We are going to jump into, okay so the question today is, and it's related to Jason's question, white intellectuals generally, with the exception of the Walter Williams of the world, why do they hate capitalism? Why do they reject capitalism? So for that we're going to turn to the Joe Rogan show and to his interview with John Mackey. Those of you who don't know John Mackey, John is the CEO of Whole Foods. He sold Whole Foods to Amazon but remained CEO of Whole Foods. He was the founder, the entrepreneur, the guy who built up the business. So one of the great entrepreneurs of his generation, very successful, lives in Austin, Texas. Whole Foods is based in Austin, Texas, is, considers himself a libertarian, considers himself a free-market guy, a capitalist, but thinks that capitalism is badly marketed and is the author of something called Conscious Capitalism and now a new book out that's called Conscious Leadership that we will be actually debating him about Conscious Capitalism in February or May. I'll get you more information once I have it regarding the debate.  But he's a real, you know, he believes in free markets, very much so. So we're going to watch and see how he addresses this intellectuals issue. I'm going to tell you what I think we might watch a video from Hayek where he talks about this. Hayek and William F. Buckley, there's a treat for you. And we'll do that. Now remember, please don't leave without liking the show. So let's try to get this up to 100. We're at 78 likes right now. We could easily be at 100 given how many people are watching live right now. We could be at a lot higher than that if you all went over and just press that like button on your iPhone, on your iPad, on your computer. It's really easy to do. Those of you who are not subscribed to the show, it'd be great if you subscribed. It'd make it easier for you. You'll get notifications about when we put up videos, when I go live, or when we put up one of the shorter videos. So don't forget to subscribe to the show. And if you click on the bell, you get notified for when we're going live. And then finally, those of you who listen frequently and appreciate the show and get some value out of it, it would be great if you supported the show, showed value for value as in a trade between us. And you can do that on your on bookshow.com slash support. You can do it on Patreon. You can do it on Subscribestar. You can do it on locals. Those are my preferred ways because they all involve monthly commitments, which I prefer that way. I have predictability in terms of long-term money coming in for the show. And of course, if you're on YouTube right now and you also want to get your questions answered, you can use the Super Chat. And through the Super Chat, both contribute to the show and get me to answer your questions. So that's great. Drew says, go back on Lex Friedman's show and inspired me to read Iron Man. Great. I mean, my purpose of going on Lex Friedman's show was to inspire people like you to read Iron Man, so I'm glad you're doing it. I'm hoping to be back on Lex Friedman's show. Lex invited me to come back. Next time I'm in Boston, I will be hopefully in Boston sometime in the next six months. And we'll sit down and do it again. Lex is also talking about moving to Texas. If he moves to Austin, I'll probably be in Austin sooner than I'll be in Boston. And I go to Austin more frequently than I go to Boston. So there's a lot going on in Austin all the time. So Austin is one of my favorite places to go. So we'll definitely do that. So I'll definitely be on Lex's show again if you'll have me. I'm making an assumption here if you'll have me. I assume you will. And of course, I'd love to be on Joe Rogan's show. That's the other one I'd really like to be. Although I think I actually think that Lex is a better interviewer. You know, Joe Rogan has a larger audience. So that's the way it goes. All right, here we go. Let me put my headphones on because I have to hear this too. And I thank you. Thank you for the contribution. That's great. And you can contribute without even without asking a question. All right, let's let's listen to John Mackie and Joe Rogan. And we'll see how many seconds you should run a betting pool. How many seconds will actually let them speak before this? Somebody says I should debate David Friedman. No, I mean, that would be it's such it would be such a waste of time. Anyway, I'm not going to get the whole David Friedman thing. I know David. Here we go. The Joe Rogan experience back to the subject of capitalism, capitalism and Marxism and socialism. This right now we're in a wave of this, right? It's become more popular now. I would say over the last, particularly during the Trump administrations, the concept of socialism, at least, has become more more publicly discussed than any time that I can remember in my life. Why do you think that is? So that is interesting. I think that Joe is identifying something real. Socialism is being discussed now more than ever. And it's it's it's more popular maybe than ever in American history. It is it is a huge, huge issue the last few years. And it's definitely increased significantly. You know, and I think it does have something to do with Trump is somewhat of a backlash on the left to Trump. But it's also just a consequence of the fact that the left has dominated universities for 100 years and every decade, it gets worse every decade, it's bigger every decade, it's more substantial. You know, Hutter says he thought Joe was going to be on here.  And if Joe was on my show, we'd have a lot more than 168 live people watching.  But that would be really cool if Joe was on the show. No, I'm showing a video of Joe and commenting on it. So sorry. So it is true. Socialism and otherwise this is a consequence of 100 years of teaching leftist ideology, teaching socialism, teaching that capitalism is bad over and over and over again and getting more and more and more radical and being more and more and more principled on the bad ideas. That has an impact. It just has an impact. But that's not John Mackey's answer. I think it's because the generation that's coming up is I mean, you have to understand the academic community is is I always say the intellectuals have always been the enemy of business. So that's good. I like the fact that what Mackey does is the immunity goes to the source of where the problem is. And I agree completely the source of the problem is intellectuals. The source of the problem is the fact that intellectuals are antagonistic to capitalism and have been for a long time. And and I agree with John completely about that. It's it's our universities that are at fault in turning this country further to the left is making the left more popular. And by the way, making the right less intellectual making the right less pro-capitalist. So the intellectual class overwhelming with a few exceptions like Walter Williams are overwhelmingly anti left. And that's absolutely the reason why the culture is moving anti left. But the question is now, and this John is going to try to answer this, is why are the intellectuals such leftists? It took 13 seconds. Stephanie counted 13 seconds before I interrupted. This is this is just, you know, this is what our dinner table was like. You know, on Friday nights when the whole family was together at dinner, it took about 13 seconds before I interrupted everybody else from the age probably of 12 on. That's how I became, I guess, who I am. We're an argumentative family and argumentative people, if you will, an argumentative culture that I come from. Certainly the enemy of capitalism. And but why is that? I think because in a in a market society, which has been rare in history, we haven't mostly had market societies, but they're not very important. So this is funny because this relates to, and I didn't even realize it when Michael asked the question, but this relates to Michael's question, right? So basically, he's saying it's because of status. In a market economy, they don't have a lot of status. And what matters in life to them is status, so that they're anti-capitalist, because they don't have enough status. Now, as we'll see, we'll go through this. This is the problem with many libertarians. I won't say, oh, but many libertarians, most, I'd say, is while they get that the intellectuals are the enemy, they don't get why. And in that sense, they don't get the wall of fundamental philosophical ideals. They just don't wish intellectuals because that's at the universities. And then they have to make up economic explanations for it, like status and money. Because people are not motivated, primarily, I would argue, by status and money. There are other things that motivate people. There are other things that determine why people would be pro-anti-capitalism. But those are philosophical ideas, philosophical ideas. In a market society, the intellectuals aren't very important, generally not as important, no. But aren't they the ones that inspire the minds of the people that create and maybe innovate in the industry? They don't have the same social status that the entrepreneurs have. Elon Musk or Steve Jobs or Jeff Bezos. So you think it's an ego issue, the social status issue? Think about it this way. You're going to school, okay? And the people that end up teaching at the universities were always the smartest kids in the school, generally. And they do well in school. I mean smart in terms of doing well in school.  That's been their universe, right? And they excelled at it. And they were smarter than the other kids in school. And now these other kids, they go to college, and they get a degree in business, and they're in a fraternity, and they make a lot of friends in relationships, and they make more money than the intellectuals do. And that seems like that's completely unfair. It's a nice world that less smart people are making more money than the smart people do, and they have more status in the society. So it's about money and status. And it's sad that that's what somebody like John Mackey thinks, because it's not true. It demeans the realm in which the intellectuals deal with. It says their opposition to capitalism cannot be motivated by ideas. It cannot be motivated by the fact that they don't get capitalism. It has to be motivated by envy. Now it's, there's no question that for some of them it definitely is envy. For some of them status does matter. For some of them, many of them, they become intellectuals to begin with. They go to university. They become professors. Or they become haters of capitalism before they even become professors. For a variety of psychological problems, for a variety of psychological reasons that have to do with resentment and status and so on. But that isn't the core issue. What is it that intellectuals hate about capitalism? Is it that people make a lot of money? Just? You think that if we raise a, I don't know, wall tax to 10%, they'll be happy with capitalism? What they conceive of is capitalism. What is it exactly? Because let's say we gave all university professors a raise. Let's say we made them as rich. Would they, would their opposition to capitalism go away? A rich professors and their number of rich professors more likely to be supportive of capitalism than poor professors? I don't think there's a correlation there. I think some of these guys have become rich. I mean, and it is true that the social status of Steve Jobs is higher than the status of a Norm Chomsky. I mean, Norm Chomsky is revered by millions and millions of students, by his colleagues, by their other than intellectuals. Is he really suffering from so, now he's much poorer than a Steve Jobs or Bill Gates or Elon Musk, but social status wise. All the cool kids want to be with Norm Chomsky. So it's just not a convincing explanation and it's psychologizing. And the problem is that they don't want to deal with the deeper explanation. And Joe Rogan, you'll notice, is not buying this. He's not buying this as an explanation. I think, I think that's under, under, underlying it is a resentment or an envy of a society that doesn't judge them to be as important as they judge themselves. Or it doesn't pay them as if they're that important. But, you know, Rogan is not buying it. It's interesting, but I think it's a very flawed perspective.  