other buildings. Hi. I'm Casey. This is Nathan.  So I brought up the idea on the mailing list of doing kind of a comparison of Ruby and Elixir. I'm going to make the assumption that we all love Ruby here. And I'm also going to make the assumption that none of us were born loving Ruby. So there's something about it, how do we leave either the productivity that it gave you or the community that drew you into Ruby as a language. And basically what I'm hoping to leave you with is an idea of where Elixir is in its growth as a language and whether or not it's something that you would also want to learn to love. Okay, so how many people have heard of Elixir? Yeah, that is a lot. So Elixir is a programming language that's roughly based on another programming language called Airlang. And the primary canonical complaint about Airlang as a language is that the syntax is ugly, not particularly in that camp, but whatever that's what most people think. So some people who have a better programming study than I have decided that they would make the syntax look very much like Ruby syntax. And they did and they call that Elixir. Oh by the way, so I'll be doing most of the talking. Nathan is mis-assertions that sideline like Shetter, I guess. Kind of. It's actually my excuse. So it will be pedantic about some technical things so that I don't have to be pedantic about 100 percent of this presentation. Right. Because, yeah, ideology in programming languages that never devolves into that. So Elixir, the syntax looks kind of similar to Ruby and I'm not sure you have a lot of code but enough that you'll kind of go, oh yeah, that looks like Ruby. But it compiles to bytecode for Airlang. So under the hood, it uses Airlang's VM, which is called the beam if I slip or call it the beam. I'll try to call it Airlang's VM. And the code actually runs on that. So I'll lay out a methodology for comparing the two programming languages. Then I'll focus on a couple of those methods and then kind of sum up with a conclusion about where Elixir is. Joey, I'm also going to make this difficult for you because I tend to pace. Okay. So some different ways we can compare languages. One is bias. I'll explain to you what my bias is so that you can take that into account when you're listening to what I say so that I'm pretty sure you can then subtract it and everything that I say is objectively true. So we can look at bias coming to programming languages. Technical virtue, some languages perform well and so on. Learning per, how long it takes to learn programming language. The community around it. The productivity that it gives you as a software engineer. How would we be more important for contractors than people who are FTEs? I'm going to let that one go. Okay. So when the areas that it's useful to use that programming language. These three are less important to me so I'll talk about quickly. My bias, our bias is coming from distributed systems that are highly available. So they always have to give a response and things that like lives depend on or server monitoring depends on stuff like that. Or fault tolerant systems. Systems that are large enough that you optimistically expect that stuff will break. So like if you're running a lot of servers, you know servers are going to go down and you need a system that can anticipate stuff's going to break and just work around it. So that's where we're coming from. I've been programming Ruby. I've got almost 10 years now and Erlang off and on for about three. Learning curve. The learning curve. Elixir as a language has a really small footprint. I didn't count but I think it's safe to say that the standard live is much smaller than Ruby's standard live. I think Ruby's is pretty small compared to other mature programming languages. And so the learning curve isn't for Elixir. It isn't hard. It's pretty low for programming language. Coming from somebody who came programming. And the community is really small because it's still a small programming language. It's still a very young programming language. So it was originally, the first release was about three and a half years ago, something like that. This past year they had the first Elixir comp in Austin. And it's still small. It's very, very pleasant to people in the community currently are very nice. There might be a z-shot in their hiding. But right now, sorry, that's just good. But it's right now it's a really fun community. So we'll just ignore those and focus on the other groups. The technical virtue of the language, the productivity, and the applicative domain. So the technical virtue. I'll talk a little bit about how Elixir works based on a compiling into airline. By comparison to conventions in Ruby Rails in particular that I hope are familiar. So this is heresy. But I'll say it. So modules in Elixir are roughly, you can at least think of them as being somewhat analogous to classes and processes in Elixir as being roughly analogous to objects. So I'm just going to pick on people whose names I can see. So Daniel. Daniel's a classy guy, so we'll assume he is the epitome of the Daniel class, right? So if we're making some sort of web application framework, we're going to say, give us a new instance of Daniel and whole process something and return some HTML, right? Easy enough. And Julio will say is a module in Elixir. Very similar thing. When we want to process some HTML in this app, we'll create an instantiation of Julio, we'll create a process of Julio, and he will compute some stuff and return HTML. Are instances of Julio called Daniel? No, no, no, sorry. Ruby Elixir. Bikeshed yet? Modules are only for code organization. So when you're using classes to namespace stuff, and then export that functionality to the outside world, that is the piece that is analogous between those two things. That was sufficiently pedantic. So so here's an interesting thing about, you know, the technical virtue of people say, oh, Elixir is great because Elang offers concurrency out of the box. And here's roughly how it does that. In the Ruby example, more or less, if requests are coming in for this web page, we say, okay, we'll take Daniel and make an instance of him, and you're now the Daniel object.  And when you're done, then, sorry, you get destroyed. Now, next request comes in, and it's a really, it takes a lot of processing, but same thing, instance of Daniel Ben. So you handle, you have the luck, you're unlucky enough to handle this really long taking process. So it takes you a while, but finally you return it, and HTML comes back. And then we go back to a quick one and a quick one. Okay, it was kind of unfair to the subsequent instances of Daniel that a very long processing one happened before that, right? Ruby blocks, in most cases, it's blocking. So if you have a really long processing request for a single instance of a Rails app, it seems unfair to the request coming after it. Now, in Elixir, so if we take the Julio module and create a process from him, and that's a quick request. Okay, I'm not going to actually ask you to process this. So if some parameters come in, it's just to render some HTML and then return it, but there are more requests. So what happens is we can go ahead and spawn up many processes on that airline VM, and we can give her the first request, and we cannot wait for her to finish processing. We'll go ahead to the next one, and so on. And then we'll come back and we'll say, okay, you have one Mississippi. Do you finish processing requests? Yes. Okay, we're done. We return. You have one Mississippi. Do you finish returning the request? No, he's got the really long running one. Okay, back to the line. Go to the next one, and they both finish. And he just goes through the line more times. He goes to the end of the queue more times. So it's like a more fair way to divvy up the tasks. Now, all else being equal, we didn't actually parallelize the code, we just made it concurrent. So all else being equal over the course of an hour or so, the same amount of work got done. But because it was concurrent, the latency was a little bit more predictable. And from an end user experience, visiting web pages like this, most web users will feel like that's more fair. Did that make sense? So in this case, a process in the elixir and airline world is similar or an approximation of the actor model, which is a concurrency model that is some people probably know about. Celluloid is a Ruby framework that provides a similar type of thing. That part of it is more like an object in the way that the because there's a state that gets tracked around and you can call send messages to it and will do things to, excuse me, to mutate that internal state. But as it's laid out here, it's not exactly a one to one. This is a gross misrepresentation. But it's great as a learning aid. Perfect. So yeah, I mean, so it's more or less the rub of a concurrency story that you can make for why elixir has good technical merit. Another one I want to touch on is security. And this is what security looks like an elixir. There is no. So this is hard to explain to people. So I'm not talking about authentication in the application. I'm talking at the programming language level. So airline was developed for phone networks where they didn't want to send people out to the