Hey everyone, welcome back to the channel. Today we're gonna do a Q&A session so that we can all get to know each other just a little bit better. It's been almost a year now since I started this channel and I've gotten quite a few questions about my background and how I got into cooking and things like that. So I figured I'd make a dedicated video to answer all of those questions. So let's get into it. So I figured it would make the most sense to start off by talking about my background and how I got into cooking in general. So thanks a lot to everyone who's submitted these questions on both Instagram and YouTube, all of which you can see on the screen right now. So I'm currently 24 years old. I did go to college. I went to the University of Michigan and studied environmental engineering. So I graduated about two and a half years ago now. And after I graduated, I worked in environmental health and safety at the university for a bit. Then I ended up getting a job as an air quality engineer at an environmental consulting company. So to keep it somewhat short, within a few months of working at that job, while I liked it well enough, I knew that the nine to five sort of corporate job life wasn't really something that was a great fit for me and for my personality. So I already knew at that point that I sort of wanted to pursue something different, even though I had always kind of imagined getting a job as an engineer and that's sort of always what I had pursued. But about 10 months into that job, I ended up starting this YouTube channel sort of with the hope of eventually turning it into my full-time job. And at the same time, I had been learning about personal finance and the stock market. And I had found a way to bring in another decent source of income on the side trading stocks. So back in February of this year, I decided to take the risk and quit my engineering job to focus on this channel full-time and that's what I've been doing ever since. And as sort of a shameless plug here, I actually just started a second YouTube channel about personal finance and stock trading and I just posted my first video there a couple of days ago. So on that channel, my goal is to help people achieve a high level of financial freedom so that they can free up their time to focus on the things that they truly care about. So feel free to check out that channel too if you're interested in that kind of thing. It's called More Money, Less Problems and I'll of course link it below. But anyways, that's not what this video is about. So let's move on to my cooking background. So as most of you know, I've never worked at a restaurant. I didn't go to culinary school or anything like that. So I'm just completely self-taught. My parents did cook a lot of homemade meals growing up. So I got quite a bit of inspiration through that but it wasn't really until I started living on my own in college that I actually got more into cooking for myself. So I learned most of what I know through reading books, watching videos and obviously lots of practice but I'm also constantly working to get better and better because I know that I still have a lot to learn myself. So I started out kind of like most people just sort of following recipes because I knew I liked cooking but I didn't really know how to take it to the next level or how to feel more confident cooking from scratch. But then once I really started getting more into it reading more books about cooking and things like that it really started to click for me and I gradually became more and more confident. I realized that once you sort of know the underlying techniques and concepts behind cooking it's really not as hard as it seems from the outside. And so that's sort of why I started this channel in the first place because I wanted to help other people sort of have that same realization that I had and helped to teach the basics that helped me to initially become more confident in the kitchen. And aside from that it's just another way to keep myself accountable to honing my own skills because in order to put these videos out every week and know that I'm putting out the best quality content I have to be confident in my own cooking skills. So it kind of serves that purpose for me too. But when it comes to the books that have helped me out the most I do have a lot of them here. I tend to kind of just buy new cookbooks whenever I get the opportunity even if I don't really have the time to read all of them but I would say the book that influenced me the most was Salt, Fat, Acid, Heat because it really helped me to start becoming more confident cooking without a recipe. And from there I just cooked more and more continued to read more books and really just tried to learn as much as I possibly could. And after graduating college is really when I have more time to focus on my hobbies like cooking. And so that's when I think I improved the most. As far as how I got into sourdough bread specifically I know a few years back I used to buy sourdough bread from this guy at the farmer's market that I would go to. And so that sort of initially piqued my interest I think because he was talking about how it was naturally fermented and things like that. And at the time I didn't really know what that meant but it did sound interesting to me. And so when I got more into cooking and baking I eventually bought a baking related cookbook and there was a sourdough bread recipe in there. So I kind of just jumped straight into it and started with that one. As most of you know, once you get into it it's a pretty addicting hobby. You just want to keep improving and making your loaves better and better. So after that point I was pretty much just hooked. So that's basically the gist of my cooking background. So let's move on to a few specific questions that I got. So on Instagram, chaotic good eats asked what's something that you've learned the more you've been making content. I think the biggest thing I've learned which really applies to almost anything in life is just to focus on constantly improving and getting better. And most of the time you'll eventually get to where you want to be. So don't worry about making everything perfect right from the beginning because I know when I look back at my first few videos I'm not super proud of them based on my standards today. Even if at the time I thought they were pretty decent and I hope that in a year or two down the road I'll even be able to look at the videos that I'm making right now and see significant growth from now until then. So really if you focus on making each video at least 1% better than the last one I think you'd be surprised by how quickly that can actually add up. So that's sort of the philosophy that I've followed with this channel and I think it's worked out pretty well so far. So next Tina on YouTube asked what did you think you would be when you were 10 and what do you think you'll be doing when you're 50? So that's a good question. I think when I was 10 probably like most kids I mean I was really into sports obviously every kid dreams of being a professional athlete or things like that but more realistically I mean I knew I did well in school so I thought maybe I would wanna be a doctor or a lawyer or an engineer but at that point I definitely didn't really think I'd be doing anything cooking related. I mean when I was 10 I hadn't started cooking at all yet so I definitely didn't think that I would be doing what I am now. Now when I'm 50 that one is pretty tough because that's about 25 years out and a lot can change between now and then. So whether or not I'm doing something cooking related at that point is hard to say. I would hope at the least I'm teaching in some form or another because I think that's what I found that I'm the most passionate about is really just sharing what I know with other people and helping them improve their lives in one way or another even if it is something as small as becoming a better cook. All right so now we'll move on to some food and cooking specific questions. Starting with a question from Ethan on Instagram who by the way has a YouTube channel that you've probably seen as well but definitely check him out if you haven't yet. But he asked what's your favorite kitchen tool that most people probably don't have? And I think the obvious answer is my three in one avocado slicer. But if I had to give another answer I would say my dough whisk. And for those of you who've seen my baking videos you know exactly what I'm talking about. I didn't even know they existed until somewhat recently but if you make a lot of bread or other baked goods it just makes it so much easier to mix your dough. When you use a normal whisk the dough always gets stuck in the middle and it's just a hassle to clean and then when you use a normal spoon it doesn't quite mix the dough as well. So this whisk is kind of the perfect tool for that. So the next question from Instagram what's your all time favorite thing to cook and why? And this one's a pretty easy one for me. I would definitely say pizza is my favorite thing both to cook and probably to eat as well. It's sort of one of the first recipes that I kind of mastered when I really got into cooking. And I mean who doesn't love pizza? The whole process of just making the dough from scratch letting it rise, shaping the dough is just sort of therapeutic. And I personally think that it's pretty much impossible to beat homemade pizza. There's just something about it that's always better than the pizza I've gotten at restaurants. I actually do have a pizza video on my channel but it was one of the first videos I posted so it's not the best by today's standards but I will be working on remastering that video pretty soon both with a few updates to the recipe and obviously hopefully a much better production quality on the video overall. So next it's Ryan Turley on YouTube who I know also runs his own cooking channel which you may wanna check out asked what's the most exciting thing that you wanna cook that you've never tried? I wouldn't say there's one particular dish that I've really wanted to make but lately I have been making a lot more desserts like cakes and things like that because that's something that I never really made or had that much interest in in the past. But I think in order to sort of become a more well-rounded cook I should have some experience making cakes and pies and all that kind of stuff. You know I think it'd be cool to not only be able to master the savory side of cooking but master the sweet side as well. Now David Friedman on YouTube asked what are some of your hobbies outside of cooking and what would be your final meal? And I sort of already answered the other two. As far as my hobbies outside of cooking I would say the main one is working out. I've been lifting weights like five or six days a week since college pretty much. Obviously these days it's a little bit harder with gyms being closed and things like that but I've been trying to do what I can at home and looking forward to getting back into it once gyms do reopen. I have always kind of enjoyed being active so I'll play basketball every now and then but recently this channel has kept me pretty busy and just cooking in general, testing recipes, things like that tends to take up the majority of my time. But when I do have some free time I'll sometimes read, watch some TV, watch YouTube videos and things like that. So I'd like to get into some more hobbies now that I kind of have a little bit more free time with having this channel up and running and all that. But yeah at the moment I would say I do spend most of my time on cooking related things. As far as my final meal I would probably say just a nice plate of barbecue, like some ribs, cornbread, baked beans, things like that. I would say that's in general my favorite type of meal even though pizza is kind of my favorite thing to cook and eat on its own. I would say my favorite whole meal is barbecue. So I like all types of barbecue, chicken, ribs, brisket, things like that. So for my final meal I would say just a whole plate, a little bit of everything would be kind of the ideal meal for me. Now we have another question from YouTube. Have you experimented with xanthan gum powder as a dough conditioner and sourdough? I wanted to make sure I included this one because really the main reason that you would use xanthan gum I think is in gluten-free doughs which I know a lot of people out there are gluten intolerant. So it's definitely something that I do wanna work on. I haven't yet to answer your question but I do have a good gluten-free pizza recipe that I haven't put out on the channel yet but hopefully I will soon. It doesn't involve xanthan gum but you know for those of you who are gluten-free it is a great recipe for pizza. I hope to eventually work on some gluten-free sourdough bread and just bread recipes in general but I haven't actually started testing those recipes yet just because there's so many other things that I wanna work on but again hopefully I will do that soon. So if you made it this far in the video I appreciate you sticking around. Thanks again to everyone who sent in questions. I really enjoyed making this video and kinda seeing what you guys wanted to know. If you haven't seen my most recent video be sure to click that in the bottom right corner of the screen. Otherwise I'll see you all in the next one.


