all home foreclosures. So if you know that the bank can't foreclose on your mortgage and you're not paying the mortgage, why continue to pay it? So as a result of this legislation, people stopped paying their mortgages and almost all the banks in Minnesota went out of business as a result of this legislation. But the Homebuilding and Loan challenged it and its challenge was articulated on the contracts clause. If the states cannot interfere with a contract and if this contract between the Blaisdells and Homebuilding and Loan was a freely negotiated for a contract, you wanna buy that house costs $120,000, you have the 20, we're gonna loan you the 100, fine, but if you don't pay us back, we can take the house, you agree to this, you agree to it in writing, this is a system we've used for 600 years, all of a sudden the state's gonna come in and say you cannot enforce the remedy in the contract and the Supreme Court sided with Minnesota, which of course accelerated even more banks in going out of business because then even more people stopped paying their mortgages because they knew that there would be no remedy. What was the Supreme Court's argument? Well, the Supreme Court's argument was we are, the legislature of Minnesota did not interfere with the contract. It only interfered with the remedy, which is for closure. Now, this type of nitpicking when discussed in any group of intelligent people here, a law school classroom, a gathering of judges except for wherever the progressives are and unfortunately they're everywhere except here. It is always met with the same reaction that you just uttered and articulated.  If the legislature can interfere with the remedy of a contract freely negotiated for, then the legislature has materially and substantially interfered with the contract and that violates the Constitution. Well, from and after home building and loan versus Blaisdell, there are literally hundreds of cases in which federal courts have permitted state interference with contract. If you come to me in New Jersey and ask me to perform some legal service for you and we agree on the price, that all has to be in accordance with the government's regulations, not any agreement between us. So obviously, this part of the Constitution has been disregarded along with the Ninth Amendment. The last, well, there's two more parts of the Constitution. The due process close to the Fifth Amendment says that if the government wants to take life, liberty or property, it must do so pursuant to due process. Now, what does that mean? Well, that means that the government can't just steal your property by suddenly declaring itself the owner. The Congress couldn't enact legislation that said that lovely building on Magnolia Avenue in Auburn, Alabama is now the property of the United States government. It would either have to pay a fair market value for it or it would have to enact a tax. And if it enacts a tax, the tax has to be similar in severity and wait to similarly situated taxpayers. So the Fifth Amendment says that if the government wants your property, it would have to tax you pursuant to some fair system, though, of course, income taxes at the time, blessedly, were prohibited under the original Constitution, or it would have to charge you in a court of law with having broken a law where the penalty that was prescribed before it says you broke the law was the loss of the property. The Fifth Amendment also provides for government takings. Now, in the Philadelphia in 1787, they had a monumental debate about takings. This is the opportunity of the government to take private property for public use. Jefferson wasn't there, but Madison made the Jeffersonian argument. Hamilton and Adams were there and they made the George III argument. Hamilton and Adams argued that the government should be able to take whatever property it wants for whatever reason it wants and not have to pay anything. Jefferson argued, again, he wasn't there, he was in Paris, so we believe from Madison's notes that Madison made this argument. Madison argued that under the natural law, the only moral transaction is one that is truly consensual and therefore if you don't want to sell your property to the government for a public use, you don't have to, no matter what the purported public use or no matter what the money the government offers you because your right to own and retain and use and enjoy private property is a higher moral good than the right of the government, in this case the majority, to take that property and to distribute it for public use. Hence the compromise. The compromise is the government can take whatever it wants as long as it's for a public use but the government has to pay a fair market price for it. So from these areas of the Constitution, legal scholars and even Supreme Court justices prior to the time of the Civil War accepted the prevailing legal theories that the government had no place attempting to regulate the free market. The same time that that theory prevailed, the popes in Rome were writing in sickle calls about Catholic social justice theory, every single one of which imposed the burden on individuals for compliance rather than on the government to coerce compliance. Now fast forward to where we are today and we are in an unhappy place. I don't mean here, but this is a very, very happy place. But culturally, socially, legally, constitutionally we are in an extremely unhappy place and I haven't even uttered yet the letters NSA. You know, when I talk about the NSA, I usually start like this. If you have, by the way, I was at a dinner party the other night and Fox wanted me and this thing went off, it's a blackberry and I took it out and you would have thought that I took out a buggy whip with the people at this dinner table. You still use a blackberry at Fox? There's 2,000 employees there. How many people have blackberries, about five of us. But anyway, I say to the audiences when I'm gonna talk about the NSA, if you have your blackberry or iPhone or Android with you, take it out and leave the battery, make sure the battery is in there. Because I want President Obama and the NSA to hear everything I'm about to say. Now if your device is more than a year old, I'm looking at the young people here because they get new devices every six weeks, if your device is more than a year old, if you take the battery out, the NSA cannot access it. But if your device is less than a year old, there is a computer chip in there which will give the NSA access even if the battery is not in the device. Can the NSA hear what we say from these? Yes, as long as it is not muffled or hidden. When Edward Snowden spoke to reporters in his hotel room in Singapore, he collected all of their blackberries and iPhones and put them in the refrigerator of the room in which he was meeting because he knows and I can tell you that a refrigerator will generally frustrate the ability of the NSA to use your own blackberry, blackberry or iPhone as a listening device. Back to where we are today. I mean, where we are today is one where Uber regulation is the norm and when you make the free market argument, you are looked upon as an odd duck. I mean, there are three members of the United States Senate who are Republicans and get excoriated every time they make a free market argument. Mike Lee, Rand Paul and Ted Cruz. And Rand Paul is, I believe, a very, very serious candidate for the presidency of the United States and I believe that he will bring together a lot of freedom-loving people who have never voted for a Republican in their lives to vote for him. But this will require an understanding of natural rights which transcends anything that we have seen in the government since the time of the Civil War. Oh, there have been some bright spots. There were areas in the early FDR years when the Supreme Court was invalidating the New Deal. There's a famous 1903 case called Lochner Against New York in which Mr. Lochner owned a bakery and the legislature of the state of New York and its wisdom said you can't work more than 60 hours a week even if you want to. And Mr. Lochner was actually indicted for employing people more than 60 hours a week who wanted to make the money. They actually agreed to live on the premises where this bakery occurred. There were several apartments on the premises and Lochner was convicted of paying people more money and employing them for more hours than the legislature and its wisdom said you could pay them or employ them for. And the case went to the Supreme Court which invalidated the statute on free market and on natural rights grounds. This is one of the greatest decisions in the history of the United States Supreme Court. Of course it was invalidated about 30 years later with the onset of the New Deal and is now referred to derisively. Oh my goodness, a judge decided that something was unfair. A judge decided that an individual had natural rights and the legislature interfered with them while that judge is guilty of Lochnerizing. No, I am not making this word up.  Say I saw you Lochnerizing. And in these high end academic legal circles that's one of the worst things you can be accused of. And what is it? Finding natural rights and keeping the government at bay. So where does this bring us? We obviously have a battle on our hands for human freedom. The battle is not only in the sphere of privacy NSA but it's in the sphere of economics which is why you are all here this weekend. And it's a battle for the hearts and minds of people in the United States of America. I believe that if Rand Paul is elected president of the United States that means that there is a mandate for him to dismantle much of the government apparatus and that mandate will be manifested in members of Congress as well. This is not gonna happen where you have a libertarian in the White House and a Congress or Senate filled with Republican neocons and Democratic progressives. Some of them will still be there but presumably there will be many, many people in the Congress who will agree with this libertarian in the White House because all of this will happen by an awakening amongst the public that enough is enough. And it's time that we returned to an attitude manifested by the Ninth Amendment and the contracts clause and the due process clause which asserts that the individual is greater than the state and the right of a human being to utilize property to exclude whoever he wants from the property which means even the government is a higher right than the majority to take that property. I mean the definition of a natural right is an area of human behavior immune from governmental interference no matter how beneficial the government claims the interference will be. There is still some recognition of natural rights even among the progressives for privacy and speech and the press but there is no recognition for natural rights in our laws today, state, local and federal for economic liberties. That will require a Herculean effort to bring them back. That Herculean effort begins at gatherings like this one.


