So privacy is not an add-on. You want to design for privacy from the ground up. First off, who's this weirdo? I'm a privacy and security engineer. I've worked at large international companies and small startups and kind of everything in between. I protect user data for a living. That is what I do. Come see me on Twitter, Alicia Clock. So now the important stuff. Let's start with what is user privacy? User privacy involves the right or mandate of personal privacy concerning the storing or perposing provisions through parties and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Let's try that again. What is good user privacy? User privacy, sometimes referred to as data protection, but I'm going to use user privacy for the most part in this talk, is when privacy is done right, it makes users happy and it helps companies thrive. So what does that mean for users? My slide will go. There they go. For users, it means choice and control. Users need to have meaningful privacy choices. So that means something other than except all of our invasion of your privacy or don't use our product. That's not a meaningful choice. Tech products, tech, software and services are such an integral part of people's daily lives now. So think LinkedIn, Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, all of those, that's how people stay in touch with friends and family. That's how they find jobs. It's not really an option to not use it. So it's not a meaningful choice to say if you don't like our privacy policies, don't use our product. So you need to make sure that users have meaningful privacy choices about what they share, when they share it and how they share it into whom. And so closely related to that is users should have control and that means meaningful control over their privacy setting. So again, not just like one toggle that doesn't really do anything, protect my privacy on, okay, that's not meaningful control. I don't know what that means, I don't know what that does. So users should have meaningful control over what they're sharing, when they're sharing it and with whom. For companies, good user privacy means trust. Users will trust your company's products when you demonstrate that you respect their privacy. It means risk reduction because when you are properly managing user data, there's a lower chance of something bad happening to that user's data under your watch and then you being on the hook for it. Obviously nothing can guarantee that no bad things will happen, but this is DEF CON, one of the things about this is taking sensible steps to protect yourself. And finally, data usage. If you properly manage user data and protect user's privacy correctly, it'll actually support your company's ability to collect and use the data that you need in order to provide your products and features and to develop cool new things. So let's dive into that a little, maybe? Come on, okay.  That doesn't provide meaningful choice or control for users. It can't at that level because you've already built everything, you've already designed how the things are going to work. Slapping a toggle on top isn't going at that late stage. You can't do anything meaningful with that toggle, not without going back and undoing a whole lot of other work. And then for companies, again, when you just treat privacy as an add-on, that last minute toggle, your data's not gonna be well managed. You're going to have that increased risk, you're going to have data going where you don't expect it, it's going to show up in weird places, be uncontrolled and you're not gonna really use it when you don't know where it is, when you don't have good control over it. And it means that users won't trust the company's products. Users can tell when privacy is just an afterthought. Think about all those various toggles and all the social media you use, I'm not going to name names but I'm pretty sure you can all think of one or two or 10 examples where you go in and you see a toggle that's just, I don't wanna share my data. You're like, okay, that doesn't help me. Users know and they won't trust you if they can tell that you're just tacking on privacy because somebody at the last minute told you to. So how do we build in privacy early? There's five stages where you wanna build your privacy in, data collection, data storage, data access, feature design and the controls for the features and then your policies and procedures. So your software development life cycle, your internal policies and your employee education. For data collection, there's one rule. One rule, this is the one thing that I want you to take away from this talk. If you take away one thing, this is it. Only collect the data that you need. I have this arguing with engineers all the time. Only collect the data that you need. Do not test me, I will hunt you down. So the reason that I emphasize this one so strongly is because the more data you collect, the more data you have, the more data you have to manage, the more data you have to protect. Don't do that to yourself. If you don't need it, don't collect it. Limited collection, so again, back to the users understanding, like they know when you're collecting data that you don't need. The exaggerated example would be like the notorious flashlight app that wants like your location and your contacts and all of that, like users know that you don't need that for a flashlight app and maybe the flashlight developer was thinking innocently of something like, well maybe in the future, I can develop a really cool feature office data, but in the present, it just looks like you're trying to scan the user. Don't do that, save yourself the headache. So once you've collected the data, now you're storing it. So when you store your sensitive data, the obvious one is it should be stored separately from your non-sensitive data. That's a given. And then in access-controlled storage systems, so not in a storage system that everybody in the company has access to. And despite everybody in the company thinking they need access to user data, they don't, we'll talk about that in a second. So in access-controlled storage systems. And then the least obvious one is in separate partitions or systems based on usage. So this is where you want to know what data you're collecting and know what you're using it for because a high level example would be your customer support line might need to see users' names, addresses, phone numbers and credit card data in order to provide billing support and your engineers need to access messages or account content in order to test or debug or fix things. Engineers shouldn't have access to credit card data and customer support people shouldn't have access to messages. So look at your high level use cases and partition out your data in a way that an engineer poking around in the data to try and solve a bug isn't accidentally going to come across the credit card numbers that he doesn't need. And vice versa. Now I mentioned we're gonna talk more about data access. So access to sensitive data, probably again some of this is obvious, it should be role-based. So people who need the data to do their jobs are the only ones who have access to it. If they don't need it, tell them they don't need it. And because I wanted it or because I think it might help me is not a reason. Only those who need the data to do their jobs should have access to it. And then again, back to the partitioning thing, they should only have access to the data that they need. So you don't want your data, here's all of my sensitive data, here's all of my non-sensitive data. Everybody with access to sensitive data can access all of the sensitive data regardless of what it is or what they need. Split that out further. Make sure that people can't inadvertently or maliciously access data that they have no need for. Obviously log and monitor, again, that's kind of a given. And then automatically updated based on personnel changes. So if you have somebody who moves from engineering up to management, they probably don't need an engineer's level of access to the data anymore. So make sure that that gets taken away and done automatically. You don't want to have to be every five years, somebody thinks, oh shit, we should maybe review our data access policies and then you find out that this manager's been just casually accessing his ex's account for the last five years. Once you've got your backend system set up, now you need to look at your development process. I'll talk a little bit more about the software development lifecycle in a second, but we're gonna dive more into strictly designing your features and controls. So there's a bunch of questions you wanna ask yourself, starting with how am I going to get users to give me the data? And this shouldn't be a malicious thing, again, only collect the data that you need. So think about how you're going to turn on the feature for users. Auto opt-in is not a thing. Do not use that phrase, I will fight you. Do not maybe get the roll of newspaper and bop you on the nose, that is not a thing. Opt-out is a valid option, but call it opt-out. Again, users know when you're trying to deceive them and saying something like auto opt-in instantly will lose you some user trust. And then it should go without saying, never sneakily turn on a privacy sensitive feature. Again, users will find out and they will not like you for it. So now, how do we get users to turn on this feature if we're using opt-in or we're not sneakily turning things on on them? You need to think about how you're going to explain your feature. And this is where you wanna loop in your publicity team, your marketing team. This is the thing that I wanna do. This is the benefit that it's going to give users because if you're not giving users a benefit, then you probably have a problem. Even if the benefit is just as simple as we're making the product run more smoothly for you, but you need to be able to tell them what they are getting out of giving you this data. You need to sell them on your feature. They need to understand why they're giving you the data. And that goes back to that choice and control. Users need to understand what you're going to use the data for, what they get out of it. You also need to consider your legally required notification. So GRDP mandates, any mandates or companies under or any other laws in the countries that you're operating in. Talk to your lawyers about those, make sure that you have those in. But the primary thing that you wanna do is sell the feature to your users and then secondarily, provide information on how to turn it off. Nobody likes to think about users turning off this really awesome new feature that they've created, but users do have valid reasons for doing that. So once they have revoked consent or don't give it in the first place, you need to think about this. What happens then? Do you stop collecting the data? If not, why not? What do you do with it? How long do you keep data that you've already collected? Is it forever? Is it for a week after they've turned it off? Because that's how you're just, there's not a wrong answer here, but you need to have an answer. Because in some cases, collected data might need to be kept indefinitely because some legal thing or other, again, talk to your lawyers, they'll be able to tell you more about that. But there's not a wrong answer, you just need an answer here. And a little bit more about why users might turn it off because a lot of people don't think about this. And I've talked to engineers who like, when I give them a story about why a user might turn things off, they kind of, I never thought about that. So there was an example, when I was working at Google, Google was linking people's accounts. They were like, oh, we're gonna be really helpful, because you know, everybody's like, they set up this old Gmail from when they were in high school and they set up a different one for their professional life. We're gonna start linking all these accounts and making it really easy for you to manage all your accounts. Well, there was a user who was trans.  