Although the United States is one of the wealthiest nations in the world, we have some of the highest levels of wealth inequality. We're sold the idea that no matter what class of wealth you're born into, you can work hard and succeed. But numerous studies have shown that this is far from the case in our country. While you'd think the biggest indicator of future wealth was based on work ethic, it's actually based on how much money you're born into. Knowing all this, when the Varsity Blues admission scandal broke, I was far from surprised. For those of you unfamiliar with the story, a man by the name of Rick Singer was paid hefty amounts of money to forge academic credentials of rich kids to get them into good schools. One of those children was YouTuber Olivia Jade, who is the daughter of full house star Lori Loughlin and fashion tycoon Masimo Giannulli. Actually, I was pretty surprised. I wasn't surprised that this happened, but I was surprised that this was news. If you're part of the 99% like myself, you've known for a long time that wealthy children are much more likely to get into good schools. So, why was this college admission scandal so publicized? Recently, I discussed how I don't know how I'm supposed to lie to my son about the college admission process. But today, I saw something that really frustrated me. As part of her redemption tour, Olivia Jade went on red table talk to speak to Jada Pinkett Smith, Adrienne Banfield, and Willow Smith. Today, we're going to discuss how this was one of the most tone deaf ways for Olivia Jade to come back and show remorse. Will Smith is worth about $350 million, and Jada is worth an estimated $50 million. Who on earth thought it was a good idea for one of the richest families in America to shame a privileged girl who bought her way into college? As the common folk, we're completely blinded to the fact that things like this happen right in front of our eyes, and it's beyond disrespectful. Not only are there tens of thousands of kids around the country incapable of paying for college, but millions of families don't know how they're going to pay for rent or put food on the table. To fully understand why this interview is such a problem, we need to get a little philosophical and really deconstruct the primary question. Why was what Olivia Jade's family did so wrong? Not only do we need to break this question down, but I need you to keep this in mind as we continue this discussion. The primary reason this is so wrong is because this is a prime example of privilege from the wealthy. Rather than getting into a good school on the basis of merit, the family was able to pay to get Olivia Jade into a good school. Then there's the fact that they lied about her athletic abilities to pad her college application. This is wrong because someone with lesser athletic ability should not get a reserved spot in a college meant for athletes who have worked hard.  For the most thorough understanding of how the wealthy and privileged weasel their way into college, I highly, highly recommend you read the book The Price of Admission by Daniel Golden. In his book, he discusses how kids get into prestigious colleges based on big money donations from their parents, their parents being alumni, and their parents being famous. Harvard, Yale, Duke, Notre Dame, and just about any other prestigious college you can think of can easily be bought. Despite his mediocre SAT scores, Jared Kushner was accepted into Harvard after his parents donated millions of dollars. While that's one of the more high-profile cases, throughout Golden's book, there are dozens of examples like this. Golden discusses how many colleges expect donations between five or six figures just to get in. Nobody in their right mind would disagree that what Olivia Jade's family did was wrong, but we need to acknowledge that families donating ungodly amounts of money to colleges is completely legal. While Willow Smith and Jaden Smith didn't go to college, it's extremely tone-deaf for this family to lecture Olivia Jade. Had Willow or Jaden wanted to attend a good college, they could take their pick. Even if the Smiths didn't donate hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars to the colleges, being the children of Will and Jada is an extreme advantage. To put this into perspective, ask yourself if you think anyone would know of Willow or Jaden Smith if it weren't for their parents. Would Jaden Smith have been in multiple movies and have a music career if it wasn't for who his parents are and what connections they have? Would Willow Smith's song about whipping her hair back and forth been a hit single or would it have fallen into obscurity? Again, we're asking ourselves why it was morally wrong for Olivia Jade's family to buy her into college, but how much different is this than the privilege the Smith kids have? College is an experience for you to receive an education which transforms into the career you want to pursue, but Olivia Jade's family use their money to pay for this. Meanwhile, the Smith kids have had the privilege of being linked up with top people in the music and film industry to further their careers. Now, there are those of you who are experiencing cognitive dissonance and want to believe the Smith family was the right family to shame Olivia Jade, despite the fact that the Smiths could give you 0.001% of their net worth and change your life forever. But even though they're far more well off than anyone watching this video, people might be saying, but they lied about Olivia Jade's athletic capabilities. Well, this isn't new either. In the price of admission, there is an entire chapter about how unathletic rich kids are given spots on the team due to donations from their family. And this doesn't even account for the fact that many of the sports scholarships would never apply to underprivileged teens. I want you to imagine a young girl growing up in poverty and then ask yourself if she'd ever have the chance of getting a scholarship for something like fencing. What about a black kid growing up in the hood? Do you think his school has a crew team for him to practice rowing? Of course not. So again, if we go back to why what Olivia Jade's family and all those other families did was wrong, we need to realize that it's happening all the time in completely legal ways. The entire college system is set up to help the wealthy and the privileged. And the last people who should be shaming Olivia Jade is a family of millionaires. If Olivia Jade really wanted to show remorse, she could have done this in a much better way by talking with smaller YouTubers and going on lesser known shows. This story was so huge that it was going to get attention no matter what. So the least she could do is talk to people that may have been affected by her actions. As someone who built a platform on YouTube, she could have collaborated with black and underprivileged creators to maybe give them a shot at getting noticed. Instead, Olivia Jade is going to do her rounds on platforms with fellow millionaires and frankly it's insulting. We need to stop normalizing millionaires talking about the problems the rest of us are facing like they can relate. We hold these people up on a pedestal for speaking out for us when they're doing little to nothing to help change the system. If the Smith family really cares about this issue, they should go campaign for college debt relief and making college free or at least affordable for everyone. They should educate themselves about the rigged college system and try to figure out ways to give underprivileged hard-working kids a fair shot. Thank you for tuning in to this quick little video essay but yeah, I was actually watching Philip DeFranco today when I saw the story and I'm sitting there and I'm just losing it like to me there is nothing worse. There is nothing worse than rich people who are taking advantage of the system talking about problems that the rest of us are facing but I think what really bothers me too is realizing how many of us don't even recognize it's happening right? This multi-millionaire family, this like the Smith kids never have to worry about anything. Their children will never have to worry about anything. Their great-grandchildren are probably gonna be fine if this system stays the way it is. So they are the last people who should be lecturing Olivia and Jade because they have all these same advantages. You know what I mean? But anyways, it's extremely frustrating. We need to start thinking about this stuff and you know, for all of you who are teenagers and trying to get to college and things like that, like I highly recommend you read that book, The Price of Admission. There's a whole list of books. There's a list of books that I've been putting together where I want my son to read them and I don't want him to read them like, oh, you know, hard work isn't gonna get me anywhere. No, that's not the case. Here's why I think it's so important for us to realize this is like I cannot imagine. I can't imagine because my son is a great student. He's only 11, all right? But he's a good student.   Like that would break my heart and it would break my heart for you all too if that happened to you or your kids or your family members or your friends or whoever it is. We need to understand that the system is messed up. So once we realize that, we can start to work on some solutions. Anyways, anyways, that's all I got for this video. Let me know your thoughts on this subject down below. Or if you have any experience with not being able to afford college or not being able to get in despite, you know, good grades or, you know, being amazing at sports or whatever it is, let me know down in the comments, alright? Anyways, that's all I got for this video. If you liked this video, please give it a thumbs up. If you're new, make sure you subscribe and ring that notification bell. And a huge thank you to everybody who supports the channel over on Patreon or by giving the books that I recommend. They're always in the description down below. And those are affiliate links, so they'll come back to support the channel and all that. I appreciate you all. Thanks again for watching. I'll see you next time.