poll to fix things. They wanted to be able to log on locally and just send code down to the poll and have everyone there or send code down to the poll and have it send code down to the next station and have it run. So what you end up with is if you can connect through an airline shell to any airline process, you can run any command that has airlines permissions on that machine or shut the program down or do any other sort of malicious thing you would want to do. I don't assume anyone here would want to do malicious things. So it's the only way that I've seen to practically secure an airline application is to just put it behind a very strong firewall. So security is kind of not in or it's a different beast to consider. Yes. Question is, does it automatically open up network ports? Sort of. It's always listening on certain ports for other airline virtual machines to connect to it, which is a plus when you want to run a distributed system and you just start airline up on all of these machines and then have one go reach out and they all can just start chatting to each other. So you have to firewall those if those are open to that side world to your house. And another one is logging. This is not in electric favor. This is I just grabbed this off of Stack Overflow a couple hours ago. This is some error message from an airline program. I have no idea what it says. And I would argue that nobody else does either. Yeah, remember these, these are painful. So elixir does not give out error messages in elixir. It gives out stack traces from airline. And they are really curiously difficult to understand. So logging, understanding stack traces and logging is really difficult. Trust me, you do not know what this does. No, it sends in malformed JSON to the React MapReduce. Nope. Yeah, it does. It's a web machine. What was malformed? The there was undefined function that they checked. Oh, fun. You would see that on this page. This goes on for a long time. Yeah, so error messages, that's, yeah, doesn't it's not, it's not great in elixir. So just a hop over to an example. I'm going to pick on Chris McCord a little bit. So I let him know though. So I think that makes it okay. So he put this blog post out. Okay, so he put up a blog post where he says elixir versus Ruby showdown Phoenix versus Rails. So Phoenix is a content management, NBC style framework that you wrote in elixir. And he says, isn't this apples to oranges? No. Well, I'm going to argue that it is. But let's look at some code. So at top is some Phoenix code, or elixir code. And here's some the quote one Rails code. So you can kind of look at it and go, I can make out vaguely what that means. And if I had to change a route from a get to a put, I can figure that out. It's very, very similar. So there's the routing controllers, again, same situation we're looking at, you know, oh, this is the elixir code. And this is the Ruby code. It looks very similar. And it might even be exactly the same number of lines views. This is the elixir template, which looks very similar to your V. So if you use Rails, the learning curve to using Phoenix is not going to be huge. And here are the results. So he ran load testing. And Rails had about 1000 requests per second, and Phoenix had about 12,000 per second. So it's roughly 10 times faster, or was on his local not a great way to test it. He also tested it on Heroku, and it was about eight times faster. So I think this is entirely an apples to oranges, and a misleading comparison for a couple reasons. One elixir gets compiled to bytecode. I don't think it eight to 10 times performance increase is actually very impressive for going from a scripted to a compiled language. That seems a little weak to me. Two, he didn't test the full or m stack. He didn't go through active record. He didn't hit a database. So I don't think that's really representative of a content management system application. Another point, Rails done well, scales horizontally. If your Rails app is stateless, then you just bring up more stateless machines to handle more requests. And properly written, your application from an architectural point of view should be bottlenecking at the state layer. So I, you know, so I have a hard time seeing Phoenix's place because the Rails ecosystem already exists. And you're trading in all of those libraries that Rails offers for a small performance increase. To me, that equation is never going to work out. And find the way easier, the more interesting portion of that comparison? Not really. Well, I already explained that. So because Ruby blocks, the latency is going to be a little bit higher. So technical virtue, that's kind of my really light touch over the technical virtue of Blitz Resolane. So productivity, Erlang has this thing called OTP, you know, open telecom platform, there at that. And which I am going to make another heinous analogy to active stuff. But for a reason, with productivity in mind, so OTP is a set of behaviors that you can invoke, that you can mix in into your modules, that handles a lot of functionality for you, so that you don't have to rewrite, so that's better tested, very similar to what the active frameworks do in Rails. So I'll give you a quick example. So here's an active record thing, right? You inherit from active record, and then you automatically get has many and all the other basic conventions for SQL and validates name. Okay, so if you use Rails, this is very familiar. And if you use Rails, you know what has many does, you know that it's there, and you don't have to write joins based on the underlying data structure, right? So it saves you a lot of work. OTP does something similar, except that the OTP behaviors are much different than the active model behaviors. So here is a supervisor behavior from OTP, where you say, this this module, this bit of code is going to have a supervisor, Nathan will be our supervisor. And we're going to have these processes running, answering web requests or whatever they're doing, or fighting to the death, or not fighting to the death, no, not doing that, making web pages. So we just define in his net, okay, he's, he's got a children array, and the children array has some workers, and they're different modules, and they have different names. And then we call supervise these children with this strategy. And a strategy tells the system tells OTP that if one of those children's die, if something happens, they get malformed JSON and they just stop working, then he as the supervisor will automatically be notified. And because it's a one for one strategy will automatically restart that child. So there are patterns like that, which are incredibly useful if you have to do stuff like that. Here are the five basic ones, a server.  One that handles events, a finance state machine, the supervisor, and an application, which is a way to package things together so that these components interrupt pretty well. So similar to the active paradigm in that these conventions handle a lot of work for you. So that's a big plus for productivity. And applicative domain. When Ruby when Rails came out, and when Rails really took off, there were thousands of content management MVC frameworks, we'll even say a couple, you know, couple popular ones in Java, just too many of them in PHP. And Ruby wasn't particularly popular. So why did Rails win? Have any theories? I actually like to hear a quick theory if anybody has some. I'm the only person who's thought about this. We'll leave that as a hypothesis. So, okay, so I spent a lot of time thinking about this. And so my conclusion, for whatever that's worth. Yeah? I think it's sort of like WordPress was like too much on the CMS. It made truing decisions. But Rails made just enough decisions that like, get to the point where you're like, okay, so this is just a decision. I don't agree with the change that picks up. But it was enough along the way, but not too far to be a pool of CMS. Okay, so the porridge was just right. It was like enough over not too much. Okay, right layer of abstraction, right layer of abstraction for the problems that we deal with as developers. Sure, that's plausible. I would say one of the reasons that it certainly gained a lot of attention is because there was a 15 minute demo. So DHH, nice guy, posted on a Riley blog somewhere this 15 minute demo to get Rails out of running. And most of the rest of us who are custom rolling our own NBC frameworks and PHP, we couldn't write a new application in 15 minutes. But there you had a full crud cycle on a resource running against the database, you know, in local host on your web browser in 15 minutes. That seemed like an order of magnitude at least faster than how long it took to build applications previously. Another reason is the conventions. For me, one of the reasons conventions are so important is because most of my time programming is spent sitting back in my chair thinking of variable names. And when you have conventions, you don't have to think of as many variable names. Right? What's the key for this table? Oh, somebody already thought of that for me. It's ID done. Conventions also let you carry information from one project to the next. So ID, that's a good variable. So I can I could, you know, any any conventional Rails application, I could start working on it today and be productive and well, maybe tomorrow and be productive in it that day. Because I know where all the files are, I know how it's going to use active model. So that information carries over from project to project. That's really powerful. And I will say this in quotes, quote me on this, Rails want despite poor performance, a poor deployment story and poor paradigms. So I feel like we've all kind of just swallowed poor performance like, okay, performance is always going to stop.  