I said smart in terms of school. I didn't say in terms of street smarts or ability to do things, to connect with people. There's emotional intelligence. I'm merely saying they're good at taking tests, writing papers, abstracting thoughts, essentially. Yeah, but this is what I'm saying. That just the term smart, it's almost like the problem is it's like a blanket term, right? It's like drugs.  No, I mean, smart has a meaning, particularly if you define it. And I think, I think Mackie has. The people that are interested in that pursue that, the fact that they can understand that there's an, like Elon Musk is a great example. If you don't think Elon Musk is intelligent, you're either, you're in.  You don't think Elon Musk is intelligent.  It's one of those things. There's something wrong with the way you think. He's clearly intelligent.  And the guys running like four different businesses simultaneously, they're all successful. And he's innovating with when it comes to space travel in a way that you would assume that someone have to dedicate most of their life just singularly to that task, to be able to figure out past NASA how to shoot a rocket up into space and have it land, right? And then reuse it. No one's been able to do that besides him or up. I mean, Joe Gong is absolutely right in saying, wait a minute, these people don't really think they're smarter than somebody like Elon Musk. That can't be the reason they envy Elon Musk. And he's right. It's not. So he did it. And I think Jeff Bezos' company is doing the same thing to Blue Origin. Yeah. They're obviously two of the great entrepreneurs of this particular era. But I don't think Jeff Bezos is actually engineering these things. But if you think about it, the intellectuals have always disliked business. They've always discriminated against the merchant classes, the Jews in the West, Chinese in the East. There's really been no historical period where intellectuals praised business, maybe a little bit around the time of Adam Smith up until probably Ricardo and Malthus wrote in the early 19th century. And why is that? Because they've always thought they were smarter than the businessman and therefore should we have more prestige? I mean, he's really getting to the point. This is a long history. And what constitutes that history? What is true of that entire history? Why have the intellectuals always resented the merchant class? And in particular gamblers? It's for the most part, business people have been seeing they're disruptive. They change things. They upset the status quo. They innovate. Well, a lot of people. That's true. So why is that a problem for the intellectuals? The intellectuals can be disruptive. What is it about these changes that they find so important? It's threatening. It changes social status. It changes wealth. Social status. It's all about status. It's almost like capitalism is like a genie that got out of the bottle. And they're trying very hard to stuff the genie back in the bottle. Why is the question? I think if you think about it that way, you'll understand we're never going to win the intellectuals over. Really? Let me just say this. I think it's completely true. If we can't win the intellectuals over, we're lost. We're finished. We have no chance in the world of being successful. Our only chance. The way to change the world. Maybe it's not to win them over, but to replace them. To replace them. Don't worry, Yasser. I will tell you. Do you have any doubt I'm going to tell you? I speak in universities all the time. And the students, I'm an entrepreneur. I self-identify that way. Students love when I talk about conscious capitalism. I say you can do good and you can do well. There's no contradiction here. You're not. Here you go. This is at the core of it. He can't criticize the intellectuals because at the end he agrees with them. You can do good and you can do well. The moral, he says, can be the practical. The practical can be the moral. Under what conditions? Under what conditions? So as an objectivist, I say when you do well, you do good. Because how do you do well by creating values for other people? That's how business works. You create values that other people pay for. Why do they pay for it? Because it makes their lives better. So it's a win-win relationship. Trade essentially is win-win. They do better. You do better. You do better by making them better. That's the essential characteristic of business. But no, you can do good and do well. Not doing well is doing good. That's the fundamental difference. Between me, I mean one of the fundamental differences between Mimi and Mackie. What we need today, what I call the new intellectual, would be any man or woman who is willing to think. Meaning any man or woman who knows that man's life must be guided by reason, by the intellect, not by feelings, wishes, wins or mystic revelations. Any man or woman who values his life and who does not want to give in to today's cult of despair, cynicism and impotence, and does not intend to give up the world to the dark ages and to the role of the collectivist. All right, before we go on, reminder, please like the show. We've got 163 live listeners right now. 30 likes. That should be at least 100. I figure at least 100 of you actually like the show.  But at least the people who like it, you know, I want to see a thumbs up. There you go. Start liking it. I want to see that go to 100. All it takes is a click of a thing, whether you're looking at this. And you know, the likes matter. It's not an issue of my ego. It's an issue of the algorithm. The more you like something, the more the algorithm likes it. So, you know, and if you don't like the show, give it a thumbs down. Let's see your actual views being reflected in the likes. But if you like it, don't just sit there. Help get the show promoted. Of course, you should also share and you can support the show at your own bookshow.com slash support on Patreon or subscribe star or locals and show your support for all for the work, for the value, hopefully you're receiving from this.  You'll know what shows are on when they're on, you'll get notified. Right. So, yes, like, share, subscribe, support, like, share, subscribe, support. There you go. Easy. Do one or all of those, please.


Welcome. We'll have now Philip Kern and Adam Barrett. They are the stable release managers and they will talk about the stable release management. Please welcome them. So, hello everyone. We wanted to talk about how we are currently managing stable. Some upcoming updates to how it might be managed in the future, some proposals, how volatile will be handled or hopefully will be handled in the future. So, the agenda is to talk about a bit about what's stable release management in general. What are we doing? What's the output of it? What are the tools we use? How can the random developer look at what we are doing and how we are doing? The second thing are point release intervals, what we are planning on doing for squeeze, what we plan to do for lany and edge, which might or might not have been worked out that well, about policies, what can go into stable update-wise and then I hope that you have questions and comments about how we can do it better or how we can do it differently than we are doing it before because we try to be open-minded on it. If there's something we can do to improve stable and especially from a user's perspective, we don't always know what users expect from stable, so it's interesting to know what people expect from us. So, the first thing is what are we actually doing? We are updating stable, which means that there are certain defined dates where we copy over packages from a suit called proposed updates into stable proper. This also means at this point we are pushing packages, not security updates out to the users. It also means we are building new CDs people can use to install from DVDs and other installation media. So, what we do to prepare is to review security advisories, actually look at the diff, most accepted as is though, and then review other fixes targeted to stable, which means requests we get on Debian release, at least which are directly uploaded to the PUNU queue, which should have landed on the list before. And for the actual point release, we prepare an announcement which people can see on Debian announce and on the website. We coordinate with the stable kernel team to get the kernel updated. We coordinate with the Debian installer team to get the recent fixes into Debian installer and maybe roll a new Debian installer release into stable. And then it's made late to contact the various teams that are involved in the point release, which are FTP masters, press team, security team and city team to set a date when to do it because it's quite an act. It requires many people to be present and that sometimes involves quite a bit of management. Of course, when we are accepting updates and to propose updates, we also have to be sure that we have all builds available for all architectures that no architecture falls actually behind. So, we are mostly closing it some week or two before the point release to ensure that we have all builds available. And the same is of course for all stable when it's still in the archive. So, what's proposed updates? Some people didn't seem to know back then that the suit is nowadays reviewed. Every package that isn't proposed updates has been reviewed by us. There's a separate new queue for it, which means that we are actually looking at what we're accepting and it's not random stuff. Some maintainer decided to upload. And we're actually telling that to accept it at some point. Yeah. Yeah, I will come to that later. So, what are we actually using for managing this is a queue viewer that's running on release.debian.org. It's even linked from there, which creates an adaptive against account version, which means either the stable version of the proposed updates one, which also does automated checks for version and installability problems to ensure that we don't create uninstallabilities in stable because we don't have something like Brittany ensuring it for us. We are of course tracking missing builds and that tool also helps us to create the point release announcements. And it also lists to do items. So, I've opened it here for people who wonder about that. It's actually reachable from the release.debian.org site on useful links. So, you can see to do items what's still left to do for the point release. Some packages that were not yet accepted into proposed updates together with the corresponding diffs and problems and missing builds if it's the case and the ones that will be part, will probably be part of the next stable release. There are sometimes cases where some packages that are not ready yet are skipped. That's mainly due to the fact that packages that are not security announcements are auto built in proposed updates, which means that for them getting built, we need to accept them. And if they are not up to date at the point release time, we need to skip them to have them actually in sync. So, what I am really curious about is who is using proposed updates? Who is using stable? So, where do you use proposed updates? I was told at one point, way back when it was probably years ago at this point, we was told that that was back before you had proposed updates new. And there used to be all sorts of random crux that would show up in proposed updates and then sometimes disappear again. So, for the systems on which they run stable and therefore proposed updates would be interesting, we didn't want to have that cruft appearing and disappearing. So, now that I know that you are checking every package that goes into it, then that makes it much easier for us to start using it on a wider basis so that we can test updates for you and let you know if they don't work. So, now I have an action item as soon as I get back to Stanford to go look at pointing all of our test dev systems that are running stable and add proposed updates to the sources list. That would be cool because we are not really sure who is actually testing the things in proposed updates. We really hope that they don't break anything. That's why we review it after all and we do some tests on them. But in