Google linked those accounts and suddenly this user was outed to all of their coworkers in professional contacts against their will. So that user should have been given the option to not link their accounts before it was done. And again, this was nothing malicious. Google was genuinely trying to help. They thought that everybody wanted their accounts linked. They forget that not everybody is one single unit of person in need space. People have multiple identities and they deliberately maintain these multiple identities. So think about these kinds of use cases where people might want or need to turn your feature off for their own safety or just even just personal preference because that is also a valid reason. But think about that and make sure that you have a plan for when users turn a feature off. Finally, on the feature design side, this is the other thing that I want you to remember from this. When you're designing a feature, ask yourself, does your feature pass the New York Times headline test? How many of you have heard of that already? Okay, some hands. So the New York Times headline test, how many of you are familiar with how much J. Jonah Jamison hates Spider-Man? You know about that? J. Jonah Jamison hates Spider-Man to the point where everything he will do, every positive article he will twist.  So now imagine that your feature is Spider-Man and J. Jonah Jamison is writing an article about it in the New York Times. How well will your feature hold up? Will you be embarrassed? Will it be a black mark on your company's record to have this New York Times article out there? Or will you be able to stand up and probably say, yes, we are collecting this data. This is what we're doing with it. This is what it gives the user. Here's how we're protecting it. Because if you can say that, if you have a really good story and you can explain why users might want to give you this data and then how you're protecting it, how you're respecting their choice and control, then you're good to go. But if you're gonna be embarrassed, if that comes out in the New York Times, maybe you should rethink what you're doing. User trust is really, really, really hard to earn and really, really, really easy to lose. Bad handling can kill the best intention feature. So how many of you remember Beacon? Facebook's Beacon. Not enough hands here. Okay, the Beacon thing was basically, Facebook would put little Beacons on like Amazon Pages and other web stores. And so then when you bought a thing, it would automatically post to your Facebook timeline, hey, you know, so-and-so just bought like this thing. Well, all of a sudden, people buying a surprise birthday presents, engagement rings, you know, maybe adult toys that they didn't really want their mom to know about we're getting out in. So Facebook had a good intention, but they didn't handle it well. They didn't provide choice. They didn't provide control. Good handling, on the other hand, can push a feature above and beyond. How many of you remember when Google now launched a while back? Because one of the things that struck me about the Google Now launch was that on its face, Google Now looks really, really invasive. They basically say, we wanna scrape your email, we wanna scrape everything on your phone, we wanna scrape everything in your Google account, but we're gonna provide you all these really, really, really useful services for it. And we're gonna respect your privacy. Here's all of the controls that you'll have over what you're giving us. You can turn off now at any time.  And like, I was seeing on even like the really tinfoil hat subreddits and forums where people are saying, you know what? Like, I normally wouldn't go for anything like this, but this is actually pretty cool. And Google Now is so integrated, it's not even Now anymore, it's just the Google app and it lives on all the Android phones. Like, that's how well it was handled, even though on its surface it's really scary. So let's talk about policies and processes and education. So we went into the like questions you should ask yourself during development, but that's not the only thing you should be doing during the development stage of your software development lifecycle. You want to engage your program managers, your product managers, and your engineers very, very early. You do not, do not want to come in late and say, oh, you're launching in three days? Well, you need to do this, this, this, this, this, and this, and this, and this, and this.  Or, you know, it's going to just be bad for everybody. So engage early, as early as you can. You also want to make friends with your lawyers. Every lawyer that I've ever met has been perfectly willing to be the bad guy when you need them, which is really, really helpful. But they also, they're your lawyers. They're your company's lawyers. They want you to succeed. So if you get them in early, they'll be able to say, okay, well, there's a, you know, this law says you can't do it this way, but you can do this other thing over here, and that'll get you the same thing that you're trying to do, and we won't be, you know, doing anything to get in trouble. So make friends with your lawyers. Recruit advocates as well. And advocates are people, there are any part of the company, engineers, PNs, support people, managers, anybody who believes in privacy, because they might not be on your privacy team, but they will advocate for you. They will, you know, speak up in meetings, and they'll be the ones to call out those use cases. Like, you know, what happens if a person in a domestic violence shelter is using this? Like, how do we protect that? So recruit your advocates. Make sure that you support them.  And then I touched on this a little bit in previous slides, but just in general, you want to engage all your other teams really early too. So we talked about legal. We talked a little bit about publicity in terms of how, you know, how you're going to sell your feature and sell the, like, the data collection. We also want to engage customer support. I've seen a lot of times where a product team will push a new product, and then the customer support line gets flooded with calls and the customer support people are like, we don't know, we got it at the same time you did. We have no idea what's going on. That's not a good experience for your users. They're not going to trust you when that happens. It's like, okay, if you don't, if you're like, what is going on here? If you can't even tell your customer support people how to support me in this creepy new feature. So engage your customer support. Make sure they understand what the feature does. Make sure they can answer the common questions. How do I turn it off? What data does it collect? What happens to my data? So engage them early as well. Once you've developed your product, probably it's going to go to test. Hopefully it's going to go to test and not just directly to prod. Keep privacy in mind. Test users don't give up privacy just because they're test users. The level of privacy may be different. That's what testing is for, but this goes back to making sure your users, test users understand what they're giving up, what data they're giving up and what's going to happen to that data. So have your data retention plan. And again, there's not a wrong answer for a data retention and deletion plan because the answer might be, we can't legally delete it. But you need to know what it is so that when people ask, you can tell them and you can tell them why. And test your privacy controls. Find that person that you know that is all about privacy and they will toggle all the privacy. Find them and give it to them and test it and make sure that it works and passes muster. And just like privacy doesn't stop at test, it doesn't stop at launch either. You can't just chuck product out into the wild and be like, hey, there it is. We're done moving on next project. Doesn't work that way. You need to check in regularly with your product teams. Make sure that they're still respecting the privacy controls that you put in place that they aren't changing things on the backend as new things come up. And then as new things come up on your side, work with the product teams to integrate them. So maybe you've developed a new encryption scheme. Go back to all those product teams and say, hey, we need to upgrade your product to include this new privacy tool on our backend. You want to, a lot of this comes in from internal policies and procedures. Getting all of this through the development lifecycle, having people work with you on this. So you need to make sure you have policies and procedures in place to support all of this. Getting C-suite support, your chiefs of staff is super important. They're probably not going to do a whole lot, unless you're really lucky, they're not going to do a whole lot more than issue a blanket statement. Like, we support privacy at this company, but even that is enough to then get the mid-level managers to start issuing actual policies with teeth. Once you have a policy, you need to make it just the done thing, because you don't want to constantly going back and fighting with people about, this is the policy, but I need to do with this. No, this is the policy, but you don't want that. So make it the done thing. And a really sneaky and easy way to do this is teach your new hires. Especially if you're a growing company and your new hires tend to outnumber your old guard, teach the new hires and just tell them that's how things are done. They don't know any better and they'll just start doing it and eventually it will propagate enough that it does become the done thing. And then finally, okay, we've got all these policies and procedures that's great and now we're getting kind of bogged down. Don't let that happen. Make sure that your procedures are as simple and as integrated as you can make it. Again, you don't want to be the team of no. You don't want to be a gate on teams getting to do cool stuff. So you want to make privacy as integrated and seamless as possible. And this goes back to what I was saying about get other teams in early. Engage with product teams early. Get publicity and legal and customer support early because the earlier you do all of this, the more you are steering instead of saying no. Because if you can steer, if they have two choices and one of them is privacy good and one of them is privacy bad or even privacy neutral, if you can catch them before they've made that choice, then you can just steer them and it isn't an issue. They're just using the correct privacy thing. If you get