Welcome to the ITU studio in Geneva where I'm very pleased to be joined in the studio today by Isfand Sebastien who is former secretary-general of ECMA International, a key member of the original engineering team responsible for the development of the first edition of JPEG and also has close ties to ITU being a former CC ITT special rapporteur. Isfand, welcome to the studio. Thank you very much. Now I'd like to start off by talking about something very special that has happened. The engineering team has been awarded an Emmy for their outstanding contribution to image coding. So looking here very much at JPEG. I wanted to ask you, how did it all start? First of all, congratulations. So first of all, thank you very much, not for me, but for the entire team. It was a large team and also several organizations who have cooperated with each other. Now I'd like to start off by asking you how did it all start and what's the story behind the development of JPEG 1 or also known as ITU-TT.81? Well, the story actually, it is a long story, so I try to be very brief. So it was in the beginning of 1986 when I saw TC97, SC2, etc. And also CCITT study group 8 have recognized that in the area of image coding, there is an absolutely common application and common interest to get together. Now from the CCITT study group 8 point of view, there were five or six different application areas or questions which had incorporated in some form or the other also images. On the ISO side, there were less, but basically it was video text, photographic mode, those types of things on the ISO side. So we had really a common goal to come together and actually also many of the members of the group, at least 60 or 70 percent of both sides that came from telecommunications, from the telecommunications side. So either manufacturers or operators. So we had a lot of common things and then we have decided, okay, so why don't we then join our forces and then develop together standard for continuous stone color images. So that was the starting point. Now for the common work between ITU and ISO, it already existed at the time several project in parallel, which I do not want to name. But one of them of this common project was this JPEG project. The problem was that at that point in time, there were no common rules for the joint working. And also there was no common template for the standard. So we were actually the first or before the first for the common rules who have designed our own rules and policies. And for the text, there was already the joint template format. So we have applied that. So this all started in 86. It was absolutely from both organization and informal group because the rules have not existed. And so I as a special report and also my partner from ISO, we were responsible to bring in the requirements from the ITU and the ISO site. Then this independent group, they worked, they came out in the end with a specification. And then we have taken the specification back to the ITU and also to your respective view to ISO. And then the formal approval process started and then it became standard in 1992. We were faster, long story. And then ISO came out one and a half year later because they had this traditional approval procedure. So this is in brief history of how it started to happen. It's difficult to think of a standard as well known as JPEG. The words JPEG and photograph have become perfect substitutes. In your view, what has been the secret to JPEG success? First of all, we didn't expect to be to be honest. So we thought, you know, that maybe this standard would be the first generation of that source. Maybe it would last for for six, seven years and then the next generation would come, which is true. It came, but the next generation was not as successful as this one. So there were a couple of components that, honestly speaking, we did not see. So the first component, which made it extremely successful, was incidentally, you know, the CCIT requirements side from this all different application that we came to a design, which was a toolbox type of design. So this toolbox element actually was so flexible that you could also apply it for medical images, for all different type of images, even motion JPEG images, et cetera. So it was extremely flexible, the design. This was one of the reasons. The second reason was that it was immediately, as the specification became available, picked up by an open source group by the so-called independent JPEG group. They have picked up the ISO version from ISO because it went into two different places. As I mentioned to you, and they have created within a year so much earlier than when we came out with our standard and ISO came out with the standard. Already a code, which they immediately put it on the internet. Everybody could download it. Everybody could implement it. Maybe not the best application, you know, but for a starter it was good. So that was the first skill application, the successful links with the open source community. The next one, which we also didn't see, is that the World Wide Web needed, from the very, very beginning, early 92 already, they needed a still picture coding standard. So they knew that this existed, so they have immediately taken it over. So the second was this. The third one was, which we absolutely didn't expect, that it would kill one of the components for killing the analog photography. And then, at the year 2000, then it turned out that it killed. So then everybody started to take pictures using JPEG. As I said, we didn't expect it. The next one, killer application, we also didn't expect, and that was with the smartphone. So with the Apple iPhone, et cetera. So there's suddenly, you know, this type of applications, and that's also social network, et cetera, et cetera. JPEG and the JPEG pictures were absolutely key. And so today, we have in that area, five billion mobile phones that are taking just the mobile phone, taking pictures and many more pictures than the analog cameras would. So really with that, you know, JPEG is absolutely dominated. JPEG one is absolutely dominating the still picture making or market. You say JPEG one. Yeah, that was the first in the series. So there's a whole family of JPEG, is that right? Yes, and they are still working on JPEG. Obviously, it is now very, very difficult to make that success again, because as I said, so this is a killer standard in that sense. But on certain segments, professional segments and new area and security feature, light field, et cetera, et cetera. So they are still working and actually together also with the ITU. So the ITU is still involved in it and but everything now is called JPEG. Like you said, JPEG is the most successful image coding standard on the market. What do you see for the future of JPEG one? This one will never disappear in my opinion, because every year, one trillion pictures are being created and this already for 20 years. So if you go back to the history of taking photography all the 150 years, then practically already the JPEG one standard for normal photography, et cetera, it is already dominating the area. So there are so many pictures that you cannot get rid of it anymore. You cannot convert it to a new format, whatever. And people are very much interested, of course, to see the ancestors and then how was it when I was young, et cetera, et cetera. So for this reason, in my opinion, I say that this is one of the so-called human heritage standards and the human heritage standard, especially it is connected to some content. It will, in my opinion, not go away. So you will have it in 100 years, 200 years. It's a different type of standard like, I don't know, 3G, 4G, 5G. So that one is being replaced, but this one not. JPEG one will live on and on. And I can say, obviously, wholeheartedly, that the ME is a great accolade. And I'm sure very well deserved. Thank you very much, indeed, for joining us in the studio and sharing these these lovely insights with us. And hopefully, as I say, we will catch up with you at some stage in the future. And you'll be able to tell me about some other success story, too. Yeah, so thank you very much. Thank you.