general it would help if more people that can afford it, which means that it's not a machine that needs to be really, really stable to activate it and report back if there are any problems. You are already almost reply to my question but I am supposed to use proposed updates on production? No. Machines? No. So, I need to have a testing, I mean a system that can use for testing. So, this may not uncover all the possible problems actually. Right. True, true. Yeah. Well, it's basic update testing or upgrade testing and testing if the result still works. The problem is if it's not done it might happen that it gets copied into stable and at that point we cannot easily update it currently. So, it would really help us. I'm talking to developers here so it's also common that they have something to test with. But for really production machines it does make sense not to enable it. Yeah. Any more remarks about you think how we could possibly test them? Because for us it's some, yeah. You said you do some installability testing and I'm wondering what you're using for that? Installability is mainly a step check. Okay. What about something like PU parts? We could try that. What I heard about PU parts is that some packages fail on it, which is also the case in unstable and that it's pretty hard to get a bug distilled out of it. That's at least what Lukas said. But on the other hand I think he also either wrote or got a tool that does installability testing which he uses for unstable and for Lenny to testing upgrades that might be more useful and I think we will look into that. Yeah. That will of course catch the obvious installability problems. It won't catch anything that depends on the runtime of the program or the actual patch if it's not to the Debian packaging. Yeah. So, it's a bit about the QA of proposed updates we're wondering about and maybe at some point we can get to a state where people could report that they have actually tested it. Currently we are mostly relying on the maintainer testing it probably or the security team for that matter for those which come through security. Yeah. How do you want to receive reports and is there a tag or something we can use in the BTS for this or like if we are running these proposed updates and we run into problems how should we report them? You can report them to the BTS. Normally they would of course be attached to package and we would appreciate the CC which is mostly enough for us to keep track of it. So we see that there's actually an issue in stable. Just make sure it's a version in stable and it mentions that it's actually in stable you're seeing that bug. Are you interested in using effectsrelease.debian.org on bugs that are filed against the package as a way of getting it to show up in your bug list? Again please. So the BTS supports effects which lets it list a bug in multiple packages. Do you want us to say that effectsrelease.debian.org if it affects a proposed updates package? I think that would be nice here. If the BTS supports that for nonversion packages, yes. I think it does. Okay. I guess I will note that. Okay. So that was the stable release management in general part. I guess we can do questions on that later if there are any. The next point would be point release intervals. We are currently looking at doing stable updates every two months and old stable updates every four months so that doesn't currently apply and we screwed it up with Edge being released a bit too late. Actually the fixes that people pushed in after the lany release were delayed until Edge was end of life which wasn't really great and we are working on improving that by setting up a timeline when we actually intend to do the releases. It might be that point releases could be more frequent immediately after squeeze is released which is also what fits with the past history. An interesting part is when you look at the woody release which is very old, there were point releases every other year. No, sorry, every year. So this should still improve the situation and of course we have to ensure that we are not doing two point releases at the same time or doing a point release and release at the same time like we did with Latch and Lany and Edge that messed up the CD team's infrastructure a bit. So that's the thing. What are we doing in between those point releases? So there's testing, sorry, stable proposed updates. There's also volatile. So there are some packages which require timely updates besides normal point release schedule that are not security updates. One thing is TZ data which ships time zone information. Some countries actually think of introducing daylight saving changes one week before they actually do it like Argentina. So it might make sense to push that earlier and it's not a security update. So it's not appropriate to use security on that. And there's this other package. Some people disagree with its use but which is still used by quite some people which is clam AV. This package is interesting in that it does, well, didn't the past bump its API on bug fix releases because upstream thought it would be a great idea to bump API on bug fix releases. And sometimes they also deactivate new older versions through their signatures. So we do have to address this in some way which we currently did through volatile. And then there were also things that led to the introduction of volatile sloppy back then which were pigeon and purple updates to cope with instant messaging protocol changes like I CQ and I think for MSN security update even deactivated the whole protocol. So we also need to address this in some way to keep stable usable. So to get back a bit why volatile was introduced at least as I could find it because it was made at the such release I think. Volatile proper was a set of packages. Everyone can basically update to which means clam AV data was mentioned back then and TZ data which are safe to upgrade. Now clam AV data something we are going to face out because there are some concerns with it being built automatically and signed automatically and uploaded automatically. And there are other ways with proxies to handle this specific issues. Volatile sloppy which we currently don't really use was introduced for packages that actually need larger version bumps to get useful again. Which was the I guess and no AM client that needed this. So what was done back then was a separate team and a separate infrastructure with its own archive host to be run completely separate from everything else. So what we have now with volatile is that it's one by a single person. It uses an ancient deck version that has no support for the source version three. Now granted the security archive has the same problem but we hope to get that solved over the FTP masters have to solve it and currently there's no easy ability to copy over volatile builds into proposed updates which would make sense for TZ data because we want to push it into stable anyway. The only relief is that the mirroring is actually handled by the same people that mirror FTP master. So a burden less because we had a whole unofficial mirroring network for volatile with hosts that are not the official one. So yeah, it was a bit tricky. So the proposal is actually to run it on the normal infrastructure which means an FTP master. Some work has been already done on this. It's just not exported into onto the mirrors yet. And then use it as a suit pass updates more quickly to the users and point releases can if it's called updates like on other distributions or volatile is basically a bike shed issue. We will see what we do about that but we will encourage users to activate it by default, which is I think also what Debbie installed us. And then copy into volatile from proposed updates and the volatile bits will also be installed into stable at point release time. The goal is of course to keep stable as usable as possible. This does mean for some packages that we will integrate new upstream versions into stable, but I will come to that later. So now that's a bit of a topic switch. So I guess some people who remember the old rules for stable updates, what has to be fulfilled for a stable update to be accepted, which was codified in interesting way. So basically it said, if you fix a security problem, you need to go to the security team. The security team needs to accept it and do an advisory for it. Then it's accepted into stable. Nowadays we have the problem that the security team for some security issues doesn't deem it critical enough to publish an own advisory and points the people to us so that we push it through a regular point release, which is basically shifting the workload, but well, we have to cope with that. Then if the package fixes a critical bug, which can lead to data loss data corruption on overly broken system or the package is broken or not usable anymore, right, we are also currently opting to accept a bit less critical bugs that are still affecting users and annoying users to some degree. Yeah, that's a bit about the stable version of being installable, which obviously needs to be fixed. And the bits about the released architectures that have to be in sync and or it basically gets all architectures back in sync, which is what we do if we usually notice if things are out of date, introduced by some updates, and maybe scheduled in the news or something, this has happened in the past. So there was this rule, what needs to be fulfilled for it to be accepted. And there was also the bit packages which will most probably be rejected packages that fix non critical bugs packages that fix an unusable minor part of a package. So what we are now settling for is a bit different. Of course, we still let in most of the security advisories unless we really know they are broken. And what's likely to be acceptable is if you fix a security issue or fix a bug of at least severity important, or fix an installability in FTPFS bug or bring architectures back in sync. So FTPFS bugs also run fixed in a stable release, but it makes sense that the security team is actually able to recompile it for the updates. So we also accept those bugs. Then we try to apply common sense on those updates. I mean, we are also involved in testing updates. So we regularly review code and mostly you can see if a change is mostly sane or not. It, of course, makes sense to have minimal diffs to review because it makes our life much easier. Then, yeah, it's still the case that if we update a package, it must have a reason, of course. So it's not that the wish list bug of your choice can be fixed and stable because we don't want to risk to break anything. So if there's a stable package that should get fixed, and you're, for example, the maintainer of it, don't hesitate to contact us, if you think that issue should really be fixed and stable. Normally with common sense, we can see if it warrants an update or not. So there are some packages that will get newer upstream versions. We settled with that in the past. This is probably not an exhaustive list. I don't know what will happen in Screeze, but what we did is post Cresql, I still don't know how to pronounce it properly, which gets newer bug fix releases because we trust upstream not to screw it up. That's actually Martin Pitt working on it most of the time. Climby, as I already said, TZData is also basically upstream releases and the Mozilla-related packages that are also pushed through security as new upstream versions because it's unfeasible to actually backport the security fixes. There's still a problem, though, how to take packages of which we know that they get larger updates. There's some mechanism currently in use. Nobody knows of, I guess. I guess nobody in this room, that is, that tax used for limited support tax and unsupported tax with relation to security. Does anybody know that packages are tagged like that? One person. Interesting. So there was a tool planned when this was introduced to actually list the packages you have installed that are unsupported, which got never implemented, so it's basically tagged through the security tracker and nobody gets, well, sometimes when it's during a release cycle, it's announced, of course, on the security list, but there are also some packages for which are affected, which might go in into a release which