Hello! In this video, you will learn how to reference information taken from a chapter in an edited book in APA format. So, what is an edited book? An edited book is a collection of book chapters written by different authors. The editor, or editors, bring these book chapters together. Here is an example of an edited book. The title of the book is Economic Concepts in the 21st Century. Each chapter has its own title and its author. To cite an edited book, you will need to identify the name of the chapter author, the editor's name, year of publication, title of the chapter, title of the book, the city where the book is published, and the name of the publisher. You should be able to find this information on the cover and the first few pages of the book. So, your reference list should look something like this. surname of author, comma, initial, full stop, year of publication in brackets, full stop, title of chapter, full stop, initial of editor, comma, surname of editor, ed, full stop in brackets, if there is more than one editor, write eds, comma, followed by the title of the book in italics, the page numbers of the chapter in brackets, full stop, city of publication, colon, name of publisher, full stop. For example, if you have cited some information from chapter 3, capitalism, written by Gavin Wong, then you should write wong, comma, g, full stop, 2012 in brackets, full stop, capitalism, full stop, in m, full stop, young, ed, full stop in brackets, economic concepts in the 21st century, in italics, pp, 45 to 46 in brackets, full stop, London, colon, London University Press, full stop. Don't forget to indent the second and subsequent lines of reference by 5 spaces. I hope you found this video useful and for more information on APA referencing, click on the link below.


So today I'm going to show you how to make these roasted potatoes, at least that's what they look like, right? In the Instant Pot to start it off and we're going to finish them off in a frying pan on the stove which is going to crisp them up and give them that beautiful golden brown exterior. So I'm Rockin' Robin and I'm going to show you how to do it right after my Chef Joke. I'm going to start off here with Chef Joke number one and we'll have Chef Joke number two a little bit later so stay tuned for that. Alright so why do potatoes make great detectives? Because they always keep their eyes peeled. So I'm using gold potatoes. You could use russet if you wanted to but I think the gold works the best and you're going to want to take these and peel them. I'm using organic potatoes by the way. Once your potatoes are peeled you just want to cut them in half lengthwise so just like that. Now with my Instant Pot I'm going to put the little, you know, grate in there and I'm going to add a couple of cups of water because you need to have some liquid and I have a basket that I purchased online and I'll leave a link for you down in the description if you're interested in checking that out.  If you don't have a rack like that you can try and set them on the grate that's in there and it might work. And we'll just place our lid on here. Make sure that our pressure release valve is in the right position and I'm going to pressure cook these for nine minutes. And when it's done we're going to do a quick release. We're not going to do a slow release. We're going to get those out of there right away because we don't want them to overcook. Potatoes are cooking so it must be time for Chef Joke number two. Here we go. What do you call a potato after it's been sliced? Chip! Once the Instant Pot is done I'm going to turn it off and then we're going to release the pressure. Once that valve pops down you're good to go.  We'll let that cool for a minute and then I'll take the basket out of the Instant Pot. Okay I'm going to lift the basket hopefully carefully out of there. Whoops, stay in there now. And let these cool for just a few minutes so that we can cut. I need to cut them one more time. After cooling these for five minutes now we can handle them and you can cut them any way you want. Just make sure that your pieces are relatively thick because we want them to have some nice soft interior to contrast with that nice crispy exterior. So I'm going to cut these into thirds and you'll find they're a little bit sticky which is good. You can cut them into wedges if you want. I would do something like this so be careful because they do want to kind of fall apart a little bit. And you might want to vary the time in the Instant Pot somewhere between eight and nine minutes because depending on the size of your potatoes they'll cook up quicker obviously when they're smaller. Now we'll take these over to the stove and brown them up.  So this is the part where the magic happens. This is where we get the golden crusty edge on these potatoes and makes them so special. I'm going to add some olive oil to the pan and I'm going to add enough, probably that it almost covers the bottom of the pan, that should do it. Now I tried making these potatoes by boiling them just to compare the difference between boiling your potatoes and cooking them in the Instant Pot. And I found the Instant Pot to be definitely superior to boiling them. The texture turns out much different. The Instant Pot version, you get this creamy interior potato that's just amazing, really. And then you get that crispy edge that we're going to form right here in just a minute. In fact I'm going to start adding these while I talk to you. I'm going to lay the potatoes in the hot oil and I'm going to wait a minute because it's not quite hot enough. And okay, so back to boiling them. When I boiled them, the interior didn't have that creaminess to it that these get. So if you can still make them, they're just going to be a little bit different texture and they're still good. All right, you can see the oil is starting to get hot now and we are going to start adding more potatoes to our pan. And I like to leave a little room in between them so that I can work turning them over. And we're going to keep our seasonings in this very simple. I'm just going to season these up with salt, pepper and garlic powder. Now potatoes need plenty of salt in order to taste good. So I'm going to add salt now to this batch. I'm going to do this in two batches so it'll just be easier to cook them. But make sure you give them a nice little coating of salt. Now that's all we're going to add at the moment. Do not add your garlic powder at this point because it will just burn on the bottom of the pan. I'm just going to go with a little bit of pepper at this point and we'll let them cook. And you'll start to notice brown edges around the potatoes. That's when you start checking to see how browned up they're getting. Okay, so let's have a peek. We'll see what's going on. This one here has that little crusty edge looking. Look at that. Beautiful. I'm going to let it go just a smidge and longer. Same with that one. There's going to be hotspots. I know that in my pan. Some are going to be done before the others. Now that one's nice. Did you see that? I really like that one. I'm going to turn that one over. I got a hotspot over here. I'm going to add some more salt to the ones that have to the ones that have been turned over. Let's turn that one over and put a little salt on it. Basically, I like to just keep turning them over until I get a crusty edge on pretty much most of the potato. When they get to be where they're almost done, then I'll add the garlic powder because I just don't want that to burn and it does burn on the bottom. I learned that one from experience. Now you can add other seasonings to this of course. One additional seasoning that you might want to add at the very end when they're done and they're still hot