So we're called the definition of an algebraically closed field. We say a field is algebraically closed if every non-trivial polynomial has a root. For which, if every non-trivial polynomial has a root, that means every non-trivial polynomial factors into linear factors are, we say, every polynomial splits. The fundamental theorem of algebra states that the complex number field is an algebraically closed field and for most of us, that's probably the one and only algebraically closed field that we're aware of at this moment. I want to construct another one because if you look at the field Q versus the field C, yeah, Q does live inside the complex numbers, but the complex numbers in addition to having algebraic elements over Q, like the complex numbers include i, the square root of 3. These are algebraic numbers over Q. There's other things like pi, e, which are these transcendental numbers, which are not algebraic over Q since they're transcendental. Let's take a, Blackboard a in fact, to denote the set of all algebraic elements in the complex number field over Q itself. We proved previously that if you take the collection of algebraic elements in a field extension, that itself forms a field extension, a subfield that lives in the middle of these two, which by construction necessarily is an algebraic extension. So take a to be the set of all algebraic elements of Q, I should say all the algebraic elements of C over Q. This field we can show is in fact algebraically closed as well. And in fact, this field a, it's commonly referred to as the field of algebraic numbers. This is in fact the smallest field which contains Q and is algebraically closed. What we want to do in this video is talk about this idea here. This idea of being the smallest algebraically closed field, this leads to the notion of what we call the algebraic closure of Q, which is what we mean by a here. And for an arbitrary field F, we will define F bar to be this algebraic closure. That is, so that is F bar is an algebraic extension of F, which is an algebraically closed field. What do we mean by here by an algebraic extension? Is there more than one that could do this? We're going to see that uptie some morphism that that's not the case, that an algebraic closure by definition is an algebraically closed algebraic extension of the field F, but uptie some morphism, only one such field can do that. And so we're claiming from before that this field a is the algebraic closure of the rational numbers. It is the set of all algebraic numbers, which are algebraic over the rational numbers there. So before we prove, because one thing we have to argue is that do algebraic closures even exist, there is an issue going on there. We'll prove that in just a second. And that proof will utilize Zorn's lemma. But before we do that, I want to prove the following lemma. So let F be a field, then E is an algebraic closure. And I'm using the word and here as opposed to the, because I'm not claiming they're unique yet. They will be, but we'll prove that in a second. So E is an algebraic closure of F, if and only if E is a maximal algebraic extension of F. Okay, so close algebraic closures are maximal algebraic extensions. What does maximal algebraic extension mean here? That first of all, E is an algebraic extension, but any other extension of E would contain something that's not algebraic over F. That is, it's transcendental. So let's look at the details of that argument right here. So let E be an algebraic closure now by a previous proposition 21-1-21 in our lecture series, which we proved that in a previous video. Let me just remind you what that says here. Proposition 21-1-21 says that any algebraically closed field has no proper algebraic extension. Okay, so if E, the statement right here is algebraically closed fields have no proper algebraic extensions, which then makes E over F a maximal extension. Okay, so by definition, an algebraically closed, an algebraic closure is an algebraically closed field, right? So since a closure is algebraically closed, this proposition implies there's no proper algebraic extensions. That means it's a maximal algebraic extension. So that direction is already taken care of. The other direction we need to go about is that if you have a maximal algebraic extension, that then makes it the algebraic closure, all right? So suppose that E is a maximal algebraic extension of F. Consider the polynomial P of X, which belongs to the ring E of joint X. And suppose this is a non-constant polynomial. And also suppose that this doesn't have a root in E, okay? Because if we have an algebraically closed field, then that means this polynomial would have a root. Because again, we're trying to prove here that since E is a maximal algebraic extension, that it's an algebraic closure. An algebraic closure is an algebraic extension. We already got that part that is algebraically closed. So every polynomial has a root, okay? Well, if this polynomial P doesn't have a root, by Kroniker's theorem, there does exist an algebraic field extension over E, call it K, such that P of X has a root. The construction basically comes down to you take E of joint X and mod out the ideal generated by this irreducible polynomial P of X. That field K will be a field extension of E, but it contains a root of P, okay? Now, we know that by assumption E is algebraic over F. By construction, K will be algebraic over E. Because K right here is just E adjoin the root, we'll call it alpha, of this polynomial P of X here. So it's an algebraic extension. Now, also by a previous result, we did this in the very first video of lecture 27. That was known as theorem 21, 118. That theorem told us that if K is algebraic over E and E is algebraic over F, then K has to be algebraic over F as well, okay? That would contradict, so K being algebraic over F contradicts the maximality of E being an algebraic extension of F. So what must have happened is that K and E would actually have to be the same thing, really. But that means E had a root, we get a contradiction. So the maximality of the algebraic extension here tells us that we actually were algebraically closed. So a field E is an algebraic closure of F if and only if it's a maximal algebraic extension. This is very important observation because this is going to be the main argument we use in the forthcoming Zorn's Lemma argument. So remember, by Zorn's Lemma, the basic template we argue is the following. We come up with a partially ordered set, argue that partially ordered set is non-empty. Then we take an arbitrary chain inside of that partially ordered set and argue that it has an upper bound inside of the set X. Then we invoke Zorn's Lemma that tells us that since every chain has an upper bound, there exists a maximal element inside the set. And then that maximal element we're going to argue is an algebraic closure. And so here we go. The main theorem of this lecture is that every field has an algebraic closure. So let F be some arbitrary field. Let X be the set of all algebraic extensions of F. Now there is a slight little caveat I have to make mentioned here. That technically speaking, this set X is not a set. It's actually a proper class, which I don't want to delve into the deep, deep set theory going on here. But a system of symbols can be introduced in correspondence with F of joint X to avoid the set theoretic problem that's going on here. That is, I can make X into a set and not a proper class. But I'm going to hide the details that most of us won't be too concerned about. The issue is that we can do it and I'm just going to make it for simplicity's sake, suppress those details because it goes beyond the scope of this abstract algebra lecture series. So we have this set X of field extensions for which these are all fields that contain F and we can order those fields by set containment. This set is non-empty because F belongs to the set. F is an algebraic extension of F itself. It's a trivial one, but it is still an algebraic extension, so X is non-trivial. It's non-empty. That has to be checked. Now let's see be an arbitrary chain of fields inside of this set X. So if we take the union of all of those fields, so if F prime is an arbitrary element of the chain, take the union of all of these different F primes, call that set E. Now I claim that E, the union of these ascending fields, is itself a field. All right? We've made that argument before from time to time, so I'm not going to say too much about the details, but this set E is in fact a field. It contains zero because each of these elements contain zero. If you take two elements inside of E here like alpha and beta, something like that, well, that means there was some field alpha, some field, excuse me, F prime that contains alpha. There was some field F double prime that contains beta, but this is a chain, so these things, this is totally ordered. So without the loss of generality, we can assume that F prime is contained inside of F double prime. So alpha and beta both belong to F double prime.  It's got all the field stuff, so yet the union of ascending fields is going to be itself a field. Okay, now being a field does not necessarily mean you belong to X. You first of all have to be a field that is an algebraic extension of F. Now be aware that each of these fields F prime contains F. They're all algebraic extensions over F. So each of these fields contains F, so E is going to contain F as well. So clearly E is an extension of F. We want to then prove it's an algebraic extension. So let's look at the details there. Like I said, clearly F is contained inside of E since every field in C contains it. C is non-empty, of course. It's a non-empty chain. So let's take an arbitrary element of E. Now, if there's an element alpha inside of E, that means there was some field F prime in the chain C that also contained alpha, okay? But F prime over F is an algebraic extension, which means that alpha is an algebraic element over F. And so since alpha was chosen arbitrarily, every element of E is algebraic over F. So that means E over F is an algebraic extension. Therefore, E belongs to the set X. So we've now shown that, well, clearly by construction, right, E is the union of all of this F prime. So if you take an individual field F prime inside the chain, E contains it. And so therefore, C, excuse me, E is an upper bound for the chain C. And since C was an arbitrary chain, that shows that every chain inside of X has an upper bound. By Zorn's lemma, that then tells us that the set X has a maximal element, that maximum element, we're gonna call it F bar. Now, what does F bar mean here? It's a maximum element of X. X is the set of all algebraic extensions of F. Therefore, F bar is a maximal algebraic extension of F. As we just saw with the previous lemma, maximal algebraic extensions are algebraic closures. Therefore, F bar is an algebraic closure of F. And we have then that algebraic closures then, in fact, exist. That's the main result I want us to get here. The next result, and this is where we're gonna end our lecture with, lecture 27, is that algebraic closures of a field are isomorphic. To prove this corollary, we're gonna first prove the following theorem here, that let K be an algebraic extension of the field F, then there exists an injective homomorphism, we'll call it phi from K into F bar, where F bar here is an algebraic closure of F. They do exist now, such that the function phi when restricted to the base field F is the identity map. So given any algebraic extension of F, there exists an embedding of it inside of an algebraic closure, for which at least fixed the base field like so. And so every algebraic extension can be placed inside of an algebraic closure. Now, if you have two different algebraic closures, well, an algebraic closure, we'll call it, we have F bar versus F double bar, right? Well, these are both algebraic extensions of F, both maximum algebraic extensions of F. So if the previous theorem is true, that means that F double bar can be embedded inside of F bar, which F bar can also be embedded inside of F double bar like so, and therefore we can infer from these that these injective field homomorphisms do have to in fact be isomorphisms. Again, algebraic extensions are maximal for algebraically closed fields. So the corollary follows from this theorem right here, very nicely, and the proof of this theorem is I'm actually gonna leave it up as an exercise to the viewer right here to prove this, to prove this isomorphism theorem for these algebraic extensions here. And now I'm gonna give you a nice proof, a nice hint on this proof here because the proof depends again on Zorn's lemma. So to do Zorn's lemma there's the ingredients we always have to go through, we need a partially ordered set. So the above theorem is proven using Zorn's lemma and the set X, which X is gonna be the set of injective homomorphisms of the form. F goes from E to F bar, where E is then a subfield of K because we're trying to build one for K here. And when you restrict your function F to F, you get just the identity in that situation. Now it's like, how in the world are you gonna order this set? So it's a set of functions. All the previous Zorn's lemma examples we've done in this lecture series, we did sets of sets, but now we have a set of functions. Now be aware that functions themselves are sets, right? Because a function first and foremost is a relation. A function F is a relation on the set. So if your function F is from E to F bar, that means it's a relation, it's a special type of relation, but it's a relation on the set E cross F bar. And so a relation in particular is a subset of the Cartesian product. For which E cross F bar, since E is a subfield of K, each of these Cartesian products is a subset of K cross F bar. So each and every one of these functions is a subset of K cross F bar. And therefore that tells us that the set X, which is the set of all these functions here, is a subset of the power set K cross F bar for which the power set has a natural ordering to it. It's a partial order set. You just, you order it by set containment. As X is a subset of that, you're gonna borrow the ordering from there. So to prove this one, your best bet is to actually think of the functions as sets of ordered pairs for which you have the restriction that if the first coordinate is from the field F, the second coordinate is gonna be from field F. And if you do it that way, you can improve this using Zorn's limit like we've done all the other ones. But like I said, I'm gonna leave that as a, as an exercise to the viewer here, which then brings us to the end of lecture 27. Thanks for watching. If you learned anything about algebraically closed field or algebraic closures, please like these videos, subscribe to the channel to see more videos like this in the future. And if you have any questions, please post them in the comments below and I will answer them as soon as I can. Thank you everyone. Bye.