The PI3K Act pathway is crucial for various cellular processes and plays a significant role in cancer development and progression. Targeting major components of this pathway could provide new insights for cancer drug discovery. However, the clinical efficacies of inhibitors are limited due to oncogenic activation occurring through various mechanisms and therapeutic resistance. Combination therapies involving signaling inhibitors and conventional cancer treatments may solve the therapeutic dilemma. Cascading inhibitors of the PI3K Act pathway, either alone or in combination with other therapies, are the most effective treatment strategy for cancer. This article was authored by Yang Hee, Miao Miao Sun, Guo Ding Zhong and others.


When a girl comes into the like the smush room, I feel like they shout grenades. Is that right? Maybe it's a type of fruit? Vegetable? A grenade is someone that's actually butters or ugly. Mints, oh my god, you said it. Yes. You look mint tonight. What mint means is like, fresh. Like a mint. I might be a mint. G-T-L. Much language. Is it a car? G-T-L, obviously the famous, Jim Tan Laundry. Reggie is one their version of Guido. So like I'm the number one Guido. And one of them is probably the number one Reggie. Smush. I reckon that means you're net on with someone. Smush him. I would probably say smush. I mean two things, either to kiss someone or to fight him.  You're touching my booty. You're my pet. Do you have a T-U-N-E? Toon. A Toon I think is somebody that's from not from around the area. He's a Toon. Toon. I'm about to get Tooned tonight. Toon, like, I hear you. We're about to get turnt up. Sneaky's always been called Meatball because she's small. She's like a Meatball head and D and I was always called the Meatballs. It's about the Meatball. Pie, like a, like food. Like mashed potato pie. Pie means you are drunk. I feel like when you at the club you drink it too much. You're pie. What would land, might mean? Like, I don't know. You landed yourself a Fitbird. That must mean that you've dropped a Bollock. Favorite disaster? Crackers. Hmm, I don't know what that is. Crackers, maybe it's like a lame dude, like when wackies are crackers. Crackers. I don't know. I feel like we held our own a jolly shoreline. Language. We got some right just because they told us. I think I've probably got quite a lot correct compared to the others. I'm not sure how I did on that. Language challenge, but I don't know. Maybe I did good. That was me for the Jersey Soul's Language Challenge. I don't think I did that well. But who gives a f***?


Yes, I'm an alien here. I don't know anything about Neurosize and a lot about data. There are no monkeys in this talk and you can tell that I'm from a different community because the collection of stickers on my laptop is completely different to the collection of stickers on everybody else's laptop so that's a sure sign that I'm from somewhere else. Okay, so I'm going to talk about fare. Now I know it's after lunch and it's all about data, and no groovy pictures of brains. But let's try to at least get some enthusiasm. So, Faire as Marianne, who actually gave practically all my talk this morning in her opening, who's also an author of the Faire Principles paper, which has done our H-indexes, no harm at all, Marianne. Oody told us it's stands for Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable. Maen nhw wedi fy enthusiastic wrth g surfing adrwyddoch, rydyn ni'n gwah Heavenfanc activism yn casgliadal ei pergywed am ymbygau, lle'r bwrs iawnntau. Nid yn fan gwrs-yfferddo lijaf xenon arno fel rhan fyddai hwn yn fwy yr holl o bron, neu mae'n ddyprif ordid ddweud, mae'n ddifredig awrraedd ei dddrealion ei gref 무엇 ar hyn. Eu disgwylchi'r mewn sefydlin. G faltwch ar yr gallwn cymdeithasol. Dwi'n cael ei gynnunio. Mae gyda'r cymdeithasol esudio, mae'r cymdeithasol ym fades pregnantor o'r hamlŷ ddechrau a'r ddeddarau. Mae'r cymdeithasol esudio. Ac mae'n meddwl byddwyd o phlog, ac mae'n meddwl gyda bod y moyddl iaith, ddyn nhw'n meddwl yn credu arddangos penthalof yr ysgol. Mae'n meddwl mynd i'r lluneg ac yn ei cherdd.  Ac mae'n rhaid i'r gweithio ar y cyflwyno'r ffordd cyffredinol, mae'r rhaid i'r rhaid i ddod o ddechrau'r gwaith. A oeddwn ni'n rhaid i'w dechrau'r ddod o'r ffordd. Felly mae'r cyffredinol, os yw yw'r cyffredinol, sy'n cyfrifio'r gwaith arall, ond mae'r gwaith eich portol. Mae'n gweithio ar gyfer y gweithio'r Gweithfawr, cyllid gweithfawr eraill? No, wey, no. Because the European Open Science Cloud, which of course isn't European, isn't open, isn't about science and isn't a cloud, but apart from that it's perfectly named, is actually a research commons and there's always this attempt to put a single entry point, one web page onto all data for Europe. This is just bonkers. It's not the way a commons actually works. It's also collectively created, owned or shared by the whole community with mixed degrees of control and I wanted to highlight that a little bit. So this is a picture from the research commons in order to be able to do cancer research which was funded at the NIH and this was an attempt to actually kind of quite control how this would be managed by organising a few key data sets and organising a community in order to be able to really work on very well defined standards. You're all building research commons so I found a couple of examples. You know the human brain project, that's building a research commons. The open science brain community, that's building a research commons. I think the next two days we're going to hear a numerous number of people building research commons. The one I'm associated with is called Elixir. Elixir is an equivalent to INCF in some ways for life science data in Europe. It's 23 nodes from European countries, 15 different communities that it recognises it particularly supports but it supports all life science data. So it's particularly how do we organise and manage life science data for all life science problems and projects. It's trying to coordinate a zoo of community resources. So you know you all use RayExpress and ENA and all these kind of other things, all of those, as well as all the national data sets. And to try to marshal all the different tools of the community, compute resources and so on. It's massively distributed. It's 220 different institutes in Europe. Each one of these has its own APIs, its own funding, its own web interfaces, its own submission tools, its own tool deployment. And it's held together with common identifiers, registries, workflows, love, hope and an awful lot of politics and drinking. I was like this is how we actually put this together. And because that's easy we are now doing the European Open Science Cloud Life project which is to build an uber fair life science community commons which attempts to federate 13 research infrastructures of which Elixir is one. So for example BBMRI which is to do with Biobanking, MIRI which is to do with Marine. I mean all these, so this is clearly a challenge. So what we're dealing here is a zoo of catalogs, a zoo of tools, a zoo of data, a zoo of workflows, a zoo of computing resources. So my first fairy story is to pick up on something that Mary Ann said which is there's a temptation if we're talking about fair to jump right in and talk about interoperability and to talk about doing really complicated things with standards. But the first thing you must do before you can link something is find it. So how would we, when we're working in such a complicated community commons where we have such a range of every kind of life science data, imaging data and omics data and model data and synthetic biology data and so on what do we do there because there is no one model so we looked at how do we do simple finding so our first fair story is conventions lightweight conventions for just finding and accessing registering data sets where you have existing data models and existing interfaces and we have two things here that we're working with particularly one called EDMI which is the European Open Science Cloud data set minimum information which is does exactly what it says in the tin is a minimum information in order to be able to describe for each of the resources what that resource actually does in order to be able to drive underlying infrastructure. I'm not going to talk about that one I'm going to talk about bioschemas. So bioschemas is conventions for using schema.org to find, access and index data sets and other objects in particular to make them ready well not particular but it also incidentally makes them ready for Google data set search as well. It's very small very lightweight, it's very viral and it follows a model of a little bit of semantics everywhere. Who's heard of schema.org? Yay right good so I don't have to explain this slide for the handful of you who didn't it's structured data descriptors in web pages. Very low barrier universal markup so it's a little bit of embedded markup in a web page but the key thing is it's a little bit so that you can expose what's in that web page or that data set or whatever it is you're trying to expose such that you can then exchange information about it, you can extract it from your registries, you can do automated curation with it so fair sharing which was also mentioned by Marianne as a registry of standards fair standards that's managed by part of its part of the Elixir family that uses this kind of mechanism. So it follows the Goldilocks principle which is not too hot and not too cold just enough and Goldilocks is the principle that we're trying to follow throughout all of our activities in our Elixir Fair Commons which is the temptation to over engineer everything is strong and we have to constantly hold back and I'll mention that a little bit later on. So what we've managed to do over the last two or three years, it takes a long time, is we take the schema.org now consider data set for example in schema.org there are 91 properties for data set we probably don't need 91 properties in fact we needed 5 so we chose 5 with 8 optional ones but really just 5 that we were interested in if you wanted to describe a data set, basic information like who owns it and when was it released, boring stuff like that the tools could then use when they were automatically processing over it so we have generic specifications we have some to do with scientific activities like marking up workflows, marking up protocols and then we have things to do with bio data so the few, the six or seven things we want to say if it's about a protein or it's about a sample we then embed that into our resources and then it can be picked up by