You know, I don't like talking about stuff like this because I was a member of the media the print media at one point in my life I never worked for a big, you know website Kataku or IGN or GameSpot But you know running Zelda and former in game easier and you know metroid wiki.org It kind of was one of those things where I learned a newfound respect For trying to be a gamer trying to be a fan and trying to be a professional all at the same time But this story man This story It bothers me for a number of reasons. Let's just get into what happened. So Chris Grant He is the editor in chief of Polygon now I'm gonna tell you right now. I'm not a big fan of polygon in general When it first launched, you know years back I actually thought it was kind of a cool idea because it seemed like a place that was a refugee For certain games journalists that were fired or left other companies due to their BS Whether it be Kataku back when Kataku was doing a lot of bad stuff And I say back when because Kataku today is a lot different than the Kataku back then in terms of their video game coverage They still have some other coverage out there that you might not be into but their video game coverage is pretty excellent at Kataku in 2017 Pig credit out to Stefan Tatillo for really turning that side around after he became editor-in-chief, but that's neither here nor there Polygon interested me at first As the years wore on It became clear to me why some of these people maybe don't have jobs other were at other places in the industry Whether they chose the left or not A lot of sensationalist stuff a lot of just outright untrue, you know news reporting And I guess I shouldn't be surprised that this happened when Chris Grant and I realized I'm burning any possible bridge. I have it with working with Chris Grant or anyone else at Polygon, but He put something up on Twitter Bashing Breath of the Wild and bashing Nintendo That's just idiotic. Well, let me just get into his tweets and I'm gonna put them up here for you guys to see He said so he had friends over for a dinner party and he showed the switch off to a good pal And he accidentally overwrote my 100 plus hour Zelda file and it took three seconds for that to happen and He goes on to say not exaggerating when I say this Zelda just dropped from a top three for me this year To not ranking at all Nintendo is straight up delinquent The switch is an amazing console marred by a dinosaur of a company Refusing to honor its own customers. I can promise you with 1,000 percent confidence I will never play that game again. What a Effing disaster my favorite part of sharing this is all of the dipshits who stuttered to exclaim user error I didn't do that. Okay, so that's that's how this all got started, right? But the story didn't end there Later on he updated the situation update after working up the courage to look at my switch again it restarted and was in the Zelda menu and Master mode he started a new game in Master mode my empty save slots were empty master mode save slots when I switch back to normal there.   This isn't just some some writer some editor this is like the top brass at Polygon talking about this and This isn't the same things are all rosy at Nintendo, right? There should be cloud saves cloud says would fix all of it Oh, you accidentally delete your save you can redownload it off the cloud, right? It's a thing that pretty much every other major platform has and Nintendo doesn't and it is something they need to address Breath of the Wild is also a very unique game in the Zelda sphere in that usually you have three different save files But because of Breath of the Wild's auto saving features and the way that it's set up It's one save file per user per version. So if you're playing normal mode, that's a safe.  Is Polygon actually wrote an article? Shortly after or it might even been before Switches launch saying that hey just to let you just as a heads up If you want to let your friends try out Breath of the Wild and you just set up a new profile for them So they have their own save file. So like Polygon wrote up a piece Specifically saying if you're going to let people try out this game create a new profile Chris Grant Had to have known this he had to have approved it He was editor-in-chief of the site back then so he knew that that article went out So he should have known off the top of his head that you should be making a new user profile for your friend That even try out the game now obviously it all ends up being a viewpoint because his friend never deleted his save file in the first place You started a new game in master mode Chris Grant is saying that his save file was in normal mode. So it's He made this big hollow boo out of absolutely nothing. Here's what frustrates me Regardless of what you think about Nintendo if you think that apparently he thinks they're a dinosaur of a company There's no way in heck. He got to this conclusion off of one thing He's based in on a history of things that Nintendo has done That's a little bit behind the times and I understand that but to call them straight up delinquent is his just wow and On top of that, I mean not only is he just straight up burning any possible bridge He has with Nintendo over what user error is and he says my favorite part in sharing this is all the dipshits Who stutter and the same user error? I didn't do that when it was completely user error It was user error both on his friend's part and user error specifically on his part because this fake file never got deleted And what really makes me this is how you know that there's still issues in the video game media and things I don't have an issue with video game media in general I think most of them do as good a job as they possibly can The fact that he's saying that he dropped Zelda from his top three because of what was a mistake and a user error is just hilarious The quality of Zelda the quality of Breath of the Wild how great that game is shouldn't be based on whether or not your friend Potentially in this case. He didn't do it delete your save file if your save file got deleted That doesn't affect how great the game is Unless the game itself deleted it like if it was a bug I used to have a bug playing the majority's Mask Gold cartridge version. I had I got it at launch I had one of the early obviously one of the original gold cartridge versions and When you played it if you would save at the owl statue inside the stone tower temple And you would you know keep playing or either quit and you didn't save it another place after that So if that was your last save point, which I know it's always a good save point for me I always like saving right before bosses then maybe coming back to the bosses later And you save there I would come back in and my whole save file would be deleted after I restart the game It was a big issue. I have a majority's Mask and it's why even to this day it stands as the only Zelda game I have not beaten Because I got so frustrated because I accidentally did it to myself three times as a kid And I just like oh man even majority mass 3d when that came out I played a ton of it, but I never really beat the game because I knew how the game ended at that point Right. I had watched how the game unfolds So I just didn't feel a desire that I needed to play it It kind of frustrates me that I'm still at that point But that's something I understand because that's a game you can argue that's a game breaking bug Right to lose hundreds of hours of it on a save file because you did what the game told you to do and it deleted your file That that's frustrating. This is different This would have been 100% user era and as mad as you want to be at Nintendo for not offering cloud saves Or for this particular Zelda game to not have multiple save files as if that would have changed the fact that your friend could Easily overrode a save file.  I'm not name-calling here But about this particular thing.  Well, guess what you have your save file guaranteed You've already played it again since and on top of that If the game was a top three game and as great as you thought you were never gonna start the game over again Really? Really? I know several games that I think are all-time great games or greatest games of the year and Yeah, I start them over again because I want to experience it all over again. I I Don't know. This is just a funny story to me. It's a complete non-story, right? This isn't even newsworthy, but I just had to talk about it because it's so funny And I hate when the media gets painted in such a bad life, but man, I can't ignore this This is bad. This is bad Chris Grant Congratulations, you burned every bridge you had left with Nintendo I won't be surprised if you end up on Nintendo's blacklist now and you're not gonna get you know Even polygons as a whole might not get review copies of Nintendo games anymore and I wouldn't be surprised if People stop taking your opinions on things seriously because this was extremely reactionary without even bothering They'll boot the game. I mean you literally couldn't boot the game up and see that Before you went on this rant that your file was actually gone. You just assumed it was gone. Oh Man, I mean how do you know he wasn't playing under a different profile at the time again user error both on your body's part I'm primarily on your part, Chris.  I don't know I haven't trusted them for a long time due to other articles. They've created but This is one that yeah, I mean I'm not saying polygon can't turn it around if Kotaku could turn it around where I used to Not trust them and now I do Polygon can too, but it's not gonna happen in the leadership of Chris Grant Not say he's a bad guy not saying he hasn't done some great work, but this is a bad look and At least when it comes to the Nintendo stuff We obviously can't trust you when you are calling Nintendo delinquent and all that stuff. You can have criticisms all you want You didn't even state why they were delinquent or why they were a dinosaur company, right? Like if you're gonna make accusations like that back them up I think actually saying marred by a dinosaur of a company and refusing to honor its own customers I think that's something that you actually could make a legit argument for and back up with facts But you didn't you're using an example of a user error To say that and that example does not fit that description And I don't even get what the whole honor its own customers thing means like what? What are they supposed to honor you with they gave you one of the greatest games of all time? We have Super Mario Odyssey coming out this week again potentially one of the greatest games of all time Nintendo's continuing to give you great content. They're giving you a switch that you loved That your friends are enjoying as well when they try it out. I I don't know how they're not honoring you Can you explain that? Because again these issues sound like they go well beyond this dumb user error that you're saying my favorite part is shared And this is all the people that will say who started to explain user error. I didn't do that Yeah, I mean exactly that's exactly what it is Not only is the save file still there, but even if the save file was gone. It's still your fault Chris Anyways folks, I'm with any rubber jabs from the tender prime if you like this video You know what to do it if you I should not be smiling so much while I'm going to this right? I actually think this is terrible, but man Some people's idiocy could just be really entertaining anyways folks Subscribe for more content, and I'll catch you in the next one


People ask what is an extreme DUI in Arizona? Well an extreme DUI by statute is if you get any DUI while your blood alcohol concentration is a 0.15 or higher. Now the super extreme is a 0.20 or higher. What does that mean? Well for first offense you're looking at 45 days in jail if you're super extreme and that's the minimum and if you're a regular extreme you're looking at 30 days in jail. Now anything below that you're looking at a day in jail is the possible minimum penalty. With all of these it can be as high as six months in jail. If you have a second offense super extreme DUI the minimum and the maximum are the same. It's 180 days in jail. If you have a second offense extreme DUI that means you have any prior DUI even if it's regular but now your next DUI within seven years is a 0.15 or higher. Now you're looking at four months in jail and if you have a second offense DUI that's not a super extreme you're looking at 30 days in jail. Why is that important? If we can reduce the super extreme or extreme to a regular second offense DUI it drops down to 30 days in jail which is obviously a lot less and you can do work release so you don't miss work things of that nature. If this is you contact us and see what we can do for you.