to them after they've made the choice and they've gone to the privacy bad side, well now you have to undo all of that work, bring them back here and send them out again. So get them as early as you can. And finally, education is super, super important. Teacher employs the value of privacy. This isn't just like have an orientation thing where you have a slide up that says, our company values user privacy. It's important, rah, rah. Help them understand why privacy is important. So again, the things we've talked about here. Privacy makes for better products. Privacy improves user trust. It makes your company stronger by giving you data that you can use and by having customers that respect you. And then also, especially teacher non-privacy engineers, how to engineer for privacy. This relates to it being done thing. You want your engineers to just, the first thing that they think of when they think, I need to deal with PII is, okay, well that means it goes into this system and it's handled in this way. You don't want to have to do it in whatever other way they've learned. You want them to do it your way. So teach them that way. Teach them how to do it right from the very beginning. Because the more they do, the less you have to do. But that does all sound like a lot of work. Like all of this backend stuff and all this education and all these policies and all these development questions. Okay, yes, it's a lot of work, but it's worth it. Good user privacy, it makes users happy. Happy users will buy more products. They will see more ads. Happy users are brand ambassadors. I'm going to pick on Uber here for a second because they're just a really good example right now. They had a lot of negative press around, among other things, their privacy practices. And a lot of people jump, shift, jump, ship to lift. Because people would say, hey, you know, I've tried Lyft and they don't do that. You know, you should come over to Lyft. And similarly, you want to be that company. You want to be the company that people say, come to this company, they respect your privacy. Get those brand ambassadors, teach people, show your users that you are the one that they can trust. And then once you've done that, your own company will thrive. Because you're taking on less risk, which is always a good thing. Your user data is better, more useful to you. It's better managed so that you can do more with it. And then you are earning your users trust. And again, users who trust you are users who use your products, who give you money. So do privacy right, earn your users trust. Questions? Microphone. Yes, please. Yes, please. So number one, I just wanted to say thank you for giving this talk. As an engineer, sometimes you get really going home. I'm driven to build a new feature which leverages all this data. But that doesn't really compare when you have considerations in all human beings of mine. So I think you're probably making a difference. You're already sort of harvesting the minimum amount of data to carry on your value proposition and all the things that we do to launch it. If you cannot work technical data, launch and make a testimony to e-testing, how do you suggest that you inform your users that you need to gather their data stuff? This will go back to very careful messaging and I strongly suggest engaging your marketing team because that's literally their job. In some cases, if your company is just known for doing kinds of A, B testing, Google gets away with a lot because there was that whole thing about they're testing 60 different shades of blue or whatever it was a few years back. So if your company just has a reputation for doing all kinds of A, B testing, then users have the automatic understanding that this is what you're doing. If you don't have that or you need to build it up, then this is where individuals, so if you have two different sets of toggles, you might have two different sets of explanations for it, depending on what they do and just treat it like any other privacy control, really tell them what's going on, what it's being used for. It might be as simple as we're trying to improve our products and therefore this feature because improving your products is a valid use case. Users understand that they want better products, like everybody wants the products that they use to be cooler and do more for them. So it doesn't have to be a long technical explanation about, okay, we're A, B testing this and that and we're going to run the test for this long or whatever, it's just, we're improving our products and features and as a part of that, here's this new feature. Thank you. Mike? I like him, I'd like to thank you for making the talk. It's got some really good points and I'd like to address like the main point that you said that we should take away from it which is don't take more than meaning. So I'd like to use one of the examples that you used in your talk, which is the flashlight app. So right now when you download a flashlight app, you know, there's very little transparency into what they're actually asking for. In fact, you actually on Android, you actually have to scroll down and click on the button, see what they're actually asking for. A lot of times they don't even give you the option when you start the app to opt in or opt out. They just turn it on by default. So with that in mind, where do you, or how do you see a solution that problem actually coming into place, specifically with things like the Android apps or the iOS apps or things like single sign-on with like Facebook credentials or something like that where people are asking for your birthday or whatever with no real indication that we need this birthday to serve you content or whatever. So on demand data requesting, iOS does this already. So instead of presenting, when you download an app, instead of presenting you with a list of things that it wants right off the bat, it waits until you try and do a thing. So like if the app wants access to your camera, it'll wait until you try and do whatever in the app that needs the camera. And then it'll say this app needs permission to access the camera. That puts it in context for the user because they're like, oh, I was trying to do this thing. Clearly that needs the camera. I understand why I need the camera app. All right, I'm gonna grant permission. Or they might change their mind, which is a valid option, but they understand. So this goes back to having that meaningful choice and meaningful control because they understand why they're asking for permission. Android, in previous versions of Android, they do exactly what you say where they just kind of give you all of the things up front and you accept them or you don't and you're just kind of stuck with it. I think Android M is the one that started doing the on-demand permissions model. They still have to, like older apps that haven't been updated, still unfortunately run off the older permissions model, but that is a problem that Google is specifically aware of and are working to fix because that is the worst way, like studies. The worst way to get users to give you permissions is by dumping them all up front because you're asking them, basically it's a reward thing. So the user is trying to take an action, get an app, you're putting a thing in front of them that is blocking their ability to do the thing. So of course they're gonna say, yes, I don't care, whatever yet, give me the thing, I want the reward that I'm trying to get. So that is the worst time. They're not going to pay any attention to it and that is where you get those scam apps that just take everything because users don't see and they take advantage of that. So on-demand permission model where you put the request for permission, request for data in the context of what the user is trying to do because then they can understand what it's for, it makes sense to them, they know why you're asking and it's a logical next step for them to say, I wanna do the thing, I understand why it's asking for this permission, it's so that I can do the thing okay. The mobile model for privacy is really good. Do you foresee or see any hope in the future that modern web browsers will also adopt that model instead of just walking everything, giving you the choice? I think web browsers could ever agree on actual standards and actually implement them. There's many insured versions of this, like every once in a while, you'll get asked such and such website, wants to use your location, block or allow and I can be like, okay, I'm on, for whatever reason, using maps inside Chrome, I don't know. That makes, okay, I guess you can use my location or it's a news site and it wants to know where I'm at so it can give me local news. Okay, that makes sense, I'll allow. So they're trying, I think, but they're hampered by the lack of standards and the like, because you have to get every website on the internet to comply with that as well and we're a really long way from that. Any other questions? All right, thank you.


As folks, it's the Roy Rogers Radio Show for the whole family, adventure, suspense, history, and music. Starring Roy Rogers, King of the Cowboys, and Dale Evans, Queen of the West, with Pat Brady, the metalman, and an all-star cast. And now, here to greet you with a song and a story, a Roy and Dale. Mexicali Rose, stop crying. Well, good evening, folks. Greetings again to the whole family. That song, Mexicali Rose, reminds me of a fifth Dale and Pat and I made a wild band. We've been looking around for a real isolated guest ranch, where we could take it easy for a few days. And the Rancho Eldor Bay looks just right. It's down in the desert country, about 20 miles this side of the Mexican border, and the town of Mexicali. Before we got there, Dale made me promise that I'd do nothing but rest and relax. And when we checked in, Mr. Wilson, the owner of the Rancho, guaranteed that we'd have a nice quiet vacation. Well, the next morning, we got up early and decided to give the horses a little exercise before breakfast. See, so much sand in all your life. See, nothing but miles and miles. Keith and Clyde in isolation. We couldn't have picked a better spot. Hey, Roy. Yeah? How about turning back? I'm stomach yelling for breakfast. Okay, Pat. Let's go. Well, I'm not sure. It looks like a man's body. Body? Where? Over there in the sand. Let it be a mirage. Please let it be a mirage. It's no mirage. He sure is, Pat. That isn't all. Looks kind of strange, Roy. He should. This man was frozen to death. He's to death out here in the middle of the desert. Well, the desert isn't very hot at night. I don't know, but it doesn't get cold enough to freeze. Hey, Roy, that's not nice, darling. It's all dissolved in a minute. I see. That proves one thing for sure. Why? He must have been brought here sometime during the night. I suppose he got here. That's what I'd like to know. I wonder if he has any papers on him that'll tell us who he is. I'll take a look. Now, Roy, remember. We're on a vacation. Let's assure he finds out what happened. Okay, Dale. How do you reckon? I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know, either. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. We'd better find out what happened. Okay, Dale. How do you reckon who ever bought him gear? Did it without leaving any tracks, Dale? They must have wiped out their tracks when they left, so they couldn't be fall at that. Would you find anything on him, Roy? No, these plots were empty. Well, we'd better get back to Hampshire. Old Obie, so I can call the sheriff. I hope you're right this morning. I gave you enough time. Fine. How's the table here? This will be fine, Mr. Wilson. Will Mr. Rogers be joining you? Yes. He's in the lobby making a phone call to the sheriff. Sheriff? Well, why? Is something wrong? I found a dead man out on the desert. No. Yes, an underburied mysterious Cuban circuit. Er, I think I'm... really? Yeah, he's frozen to death. Frozen? In the desert? Yeah. Let's not talk about it. Okay. How about breakfast, Mr. Wilson? Oh, certainly. I'll have Clara take your order. Oh, Clara! Yes, Mr. Wilson? The Rogers table as soon as you can. Be right there. All right. Good morning, Mr. Wilson. Good morning. As Evan says, told me about the mystery you uncovered this morning. Well, it wouldn't be a mystery very long before I wasn't on a vacation. What did the sheriff say, Roy? He thought I was joking at first, but I guess he finally believed me. I told him we left the trail and marked the place where we found the man. He's going out to investigate. Well, the sheriff's a good man. Oh, excuse me. Someone's in the lobby. Finding folks? Good morning. Good morning. Uh, what's good today? Oh, we have a special treat for breakfast, Mr. Grady. Oh? What's that? Handelopes. Handelopes? I don't see them. I have the size on the bill. Oh, Mr. Wilson brought several back from market this morning. Well, our stock was one of them. Instant cereal? Ham and egg? Maybe an order of main toast? An order of beer? Comedy? Coffee? Rogers, my name is Bradley. I'm a special investigator with a board of patrol. I wonder if I can have a few minutes of your time. Sure, come in. The sheriff told me you found the body of the manual Lopez. Is that who he was? Yes, he was one of our best men. He worked undercover for us on the other side of the border. I see. The medical report says he was frozen to death. Well, they did it. We don't know. They? The smuggling ring. We've been after them for over a year. Last night Lopez sent us a message by shortwave saying he was coming across with information that would tell us who the leader of the gang really is. Well, obviously he didn't make it. Do you think the gang learned he was a spy? That's right. They're smart and dangerous. And Mr. Rogers, we understand you're down here strictly on a vacation. Yes, I am. Well, now would you consider extending your vacation to the other side of the border? What did you have in mind? You'll just continue to act like you're on a vacation.  Buy the usual things, rapes, souvenirs, and diamonds. Diamonds? Yes, that's right. Now, you see, we're sure that the contact with the smuggling gang is a man named Popescu, a Romanian. He poses as a poor refugee, forced to sell the family jewels. Aren't the diamonds he sells real? Well, they're real enough. They're only worth about a tenth of what he'll ask for them. I see. And you think I might learn from the boss of the gang, if I bought some diamonds from this man? Well, no, no, not quite. But if you were interested in buying, say, oh, $10,000 worth, providing you a guarantee they could somehow get them past custom to the border, well, Popescu might take you to someone who could give you that guarantee. I see. I admit it's not much to go on, but it would at least give us another link in the chain. Well, I'll have to ask them today, Mr. Bradley. I promise, sir, I wouldn't... Well, now, that wouldn't be wise. You are people who know that you're helping us the better. But if I don't tell her, she's lovely.  Now, the less they know, the healthier it'll be. And so what happened to Emanuel Lopez? Well, there, aren't you glad we decided to take in Mexicali? I certainly am. Those costumes the natives wear are the most colorful I've ever seen. They're just... Hi, folks! Hi!  Oh, I didn't buy some much, just a Zavapi and a pair of hurry cheeses. Uh, who... Mexican chew. We know Pat, have a seat. Thank you. Senorita? Senorita? Photographer wants to see you. Hey, Roy, let's have a picture together. Okay. Oh, gracias, senorita. You know her name? Oh, yes, senorita. It is because of my little brother, Pedro. He's a great man. How do you say? A great fan of yours. Oh. Please, you all come closer together. See? Like this? Good. Good. Oh, nice. Hold it. Oh, bueno, bueno. Your picture will be ready in a moment. Okay, miss. Maybe you can do me a favor. Si, senorita. Do you happen to know a good jeweler in this town? I'd like to see about buying some diamonds. Diamonds? Yes, senorita. I do not know. That's your one. So, how do you find diamonds? Roy, who do you want to buy diamonds for? Oh, I've heard you can get some real bargains down here. Pardon, Mr. Rajev? Yes? Permit me to introduce myself. My name is Popescu. I have a proposition that I believe may interest you. Oh. Well, sit down, Mr. Popescu. Oh, thank you. This is day 11. This is Pat Brady. Yes. Mr. Popescu. How do you do? How something like that. Mr. Rajev, I will come right to the point. I'm in need of several thousand dollars. Oh. Unfortunately, it's taking much longer to acquire the visa to enter your country than I anticipate. I see. Because of this, I'm forced to part with some of my family heirlooms. Heirlooms? Well, why would you want any old looms for your hair? Oh, Pat. Go ahead, Mr. Popescu. What kind of heirlooms? Diamonds, Mr. Rajev. Beautiful, absolutely perfect stuff. Now, I'm forced by Popescu to tell the same, world-famous, genuine, perfect, blue-white diamonds as tremendous bargains. Are you interested, Mr. Rajevs? Well, I'd like to see the stones. Do you have them with you? No, Mr. Rajev. I would be risking my life to carry such a treasure abroad for my small hotel room. But if you would care to accompany me there, I'll be sure to walk from the Cantina. OK. I'll be back in a few minutes, folks. Good boy. Let's go, Mr. Popescu. Do you not agree with me that these stones have a truly magnificent luster? They sure sparkle. What do you think they're worth? This country next to nothing but in the United States. They will be worth, perhaps, $30,000, $40,000. That much, huh? That is conservative-based, isn't it? However, you may have the stones for only $10,000. $10,000? Well, that certainly sounds like a bargain, but there's a matter of paying duty on them. They haven't crossed me at least another $10,000. Now, sir, Mr. Popescu, for the time I got them back into the United States, they'd crossed me too soon. No, sir, here, Mr. Rajevs, but I do not remember saying anything about paying duty on the stones. Well, how could I avoid it? What would you say, Mr. Rajevs, if I guarantee to have the stones delivered to you in the United States duty-free? Then that certainly begins to the environment. Good. Good. Come with me. Where through now? It's only short distance near the freight yard. I will introduce you to a man who will see that you receive the stones safely across the border. Yeah, I know. Here comes a girl with that picture. I wonder if she knows where that, Mr. Popescu, is. Señorita, senor Rajevs, your picture is very nice. Thank you. Quarta, quarta, how much? $1, senor. Oh, here you are. Thank you. Oh, miss, you know the man who I left here with, Mr. Popescu? Mr. Popescu? No, senorita, do not look him. Were you far and sitting at our table then? No, senorita, no one at your table. But he came over here right after Roy asked you about buying some diamonds. Yeah, it looked like you sent him. I'm sorry, please excuse me, but I don't know why you're not telling the truth here. But if Roy has been twindled into buying some phony diamonds. I think we ought to tell the police, Vail. That's a good idea. No, please wait. Will you tell us where Roy is? Please, senorita, it cannot. Mr. Popescu, you would be very angry. Okay, Pa. Call the police. No. All right. I will do it. Come on, I will take you to senor Popescu's hotel. Let's see him, Mr. Rogers. I see. Hello, baby, it's me, Popescu. What do you want? There is someone with me, a gentleman with much money. He wants to talk business to you. Come in. Mr. Rogers, this is senor Morales. Much gusto. No, senor, what can I do for you? Well, I might buy some diamonds from Mr. Popescu, providing we can get to get... Oh, excuse me. Don't worry, Mr. Rogers. Senor Morales will make all the necessary arrangements. He has a connection. No, senor, you were saying... I was saying that Mr. Popescu wants to sell me some diamonds. Oh, I see. And you wish me to bring them to you across the border. Well, yes, if you think he can do it, but I guess... Morales, are you crazy? Why did you hit him with a piece of fine paint? Of course, baby, he's a spy. What?  Rogers was sent here by the border patrol to Tripos. How do you know? The man at the door, he was sent by the boss, he told me. So what do we do with him now? Same thing. I did with the other spy. We'll send him across the border, and when they find him, he'll be in the middle of the desert, frozen to death. Then we'll patrol the border, baby. They'll live in a few minutes. This is the car where you sent me to trip. Refrigerated car. How cold it gets in there, baby? Cold enough to freeze him. I'll open the door. Get in, Popescu. I'll lift Rogers up to you. Hurry, baby. It's cold in here. Okay. Here he comes. Drag him back inside the car. Okay, baby. See that? Fine. So long, baby. Sorry, but you're not too much. No, Morales, please, no! Mr. Rogers. Mr. Rogers. Yeah, Popescu? I hear you. I did not know. Believe me. I believe. We're going to freeze to death. We won't be able to stand this cold much longer. How far is it to the border? For us too far. We'll be ice before then. I'm getting so sleepy. Well, don't give in to it. It's for me. No, yous, we haven't got a chance. Don't give up, Popescu. Try to keep moving around. But there's no road. There's so many mail-ons. Hey, we're slowing down. The train's slowing down. So soon. It's time, baby. There she is. Hotel, and from there to senior Morales. It isn't road. Absolutely sure, but I think it's... The train's slowing down. Okay, get ready. Things are cold, not frozen. I should have given you the reservation at my ranch, Rogers. I knew you fell in trouble. That's not the only mistake you made, Wilson. You shouldn't have been serving cantaloupe for breakfast. The only place you could have gotten them, that time of the morning, was out of a refrigerated freight car. That's the method you've been using for smuggling and for freezing people in the middle of the desert. The biggest mistake I made was in believing that you were on a vacation. I was. Some vacation? Like a jockey taking a horseback ride on each day off? That's right, Mr. Roy Rogers, and when you're ready, we'll start home to the good old double-R bar. It's peaceful and quiet, and we can get rested up from our vacations. And folks, that's a story I'm always reminded of whenever I hear the song Mexicali Rose. Mexicali Rose. See you next week. You've been listening to the Roy Rogers show starring Roy Rogers, King of the Cowboys, Day 11's Queen of the West, with Pat Brady, the middleman, and the all-star cast. Be sure to be with us again next week at the same time. This is the United States Armed Forces Radio and Television Service.