are not supported. So that's kind of a similar case we should solve in the near future to actually get the information to people. So I would really like to know what you are expecting from Stable. It is, of course, hard to get, we had the edge and the half thing for the trivers updates. Those are, of course, a bit harder and mainly rely on people doing the work, which we currently lack, I suppose, for this, and backpotting stuff into the kernel. What was done for Lenny was backpots of some trivers into the Lenny kernel. Instead of a full and a half release, but it would be interesting to know what the issues are you are having with Stable. You're currently the only one. So I will say that I'm torn. The edge and a half release from the perspective of a stable user was nice to get the driver, to get more driver updates that can be reasonably back ported and we missed that a little bit with Lenny in that we have some new Dell servers for which we're running the back ports kernel because the firmware for something or other was just not available in the Lenny kernel. But that being said, from a package maintainer perspective, the edge and a half kernel was really hard because there's actually a whole bunch of out of tree kernel modules in Debian and almost none of them got rebuilt for edge and a half, which meant, and I have one of them open AFS and the way that the kernel development tends to work and then the way that upstream on those out of tree modules tends to work, you're gonna need significantly newer upstream releases of the out of tree kernel module in order to work with a new version of the kernel and it all turns into a big mess. So I think it provides a more consistent stable experience to not have that edge and a half style release, but I do think we should realize that when we go that route, that means that some of our users will have to use the back ports kernel. Right, right. I mean, that's also the issue of X drivers where I don't know how much is currently in back ports or if at all. I don't either. I mean, we mostly use stable on servers, I actually run testing and unstable on desktop side. Yeah, that's something we need to address at some point, I mean, out of tree modules. If the maintainers would actually bother to somehow provide a co-installable version of it or tell us what to rebuild, it might work, but of course, you need newer upstream versions. And if open AFS, the problem is is that it's a whole lot of software, there's a user space and a kernel thing and it gets really hard. I mean, one hope is that maybe that kernel version gets more back ports, but then it also depends on the maintainers doing them, probably, or fetching the patch somewhere. We didn't settle for anything yet for squeeze, we just said we won't do it for any other questions, any other needs you have, any concerns you have about what we are doing. Did we actually manage to break your system already or break it? First, I wanted to say thank you for helping to keep stable usable. I use it in a lot of places and one of the things I find is as time goes on, I end up back porting more and more packages and uploading those to back ports. One thing that I had heard about a while back but I don't know the status of and maybe this is relevant to the work you're doing, I think deep package to live depths was gonna be made to be more intelligent about how it determined dependencies. Such that it minimized dependencies so that you might actually be able to use packages from testing and unstable on top of stable if all they depended on was an older libc or something like that. Does that help you out at all with stable proposed updates to just be able to pull things in faster? Not currently because we don't have a technical ability to actually pull things from there unless at the point release time where we sometimes manage to push versions up into tree which means push some things from stable to testing and unstable because they weren't updated there yet. The other way around only happened on Debian Archive key ring I think where something was controlled suited into stable directly. Currently it doesn't help us. I mean you see many build blocks where it tells that the dependency is actually useless but the program links against it. I guess you're referring to a simple files? Yeah, yeah so I guess that's just a matter of fixing packages in the archive to allow for that before that will be useful. Also some packages that call that's now from a testing point of view DH make shlips dash big re which causes packages to have an shlips that matches with the current upstream version of the package. Those are really annoying because it's just guessing if there are new symbols at that point so simple files would help with that from a testing point of view and that would help significantly on migrations. From the stable point of view there's not that much currently we can do. We could do installability checks but then you're stuck with testing all architectures if they picked up similar dependencies and then putting it in which might work but then you might have to bin and amuse some of them so it's not really easy at that point. Well and you guys still have to review all the changes no matter what anyway so it would just maybe speed things up a little bit but. Yeah actually if you can take the patch and just do an appropriate version number into proposed updates that also works well. If you have to review it anyway okay it gets rebuilt but that's a price you pay. So I use volatile on my stable boxes and so also thank you. Clamav is a lifesaver. I was just curious what your philosophy was on actually I guess putting more stuff in there. I mean I think about if we're talking about content and not code things like CA certificates. Things like that. Like what? CA certificates so you can get fresh CA search on the box. Just curious some of those things would be seems like they could be useful but maybe I'm not seeing the whole picture. That's certainly useful. The problem with CA certificates is that it's packaging is fragile to say the least. So perhaps it could be split into. Yeah it should actually be split and there should actually be a same solution that all packages use the same certificates instead of Mozilla using its own certificate store. Java updating it from CA certificates. Conqueror using an own certificate store. Yeah I agree on that. There's some infrastructure that should be done on PKI. It would be an obvious candidate if it wouldn't be that fragile and I think we did one update of CA certificates for volatile actually. Yeah that seems stirring about but the general philosophy of, I mean some packages are really just content. Which ones? That would be interesting to know. I mean Climavy data is a pretty special case but. I'm thinking about ISO codes which we are maintaining which is basically content and I think the package is correct. What's using that data? I think that the GNOME is using that data. We have some input from them so I think we merely don't know who is using that data. It would need to check the dependencies actually. I mean especially if users request an update of such data packages or developers for that matter we can do that. They seem to be a little risk at that point but yeah there needs to be some use to it of course. I mean with these data on some instances it's pretty critical to have current times on data. I wouldn't mind such an update. Mostly the content of ISO code for instance is made of translations. So that brings another topic. Could be interesting how about some updates to localization stuff for stable if that happens to be doable without upgrading to a new upstream version for instance. Right so are you referring to simple translations or to depth conf translations? Actually I think none of them are doable with what we currently have and how the packaging is done. That was the idea lying under the TDEB proposal but nothing is ready for either a squeeze or a squeeze plus one or whatever. I think TDEB would help with that. This is just ideas popping in my mind and things that could be easily as soon as the infrastructure is ready for that updated for stable release. What we're currently doing is accepting some translation updates when the package is updated anyway. So if there's a bug to fix and you can also then you if you ask us you can also squeeze translation updates. There's a bug fixed and there are some depth conf translations for instance then that would be acceptable for an update. In the general case we don't have the infrastructure to do it for all packages. I have a minor bit of almost bike shedding but not quite. So historically we've not had a particularly well communicated standardized written down standard for versioning your uploads or proposed updates and currently we're basically using sweet names now mostly appended with a plus or prepended with a plus. The problem with the sweet names of course is that they don't guarantee a sort order and when we go to squeeze down they're really not gonna guarantee a sort order because S is kind of late in the alphabet. Maybe it's time to switch to version numbers now that we have a stable versioning number policy because it used to be that we weren't sure what version number the next release was gonna be but now I think we decide we're always gonna increment the major number. We can of course communicate such a policy. Indeed it's nice that squeeze is larger than Lenny and edge was less than Lenny so it actually worked for those three. Basically it's when what we currently use it if it's the testing or unstable version basically back ported because it's just a maintain upload on NMU in between then we use tiller, suit name currently and we use plus if we add patches. Sometimes it even gives collisions with the security team so... And old style been an NMU's unstable which we love. Old style been an NMU's our pain. Because yeah, because x.naught.one sorts higher than x plus Lenny one. So thankfully, sorry. Sorry I had to interrupt you. So thankfully I think been a NMU's are now using plus B uniformly which means that if we sort out between stable updates and security updates either coordinate using the same version number or give security something probably that sorts earlier than the stable updates. But probably easier to coordinate the same version number because you guys mix. I mean sometimes proposed updates is newer sometimes security is newer and it kind of drags back and forth. It's a little bit hard. But yeah, if we can sort that all out but give all of that stuff something that sorts after been NMU's I think then this all starts looking more reasonable. Yeah, yeah. And I think there was a proposal that was circulated around all those lines that even included handling the been NMU of a stable update case and the whole thing. So maybe we could, but mostly they were good ideas. They seem to solve all the problems but we never declared one of them as official and therefore no one knew to follow it. So I think it seems like now is a good time to kind of do that. Right. So I will note this down that we need to solve this. Actually what security does if there's an update in proposed updates they usually merge it in. So you can actually get proposed updates sometimes earlier than a point release. But that's mainly to save work on one side of the pond. Right. So we still have time left but it doesn't really seem like questions and I see also looks like, oh, there's a tar package. Right. That's also a package that needs updates to still provide anonymous access to a network. I could imagine updates to that to be honest but we would need to be contacted by the maintainers about it. Didn't we actually fix the specific issue? The key roll over one, I'm fairly sure we did. I think we, I know Wiesel wanted to upload packages. Indeed. I'm fairly sure we did fix that specific one. I think so too. But in general the top people are also folks that won't to get new upstream versions in for strong anonymous access, whatever. So yeah, if we are approached we might be open to that. There's a question earlier on there about, so can we expect more priority important bugs to be fixed and stable? Some maintainers don't seem to have much interest in that. I can offer my opinion, which is