aggregators and registries and search engines like Google and various different applications so we've taken up to now 200 people participating in that activity 68 resources are marked up so far we have about 11 million pages we have seven candidate new types like sample going to the schema.org community where they will become part of the regular schema.org activities and we have 30 profiles which are conventions for using current schema.org, 14 countries have participated in that and a little example of this is the marine our marine partners and they have a marine archive which they have no API, they've got no ability to do an API it's a very small activity, they mark up their webpages in bioschema we have a little search, a little harvester that goes and crawls and picks it up and then in biosamples which when it wants to register this data extracts that information, registers it into the biosamples curation and links back to it so you keep the provenance of where these things came from. So this is an example of very lightweight fare in a fare commons so it was a happy ending, it was endorsed by Elixir, our first types are going into schema.org and as I said this Goldilocks principle was very important because believe me the amounts of debates on trying to explode into ontology land so ontologists are great people, some of my best friends are ontologists however they could argue about the semantics on the head of angels and pins till one loses the will to live and particularly as an engineer because I'm actually an engineer we lose the ability to do anything with it and so this is a very engineering process so it was important that it remained tractable to software engineers. So when it all got a bit too ontology we went back and said no unless it's a very simple thing that somebody can immediately put up that just understands how to scrape a bit of Jason, forget it. So that's the difference between elegance and the best for tools and of course we have trolls because everybody thinks we are reinventing ontologies. This only uses a subset of the fair principles so then I want to go into a little bit about the fair principles or quite a lot about the fair principles actually having spent some time writing them with Marianne and the fair principles versus fair the nice intention because they are quite different things. So our second story is that once upon a time in a meeting in Lawrence in the Netherlands there was a gathering together of 40 people and a woman so there's issues there I had to nip out for a day and so that was their last female left those of you who watched Ice Age you'll get that joke with your children. So anyway we produced this paper called The Fair Guiding Principles but there have been many many efforts before there was a grassroot activity that has actually become a bit of a top down one. Here are the principles which I took off the website so I knew diligence I did go on to the ICF website although I'm now told that it's all changing anyway but anyway this is the fair principles they will be short test afterwards they are actually in the paper only in a breakout box they are never explained so that's actually proved to be good because we can get away with anything and bad because we can get away with anything and some of them we're not quite sure what they even mean metadata includes reference references to other, qualify references to other metadata people puzzle about what the semantics of that actually mean so what they're intended to mean is that data and metadata are locatable and accessible by identifiers and they're standard access protocols to access them and they have the least restrictive licences that you can get away with and the second piece is that they're machine and human readable data formats that is compliant to many community standards not just one community standards because you might have if you have a data set you might want to be able to mark that up with respect to a data a standard to do with registering that data set which comes from the library community as opposed to marking up with a community standard which comes from the domain like proteomics so there's multiple data sets persists that metadata persists and it tells you the provenance of the data and how it's crossing to other data so that was the intention so they're more than a fuzzy feeling and in fact on your own website you say it's enhancing the ability of machines to automatically find and use data or any object that supports is reused by individuals so it's all to do with access automation so that was the purpose but it's also got into policy and proclamation and vision because it has this cool word called fair so the message is spread across the lands there's numerous papers about the cost about not having fair and what does fair mean in practice and the whole grant program is called the fairification of data sets and things like this there's fair hackathons at bio IT world and there's a whole bunch of projects with the word fair written into them just to be on the safe side and including one of mine I'm not stupid and a whole bunch of these are all projects I'm funded on actually and all these different organisations claiming that they run the whole meaning of fair so lots of going on so this tells me something that simple words are powerful things are angled and simple concepts are not so simple to implement so it's going to have a little bit of look at what we mean by fair one size does not fit all and do beware if you remember one thing out of this talk beware of fair zealots because there are lots of people out there who are claiming that they will solve your fair problems because they have always been fair whatever that was use their technology because it's the only way that you can possibly be fair that they are claimed to be the only people that control fair and they don't know what it means but they're going to measure it anyway and that's one of the things I'm going to talk about next because that's very very worrying so even Barrow Mons who is our kind of he came up with the word wrote in his paper which immediately followed there are emerging indications that this word may be sometimes stretched which will raise concerns and confusions and in fact he's just produced or led the activity of another paper which is interpretations and implementation considerations which was still equally as contentious so let's get south at some reality so because this morning fair came up at least four times that I counted in different talks the principles are actually an aspiration they're a journey they are a call for this machine actionability they're very ambiguous it's a spectrum what's you know you can have different degrees of fairness which are briefly say they have to be domain respectful they have to be implementable with today's protocols so that's something else that people are trying to invent the notion of a fair protocol there's no need for a regular protocol it's more to do with how you use those protocols not the invention of a new one it's just a subset of what we mean by good indicators for a good data set and they are very much a work in progress they are not a standard they're not strict they are not about one size fits all they've got nothing to do with quality they are not open they are not tablets of stone so they're not about being open you can be fair not open otherwise it before because A stands for access not open and they're not about privacy preserving or regulatory rigour either I'll mention that a bit later on as well they're not about a resources quality or impact so for example in elixir we help choose which resources we're really going to put our energies behind supporting we call them the core data resources and amongst a whole measure of indicators are they fair so do they adhere to these principles but there are many other indicators like what is the quality of the data is it a good database does the community care about it you can have a fair data set which is perfect all the metadata is there it's readable it has all the APIs it has all identifiers and nobody cares a damn about it because it's irrelevant it's out of date it's not supported by the community and you can have another data set which is absolutely critical and doesn't meet all the fair measures but that's okay because it's an aspiration of where to move on to it's not about harmonising all metadata to one schema either so there's a bit of hype and we're about here at the moment about to descend into the trough of disillusionment because we need to do a bit more of this clarity business and in particular we need to do more on cost benefit analysis because it is quite expensive to make a existing data set fair and so you need to be very careful about how you choose your battles and what you're actually going to do so this European report actually is very good I know most European reports aren't but this one's alright turning fair into reality and it sets out a roadmap which I've summarised here so that you can actually read it which is first define it good point then implement it and then embed it and sustain it so this is a journey that we're currently on the moment and you'll notice some things that building a culture building some skills building incentives are actually critical so when I looked at your current website this is what you said about ISCF's reports fair and it's adherence to them is a requirement for the standards and you have this document which is about review criteria the standards of best practices so you've got quite a lot of things to do with the standards of best practices but nothing about in the website I'm looking at Marianne here about the actual resources themselves I thought you would so let's go into what do we mean by how would we then, how would INCF then account and be able to say your data set is fair not your standard but your data set or your registry or whatever it is you want to be able to do that means being clear having clear metrics and models and maturity models and you need to have some sort of assessment and then you have to have some sort of verification methodology and verification is a word by the way well I have made it up but you know it's a word and when do you do fair, do you do it when you create the data do you do it when you want to store the data somewhere else in a public archive for example or one of the splendid databases that was presented earlier or what do you do with all the legacy so here the thing to worry about is that fair is actually on its three steps it's a contract at first so it's all about setting up expectations as I've already said so that