Hello friends, I am Sanjay Gupta. I welcome you on Sanjay Gupta Tech School. In this video, I am going to demonstrate you differences between sales app and sales console. If you want to follow Salesforce training videos, you can search my name Sanjay Gupta and you can follow my YouTube channel. So now we are logged into Salesforce Lightning. So if we click on this app launcher button. So here you will see various apps. Those are available and if you click on view also you will see all available applications. So right now I'm going to differentiate between sales and sales console. So you might have seen the sales application and the sales console. So let me first open the sales application. So if we open the sales application, so this is pre implemented by Salesforce and as per your requirement, you can do changes in this. So here you can see this sales app provide standard navigation with the help of tabs. So for various objects which are implemented in this org, they have related tabs and those tabs are available at the top of this app. So first tab is home. So home basically provides various components like assistant, quarterly performance, today's event, today's task, recent items. So you can manage these things as per your requirement. So if you want to change anything in this page, so you can click on setting and you can click on edit page. And lightning app builder will be open and you can modify this thing. So I'm also going to demonstrate you that how you can do. Then if I click on opportunities, so it will show all available opportunities. So let me open any opportunity. So here it is open. But after opening any opportunity record, if I move to accounts, so you will see opportunity tab is automatically closed and we are on account and we can open any account record. Right. And if I open any related contact that is available on account, so you will see account is automatically closed and contact tab is opened and related record is displayed here. So this is standard navigation that is available in sales application. So now if your requirement is like we opened opportunity through opportunity we opened account and then we open contact. So if you want to open all related records and sub tabs so that you can easily navigate between them. So then instead of using sales standard navigation, you can use console application for navigation. Right. So now I'm opening this sales console application. So here you will see records will be available in sub tabs so that you can easily navigate. So here we have a list of tabs. You can open any tab that is required. So let's say I'm opening account so it will show all available accounts. So right now it is showing decent view. Then if I want to show all accounts so from this list view I can select that option and all accounts will be displayed. So now I'm opening account record. So here you can see it is open in the main tab. Right. Now, if I scroll it down so it is not having any related record. So let me open any other tab. So let's say I'm opening contact record. So you can see as I open contact so account is available here that is open and contact is available in another tab right and this contact is having account associated. So now I'm going to open this account so see carefully see what happens if I open this account so you can see this contact is having now two sub tabs. This is for contact and this is for account. Right. So here you can see two tabs are available. Sub tabs are available and the account which we opened that is also available in another tab. Right. Now let's say I'm opening any opportunity. So I'm opening this one. So you can see third tab is created. So our account is available here. Contact is available with sub with two sub tabs. Here opportunity is available and let's say I open this account related record for opportunity. So opportunity is now having two sub tabs. And on opportunity we have opportunity owner. So let's let's say I open this one also. So this opportunity is now having three sub tabs. And previous records are already open. So this way this is console navigation where the record which you open will be available in tabs and you can easily navigate to records of different objects. So I hope you understood how we can use console applications to manage records. Then here we have this list view option so you can also minimize this whenever it is required you can view this list view mode. So this way we can manage records in console application. Also if you want to add any other tab so you can add more items by clicking all. So from here you can add tabs. Right. So so this is the basic difference between sales application and sales console application. So I hope you understood how we can use these two different applications. Now suppose if you want to edit any page so that I discussed earlier like we can add it a particular record page so you can click on setting and then select edit page. So lightning app builder will be available here in edit mode. So here all the components are available if you want to place any other component. So from left hand side you can simply drag and drop that component. So first it shows a standard components and then custom components so you can drag and drop and then you can save and activate that particular edited page. So if you want to know more about these lightning report pages how we can manage them so you can watch another video in this playlist. So then you will get to know how you can edit this lightning report page and you can use it in your org or any particular application. So right now I'm leaving this page. So I hope you understood the difference between sales and sales console in this video that was our main topic. So if you want to watch more Salesforce training videos you can search my name Sanjay Bukla on YouTube and you can follow my channel so that you can find various videos related to Salesforce. Thank you for watching this video.


Ring in the New Year with amazing savings from Appalachian Wireless. Get the Galaxy S7 for just $49.99 when you sign a renew a two-year service agreement. Better service, bigger savings. That's today's Appalachian Wireless. Maddie Smith, a senior at Belfry High School, will compete in distinguished young women of Kentucky next weekend. Girls from across Kentucky will spend this week with a host family while participating in community service programs and rehearsals. This weekend I'll be going to Lexington for a week to compete for Distinguished Young Women of Kentucky, which was formerly known as the Junior Miss Program. It's basically a program that encourages high school seniors to be as well-rounded as they can be and rewards them with scholarships and other college opportunities. Smith is the first-ever contestant from Belfry High School and the first to compete from Pike County in at least 10 years. There are five components that make up the scoresheet, academics, interview, self-expression, fitness, and talent. Since I was a little kid, I've always loved school and I've always loved working with people. And so God's given me a lot of opportunities to combine the two through National Honor Society and Governor Scholars Program. Being in use, there's countless opportunities that I've had and they've all led up to this one awesome moment. Distinguished Young Women also offers a little sister program. We're just trying to get younger girls out there and make them see how important all this is, how important being a well-rounded girl is especially, and they're just getting to be a part of it and it's awesome. Smith chose Belfry Middle School 6th grader Micah Steele to join her in this year's Distinguished Young Women program. I'm proud to be picked to represent with her. Distinguished Young Women of Kentucky will take place Friday morning and will last until Saturday afternoon at the Singletary Center for the Arts at the University of Kentucky. Reporting in Belfry for EKB News, I'm Shelby Steele. Thank you.