Hello, and welcome to screencast 121 part B, which is a part two of working with definitions. Working with definitions and instantiating them in particular is so important that the more practice we get the better. And so we're going to practice a little bit with this, with an example that's not in your textbook. It's not even based on numbers, but on geometry. And that's the definition of a polygon. So a polygon is something you probably know what it is. If it'd be a good idea before you read this definition, I'm going to show you to just take a second, pause the video and draw some examples of what you think a polygon is, maybe some examples of things that aren't polygons. Just to kind of get straight in your mind what you think it is, because we're going to have to go on this definition, I'm going to show you here. So after you have done that, let's read the definition here. This is taken from Wikipedia. It says that a polygon is a flat shape that consists of straight lines that are joined to form a closed chain or circuit. So you notice in this definition, there's sort of three major pieces to this that seem to be emphasized, the notion that a polygon has to be flat or something that isn't sticking up or curving in 3D, that it consists of straight lines and not semicircles or arcs or curvy things. And then this last one, closed chain, now flat shape and straight lines are pretty straightforward. We don't really necessarily need definitions for that, but closed chain, you might wonder quite legitimately, what is a closed chain? It's kind of hard to move forward with this definition until we understand what that is. So this happens all the time in mathematical definitions. Mathematical definitions build upon themselves and they're typically defined in terms of things that have definitions of their own, like closed chain. So what is a closed chain? Let's make sure we know what that is. Well on the Wikipedia page, actually under closed chain is a hyperlink and it will take you to this page here that contains this text. The actual term closed chain is a closed chain. Well what's a chain first of all? Well here's the definition of a chain. So notice we have to recurse ourselves a few steps backward in this definition. We have the definition of polygon that depended on knowing what a closed chain was and we can't really understand what a closed chain is until we know what a straight up chain is. So what is a chain? Well it's a connected series of line segments and if you weren't clear on what a line segment is, that's got a definition too. So it's a connected series of line segments period. So let's instantiate that definition up here at the top of the slide. So what does a chain look like? Well it's a connected series of line segments. So something like this would be considered a chain or one line segment would be considered a chain or a couple that kind of do like this would be considered a chain. But something like this would not be like a two line segments that are sort of separated from each other. It's not connected. That's the word connected there is really important in that definition. So these are chains, this isn't. That's instantiating the definition. Now since now that I think we're, if you're clear on what a chain is, let's talk about what a closed chain is. Well it's one a chain in which the first vertex coincides with the last one. Okay, so actually none of these guys we drew here would be considered closed chains because the first vertex is not connected with the last one. Okay, so here's what a closed chain might look like. And here's the line segment, drawing my chain, draw it down here, and then maybe that's supposed to connect up right there. Okay, so that's what a closed chain would look like. Okay, so now we understand the three major portions of the definition of polygon, flat, straight, and closed. So let's move on to a little concept check here. And this is a something I'm going to give you, although in practice you would be doing this yourself. And there are some some figures here, six figures I'm going to draw. And I want you to determine whether these are polygons or not. Okay, so the first one here is just a straight triangle. And by the way, you've probably noticed my handwriting is not the greatest on these things. Forgive me. And just kind of assume that unless I say so, all the lines you see here are perfectly straight. So triangle, this sort of a shape here, it's got a dent in it. This shape here, which is going to be like the previous one, except that point is going to actually connect with the lower line segment there. This shape, which is going to be kind of in an X form. And there's no intersection vertex right here, the lines are simply overlap and there's no vertex. And then lastly, this sort of a U shaped, there's vertices at all these corners here, in case you can see them. And then finally, this one, which is these are truly not straight. I'll even draw a little loop like this, because it's kind of fun. There we go. And that's f. Okay, so question is, which according to the definition, which of these six figures are polygons? Now go with the definition. Don't go with what you think a polygon is, but what does the definition specify a polygon is positive definition, pause the video, and come back when you're ready. Okay, so you might be surprised that all of the first four are polygons, but neither of the last two are polygons. Some of these are surprising and some aren't, but there are some surprises in here for sure. Let's look at the first four. Well, I think it's pretty clear that the triangle one is a polygon. But the question is why? How do we know it's a polygon? It's not because of our intuition. It's because it's hits all the important specifications of the definition. It's a flat shape. Yes, it's consists of straight lines. Yes. And those lines are joined to form a closed circuit. So if I kind of go around counterclockwise one, two, three, one, the last vertex is connected to the first one, that makes it a closed chain, according to our other definition. So that's a polygon. So as this one, even though it's got kind of a dent, you might have been wondering, does the dent disqualify from being a polygon? Well, not this time. It's not what we call a convex or regular polygon. Is it a flat shape? Yes. Is it consist of straight lines? Yeah. Is it a closed chain or circuit? Yeah, I can go kind of go around in order like this. And I end up the last vertex is connected to the first one. Even this one is considered a polygon. Is it flat? Yes. Is it straight? Yes. Does it form a closed chain? Yes. 1234531. You might consider, well, wait a minute, that was the last vertex here, but I can still get around and call this and call this maybe like I hit this vertex twice. There's nothing in the definition of closed chain that rules out duplicate vertices that I saw. Okay, so this would be considered a polygon under that definition. This one would also be considered a polygon, even with the intersection of the line segments, because this is actually even easier, I think, to understand. If I kind of go around in a little tour like this 12341, that's definitely a closed chain. And this is flat and made up a straight line. So those are all considered polygons.  I will say that one of the things you need to realize about mathematics is that many times the same term will have different definitions. And so you might look at this and say, I don't want to consider those polygons. This definition stinks. I'd like a different definition or at least a modified definition that maybe says a flat shape consisting of straight lines that don't intersect. You know, and maybe if I modify that definition, I would have something that I really like. But without modifications, these two guys have to be considered polygons. There are other definitions of polygons out there, particularly in some of the applications that I personally work with that specifically rule out intersections. So this guy and this guy would not be considered polygons. However, this definition, which is the only one that matters right now, does specify those are polygons. Like it or not, okay? So what that means about our definition is another question. But under the definition, those would be polygons. So those are good instances of definition, even though I don't necessarily like them, because they push the boundaries of what the definition means, is particularly what does a closed chain mean? These last two are pretty clearly not polygons. This one's not a closed chain. You'd have to connect those first and last vertices together. And so that's not a closed chain, hence not a polygon. And this one's pretty clearly not, because the lines aren't straight. So let's wrap up what we've learned here. So instantiating a definition is pretty interesting. You have to construct examples and non-examples that really push the boundaries of the definition and the terminology. Many times you're reading a definition, you will come into a term that you don't understand. And so in that case, what do you do? You go look up its definition. And a well-constructed definition will always let you do this. And what you want to look out for are extreme examples and non-examples that really do push the boundaries and help you understand the object that you are working with. That's it for now. Thanks for watching.