you can do some self-evaluation and do some reporting there's a step which is to do with compliance when you want to be able to comply to what you consider in your community to be judged to what you consider to be fair and that's in order to be able to review and to do comparisons and to do monitoring and then it's this third step which is judgment and regulation by whom and I presume as from Marianne said this morning I NCF has a view to do this for some of their resources the reason I put that up is because it's amazing as soon as you put out a paper immediately people say right we've got to measure it we've got to you know because the commission wants to know are you fair or are you not so because then we can decide what we're not going to fund anymore because you don't follow you don't get a tick so a whole bunch of people including the NIH came up with the idea of how do we do its assessment and we're going to have stars and scores and things like this and this is a nightmare because you've got something that's ambiguous that is domain specific that really needs to be worked out in the community and then you're going to have some folks who you've never heard of declare that your data set isn't fair that's not a good thing to do so this was a very unhappy ending from these efforts subjective hard to interpret judgmental when the intention was not to be judgmental the intention was to be supportive to be able to change how we did things not to measure things they tended to be drift to quality reviews occasionally just barking mad things came up with you know this resource clearly isn't fair oh okay so shall we just tell the EBI they should close their data set down I don't think so and you know what they didn't anyway so this is partly because of dunkelseifer dunkelseifer is the splendid german word it says dark figures it is the things that you cannot see that matter and so not everything that counts can be counted counts and not everything that counts can be counted so that's why this kind of evaluation has to be done very sympathetically because fair is non-trivial at anything other than most superficial level and that's from Mark who is our lead author so when you INCF go about defining their fair assessments they will need to do some very this is going to be a big piece of work this is going to be tough because you've got to pick up indicators you've got to divide your transparency evaluation and then you've got to eat your own dog food which means design build test and learn those indicators at the same time as you do the evaluations so all together not to do them separate and you're going to have to take indicators that are robust, have humility, are transparent diverse and reflexive and there's this brilliant paper called the metric tide that describes all about metrics and measures as well as putting it into context particularly what's the cost benefit and so now there's a whole bunch of activities throughout well not just throughout Europe but elsewhere figuring out what does a maturity model look like so maturity models are where you have different levels like a sort of value based assessment so this is a sort of naive maturity model that says the different stages, the different points that you could be at in your fair assessment and there's a lot of work being done in different projects in order to be able to identify what are the indicators that indicate that you might be meeting a fair principle and what is the process and how do you choose what the different levels of those indicators should be so this is a process or capability model that's being developed from the fair plus project which is to do with verifying drug databases and this is on the research data alliance fair data maturity model working group which was set up in part to be able to deal with quite a lot of these different challenges and its next meeting is on the 12th of September and it has various different sessions at the Helsinki research data alliance plenary the moment it's for those of you who's been participating in this can I urge you to participate this was actually although it's through research data alliance it's actually a price waterhouse Cooper contract for the European Commission which means that whatever they come up with is how your grants going to be judged so you want to be in there man because I think this is actually very important and in my opinion it needs a little bit of restyring I'm being videoed aren't I it needs a little bit of nudging shall we say so here's an easy indicator metadata are released with a clear accessible data usage license or metadata are released like this so you can say okay what's the property of license what's the format and what does it allow you to do and this is what you are actually measuring now this is currently what that was an early attempt this is a new attempt is mandatory that metadata includes information about the license under which the data can be reused well okay it's okay I guess it's kind of less clear it's less precise but this is the kind of thing that will become part of the judgment of all resources this one's a trickier indicator it meets the domain relevant community standard and this is trickier because all it does is it just says you will meet the domain community standard it's not very helpful to measure and suppose there isn't a standard suppose the standard isn't up to it they had to be community specific which standard how's it going to be validated how are you going to capture it so things like the Euro shapes, metadata your portal, your reviewers this is the sort of thing they're really going to have to work on because basically it's quite easy to do some of the F and the A you can do them in a kind of non-domain specific way but as soon as you get into the interoperability and reuse you're into it's up to you guys to come up with it and there has been an effort to build an automated system in order to be able to defyse and create maturity indicators to register them as collections in fair sharing to then write tests for them so that if you have a starting URI you apply those tests and then you report and that infrastructure is called the fair evaluator and there are companies already starting to start this up as a business so at least it has community governed indicators so you can decide your own the idea is to completely automate fair detection and at least they are trying to sanity check it while it's being developed of course this doesn't do anything to do with that one I just mentioned because it's impossible but it will do things like have you got a license, does it resolve is there a metadata there and the thing that we well Mark's been doing this for some time now is that most things that say they're fair aren't this effort to do with verification of legacy databases the new magic word which is how what is the process and the methodology in order to be able to take the legacy databases and make it so that their identifiers are persistent and make it so that their metadata is fair and so on without getting all muddled up with harmonisation pipelines is non-trivial and this is again turning into a business so people are turning this into a business so the conclusion of this part is just saying you are fair doesn't make it true okay is uneven some parts are fair or easy some parts of it aren't and it's multifaceted identify use is chaotic so that automated system that Mark Wilkerson has produced where you produce what you think you should be measuring and how and then really put it through this automated process has really identified that identify use is terrible actually and separating out what is metadata from data is really hard okay and yet it's part of this it's a non-trivial it's a set of behaviours not a specific technology and also that we really need to be investing in first mile fair that means we can't be doing this as a legacy effort we can't be saying oh we're going to try and just fix it at the end we can't try to fix it when we're putting the data into a public community archive or shared repository we have to actually do it at the beginning so for that is my third story and my third story is first mile last mile same thing this is how far away are you from the actual end goal of where you're going to deposit your data so I built a system for years now a decade now which is a common for self managing systems biology projects this is systems biology projects where there are no curators they're doing it themselves they're managing data and models and standard operating procedures and workflows and samples and what we want to do is to bridge from the infrastructure and the standard and the databases between the community to the actual investigator and it's been quite widely used and the infrastructure is very widely used so the key point here is what this tries to do is say one of the problems that we have is you're doing lots of different types of work systems biology and then you have put it into all these different repositories for different types and you completely lose the context so then you have to rebuild it all again because there's a really good database for proteins which is proteomic database for pride and there's the models for the models and there's another models one and so on so on, what you want to be able to do is to say we respect the existence of all of this but we want to be able to create a way of interlinking all of the different types of data and to enable them to still be in their own repositories to still be there so this is references between metadata including the repositories that may be at your own institution because that's where your data is stored so this is a commons that attempts to effectively bridge across the ecosystem it bridges across the ecosystem of your local environment so your local lab your local university but also the public databases where your data will be eventually deposited into or that you want to be able to refer to when you're trying to organise your metadata and it tries to also link things like your protocols with your data and your models and so on and it does it by using this thing called ISA which is the investigation studies assay model so that's and this is a little bit that you can briefly see a little bit there so how do I relate metadata together so why is that important because what we want to do is when you're starting your project and you're looking after your data like this put it up to a repository because it's already organised it's already prepared it's already got a pathway so it's a part of a staging post to these other resources because when you're in your