The horror stories from earlier on, in Rails history, I won't even go back that far. But getting the right libraries bundled together in the proper word has been a problem for most of the history of Rails in terms of deployment. It's a lot better now than it's ever been. And poor paradigms, and I'll give you just one example of a poor paradigm in rail. Does anyone know how to pronounce that? It's never. Thank you. Thank you. It's a terrible acronym. This is the index show new edit create update delete. Yeah, this is a fault methods for a controller. That's terrible. So Sinatra gets this right. There's no reason to have that layer of abstraction in it. It could simply just be get put post, then you know what it's doing, you know, when why it's doing this paradigm is just weird, completely arbitrary. And so there's a couple other things like that, that are unfavorable. So the convenience of having an application of the less than running in less than 15 minutes and the conventions that go with it and it being, you know, just the right temperature for porridge made rails really successful. Does elixir Phoenix have that? Well, it's borrowing the conventions. So it can kind of support that. But, you know, it's much younger. So it doesn't have the other libraries that's for those conventions. And it is certainly not in order of magnitude faster to build an application in Phoenix than in rails. So I'm having a hard time seeing what I could really mean to put a strike. But it is a good project. Chris would say that the appeal to for Phoenix isn't the content management system part. It's something called channels, which is like a way to do soft real time for chat type applications. I'm not convinced that that's production right. But so applicative domain, I don't think this is it for for elixir. applicative domain for elixir are these types of things basically anything that airline is good at network applications, chat applications, if that's still a thing, I didn't think it was. But what's that made? Yeah, Snapchat recently. Oh, God. Yeah. Snapchat just raised Internet of things stuff. That seems like a certainly call our systems where you expect things to break expect to go down. So in those types of applications, elixirs are a really good choice. Does anybody here write applications in these things? I'll even remove chat just these three network applications, internet things call our systems. Okay, cool. So the six of us could get I will talk to other people that don't do those things. You don't have to. So yeah, so that was the methodology. And that's an overview of the technical productivity and the application for for elixir. I think it's biggest challenge is one, it doesn't have killer application. You can't look at the elixir community and the way you could at Ruby 10 years ago and say rails, that's the killer app for Ruby, totally was the killer app. Elixir doesn't have that. And it doesn't have a corporate sponsor. It doesn't have anybody yet, as far as I know, who is making a non trivial production bet on the elixir ecosystem, where, you know, money is on the line. Who knows, maybe our sponsor will be back. So follow up information. Chris McCourt's presentation on Phoenix is online, you can Google and find it online on Casey, he's Nathan. And I would just want to close with a poll. If there was an elixir class at airline factory down in San Francisco in March, it's about $2,000 a person refundable by your employer. For three days of training and two days of the conference, would anybody here be interested in going to that? Is it in Portland? Consider relocating to Portland. If it was relocated to Portland. All right. Okay, same six people. So much to learn. Yeah. All right. Thank you.


This is the SF Productions podcast network And I'm mark you can check out our audio podcast how I got my wife three comics on iTunes or on our website SF podcast network comm As the new fall TV season approaches we're hearing of a change on one of the sitcoms Kevin can wait The hot wife to James's dumpy husband played by Aaron Hayes is not returning to the series And the network decided to write her out by killing the character Yes, and this got us thinking about other shows where a character or an actor died during production Now we're excluding soap operas and they're my time and yeah, and they're modern cousins the genre series sci-fi fantasy superhero horror because killing characters are pretty much their bread and butter Yeah, we're also skipping characters that just disappeared looking at you Chuck Cunningham Or where the actor changed but the character remained right aka the Darren effect In 1962 during the third season of Dennis the menace mr. Wilson Joseph Kearns passed away Gail Gordon was brought in as his brother to end the season out And then he was just referred to as mr. Wilson for the rest of the series with no mention of him actually being a different character It's a kid's show that yeah, nobody noticed. Yeah in 1963 Larry Keating of mr. Ed passed and his character the neighbor Was replaced without explanation in 1966 Alice Pierce mrs. Kravitz of bewitched past and her sister-in-law took over played by Mary Grace Canfield With the explanation that Kravitz was off seeing her mother and the next season Sandra Gould was brought in and Became mrs. Kravitz again. Okay, so she they didn't even say Again a new neighbor or anything just just like they did with Darren Another bewitched switch was due to the death of Aunt Clara who was played by Mary and Lauren She was replaced by Alice ghostly as as morel'd up, but basically the same role. Yeah Petticoat Junction had an older cast which caused havoc over the seasons Smiley Burnett played Charlie Pratt the train engineer who passed away He was replaced by roof Davis as Floyd smooth who then he died and he was replaced by Byron Folger as Wendell Gibbs Which makes for some really interesting things. There was one Christmas episode that they just basically Redid in a later year. Yes, they went for it It was the black and white they did it again in color and when they did it the first time They had those two engineers and when they did it the second time it was the other two engineers It was the same script though same script The star of the show be benedirate died in 1968 although she mostly disappeared earlier that year and They referred to her as being out of town and then when she died they only indirectly reference her death There's a Kate Bradley memorial suite at the shady rest June Lockhart moved into a similar role of the mother type figure as dr. Janet Craig Dan blocker who played Haas on bonanza passed away, and they attempted to replace him with David canary Didn't really work the show was canceled shortly after that McLean Stevenson asked to be released from mash and they did so by having his character killed in a plane crash while finally going home Freddie Prince got his big break on Chico and the man, but died in 1977 at first They said he was just away, and then a 12 year old kid replaced his role on the show And he was prayed played by Gabriel Melgar Diana Highland died after the first season of eight is enough and a new character replaced her played by Betty Buckley Yeah, I thought that was very strange. I actually was watching the series at that point in time I and you know keep in mind that was like before the internet and you maybe didn't know That these people died in real life, right? And it was just like why is there not there and now the dad who was just married is dating somebody else, and you know Yeah, it's just weird. Yeah during the Waltons Run will gear who played the grandfather died and the seventh season premiere addressed it in the plot Jack Sue of Barney Miller passed in 1979 and an episode with the other characters speaking out of character addressed it. Yeah Michael Conrad passed during the Hill Street Blues run with his character killed off while making love So like off-screen.  