and a little bit, you know, oily is some Parmesan cheese. Freshly grated is amazing. Look how beautiful these look. Nice and golden brown. And we're just about ready to take these off. So now is the point where I'm just going to sprinkle on a little more salt, a little more pepper, and the garlic powder. And now if you wanted to add the Parmesan cheese, you could start grating it over at this point. And basically we're done. Sometimes it looks nice to garnish this with a little bit of freshly chopped parsley and then they're ready to go. These potatoes smell so amazing. I can't even tell you how good they are. I wish you guys could smell them. I smell the garlic. I smell the roasting of them. They are fantastic. Make a great side dish for any meal you want to put together. These are just incredible. That crispy edge. I love these so much that I've made them three times in the last week. No kidding. I can't stop eating them. They are so good. You must try them. This would go great with my lemon chicken oregano dish that I just put out last week. I'll leave a link for you. Check that out. Make it with this. It's a quick meal. You'll love it. Thanks so much for watching. Don't forget to subscribe to my channel for more videos coming out every week. Smash the like button for me and leave me a comment. Alright, we'll see you next time.


BHD syndrome is a rare genetic disorder characterized by skin lesions, lung cysts, and renal tumours. It is caused by mutations in the gene for folliculin, which regulates the activity of two proteins involved in lysosome formation and function. These proteins, TFEB and TFE3, are also important in tumour growth, and when they are inactivated, it can prevent the development of tumours in mouse models of BHD syndrome. Furthermore, inactivating either of these proteins in human BHD renal tumour cells can cause them to stop growing. This suggests that targeting these proteins could be a potential treatment option for patients with BHD syndrome. This article was offered by Chiara Di Malta, Angela Zampelli, Letizia Granieri, and others.


I'm Barack Obama. I approve this message and ask for your vote. It's morning again in America. Today more men and women will wake up than ever before in our nation's history. To unemployment rates, 3 tenths of a percentage point off record highs, not seen since the Great Depression. A child wakes up to hot breakfast on the table because her mom and dad's unemployment benefits and extended six more months. Next door. A dad leaves for the furniture factory because his union wisely accepted the necessary rollbacks to compete in a global economy. Nearly 2,000 families today will get to stay in their homes because the bank can't find their original loan documents. This afternoon, 6,500 young couples will walk down the aisle. Three or four of those weddings will be the same-sex couples whose marriages are recognized in nearly six states, more than at any time in our nation's history. And with our national debt at its highest level ever, they can look forward to the future with confidence, knowing mathematically speaking, things can't possibly get any worse. And if things do get worse, it won't be worse by that much. Mathematically speaking, it's morning again. In America, and under the leadership of President Obama, things are a little bit better. I'm Barack Obama. I approve this message and ask for your vote.


Normally you don't want to have a whole lot of players from bad teams and fantasy But Elijah Moore sticks out as a player who has really big breakout potential here in the second year He had a really nice string of games before getting hurt towards the end of last year We saw him have 141 yards in a game 11 catches So the upside is there and they've resigned Braxton burials But there's no other wide receiver on this team that can really overtake him He's the number one wide receiver right now. We saw the Jets try to go get Tyree kill But now, you know Elijah Moore is the guy and if Zach Wilson has any type of you know uptick in production We can expect Elijah Moore's production to follow as well He's a wide receiver three and somebody with upside He carries it and don't be afraid to take him just because he's on the Jets or he doesn't have the big name as you know Jamar Chase or some of the other guys that were taken last year Elijah Moore is going to be part of the fantasy production next year And we can expect to see big growth from him in this second year


So James. Oh, hello mark. What are you doing here so early morning of the game? You seem to be busy already. This is exactly it mate This is what people have got to understand at this great football club of ours I lick the stamps make the tea sign the checks and even get 10,000 of these printed on Every seat in the cop before one o'clock. So if anyone's out there that needs to Lose a bit of weight or get fit come and help me because I'm on my own this morning But it's going to be absolutely fantastic Imagine that when the players come out hold these up So come on city in the start of the game Sunderland will not know what's hitting them So I'd best crack on I've only got 8062 to go No problem. Why not why not be the difference


My name is Liz Abinante. I am a software engineer here in Portland. And last year, I found myself in a really terrible position. My CEO had made a rape joke at an all hands meeting. And I reported it to HR. Lots of conversations with VP of HR. And I was very upset about this. A number of us were upset about this. A few people quit over this. I could not quit over this. It was my first job as a software engineer. No experience outside of this job. And I was like, well, I'm screwed. This is it. Goose cooked. I complained about the CEO. And the company was also 80% Mormon white men. Not a place you would picture me working. That's a different story. So this complaint came up in our public engineering chat room.  It's like, whoop. Not going to work at a place like this again. So how do I prevent this from happening? So let's say you're looking for a new job.   How can we prevent this? How can we find places to work that fulfill our needs technically, culturally, and mentally and give us health benefits that actually cover things? So, oh, that's so tiny. I'm so sorry. I'll read it to you. So I'm going to go over a couple things, mostly just a multi-pronged approach to screening companies, but also interviewing successfully that you can do before, during, and after the interview. And I'm also going to give you some tips for finding places to interview. All of this has been totally scientifically tested to quote somebody yesterday, Stephanie, or Thursday. By me, I tested this. Last time I interviewed for a job. I'm employed, so I think it works. So before you actually go interview, research. Research, research, research. Find people in your network or friends of your friends in your network that know people that work there. If it's like your brother's sister's cousin's friends' neighbor, that's a connection. This is what LinkedIn is for. This is why we use LinkedIn. And submit interview requests before your actual interview. So when you get that, hey, we want you to come into the office and meet everybody. Cool, we're going to interview for eight hours. It's going to be so fun. Reply to that email and be like, great, cool. I've got these requests. Find an interview buddy at the company if you can. And if you're somebody like me who likes to write things down, bring an open book with a bunch of questions and ask all of your questions multiple times to different people in different roles with different managers and different opinions and different identities. Answer their questions as real as you can and try to gauge their responses. If you're not