ecosystem when you're in your commons what we frequently think about is this world all the different public data sets and how they all work together but nobody works in that world they all work in their labs and their labs is using their normal environments or they're working with their national infrastructures, their national store, their national galaxy installation so a commons has to incorporate all of these things so part of the challenge for INCF is how do I go from the data actually being collected and managed by the researchers in the field such that it's ready to go into the public archives in its format because here a miracle occurs quite a lot of the time and also that miracle is two different kind of agendas here so INCF has the agenda of wanting really good long term high quality data collections and these researchers want to get a nature paper out really fast that's completely different and sloppy science wins so that's going to be a challenge and here's the picture so that's exactly what Marianne said so I just had a different picture but that's what she was saying so the end of this part of this story is there's a tragedy there's a tragedy of the fair commons it's only as fair as its tenants so it's only as fair as they support and allow it and contribute to it project sovereignty rules so I've been running this thing called Fed and for a long time so I've got a hell of a lot of data about how people actually share in projects and the answer is they don't because of all the reasons that we all know professional stewardship into projects is essential because it's the only real way to just having a PhD student read up about a bit of of how to do a bit of data management isn't enough and there has to be significant community socialisation and values by which I mean primary investigators because a villain of the piece is primary investigators because PhD students in my experience are very keen on being able to do the right thing primary investigators are very keen on them writing a nature paper and it costs some very great primary investigators who have done this well and have benefitted but many are kind of, they don't see it's important to do good data management and this might be a useful little roadmap for you when you're doing INCF I mentioned nudging here because there are four incentives in the world in commons production love, money, fame and nudge that's the only four things you can do in order to be able to persuade people to behave well in a commons environment PhD students do it for love everybody else does it for grants and for papers but the way to really make a difference is to do it by stealth by sneaking it in to processes by smuggling in very good quality metadata collection into your spreadsheets things like this this is how you really manage it the story is about fair digital objects so in the turning fair into reality paper it talks about digital objects not just data so that means everything has an identifier there's formats, there's metadata and there's this object and in particular in the European Open Science Card Life project we are building workflow commons really into workflows because JB told me in Neurosciences and I've run for the last 15 years I think workflow commons the first general and still the only general workflow registry but there is a zoo again of workflow registries for all the different kinds of systems including GitHub itself currently available for science any guesses no not 1500 that's a good guess though 255 we know of 255 that are real as opposed to there was a paper like they had to actually have some code things like that so 255 and counting so the point of fair was to make metadata and data so it's machine actionable so that you could actually use it in things like workflows and even better if that fair data could then be generated from the workflows because then it would be automated and it would be good fair data and that means all the workflows have to operate in fair and not proprietary formats so that's your software has to produce fair and not proprietary formats it also means that you have to propagate identifiers and licenses and authorization through your workflows which is non-trivial it also means you have to mint identifiers and track provenance and know how to license the end product as well when that end product is actually the combination of many other data items all with different licenses codes that may also all have different licenses so that's quite interesting and here's a little picture of an entry of kind of a view on our forthcoming workflow commons we can treat fair workflows fair workflows themselves if they're like software then the principles don't work anymore because they're composite they have portability issues there's lots of versioning I mean it was designed the fair principles were really designed for data they weren't designed for Kylie composite executable changeable objects and in fact things like software maturity and maintainability and documentation practices are really important but we can also treat workflows as if they were metadata and if we treat them like they were data then we can give them machine actionable metadata and luckily we have some the common workflow language is a way of describing workflows to be portable and scalable interoperable for the different systems and so that it could be used for containerized tools and we also use things like e-diamontology to mark up the inputs and outputs and the different steps and we're using something called the research object specification to bundle together the descriptions of all of the different components of the workflow to add some context to relate the different components to other collections like the standard operating procedure it might be associated with or our protocols and also to link these descriptions with their native workflow systems and this is going to be the basis of the European Open South Science Cloud Life Workflow Collaboratory it's also the basis of something called the biocompute object specification and this is an IEEE specification that is currently going through standardization which is to do with how do I describe a high throughput sequencing pipeline such that it can go through regulation as a medical instrument so that means I really have to describe it so it's safe which means I really have to describe the parameters properly for once because that matters and so this is all part of that activity so this is part of the standards work that Marianne mentioned that is going on somewhere else that maybe INCF will be interested in so to finish up how's that going, how's this workflow stuff going well it's work in progress, again the issue here is to keep everything developer friendly, nobody reads specs nobody, everybody copies examples so the most important thing that we should do is make lots of examples and we particularly the European Biophematics Institute has really moved forward on this their Metagenomics division now designs all their workflows workflow language workflow blocks, makes them and then implements them in various different systems, it means that they've enabled pipeline exchange amongst projects, they can compare the versions of the different workflows, they can recycle, sub workflows, they're building libraries and that workflow library is now part of the standards it's becoming part of the standards genomics consortiums activity and nipypes, those of you who use nipypes CWL is coming, woohoo how exciting, anyway, well I find exciting because I'm a geek so the last slide is what is fair what should be fair and how to implement it I heard it a whole bunch of times this morning and every time I hear that word I go ooh I wonder if they know what they meant, right, because it's not simple but it is not good intentions, it means something very specific, all the stories that I hope I've told you are not technical ones, they're social ones they're all to do with how do we get society, how do we get the community to work together in order to be able to use a small bit of technology in order to make things fair but without incentives and cultural normalisation and long-term investment everything is just going to be a story anyway I suggested, where I suggest that this kind of road map that's been come up by the European Commission is actually might be a good road map for INCF because it kind of lays out what are the steps that you need to do, what are you going to be in your incentives how are you going to skill, what is your fair ecosystem, how will you build a fair culture what is it actually you want to declare as your community what you believe to be something that can be measured as a fair assessment and how do you want to measure it before some other guy comes along and says aha I've got the contract to measure you because you don't want that so that's the end of my fairy talk and I hope it actually gave you some stimulation I ought to mention the name at the bottom that's Ian Cotten and he's my husband and the reason I put him in is because he for the first time we've been married 37 years now he met me when I was a child honest and he for the first time he came over breakfast he said I've just been allocated to this research software engineer to this neuro informatics project he said and it's something to do with pipelines and I said oh I do hope you're going to do a workflow pipeline and he came back to me and he said my god it's so bad they're merging files using eyeballing spreadsheets I'm not going to tell you who the group is so let's be have a bit of reality here while we're all kind of in this exciting world of beautiful data archives and beautiful tools that I saw this morning and great talks that I'm going to hear later on the majority of the community are struggling to write a bash script that actually is under version control and emerging their data files eyeballing Excel spreadsheets so let's just worry about that for a second and then publishing papers so of course a wonderful talk Carol and when you said and you haven't gotten to evaluating resources yet I was like well we actually deliberately did not do that because I felt that there was actually a mistake going on with fair in this headlong emphasis on this technical validation when the communities who are referred to all the time in the fair standards had not yet come to grips with what that actually meant at a level at which they care about it they care about file formats, they care about things that are in the laboratory but a lot of people who talk about fair are talking about semantic graphs that sit on top of these public databases and I