Mm-hmm. So his character on the cover-up was replaced Nicholas Colosanto died during the Cheers Run and his role as bartender was replaced by Woody Harrelson Speaking of Cheers Jay Thomas's character Eddie LeBak was killed off after he made a snide remark about costar Rhea Perlman on a radio show And then to the old Bayless on night court played by Selma Diamond and Florence Hale up past during the show's run in succession And then they went with 32 year old Marcia Warfield to resolve the issue that way, you know She probably wouldn't die right Now Valerie is a very interesting example of this The star Valerie Harper and her husband slash writer Walked out trying to get a pay increase now She had done this on Rota in 1975 and she did get a pay increase The negotiations dragged on and Brandon Tartikov head of NBC at the time got tired of the whole thing Meanwhile NBC had just a signed a deal with Sandy Duncan problem solved They shot around Harper for a few episodes and then Duncan arrived as an aunt who took over the family After Harper's character died in a car accident The show couldn't be called Valerie of course. No, so it became Valerie's family and then finally the Hogan family it ran from 1987 to 1991 with Sandy Duncan including a switch from NBC to CBS so that show went all over the place Yes, now Red Fox passed during the run of the royal family and Jack K. Harry was brought into help out the family, right? Phil Hartman was killed during the run of news radio and his friend John Lovitz took over a similar role for the final season And then one that I was never fond of Dan's character on Roseanne left when John Goodman wanted to exit the series It was revealed in the final episode that his character actually died and that the season was essentially a dream sequence Yes, which may or may not apply when it comes back. Yeah David Strickland of suddenly Susan hung himself the character just disappeared from the show with no explanation Madeleine Conn of Cosby passed during its run and that was the CBS Cosby not the NBC Cosby show And like Barney Miller an episode was aired with the cast out of character giving her tribute John Ritter passed during eight simple rules and his character was killed off in the same manner as he died With a heart condition James Garner was brought on as a new character to replace him And if you remember that series was first called eight simple rules for dating my daughter Yes, and it went to eight simple rules when he died. Yes, because you know no longer his daughter You're right in a similar manner John Spencer and his character on the West Wing died of heart attacks His running mate Matt Santos who was played by Jimmy Smith's went on to win the election Cal Penn's character on house was killed off for a good reason in 2009. He got a job at the real White House under Obama In 2011 after Charlie Sheen's personal life imploded and he asked for a huge raise on two and a half men His character was killed by a train. He was run over by a train, but in the last episode. He somehow returned from death. Yeah And finally the unseen Debbie Wallowitz on Big Bang Theory Which was the voice of Carol Ann Susie Passed when the actress did and they had a tribute episode where the cast eats her dishes from the freezer I thought that was a really good one. Mm-hmm There are probably more examples of that I can actually think of two right off the top of my head that I didn't remember until just now Okay. Oh, you want one? Yeah, why not on Seinfeld the Susan episode. Oh, yeah Yeah died from the making the envelopes Apparently there was at at the time there was some Issue that maybe she didn't get along well with the rest of the cast Okay, then they later Jason Alexander later came out and said no, no, that wasn't the case, but So that that was one where they just killed off the character to get rid of the actor, you know Yep So if you think of any you can always let us know and you can check out our audio podcast How I got my wife to read comics on iTunes or on our website SF pod netcast network calm from the pop culture bunker I'm Indy and a mark. Thanks for watching.  I won't replace him


So a lot of people have been asking about sleep paralysis and I thought I'd make a quick video to explain a bit more about it and What you can do to possibly avoid it if it's something that's bothering you So for those who don't know sleep paralysis is what happens when your body is trying to go to sleep and Your mind is sort of caught up in the middle of it. So usually We're not conscious of this process. So we'll go to sleep our mind and body will fall asleep at the same time And we'll enter a paralysis which is the body's way of stopping you acting out your dreams in the night So if you didn't have sleep paralysis if no one had it then you would When you're dreaming say if you were dreaming about running down the street You'd physically act out that running in waking life. You know it might kick your Covered over or something, you know might injure yourself So the reason the body Paralyzes your muscles when you sleep is so that you can't act out your dreams in the night So it's a very good thing to have enough. We didn't have it. We probably have a lot more injuries, right? So it's not a bad thing. The problem is that Sometimes you can wake up in the middle of the process. So you can actually be trying to go to sleep normally and You'll find that you wake up in the middle of sleep paralysis and it can be very scary You won't be able to move obviously But you'll be very aware of the fact that you can't move.  You're awake. Okay, because the important thing to remember is that it's sort of in There's a fine line between being awake and being asleep and sleep paralysis is right in the middle of it So you're you are awake in your mind, but you can't move and that means that you're just on the edge of going to sleep So to exit sleep paralysis, you can either go into a lucid dream directly or you can just wake up So to wake up like I said start by moving your fingers or a small part that you can move that isn't gonna Be paralyzed that much or you could enter a lucid dream from sleep paralysis now to do that There are several ways you could do it.  You might see lines colors Different parts of a dream scene and you just naturally let yourself enter the dream like that or you can just let yourself fall asleep and this is probably the most common and This is what most people do right. This is what most people do without realizing it in sleep paralysis They can't move they just let themselves fall asleep and you can naturally enter a lucid dream like that To do that you just tell yourself as you're in sleep paralysis. I will lose a dream. You just keep telling yourself It's over and over again and eventually you do Okay, so two ways of doing it But just to reiterate the first point sleep paralysis is not a bad thing If you didn't have it you'd be kicking around and you'd hurt yourself in the night So it's not a bad thing. It's a good thing It's nothing to be scared of and you shouldn't worry about it So that's it guys if you haven't subscribed subscribe now, and I'll see you next time


Jimmy sells his catch at the local market. He knows that he can sell only fresh fish, so he throws the bad ones away, regardless of the time it takes him to find, catch and clean the fish. Jimmy knows that if he were to sell spoiled goods, his customers would not return. So instead of crying over stale fish, he considers them as sunk costs and sells what customers actually want. In his free time, Jimmy isn't that rational. Unlike fish that don't go to the movies, Jimmy does. He buys himself a ticket for the afternoon show, but it turns out that a few hours before the film starts, his friends want to meet up to play football, Jimmy's favorite sport. Since he has already spent money on the ticket, he declines the invitation. According to Sunk Costs theory, he shouldn't have. The money he spent on the ticket is already gone, and he won't get it back by watching the movie. What matters is that he has a good time. Jimmy falls for the so-called Sunk Cost fallacy, the strong natural fear of losing what we already own and the tendency of our brain to treasure all the things we possess. A more famous example of the fallacy is the Concorde, the supersonic passenger plane. Building the aircraft proved to be very difficult and expensive, but instead of shutting down the project, the British and French governments continued funding it, even though they knew the aircraft would not have any economic benefit. They argued that they had invested too much to give up. To test the Sunk Cost fallacy, economists Hal Arks and Catherine Bloomer came up with an experiment using theater season tickets. The regular price for the season was $15, but some people were randomly given discounts of either $7 or $2. It turned out that the people who had paid the regular price attended more plays than those who received a discount. Interestingly, the only ones who behaved rationally were children under the age of six. Behavioral economists suggest that there are three psychological reasons for our irrationality. One, loss aversion. People prefer avoiding losses to acquiring equivalent gains. Most avoid bets where they can win $50 because they could also lose $50. Two, the desire not to appear wasteful. This is why some finish their food even when they feel full or don't think it's particularly tasty. Three, to ensure we do things we fear we otherwise wouldn't. We might buy an expensive gym membership to make sure we actually go and work out. Assuming you are immune to the Concorde fallacy and you could completely ignore all investments you have ever made into your education or getting to where you are today, what would you be doing differently going forward? Can you identify any sunk costs that are holding you back from making those changes? If you found this helpful, check out our other videos and subscribe. If you want to support our work, join us on Patreon.com. For more information and additional content, visit SproutSchools.com.