We've entered our third and final track of the summit over the course of the last day or so on the credentialing economy, which as you know is focused on innovation and disruption, where we'll explore policy and technology environments that we are currently and will be operating within as educators, employers, state agencies, credential providers, and community organizations. To set the stage for our last panel, I'd like to introduce Dr. Robert Atkinson, who is founder and president of the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation. Recognized as the world's top think tank for science and technology policy, they are also a co-sponsor of Connecting Credentials. He's a prolific writer, speaker, and tech titan who is a valued advisor to policymakers and has held many prestigious posts with previous administrations, including President Clinton's commission on workers, communities, and economic change in the new economy. His most recent book, Big is Beautiful, Debunking the Mythology of Small Business, was released in April of this year, and I would also direct you to a series of essays, Work in the Digital Age, Challenges of the Fourth Industrial Revolution. Please join me in welcoming Dr. Atkinson. Okay, well thank you everybody.  So I was named this digital titan or something, I don't know, a tech titan. But I also won an award, like down in a long time ago, there's doers, dreamers, and drivers of information technology, and I can tell you it was not for doing anything or even driving anything, it was for dreaming, so you all do things, I'm highly impressed with that. I can't do things, I just live in Washington and I think about things, so you live in the real world and you actually help real people, so I have enormous amount of respect for that. And the other caveat being, while I've been involved, I see my friend Steve here and others, I've been involved in workforce development peripherally for a long time, but I am not an expert in it. Really what I hope to be an expert in or think I might be is really much more broader about the economy and what's happening to it, and particularly in terms of innovation and its transformation to the economy and what we need to do about it. So keep that as a caveat to what I want to talk about today. So really what I want to talk today about is there's a lot of hype about what's happening to the economy, you know, we're not going to have any truck drivers in a couple of years and we won't even have any lawyers or doctors, we'll all be out of work and it'll be awful.  So ITIF, we're a think tank, if you want to learn more just ITIF.org, if you click on innovation and competitiveness tab you can see all our work on employment and training and education policy there. Do lots of different kinds of books and reports and really a lot of our work is designed to give policymakers, particularly in Washington, but really at the state and local level, actionable ideas for what they can do in these spaces. So what's happening? Well there's this pretty clear, I think, consensus and I think in this case it's true that there are a set of emerging technologies that are going to have some important implications for the U.S. economy, U.S. industries and more importantly for you labor market structure. These are all ones you obviously know about, AI, robotics would be to me the two most important ones, but then a sort of few other ones that are in there in that space, Internet of Things, so this would be things, for example, much of what's happening or beginning to happen in U.S. manufacturing around what's called smart manufacturing, where everything is digitized. I was just in one of the leading smart manufacturing factories in Milan a couple of weeks ago and every worker wears an Apple watch and they get notified in real time when any machine in the factory is slightly out of tolerance in terms of cutting or whatever it might do. Autonomous systems, those would be things like trucks or autonomous vehicles, drones and the like. Blockchain, which is basically in this notion of being able to put information out there in a indisputable form that's encrypted, genetic innovation. So these technologies are all real, they're all happening, but the real question is just how big is this? Are we all going to be out of our job in 20 years and is this going to be like the greatest thing that's ever happened to humankind? Some people think this, this is Klaus Schwab who has written a book on this and I encourage you to not read it. And Schwab is basically, this is like, we've never seen anything like this before, Eric Bernofsen and Andy McIvy, MIT, they talk about the second machine age and this is all frankly, in my view, a lot of hype. There's a good article just a couple of days ago talking about, from a very good AI scholar on why AI seems to be hitting some real serious roadblocks and doesn't appear to be as powerful as people think. So I think we're much more akin to this, this is a little complicated, but essentially, when you really study technology in the US economy or an advanced economy, what you find is that it goes in these big waves. So there are periods where there's a bunch of new technologies that come together, they start getting better, they start getting cheaper, and then they start getting adopted widely across a lot of industries at the same time, they start powering GDP growth, they start transforming occupational and labor markets, and then eventually they peter out. So, I don't know if that has a, it doesn't happen. But if you go to the, if you look at the top of that middle curve, how many of you have an iPhone 10? All right, I don't know why you do, that's my question. So, I guess the reason you do is because your iPhone 5 broke, probably, six broke, yeah, thank you. So my point is, most of the technology that's coming out today, it's like, you don't have to have it, I mean my six is perfectly good, at some point I'll get a 10 when this gets the screen cracked or something like that.  Or when, if you remember that, when you would go online and your 28 kilobit modem, and how exciting it was when you doubled it to a 52 kilobit modem, but now we all have broadband, and I'm as most of you, I assume, have broadband, and it means probably 20 megs or 30 megs, and you can watch Netflix fine, and your wife or husband can watch it at the same time. Do you really want to get 100 megs? I don't think so. So my point is, I think we're sort of at the top of that S curve, and that's why for the last 10 years or so, I would argue, US productivity growth has been the lowest in history. So if you want to know why wages aren't going up, is all this consternation, why are wages growing going up when unemployment is so low? Wages aren't going up because productivity is going up so slowly. It doesn't matter how tight the labor market is, if a company is not producing more, they can't repay their wage, their workers more. So, but at some point we're going to get onto that other curve. And I would argue that it's probably going to be in five to ten years, and this is going to happen when these technologies are getting good enough, secure and safe enough and cheap enough. I don't know how many people saw the tragic case, read about the tragic case with the Tesla, just actually there's an article in the paper today, the Transformation Safety Board just came out, and the system didn't work, you know, it just, the driver had it on automatic pilot and it didn't work and it was a fatal crash. Eventually these systems will work.  Because the technology is not good enough yet. It's also not cheap enough. If you wanted to get a fully autonomous vehicle today, which by the way doesn't really exist unless you're on a test track, you'd pay 50 to $150,000. Okay, but eventually that's gonna, the technology will work, it will get cheaper, people will adopt it. Same thing with robotics, same thing with AI.  Okay, so there was a question, did people do this?   Worse off, oh my God. I have a lot of work that I have to do here. God. All right, the answer is better off, by the way. So, just to let you know. So why are the most workers gonna be better off? But the simple answer is, if you remember the link between wages and productivity, and there are people who argue that that link is broken, and I'm happy to discuss that later. It's not broken, it's bent. Productivity does still benefit even workers in the bottom, 10%, 20%, 30%, whatever. We're not gonna raise worker wages unless we raise productivity, we're not gonna raise productivity unless we get more technological innovation. The real question is, are how can workers who are negatively impacted by that make successful transitions? And that's what you all do, which is why what you're doing is so important. So I'll talk about that in a moment. But this is largely about, I don't know how many people have despair calendars, but nobody, nobody. Oh my God. All right, here's your task for tonight. Go online and go to despair.com. I have this calendar on my wall. It's fantastic. The one for last month was something along the lines of optimism and praise. The next generation is gonna need it because they've never been told they did anything wrong and they're gonna need as much enthusiasm as possible as they fail. So this is a good, you can't read that, but adaptation. The bad news is robots can do your job. Now the good news is that we're working, we need robot repair technicians. The worst news is we're working on robot repair robots and we do not anticipate any further good news. So there are people who believe this, not just jokes. So let me spend five minutes on why that framing, I would argue, was wrong. First of all, you can find the exact same things people are saying today in the 1960s. In fact, there was an entire book written for Fortune magazine called The Automation Panic, or Automation Hysteria, some of that. Exactly what people are talking about. There were people advocating for a universal basic income in 1960s. There were people saying that automation of the 60s is gonna kill jobs. Anybody here, Twilight Zone fan? So all right, a few. This is a great episode of the Twilight Zone where anybody leave it to Beaver fan. Nobody. All right, so you remember Lumpy's dad? So war, whatever his name was, he's the manager in this factory and the robots come in and they eliminate all the factory jobs. And he's the manager. He's like, this is great. And he walks into work one day and this robot had replaced his job. And this was a very popular notion in the 60s that this technology, what they call cybernetics is so powerful. The human brain is in this machine. How'd that work out? It raised productivity, but it didn't eliminate jobs. In fact, in the 60s, after all this, we had the lowest unemployment rate we've had, perhaps in US history. But you can look, okay, well, maybe something's different now. And there's a lot of people who say, Larry Summers, the famous economist, half the jobs will be eliminated. Even the economist, brain workers, so it's not just that factory workers are gonna lose their jobs, knowledge workers will lose it too. Guarantee, if you do a Google search on just put in automation and jobs, guaranteed the first link will have a site to Osborn and Frey, these Oxford economists whose work now is basically, it's iconic. It's like David Birch in the 70s and 80s said small business creates most jobs, even though small businesses don't create most jobs, everybody still believes they create most jobs. Everybody believes Osborn and Frey now. I won't go into why their study is basically just completely fallacious because what they did is they looked at the Onet things on jobs. If you know the Onet analysis of individual jobs, they just said if your Onet thing is