I think it's gonna depend a lot on the maintainer because it can be a fair amount of work to backport an important bug fix to the stable version. I mean, I know I feel kind of guilty because DSA actually asked me to do that for one of my packages and I just never ended up having time. I mean, I've done this process and it works great. So certainly any Debian package maintainer who wasn't aware of it, stable updates are great and if you have a bug like that that you wanna fix. I mean, there was this bug on kernel package which basically said you cannot build kernels, I think greater than 2635, so the count run, you can't build it on stable and the maintainer basically said, I can't do anything about that, that's a stable release department without actually seeing us. So we didn't see that bug and actually somebody replied like, please contact the release team on that address and he didn't bother to. So it really depends on the maintainer and it's somewhat different if some random guy shows up providing a patch then the maintainer actually saying, okay, I've did this, I know it works in unstable, it was tested in unstable. I'm pretty sure that backport will work and then we can do it. Yeah. I think I can confirm that we did that for some bar few times already. I think four or five times fixing important bugs and asking for permission in some way by posting a patch, it worked very well. So I think the policy you explained about important bugs being allowed to be fixed in stable, it is already working. As far as I've seen for some time, it's working, it's working very well. Not all maintainers know it though. Despite it being announced on every endeavor. We need to say it louder, it's working. It's actually sometimes even more reassuring than updating a package in unstable because you get all these people reviewing your patch and making sure it looks right. We sometimes have the case that a patch in question was, oh, well, it turned out to be uploaded to unstable later, but yeah, it should be tested first. If the bugs in unstable, in the unstable patches, we would really prefer that you have actually tested it in unstable first. And maybe some aging applied like we do for testing. Yeah. Mainly because if it turns out to have huge issues, it's much easier to just re-upload to unstable. We have had cases in the past where people have only noticed stuff after we've released a point release and then people have turned around and said, that broke something, which we did. You definitely. Okay. So you're all happy about stable otherwise or not just ignoring it? Okay. Any more questions? Nothing. Oh, there's one. As long as there's time, I'll ask. Some of the things I find myself backporting the most, I still actually run a stable desktop and the things that I find myself backporting are things where the technology's moving at a pretty fast rate. So things like VoIP clients like Icaiga or Twinkle or some of these other things. Or even web frameworks and that kind of stuff. Yeah. In a lot of cases, there's a lot of library dependencies and I end up backporting a dozen packages or something to make it work in order to get this new functionality. But that's a lot of that's desktop specific. Is that something that volatile could address to get? You mentioned Ice Weasel and Ice Dove is things to get. There's a bit of a technical necessity. There's a bit of a necessity to do it there. And it's not new branches. So it's fairly, it's at least remaining in the same branch, which you probably can't say of the software. I mean, I guess it's unavoidable for users to either use backports for some packages or make that official in some way and maybe also get more QA on it. Or to install them by themselves or backporting them by themselves. I don't think we want to provide a stable system, which means the basic services will all be there. They will all be supported. And if you're running a website and you need a new version of a web framework, we cannot complicate off of that in the same way. Sadly. Markin. That's the question. Right. So the question is if the volatile takeover is only a proposal or if it's going to be there for a squeeze. I really want like, I really want maintain the ancient DAC anymore. So the work that has been done was creating a separate suite that we will be able to manage. So I think with the help of the FTP masters, it will be doable for squeeze. I don't know how it will be called and Butterberg on the installer will be to do it by default, but I'm pretty sure it will be there for squeeze. Yeah, I just wanted to remind people that lack of hardware support is also considered a severity important bug and also acceptable for a stable release. So if you have a case where you just need a new driver that's not backboard or something like that, but feel free to file a bug and we're definitely interested in enabling new servers, new desktops and stuff like that if we can without risking regressions. And that's actually the guy that does most of the kernel stuff in stable. So anything else? So thanks for your coming. That's it.


here is all the artwork we are taking and whatever else we make this week is all the artwork that's for sale and we're taking to the Debellum Art Festival here in Dallas, Texas and if you would like any of them they each have a little price tag on them this will be a very long video and you just let us know which one this is one of my favorites one of her first resin pours just take a screenshot this is another one of my favorites this was a fan favorite these are all the 8 by 24s there are two of my favorite ones here the recent ones this one too 10 by 10 my camera focus that's a pretty big good size there me all fatefuls Swarovski crystals Cowboys one any of you Dallas Cowboys fans this is one of my favorites somebody basically commissioned me to do that they put a deposit down and then I didn't hear from them on the market we got this big old piece that we did with the pendulum it's a big piece well see Darth Vader and some small stencil stuff down here as well those are all 45 smaller stencil stuff 25 ones are fun just let us know yeah that piece is for sale as well I'm not sure how much I'm not sure if I'm even done with it but it's the ghost robber look at our wall is like blank I think I'm keeping that guy artwork on the walls the old stuff over there one day sure


Yeah. Okay. Hi everyone. Thank you all for coming in. If I'm not audible at the back, please let me know the recording is that's like actually meant just for the video. And if I'm not audible at any point, just let me know about that. So again, thank you all for coming in. Giving the short talk about the theory of design that I learned in an architectural setting. I'm an architect myself by my undergraduate training. And the previous talk actually set up like a good background for me, the idea of a designer. It's actually so vague. It's like coming in from so many different perspectives you could be designer. But personally at the end of it, the way I take it is like problem-solving. If you're solving problems, you're doing design. And that's something that's been core part of architectural ethos like from the beginning. The term itself architect, it's like compound of two words, architect meaning like master builder. And this is like way back sometimes like there was some construction to be done.  So he's an architect which like slowly, slowly transformed and now we have this like very well documented industry and like a profession called architecture. So given that background, that's how I started in. But right now how I work is I work as a computational designer. And which essentially is using computational processes in any means for architectural designer could be anything. So this is a classic example I use for explaining the idea of how different computational processes come into the world of architectural engineering and construction. It's a public building, I'm not sure if I can call it a building. It's like a public monument that's recently opened in New York was done by a British architect Thomas Hedovick. And the engineering was done with Thornton, Thomas Hettie and AKT2 who are from New York and London. So the computational parts come, comes in like different parts and processes about this. Where you can see in the design process they use sort of an algorithmic approach to come up with the design in terms of 3D geometry passes it on to the engineers to analyze it or to assess it. And from there it goes to the next step where in the design process itself you mark out how the construction, how the certain different members that you can see they're gonna be. And they go back on site to be reassembled sort of like a jigsaw puzzle way. So it goes full length like from design to being engineered to the fabrication. And computation is like an aid that you use in the process. Similar approaches have been used for fashion where they've come up with like using different computational means and techniques. I'm not a personal expert about this. It's a project I found online done by Fab Textiles where they were using computational processes to come up with different designs and materials. Similarly for architecture or sorry for product design or furniture where you use the approach, the idea is to have a product that's usable by people. How you approach is like your own idea of what design is. And coming from this background I was looking at the whole field of architecture and the industry or like the profession being so old has a big volume of work about the theories that come up with design. And a lot of the discussions that we do in today's practice as a computational architect or any architect per se starts at a lot of abstract level of thinking. And that was really interesting to me. And that's how I got started in this. Where a lot of common problems be it like experiential, be it physical, be it technical were having repetitive solutions and coming back referring back to the same methods and techniques. So through this talk I'm gonna go through a bunch of different examples of how the problem has come up and like being resolved in different ways. And so it's gonna be a collection of different things. So there'll be a lot of context switching involved. So just heads up. The first one that I'm starting off with is this book by Christopher Alexander, Sara Ishikawa and Mures Silverstein called The Pattern Language. This idea has been used across in a lot of industry. Like it's also very popular in the software industry where like there's this book, The Five Designs. I'm lurking on the name, where you have common, so what the book does is it creates a new language called the pattern language. And patterns describe the problem and offer a solution. So common problems, common approaches, encode that as a pattern. So it's reusable in different aspects but it's not like specific and this way like the abstraction works to separate yourself from the core issue, think about it at a higher level and then reimagine how you can apply it at different scale, different uses. This is an, the whole book is a big collection of patterns. I'm not even sure how many, like I think it goes 200 plus. The book came out in 77 and it was a collection of his work over a period of 10, 12 years before that. And this is just one of the examples that I'm using and the context which he's describing this problem is in like looking at the city is not a tree but it's more like a connected graph sort of thing where like if you look at a city, a very top-down approach like there are big districts and then you're narrowed down. You come down to the neighborhood and like that sets up a hierarchy. This is actually trying to describe that issue in a slightly different way. Where the point he's making is a city is comprised of different units and each set, each unit and which he's calling a set. And a set is a collection of elements which interact together, relate together in some way and they make a whole unit. It'll make more sense when the example comes up. And organizations of these sets form the experience of a city and how different cities are. And you might be different cultures, different location, different scale, different sizes but it's a similar nature of breaking down, trying to