How often do you see outdoor advertisements that are truly catch your attention and are Responding to your needs. I bet not often The reason is advertisers are lacking the way to address targeted message in out-of-home space and and Advertisers spend most of their budgets currently on Online rather than in out-of-home because it's much more transparent and much more targeted but what if digital billboards had eyes and brains We are at Synapse labs developed an artificial intelligence platform that is able to recognize the make model and the license plate of each car passing by We mount a camera on the highway pole 600 feet from a billboard and our software cloud platform Process all the data in less than a second to trigger most appropriate ad on the digital billboard our solution will Transfer digital out-of-home from a classical traditional channel to a programmatic one Just the way it happened in the online when real-time beating mostly replaced banners We believe our technology will revolutionize the entire out-of-home market for three reasons firstly Synapse provides accurate targeting at the level of cars make model and license plate Advertisers will now only choose the right audience irrespective of location secondly synapse With synapse advertisers will only pay for targeted impressions no more wasted budgets and wasted airtime and Thirdly synapse opens Unlimited space for personalized content We know exactly who so what when and where and we can even tell stories on different billboards Welcome to the future out-of-home where we make Where we measure every bit of traffic and make campaigns targeted personalized and efficient We successfully completed commercial campaign in Europe and I just about to pilot This technology in the US So please stop by our stand to see live demo and learn more. Thank you


The Alaska Rail Belt Transmission System provides 75% of the state's population with electricity, but it is expected to face increased demand due to electrification of the transportation and heating sectors. Several organizations are working together to develop an integrated resource plan and reliability standards to address these challenges. This effort involves research into the potential of hydropower and pump storage hydropower, PSH, resources located nearby the rail belt transmission system. GIS mapping techniques were used to identify suitable sites for hydropower and PSH, while cost models and least cost path analysis were applied to narrow down the list of potential sites. The results of this study will help determine which energy sources should be further investigated. This article was authored by Leif Britson and Felicia Sicilio.


Yeah, I think that whether you're single, you know, couple, divorced or dating, understanding your attachment style and also the attachment style of the people that you're involved with can be really helpful. And the goal is to become more secure in your own attachment. And it's important to note that attachment style, it's on a spectrum. And so it also depends on what's going on in life, right? Before the pandemic, if you are living your best life, you're seeing your friends all the time, things are great. You might have an anxious attachment style, but it doesn't really come up. But then pandemic hits, you lose your job, you don't see your friends, suddenly the person that you're into moves across the country. And then you're like stage five, Klinger vibes, right?  No, there's actually some reasoning why. And so I think for those who have more of an avoid an attachment style, yes, you can become more secure. And I think one of the things is if you're an avoidant, you might be drawn to someone who has more anxious tendencies. And so usually the push pull is you want a bit more space and autonomy. They want a little more connection and more time. And it's not that anyone's at fault. And so part of your role is learning how to communicate those boundaries and limits instead of avoiding them and like, you know what, I'm just going to talk about it until you explode. Because that's a tendency. If you don't, if you don't learn at a young age of, you know, when you feel the uncomfortable emotion, when you feel that smothering from a parent, whatever that is, instead of having the voice to be able to say that and we weren't equipped with those tools back then. You now have to actually repair it yourself. And how can you communicate like a functional adult?