Hello and welcome to NewsClick. Today we are joined by K. Hemlata who is president, all India president of the Center for Indian Trade Unions. And we are going to discuss about the demonetization and its impact on the Indian working class. Welcome to NewsClick. So the demonetization has been there for last two months almost. What is its impact on the Indian working class? The impact on the Indian working class has been devastating, particularly on the unorganized workers. We are having reports that thousands of small industries, particularly the micro, mini and small industries and the medium industries also, have either closed down or they are not able to pay their workers on cash. And because the workers, most of them are migrant workers, they are not able to open the bank accounts. They do not have the bank accounts and most of them are illiterate and they need cash for their day-to-day requirements and the owners are not able to pay them in cash. So because of that the industries have closed and the workers are migrating back and there is a reportedly reverse migration what we call. So workers are going back because they are not able to sustain their lives in the cities. They are going back to their villages. The government has also been claiming that we are opening Jandan accounts and through that workers can take their money. So this entire process of digitalization that they are pushing, do you find it feasible? No, we do not think feasible because one is that even today around 35% of the country is not covered by banks, then the electricity, then the networking of the internet, they are not available. Even in Delhi what we find in the reports that the workers do not have the migrant workers, they do not have the bank accounts and even when now they are going to have the bank accounts, the bankers are not willing to open the accounts because they do not have the necessary documents, the identity cards. They were saying that the identity cards you have, they are from your state, so they want address from here, which they do not have. So that is one aspect. The other thing is, we came to know about a domestic worker who was saving some 10,000 rupees in 1000 notes. When she went to deposit that amount in the bank, then she was told that her Jandan, she had a Jandan account which is a zero balance account. When she went to deposit that amount, they refused. They said that it was black money, so they did not accept. So, these are very different types of problems faced by workers and because of this, we do not think that it is feasible at this juncture to digitalize economy and to force the other thing in cashless economy. So, do you think there has been any specific section in the working class that has been more impacted due to demonetization? For example, most of the unorganized sector also has women participation in it. So, it will have any impact on them? Definitely, unorganized sector workers are the most impacted and the migrant workers in the brickel industry, in the construction industry, in the textile, garments, etc. So, even in the engineering industry, steel industry in Delhi, the migrant workers are the most affected, unorganized sector workers are the most affected and naturally women who are part, large part of the unorganized section of workers, they are also affected and they are the responsible ones who are responsible to feed their families. It is very difficult for them even to buy the necessary things. So, women are also as part of the unorganized sector, they are also very much impacted. So, recently this organization of Indian manufacturers that had come out with a report, giving stats that how there is a large chunk of manufacturing units that have closed down. What do you have to say on that? We agree with that report, they say that 35 percent job losses have been there and they say that up to March, it is going to increase to 40-45 percent and the losses through the industry was also revenue, dip was also around 50 percent, they say it is also going to increase and all the reports from different quarters, the automobile sales have come down, the purchasing capacity and even in Gujarat, there was a report that the dairy farmers, they were not able to get their money. So, different quarters it is the same. So, I mean the Centre for Indian Trade Union has been fighting on this issue for long. There was a nationwide strike call on 2nd September, you had various charter of, you had a charter of demands, how do you plan to pursue it further when we have seen demortization and its impact? So, actually on November 28th, when the left parties gave a call, we were in our conference, in the 15th conference which was in Puri. On that day itself, all the over 2000 delegates, we held a human chain and demanded that workers should be paid in cash till the new currency notes are made available, old currency notes should be accepted. That was at that time. Then after coming from our conference, we had a meeting with the Kisan Sabha and the Agricultural Workers Union and this 19th, we are having an All India program where the three organizations, the CITU, All India Kisan Sabha and the Agricultural Workers Union, we are holding demonstrations at the district level demanding that there should be compensation for the job losses, for the wage losses and the crop losses because it is not only the workers, even the peasants are suffering. In many places, we are seeing that the farmers, they are not able to sell their produce and they are throwing their tomatoes, their potatoes and in some places we have received reports in Chattisgarh that they were distributing free. So, all these things, so altogether we are having this, so on these demands and also because of the reverse migration, the demand for MNREGA work that has increased, around 60 percent or more it has increased it is said. So, we are demanding that the allotment for MNREGA that should be increased and the workers should be paid on that, given jobs on MNREGA. And also we are on the other demands we are having that loan waiver for the farmers. So, with these demands we are organizing this and yesterday all the trade unions, central trade unions we met in INTC office and so we also as a, from the joint trade union platform, we have decided to organize demonstrations on 28th, 28th of this month on January, all over the country. When you talk about the joint trade unions, is BMS also part of it because if you look at the 2nd September strike, BMS withdrew at the last moment. No, this time it was not part at all. In 2015 it withdrew in the last moment, but in 2016 from the beginning it was not part of the strike call. But for this in the case of this demonetization also, initially they welcomed, they said that it was a good move and it is good. But later on they changed the statement, they said that it is leading to job losses and they do not believe that it is useful in unearthing black, many workers were facing difficulties. The intention was good, but it was not implemented properly. But anyway they are not part of this, they did not come to this. So, the other trade unions have given this call. This would be my last question. If you look at the Indian economy and the model of neoliberalism it had followed since last many years, the economy is making, it has resulted in growing inequalities and once this demonetization comes, what will happen to the economy? We have already seen the figures that GDP is coming down. Yes, GDP is coming down, that is one aspect. But as you said the inequalities are also growing. What we see is that this entire measure, first when they started, they said that it was meant to unearth black money and corruption, funding for terrorism, counterfeit notes, etc., etc. But later on the entire narrative changed. Now they are not talking about this. The thing is that digital economy, cashless economy, all these things, so entire exercise as we see it is only meant to benefit the international finance, finance capital. All the money has been mopped up into the banks, so the banks were facing this question of NPAs. Now again they will be able to loan to the big corporates, provide credit for them, but the people will be suffering. And the other thing is the IT companies, they will benefit the pay time, etc., they have given big advertisements and all these things. So the inequalities are bound to increase.  So definitely in the coming period inequalities are going to increase. Thanks a lot for giving us your time and as these things proceed we will be coming back to you on such a day. Thank you. Thank you for watching Newscliff.


This is Stink Tech Hawaii, Community Matters here. Okay, Stink Tech, it's Monday, it's 4 p.m. That means Stink Tech Asia with Russell Liu. Welcome to the show Russell, you've been down here plenty and we'd love to see you. Welcome Ni Hao, welcome. Ni Hao Ma. One Hao. Yeah, okay, all that, yeah, and happy New Year too. Yes, happy New Year. And the American sense. Yes, but we're coming close to the Chinese New Year, February 16th. Yeah, she didn't get in quite a little bit, I'll save that. That's right, yeah. So anyway, Russell is an American lawyer, a Hawaii lawyer practicing in Beijing and teaching in Beijing, and he comes back and forth and we have these great moments where we discuss, you know, the sort of the cultural arbitrage between the two countries. And let me add that, you know, I think in modern time we don't fully appreciate China, we get fear about China and we get China bashing about China and we don't want to trade with China. We want to push China around. We are afraid China is pushing us around. It's tense and this administration is not doing a very good job at mediating that. And so it's important we understand where China is, where it is economically and politically, you know, in terms of diplomacy and in terms of its global, what don't you call it Russell, its position on the global grid, very important. That's a good term. Okay, so Russell and I are going to discuss that today. We're going to figure out where China is, regardless of what Donald Trump has to say about it and where the U.S. is. And guess what? Also, we're going to talk about where Hawaii is, how Hawaii is affected by the sea change around the relationship between China and the U.S. and China. Before we start, maybe I should look at one thought for everyone out there in the audience. Regardless of where you are, whether you like China, you don't like China, you don't understand it, or you do understand it. There's a saying that I always have to somebody is that when 1.34 billion people in a herd move in one direction, you feel the wind. You feel the wind. And you're going to have to deal with that. So it's important that we understand more about China. And especially this community, you know, Jay, I grew up here, lived full-time in China for 15 years, so I have a little different view. I'm not an expert because it changes every day so quickly, so rapidly with so many people. Well, I think it's clear that China in many ways, even on our own terms, is ahead of us. We had an interview with a young fellow who came from China a couple of years ago, went to Maryknoll School. His name is M.J. Mao from Shanghai. And he finished Maryknoll School. He went to the University of Wisconsin. He's Olympic swimming material. He's also into science and diplomacy and design. A very interesting interview, I thought. But here's a kid who's completely, I shouldn't say kid, he's in college, but here's a kid who's completely successful and whatever he touches. And we have to regard that. You know, it's like, when I first visited China, I was blown away by the energy of the place. Everybody's working at 10 times the speed that you see in Hawaii or for that matter on the mainland. And you say to yourself, if this energy could be harnessed into an economy, which is being harnessed into an economy, it would be the most incredible economy on the face of the earth. And that is being played out right now.  