X, then you're gonna lose your job. So my favorite two ones there were fashion models were gonna be automated because of their Onet scores. And I don't think that Versace is gonna put a really $3,000 dress on a robot. So that's number one. Number two is other one was school bus drivers. All right, so maybe school bus drivers will get automated at some point in time. Anybody here with kids, the school kids, would you ever let your kid get on a bus without an adult? Well, you might, because you're like, okay, but I'm talking normal people, you know. It'd be like Lord of the Flies, you'd never ever do it. So there will still be an adult on the bus. Yeah, that's true. Or brain implants in your kid, yeah. So if you look at these, how do you automate firefighters? How do you automate dental lab technology? You're gonna have a robot coming in and cleaning your teeth. So here's an interesting quiz for you. This is US jobs changed from 2010, 2015. Some of them declined, some of them grew. Network and computer system operators, computer operators, economists, taxi drivers, reservation, ticket agent, and shoe leather. Who wants to, who do you, let me just let a poll show of hands, how many people think that it was, you know, I don't know, taxi drivers were the biggest negative impact? No, anybody want to just half add them a guess? What do you think is the biggest negative impact? All right, I can't hear anything, so I'm just gonna assume the, I'll just tell you the answer. The answer was actually shoe leather workers grew the most. Do you have training programs in your state for shoe leather workers? Because it was a big growing occupation. Taxi drivers grew, why was that? Because Uber drivers are listed as taxi drivers. And what Uber and Lyft did is they dramatically increased the demand for paid rides, because it's so much easier and cheaper. Actually, computer operators declined the most. So the point of this is just simply to say, we can't really understand how these all play out initially, or even maybe in projection, because they're so complicated. So, instead, take that 47%, erase it from your mind, and instead put in 20%. The good studies that have done this, that have really been careful, so one was an OECD study that just came out a couple of months ago, basically said about 15% of jobs are gonna be automated. That's a pretty low number. We estimated 20%, McKinsey Global Institute said 25%. So if you're in that ballpark, that's generally a known number. Now, you might think 25% automation is a big number, but think about that over 15 years. That's about 1.1 or 2% compounded productivity growth rate a year. In the 60s, we had 3.5% productivity growth rate a year and 3.5% to 4% unemployment and 35% wage growth. So these just are not big numbers. Having said that, let me back up. Having said that, I believe that we're going to have a faster rate of employment and occupational disruption than we have now. So for the last 20 years, we did a little study on this. The risk of you losing your job in the United States from a layoff or a closure, sorry, a downsizing or a closure is the lowest it's been in 25 years. Just the opposite of what everybody thinks. But that number is gonna go back up as these things happen. So what's gonna happen? First of all, this stuff takes time. This is a study we did where we went back. It's on our website where we looked at every occupation changed by decade from 1850 to the present. And when you do that, you see a couple of things. One you see is man, you don't wanna live in the old days because occupational disruption was massively high, much lower today. But secondly, these things take a long time. This is my favorite. This is an elevator operator. We didn't have any elevators in the 1870 operators because we didn't have any elevators. So we invented steel buildings. We needed elevators. Otis elevator invented the elevator. But they were manual. You had to have an operator. 1923, they invent the self-service elevator. It wasn't until 1990 that they stopped collecting data on elevator operators because there's only like seven of them and they're all in New York City. So this takes a long time. If you were a techno panicker in 1923, you'd go, oh my God, elevator operators, you better retool quickly. Didn't happen. Secondly, what we have to also remember is technology does create jobs. There's gonna be a lot. If you look at the occupational list in the BLS, what you see is a lot of jobs, a lot of occupations that didn't exist 30 years ago. I know you're gonna think I'm really stupid, but I found a book, believe it or not, at a book sale one time and it's the 1923 Directory of Occupational Titles. Fantastic book. It's really fantastic because it's every single occupational title and a little description of what it means. And there's a lot of occupations in there. You're like, what is that? And it turns out there's a massive number of occupations related to making phonographic records like sieve grifters or something. I don't know what it is. And there are lots and lots of occupations making phonographic records. Now, actually with the redo of phone, everybody's now buying LPs again, so maybe those jobs are coming back. But the point being, technology creates all these new jobs that we didn't hear. This is computer occupations. Also the key thing we have to remember here, by the way, is if you're working for an organization and they cut their workers, organizations do two things on average. One is they end up actually raising wages. So the relationship between productivity and wage growth through industries is pretty solid. If you're in an industry that raises productivity faster, you tend to get more money. And secondly, they lower prices.  That's why after we've raised productivity 50% over the last 50 years, we don't have 50% fewer jobs. What we have is 50% more income. And we're spending it on all sorts of useful and useless things, so. Okay, now, I think for what you're doing, this is probably the most important point. Not all jobs are gonna be impacted the same. So we did a study on this and a couple of other folks have done a study on this. Basically come up with the exact same conclusion. If you were to correlate the risk of occupational loss, so for example, if you're a cashier, your risk of occupational loss is pretty high from technology. If you're a CEO, the risk is pretty low. So just correlate that with the wage levels and occupational skill levels of jobs. What you find is very high negative correlation, essentially around 0.55 negative correlation for those of your math people. In other words, what this next revolution is going to do, it's going to have a disproportionate impact on lower-skill, lower-wage jobs. When you control for the income and skills, race is not a factor. Gender generally is not a factor, but age is a factor, and age is a factor in a good way, in the sense that if you're young, occupations that have more young people in them are more at risk than occupations with older people. That's really, really good, because older people have a much harder time making adjustments, they've got commitments, they've got, you know, they're stuck in their ways oftentimes, younger people are not. But the key thing is we're going to have fewer low-wage jobs. Now is that a good thing or a bad thing? If I did a poll, most of you probably would be even worse than the first poll. I would argue it's fundamentally in the long run a good thing, because we have, and don't get me wrong, because I'm a fully, full supporter of training and helping people with low skills get more skills, we've written a lot about it, we've advocated for it. But at some point, you run into limitations of that strategy. Not everybody can be a middle and high-wage worker. You have low-wage jobs, and even with training and even with going to sort of high-performance work organization, there's a limit to what you can do. There's only so much you can do to make a cashier job a good job. So the fact that we're gonna get rid of a lot of these jobs, I think is a real opportunity because what it means is that on average, the jobs in the U.S. in 20 years or 15 or 10 years will be better jobs than what we have today. The problem or the challenge is low-skill workers are like old people. Low-skill workers have the hardest time adjusting, just like old people have the hardest time adjusting. So that's why what we've argued for and what you all are doing is you really have to begin to revamp our employment and training system and particularly our dislocated worker system. All right, so let me ask you another question about where we're going without it kind of giving you, oh, we've already got the answers, okay. So do you think the next production revolution, all these technologies are gonna need more skills, the both the same or fewer? And okay, you're right on that one. So that's an easy one. But it's not just more, I think it's different. And my colleague, Manuel Trachtenberg, who's just a wonderful scholar of the stuff in university in Israel, I think it's Technion, he wrote a study recently where he said, quote, the skills employers desire and demand are poorly related to the competencies taught in school. Employers want workers with strong analytical, creative and adaptive capabilities, which are competencies few, secondary and collegiate schools in part. So I'll give you just a quick example of that. We're hiring, we have this position at ITIF, basically a sort of very, very junior-level economic researcher or data grunt. We usually almost invariably hire some BS economist, a bachelor's economist, and we give them a test. And the test is a very simple test. Well, most economists are BS economists. No question about that. But in this case, I'm referring to the bachelor's of science economist. So we have a little test, because we've learned the hard way, because there are no credentials, by the way. Having a bachelor's degree in economics to me is a meaningless thing, it's just a piece of paper that doesn't tell me almost, it does tell me almost nothing. So we have a little test, and one of the tests, very simple tests. You've got to go online to the BLS website, you've got to look at these numbers, and you have to have, and the numbers are annual average change, and then you have to tell me what the rate of productivity growth was from 1997 to 2007. It's a really simple thing you have to understand. You cannot have an average of averages. Most people who have any kind of economics background understand you cannot average averages. You have to get the raw number and then get the, oh, it went up 27%. Out of seven finalists I had, including finalists, four of them from the top 10 ranked colleges in the country. Out of seven, only one of them got that right. Now, what does that tell you? That tells you, number one, that economics departments are not really teaching kids these kind of skills. The kind of skill I need is not all that different than the kind of skill an insurance company needs for an economist, or a bank needs for an economist. So, what does Trachtenberg say? He says there's really three kinds of big skills. There's analytical skills, there's interpersonal skills, and there's emotional and self-competent skills. As far as I know, we don't do anything with three. Maybe two if you're lucky. But even one, most places don't make a serious effort to do that. Argumentation, critical thinking, it might happen, but in my experience, that's not really what most colleges do. The other component of this is workers are gonna need another set of skills. Not everybody, but my colleague and friend, David Moshella, who's with the Leading Edge Forum, and to me, one of the smartest guys in the universe on IT, and he goes out and does basic