Hello, good morning, welcome back to another vlog. So it is currently Thursday, which is podcast day. So I posted a new episode of my podcast this morning. If you're not already following it, it's called Girls Who Get It Podcast. I will have a link in the description. Definitely go check it out. I do it with my best friend Julia, who is coming to visit me tomorrow for the weekend. I'm so excited. And then I watched the new Kardashians episode and now I am ready to get cleaning. I just wanna do like a nice deep clean of my apartment. I do this every week anyway, but especially because she's coming, I just wanna make sure that it's nice and clean before she gets here. So the kitchen counter is a little messy and cluttered. I have some dishes in the sink that I need to put in the dishwasher. And in the dishwasher, I have some clean dishes I need to put away. I have garbage over here I have to throw out. The living room is not too terrible, but I do need to vacuum the floors and I wanna shampoo all of the carpet because I haven't done that in quite a while. My bedroom is also not too bad, but I have some stuff up on the dresser that I need to put away. And I want to wash my sheets and I have some laundry back there that I need to do. And then we need to clean the bathroom. Not horrible in here, but you know, it's just time. The floors need to be cleaned. The tub needs to be cleaned. So we are going to put on a podcast. I'm gonna put on Crime Weekly. One of my favorites. They have two new episodes that I haven't listened to yet and they're two hours each. So that should be perfect. On the evening of June 17, 2013. It feels so good to have it be nice and clean in here. Nice and clean in here. Oh my God, it looks amazing. I still am working on the laundry. So, gonna wash all those sheets. And this stuff I'm leaving up here because I'm still figuring out if I wanna keep these shoes or not. So, feels so good. Everything is so nice and clean and it smells so good in here. I'm just waiting for the carpet to finish drying. It's already almost dry. Leaving that door open and I have the ceiling fan on. So hopefully it'll air out and dry pretty quickly. And then I'll put the coffee table back. It's about 2.30 now. So I'm just gonna spend the rest of the day getting through the rest of that laundry and just relaxing a little bit. I'm gonna take a shower at some point. But right now I'm going to make myself something to eat. We're gonna do eggs. I have some tomatoes I need to use up because we're gonna go bad pretty soon. And some potatoes. I'm just gonna do like an egg scrabble kind of thing. But I think I have some, yeah, I have some cheddar cheese. So I'll throw that in there too. I'm still hanging out with the guys from the streets for my hometown. I'm humble. I'm not too big for them. It's a few days later. It's currently Monday. I've been sitting here editing everything that you just watched so far. I was fully planning on vlogging the entire weekend.  So Friday night her flight ended up getting delayed and she didn't land until like 1.30 in the morning. And the airport she flew into is about an hour and a half away for me. So we didn't get back here till after 3 a.m. And at that point we were super hungry. She had been stuck at the airport waiting to depart for like almost five hours. So we ended up going to Waffle House and we were literally there at 4 a.m. And then by the time we got to my apartment it was five in the morning. And then Saturday it was just very go, go, go because she came in Friday night and then left Sunday evening. So she really only had like one full day here. So we really wanted to make the most of Saturday and do as much as we could. So despite getting here at five in the morning and not actually going to sleep till close to six we were up and ready to go by 9 a.m.  I just kind of tried to show her around town a little bit. We went to the beach and the Fort Fisher area which is one of my favorite places ever. I love it. Then we grabbed lunch and went to Cosmoprof because she's been talking for months now about wanting to make her hair ginger. And she asked me if I would do it while she was here and I was like, yeah, let's do it. So I did her hair and I did record the process. So I'm gonna insert that here. I know this vlog's a little bit random but I'm gonna insert the process of me doing her hair. Enjoy. I haven't recorded myself doing hair and done a voiceover like this in so long. Oh my God, I missed it. I feel so good. But here is what Julia's hair looked like starting out. She's naturally a pretty dark brunette and she did have some old color on the ends. I think, I mean, she had obviously pre-lightened it at some point. I don't even remember what exactly she's done to it but luckily she did go to Cosmetology School. That's how we met. So everything she's ever done to her hair has always been done properly and like with professional good quality products. So I knew her hair would be fine to handle lightning. So I used Wella Blondor lightning powder which is my favorite. I mixed it with 20 volume developer and I literally just went through and I foiled her entire head. Just did slices. I didn't go all the way up to the root because I knew that her roots would lift very easily and very quickly because it's fresh regrowth and it's right by the scalp. The reason I did this because when you are trying to go a gingery color or red color, usually you can just do color with a high volume developer if you're doing it on virgin hair but I didn't know, like I said, exactly what was in her hair and I didn't really know how it was gonna take and if it would come out even and if it would lift enough if I just did color. So I thought the safest thing to do would just be to lighten her all over, get all that color out, try to get her to like a more even starting point first. So that's what I did and then I just kind of went section by section and started pulling the foils out just so nothing was over processing. I didn't wanna get her hair super, super blonde because that wasn't necessary and also the lighter I got her hair and the more warmth I removed, the less her hair would be able to hold the red color we put on it. So I wanted to make sure I wasn't overlifting. She ultimately wanted to be a level eight so I just tried to lift her right to a level eight. So yeah, here I am just pulling those foils out and you can see she actually lifted pretty nicely considering how dark she was starting out and here's Benny, literally mood. That's how tired I was feeling at this point. So this is the formula that we used for her red. Everything was from Wella Choleston Perfect which is a permanent color. I look like SpongeBob. You do. Like that's how a yellow. You are SpongeBob yellow right now, yeah. So for the formula, we did equal parts of the eight, four, one with the six, four, three and then like a third of the seven, seven. And I mixed that with 20 volume because I didn't lift or I didn't pre-lift, I should say her roots. So I wanted to make sure that I could get a little lift with the color on her root area because she did want it to be one solid color. She didn't want to keep her dark roots. So I went through and I applied it to the roots first so that they would sit on the longest and then I pulled it through the ends. And I also was thinking that the 20 volume would help to even everything out since some parts of her hair didn't get quite as light as other parts. And it was honestly a miracle because we really did not think we were gonna end up having enough color and at this point in the night, the store was already closed. So we ended up having just enough. Like I was literally scraping the bowl by the end of this, but we made it work. And I don't know if you can tell but we did end up dampening her ends a tiny bit just to help the color glide a little bit more so that we could stretch it as much as possible. And I used a comb to comb it through so that we got full even saturation. And this was the final result. It came out so beautiful and really perfectly even. So yeah, it actually came out really good. It's always tricky whenever you're formulating like reds and gingers, especially like a more natural red. It can be tricky like getting the perfect formula. And I feel like it sometimes is like a little bit trial and error and it takes a while before you can find like that perfect formula that's like exactly the shade that you were going for. I'm not gonna take credit for it. She picked the colors at herself and she formulated and mixed it. She's also a cosmetologist and used to do hair. So she knows what she's doing. And I was very happy with how even it came out despite the fact that she had like some old color on her ends and wasn't starting with an even base. But yeah, it was really pretty. And she was a little bit nervous because she, like I said, had been wanting this color for months and months but she didn't know how it would look on her especially because she has such dark features but I think it looked really good. She's debating whether or not she wants to color her eyebrows and lighten them up a little bit too but I actually like the way it looks with the dark brows. So comment down below to let her know should she lighten her brows or should she keep the dark brows with that hair color? But yeah, by the time we finished doing her hair because it was such a long process and she has a lot of hair, it was pretty late. So we just ended up door dashing some food. I don't even think I got any clips of that because we were starving. So we just, we got some sushi, scarfed it down really fast while the red color was processing. And then we just ended up passing out afterwards. And then Sunday we went to brunch and then we went to the aquarium and then I drove her to the airport and literally as we were pulling up to the airport she got a text that her flight was delayed again. So we had three hours until her flight and we were already at the airport at that point. We went to the Myrtle Beach Airport.  So we went to Myrtle Beach. We ended up getting dinner and sat outside right by the ocean. It was so nice. And then I went and dropped her off at the airport. Like I said, I really wanted to vlog it but there was just so much going on and I was so exhausted the whole time because of Friday night. It was honestly just the last thing that I felt like doing was worrying about like filming and getting good shots and all that. Cause we had such limited time too to do everything. Next time she comes down she definitely needs to stay longer but we still had a good time and she is coming to my birthday celebration which is coming up in a few weeks. So I'm gonna see her again really soon. So now I'm just trying to do some editing. I need to straighten up a little bit. Luckily we were barely in my apartment at all, all weekend, so it stayed very clean. I just kind of need to put some stuff away. I still have the air mattress out here. I need to fold that up and put it away. And then I have some of the color that we use to do her hair still out. I wanna do some laundry. And then she is gonna be calling me in about an hour and we're gonna record a new episode for our podcast. We were planning on recording an episode together while she was here but based on how the weekend went we just did not end up having time. But anyway, let's straighten up before we have to record this podcast. Is this shirt? Julia got it for me. She went to see John Mayer live in concert and he is like one of my favorite artists on the whole planet. I am obsessed. It's like the softest, comfiest shirt ever. And the back, let me show you. I got a big shirt. John Mayer tour baby. I've been wearing it like all weekend. Look at that ginger hair. I gotta vlog it. Beautiful. Oh my God, who is she?  I literally like just put everything down in my room and then I heard it coming from a distance. And I was like, no. I'm jamming. Just finished recording. It is 8.48. That was a really fun episode to record. But now my throat feels so dry from talking so much and I am just so hungry. So I am making myself some dinner. I got some water boiling.  Let's put our shrimp in. Making shrimp Alfredo because I'm actually leaving to go visit my family in my hometown and I'm gonna be there for a few weeks. I'm gonna be celebrating my 30th birthday up there and just so excited to see my family and all my friends. So yeah, my fridge is very, very empty right now but there's no sense in me grocery shopping because I'm gonna be gone and anything I buy is just gonna go bad. So I'm trying to just kind of use up what I have. So I had some frozen shrimp. I have some pasta. I have some fresh Parmesan cheese. I have butter. I have milk but I'm gonna wrap up this vlog here and I'm gonna start a new one tomorrow.  I definitely wanna vlog my party. So more content to come. Thank you guys so much for watching. I'll see you really soon in my next video. Bye.