What can, what has the U.S. done to deal with that, to recognize it, to collaborate with it, to catch up with it, you know, to compete with it, and what has it not done? Well, you know, I think we take a step back, Jay, and just remember, you're dealing with a culture that's thousands of years old, a culture that has learned through many mistakes, developed itself, survived many things, survived wars, survived being colonized at one point, and yet being able to recognize through these lessons of how it's going to implement itself through its form of government, its form of culture, and form of society. And strategy. And strategy. What comes up to strategy, incorporating all these elements, and that's what makes it very fascinating and unique. But I think as Americans, we can learn, you know, as you know, Jay, I've been there 15 years full-time. I see things differently. I see what can work, I think would work here, although it's a different culture. But I think you're right. I think, you know, everything, it has to be, there has to be a direction. And my concern is we're 2018, and as we go over some of what we're talking about today, you know, we're going to be overtaken by China in 2028. That's the date. It will become the number one economy in the world. And for many Americans, that might be frightening, but I think we shouldn't be frightened, but I think we should learn how that we need to maneuver because of the changes that will happen. They will happen with or without China, because of technology, because of different things. But we're going to have to understand what's happening, not only nationally, but I think for us locally here in Honolulu. Well, I was going to say, it's the whole analysis of this. It's complex. The whole analysis has to be nuanced. You can't be either afraid or bullied. And unfortunately, our president, who doesn't read and in many ways doesn't think, and it was people around him who just do, yes, man, the problem is he doesn't understand. So he gets in there, the first thing he does, you know, after inauguration a year ago, is he's bullying them or trying. The second thing he does, he puts his arm around Xi Jinping's shoulder and makes like their best buddies. Neither of these is a nuanced approach. Fact is that Xi Jinping could, you know, think him, outthink him any day of the week and is outthinking him. And it isn't only Xi Jinping, it's all the people who, you know, run diplomacy and international business in China are outthinking Trump, and therefore outthinking American policy and therefore this country. So, you know, the problem is that they are inextricably moving ahead of us with that economy of theirs and that energy I saw on my first trip. And we do not fully understand, recognize, and have a way of dealing with it. We should be much more nuanced in our evaluation of that in the way, as you said, developing some way to address it. Unfortunately, we're way behind. And we're actually, in a funny way, we're more behind now than we were before Trump. Yes, Shane, I think you've raised a good point that we are behind, definitely behind. I think we're way behind the cue ball, but that doesn't mean that we can be in a direction, that we can start moving in the right direction. You know, I think the first thing that hits me, Jay, is that we are a culture in the U.S. We seem to be a governance culture that's short-term. The Chinese are long-term.  We had that in the 70s and 80s. Well, the funny thing is that all that five-year planning came out of Russia. It came out of the communist era. It came out of the notion that you can make a plan and execute the plan, and you force people in that container and so forth. And when it first started, it was really hard on people, and it couldn't possibly work if you force them into the plan. But more recently, the planning has been much better, more sophisticated, and more effective. And furthermore, we have all found out, watching government, not only in Hawaii but in the nation, is you need a plan. You can't just swagger from one side to the other. You need a plan, and China understands that. That's right, and it's interesting. I was googling today just out of curiosity. Do we have a strategic plan for the United States? Is there something we're in? Not a chance, Russell. Not a chance. I couldn't find anything. And then I read some legislative reports, and we're talking about really partisan politics. We're talking politics that's killing everything where we should be going. We're not talking about economy, building economy. We're talking about investigation of Russia. We're talking about protecting the president. We're talking about going after the Clinton Foundation. It's all politics. So we are not getting what we should be having, a governance where we're having people know that the government is doing something. We're addressing it. And it's frightening because I read a report that was a legislative report, the three years ago, that one of the things the Republican Party was doing was cutting down these education spending. And again, China has been in the opposite mode. They've understood where they need to get to and how to do it. They understand that education is important. They understand building infrastructure is important. Building capability. We're doing it while we watch. As we watch, it's amazing. Despite all Trump's campaign promises to rebuild the infrastructure of this country, not a nothing. In fact, the tax break is going to make it much harder to do that. So anyway, I want to cover three things that we have time. I hope we have time. Number one is how are they doing right now? What is their plan right now? And how will it affect the United States? And what should the United States do to engage with them? And let's give all those guys some advice today, Russell. Sure. Well, you know, it's interesting because their plan for the last 20, 30 years was to bring manufacturing to China, which they did. And that created jobs. That created an engine. And that brought a foreign direct investment where American companies were coming to China, German companies, French. The world was coming to China. To build capability, the manufacturing. And China realized that somewhere along the road that low-end manufacturing is not going to cut it. You're going to have to move up the curve, the value curve. So they came out with a policy a few years ago where they said, we're going to switch, we're changing tracks. From low-end manufacturing, we now move into added value technology. We want innovation.  And their plan is in 2050 to be number one in technology in the world. 2050? 2050, long-term. So they're taking steps. But along the way, along, you know, with their GDP that grows at 6.5% a year, the U.S. is 2.2. Where we're at now and where they're being 10 years in 2020, China, based on that annual GDP, a conservative figure, they will be ahead of the U.S. period. Their GDP. And it's very interesting where they are now. They're the population centers. They're about where the U.S. was in the 1940s. So think about the 1940s to 1970s, 70s, 80s, 2000s. It's a long way and a short time. It's a long way and a short time. But remember how that gap when the U.S. was urbanized, then people had purchasing power. So as that gap shrinks down, more people are moving the cities, which means that the purchasing power of the citizens will be truly greater. And so we're seeing that wealth is being spread in the country. And then we're also seeing a one-road, one-belt, one-belt, one-road, one-road. Yes. You know, that's going to have a sort of, almost unpredictably good effect on China because it's going to connect it up. It's going to make it a global power economically. And that's part, I mean, the one-road, one-belt, one-belt, one-road. One-belt, one-road. One-belt, one-road initiative is part of a much larger EDI-E-L-M-T. Thought package. It's a thought package of being global, of being a leader in the global economy. That's what we're talking about. But, you know, Jay, I got out to that. That's reminiscent of their blueprint for domestic China, how they've created the supply network, the chain, and China through their rail systems, their high-speed. They've got the largest high-speed rail in the world. It's all about connecting. It's connecting. So the next step is connecting the world. And taking the history lessons that Silk Road has been the key to Lake China and the maritime route that goes through Southeast Asia and around the Indian Ocean. That's why I have the noise in the South China Sea. They want to control transportation and connection. I mean, even if they're being bullied about it, which they are. But, you know, the problem is the possibility of overheating, you know?  