the kind of person who's really great at reading people, that's OK. We can practice this. And if it's an office environment and not a distributed company, try to get a feel for the office environment. If it's a remote company, try to get a feel for how they communicate. Take breaks in the process and self-care. This is what you should be doing, loving yourself throughout this process. Don't stress yourself out. Take time. So how do we find these places so we can actually do these things? Who do you know? Where do they work? Where have they worked before? Where do they never want to work again? Start with that list. Look for places friends of friends have worked. Or maybe if you're not super social or you're new to the industry, do you have a favorite meetup or conference like maybe AlterConf? Who sponsors that? Who goes to that? What kind of employee presence is there? And my most favorite thing to do in the entire world is to activate the Whisper Network. If you are in tech and you have a network of friends, DM, email, tweet, IRC, whatever your method, ask them where they've worked and get the dish. This is hot, hot gossip and trust me, everybody does this. You should do it too. So before the interview, this is before you walk into that door and start asking all those questions. Let's talk about that research that you're supposed to be doing here. Who works there right now? And again, LinkedIn. I'm telling you, this is the only thing I use it for is finding jobs. Who works at this company? But who used to work there? And why don't they work there anymore? Did they leave of their own volition? Or were they fired? And why were they fired? If there's any negative press about this company, can you find it? What does it say? If there's positive press, who wrote it? Is it always the same person? Are they a sleazeball? If it's a VC funded company, who do they report to? Who's on their board? Who are you gonna have to deal with when you have to file a complaint about the CEO? And what does the demographic of this company look like to an outsider? Does it look like your friends? Or does it look like everybody works in the brewery and chamber at Dropbox? So some tactics. Asked to be interviewed by a person from an underrepresented group, even if you do not belong to an underrepresented group. Ideally, it would be someone in the role that you're looking to fill, but if it's a small company, that's not always possible. And then maybe, interview with someone from a different department. I'm an engineer and I always ask to talk to somebody from customer support, because how that person feels about their job is way more reflective than that engineer eating Cheetos. I eat the Cheetos. It's me. I'm the Cheeto reader. So take note of what happens here. Who do they pick for you to talk to? Are they a token or are they actually somebody who's generally interested in talking to you and caring about their job? And these interview requests, like I said earlier, submit them as soon as you can. How do they actually respond? Do they give you sass? Cause they shouldn't give you sass. Like these should be normal things that should be accommodating. And do they actually fill all of your requests? If they can't fill them, why can't they fill them? And I know for me, I really wanted to meet with people who were not dudes, having come from a company where I was the only woman in the engineering team for my first six months there. Don't do that. I really wanted to meet some other women that worked at the company. Cause you know, friendship is magic. And I got to meet someone who was on my team, which was really great. And I interviewed with her, but I interviewed another company that said, well, we don't have any women. We can't find any. And I'm like, all right. I think your values are probably not in line with mine.  And you're all one type of person and that one type of person is not diverse. Our values are not in line. Thank you, but no, thank you. So prepare a list of cultural screening questions based on your requirements. And I've got some sample questions for you. We will talk about here shortly and all of them are online, so don't worry. Do they have HR? Maybe you should talk to them. I always try to speak to somebody from HR. And I ask them the same questions. I ask the engineers. And you don't always get the same response. It's very interesting. Before you go in, always ask about the interview format. You don't wanna go in, whether it be an hour or eight hours or four hours or heaven forbid multiple days and have no idea what's gonna happen. Are you, do you need to bring your own lunch?  So ask these questions ahead of time. They're not gonna think you're weird. And during the interview, it's okay if you say a class word, I promise. But prepare notes and make sure you have everything ready ahead of time. I'm a person who likes to write stuff down. Other people prefer to be more extemporaneous and just fly off the cuff, but I would still recommend that you have something to reference because when you're nervous and you wanna perform as good as you can or as well as you can, you wanna make sure you have something to reference from. Like, I have these sweet slides to reference from. And other speakers have had notes to reference from because while we trust our brilliant selves, we would prefer to just be on the safe side. If it's an office, visit the different departments. Are there different floors? Where are the restrooms? How do these things work? And observe the actions happening around you as the environment changes. If you go over to the design department, is everybody super excited and happy to be there? Of course they are, because they're playing with fonts. I live for fonts. I spent four hours picking this font, not a joke. Or is it really sad and depressing over there? The designers just huddled over there like working on their things and just, my life. Or is it a party and engineering and depressing and customer support? What's it like? How do these departments vary? And take your time and provide real answers to their questions. No, I'm not talking about like, re-implement the shuffle method. How would you prove that something is random?  What I care about is answering the questions in a way that is as real to me as I can possibly answer.  I am a married white lady and I'm married to a man. So I'm very fortunate in that I can walk into a room and be like, well, this is me, what's up? And I can do that, but not everybody can. So if you do not feel safe in emphasizing the things that are important to you or if you feel forced to out yourself, you do not have to. You do not have to do this. You can find somebody internally to ask us questions for you. This is the interview buddy that I spoke about earlier. In an ideal world, we would all know at least one person at the company we were interviewing at. But if you don't, I might. I can help you. I'm sure lots of people here would be happy to do the same thing. Maybe that person feels comfortable asking those questions for you and they can ask them internally and get the real answers, not the PR hiring a new candidate answer. And if you feel safe, meeting with HR confidentially might be an option. It also might not if you don't trust them. I don't blame you. I don't always either. Or you can request interview modifications that allow you to kind of like sniff things out without actually having to ask questions to put yourself in a situation where you feel unsafe. So here's some of those sample questions I talked about earlier. Again, these are all online. So if I go through them a little quickly, they will be available to you. I break them down into three broad categories that are not distinctly different. They are related to each other. Diversity, employee