d women's rights as a win-lose for them personally, vice a win-win situation and reluctant to power share.  Because I talked about it, I'll give it a shot. I think you've got to model the behavior as a leader. You've got to talk about it. You've got to be willing to step out and that's not unique to just WPS and power sharing, right? I think to Admiral Klein's points, there are leadership characteristics and aspects of character which are applicable to WPS which are applicable to a lot of things. But I think the modeling of the behavior on the part of leaders is something that's important. In a case like WPS, in a case like power sharing, I think leaders have to recognize that at some level they've got to step into the breach and demonstrate some vulnerability. The aspect of what keeps men out of those conversations of it not being a safe space because I'm not sure whether or not I'm going to be rewarded or if I burn the bridge by entering this conversation. Maybe I didn't burn the bridge, but I certainly didn't do any maintenance on it. You're that guy. Those types of sentiments roll through men's heads, but I think the commanders who are those leaders, those men that are in those positions have got to be willing to balance that idea of that there might be risk to this, but there's also risk to my team, to my force, to all the members of my team by not stepping into the breach and showing some vulnerability in having those conversations. It sounds self-serving, career-minded to say that, hey, I wouldn't do those things because, hey, Brad, you're a poor leader because you're saying you won't have tough conversations. I'm not saying that I'm just operating the realm of reality, but that is a consideration for every professional. What conversations do you choose to go into openly and which do you choose to have in private? And I think you got to start having some of those conversations with your teams more openly and more frequently. And it could be done in manners that don't have to look like, like DE&I and A-training or WPS conversations, but just challenging folks with ideas that get them to recognize things. Illustrative example, I kind of give quips to my team just things that I'm learning, things I'm listening to, and sometimes it's just weird information, factual in nature. I did some preparation, not for this, but for that session I talked to you about, about why I mentioned mentor women and was drawing on the aspect of how something like law in place doesn't necessarily produce the change that we're looking for. Yes, that happens in this aspect of residual effects. So the illustrative example of it's not a discussion, it's not a sermon, et cetera, but like, hey, did you know that it wasn't, that your mother could be denied a credit card by a bank up until 1974 unless her husband signed? I'm like, what are you talking about, sir? Yeah, the credit act passed in 1974. Did you know that she was class two or three at the academy? I would expect class two or three of women, the first women they got allowed. 1975, first quotes, 1976 under the academies. Having those conversations that illustrate that this is not about the esoteric conversation, this is like in our lifetimes, these are things that continue to be requiring change and putting it to people in terms that they can grab hold of. I think there are some of the ways to do that. I ramble, I apologize. My team knows I do that. Just to follow up on that. So I've been over the last 16 years now in 40 different organizations where I've been sent to those organizations to deliberately study culture. And in some cases it is to take organizations from good to great. In other cases, it is taking, receiving the 911 call that we have an organization that is extremist and that we need to get them to just above marginal. What I find in those organizations, and I am talking specifically to the good to great organizations, and these are my observations of those organizations, the most significant effort in the commander's list of objectives in terms of setting the conditions for healthy, developmental, growing cultures and climate is the ability to establish a learning culture. This is not our first rodeo in civil rights. It is not our first rodeo in social equity. It is not our first rodeo in recognizing that women are a powerful piece of this conversation, not because it is only the right thing to do, but that there are lots of objectives that we meet in doing so. Learning cultures are disruptive. They are publicly principled. There's a sense of urgency in a learning culture. There's unambiguous language and feedback when things are kind of coming off the rails. Commanders are not afraid to jump in and to say, hey, that's not okay. To the conversation that we had yesterday, we don't do that here is not set enough in some of those organizations that are struggling with this kind of idea. Learning organizations have the study of people at its core and are willing to take personal risk. Going back to that conversation about gratitude and then to Brad's point that is so eloquent, learning cultures are deliberate cultures. There's no accidental learning. It's not like we have to muster the troops and do a set aside an hour to learn about women in peace and security, but in the course and the fabric of that organization that there are conversations about why that matters. And I just think that those things are just super, super important. Where I see the failure of leaders to have learning cultures are leaders that will not do the hard work. And I think the principles in an organization have got to do the hard work. They've got to have suitable trusted agents. They've got to be intolerant of individuals that lack discipleship, the willingness to go out and spread the message or to spread the gospel. They can't be my optic in like, hey, there's my bottom line, that's what I'm after. They really need to be thinking broadly about being accountable for what is going on in and around their folks in that organization. And if leaders are willing to say, please go find me a black female so that I can have a diversity, equity, inclusion officer at my command, but I don't provide that person with a budget. I don't provide that person with any resources whatsoever to carry that water than we have failed in that space even though we might have checked those box. So just some thoughts to that question. So I have a question in reference to, so women, peace and security, the necessary ingredient is women, but the DOD has a huge women's retention issue. Women leave the military service at 46% higher rate than men in the Marine Corps. It's even more, so it's 64% more than men. So how do we start to have those discussions about real issues with retention and those issues with retention that are specific to gender? And the reason I say that is because oftentimes we want to avoid the appearance of being just female focused, but in this case we actually have to be female focused. So any thoughts? Yeah, I kind of feel like I might know more than a couple, at least one of the people here, although Joe probably has studied it again as he's looked at 40 organizations in the last few years. I feel like women's retention is a symptom of deeper problems and there's some really good data on the business world side that nobody tells the truth on their exit interviews, that what people say anybody says, what they say why they're leaving is rarely a reflection of what really pushed them to not stay in the organization. And so I have a very strong DNA towards being stubborn and not letting anybody tell me whether I belong or not. So that was my survival tactic. And it took me until I was sitting in a hearing in 1997, Senate Armed Services Personnel Subcommittee with Olympia Snow. I worked for Olympia Snow for a year and she's an amazing leader and incredibly thoughtful and a huge advocate for women. And she was asking questions at this personnel subcommittee of women who had been sexually