And I mean, although they're a little more flexible than they used to be, they're still operating on the same, we will do this notion. So the risk there, which I think existed 10 years ago and still exists, is the risk of overheating, right? People talk about that risk even now. So the question I put to you is, what are the challenges that China has in reaching those goals? I mean, could it be that somewhere along the line, they're going to overstep it? They're going to be overheating and their economy will suffer? Well, I think the unique aspect about the way the Chinese economy works is really run by the government. But, you know, we think in America, that's bad. But go to Singapore. Singapore was basically a benevolent dictatorship, Lee Kuan Keeu, and he ran the country. But he's all fit. You look at the book Tiger Mom, how the Chinese mother-parents will kind of control, not control, but manage the trial to make sure that they're on this right road. Now, that's how the government is. It's the same culture. It's a cultural thing. It's a nuance. So people will follow that. You're not worried about overheating? I don't worry about overheating because the adjustments are there because they have a different governing system. For example, China was very worried last year because the capital outflows, the investments remained outside the China that were not good, that were draining money out of the economy. So what they did is they clamped down. And a lot of the leading private companies are under scrutiny. And they have made adjustments so that the regulations have been changed so the outflow of capital is really scrutinized now. So the outbound investments that are being made, they have to make sense with the Chinese national priority. Yeah, more and more the conversation among the people I know is to question whether democracy still works the way we thought that it worked. Back when we went to school, and certainly when you and I went to law school, democracy was the cat's meow. Democracy in the American form. But now you begin to wonder, and you hear thinking from really many quarters about how a benevolent dictatorship, dictatorship is too hard a word. But in that way, a strong central government with a strong group that has a lot of discretion and then as well motivated for the benefit of the country, maybe that's really the model that will prevail in the 21st century. Because democracy right now doesn't look like it's doing all that well. I think that's a really good point, Jay. That really gets a crux of economics. It's the governance. It's the corporate governance, like a company. And I look at it this way. We have a country where we value our freedom and liberty, which is wonderful. In China, maybe it's a little bit different because it's a Confucian society and people will follow the leader what's best for a group of people, not individuals. Because 1.34 billion people, it has to move. The herd has to move. So as long as the government's moving the herd in the right direction, kids nowadays can afford to have an iPhone. Living conditions is tremendously improved. All of these things add up to something that people think I can live with this. And I always give this example. Everybody asks me, what's the difference between China with the government, so forth, and the US? Well, look at this way. It's like this. Imagine a 25-lane highway. That's China. Huge highway. Many lanes. As long as you don't get to the edges with sensitive things, you can cut in and out. You can do many things. And the US is more like a 10-lane highway. We come in a rural law, a box. And you don't work out practical solutions. You're worrying about the law and the restrictions. And again, those restrictions create the rural law, democracy. But you may not get the real very pragmatic approach. So when people in China talk about pragmatic approach, I think that makes people in America scared because it's a different approach. There's a lot to move around. Yeah, you want a pragmatic approach? I'll give you a pragmatic approach. We're going to take a break. That's a pragmatic approach. We take a one-minute break, Russell Liu, and then we'll come back and we'll talk some more about the same subject. And we'll also find out what's going to happen here and what the US can do about it, if anything. I'll be right back. Thank you. Nothing has changed. Russell Liu is still here. He's an American lawyer practicing in Beijing and teaching in Beijing for 15 years now. He is exquisitely familiar with the comings and goings between Honolulu and the US and China. As it has evolved in that period, it's really remarkable. I hope you write a book on this, one of these days. Anyway, so where is it going? They've got a plan. The probability is that they will not meet a showstop kind of challenge, like an overheat challenge. Short of some global disaster, they'll keep on going down that track. They'll reach Europe. They'll connect on a global economic grid. They'll have all kinds of... It was an interesting distinction between hard power and soft power and the idea is that the US has been engaged in software, soft power policy, where China's power is usually harder. And so they're dealing with other countries. It's a little harder than ours is, call it hard power. But they will prevail, I think, in many cases. Short of any kind of war, just a little bullying here and there, a little pushing here and there, and economic pushing included. And they will achieve global economic supremacy. That's what is likely to happen. So, I mean, you agree with that, and when do you think it'll happen, and what will be the fallout? What will be the implications of it for them and for us? Well, you asked me, when will it happen? That's going to happen in 2028, based on the annual GDP of the US and China. What, January 1st? Somewhere along in 2020. My brain works. Probably at the end of 2027. Okay. And it might be soon. July 31st. But do you raise some interesting points, Jay? We're just talking about the two systems. You know, I view it as a lawyer, and I see how things are done. I think the problem is that we have this rule of law society. Not a problem, but we have everybody fits in this box. We do things a certain way. And people along the way that know how to milk the process, as I would say it, make it more inefficient here, and ends up the project being dead because the money's run out.  And in the end of the day... I was involved in a program three weeks ago, December 7th, it's a month ago, I guess, at the university called group participation in a polarized era. And it's all about the laws that were adopted after 1970, how they encouraged and permit public participation. And they do not limit public participation. And people who want to participate, like activists or self-interested groups, have found ways to use those laws to stop progress. And how do we... What's the countervailing? What's the swing back? How do we fix that? And it's not an easy answer, and there may be no easy answer in terms of creating a society which is efficient in getting things done. Well, one of the things that's important to getting efficient done, yes, we have a rule of sight, recognize that. But I think what I would be very concerned about is that we come to this crossroad where, yes, individual rights, I believe, are important, they're sacred. I teach a U.S. constitutional law class there, and people understand and they agree. In the U.S., we have the best system, democracy for individual rights. But along the way that we've got to recognize that with these rights also comes a responsibility. Responsibility of leaders to understand. You need to put aside partisan things. You need to think about what is good for the community and the people. And I believe that China understands that. Do you believe the leaders in China have, in their mind, the wish to help all the people?  Well, I can't really say, because I'm not in political structure in China, but my observation, I can point out that, from what I see, is that because of the Internet, there's much more open transparency, social media in China, that I believe that it keeps everybody in track because they have a one-party system. And I think the government does realize that it can be in jeopardy because of its past history in China. Things can happen very quickly overnight. That being said, I think that people are more or less in a one-page, they're on the same page that they realize they have to make a better economy. But you know, it's like this, when you're winning by a couple touchdowns, you have an attitude. You have a winning attitude today. And you want to further that, you know? So I think that's where they're at. They're winning the game. They're winning the touchdowns. What do they think of the U.S.? What do they think of the troubles we're having with our president? Well, I think they're amazed at what's going on in the U.S., where everything is too open, maybe too transparent, and people aren't looking into the wisdom of being long-term and everybody's fighting for this power thing. And you know what it reminds them of? One Chinese expert reminds them, this looks like when China had a cultural revolution.  It's internal. You know, I heard there was a Chinese visitor to Hawaii and he was speaking about the comparison that you and I are making. And he's talking about the history of China in recent years. He said, you know, we had our cultural revolution 1979. It was very hard on people. Now you are having yours. That's right. What an interesting thought that is. And as an American in China, when I'm thinking about the U.S., I'm thinking the big question is, who are we as Americans?  There's more Spanish-speaking culture and we've had that event in Charlottesville and we're having people giving the white power sign and President Trump's one of his aides. And it's shocking to the Chinese that this goes on. So they don't think it should go on. They think the government should step in and stop it. The government should stop it. Because, you know, this leads to so much disunity that the model, the platform, the government, business, it comes to an halt. So paint me a picture of China, you know, in five years. What are we going to see here? How is the economic success going to play out? To the men on the street, to the country, and to the way the country relates to other places? Well, I think there's two ways to look at it. One is domestic. What's going to happen domestically? And the other is what are they doing so globally? Are they making impact? Where are they? And I think domestically, you know, that was part of the mission for the last 10 years. They've got the technology. They've built up their logistics. They've built up their transportation system. So they're the largest network of rail in anywhere in the globe. Things are accessible. So there's less of an issue of geographic where you are. You can't get things. Now you can get things wherever you're in China. Number two, they've moved into innovation.  