Matthew Spriggs is an Australian Research Council laureate fellow working on the project The Collective Biography of Archaeology in the Pacific, CBAP. He's also the professor of archaeology in the School of Archaeology and Anthropology at the Australian National University. He's undertaken extensive archaeological research in the Pacific Islands and island Southeast Asia for over 40 years, particularly in Vanuatu. His laureate project is concerned with the history of Pacific Archaeology and it's been a pleasure. I'm Adam Nelson, I'm the head of education at the Hearst Museum and it's been a pleasure working with Matthew on selecting and doing the interpretation of a handful of sherds that are now on display in our gallery, so we're going to have a look. We just unveiled that case the other day, so if you haven't had a look, check it out. It's exciting to have these objects and these stories in the gallery in our lounge of wondrous anthropological discoveries, so I think without further ado, I'll turn it over to Matthew. Okay, thank you, thank you. Right, I gave a seminar here in 2015 actually and that was just as the project was starting and I talked about what the aims of it were, so if you were at that one, you'll have seen some of these, although perhaps in a longer form. Just to really reiterate what the aims were, really there isn't much on the history of Pacific Archaeology and the most accessible thing is Pat Kirch's chapter in his textbook on the Road of the Winds and that's basically it. There's a few national histories, particularly from New Zealand and Australia, there's been quite a lot on the history of archaeology, but on the Pacific Islands, amazingly little, so we thought this was time to change this and part of it came from a desire to kind of critique really our current understandings of Pacific Archaeology, not least because I remember picking up some article, I think it was written in 1914 and it had pretty much everything that we kind of, you read in standard textbooks today, it was already there, including Austronesians, it kind of mentioned the whole thing, so that's rather alarming I find, have we wasted 100 years or we didn't have to do anything at all? So that's part of the idea and also histories of, I notice histories of socio-cultural anthropology which rely a lot on Pacific materials, they've kind of created that history by excising the fact that a lot of these early people who are now called anthropologists, of course they were ethnologists at the time, they're as much the ancestors of archaeology as they are of socio-cultural anthropology. People like Alfred Court Haddon, for instance, much of his work was on material culture, but his 1898 Torres Strait expedition is always seen as the kind of one of the birth places of modern socio-cultural anthropology. Even Malinovsky once published an article on stone axes, one very good, but at least he made the attempt. So the history, the early history of archaeology and anthropology in the Pacific, these are very much intertwined and yet that you won't get that impression from reading, particularly histories of British social anthropology, which are very strange things. Also, although there's been quite a lot of work on the history of Australian archaeology, it's very much, and the New Zealand material is the same, it's just about people in Australia and New Zealand, as if they didn't have wider connections with the outside world. And in fact they did, and many of the figures who are quite important in the history of Australian archaeology, people like Fred McCarthy, who was a curator at the Australian Museum in Sydney, and Norman Tyndale in South Australia, also worked in the Pacific and or Southeast Asia as well. Also, I didn't want this to be the dead white Anglo-Saxon male history of archaeology in the Pacific, so the two post-docs that I recruited, one is a Francophone and the other's a, if there is such a word, a Germanophone, I don't know what the word for a German speaker is, and particularly French archaeology in the Pacific up until the present day is very strong. And the Germans made a lot of interesting, mainly pre-World War I contributions, i.e. before they were kicked out of the Pacific at the Treaty of Versailles. So some important stuff. Also, and this was something, I don't know if it's impact coach's latest version of his on the road to the winds, but the original version, he suggested that outside of New Zealand, the number of excavations done before World War II in the Pacific could be numbered on the fingers of one hand.  There were lots of excavations and they were done, some of them were as good as excavations anywhere else in the world at the time. So I wanted to kind of bring these back into focus. Also, one problem that we have is that quite often the artifacts and the field notes are in separate institutions or they have the artifacts in a museum, but they have no documentation about them. So part of the aim, too, is to try and sort of find where these archives were. And the immediate result of that was that we found there was in fact an enormous body of material because no one had really looked for it. You know, we had no idea how much there was, but there is a real, there are archives all over the world about this stuff. Just as a notable example, Catherine Routledge, who was an early archaeologist who worked on Rapa Nui Easter Island, and her field notes are in the Royal Geographical Society in London and the artifacts are in the Pitt Rivers Museum in Oxford. So this kind of stuff happens all the time. Also, I wanted to look at this perennial issue. Every few years it comes up again of trans-oceanic contacts, particularly contacts between South America and the Pacific, and also to try and understand why they've been so persistent and what we might get out of knowing about them, what it might tell us about wider ideas about the Pacific. And I have a PhD student who's just finishing up her PhD on that very topic. And she's a Mexican citizen. And so she's been able to bring together all the Spanish language material, which may be more accessible to people in the US, but it's not very accessible to people. We don't have many Spanish speakers in Australia. So that's going to be a very interesting thing. We also wanted to redress and neglect to the role of women archaeologists. And I'm very pleased to say that my postdoc, Emily Dot-Siru, has now got another postdoc or another fellowship to concentrate on that for the next four years after the project finishes at the end of this month. And we have done a bit with the project so far. But again, there's a lot more material. There are women who were identifiably archaeologists in their own right. And then of course, and this will come up again in relation to Edward Gifford from this very university. Often they went on expeditions with their wives and who were doubtless doing a lot of the work, but never mentioned and barely get into the books. In fact, the only time that Delilah Gifford got her name on an Edward Gifford monograph about his work, even though she accompanied him on almost every expedition, was after he died and she ended up editing the monograph on Yap. That's one of your series here. It's the only one that her name appears on, even though she was there and obviously doing stuff in lots of them. So we're trying to recover some of that. And also, I don't know why the N agency is, I must have made some word I left out, just the agency contribution of indigenous scholars and interlocutors. And this is very largely the subject of what I'll be talking about today. Okay, just a couple, because there, a lot of them have just come out, there's a few references, which if you're interested, are certainly worth having a look at. The whole sort of rationale of the project can be found in the 2017 paper I wrote in the book in the history of archaeology, which is an open access journal, also available for free download in a book on archaeologists of island Melanesia. I tried to put together a different way of looking at the history of really Pacific archaeological practice, but particularly Melanesia, which is to look at the technologies available to archaeologists at different times, like, you know, you can't really get an absolute chronology until you've got radiocarbon dating. So what was the effect of that? When did it come in? When did people start using it? And a whole range of archaeological techniques such as petrographic thin sections of axes and pottery and other stuff. When these come in, they're kind of game changes in terms of what archaeologists can even talk about exchange, for instance, can be talked about much before then. Particularly in relation to what I'm talking about today, in Journal of Pacific History, not sadly not an open access journal, but I'm sure your library has it. I did particularly write about Indigenous Agency and Giffords Fiji and Archaeological Expedition of 1947. And that came out last year. And then an article which I'm very proud about, which came out the day before yesterday. In the Bulletin of History of Archaeology again, not really relevant to what I'm talking about today, but it fits in with the, it came out of the idea to make the history of Australian archaeology take note of the fact that Australians were also working in other places in the Pacific, for instance. However, it morphed into a basically realizing that the whole history of Australian archaeology is a lie. The standard history of Australian archaeology begins in January 1956, when John Mulvaney starts excavating at Froms Landing.  