jobs, he goes out and talks to CIOs from corporate companies in the US and asks them what they're doing. And David says, quote, double deep employees, which are those individuals who know both their job, be it engineering, marketing, accounting, and so on, as well as IT relevant to that job. What David is saying, and other people are saying, that's what employers want today. They don't want somebody who just knows accounting, you have to know all the packages around that, and probably increasingly have to know AI and accounting, or graphic design, and all of that, or even manufacturing. So this is a little study that Brookings did recently, where they did an ONet analysis compared to 2002 to 2016, and what you basically think you gotta understand, or remember is that dark blue are the number of workers in the economy who are now in jobs with high levels of job digitalization. It went from essentially 5% to 23%. Middle levels went from 40 to 48%. So now essentially 70% of jobs in the US economy should have, or say they have, some reasonable component or need for digital skills. So if we're not doing that, I think we're making a, we're not responding to the needs of students or employers. How are student schools doing on that? Not very well, one of my favorite stats is there are more kids in high school in California taking pottery than there are taking computer science. Now a lot of groups that I speak to think that that means that I'm anti-art, and I am. Just kidding, I'm going to pick up my daughter. She's actually at an art magnet school and she's a wonderful artist. What I am saying, though, is you have to be teaching CS skills in high school. You just have to be, and most high schools either don't do it or they do it pretty badly. It's sort of glorified JavaScript. The other one is if you ask today, or an employer, what do you want, what do you think is more valuable to have a student know? Geometry or statistics. I guarantee you it's not geometry. It's statistics.  And I actually, I love geometry. It's my favorite classes, but it's just not as useful as statistics. Only 7.7% of high school students take and pass statistics today. So we've completely made it backwards. Why do we keep teaching geometry? Because we have always taught geometry. So we need to think anew on that. Colleges need to do better. So there's a number of different studies on this. The College Collegiate Learning Assessment study, these NYU economists, Arun and Roska, found that only 45% of students, didn't have any gains over the first two years. So the only thing they learned was how to drink, as far as I can tell. 36% had no gains. So they're in school for four years, they have no gains. Now you can say, well, maybe the test isn't quite good enough, but you ought to have some gains. 38% of college second semester seniors are fully proficient on pros.  Only 38% of college seniors can pass it.  And then 34% of US business leaders think they're not graduating. I'm surprised that number is as low as it is, as high as it is, as low as it is, are not giving the skills that they need. So what do we need to do? First of all, don't panic. We shouldn't slow the rate of growth.  Because we're not gonna have workers who are out of work. What we need is much more income support while workers are out of work. Unemployment insurance is abysmal in a number of states. We've argued for basically turning the Trade Adjustment Assistance Act into the Trade and Technology Adjustment Assistance Act. But to give workers money in perpetuity, just because you feel like it, is basically a way to keep workers out of the labor market, because they don't have to work. It'd be a terrible idea. So speed the adoption of this, reduce the risk of job loss. So certainly universal health insurance, we need much better UI coverage, as I said. But also better programs. So there's a report that we wrote recently. It's on our homepage. It's called How to Reform Worker Training and Adjustment Policies for the Ear of Technological Change. And one of the things I did in that report is I pretend that I was an unemployed or dislocated worker in the state of Maryland where I live and I said, I'm gonna go online and see what help I can get. So it took me a long time. I knew where to look, by the way, but I pretended I didn't. It took me a long time to sort of find the one stop just through Google searches and things. I found that I found the page where it would say, okay, you can take this test to assess your skills. I took the skills assessment test online, blah blah blah, and the answer came back that I was qualified to do nothing. So I just am praying that my think tank survives. Until I retire, because I don't know what I'd do. I'd have to go back to school and my PhD is not good enough. So then I decided I would go and say, well, pretend that I wanted a computer science course. I put that in. Help me find a computer science course. Spits back three or 4,000 courses in schools. I don't have time to look. I don't want three or four. The point of all that is just how poor these systems are in many, many places. So we are big fans of what Colorado's doing with the Markle Foundation. I see Kale's a sponsor. Kale's done some really great work in, I believe, in New York City around finance jobs and tech. We need to make these systems incredibly easy, like Amazon Prime easy. Was that a here, here? Yes. All right, good. Not a boo. No. All right. And then embrace more fun. I heard really some great examples here, but we need to really keep up on that. Probably the most radical one is the proposal we had of the report we did called the Disrupting Higher Education, I think. What we proposed was really radical, which is, number one, employers should stop demanding BA degrees, not BS degrees, but BA degrees. We no longer require a bachelor's degree for any position at ITIF. No, in reality, if you don't have it, you're probably not going to know enough. But we want to sort of set a model there. We've argued that OPM, the Office of Personnel Management, the federal government, should lead the way and just stop requiring that. You should require that people know enough and have the background and the skills and the capability to do the job. But it's interesting, a number of companies are doing this. IBM now is doing this for most of their CS jobs. They're just taking away that because many people in CS are taking alternative paths to do that. Somebody told me that one of the big public, maybe it was Random House, but I remember one of the big publishing arms was doing this. But we need to really begin to get employers to just abandon that. And then that would open up space for these alternative forms, where, frankly, I think you ought to be able to mix and match and say, I've got what is equivalent to a bachelor's degree in something, whether it's sale or university courses or community college or all a mix of all the like. And with that, I will stop. And I don't know if we have any time for questions or not. So thank you so much. So keeping on the BS theme, there's a book out now called Bullshit Jobs. And it basically is the counterargument that says that the reason we haven't seen the dramatic decline in positions is that we've artificially created a lot of jobs, the inspectors of the inspectors, and things like that. So I'm just curious whether you think how you resolve that critique with the framework that you put forward. Yeah, I don't really buy that.   But companies don't create jobs just for the sake of creating jobs. They have every incentive to actually create as few jobs as possible because they want to be as efficient as possible. I think the much bigger problem or a bigger problem is we haven't raised the minimum wage in 20 years. I have a new piece coming out next week in the thing called the Democracy Journal, arguing that progressives are making a fundamental mistake by arguing for the minimum wage on equity grounds, which it is clearly the higher minimum wage is clearly an important equity tool. But they're ceding all the grounds to the conservatives and the anti-minimum wage people by not saying it also, by the way, drives productivity. The evidence is very clear. One of the reasons why we have so many BS jobs, not bachelor's or science jobs, is because we have such a low minimum wage that it's just so easy to throw workers at the problem rather than what you see in Germany, where they don't really have a minimum wage. But by definition, the wage is a lot higher for social, political, and union reasons. In Germany, they actually put engineers on the problem. How do we automate jobs? How do we move to high performance work organizations? So yeah, we do have a lot of jobs like that, but we could get rid of some and automate some if we had a higher minimum wage. There's actually a lot of evidence on that. Restaurants, for example, now are beginning to think more about automations and wage levels have gone up. As an economist, do you ever speculate on what might happen with the massive college endowments and all the real estate that colleges own as we start to move to a place where people can create their own degrees in different ways? I mean, because that's a big pool of money. We could open up shopping malls, maybe, but yeah. So I think the real question is, how I would frame your question is, if you look at many information industries, which is what higher education is, it's an information industry, have been pretty disrupted by technology. So think about travel agents. They went up in that last thing, but you go look at travel agents in 2000 to 2016, and they're down significantly. There's a lot of occupations that could be disrupted or automated or changed by technology. One of them, by the way, is finance. I think in 10, 15 years, we're gonna get a very different finance system in the US, much more streamlined, much more efficient through what's called fintech.  I've just given you 20 bucks that easy. And by the way, you were in Greece at the time. So that's what's gonna happen in fintech, and it's gonna really dramatically shift it. That is possible in higher education, and at least it's possible for significantly higher productivity in higher education. I'm thinking, if we do that, I'm not a higher education expert, but here's how I would view the world in that, is that the bottom 20% of schools just go out of business. The demand for seats just goes down, because now I don't need to be in a seat for four years, for four classes a term, I can be there for two classes a term for three years and still get a degree or a credential. So I think the weakest colleges just, they go out of business because nobody wants, just there's not enough bodies to fill them all, so they go out of business. I think the elites still stay in business and do quite well because everybody still will wanna go to Harvard and Princeton. I think it's in that middle tier, a lot of the states, big nicer, not nicer, better state schools, where you just might see some of that disruption. Having said all that, the industries are super good at resisting disruption. Why do we still have so many real estate agents in the US? That's an industry that really should have been disrupted by technology. In fact, if there's a potential, the DOJ case coming up, and that's because they've used the laws and other rules and their monopoly power to just basically disrupt online real estate transactions. Higher ed has real powers here for a lot of different ways and I think largely wanna resist this change. So I think eventually all these changes, eventually you can't resist the changes. They're like the Borg and they just will take over, but you can slow them down and I don't know how long it'll be slowed down. All right, good, thank you so much.