harassed and sexually assaulted. And it wasn't until I was working for her that I realized how incredibly privileged I had been to work where I did and to have the defense mechanisms I did. So I think that upstream downstream, whatever model you're using is, I think that we need to have a better grip within the Department of Defense. This is very different for women in uniform. I think it's different for women in uniform than it is for civilian women. And so is that, were you asking uniform or uniform and civilian? Mostly uniform. Yeah, I mean, I don't, I've been studied the civilian retention numbers, male versus female. So again, leadership, right? This is my problem with trying to write policy that says, thou shalt keep all your women, right? Because people will say that, well, I really tried, but I can't help it, that she wanted to go have a family, right? It is rarely that that is the actual reason they left. So it comes down to a leadership issue. And if we did many of the things both Brad and Joe talked about, the organization would be more welcoming and people would join and join with the intention of what can I contribute to this organization? Not the dread of I wonder if my work will be valued. I think that's what has to shift. And I don't know this, but just the fact that we had to legislate women, peace and security should be about all you need to understand. And Brenda Opperman will throw something at me if I totally get this wrong because she's my smee on this topic. But you know, we've had, the services have a history of having to have things legislated because they wouldn't take them, they wouldn't take the problems on their own. So the really complex problem is people because people are the most complex weapon system that any of the services deal with. And how to understand what good leadership looks like I think is the domino that we could tip to start tipping others. And that's a really unsatisfying answer, but I think it's at the root of how we start to make things better. Let me just say one more thing. One of the things, and this is related, this is the blame game, right? This is, well, women just don't like it here. It is not my fault that women don't like it here. I was really proud of C&O Gilday after George Floyd's murder. He said, we have a race problem in the Navy. He didn't say people of color don't fit in as well here. He said, we have a problem with racism in the Navy. He's right. We have a lot of isms in the Navy. And again, that's my personal experience that from my time at OSD, I would say the Navy is not much different than the other services. So it starts by taking it on, internalizing it as we realize, oh, we're culpable in some of those, as you ask, the retention numbers. Two quick things, Sharon, to add, because I'm not just me in that, but it's some synthesis of some of the things that the Admiral was saying, and then some of my own perspectives. The conversation needs to go to diversity, and diversity is not about a gender. It's not about a race. It's about all of them, right? So viewing diversity is not just what the person brings, but who the person is, what they live, and what makes them thrive, right? We should be looking at all those factors and retention for all the people that we have in our force to include women. So I think expanding the aperture to include, how do I get people to thrive in the organization? What do those people live in the organization? Because if it's diverse, it's not the same. Every person, every group, every dynamic will be different. And then the second piece is, I think we need to do better about figuring out ways to be able to gather information from different groups as to what's the right turtle? What turtle actually made them leave? Let me think about the turtles all the way down, because I think to the Admiral's point, sometimes we get answers, and then, well, yep, policy change, and all we did was throw a bandaid on the sucking chest one, right? That really wasn't the answer. It wasn't really the right why to that, so. Thank you, Brad. I'm conscientious that we are at time, and Dean Klein does have to go. Thank you so much, Dean Klein. Did we have time for one more question? I did wanna ask the panelists a closing, give them a minute to make a one minute statement. Thank you, Peg.  So thank you for your challenges to, as you're stating it, Brad, to step into the breach to leaders, and Joe, your challenge to set the battle space for a learning culture. If you had the attention of global security leaders just in the last minute, could you state what critical piece of advice that you would give that could help institutionalize positive change? Over to you, Joe. Yeah, thank you very much. Two pieces of advice I would give. First, I think, and this maybe even speaks to the question that we just asked, hierarchical organizational leadership is no longer effective or desirable, particularly when individuals enter the service and cannot see themselves represented in that hierarchy. So we've gotta think very, very carefully about what parts of hierarchy are important in terms of communicating from commanders to their battle space. But in other places, we've gotta think about how does the lieutenant and the Brigadier General sit in the space and talk about culture in a way that is meaningful and important. And then the second thing that I would offer is that, again, just my observation, at some level, organizational leadership is not keeping pace with the quality of the individuals that are entering the service. I think, you know, to have a conversation about diversity is really impactful and important, but having conversations about inclusion is where we will retain the young men and women of all races and genders and colors and flavors. That's really where it will make a difference. I fear for our senior NCO community, from 20 to 34 years, the number of females that serve in that space are diminishing rapidly, and I don't know that are getting any better. And I would say that there's probably a similar case to be made for the 0304 in all of our services who is female and is being driven out of the organizations because there is a say-do gap between what we espouse to believe and what barriers might be in place. Thank you, Gina. If, well, accumulated shared learning is culture, that's what Peter Schein told us. So if that's true and the culture that exists is not what we desire, then we have to continue to learn. If it's shared learning that's accumulated over time, that means to change it means that we've got to continue to grow and learn. And I think the idea of what do we do that should be oriented on that and a lot of different ways to do that. But I do believe and subscribe to the idea that was laid out that that learning and that growth occurs at a relationship level, right? The personalized those things, those levels of intimacy associated with that. And in an organization which is hierarchical nature, we're not going away from that. People are going to wear a rank and they're going to be able to exert authority over. We need to develop within focus of mindset that developing relationships that are based off of respect is important. We're not primed to do that. So the simple advice I would give to, and I do give to myself and others is you can do it, but never miss the opportunity not to be a jerk, right? You can always be a jerk because your rank can allow it. Never miss the opportunity not to be that person. Allow those conditions to thrive within your organization. So thanks for sharing with us today. This was really great. Thank you. Thank you so much, gentlemen. Okay. We'll be shifting our location again upstairs. Hopefully we'll try to regain a little bit of the schedule. I understand everybody will do some admin time, but if we can regroup upstairs ballroom as quickly as possible for the next design thinking part to be much appreciated. And again, your note taking forms deposited by the door as you exit. Thanks very much.