Well, they didn't have pots, but you know what I mean, an artifact collector and just wandering around kind of at random. This is so not the case. You know, there was really good archaeology being done in Australia, long before John Mulvaney came on the scene. And certainly in the 1940s, there was excellent work as good as work being done anywhere in the world being done, particularly looking at trying to get at issues such as when was Australia first settled by humans? And in the absence of radiocarbon dating in a place like Australia, it was a pretty, pretty difficult subject to address. But people were doing great work. So again, I think that's going to essentially going to annoy a lot of people in Australia, which is great. Okay, my project very sadly is coming to an end soon, the end of this month. But we're ending with a histories of archaeology conference. And really there, we're part of the idea is to bring in some of the sort of heavy hitters in the history of archaeology, Nathan Schlanger, Margarita Diaz-Andreou, Oscar Mauro Aberdia, Tim Murray, other people, and to try and get a bit more of a theoretical reflection on on our work that we've done working on the project in the Pacific. Because I think that where we've been weakest really is in relating our work to the wider sort of histories of archaeology that being done in the world. I think partly just because we became kind of overwhelmed with the amount of new material that is available. So just like documenting that there have been all these excavations, which had happened in the Pacific from the 1870s onwards, was kind of tough enough without having to without kind of getting heavily involved in some of the theoretical debates. So we're hoping to sort of get a bit of a boost and get a pull our theoretical socks up with some of the contributions from that conference. Also, we're running a workshop for Pacific Island Museum and Archive people to really let them know what the project has done, what resources we have. And we have ongoing collaborations with several of these museums. And really it's to sort of look at new collaborations or things where we can help each help each other. The biggest headache has been organising many exhibits at something like 35 museums around the world, all meant to be opening today. At least the Hearst Museum one is open today. And on Friday I was in the Bishop Museum and we were installing the exhibit there. And then I'm going on from here to Harvard where they're opening on the fourth, I think. And the idea for each museum was just to do a single case, but to tell a story which contributes to the history of Pacific archaeology from their perspective.   Then they will actually come to the party, including the British Museum, whose I think their exhibit is opening today or tomorrow. Anyway, it was a complete nightmare dealing with all these museums. I exclude, of course, the Hearst Museum, which it was a joy to work with them. But some of the museums are really difficult. Other museums, you know, they're like, yeah, fine, fine, fine. And then that person leaves and the next person comes in and he goes, I don't know anything about it. I'm not interested. Or people are all keen and keen and keen. And then they just stop answering emails. And one of them stopped answering emails.  So I sent an email to the guy last week. And to my amazement, he got back to me, he said, no, absolutely, we're meant to be installed on the second of March. But the exhibitions, people say, can't do it till the 12th. But it's all happening. This is someone who's refused to answer a single email from me for the last six months. Yeah. So that's why I don't actually know how many museums are putting on exhibits. But I'm sort of going to be traveling around the world to find out. Okay.  So that should be exciting. Now, this is great. Bishop Museum. There's Gillian Swift and myself and the subject there of their exhibit is John F. G. Stokes and early Hawaiian archaeology. Stokes did the first recognizably scientific excavation in 1913 on the island of Kahua Lave. And so we've got a small exhibit about him and fish yolks and other artifacts that were found there. And as I said, these are various places where these exhibits are happening. And there may even be more countries where they're happening. But that was, it was great to be there and see it set up from like there being a, you know, a gap against the wall to people coming in. I mean, it was wonderful. So that was Friday. And then today I got this, one of our exhibitions is of Lapida Pottery from Waterm Island that was sent by Father Meyer, who's one of the first discoverers of Lapida Pottery, the earliest pottery in the Pacific. And he found it on Waterm Island off New Britain in Papua New Guinea. And so we arranged for an exhibit at the Melbourne Museum, or Museum Victoria, since also known. And I wanted to try and contact the Waterm Island community who are like, you know, this is a little island in the middle of nowhere. It's very hard to get hold of people. But just the other week I found the man who can do it. And his name is Kepis Pound. And he's a businessman. But he goes backwards and forwards from Port Moresby, where they actually do have good internet connections and stuff, to Watton. And I asked him to kind of, you know, I asked him to explain, yeah, we're going to have this little exhibition. It's 26 Shirts or something. And, you know, what are people on Watton think about it? Are they interested? And in fact they were. And then they, he, this is, this would be yesterday, or on Sunday, so other so the date line, so I guess two days ago. And he held a meeting after church in the church, and right where this church is, is on top of the Lepidocyte of Watton at Rakival. And so they got the statement saying they look forward to a future collaboration with the Melbourne Museum, Papua New Guinea Museum, another host of evidence of Lepidiculture and revealing more knowledge about it. And a whole bunch of photos of people taken on Sunday in Watton, at the place where Lepidopotry was found in 1909. So that was a rather nice thing. And then this very morning, this picture was taken at 10 o'clock this morning. This is the exhibit in that sort of first room where you enter the Hearst Museum. And this is about a collection of, I'll talk about it a bit more in a minute, a collection of Lepidopotry that you have here. That was sent, it wasn't found by Delilah Gifford during his 1947 expedition to Fiji, but it was sent to him by two people, Lindsay Verrier, a local doctor, and Ratu Ramvithi Longavatu, who is really the subject of the talk today. Now, Edwin Delilah Gifford. Edwin Gifford course the director or curator, what he was called of the what is now the Hearst Museum and his wife Delilah, who was a conchologist, a shell person of some renown. And yeah, he did this expedition to Fiji in 1947 and these collections and field notes and everything are here in the museum. I would acknowledge and I think I've spelt her surname right, I think it's S-O-N, Maureen Fredrickson, who's the granddaughter of Edward and Delilah. And she gave me this lovely photo of them about to set off, they're about to get on the boat to sail to Fiji in 1947. Now Gifford published his monograph, Archaeological Excavations in Fiji and I won't read it out, but as Pat coach said, this was a kind of pioneering piece of work, it was the first major piece of field work in the Pacific after World War II. And he did look at two very interesting sites, Nabatu and Vunda, excavated them. And then as I said, by the time his monograph came out in 1951, he had received this small collection of Lepidopotry there. But the point that I made in the article that I wrote about covert control was that really, and I don't think Gifford was aware of this, but I also don't think he would have minded at all. His whole expedition was really being directed towards certain ends by Ratu Zalala Sukuna, who was the major Fijian political figure of the time. And it related to these two sites, Nabatu and Vunda, which are both very important within oral traditions and the origins of the Fijians, and they're spread across the main island of Viti-Lebu. And Sukuna clearly thought that perhaps Gifford could tell him something about, sort out the land disputes or something. Well, of course, as we all know, archaeology can't actually do that. And Sukuna, I think, quite quickly lost interest. And when his annual report of the Fijian administration came out for 1947, it doesn't mention Gifford's work at all. Although his administration provided tremendous help to Gifford. But so he mentions Zalala Sukuna, his deputy in the Fijian administration, George Kingsley Roth, who was a notable anthropologist of Fiji, and son of Ling Roth, H. Ling Roth. But also here Ratu Rambethivu Kandavu Longovatu, an educated young Fijian of chiefly rank. And he was ostensibly put in as the assistant of Edward Gifford, but was also very much the eyes and ears of the Fijian administration to sort of keep an eye on him, make sure he didn't kind of screw up. And also that he that he didn't do things he shouldn't be doing. And also he was a chiefly rank. And so he, you know, Gifford kind of sees him as just, oh, you know, they've got this young Fijian, he's going to kind of help me out. But he was clearly much more than that, given his chiefly status. Now, Ratu Soala Sukuna was a truly amazing character in Pacific history. He was the first Fijian to go to university, went to Wadham College, Oxford just before World War One. It's very interesting that no other Fijian went to university until after World War Two. And that was only because of the sponsorship of certain European residents of Fiji who paid for scholarships. So Ratu Soala Sukuna, he was very happy that he was the only educated Fijian. He also was not allowed to join the British Army because he was black in World War One. So he hopped over to France, joined the French Army, or probably the foreign legion, I guess it was, would have been the foreign legion. And he won the Medaille Militaire, which is equivalent for whatever it was that he did to the Victoria Cross, the highest military honor you can get in Britain. So he was a truly amazing character. He clearly really, he was like the king of Fiji. I mean, you had governors, but they all took notice of what he said. In 1944, he set up this amazing governmental system in Fiji, where basically the colonial officers who'd been kind of running the place were told to butt out. And native Fijians were ruled by the Fijian administration of which he was the head. And it had its own staff. So it was a government within a government. And this system carried on until, essentially until independence of Fijian in, I think, 1970.  