So I've done several videos about the Xmoned Tiling Window Manager, it's one of my favorite Tiling Window Managers, I've been an Xmoned user for probably a decade now, and a lot of you guys are asking me about the XMobar panel, which is typically the panel that most Xmoned users use, and a lot of you guys are trying out Xmoned and you're struggling getting XMobar configured to your liking. So today I wanted to take a few minutes and show you guys how to configure XMobar and you know how to make XMobar work for you. I think the first thing you guys need to do is you need to do a search for XMobar in your favorite search engine, whether that be something like Google or DuckDuckGo or whatever it happens to be, and chances are you're going to come to this page about XMobar over at Haskell.org, this is the Hackage Subdomain on Haskell.org, it's basically your XMobar man page if you will. This is a rather lengthy document, you know there's a lot to it, but it really does explain everything that you can do with XMobar, and I'm going to link to this page in the show description, and a lot of what I talk about today with XMobar, but really with any tiling window manager, with configuring any kind of panel, configuring your shell, your terminal emulator, a lot of the kind of stuff I do on the channel Veeam, Emacs, you know all of this stuff that you guys want to do. If you just read the documentation, you know most of it is obvious if you just pull up a simple man page for the most part. Now there's some things, sometimes you want to do weird things that you really have to dive deep in the documentation to find, or sometimes the documentation for certain things is not good and you have to ask questions, but 99% of the time if you simply pull up a man page you will find exactly what it is you're looking for, and to be fair XMobar has a fantastic man page, and if we read a little bit of this man page about XMobar, you get to some of the flags as far as compiling XMobar, for those of you that are going to compile XMobar yourself, there's several flags you could give it so that you can compile it with certain modules already enabled. Honestly, if I'm compiling it myself, I'm probably just going to do this all extensions flag to make sure that everything that is possible will actually work in XMobar. Those of you that are just getting a prebuilt binary of XMobar from your Linux distributions package manager, for example, like installing XMobar with Pacman and Arch Linux, XMobar is already built with all the modules available. So you don't have to worry about this. This is just strictly for those of you that are real nerds that are going to build XMobar from source yourself, you need to know a little bit about the flags when you're building it. Now, I could go through this man page and describe to you each and every little thing in here, but I'm going to let you guys read the man page.  Now, I think what I want to do now is go ahead and switch over to my desktop and let's open up our Xmonad config because we're going to need to edit the Xmonad config. We also are going to need our XMobar config so we can edit that. So I'm going to go ahead and open my configs and do me max. I'm going to open up my Xmonad config and let me toggle on big font mode. So you guys can, you can see everything. So this is my Xmonad config.  I actually have three separate XMobar configs on my system because I have three different Xmonad configs for each of my three monitors because each of them have different widgets on their XMobars. So very briefly, I'm going to run down everything that is in this XMobar config. A lot of it is standard stuff. Some of it is not so standard. The very first thing you need to know is typically you're going to have the word config and then a opening squirrely braces there. You're going to have the closing one at the very end and everything in between those braces is actually your XMobar config. The first thing you need to do is define a font and all of this again is in the man page for XMobar. But first thing is font and typically you're going to go. Actually, if you read the man page here, if I do a search for example config somewhere should be a quick start. And here on the web, there is an example config for your XMobar and it's going to look something like this. You're going to have font equals miscellaneous, fixed font, whatever. I would just grab this. It's a very simple config file. There's not much to it. And the reason there's not much to it is they want you to actually read the man page and pick and choose the modules you want. So there's not much to the default config. But what you need to do is, of course, change the font to something other than just miscellaneous fixed. And you can actually use the standard XFT format. So what I'd set is I set my font, the standard font to be Ubuntu weight equals bold. So I want Ubuntu font bold pixel size equals 11. So the size is 11. I want it any alias. So any alias equals true. And I also set hinting equals true. So if I show my bar again, this font here that you're saying for the workspaces right here, all of this section here on the left hand side, that is Ubuntu font weight, bold pixel size 11, any alias. Now, one of the questions I often get about XMO bar and especially my XMO bar is the little Unicode emojis here, you know, the glyphs here, like the Penguin glyph and the computer monitor glyph and all of these. You know, how did I get those? Well, you get those by having a font listed that can display those special kinds of glyphs, those Unicode emoji characters. And what you need to do is XMO bar in the example config, if you grab the example config, they have the line under font is additional fonts equals. And then in brackets here, it's empty. You actually need to include some extra fonts. What I would do is include at least one extra font that you know has some of those Unicode glyph supports. And what I did is I included mononoke nerd font pixel size 11, any alias true, hinting equals true. Because I know mononoke nerd font has a lot of those special glyphs enabled in it. So that's what I use to display those, you know, like the little Penguin and the computer icons and all of that. I also set font awesome pixel size equals 13 as an additional font, although I don't think I actually use any awesome fonts in my config. I have it listed in the config file just in case I ever want to use it. I also have it listed in my XMO bar RC just so you guys can see that if you guys want to use font awesome, it is available. And the man page actually discusses font awesome a little bit if you read the XMO bar man page. The next thing in my config, we're setting background color foreground color. So the background color I set to this dark grayish blue color is similar to the background color in my Emax and in my terminals. That's the same background color I'm using in my XMO bar, the 282C34 color. Then foreground color is a lighter color. Now I'm using a bunch of different colors in my XMO bar, but the actual foreground color that's this light color I believe is this color here that you're seeing for the window titles. And then the next thing we set is position. Now there's several different things you can do setting the position for XMO bar. Typically the only thing you need to do is set the position to either top or bottom and it's going to fill up the entire width of the top or the bottom of the screen because I'm doing three different XMO bars on three different screens. I have to do things a little differently. I have to actually specify the X and Y coordinates for my bars because instead of it being at zero by 1920 I'm actually doing 1920 three times because I've got three monitors. So the one I'm working on now, the exposition actually starts at 1920 because this is the second monitor. If the first monitor, the exposition would start at zero. I hope that makes sense. The third monitor, the exposition would start at 3840. Again, that may seem a little complicated, but just know that's because I'm using multi monitors and I've got three different XMO bars running. Now typically you don't have to do this. If you're running XMO bars, if you're running the same XMO bar on all three monitors, you don't have to worry about this. You just set XMO bar to start at the top or the bottom and you're going to have the same XMO bar on every monitor. But again, I'm running three different ones. Next two settings were actually in the default config and I just left them as is lower on start equals true and hide on start equals false. I'm not exactly sure what those mean. I would have to go to the man page and lower on start. It looks like when true, the window is sent to the bottom of the window stack. Initially, I don't know what that means because typically your panels are not managed by the tiling window manager. As far as it's not part of the window stack, hide on start is when set to true, the window is initially not mapped, i.e. it's hidden. Okay, not again. I'm not exactly sure what those do, but I just left those as the default settings. Again, typically your panels such as XMO bar are not really managed in the window stack of your tiling window manager anyway. So I'm not sure if these are even really necessary to be in the config, but I'm going to leave them. The next one is all desktops equals true. This means XMO bar should appear on all our desktops. The next setting is persistent equals true. I believe that's also one of the default settings in the standard XMO bar example config persistent. I'm assuming that means the XMO bar should always be there. It shouldn't be able to be hidden even though I'm hiding mine, but I'm actually not hiding it. What I'm doing here is actually nothing to do with XMO bar. I have a key binding for my windows. The window with focus will go 100% of the screen without a border. So that's what I'm doing. It's actually that key binding actually is not doing anything to XMO bar. It's actually doing something to the window that has focus at the time. Now those first few sections here, these are pretty self-explanatory. Most people don't have questions about any of that stuff, except the additional fonts. A lot of you guys are not including additional fonts in your XMO bar config. That's why you're not getting those unicode emojis. So make sure you use proper additional fonts. But where all the action happens is the next section is, well, let me explain icon root. If you use icons in your XMO bar and I use one icon this year, that Haskell logo there. That actually is an XPM image and it needs to be an XPM image. It can't be a ping or a yuf or anything like that. And if you want to use icons, you can. You have to specify where those icons that you're using are located on your system. It has to be somewhere in your home directory. So I put it in slash home slash dt slash dot XMO net because that's where your XMO net config is slash. I created a directory called XPM slash. And in that directory, I have an image. I think I called it Haskell dot XPM. And later in my config, I will call upon that image. But really where all the magic happens in the config is this next section commands equals. And then in brackets here, we have various modules that are commands, commands that run and then we take the output of those commands and we output it into the XMO bar. So for example, the very first one now this dash dash is a comment dash dash time and date. I left that comment for you guys to let you guys know that this next line is the date module for XMO bar and how you run it is you type the word run space name of module and you can actually search the XMO bar man page for all the modules that are possible. If I go down, I will eventually get to a list of yeah, starting right here with the weather module, network interface, wireless interface, memory swap, CPU, multi CPU battery. There's a lot of modules and of course you can create your own custom modules as well. But there's one called date. So I'm running the date module and then you can specify the format of date. Now, all of this is in the XMO bar man page. But what I'm doing is I'm specifying the format as this tag here, this FN tag. So I'm doing inside the the Chevron is the greater than less than sign. I'm doing FN equals one. Now, what does that mean? That means I want to use a different font than the standard font. Without that tag, everything in the XMO bar config will use the standard font, which is a boon to bold. I want to use one of the additional fonts and the one I want to use, I want to use the first one, which is FN. That's the additional fonts equals one, which is the first one, mononoke nerd font. And then what do I want to display? I want to display a glyph and that is the code, the hex code for the glyph slash XF one three three. And what does that display? Well, that displays where's the date right here. That displays the little calendar Unicode character. That is exactly what's going on there. And then the closing FN tag and then percent sign B percent sign D percent sign capital Y. That is the format for the date January 21, 2021 and then dash because I have a dash here. And then inside parentheses, you see, I have parentheses for the time and the time, of course, is percent sign capital H colon percent sign capital M. So that's hours, minutes, of course. And then I have a closing quote. And then I have another opening and closing quote with the word date in it. Now, what does the next set of quotes with the word date in it? What does that do? Well, what that does is we set a name for this command, this run date, and then all the formatting options. We need to set it a name. I give it this name date because later in the config, we're going to call upon this command. And I just want to be able to simply refer to this whole command as date. So that's what the second set of quotes behind each of these commands are. It's just giving it a name. And then finally, after the second set of quotes, you need to give it a number. The number is how often should we run this command? These numbers are desi seconds, meaning tenths of a second. So I want to run it 50 desi seconds, which is actually just five seconds. So every five seconds, I want you to rerun the time and date command. Of course, if I was showing seconds, if I was instead of just doing hours and minutes, I was showing seconds, I probably would want to set that to 10, which would be one second change. But because I'm not really showing seconds, I don't need it to run every second, every five seconds, 10 seconds, even every minute would be plenty for what I'm doing. Now that we showed you that command, the rest of them are very similar. Run network is the network command.  