value and retention and HR. So for diversity, I start out with the soft balls, the easy questions, the things I expect people to answer with some nice, beautiful PR sentence. Why do you think it's important and how do you define diversity? What's going on here? And then I ask them, do you have trans-inclusive healthcare and what exactly does it cover? And you'd be surprised when you ask this question and you're not trans, what answer you get? I ask this question everywhere, it's interesting. I also ask about parental leave and lactation rooms. I also ask about what policies happen for working at home or bringing babies to the office. I also ask about bringing dogs to the office, but that's me. And then I write as I'm about to leave, write when I'm about to be done with this meeting, what does diversity success look like to you? And sometimes people say terrible, terrible, terrible things that erase everything good that they said before. So just use caution if you're gonna ask them that question. What kind of diversity focused initiatives do they have at that company? What have they implemented recently and what did the results look like? Did they even measure results? And what work do they think needs to be done still to make it a good and happy environment for underrepresented people? Employee Valuing Retention is really important to me which is why I always ask to talk to people in customer support. It's generally the last department to see career paths and raises and anything other than talking on the phone or applying to email all day. So what kind of job training do they provide and are there budgets for different departments? Do some departments have much cashier budgets than others? And what career paths are available from the position you are applying for versus all positions? And do they track metrics on retention and satisfaction and do they cross-reference those with demographics? Do they even do any of this? HR, our friends, do they have HR? This is like super basic. And the answer is no, I would recommend maybe just not unless you're interviewing for the HR position in which case please. And who do they report to? If they report to maybe like marketing that's probably a bad sign. How do they handle internal complaints? If like my last company they just tell the person that you complained about them, maybe, maybe don't. And then this one is kind of a little pop quiz. How much do you know about labor law and unions? Our employee salary is confidential. How often can you renegotiate? Can you renegotiate publicly? These kinds of things. And what is their charter? What is their primary function? And sometimes they give you an answer that implies their primary function is to protect a company, which is not the case. You should be looking for an answer that's to protect you as an individual. Not all workers, but you. They want to protect you. So while you're asking these questions, while you're doing this interview, put on your scientist goggles. I love minor goggles. We shall have a pair. Put them on and do some observing. Who actually eats lunch together? Does everybody eat lunch at the same time? Do they socialize outside of their department? Or is it just everybody that sits together at work then moves and eats here and then goes back and then works? How does that happen? What's the social dynamic? Do they have gender-neutral bathrooms? Did they get confused when you asked them what they were? What does the employee demographic look like? What's the average age? Are they all sub-30? I'm gonna turn 30 this year. It's gonna be great, guys. Sorry, everyone. Are there people from underrepresented groups in upper management? Not I'm managing a team of product designers or a team of engineers or a team of whoever, but I'm the SVP of the super awesome department. Are those underrepresented groups or are they all still dudes that are white? Real questions. How are those low-level employees treated and do they get the same perks? Do they get to travel to conferences? And are they promoting internally or externally? And are they hiring experienced people or are they hiring people with varying backgrounds? Do you have to have a college degree or is high school diploma sufficient? Or maybe just a GED or not at all? What does it look like? How hard is it to enact change and what changes have they made recently? How long did it take? Pro tip, if a company is public, expect on the many, many years market or level. Sorry, sad, sad fact. And the Model View culture piece that came out a while ago, look for HR anti-patterns, the biggest of which is there's no HR. So after your interview, you've gone in, you have wowed them with your brilliance, you've asked all these questions. What did you know? Got all this information. Usually when you go into interview you don't just talk to one person and I find that I very rarely have follow-up questions for like say the hiring manager, but I really wanna talk to that one person that I had lunch with. I emailed the hiring manager or the recruiter and asked to speak to that person directly. I try not to go through a recruiter or hiring manager to ask questions to other people at the company and ask them their questions over email. I always prefer to get things in writing and gather all those notes and research. And if you're me, they're probably color coded. If you're not me, then they're probably easier to read because you were writing instead of getting pens and examine how everything comes together. What was your perspective? What did you observe and what are the actual policies? Where are the differences?  Their words match their actions, sometimes not always on which issues. Where do they skip a beat? And what stances do they take on the things that matter the most to you as an individual? And say you have a list of 10 things that are the most important to you. And on one of them, your most important thing, they knock it out of the park. Everything exactly what you wanted. And then on the other nine things, they just fail miserably. It's terrible. It's kind of embarrassing.  Maybe that one thing alone is not important enough. You have to balance what's most important to you and how they respond to the things that are most important to you. Put it all together to make a decision and it's not easy and I'm very sorry. Someday we'll have our lovely, lovely tech cooperative that we can all work for and it'll be great. But for now, we just have each other. So good luck and go forth and prosper. Thank you.


Hello G.I, it's Chinchot. As you remember I'm the ex-head boy from back 2016 and 17. So basically my favorite memory here was like staying back after the school because of my sister. And during that period like I used to ask my doubts to the teachers present in the school. They used to give their own time, their personal time for which they had to eat their lunch a lot to just to clarify my doubts. Then if I'm free then I used to go and play basketball on the very own ground.  So that was one of my favorite memories. The other memory was like being in the student council. You get to lead the whole school behind you so you need to cite an example. Then in that like my motive to do that I had to undergo a lot of things. Like I had to listen from the teachers like what I should do and I used to try and implement that. And further like I just say that you don't get to enjoy these things in the college life. You will miss school when you pass out from here. And this way school has become very friendly to us and gives us a lot of time to think about what we want to do. And if you have something in mind it helps us pursue it. So thank you to all the teachers who helped me personally as well as in my academic results. So thank you G.I. Institution.