A quote from Derek Skar's book about him, he was just below God and the King, with only the governor intervening. As one who dealt authoritatively with land, he was practically a God himself. So Ratu Sukuna is a Sukuna park in the middle of Suva and all this sort of stuff. Incredible character. I won't read this out, but yeah, he was, he had very high chiefly, chiefly rank. As I said, he'd won this meddling World War One and really a unique figure in, in, in Fiji and very supportive of Gifford's expedition for the reasons that I said. Also, Gifford published another book, University of California again, Tribes of VT11 and their origin places that was essentially a gazetteer of information collected by members of the Fijian administration. And it's interesting that Sukuna wanted to have this information published by a university professor, even though all of the information in there was given by his own staff. But I think he thought that an academic imprimature would give more power to the statements that were in it, which relate to tribes in relation to land. So again, this is more covert control by the Fijian administration of Gifford's, Gifford's work. His deputy was George Kingsley Roth. And the complaint, and I think it's about Roth of later sort of commissions of inquiry into the colony of Fiji and the processes of decolonization sort of said, you know, the white men working for the administration are more Fijian than the Fijians. You know, they were sort of complaining they were more on the side of the Fijians. And certainly Kingsley Roth was very much like that. He was rather a long suffering deputy to Lala Sukuna, I think. I love this bit with his razor keen sense of efficiency and preoccupation to the nth degree with detail. He was a fine foil to Sukuna's statesmanship, which was an imposing formidable mixture of the global and the tribal. So, yeah, you know, you had a hard time working for Ratu Salala Sukuna. A wonderful thing just before Gifford's going out there and this is all material from the Bancroft Library. He had some, you know, he got advice from a lot of people, one of whom was Otto Degener, who was a botanist and with this wonderful quotation about how he saw the colonial administration working in Fiji. He was there, I think, maybe before the war. I'm not quite sure. I like this, you know, being an American, I can't help being democratic. How times have changed. OK, now, Ratu Rambithilongavati. As I said, he's put on to assist Gifford and also really he's he's he's there as the eyes and ears of the Fijian administration. And he has a lot of roles. He's he in the end he's doing his own excavations in another part of the site than Gifford is doing. So he's directing excavations. He's he takes many of the photographs of the expedition and becomes a very keen photographer. And he he's already trained as part of his training as a surveyor. So he does a lot of the maps. So this is someone who, you know, one would really like to know more about because he's quite, obviously, a key figure in the whole operation. But of course, his name isn't appearing on apart from in the acknowledgments. Also, this is an interesting event. The actual label, I think, in the in the monograph says presenting Yangona, that's carver to the dead before removing bones from burial number one. In fact, they're putting the bones back, not removing them because they had excavated a burial the day before. And then the local pastor, who was also a chief, was possessed by spirits. I'm kind of having fits and things like that. So they realized that this could well be to do with the fact they disturbed these bones. So they quickly got them all together and buried them back, had a ceremony with the carver, the Yangona. And then he he got instantly better again. So the caption was not quite what happened. Here's some examples, some 3D drawings that Ratu Rambithi did for for Gifford of some sites Gifford couldn't go to. He was 60 and not in great health. And and so some of the places he couldn't really get to, but Ratu Rambithi could. This is another particular site that that Rambithi was able to get details of from one of the chiefs of Raki Raki, with whom he was staying. That's in Gifford's field notes from Witter and the Hearst Museum. There was originally going to be an appendix by Ratu Rambithi, Longavatu, which would have been a very interesting document. And and this was to do with his trips to various places. He he climbed Novatu Peak and did drawings of the areas of it, which had had the village on top before. But this was cut out of the monograph. And I haven't been able to figure out why. I presume it was because of, you know, the thing was getting too long or it cost too much to print. But I'm trying to while I'm here, I'm trying to track down who made the editorial decision to cut out the appendix, which would have been I think there's only three appendices now, but there originally a plan to be eight. So it wasn't just his that was cut out, which is why I think it's an editorial decision to do with the length of the monograph. But he would have got a lot more recognition had he had an appendix there under his own name, and that's a draft of it. Instead, we we get some of the some of Rambithi's statements from his appendix that included in the general text of the monograph. That's the nearest we get. Now, as I said, after Gifford left, went back, came back to Berkeley. He was then later on, he was sent a bag of pottery, accession 948, received on the 25th of October, 1948. In the museum and among it was some what we now know to be Lapida pottery, the earliest pottery in the Pacific and beyond the area marked on the map as near Oceania, the pottery used by the earliest settlers who came out as far as Western Polynesia and whose descendants then came on to settle places such as Tahiti, Hawaii, Rapa Nui and Aotearoa, New Zealand. So this is the distribution of it as we know it today, Lapida pottery. But of course, when Gifford receives this little bag of pottery, he can see that the Lapida, what we now know to be Lapida pottery is different. But he doesn't know, he's got no idea where it fits in the Fijian sequence because he hadn't found anything like it in excavation. He actually, first of all, he thought it was quite late. But in fact, it turned out to be earlier than any of the material that he had found. Okay, and where this bag of sherds came from was the Singatoka sand dunes, which are down here on the southwest coast. Very impressive sand dunes, one of the biggest dune fields, I believe, I think it is the biggest dune field on any Pacific island and sand continually shifting and revealing pottery, skeletons, other remains, many of which are from a time before the sand dunes were there. So originally the coast did not have sand dunes, the sand dunes are actually a result of human-induced erosion of the uplands of the Singatoka Valley. And then the material was brought by currents and blown up to form these dunes within the last 1500 years or so. And the pottery was sent to Gifford by Lindsay Verrier, who was a local doctor. At this time, Ratu Rambithi, he'd gone back to work and he'd been sent as a provincial scribe to the provincial headquarters in this area. And so he was there, as was Lindsay Verrier. And so they went wandering on the sand dunes and they found this pottery that both of them, I think, noticed was quite different than anything, certainly that Rambithi had seen having accompanied Gifford on all of his work. And in another place, I'm trying to work out exactly where they found this pottery. There's a strange thing. In the 60s, there's actually been work at the Singatoka dunes almost continuously ever since because the sands are always shifting, new remains come up.  And they actually found a piece of pottery that is identical to one of these sherds here, just one. And I, but from the account that Rambithi gives, I don't think it can come from the same place. And I really wonder if Verrier had two pieces of this pot. And in 1963, he thought he'd be a bit mischievous and he dropped it where the Berkses were digging because I really cannot see that this is the same site, but there's no doubt it's from the same pot. So there's a mystery there that whether we'll ever sort it out. Now, these are the Lapida sherds and the piece of pottery that the Berkses found is exactly like this. But this is here, I've seen it, it's in the museum. That is on display. And these are both dentate stamped Lapida sherds. And the important thing about them, I mean just a couple of sherds, three or four or something, is that they, from discoveries that were made after Gifford had done his work, discoveries in New Caledonia, Gifford realized that this looked very much like pottery that was found, published in 1948 on the, from the Ildepan, which is an island just off the New Caledonian mainland, related to that. He also remembered that in 1921, he had been working in Tonga as an anthropologist collecting oral traditions with McCurn, McCurn of the Midwest taxonomic system. Isn't it cool, is that McCurn? I think it is. Anyway, it's the same guy, WC McCurn. And McCurn had found pottery in Tonga, the first pottery ever found in Polynesia. And of course it was Lapida. And so Gifford in 51, when he publishes, he says, I don't know what this stuff is, but it looks like the stuff in Tonga and it looks like the stuff they've just found in New Caledonia. Well, of course, nobody was using any radiocarbon dating at the time, so it couldn't relate any of these. And of course the sherds that he found were just from a surface blowout, so there was no dating associated with them. But then by 53, he's gone to New Caledonia on his next expedition and he has excavated at the site of Lapida, which gave the name later to Lapida Pottery. And he could see that the stuff he found at the site of Lapida, which he mainly called Site 13, was again the same style. And by then, he had also realized, because he'd been told by Father O'Reilly, who was, despite his name, was a Frenchman, obviously descended from Irish settlers, as Jacques Avias had already seen the connection between the Ildepashers and those from Waterm Island, where our friends just sent the nice statement from that you saw earlier on. So this is when really the idea that there's this very widespread, what Jack Goulson later in 961 called, a community of culture, bridging the divide between Melanesia and Polynesia. And that was Lapida Pottery. So the distribution of the Lapida culture really became known through this work. Ratu Rambithi, I won't read out his whole history, but I found his employment file in the Fijian archives. And he later became in charge of an entire province, until sadly about 1967, he had a very terrible car smash and had to then retire. But he in fact lived until I