In my case, it's NP6SO. And then the same thing as before, you have to give it various options. You again, research the man page, because the options are a little different for the network command than the date command. Again, I'm using some fancy fonts. You see FN equals one. Again, we're going to use the mononoke nerd font to display some glyphs.  And of course, we're running that network command every 20 desi seconds, which is actually every two seconds. So let me toggle truncate lines here in do me max because I've got some line wrapping going on and it's making things hard to read. Now the command section, that's where you include all the commands you want to run. You can actually include custom commands. You see run com. What that is, is that is a custom command that's not built into Xmobar. This is it can be any command. It can be a terminal command such as run com and then in quotes you name. What does that mean? It runs the standard you name command in your shell. And then inside the brackets inside the quotes dash R that's telling it to run you name with a dash R flag and then thirty six hundred is thirty six hundred desi seconds. Now when you start adding multiple flags to a shell command, it gets kind of hard to figure out exactly what to do in these brackets because you have to have quotes around I think every flag. It's a little confusing what I have found if you're running a complicated shell command instead of trying to run it directly, you know, with run com and then the name of that command actually make a script, which is what I did on this line here run com and then the path to this script that I call pack update. It just shows me how many updates are available in Pac-Man right now. And then I named it, of course, pack update, which will call upon pack update later in this config. And I want you to run that every thirty six thousand desi seconds, which I believe is every hour it runs this command. And if I opened up a terminal and I actually just ran my pack update script, let it run for a second, you see two hundred ninety four updates was the output from that terminal command. And if I go back to the X Mobar, you see I have this little bell icon, two hundred ninety four updates. You know, that is where it runs that pack update script for me and it takes the output and it places it in X Mobar. Now, once you have the command section to your liking, you have all your modules later in the config, you have template equals and then a opening quote and a closing quote. And your template equals may not be nearly as long as what mine is. This is a very long line for me is because I have a lot of stuff going on because I'm using a lot of different fonts, a lot of different font colors. I've got some other stuff going on such as action equals X do tool. I'm setting a key binding for something by default X Mobar does not accept key commands as far as mouse commands. So me clicking on anything does nothing at the moment. I can turn that functionality on. I will show you how to do that in just a second. If you want to have mouse clicking available in your X Mobar, you need to have this line in your command section. The very last line run unsafe standard in reader. Typically what this is going to be in a default config is going to say run standard in reader, which is the non clickable X Mobar change that to run unsafe standard in reader and that doesn't immediately get you the clicking of the mouse working. You have to also do something in your X mode and config as well, but make sure you have unsafe standard in reader. Then in template somewhere in template, you should have percent sign unsafe reader percent sign. Every command that you reference from the commands here needs to be wrapped in percent sign. So percent unsafe standard reader percent is actually this entire section here. Everything on the left hand side. All of this on the left hand side is not defined in your X Mobar config is actually defined in the X Monad config. If I go to the very bottom of my X Monad config, where I have my main block, you somewhere in your X Monad dot HS, you should have main equals do, which is your main block is where everything is executed in X Monad, you know, all your config all comes together in the main block here. And then my main block I have various spawn pipes where I'm telling it to spawn three different X Mobars with three different X Mobar configs and somewhere in your main block you also have log hook equals and then a whole bunch of other stuff somewhere in your log hook you need to have all of this or not all of it, but you may want some of it, you may not but you need PP output equals PP is a pretty printer function for Haskell. And it's basically saying I want you to take the output from my X Mobar processes and you know, where do I want you to put that? I want you to put that in X Mobar. PP current is the current workspace in X Mobar. So PP current equals X Mobar color. I define a color for it. I tell it to wrap it in brackets. So the current workspace I'm on is www. You see the color I've set is green and I've defined my current workspace to be wrapped in brackets. You see how that works? So that's PP current, you know X Mobar color. I set the color and then I set it to wrap in brackets. The next line PP visible is all visible workspaces. I want those set to a color. I don't want those wrapped in anything. That's why I didn't include a wrap command. So all of my visible workspaces right now are the first workspace. Dev is visible. That's why it's green instead of purple and my eighth workspace. Vid is visible right now because on my third monitor I have the eighth workspace video workspace open where I have OBS recording this video. And some of the other PP options that you want is PP hidden. That's your hidden workspaces. So that would be a hidden workspace that has a window on it. I don't have one currently. Let me create one. So I'm going to go to the fourth workspace. I'm going to open up a terminal. I'm going to go back to the workspace I was on and you see my fourth workspace is now blue in color. And it has a asterisk in front of it. That's letting me know. Hey, you're not currently viewing this workspace. That's why it's blue instead of green. But you do have something open on that workspace. That's just letting me know there's a window open on that. You might want to go and check it out. If you didn't know there was something there. Other PP configuration options include PP hidden no windows, which is workspaces that have no windows on them. So that's just any standard workspace that we're not actually using at the moment. That's all the purple ones. We also have PP title, which is the title window that appears in the bar. So that's this here. We have PP SIP, which is the separators between all the actions. So you see I have the pipe character as the separator here between the workspaces and the layout, which is currently the tall layout. Then I have a separator and two, two just is telling me there's two windows open on this workspace. And then I have a pipe separator again and then the window title. And we set PP urgent that sits the urgent color. If there's something that needs our attention right away. We have PP extras, which are extra modules that are normally not included in the PP output. And the extra module I wanted to include is the window count. This is not something that's normally displayed in X-Mobar, but I wanted it. So I set PP extras to include window count. And then to actually make that show up, I also needed to do this command here, PP order where I set the order of everything that shows up on this left-hand side of the screen. I set the order to be, and I set the order to be workspace layout, then the extras, which is the window count and that's the number two here. And then the T is the title of the window that currently has focus. I hope all of that makes sense. And there are many, many more of these PP command, the modules that you need to add to your log hook inside your Xmonad.hs. If you wanna include some extra stuff here, let's see if I can look up on Haskell.org. All of this is actually found in Xmonad.hooks.dynamiclog. And I go back to the top of my config and my imports, somewhere in my imports, I import Xmonad.hooks.dynamiclog. I have to import that module to use all those PP's. And then I specify all the ones. I'm gonna use dynamic log with PP, the wrap command, Xmobar PP, Xmobar colors, shorten, et cetera. And then let me get back down here and you see all of that. That's what I included here. And if we go back to the documentation for Xmonad.hooks.dynamiclog, somewhere there should be, yeah, this graph here, this PP shows you all the PP's we could have used. We could have used, I think I'm using most of the ones that are available, PP sort, I didn't use. That allows you to sort things in different orders. PP title sanitize, I didn't know that was available but that shows you the window title but it does an escape sanitize function on it. We also have PPWSsep, which is a separator to use between the workspace tags. That's another one I didn't know was available. So that would add a different separator between the workspaces because by default, your workspaces don't have separators. So if I wanted to use PPWSsep instead of the standard PPsep, well, I need that too, but I would just add a new line with PPWSsep and it would add separators in between the workspace names. I don't want that so I'm not gonna add it to my config but those of you that do want that, that's how you would achieve that. And again, I didn't know that was possible but just reading the documentation, it's very easy to figure most of this stuff out. Now, obviously you have to get used to the document and the more you play with this stuff, the more it gets comfortable for you. The last thing I want to mention is I did mention clickable workspaces. If you guys check out my Xmonad config, I've made it very easy for you guys that want clickable workspaces because I give you two examples in my config. I have standard non-clickable workspaces which is what I'm using right now. And then I have this section, clickable workspaces where I'm doing this here. And all you need to do is for clickable workspaces, well, I leave you a note here, to use clickable workspaces, be sure to have workspaces equals my clickable workspaces in the main at the bottom of this config. So workspaces equals my clickable workspaces in the main at the bottom of my config. So let's go to the bottom of my config and in the main block, we have workspaces equals my workspaces. But what it needs to be is my clickable workspaces. Let me escape, let me write this and now let me restart Xmonad, so do a quick restart. And now my workspaces should be clickable. So if I click on the fourth workspace here, I should go to it and I do. If I click on the first workspace, I go to it. So that's all you need to do for those of you using my config. Even if you're not using my config, you may want to copy some of my code blocks from my Xmonad.hs, because it really does make things easy by having two different workspace sections where I have non-clickable workspaces and clickable workspaces. It makes it very easy for me to swap between the two because all I have to do is change one line in my config. So if I was using clickable workspaces and I no longer needed them, well, you know, what I could do, I could just go back to workspaces equals my workspaces. Instead of my clickable workspaces, I could write this and let me recompile everything and restart everything. And now my XMObar no longer accepts clicking. I didn't want to spend too long on this topic because this video could run very long, especially if I went through everything that was in the XMObar documentation and everything that was in the Xmonad Hooks Dynamic Log documentation. But I think I gave you guys enough on camera to work with. Again, go grab my Xmonad config and my XMObar config. You don't have to use it, but just look at what I'm doing in my config. I'm also gonna link to the XMObar documentation. Read that page. It's long, but just read it. It'll take you, I don't know, 20 minutes to read through the whole thing. It's 20 minutes that long to figure out something that you're really trying to get working. I don't think it is. I'm also gonna link to the Xmonad.hooks.dynamiclogs module page because some of you guys are gonna wanna know about the various pp commands that you need to add to your Xmonad.hs. Now before I go, I need to thank a few special people. I need to thank the producers of this episode. Absi, Devin, Fran, Gabe, Rebenian, Mitchell, Lakami, Archvijay, Chris, Chuck, David. The other David, Donnie, Dylan, Gregory, Lewis, Paul, Pickvm, Scott, Wes, and Willie. They are the producers of the show. They are my highest tiered patrons over on Patreon. Without these guys, this video about configuring your XMObar panel in Xmonad, it wouldn't have been possible. You would not have heard me say pp a million times on camera today without each and every one of these guys. The show is also brought to you by each and every one of these ladies and gentlemen as well. All of these people, all these names you're seeing on the screen right now. These are all my supporters over on Patreon because the DistroTube channel is sponsored by you guys, the community. If you'd like to support my work, look for DistroTube over on Patreon. All right guys, peace.