Bratali kwa kufi mizubu na hataba kufi, hansuha mibu kufi hansuha kufi hansuha kufi. Kijanya za mibu ka, kufi nuzo na kufi kufi na hansuha kufi na hansuha kufi na hansuha kufi. Nicoia kufi uste kufi. Mibu na kurwa kufi 2013, siya kufi 2015, hansuhe mtul warma na hansuha kufi kufi wakusda vokana kufi. Mufika jufu nida. So, during the stay at the Intubation Hub, they really helped me and my plan to become compliant. So, I have a certificate and my product is well-consumed across the region and also international markets. Volcano coffee works in five coffee-growing regions of Uganda, and we have made it possible to train other young people, especially who are passionate to coffee, and we have made it to 1,200 young people trained in various value chain capacities. That's to say, coffee roasting, entrepreneurship, and also product management, which is still a big challenge to the coffee sector in Uganda. We've managed also to make sure that our center of excellence is up and ready, and also helping other coffee farmers from different growing districts of Uganda who came to our center for services. Through FAO, we got support of equipment. The equipment we have is a coffee roaster that we used to train others. So, it was a big mileage for us to get the support and also add value to Uganda coffee, vis-a-vis helping others to achieve their goals and also to learn more about what coffee is as a product.


I think I've emphasized it enough, but if I haven't, it has to be reliable. If it's not reliable, then people get angry. If people get angry, it leads to the dark side, dark side, and you know, the rest of the story. It has to be easy to understand. So when the developer gets the job in CI failed, they have to easily understand what the test was trying to perform and how to debug it. If it doesn't, again, meet either of the criteria, then developers get upset, they get upset, angry, dark side, and so on. But it has to be fast. And before we go to the fast, I want to concentrate a bit because I heard several lectures in the last few days about CI and how the unit tests are great and it tests in parallel and everything's fine. But it's not that easy to get them into being reliable. For example, what happens if a test sometimes fail? So again, I'm emphasizing reliability, we're not going to talk about it. I just want to mention that it's very, very important. And in the context of doing things fast, you need to remember that it's not worth the effort if you sacrifice reliability or debuggability or simplicity. So what can you do in 20 minutes? So this is what today over system test can do in 20 minutes. It can, from scratch, install a complete, over environment. Starting from the engine, the engine is a Jbos application. So it brings 300 something Jbos RPMs, including the engine RPMs. It installs all the RPMs. It then continues and configure the data center, the clusters, the host. The hosts are, again, yum install of tens of packages. After it installs them, it adds the storage domain. So the storage is actually configured as part of those tests. So we configure actually ISCSI and NFS targets as part of the test. And then we add those targets as storage domain to the over system. We then continue on and we add a quota to the storage. We actually run the log collection because part of the basic sanity has to be the log collection runs well. Because if at the end of the day QE are finding issues and they cannot give us the logs because the log collector failed, then it's a basic requirement. It continues on. It does some networking addition of networks and the test of networks with VLAN, without VLAN attaching, detaching. It then continues on. Over it is a virtual machine management system. So it's all about managing VMs. It creates a VM. It configures the VM. It adds a disk to VM. It has a network, a console. It then creates a template of a VM. It launches the VM. It migrates it. It then hot adds a disk, hot add network interface to it. It live migrated. It does a snapshot, live snapshot, actually. It merges the snapshot. There are several tests that I forgot. All of it on my very small desktop. I can do it 18 minutes today. And that's because of a bug in one of the tests. It should have been faster. And about 24 minutes on the laptop that you see here, which is an 8 gig SSD, but 8 gig RAM desktop. So that's how fast it can actually go. How can you do it? So the very basic rule is that you can do anything you want as long as you don't cheat. And cheating, for example, in my opinion, is anything that practically really changes the rules of the games and changes it from a real end-to-end test to something different. For example, if you pre-install the dependencies, then you miss some of the tests. Because in reality, sometimes you break dependencies. Sometimes you have dependencies that are missing, or are wrong, or the dependency chain, or whatnot. If you mock something, which is great. In unit tests, that's all we do. But we need real iSCSI server. We need real NFS server, for example. So we want to really make it as much as possible and to end real-life scenarios there. So again, I said, bend the rules. I gave some examples. It's a good question. Do you want to add randomization to the test or not? So we do want to add some randomization because we do not want to test the same path over and over again because we want to expand the coverage a bit. However, if you want to be able to replay that, then that's a bit tricky. Yes, we could save the seed and so on and so on. That's a bit tricky. So it's an open question. Do you want to introduce some kind of randomization to some of the tests? Why is it important? So the basic assumption here, and let's not tell everybody, but the basic assumption is that it's solid, rock solid. CI, either it passes or it fails because of a bug, not because of anything else. So if it is, it has to be fast. And there are multiple reasons why it needs to be fast. Developers are impatient. Everything that they didn't write is, of course, slow. So that's one reason. And we want to make developers happy because I mentioned earlier the reasons. At least in the project that I'm working on, there's a rebase race. So multiple people submit a patch. They may be in areas that are maybe even conflicting. And now they're waiting. They're waiting for the unit test. They're waiting for the static analysis. They're waiting for more tests. And until everything passes, someone else just pushed the code and they need to rebase. And that's like a race, almost inherent race. It's really, really annoying developers. So as fast as it can go, that's the better. If you want to create it as a gating item, and I just heard yesterday, I think, that OpenStack, for example, are pushing 250 patches a day, then either you have a huge cloud or a huge resource that you can handle and can handle that load, including draft patches and work in progress patches and on multiple branches and whatnot. Otherwise, it's just a matter of resource. If your tests are fast, if they don't consume a lot of resources, then you can run them more and more often. So these are the main reasons why we want those tests to be as fast as possible. People told me that it may be a rectangle, but I draw just a triangle. You will hit, like, any other program, one of those bottlenecks. So you may argue that network and disks are different. I call them IO, or either memory or CPU. So your test program is going to be bound by one or more of those items. And we need to work around those or wait. So the techniques I'm going to show you are mainly dealing with those bottlenecks. Any questions so far? Am I speaking too fast? I'll smile. OK, so how do we optimize? Same thing as we always do. CI tests are just code. Ours, for example, is written in Python. But I've seen tests written in Go or any other language. There's no magic on how to do that. I'll emphasize later why you shouldn't micro-optimize, but don't micro-optimize, although I tried last night to micro-optimize because it's fun and you think you'll gain a lot, but no, you don't. The rule is simple. There are two items that you need to deal with, either the slowest part of your test code or infrastructure, or