think that's great but when you talk to most neuroscientists it's at the data level and at the operations in the laboratory and that's where those people cannot help us that's why I've been emphasizing that there's a community infrastructure that's required for fair and that this work is hard because this is where the scientists themselves have to come to some agreements and that's why we decided to start on the community standards to say where does neuroscience do we even have any and the good news was yes they're starting to come out in a form that possibly can be used but we deliberately said we're not going to do that yet because we don't really even know how because we haven't defined what fair means for neuroscience. Exactly and of course I expected that because you are a wise woman and one of the authors of fair and one of the so I had a little Skype chat with Mark Wilkinson who's the lead author of fair doing a lot of the work and I sent him Marianne's picture and he said whoa they get it I said well Marianne does anyway and because because you're right absolutely and what worries me is that a lot of people there are a lot of missionaries there's a lot of fair missionaries out there a lot of people who are fair wizards who will say I can magic up your data set to be fair and I can be contracted to do it and people believe them and important people believe them like funders right and journals and other places or fame and money so this is why it's important to engage and to say put your foot in the door I spend a lot of my time in these RDA telcons putting my foot in the door saying no but I'm beginning to feel a bit lonely so you're in the right place now so it's really good that as an organization say this is what we are going to do right and that's a powerful thing and really good yeah you should absolutely Hi Carol thank you for the wonderful and inspiring talk I wanted to ask a question about two pieces of things that you said one is that you said it can't be about building better tools fair is not about building better tools that is absolutely correct but then I want to ask the question so you said we have to ment and propagate identifiers and I'm picking on that one because that's one of my hobbies and pastimes but it's also one of the things that we have founded to be just at a practical level one of the most difficult things to get anybody to forget bascripts I mean this is a whole other level so my question is do we have the tools to build a fair data ecosystem out of right now and if we don't have them right now what do we need to do first oh okay that's a that's damn hard question luckily we don't have time to answer that now so yeah absolutely so people have been worrying about things like identifier creation and particular propagation of identifiers through workflow systems for example for a long time it's really a research topic and it hasn't even got to the development stage it's still trying to figure out what that means so one of the things that we so this has to be done I think at the moment in practice what do we have to do in order to solve a particular problem so we don't try to do it philosophically we do it from an engineering perspective I would say that because I'm an engineer and then worry about well after we've done it over a series of different engineering examples what's the principles that we can do it so because at the moment I would say there's a lot of work on principles and theory but he doesn't ground out in practice we're better off starting at doing some bespoke practice and then coming out of that and saying well what are the general principles the other way around that's how we're doing it in elixir actually from that point of view so we're grounding everything in our experiences in next flow and galaxy and snake make and we've got about 15 workflow systems that we're using in elixir routinely and from different communities and they all have different behaviors and then we're trying to get that together in the common workflow language community so I wanted to ask a follow up to that which is I think that I would agree my question would be how do we sustain the not necessarily sustain the diversity but sustain within the principle of fair the idea that there won't be one and so how do we prevent a single implementation right from trying to say oh implementations are fair and Marianne is part of this exercise there is no one implementation there's no one technology this ship already sailed at one point so there's a community the semantic web community who declared that the only way to do fair was RDF now I come from the semantic web community I founded the first journal of semantic web no it's not you know that is not the only way because this is principles that we can then turn into practices and approaches which can then be ground out in specific technologies so the only way we can do this is by building a diverse community that is implementing it in diverse ways and to put our foot in the door and INCF and elixir are part of that foot in the door to say there isn't one technology and please don't believe people when they say there's only one way of doing it just like there isn't one workflow system and there isn't one commons and there isn't one database and you want diversity, diversity gives you strength we're all trying to retain biodiversity because it gives us robustness we have to in an ecosystem of infrastructure and data we need diversity in order to be able to retain robustness I don't know if you'll be brief it's actually a good segue into my question so you mentioned some of your best friends are ontologists but they don't really produce anything useful I didn't quite say that I want to go home and not be rude things written on my front door so the reason I mentioned that is it's easy to start with something simple that's sort of a practical to make progress but at the same time that also puts some serious issues under the rug what we have seen in the Alzheimer's and neuroimaging world is that people hurriedly produced a lot of garbage to put it plainly right so is it not better to bear the brunt in the first mile so to say take all the pain and try at least get some whatever we can agree upon standards than just propagate garbage forward there's a big trade off to do with doing something practical but giving yourself a root so what you don't want to do is to paint yourself into a corner so in bio schemas what we did was what happened was the ontologists 50 papers on ontologists so just to put my hand up say I was that ontologist it's like an AA meeting that the ontologists got really interested in trying to describe the science in the resource and that isn't what we were trying to do we were trying to describe how you found it because there were ontologists already in existence that described what the content was and what we were able to do is to say this is the minimum this is what a few things that we want in order to be able to navigate and then you drop out into the very rich ontologists but in the end we had to introduce a few things like gene and protein and so on because we needed it to work with the infrastructure which is what his question was right as an engineer we said actually what we're going to do is have a property which is this ontology term to build a harvester and that harvester is now hard to build if you're just an off the shelf jason programmer so that killed it that killed the ability to do it so we had to make a compromise so in bio schemas we have mechanisms for you to be able to incorporate the ontologists that already exist and the ones that will come but you don't break the principles that meant it was actually bio schemas rather than something else and that's what I meant so it's kind of how do you build that road map and that took two years to work out because we zigzagged you know we try to and we realise hang on we've gone down a rabbit hole here we've now made it beautifully ontological and completely unprogrammable Howard that was fantastic thank you so much I really love the fact that you ended your talk on the training and education aspect as well because if we want to get there that's definitely the work we have to do and with NCF we're running all those projects


And the stage of Potipova versus Arena Saber-Lenkup is the first semi-final for Stuttgart for 2023, and both ladies had to fight to get to the semi-final stage. Potipova entered the tournament unseeded and would take on the qualifier Martich in the first round. After losing the second set, would have to fight in a third set tiebreak, getting through with a win 6-3, 3-6, 7-6. In the second round she'd take on Coco Gough, a player she'd had a battle against a couple of months ago, but this time it was so much easier getting through in straight sets 6-2, 6-3. In the quarter-finals she'd take on the number 4 seed Garcia, and after dropping the first set, Potipova would come back to win 4-6, 6-3, 6-3 to advance to the semi-finals. Saber-Lenkup started the tournament off as the number 2 seed and would get a buy in the first round. In the second round she'd take on Krajikova, a lady she'd played in her last 4 tournaments, including this one, but this time Saber-Lenkup would win really easily 6-2, 6-3 to get to the quarter-finals. In the quarter-finals she'd take on Wildcard and best friend Pelibodosa, and after being down a set and a break Saber-Lenkup would fight back to win 4-6, 6-4, 6-4 to get to the semi-finals. These two have actually never faced off before because Potipova is relatively new to the tour and hasn't had a chance to play some of the big dogs, but this year she's been playing really well and finally gets a set up against Saber-Lenkup. If Potipova is going to win this one she needs to keep her emotions in check.  She's lost a Pagula a couple of times over the last few months because she's lost her cool. She needs to make sure she doesn't do that against Saber-Lenkup. Saber-Lenkup is going to win this one. She needs to be aggressive and just take control and also hope that Potipova does maybe get a little bit in awe of the moment. She is the unseated player going into the semi-finals. The only one so she has lack of experience which Saber-Lenkup maybe can prey on. This is going to be a very fiery matchup because both these ladies are very intense and they love to shout, but I'm going to go with experience here and go with Saber-Lenkup to make her third straight final here in Stuttgart. Maybe third time lucky win the Porsche. I think she wins this one in straight sets, but let me know in the comments below. Who do you think is going to win this one?