All across the Western world what we've seen since the financial crash is the deliberate systematic attempt to scapegoat migrants, Muslims, refugees for all the crimes caused by the powerful and because the left had ceased to exist for a long time they had a vacuum to fill and Donald Trump's just the most striking example of that and he's the kingpin of it, the you know there is a far right international which is developing speed, we have Trump's ambassador lobbying on behalf of Tobin Robinson, all the racists and fascists in Europe feel legitimised and emboldened by the fact they feel they have somebody sympathetic to their aims as the most powerful man on earth. The danger is and you get this for some liberal and sensuous opposition focuses on his vulgarity and his bad manners and how uncouth he is and almost uses them as kind of like God look how bad he is and look how virtuous we are in comparison. For stop Trump which I'm a very proud member of we wanted to join the dots that this is yes the most striking and disturbing manifestation and yes it's legitimising and emboldening what's happening in this country and elsewhere in terms of those movements but we have to you know we have to go well look actually that is terrible what's happened in the United States screaming kids being dragged from their parents and thrown in cages but let's look at the gay refugees being deported to countries where like Nigeria where homosexuality is illegal let's look at Yarlswood detention centre let's let's look at the experience of Muslims in this country who face deliberate relentless attacks by the media and the political elite and discrimination systemic racism so that for me is it you know Trump is yes the most striking example but it should be seen as an attempt to wage war against all of these injustices in this country and elsewhere


There is a lot of crunchy manifesting advice on the internet and I'm sorry I've probably put some of it out there myself, but I'm pretty candid that I will share when I do some kind of weird experiment what actually ends up happening. But in this video I thought I would share four stories from my life about how learning to surrender, let go, trust has really made a huge difference in not only the results and the goals that I want, but also how I feel internally.  Alex Hein here. So before we jump in there's a link right below this video for a free goal-setting worksheet to help you plan out how to have the best year ever of your life. So there's a worksheet there that will help you design your dream life and figure out how to get it. So check it out as you go through this video because it's going to give you some good ideas. So piece of advice number one is to view every difficulty as part of your dharma or your kind of divine purpose. Now when I was in my last year of undergrad I always wanted to go into medicine specifically integrative or alternative medicine. And I had this dream one night where I was interviewing for medical school and there was a man and a woman and they asked that fateful question, why do you want to go to medical school? And I gave what I thought was my most impassioned emotional answer. I thought they were going to smile and be pumped and yes we want you, but I gave my answer and I don't remember what the answer was, but they both looked at me like it was the most pathetic, underwhelming answer. I said make a gazillion dollars.  Now that dream derailed me because I didn't apply to medical schools and I decided not to go to them and I didn't go to get my doctorate until another 10 years later when I was 29. But that was a fateful blessing because if I viewed that as the end of my life that would have put me in a very bad state, but instead I viewed it as there was something better for me. And that dream led me to go on a vision quest to the Sahara Desert for three weeks in southern Algeria on a camel caravan to go contemplate what I had to do next for my life. And that led me to move into China and eight years later led me to doing my doctorate in Chinese medicine and coming back full circle to go to medical school for something way more aligned with what I'm truly passionate about. The second way to surrender and let the universe have your back is to really view fatigue, depression, lack of motivation as redirection. So this is one of the most common emotions and symptoms that people feel on a daily basis. And it's telling that a lot of my most popular videos are about fatigue, low motivation, low energy and depression because a lot of us are feeling that or are feeling that in the moment watching the video when we're searching for the video. When I was at my last desk job in my mid 20s, I was always feeling tired, always feeling unmotivated, always feeling like why am I doing this?  Like that's the point of my life to get a paycheck and exist on a little plot of land that I don't even like that much because it's a tiny apartment. This is the grand purpose of my life. And after I stopped complaining about it and I started figuring out what I wanted to do, I had stumbled upon this field Chinese medicine. And when I first realized that I booked this flight to go look at all the schools, the grad schools to study this field. And the first thing I remember I had to journal it because it affected me so deeply. When I got the school pamphlets and I looked at the course catalog, I felt so inspired, so excited, lit up, turned on my energy just increased so much. And I was thinking, I've been sitting at my desk for five years with no energy, no motivation, fatigue, no drive to do anything. And all of a sudden in one month all of that is gone. And it taught me that these things are not always something physical.  It's like falling in love. Some people are kind of miserable and unhappy and unmotivated. They fall in love and they're like rocket ships. They start working out, start eating healthy, they go for hikes, different human. So if I viewed that fatigue as a problem, everything's wrong, I would never have searched for the next thing. But if I viewed it as a redirection, it made me listen. It makes me listen and think, this is the universe's way of saying, I'm not on the right path. Let's go find something that excites us. This is not my thing. Let's look for that thing that excites us. That's redirection. The third way to surrender and let the universe have your back is really to, instead of pushing for your goals and dreams, figure out what draws you, figure out what pulls, tugs on you. So Angela Duckworth wrote this book, Grit. And one passage from that book really jumped out to me. She said that the people that were really, really, really successful that she interviewed, these were people that they weren't necessarily just the grittiest. These are the people when she interviewed them. I think she interviewed Rick Rubin or someone like that, like someone in the music industry. And he said that there's nowhere else I'd rather be on a Saturday morning than in my studio making, mixing, mastering, whatever music. And she said, this was a common thread. The people that were the most successful not only were the most gritty in terms of work ethic over time, but they were the most passionate. And these are the people that were naturally drawn to their field. You didn't hear them talk about grinding or yeah, they were hustling, but they were hustling in a meaningful field that was tugging on them. It wasn't just I want to be an investment banker. I'm going to push and do hard work every day. There was passion. It was passion and grit, passion and work ethic over time, passion and time and not just work ethic. And that's what really affected me about her book. It wasn't just be gritty, stick longer, you know, have more grit in a field you don't really care about. That wasn't her message. She said it was obvious interviewing these high achievers that they were a combination of passion and purpose and long term work ethic over time. And that was the thing that really made the big difference. So instead of pushing, figure out what tugs on you, what could you easily do on a Saturday morning? What could you easily work on for a few hours? What when you work on it leaves you still energized for more after? Now the fourth way to surrender to the universe and see that universe has always got your back is always strive to grow without a goal or an endpoint. So Steve Jobs talks about this story in his life where he said that he just took these random classes in college and one of those random classes was calligraphy. So whereas calligraphy may not seem related to being Apple, building Apple or becoming Steve Jobs, what he said was you could never really understand how things connect looking forward, but only in reverse. And for him, one of those things was that when he took this calligraphy class, when Apple created their computers, it was one of the first to ever have font selection. Now I know that's a minor thing in terms of selling trillions of dollars of computers, but that came back in because of a random life experience he had years before that seemed totally unrelated. And you'll see that often when you pursue things that naturally draw you, they will come back to support you and help you later in your life.  Sometimes you never know how the pieces connect, but you only learn looking back in life. And so that's why I'm all about exploring those side paths that don't seem logically related, but intuitively and gut instinctively, they are related because you feel excitement and you feel drawn to them. They will come back and help you, you just don't know when. So the surrender part is you don't know how or when it's going to come back to help you, you just have to trust that it will. And one of the most important things about trusting this is just learning random skills and random abilities that you can then have come back to you, like learning calligraphy or photography, or learning how to shoot videos on YouTube. And that's why one of the companies I love the most is Skillshare, because I've used them for years to actually learn random skills that don't seem related to my craft, but sometimes end up helping me become much better at what I do. So Skillshare has created an incredible package and deal for modern health among viewers, which is right below this video, that first link right below, check out that deal that Skillshare has put together for you. Check out all of the online learning communities and programs that Skillshare has with thousands of inspiring classes for creative and curious people on topics like illustration, design, photography, video, freelancing, and more. So take for example this course called DIY Filming that I went through. It really helped me, number one, figure out how to really storyboard my video in a much more strategic way versus just being a teacher, as well as how to properly prep a short but sweet kind of highlight reel, as well as edit it, put it together, and really polish it to be a much much better presented piece of content. So Skillshare has classes to fit your schedule and your skill level. Members get unlimited access to thousands of these different kinds of classes with hands-on projects and feedback from a community of millions of people. Now the classes are usually under an hour and they have short lessons to help you fit any schedule, but I would definitely go ahead and check out some of the topics that you might like. All right guys, so that's what I have for you today. Don't forget to check out that first link right below the video for Skillshare and I'll see you in these other related videos right there.