understand a city. So this is an example. Like imagine a corner store where there's the street, the footpath, since this is all architectural, a lot of physical discussions. And it's all the common elements that you would find in any normal city. And he's explaining the way the city comes into existence, the nature of the people, the identity, the location is how these interactions work. And they agglomerate together to form a comprehensive definition or identity for the city. To get this point through, for this example where he's talking about just a corner store, we're gonna go through the next slide looking at the same description across different cultures and different places. So a place, I'm familiar like this is somewhere in America, same thing described in another place. I'm not exactly sure where these locations are but you can identify like the similar typologies. But what changes is the scale, the busyness, the different aspects, but it's the same interactions happening across different locations, different cultures, different geographies. And that's kind of how this book is talking about, like describing problems at that higher level and then looking at it individually. So that was one of the first examples in my collection of excerpts. This, the second one is a classic book that's, I've seen being used to introduce architectural design for first year grads across a lot of places, people, places that I've met, usually in like the beginning years of architecture where you're trying to explain to a kid how to go about architecturing. The book was done by Francis De Ketching and it's a book called Form, Space and Order. So trying to explain to a kid like go make a building is kind of a difficult problem. So they try to break it down into simple elements and at the beginning itself, it's more mathematical I would say, where he's just talking about abstract spaces, points, more like geometrical stuff. But I like the approach how he took to come up with the design where break it down into these simple elements, explain how their interaction works. At this point, we are still thinking very abstract. It's not really a building that we are necessarily talking about. And explain how they collect together, they interact with each other, how they form together. And it's starting to think of these elements as tools that you can use in your design process. At the same time, what we are doing is like thinking about it in 2D because it's easy to comprehend that. Sorry, designing in 2D and thinking in 3D. So one is like what you put on paper and what's in your head. And the abstraction that architects always use is meant to convey to the client, to the contractor, to yourself, to your team. And the book has a nice way of approaching this. It progresses to like using these elements and starts imparting meaning to them. Similar element like in this example of plane, whether it's placed vertically, horizontally, or sideways, imparts different meanings to the space. And then you start thinking about then how you can use them in your design process to maybe design a certain corridor or certain, or like design a certain corner of a room or a building. And this is a good analogy about how he, in a way is like justifying the origins of these meaning because these are like raw geometry, but imparting meaning to them is kind of like things that we've started associating with them more like evolutionarily I would say. And this is just touching on the issue of form versus function which is a big debate in architecture. It's like a timeless debate where the discussion goes like the architect is making a form, has to look beautiful if you can call it that, but also at the same time has to be functional. So what takes precedence in such a discussion? And I think we, I hear similar discussions in like the dev world I would say where you're thinking about like oh, beautiful is one thing and like functionality is one thing, but I don't know it's an open discussion I would say. So that with this is gonna be like the last example that I go through and I'm sure there are tons more. So this is looking at the city at a larger scale and trying to understand why cities come around to be how they be. I'm gonna run through a few examples for this image is showing is what's called a figure ground plan where you take the whole layout of the city and just block out the building footprints and put it on the map to scale. That's New York, Tokyo, Brazil, Sapporo, DC, Barcelona, Singapore, Istanbul. So with these collection of images you can see they come from different locations, different places, different cultures, but if I'd like to see like a common pattern that I see in them is like how orthogonal they are, like how everything is square, not necessarily to the whole layout but the individual massing of the buildings or the place it just ends up being rectangular. And this more like a post analysis of the situation of how cities end up being like rectangular. So coming to approach that from an idea point of way why urban masses end up being, there are a lot of theories about why a square grid is good. A lot of it comes from like theory of how cities came into existence, how they have to make it secure, how they were good for like militaristic purposes. But this is a more higher level analysis I would say where we start thinking about like space in terms of units because the idea of cities like everyone living together close nearby and best optimal use of the space itself. To do that, you start like laying out how your city is gonna be and the most convenient pattern to work around with is what's repeatable, does not face space in between and it's like more consistent in size. So I think there are just three of these shapes which actually do that. Like if you lay them out on a sheet or like individual pieces of them, they're not gonna leave any void space in between and the size of each member of them, they are the same. So that's like difficult to ascertain but like useful if you think of it like city blocks or construction units having standard sizes is good, like makes a lot of things easier. By that logic, like considering these three fit, there are still more dimensions for understanding why a square grid bends out in some sense. So the parameters that we are assessing it is in like these five aspects. One is like if you have a block, what's the future possible direction of growth? A square gives you three sides of growth, triangle would give you two and hexagon would give five. So in this sense like the hexagon makes more sense like it's more versatile but there are other points that it's losing on and I'll rest with them quickly. Understanding negative spaces in between. So negative spaces are like these red corners that you see in here like tight corners in a room that's not very convenient to use in because it just ends up being weird and by the nature of it. Squares don't end up with any negative problems. Like it's all 90, so it's all good. These things individually or the triangles individually have like three zones of the negative usage. If you put them like if you start stacking them you can avoid one of them but you still end up with two of them. Hexagons, the inner corners that you see marked here in red like they are not necessarily like claustrophobic inconvenient but they were like create these weird angles that's difficult to design things to put inside or like design things to form that acute angle on the inside. Then looking at the angles that we have, a square just has one internal angle.  If you start thinking of that for other shapes, like if to start having different kinds of tables. The fourth point, that's like very interesting. That's like when you have start groupings of these shapes for whatever reasons and purposes that the whole idea of modularity and flexibility. With a square like if you start picking how like different units to combine together you have like 53 combinations, 68 combinations and one combination with these three shapes respectively. Where again in this case like the triangle maybe wins out but over the analysis of it across these five points that's when like the square starts winning. And the creation of interior angles that's imagine like putting up a partition in between like a false wall in between that's parallel to one of the edges. You still have a consistent angles in the square and not so consistent in the other shapes. But again this is more like a post analysis of the theory rather than why we start building as a rectangular and analyzing it at more at urban scale. So in thinking of it in terms of massing instead of individual rooms and per se. And I think that's it. So those are my few collections about these x-herbs. We still have two minutes of procs for questions. So feel free to shout out. This one? The last column? Second one. Okay, so I'm gonna go outside the video slide. So this is one unit but this is also one unit. This is one unit. So put them next to each other and start grouping them because imagine a room or a city block and you wanna expand it. So you can have different combinations. I see what you're saying. But it was like I wasn't looking at it that sense because it's more like roads can be collapsed into one. Like if a property developer wants to buy more properties and start thinking around that then it's not really a problem. Sorry I didn't fully get the question. Could you speak a little louder? No, but that's a really interesting analysis. I don't know about it and haven't come across that but the whole like in urban design schools like there's a discussion of heat island effect but that's different. That's more like materials and how they interact with the built mass. But that's an interesting point that I'm gonna look up.


Zelensky admitted Ukraine will lose war without U.S. aid Senate leader Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky warned visiting American legislators that Kiev can only beat Russia with military aid from Washington and is sure to fail without U.S. assistance U.S. Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer has claimed Kiev is currently losing the war the lawmaker added speaking after a meeting with Zelensky Schumer made the case for renewed U.S. aid which has all but halted a mid Republican resistance in Congress everyone we saw from Zelensky on down made this very point clear if Ukraine gets the aid they will win the war and beat Russia but if they don't get the aid they will surely lose the war Schumer told the New York Times making his first visit to Ukraine Schumer was accompanied by a group of Democratic lawmakers who traveled to Lviv to meet with Zelensky and the country's newly appointed commander in chief General Alexander Sirsky the trip was reportedly organized to allow the senators to determine Ukraine's wartime needs according to the publication we think we will be able to bring back very strong specific evidence as to why Ukraine is for the first time losing the war or you know retreating in the war Schumer continued likely referring to Kiev's recent withdrawal from the key city of Avdivka which Russia said was long used as a launchpad for Ukrainian attacks on Donetsk the Senate leader went on to highlight Kiev's ammunition shortages vowing to bring the issue back to U.S. lawmakers and press for additional aid while senators passed a 60 billion dollar military aid package for Kiev earlier this month vocal opposition from House Republicans has stalled the legislation


Hello, I'm Aaron, this is Dylan, we work with Caminos de Agua in non-conflict base in central Mexico and this is Aguadapt. It's a certified ceramic filter to remove pathogens connected to a universal adapter to let Aguadapt be installed in any container like this garapón or this bucket. And then, thanks to its universal threading, other cartridges can be adapted to Aguadapt through specific chemical contaminants like fluoride, pesticides or arsenic or lead. So to adapt Aguadapt, we take an existing system installed in a bucket and you can attach a follow-up cartridge like that. And this cartridge could be filled with any of these materials like our bone char to treat fluoride or our biochar that can treat synthetic organics like agrochemicals, pesticides or antibiotics. Great.