Hello everybody, welcome back to another episode of Anabaptist Perspectives. I'm here again with Val Yoder. We just did an episode on the Anabaptist view of church, how we do church, how we set our churches up, and I wanted to do something a little more practical. You've written two books on the church, and I specifically want to talk about your most recent one here, Being the Blessing. So this is a very, I'm trying to think of the right word, even kind of a hands-on type book, right? It's more of a workbook about how people can invest in their churches. Explain a little of the vision behind the book and what do you hope it will do for the people that read it. The first book was, I will build my church, and I wrote that I think in early 2001 or somewhere in there. That kind of came out of my classes at SMBI on the church, just kind of rewriting my notes into a written form. I didn't realize that that would become as useful as it became. There's been quite a few people who have gotten it and used it in their churches and Bible studies and so forth. And my own understanding of the church has continued to grow, so maybe it's time to write another one, but instead of doing that, what I'd like to do is write someone of a sequel to that with maybe more practical ways to bless our churches and bless those that we're relating to in our church. I had heard the story of the fireproof where the young man Caleb and his wife were having a very difficult time.  Caleb very reluctantly decides to do that, but as he's going through these next few days and then into about halfway through, things really got tough for him and he just was ready to give up. As the story unfolds, as it gets to the end, he wins back his wife's affection through investing in her. In the process, he moves from just doing it because his dad told him to actually having a heart for it. It just gripped me that some of that same dilemma is happening in our churches. We go to church because we're supposed to. We go to church because we've grown up going to church and we kind of put up with it rather than really seeing the value to it and it's become part of our routine. Then people get frustrated with the new question that comes up and so there's division and part of the church leaves and the other part of the church says, good riddance to bad garbage and all those kind of problems that come. How can we help people to begin to love their church and invest in it and see it as being a very important component of their Christian experience? With an encouragement of my wife and her help, we worked on this which is giving us 52 weeks of projects that people can do to invest in their church. Each segment or each page actually has a scripture background and then good works that glorify the Father that we can reflect this scripture and then on this side kind of a journal to write out how it worked, which they did and the date. Each page has a different way of investing in your local church. Can you just read a few of these different ones people can do? This is great because we just had an episode on the theology, the mindset behind church, but this is getting down and real life day to day practical things. I really like that. Like week two, smile at your brotherhood in Christ. In Proverbs chapter 15, it talks about a merry heart maketh a cheerful countenance.  A merry heart doeth good like a medicine and so just to challenge us to look at our own face in a mirror, what are people having to look at when they see me in the morning? Find a mentor. Again, the mind of Christ be followers of me even as I also am a follower of Christ. Paul was saying that. So following Paul was important for some of these young men and it's important for us to also have someone that is ahead of us in a spiritual growth and that we can follow his example. Choose a mentor from your church that's five to ten years older than you and walk with you through this year. Plan to meet monthly, pretend to discussion, working on what's happening. Attendance at church, another one that we talk about, sitting closer to the front. Why is the back of the church always the full part? Sit up in the front. That's really good. Blessing those that curse you, you get along with real well. Gifts to people, that particular one is to display honor to other members of the church. Develop an addiction. Did you know that you're supposed to develop an addiction? 1 Corinthians 16-15 says, you know the house of Stephanus that it was the first of the fruits of a K.I. And that they have addicted themselves to the ministry of the saints. So they're addicted to ministry and that means you can't get along very long without ministering to somebody and get addicted to it. Those are the kind of things that we're talking about. That's great and I think the thing that especially to our audience should keep in mind is you've spent an incredible amount of time, you know, pastoring a church, being involved in different churches. This is not stuff you just kind of made up, I'm guessing. I mean, this comes from a lot of experience and having to work through some of these things yourself probably. Yeah, I pastored the church for about 13 years. I was ordained when I was 24 and then pastored for 13 years. And I went to an SMBI and was there for parts of 25 years and then I would go. Now I'm back pastoring at the church again. So you've invested a lot in not only a local church, but also the young people that make up a lot of these churches too. I'd like to just share one story that kind of underscores the importance of this. We had a young man who came to Igo a number of years back and he was really blessed by his time there. He was looking forward to spending the rest of his life in ministry in Asia. Then he got back home to his home church after his first semester. To his disappointment, his church leaders said, we don't want you to go back. They had some difficulties with some of the things that he had experienced or I'm not sure what all the problems were. So he got in touch with us as leaders and said, what do I do? I feel God's calling me to Asia, but my church leaders saying I can't come back. I was so blessed by our faculty that they said, you stay at home and invest in your church. Get some young people around you, help them if they're struggling with the church, work with them. He did. He got a group of five or six young people, young men particularly, who were struggling. He started investing in them and really developed a great relationship with them. And the church leaders saw what was going on and they saw the attitude change. Those leaders came back to him about two years later and said, you can go back again. That's the power of this thing of investing in your church rather than abandoning it, invest in it. No church is perfect as we all know and every church is going to create some tensions for us and we're going to struggle with something here and there. How do we invest in those churches in love without compromise? We don't need to just get more freedom. We need to learn how to actually give up our freedoms for the cause of Christ. And so these are ways hopefully to stimulate some thinking about how I can actually bless the group, bless the leaders, bless the young people, and make an attempt to create an atmosphere in our church that is welcoming and yet solidly biblical. You're basically, what it sounds like through this book is you're encouraging people to not be reactionary. Just like running away from, oh, this is horrible and let's just leave. You're saying look at ways you can actually be those changes you may want to see in your church, start by being that yourself. Every leader, and I'm a leader right now, we're very human. We don't see all the perspectives and so forth, but when we have people in our church who you know, they are trying to build this group in the context of supporting the leadership and supporting the parents and the family and so forth, and they're really investing in individuals in the church, whether it's a youth group or just visiting different people, and you know that they're trying to strengthen the church, well, that just gives your whole perspective to the church is one of, this is great, this is going someplace, this is where it's supposed to be, and so that's kind of what we want to emphasize with this. So I'm really curious, how does the book end? The book ends basically, which is the final thing. The final thing, okay, read about the importance of the brotherhood, works that glorify the Father, God's raised up a lot of dynamic voices today in writing, and so I'm giving a list of different books I would encourage people to read, such as the Anabaptist's View of the Church by Lutel, Church Membership by Lehman, of course I had to put my own book in there, I hope it was my church, and King Jesus Claims His Church by Finney Cravilla. Okay, we interviewed him actually. Did you? Okay, that's another great book, The Safest Place on Earth by Larry Crabbe as a book on the church, A Total Church, Uniting Church and Home by Wallace, and When the Church Was a Family by Hellerman, Why Church Matters by Harris, and there's a new book out I don't have in here because it came out just more recently by Gary Miller on Total Church, another good book. So that's the last one is just keep on investing in the church by reading. Yeah, like you're encouraging people, okay, you finished this workbook, but this is an ongoing journey. Yeah, I like that. And then, which we noted this on the last episode too, there's some contact info in there as well, if people, you know, have questions about some of this stuff. Yeah, and our website is listed there, www.kitchieblessing.com. We'll definitely put that in the description as well, so whoever's watching or listening, click through on that, check out, you know, and you have a number of other resources as well that I think would be helpful when it comes to church. And sometimes it may be that subconsciously don't value church as much as we should and we just don't put in the time really to learn some of these things. In Hellerman's book, When the Church Was a Family, he does a good job of talking about how God wants us to learn to love our mother and father and brothers and sisters in our genetic home. When we learn how to do that well, He's giving us the foundation for the major change that's going to happen when we become a believer to love that family. And Jesus even commented to those who came to Him in a crowd of people and said, your mother and brothers are out here at the door. And He says, well, who are my mother and brothers? And He said, these are my mother and brothers. He was making a very powerful statement about a change of what group is the most important family. And that could be a whole other session, but the whole thing of how we need to see our church family as the group of people that we're going to be with for all of eternity. The only way that our genetic family is going to be with us for all of eternity is if they join that church, otherwise they won't be there. And so that's why the church family actually takes precedence over every other relationship. Powerful stuff. I think you've given our audience a lot to think about. Thank you so much for sharing Val and all you've invested in writing these things, sharing these things with people.