it may not be the slowest part, but it's a part that keeps on repeatedly doing something in the background. For example, in our cases, we are pushing some API requests, and we're waiting for the status. We run a VM, and we're waiting for it to be up and running. Maybe we can optimize this waiting for up and running, which takes some amount of time. So I was talking about micro-optimization. Here's an example of micro-optimization. Do you want to reduce five seconds if the whole suite takes you 20 minutes? So if you look at the numbers, the numbers aren't very optimistic. You less than half percent improvement. However, think about it. You're going to run this CI test either hundreds of thousand times a day. If you're doing it correctly on multiple branches and multiple patch submissions, then it will take a lot of time, and every time you save is a good save. If you can do simple, well-understood, risk-free changes, that'd be great. I gave two very, very simple ones. I removed the timeout from the grub. So it takes a while to decide which kernel you want. And again, it's automated completely. So there's no one waiting, actually, for the grub. And in Libret, the boot menu of the VM, I just removed the boot menu because it always boots from the first disk. So these are two five seconds independently we saved. So those are 10-second saves. I'll talk about self-containerization. I'll talk about it soon. And the reason is that it allows you, first of all, high performance and second of all, independence from external resources, which, again, leads to more stability, but also leads to higher performance. So we use virtual machines in our tests. And actually, we use nested virtual machines in our tests. Our project is all about virtual machine system management, about the whole lifecycle of virtual machine, deploying hosts, configuring the network, the storage, and running those virtual machines after you configure it correctly, live migrating, and everything else. So we actually need nested virtualization. So I'm not sure how many people are familiar with nested virtualization. It's a pretty cool technology that probably has no use, but for testing. So I'm not sure. Maybe there's another use I've never heard of, but it's very nice. So if you can look at there is a physical host, and you only need a single physical host. On top of it, we provision two virtual machines. Those two virtual machines, the L1, are actually hosts in our system. So using nested virtualization, they can actually run virtual machines on top of them. So for the system, they look like physical hosts with all the attributes, almost all the attributes that we need, and they can run virtual machines, but they're just virtual machines. Lago. We use Lago. There was just a presentation about Lago and how useful it is and what it does. So I will not go into the Lago framework. I'll just say in a few words that it's a framework that allows us to actually run virtual machines, set up everything before that, run our tests, and collect the logs, open source projects. We started it two years ago or so, even before vagrant was ever popular, and vagrant in the time didn't have nested virtualization. If I were to do it today, maybe I would have started from clean with using vagrant and unstable, but we haven't, and that's what we have today, and it serves us very well. So faster storage. The first thing you want to handle is the storage. Storage is usually your biggest bottleneck. It's usually the slowest item that you have, the single slowest bottleneck that you have in your system. My solution, use memory. And people are afraid to use memory, and they shouldn't be. If you misuse it, you crush your system. But if you don't, then you're really gained. There's nothing as fast as your memory. Even on my AdGeek RAM, I can use some of the memory as a storage. So it's very, very simple. I just put everything I can into under Devsham. If you don't have enough, you can use Xerum. So I'm not sure how many people are familiar with Xerum. Xerum is essentially a driver that allows you to create block devices that are compressed within the memory. So for example, on a 16 gig RAM host that also needs to serve the virtual machine, I can create a 10 or 12, depends on the test, gig disk that is actually in memory and compressed. It enjoys the compression. Performance difference, because it's compressed, is again, is nothing compared to either using real disk and even SSD. And that's a great thing to have. Even if you swap and you make it into swapping, you can use Zswap. So Zswap actually tries, and before swapping, it tries to compress pages before putting them into swap. And if it has no choice and it will evict them to the disk, then they're compressed. So they're easy, hopefully faster to read. I got mixed results from Zswap. But it seems to be working fine. Now the trick here is that you can use Devsham within the VMs and outside the VMs. So it's just a good. So here are examples that I performed within the VM. When you install YAM, YAM actually downloads all the packages to the disk, and then it extracts them, and then it saves some metadata, it saves the header, and so on. You can actually do that in the RAM. You just need to remember to delete it later. So after I install all the packages, and they install pretty fast now that they're from RAM, because the main bottleneck was downloading them, which we'll get to in a second, but the second bottleneck was actually expending them, decompressing them and installing them to the disk. If you do it in RAM, it's much, much faster. It conserves disk space. Why do you need to conserve disk space? If you recall, I put the virtual machine disks also in RAM. I don't have a lot of RAM. If I can conserve some of this disk space, that will be very, very beneficial, and allow me actually to use that RAM fully, and not swap or anything. So how do we create the images? The images are QMOK VM images. We use standard, varied builder to use them. We have a sub-project of Lago. It's called Lago Images, which actually prepares the images for us. Pretty standard, pretty standard script, nothing very, very different than most images that you'll see today. Lago takes care of downloading those images, and it actually has a hash, so it caches them. So the first time you run, you may get, I don't know, half an hour of downloading images. The second time, they're already on your computer. Again, if you have enough RAM, they could be on your RAM. So if I have a large machine, like 32 gig of RAM, I can put those images, even those in RAM. In order to make sure that we do it cleanly, we actually take those base images, create a snapshot for them in RAM. And then we use syscript to configure them, and we execute them. So the advantage here is, first of all, that you're, again, independent. Once you have the pristine images, you can always return to that very, very same state. And the second thing is, it's quite fast. We're using virtio scasi for whatever you can. The reason is, theoretically, I've heard it's faster. I didn't see it as any faster than virtio block. But I really like the discard. The discard, if anyone is not familiar with it, is a feature of scasi, where you can actually ask it to discard several blocks that are not in use anymore. That's a nice feature, because I remind you that the disk are actually in RAM, and I don't have a lot of RAM. So if, for example, I install using RPM, it extracts a lot of stuff, it extracts it in memory, and whatnot. And then I issue a small fstream command, and it reclaims some of the space that I need as memory. So that's one of the benefits in virtio scasi. That's a very delicate issue. So Lago actually reposyncs all the packages that we need for the installation, and creates one big local repository. Again, if you have the RAM, put it on RAM. And we can install only from it. Ideally, we can disable all the external repositories. It has many advantages. Hopefully, the packages you have, the packages that you need, you are aware of the dependency. And you don't need to fetch the metadata from whatever mirror that is now fast, is now not very fast. Now it has a missing package. You go to another mirror. You still