in the back where we're gonna load ourselves up with that same lumber we took to Warren's last week. 2x6x16. No. Yeah, 16-footers, right? I think that's what he said. 2x6x16. Same thing as last time. Someone in America has a need of another truck with military equipment. I've seen dozens and I'm not exaggerating. I've seen dozens and dozens of trucks pulling Canadian military equipment from out west here, like around Edmonton out into Ontario. I don't know where they're going with them. Maybe I'll have to go back, but truck after truck after truck. Why are we moving so much of our military from the west to the east? Maybe we're bringing the old stuff there when we got new stuff coming? Or maybe we got new stuff already? We're giving weird lot of military moving around in Canada I've seen. But maybe it's just normal. I don't know. I've never seen this much though. Like this much is quite a bit. It's all going east. Maybe because Ontario and Quebec hit so hard with what's going on right now, maybe they're going there to help with the effort just to, you know, help out, build hospitals and stuff.  We'll see what happens. So I stopped at the Flying J here in Davidson's, Saskatchewan again. This is where I found the hand sanitizer that I was so excited to find. They were all sold out. So I had bought the last one last time I was here and I went in here again and they still hadn't gotten in a new order. So that's not surprising. It's only been like two or three days. So I tried. Nicest lady in there though. Really nice. They had hand sanitizer at the counter so that when you pay for your stuff, you can sanitize your hands right there. Like all the customers can use hand sanitizer. Super nice. A nice lady and she's talked to me for a little while there and it's very interesting to do. You feel closer to your fellow citizens when there's a crisis going on like this because everybody wants to open up and talk, you know, and everybody shares their experience of their personal experience with it. And you know, some of them have relatives that have gotten sick or you know, they've got parents that are isolated at home and they're out working and maybe they're working a double shift to pay the bills now. Everyone you talk to has their own story, which is true throughout all times, like even the good times. But during the good times, we're so sort of, you know, preoccupied with our own thing, our own life and everything that's going on in our world that we don't always stop and talk to the next person and find out who they are. I find that in a crisis like this, people come together more and we feel more as more like one, more like one people. It's, we're all going through this together and it's a good feeling, not the virus part of it, but the coming together part of it. It's really nice. I hope that that sticks around for a long time after this is all over as well. I hope that we don't forget this. It's nice. So I have another three hours and 35 minutes. I thought that I'd have more than that. Yeah, I should have four hours and 56 minutes. Why do I only have three? Hey, what's going on? Shift hours, 451. That's weird. I don't, I don't know what's going on here. But yeah, I got a few hours to go yet. We're going to keep heading on that way towards home and see how far we get. I'll probably get to somewhere around Grenfell, Saskatchewan or something between Regina and Brandon still in Saskatchewan. Well, we'll see what happens. They have a petrol canada there. I might pull in there for the night if there's a spot for me. I just wanted to share with you a little positive story about how the grocery store clerk was super nice and how everyone seems to be a lot nicer. And it's, and it's really nice. Have you experienced this as well, where you are? It's been a really good day to drive. My dad is in the area. He's a little north of me right now, north of Saskatoon. I know where I'm going. Gas is 66.9 cents a liter. In Edmonton today, the gasoline there was 59.9 per liter. I haven't seen prices that cheap since I was before I could even drive. I was probably like 10 years old. I know it's a terrible sign apparently, but for me, I love cheap fuel, cheap juice. Every dollar that I don't have to spend to fill up my tanks is a dollar I get to spend on food on the table and hand sanitizer when I find it. So these cheap fuel prices are a little bit of a nice break for me anyways as a trucker during this whole mess that's going on. I know it's difficult for some people in the oil industry and I feel for you, but got to see it from my point of view, man, it's, it's helping me out a lot, especially with all these repairs on my truck right now. We're saving, oh man, like over a hundred bucks a day. Is this guy going to move over for me? Probably not. We'll just wait here for him. I'm not sure exactly how much I'm saving, but I'd have to do all the math, but diesel fuel was about a dollar 25 a liter for the longest time, but a dollar 20 a liter. Now diesel fuel is 99.9. I don't know why it's more expensive than gasoline because you know diesel fuel is a byproduct of gasoline, isn't it? So you'd think it'd be cheaper and there's way more demand for diesel fuel than gasoline, maybe? Maybe that's wrong. There's actually a lot of gasoline engines out there, never mind. I'm just saying, I go through like, I go through hundreds of liters of diesel fuel every day and so does every other trucker out here. So just coming down from a dollar 20 a liter down to a 99.9 a liter, it helps us a lot. It's a little bit of, a little bit of relief. It's kind of nice, but I do see the other side of it as well. Ah shoot, the camera wasn't working. The guy in front of me there, I know he's too far ahead of you to see it right now. He's got more of that military equipment on his trailer and he really needs to pull over and check his chains. You could tighten those things up quite a bit. That trailer was rolling around like four inches at least. He had a little military trailer on his trailer. That's one thing I've noticed out of all of these military trucks passing me because I go slower than everyone else because I guess I value my wallet a little more than everyone else. I want to save the money and not burn as much fuel. Times are tough, man, but they're all blowing past me, right? Probably on a tight time schedule and getting paid really well. I mean, they're hauling military stuff. What I'm trying to say is that a lot of them have not properly secured their loads. A lot of them. Almost every single one that I've seen passed by, the chains were looser than I would have them, let's say. I mean, the freight is staying on the trailer, but I wouldn't want that to be my trailer. I'm just saying, I'm not going to call anybody out or show their truck or anything. They're far up there. You can't see who they are, but more military stuff? No, this is something else. But just a friendly reminder, just to pull over every couple hours, check your load, check your chains, check your straps. Make sure everything's still tight as it should be. Just saying.  We have enough to worry about right now, man. Tire loads down properly. Jeez. Then again, if he's going all the way into Ontario and if he doesn't fix that, the Ontario OPP will pull them over. They're pretty strict out there. They're pretty hardcore with their commercial trucks. It wasn't that loose. Don't get me wrong. It's not like wobbling all over the place. It was just looser than I would have done it, but hey, maybe I have higher standards. I don't know. I always say I like to have too much securement. I'd rather have too much than too little. I'd rather someone laugh at me as I pass them saying, wow, did you overdo it or what? I'd rather have them say that than what I'm saying right now. Like, wow, but like you might want to pull over. Check that out, man. There's another military truck. No, this guy's got lumber. Could be military lumber. You never know. I still wonder why they're moving so much military equipment to the east. I haven't seen any coming back west. Kind of makes me suspicious. Like, what are they doing out there in eastern Canada? Why are they taking all of our military out of the west and bringing it to the east? Well, you're leaving us defenseless out here. Must be some kind of plan that they're working on. I'm pretty sure that they're going there to help with the relief efforts, but I mean, there's been a lot of trucks. I said dozens and dozens before. I wasn't exaggerating at all. Dozens and dozens and dozens of trucks. Tons of equipment. But I haven't seen any going the other way. So I sort of feel like they're stealing our military away from us out in the west here and they're taking it to the east. Well, why do they get it all? What if we need it? Right? What's going on? Maybe it's old equipment, you know? Maybe we got a whole bunch of new equipment that just came in and they're shipping all this old equipment back out to the coast where it'll go, I don't know, probably sell it to some country on the other side of the world or something. I don't know. We're riding pretty much straight towards the moon. Man, things are getting crazy. Every day is something new. Here's this refinery in Regina. Always reminds me of Christmastime, all the lights. How do I got left? Two hours, 57 minutes. We're coming up to Balgoni flying J. So I'm debating if I should... No, I think we should go a little further. I think we should go a little further. Why not?


Many throughout the region took time today to remember a fallen Pikeville police officer killed last March. Today January 11th or 111 was marked as Officer Scotty Hamilton Day to coincide with Hamilton's badge number 111. Several people gathered at the Pikeville Police Department at 111 this afternoon for a moment of silence to remember him. The commission made this day 111 as the Scotty Hamilton Day and it was powerful when they brought it to us after all the events that took place and I thought it was spectacular and you know we we came together to the police department and figured on one o'clock today 11 minutes after that we would call that our time with him. We all came together as a city, an apartment, it involved everybody and we just knew that we wanted to retire that number so it symbolizes him because that's that's who he was. He was 111 to us. Hamilton was remembered throughout the day with many people including students and staff of several schools wearing blue in honor of him.