think 2005. And because we wanted to have an exhibition in the Fiji Museum, the exhibition that's opening today, I don't know, it's actually opening today in the Fiji Museum, I'm not there, but the exhibition there was gonna be about or is about Ratu Rambithi, who also features here, because he and Varia are the ones who found the Lapida Pottery. So this picture of him is also in the exhibit here. Ratu Rambithi and a guy called Aubrey Park, who was a British colonial officer who went to Fiji in 1951. But was a trained archeologist. So the exhibition in Fiji is about Rambithi and Park, both at times employed by the Fijian administration, which means the Fijian native administration, as opposed to the colonial administration. And I thought I'd better get in touch, see if I can find any of the family, because it would be a bit unfortunate if they didn't know about it and they wandered into the museum. Yeah, well, they got these pictures of my grandfather or something. So I started making inquiries to try and find out what happened to Rambithi. We knew that he had his first daughter, he called Delilah, after Delilah Gifford, and his second son, he called Gifford. So I thought, are these people still alive or what? Anyway, with great help from the Apeta Alaphio, the archivist at the Fiji archives, I eventually tracked them down on my last trip there last October. And just, so there's a picture of Rambithi. Now on the left, child there is Rambithi Gifford. And then the girl in the middle is Delilah. And then Emery Longavati was the eldest son named after, not Kenneth Emery, sorry to say, but after Rambithi's father. And here's an amazing photo that the family later gave me which shows Rambithi and his wife Vasimatha at the ball for Queen Elizabeth II when she visited Fiji in 1954. So again, you go, this guy's a fairly low level Fijian administration's provincial scribe.  He had a whole other thing going for him. Anyway, I'm very happy to report that I did track them down. And this is the second daughter, Bulusalata. This is Lavigne, who's the wife of Ratu Rambithi Gifford Longavati. And when it was Bulusalata who took me to, I don't think the family get together very often because first of all, she got the wrong house. We would kind of like went up the wrong driveway. Anyway, very steep driveway and she goes up there. I thought I'd wait outside the gates, you know, you can't just walk into somebody's house in Fiji. And then I saw this guy coming down the steep driveway and I said to him, are you Gifford? And the guy kind of freaks out and he goes like, no one knows I'm called Gifford. And then I said to him, do you know why you're called Gifford? He goes, not really. I said, yeah, my father said that Delilah, my sister and I were named after some American friends of theirs and I said, do I have a story to tell you guys? And so, yeah, then that night we went to another son, Seneko Nakuru, Ratu Ambiti Maritwai. So he had the first family, had five children, I think had four with his second wife. And the first person I actually met was Seneko, who's in the Army. And he put me on to Bulu Salata, we phoned her up, I spoke to her and then she took us to meet Gifford. And none of them had any idea that their father had ever been involved in archeology. And first of all, they were like Seneko when I met him at the archives, he came to the archives to meet me. He was like, are you sure you're talking about my father? And they had no idea. And then I'm talking about, and I said, you guys ever heard of Lapida Pottery? And they go, yeah, of course, we're not idiots, of course we heard of Lapida Pottery. I said, well, your father found the first Lapida in Fiji.  So it's been a kind of, a bit of a sort of life-changing experience for this family to find out. Now, one thing that Gifford did after he left, Fijian came back here, was he sent a camera to Ratu Ambiti because he could see the guy was really interested in photography. Two of Ambiti's sons are professional photographers. So that all started with Gifford. So it was just a very nice thing. Just to wind up, the sort of take-homes. Clearly, Ratu Sakuna kind of had a lot of control over, well, control over everything that Gifford did when he was in Fiji, unbeknownst to Gifford, but I know that Gifford wouldn't have been worried about it or felt bad about it. Rambithi was clearly more than just an interpreter and an aide. And also, he and Lindsay Berrio then found the first Lapida pottery, sent it to Gifford and that's what the display is about in the Hearst Museum. But Rambithi and Gifford established a lifelong exchange relationship and friendship. And the letters are in the Bancroft Library. And they continued corresponding. Gifford's granddaughter, who would be a woman, probably if she's still alive now, because I saw her in 2015, she'd be probably in her 80s. And she had met Delilah because Delilah and some of the other children migrated to the States. They were Mormons and they were first in Hawaii and then they've kind of spread out. So she had had, she had met Delilah in Hawaii. She'd gone on a cruise to Fiji and tried to reconnect with the Gifford family to Ratu Rambithi. And just the last day that we're there, that she kind of may manage to get hold of him, but it was too late and they were, the cruise ship was leaving the next day or something. So I kind of feel that I've re-established the link between the archaeologists and Berkeley and the Ratu Rambithi's family. And also I think what it shows is when there is good documentation, it is possible to recoup the contributions and agency of indigenous interlocutors and collaborators. It's often hard, but in this case it was possible to do. And there's much more that I hope to do when I see them all again in April when I go back to Fiji. Thank you very much.


So, before we continue, I just wanted to clearly state my stance on JADGPT, the uses for it, and why I chose to cover it here on the channel, because let's just objectively look at the facts. 2023 has just started, and we already have hundreds of different AI image generators, AI text generators, AI animation, and text to 3D is right around the corner. From this point on, AI is going to become integrated into every single software you can imagine, and there is no turning back. And yes, of course, every time something awesome gets invented, there will be people who use it to be lazy, to procrastinate, or to use it inappropriately. But that is not who I make these tutorials for. The information I share here is for hardworking people who want to go from writing one book a year to maybe five books a year, who want to go from making one 3D character every six months to one character every six days. I do all of this so that instead of taking six years to make your own video game, like it took me, you could do it in one. Everything I cover here is in the spirit of finding tools that generate the best quality in the shortest amount of time, with the least amount of effort for the most affordable price. And AI just happens to be excellent at nailing all four of those points. And the crazy thing is, the vast majority of these things are free. Chat GPT is free. Stable diffusion is free. Roku Co Video AI animation is free, which probably means text to 3D and text to animation is probably going to be free too. So, of course, when I find software that does exactly what I need, better than anything humanly possible for no money at all, then you can bet that I will share what I find with you guys here. And yes, chat can be wrong sometimes. That is why I recommend you always double and triple check whatever it tells you and try to use it mainly as a way to compliment your study habits, not replace them. But even with all of its flaws, you have to remember, chat was released in November. It's two months old. It's literally a baby. You guys saw how fast AI are evolved in four months. You really think we're not going to make the same level of stride with AI text? I guarantee you that most of its problems will be solved by next year. And for those of you wondering, what does chat have to do with 3D animation and game design? The answer is quite simple. Chat isn't just a text generation software for noobs and lazy people. If you're a professional 3D artist, you can use chat to save time learning new software or in game design to help you plan simple scripts and code for programming. If you forgot how to mirror joints in your rig on Blender instead of going online and surfing the web and wasting time, you can just ask chat and more often than not the advice it gives will be pretty close to what you need. If you're stuck trying to solve homework problems at two in the morning and there's no teacher and no tutor or anyone that can help explain what doesn't make sense to you, that is where I recommend trying the chat AI solution. But it is not a substitute for actually knowing what you were talking about. And let me be clear, I 100% believe that AI does not change people. It amplifies them. If you are lazy, you will use AI to be lazy. If you are productive, you will use AI to be even more productive. If you are good at learning and solving problems, AI will make you even better at solving problems. But if you do not practice, study and learn to think on your own first, it is not going to make you any smarter. The reason I cover these things is because I consider the people who watch my videos as part of my community. And I want to make sure that the people in my community are equipped with all the information they need in order to be successful. If you are a writer or an artist or an animator, I want to make sure that you don't get blindsided by your potential competition or your peers who are using AI to generate more work faster than anything you could manually do by hand. This kind of information and software could be what gives you an edge when it comes to productivity. And even worse, if you're in a managerial or a director position and you are not adapting your projects to include the new software that is coming out this year, your competition is going to run circles around you.  I want you to be up to date, up to speed and extremely sharp when it comes to modern tech and your profession. So I hope that clears things up. I'm really excited about this year. Thank you so much for watching. And as always, hope you have a fantastic day and I'll see you around.