fetch the metadata from the internet. It's slow. Generally, it's slow. Even if it's several, I know, 20, 30 seconds to get all the metadata of RAM, it's still very slow, as opposed to the local repository that you have. So that's very nice. You're independent of those external repositories. There is one huge downside. You need to keep the list of packages up to date. That's a total nightmare. And to be honest, we gave up on the idea. And we didn't disable the, we used for a long time to disable the external repos we just gave up. Just for example, centers between 7.2 to 7.3 put all the updated packages in the base channel, whereas in the past, they were in the updates channel. So we had to do the whole thinking again. Now you probably could script it, but we haven't gotten to do it. So how do we run VMs? We run them using, hopefully, the best practices. We don't need a lot of the devices to remove as much of the devices. We don't need the graphics device. We do need the RNG device, which helps performance. We use VRIT-RSCSI when we don't need VRIT-RSCSI. We don't have the SCSI controller. We use IO threads. I hope best practices of how LiveRIT is supposed to run. Test, that's the most important thing here. People are afraid to run tests in parallel. So first of all, in real life, customers and users of projects run things in parallel. They're not doing one thing at a time. They do run things in parallel. Parallelism adds complexity. That's the downside, of course. We need to remember that between them, we need to weigh in. But usually, a test that does something and just waits. And usually, there's no bottleneck. It's just a slip here, a slip there. Maybe the CPU is working, but the disk isn't so on. So I try to parallelize as much as possible. There are many items that you can do in parallel. For example, when we add multiple storages, we add them in parallel, simple Python threads. They just do all of them. If one of them fails, yes. It's a bit harder to debug, but it's still. Again, in CI, you hope things are usually stable and usually pass. And it really reduces the time considerably. For example, doing a live snapshot and doing a cold snapshot on another disk, another VM, could run in parallel. They're completely independent. It adds complexity. When there's a failure, you need to understand where the failure is. But it works. And when it works, it really saves a lot of time. I wish there was something even more advanced that would allow me to run completely independent tests alongside multiple tests without me manually doing the, OK, these are two threads that might be related. So let's run them together as one single unit test and so on and so on. But that's what we have today. Diversify is also important. Try and not do the same thing over and over again. Try to do different configurations. For example, in our test suite, we have two VMs. They are configured as much as possible differently. One is using the E1000 network. One is using the VertiOS SCSI network. One is maybe using VertiOS SCSI. One is using VertiO block. So you gain more code coverage by simply not repeating yourself. It adds more in the same time, essentially. It doesn't take more time to configure it a bit differently. Positive flows only. Questionable, because the most interesting stuff is actually negative. Negative is hard for two reasons. First of all, it's always slow, because until the application realizes something bad happens, until it realizes it needs to recover, the recovery takes time, it's difficult. And if things fail, it's difficult for the test itself to actually recover from negative scenario. I believe that you should concentrate really mostly on the positive test cases. But it's debatable. OK, what could we do faster? It's not a wish list. The things that probably we could do, I think my main concern is about YAM. I wish YAM would have been much, much faster. I know there's work on DNF to make it faster, download faster, and so on. But generally, when I'm installing 300 to 500 RPMs, surely there are many RPMs that I could install completely independently. They have nothing to do, no dependency between them. I'm sure there could be some magic dependency graph that could have been created and install whatever can be done independently. So that's the first item that I can think of. Of course, throwing more hardware into the problem is a good solution, so faster CPU and more memory would have solved a lot of the issues, but up to a limit. We're using NOS. I'm not sure if the best testing framework. I know there are better testing framework. I'm sure there's something better that could work with parallelism and, again, a dependency graph of the test and then run them faster. So that's one area we could improve. Microoptimization. So I talked a lot about not to do it, and of course I do it all day long. It didn't really most of the time help, so I tried a lot of small tricks that's supposed to make a difference. And again, because it's more of an art and not science, I'm not really testing the Stein one-to-one, rebooting my laptop, doing three times, finding the outliers and so on, I didn't see much of a difference between them. Again, because I'm writing into memory, then storage is rarely my bottleneck, so maybe a few of the optimization that I've tried to do are more into the storage, which in the beginning was my main bottleneck, but now it isn't. So maybe that's why it didn't really make a difference. If you haven't listened so far, and that's sad, but remember those three items. So fast is nice. It's important. You get great results. Again, 20 minutes, and we test end-to-end, lots of functionality of KVM, of Libret, of Overt, of course. But it has to be reliable. It's not reliable. Developers hate you, and it fails. Or they click retry, and retry, and just overloads the CI system, then it fails. Second rule, use Devchem. People are not using it enough. As an example, I've heard of a lecture about running OpenShift on Rev, and they had the cheapest storage they could buy, which obviously was the bottleneck. But from that 2.5 terabyte system, there was about almost 1 terabyte of free memory, which they could have used for scratch disk for those VMs. There's nothing wrong with it. It's just a scale test.  It's all anyway automated. There's nothing manual in the process. You could have used it. Use memory more often. Last but not least, parallelize your simple test. Very simple. Try not to make it complex. Try not to make mistakes. You make it complex. It's fragile. It's fragile. It breaks.  Questions? Yeah? So you do a lot of testing with? So apart from a small bug or miss feature where we actually use a host pass-through and not everything worked as much as we hoped to, it seems to work fine. We're using, I think, the majority are Intel. I'm sure we have it in AMD. I know that if there are bugs, then the QMKVM guys are looking into them and fixing them. But so far, it has proven touch wood, very, very performant. We haven't hit any bugs. I would say that it was surprising to have KSM or the host and KSM within the level one host competing with each other on trying to merge pages. So that might have been an issue. But it hasn't been an issue for us for a long time. No, no. We're just using X64. And you may be correct. Maybe on another platform, it may not be as mature. Yes? Yeah? Yeah, so I would think that QE should run them on a nightly basis, on a nightly build maybe, on every delivery. It cannot run on any patch. And CI, if it's fast and efficient, it could run on any patch. And there's a gating item. If it's slow, and again, what's slow? Slow is between two to three minutes. And if something else can run in parallel, then that's fine. Maybe you can run a negative scenario, and completely independent scenario. I'll give an example. If you have something wrong with storage, but at the same time, you're just testing that you can log into the UI, which has nothing to do with the storage, then that's fine. Then you're not wasting a lot of time. So you can do this compromise. Of course, if you have a bug, then who needs to debug it? Storage guy on the UX guy, which are completely different teams. So this is really the question.