Everybody forced to your rip in 2022 slight draft football first offline and hobby six box mixer number five random teams. There you go There you go Results right there link is in chat. You can always find them on the site. Good luck. Everybody will start with The hobby boxes first three hobby three first off the line here Yeah, Kraken have been definitely looking better for the most part Silver auto Eric barrier. I forgot where he went Wait, don't they have I think there's a checklist out of this Says none here. Okay. He definitely has a team though. I know it Or had a team that he would go to in a group break, you know He's USFL right now. Where did he play? Broncos He was in mini camp at the Broncos. That's where this card is going in Hutchinson field level rookie white for the Lions That's pretty sweet. You go Lions five out of 35 Concourse red Ricky Garrett Wilson nice hit jets good pack here 1 15 to 149 Silver deck Silver picket numbers insert for the stillers Kendrick prior on the base auto here Kendrick prior Jaguars Kendrick prior a hyper field level burrow The Bengals concourse rookie hyper Sam Howell for the commanders Chris Long silver Aidan Hutchinson silver spark straight London Got to make my predictions for the World Series No Kobe Dean youth explosion auto Eagles silver not numbered Concourse rookie orange for the Panthers Matt Corral 39 at 49 Field level red AJ Brown Eagles 40 setters 47 of 149 silver rookie field level Johan Dotson commanders It's young silver Dustin Crumb Three at 25 on the tie-dye auto Dustin Crumb Says none here. Okay. It's definitely not none. We gave him he had a he was with someone at one point Dustin Crumb he played for the he's playing for the Ottawa Redbacks. That's pretty cool Chiefs on the crumb he was a undrafted free agent Siney And then he was waved in August so chiefs on the Dustin Crumb Concourse rookie purple Aidan Hutchinson 6375 Alliance Field level rookie hyper Matt Corral Panthers concourse silver Devo Samuel your Quebec So I'm gonna take all the base of guys that are still in college and I al it's all gonna go to one spot Unless there's an auto around those separately, but we'll do all the I won't show all of them But they'll all go to one spot.  See Bears on the Roberson got a field level tricolor is a spiller rookie Chargers 95 a 199 Hyper concourse Ricky Johan Dotson commanders Silver Tom Brady concourse Buccaneers Rice young there's another one of those price young. Oh, so you're gonna know all these guys Chris You're gonna know all of them You'd explosion for the Rage Engage ins Levi Lewis Reminds me of a good old Darren Lewis Red Sox legend Levi Lewis Levi Lewis, he's for this a sketch one Rough Riders Seahawks, so he was on draft and signe for the Seahawks and was cut in May Seahawks Concourse Ricky white epic at CA for the Falcons 24 out of 35 Red field levels to bond digs bills nice Maryland color match 82 of 149 silver bow on the field level for the Raiders Mechy I agree with you table. I agree with you. I'm with you 100% breaks like this are not the most entertaining But you get some nice cards in here. Kyron Williams rams base auto I think he's starting this week trailing Burke's rookie field level tricolor for the Titans numbered 160 of 199 hyper concourse Jamar Chase What a bangles he's out of a month Silver Darius Leonard That's what I'm saying Chris Got 150 points here ran him out to all at the end tricolor mac jones concourse patriots 132 199 hyper Trevor Lawrence concourse Jags silver concourse rookie Jamison Williams for the Lions Sam Howell rock Purdy Niners base auto Concourse red Jordan Davis Eagles rookie 83 of 149 hyper Ricky Williams for the going to the dolphins longest tenure on the Ricky there Mike Williams silver Bleak Willis on the field level rookie. All right first off the line time Let's pull some heat Dang, that's a big one table. I love the color wheels. That's a big one Got a David O'Jabbo rookie orange pulsar first off the line field level Numbered five out of 26 for the Ravens Kyle Phillips. I believe he's a Titan Silverado. Uh, yep Titans on the Silverado there Concourse red Zeke for Dallas 67 1 to 49 hyper Russell Wilson Broncos field level Julio Jones silver there Tom Brady sparks silver Tigers drive Devonte Adams field level Raiders Nice card Raiders go into a combo spot there There you go, that'll replace one of the orange pulsars to Marvin leal 15 to 30 orange pulsar auto for the Steelers to Marvin leal Hyper concourse Brady zappy. There he is Patriots and gold Randy Moss five out of 10 Vikings concourse That is nice there you go Vikings Silver Herbert field level Her first off line of this stuff is dope A Peyton Manning Tennessee volunteers color match orange pulsar field level that goes to the Colts longest tenure Eight of 26 That's awesome There you go Colts Dustin Crumb again Silverado Just had him Crap Was it chiefs Dustin Crumb? We literally I just had this guy up here Dustin Crumb. Yeah chiefs chiefs Hyper field level Ricky Williams dolphins tricolor field level Browns. No, sorry not Browns, but uh Panthers Baker Mayfield 153 of 199 Panthers Silver Elway Drake London turbocharged silver John Mechie Two more photo boxes, man. These are awesome. I think World Series MVP World Series MVP is gonna be Brandon Marsh So I'm going with Concourse orange pulsar rookie commanders John Dotson. That's nice seven out of 26 Redemption I'll say the redemption for a second now Ricky Williams tricolor field level dolphins 47 199 Hyper Troy Aikman Silver Randy again Malik Willis silver sensations insert Titans And we've got a Tariq Castro fields Tariq Castro fields Commanders Tariq Castro fields rookie signature silver commanders Yeah, MVP World Series MVP is very tough to predict I don't think it's only rookie autos in this product. I don't think it is I could be wrong though There are other there are other autos. It's not just rookies Very very largely rookies very very much so rookies, but yeah, I'm scrolling through. I'm seeing some that That aren't Yeah, very few orange pulsar errand on all the rams field level number 69 out of 26 Kobe Bryant seahawks on the silver auto pulled to Kobe Bryant auto today. That's pretty cool It's high die rookie concourse karson strong eagles numbered 23 at 25 hyper rust for the broncos Bailey zappy there is concourse silver Brady zappy Yeah, there's some vets in there. There's not a ton Aiden Hutchinson 3 of 30 orange pulsar auto lions Awesome hit lions Justin Ross hyper purple concourse tasam hill saints 35 of 75 best tight end on the saints silver field level jonathan taylor One more photo box everybody. We do have some points random off as well as the NIL base cars and stuff And stuff Very lazy of me to say and stuff So we're gonna english teacher get mad at you in school or sand and stuff A concourse orange pulsar chris long chris long goes to the rams 20 of 26 Rory you're talking bad about that combo spot, but you've got a lot of hits with the rams honestly Redemption zachary carter signature or signature silver Zachary carter the bungles. Sorry the bangles Purple concourse jim kelly for the bills 9 of 75 Got a travis kelsey orange field level 11 to 49 chiefs concourse silver rookie kyron williams rams Jameson williams kenny pickett field level I don't think we're sold out for tonight We still got some memorabilia spots No refresh and see orange pulsar russell wilson broncos Dude, could you imagine him doing the high knees on your flight 13 out of 26? And then in the interview today he was like, I don't really get jet lagged. Yeah, dude. I love russell wilson He's like he's like my favorite person in the NFL now Silver demarvin leal auto for the Steelers I love russell wilson, dude. He's the best So entertaining Dude, it's comedy. It's comedy Nick bozak tricolor for the 49ers 42 of Let's ride is so good. I love it Hyper concourse matt stafford. They're gonna somehow win the super bowl.  I love it.  He's probably just building up all this anger and he's just gonna like throw 500 yards of game down the stretch and like Dude, that'd be amazing He breaks like Playoff passing yards and touchdowns records and just all this other stuff Okay, a couple of randoms here both are gonna be to everybody First one's gonna be for the 150 points card second one's gonna be for these are the highlights of it, but the nil players Silver brice young and jerky vegans here.   Let's ride guy So for the points 10 times one two three four five six seven eight nine and 10 Scott f gets the uh 150 points And then these are for the nil cards One two three four five six seven eight nine and ten edd d there you go edd All right, let's do a quick recap The football game is only on uh only on prime So you got to sell your soul and join amazon prime and then watch it All right, orange pulsar corral to 30 for the panthers to marvin nil stealers orange pulsar hutchinson for the lions to 30 Coby brian seahawks dust and crumb Chiefs to marvin leal another uh stealers pulsar there to 30 Calla philips titans jordan david conquers red Sean throw a curveball there brock purdy niners current williams rams Leave by lewis seahawks leave by lewis silver renty robertson jr Bears tie-dye dust and crumb for the chiefs And a coby dean for the eagles kendrick prior I forget prior jags kendrick prior Eric barrier went to the broncos a gold congors randy moss was a nice one for the vikings uh commanders to wreak cash to fields on this uh signature redemption and zacry carter bangles on the redemption one more of those coming up Thanks everybody


Meet Steve Zarros, a college sophomore, and like many others his age, a student who uses Adderall as a study aid. All it took was a friend's suggestion. I heard that Adderall's magic and stuff, so I was just like, oh, can I have one? So he gave me one, I got an A- on it, and it was the first A I got at college. In 2010, over 18 million prescriptions were written for Adderall and related drugs. That's about a 14% increase from the number of prescriptions written in 2009. Today, drug companies face shortages. It all comes down to the pressure to succeed. Now you have to get like a 3-5 at a really good school and have like be like on an e-board of like two different clubs and like have like multiple jobs and internship, and even then you still might not get a job. Dr. Lorraine Wolfe, the director of disability services at Boston University, says Steve is not alone. She estimates that as many as a quarter of students, 18 and older, have at least tried it. College students perceive this as giving them the edge to get those A's, to stay up all night and you know, write that paper rather than handing it in late. And when they're pressed for time, users say it works. You can just read a textbook for hours and it doesn't get boring and you're so focused. It helps you just zone in and focus for as long as you need to. But Zarros took it one step further when he chose to write an academic paper on the subject. The topic of the paper was like the effects of Adderall and like everyone should get it or something like that. We have, you know, these days a pill for everything so why not a smart pill? And quite frankly, it's available and fairly easy to get diagnosed, so why not use it? It's a pretty slippery boundary and fluid to the point where the exact diagnostic criteria simply don't exist. But with every drug comes a risk, something most students don't consider. People can rely on it to the point where they'll feel like I'm not going to be able to study unless I have this extra boost. A drug classified Schedule II by the DEA, the same category as cocaine, is nothing to be taken lightly. It can produce heart irregularities, seizures, psychosis with high doses, accidental death. Though he is still not completely sure that he has ADD, today, Zarros has a prescription. Once I see what I could do with it, it just kind of is like why am I struggling with this, struggling with this and then not getting any results when I could spend a quarter of the time and get a better grade. In Steve's opinion, anyone can benefit. Adderall is just like a modern miracle that makes everyone smarter. For BUTV-10, this is Alexa Dragumas reporting.


The study suggests using fiber optic cables for obtaining strain data and identifying faults and volcanic dikes which could aid in hazard assessment. This article was authored by Philippe Jauset, Thomas Range, Trond Ryberg and others.