Hello Freedom Family! I am George, the guy who hasn't made a video in 10 days! Bad George! Sorry about that. I have been traveling in Taiwan for a week and I'm going to Vietnam tomorrow, actually in three hours. That's why I haven't made videos. I've just been busy on the road. I promised to make videos when I return later this week. In the meantime, I wanted to catch you up. We've been talking to MSI for a potential sponsorship for the Freedom Family. MSI likes our 3D sets, so we're going to create an MSI custom set specifically for them, which we hope they will use in their videos and live streams. More on that soon. There will be more 110% revenue shares coming for more of you Freedom Family. Didn't know 110% rev share is a thing? It is! Look that eye to see the first batch of 110% rev shares for the Freedom Family. We're also talking to a game studio. Two, actually. If we come to a deal, we will launch MGM Studios as the game development division of Freedom that will encourage all of you to contribute your art, your voice, your talent to making a real game. These game studios are mature teams that have already created alpha versions of their products and run successful kick starters. That's why we are focusing on these to give us a much shorter time to launch. We've tried game development before, remember the age project, but that had a very small team, and this time we're trying to do it more professionally. Tell us down there in the comments below if this sounds exciting to you and Freedom just crossed 300 million subscribers in the network. Check out youtube.com slash freedom slash about to see for yourself, but I'm super excited that we have now crossed the big 300. That's one of my favorite movies. We are also launching a new Minecraft server in the Chinese language. If you're a YouTuber who creates videos in Chinese, stay tuned for that announcement so you can join a community of gamers in that language. Should we launch Minecraft servers in other languages? Tell me down there in the comments below what languages and if you would be willing to administer such a server, I would love to know. Hopefully these few quick updates will tide you over until I can get back to making proper episodes of The George Show. I do miss making them. I miss reviewing your channels. I miss highlighting your deserving comments and all the other segments of The George Show that we've been doing, like announcing winners of the $100,000 sponsorship. Didn't know we had a $100,000 sponsorship. Round two, click that I to see the playlist of all the episodes we've created so far and all the winners we've announced so far. Each of those winners got a 110% revenue share and each future winner of the sponsorship will also get a 110% revenue share in addition to the $100 cash prize. Let's check the time. Okay, it's time to wrap this up. I still have to quickly edit this video and upload it before I head to the airport. So, who am I? I am Papa George, George Sunpai and many other names. You, the beautiful freedom family has given me. I am George, CEO and founder of freedom for freedom and the freedom family and all the cool new ways we will be growing together, helping each other grow together as a family. The freedom family, that is the spirit of freedom. I am George and you've been watching The George Show, unedited. Till next time guys,再見. Click that I to partner with freedom and join the freedom family so we can all grow together. You get many perks like position music. You also get epidemic sound, a lot of other access to royalty free videos, sponsorships and many things to help you grow. Just click the links down there in the description below to get involved in our community, our forums, our Discord chat servers, meet our graphics team, meet our community team, all of that on Discord and the forums. What are you waiting for? Get started. And we will grow together as a family because this is the freedom family. You are part of it. We are all part of it and we are all growing together. To get more George, click that big F. That will subscribe you to Freedom Central, home of The George Show. And PewDiePie gave one of you, freedom family, a big shout out. Click that video to see the shout out and to see our new 3D sets for you. And click that video to see what YouTube recommends you watch next.


Hi, everyone, Joe for Jaspy's casebreaks.com, coming at you with 2019-2020, Upper Deck, The Cup Hockey, One Box, Random Team Break No. 3. One Spot gets you three teams, so big thanks to this group here. Let's triple you up. And big thanks to the people who bought Spot straight up, and congrats again to the people who won Spot in that film. Ducks and coyotes are comboed, so that makes 30 on each list. Let's roll it. You guys, names and teams, heart eight, four and a four. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, and eighth and final time. Four and a four, eight times, eight the hard way for the teams. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, and eighth and final time. Calgary down to the New Jersey Devils. Now, feel free to trade if you are feeling risky. Kevin with the flames, Carl with the sabers, Corey with the blue jacket, Steve with the panthers, Anthony with the ranger, Steve with the golden knights, Logan Smith with the abs, Anthony with the oilers and the wild, Corey with the black cocks, Steve with the islanders, Logan with the red wings, Steve with the blues, Logan Smith with the Tampa Bay lightning, Carl with the capitals, David with the stars, and the Ducks-Coyotes combo, Carl with the Canadians and the Jets, Steve with the centers, Anthony with the sharks and the flyers, Kevin with the penguins, and with the Leafs, Carl with the hurricanes, David with the Bruins, Carl with the Kings, Steve with the Canucks, Kev with the Preds, and Core with the New Jersey Devils. Let's sort by column B, alphabetically by team, and we're going to pause the video. When we come back, we're going to see if there's any trades and then we'll have the one-box break. See you on the other side. All right, welcome back. Trade window closed, so the list you saw there remains the same. Here on Wednesday the 25th, thanks everybody. A lot of hockey today, so thanks very much, everybody. It's been having a lot of fun with that. We did some stature, we did the mixer, now we're doing some cup hockey, so the playoffs, getting people in a hockey mood. All right, so we've got four boxes remaining from that six-box case. So from top to bottom, one, two, three, four on the dice roll. If I roll a five or a six, I'll just roll again. So one, two, three, four, one, top box, easy. This we'll save for next time. Use that blank card to slow play some of the hits there. Good luck, everybody. First out of the gate is Jack Eichel, 114 out of 249, Buffalo Edition going to Carl and the Savers. Buffalo! Here's Caden Fulcher, two-color patch and autograph 82 out of 249. That is for Detroit. That's going to be for Logan Smith. Next is Alexander Barkov, 32 out of 36. Nice two-color patch and auto. Florida Panthers, Steve Birch with the spot that he won. Two more to go. We've got a Conor Hellabuck, signature renditions. That's pretty cool. I almost thought there was an autograph for a second, but you can kind of see the bright blue auto against the Winnipeg blue. That's really cool. So signature renditions, blue ink autograph. Conor Hellabuck backstopped the Jets to a 4-1 win over a visiting Chicago for his 44th victory of the 17-18 season-breaking. Tom Verrasso's single-season record for wins by an American-born gold hender. Nice. Carl with Winnipeg. Two more. We've got a Quad Relic, Quinn Hughes, 47 out of 99, Jack's brother, Steve Birch with Vancouver, and the last one, Triple Relic, 31 out of 33. Top Trios, all jerseys, all Blackhawks, KirbyDoc, Adam Boakwist, and Dominic Kubalik, Shy City. That's going to be for Corey. And there you go, ladies and gentlemen, really nice cup hockey break in the books. Love this stuff. This is their sort of flagship top-tier product, ladies and gentlemen, so thanks for getting in. I'm Joe for jasmizcasebreaks.com, and I will see you next time for the next hockey break. Bye-bye.