Phones, look at Lenovo. I just bought a recent Lenovo computer and you couldn't tell that this was a Chinese company. You know, fantastic. Well, they're certainly competitive and I think they learn from us. But then they're past the point of having to learn from us because they can learn intrinsically. Right. But let me ask you the last question, Russell. So, you know, this is hard for us. And right now we're in a low point of our national development. I think it's clear. What do we do? I mean, if you were president or secretary of state or a combination, what do we do to address this? Because they're competing with us. They're not going to stop competing with us. They're going to get on top. You know, I remember there was a chapter on this issue in Simon Winchester's book, Pacific, where he explained that the power had changed in the Pacific. But China was the power. And the message essentially was, get used to it. It's changed. So even assuming that's correct, what do we do to accept it, to deal with it, to do better competition with it? What do we do? Well, I think, first of all, I think this is a good soul searching for the country. And again, and I'm going to talk to the local community here, I think, yes, we have to accept it. But I have a saying that the Marines will say, adapt, improvise, and overcome. And we need to adapt. We need to adapt to that there are changes. We need to adapt it. And I believe being in China 15 years, my personal opinion is that China surpassed the US. Although it has not in terms of GDP per capita, but it will soon. Number two, it's on this trajectory where you can't stop it. OK, let's assume all that for a minute. You say adapt. That's a hard one, because inherent in this conversation, you say adapt, you mean lay back and enjoy it, because you don't have a choice. But what kind of adaptation are you talking about? Well, for example, I think the adaptation means that you've got tons of Chinese students coming to the US, for example. Good, OK. We have to adapt to a changing environment. We have to adapt to a fact that one of the most priorities that we have neglected in the US is we need to wrap our educational services. We need to move up the S-T-E-M, science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. We need to get up the curve. We need to understand that there's the internet. So what is happening is that. So we have to look out. We have to look up, because the internet has changed everything. And we have to study Mandarin, too. I mean, we had a show today about Maryknoll School and how they have an immersion class for young kids, teaching them Mandarin right here, the first one in Hawaii. First one is really, that's shocking, it's the first one. You know, I think what I hear you saying, because we're coming to the end of our time, but we should have more time, that we have to adapt means we have to be more like them. We have to think globally. We have to have a plan. We have to send our people out to the four corners of the earth to learn and do influence and do economics, which we are not doing. Perhaps in the same way we're doing, we were doing after the Second World War, you know, the whole Marshall Plan extension there. We're not doing that so much, the multinationals maybe, but that's not the same thing. And so I think what I hear, you can tell me yes or no, I think what I hear you saying is, we have to learn from them at this point. We have to follow what they're doing. We have to extend ourselves, perhaps in a similar way that they are.  Second of all, it reminds me of my doctor here at Queen's, and he said his son was at John Hopkins University. And I think he's an engineer or something. He said that, you know what, half the class are from England, China, and they're learning. He says he's learning cultures, adapting. That's part of it, you know. And now let's get back quickly to our local community. And I think it's very essential because what I see here is that we've had this brain drain for many years. It's not going to come back. We're not creating industries. Why do kids go to school? And why do they get a vast degree? Because they use it to build a community. So what should we do? Well, we need to do, A, we need to bring in a lot of Chinese kids and STM, science, technology, mathematics, the university. So our kids will learn to be good. Bring in kids from China. China. And that brings in relationships, number one. Number two, what we need to do, if I was a leader, I would start getting Mandarin really widespread. Number two, three, build the relationships. They are very thin relationships between China and the U.S. Send our kids to China the same way China sends their kids to the United States. That's right. I just had two kids that went, they're sons of executives here, business people. They went to China for summer and it changed the perspective of many things. Sure. Made them global people. Made them global. For life. I know one of them is already planning to me, he's going to go back to do an internship there and wrap his language up. But this is what we need here. We need to change the model here. We need to build platforms, number one. Because let's, honestly, what I see is we have in this economy here, we built it too long on a labor economy. Labor economy is made out, that's 60s, 70s. It's no longer living. And we keep re-changing it to say construction. But we're not going to suggest we do technology. We have to. We have to build it now. Our kids will grow to be. The state went through this whole kind of contortion over Act 221 throughout the 10-year period between 2000 and 2010 and roundly, soundly rejected that notion. They didn't want to support it at all. And I feel that, you know, that was the issue then. And I agree with you totally. It is the issue now. And we better revisit that. We better revisit that. And look at what California is doing, the state of California. A couple years ago, I saw Governor Jerry Brown come up to Beijing. And he was talking about what he's going to do with China. And they built an office that really works. They have relationships. They're exchanging industries. And they're learning. Tempus Fugit. How do you say time is of the essence in China? I don't know if there's a saying. Time is also the essence in China. Things are done quickly there, Jay. Time is always of the essence. Thank you, Jay. Thank you so much, Russell. We can do an hour of this. We can do this any time. Fox News. Hey, thanks. Aloha. Aloha.


Studying the Merchant of Venice, here's how you can analyse Act 1, Scene 2. The scene opens with Portia in Belmont. This hyperbole shows that she is melancholic just like Antonio. She says the world of a living daughter curbed by the world of a dead father. The oxymoron hair shows that Portia is frustrated by the world of her father. Narissa, her lady in waiting, then explains her father's world hair. He basically has three caskets with gold, silver and lead and whoever chooses the right one wins Portia's hand in marriage. Narissa then reminds Portia of all her suitors and Portia wittily says the reasons why she hated all of them. Yet Narissa uses the rule of three hair to mention Bessonio. He is the only guy that Portia really liked. The servant then tells Portia a fifth suitor has come. Portia then replies by saying this and she uses oxymoron hair and hair to show that she doesn't really like the Prince of Morocco because he is Arab. This establishes the theme of racial prejudice that will run throughout this play.


It's hard to stay the same externally when you're changing so rapidly internally, because who you see in the mirror doesn't align with who you are inside anymore. Who you are externally is often who you have been permitted to be by family and friends and spouse and culture and job and where you work and so on and so on.


Join the open course on programming for geospatial hydrological applications. Start learning scripting with first learning about the command line. Then learn GDAL, a very important tool that is used in many GIS applications. Learn how to use it from the command line and later on use it from Python. GDAL is very useful to convert raster and vector formats and to deal with projections. The next step is to be introduced to one of the most popular programming languages, Python. Use our interactive Jupyter notebooks to learn the concepts. In the next module you learn how to use PC raster for map algebra. In module 4 you are introduced to the PC raster dynamic modeling framework in Python. This allows you to create your own dynamic models and in this course you will build one using a Jupyter notebook. Learn how to visualize your model results in space and time. Use PC raster's Aguila to visualize time series and dynamic models in animations. Bringing GIS to the next level. In the last module you will learn how to use PyQGIS, Python in QGIS. But not only in the QGIS interface but you will also learn how to use it standalone. Join this great course now to learn all of this.


kwaisha over time has been losing value. A lot of value and of late losing substantial value against dollar and other convertible currencies very very rapidly. We all know that. The implication of this kwaisha losing value, our currency losing value is brought. Many aspects get affected by the kwaisha losing value. One of the critical aspects is the increase in the cost of living. As the kwaisha depreciates, it increases the cost of doing business, it increases the cost of living. It increases the cost of melamine, the cost of salt, the cost of sugar to the households. And obviously it increases invariably the cost of running business. If you are in import, you now have to find more kwaisha to import the same quantity of goods that you may have imported last year. Those goods may be for manufacturing, they may be for resell, the cost just goes up because the kwaisha is losing too much value. And the kwaisha losing value is a reflection of the failure of leadership to a large extent. As we see it here, the inability to manage variables that are very important, extremely important certain policy aspects, in particular monetary policy. But monetary policy alone cannot contain the loss of value in our currency. This must be coupled with the fiscal policies. It's a package, it's a combination of measures that we will put in place because we need to restore the kwaisha's value, to stabilise it so that it's easier to plan in business, it's easier to plan in a household for especially low income earners in our households, in our families who are many, who are the majority. They need to be able to know that in the following month given the income which is largely starting, constant, which is not increasing because it's difficult to increase salaries these days because businesses are going down. They know that they will be able to feed their families. So stability is very important. So we will move very quickly by enhancing the monetary policy aspects but combine that with fiscal policies because it's that package that will bring results in our efforts to stabilise the kwaisha. And in addition to that, we will be looking at the trade side of our economy, a trade policy to make sure that we increase our exports as much as possible but you see increasing exports is an orchestrated plan, it's an orchestrated problem for us in the UPND. It has to deal with also first the increasing investments but we can't increase investments without an attractive investment policy. So we'll put in place attractive investment policies and then trade policies combined with consistency. You can't keep on changing policies every now and then you send the wrong message in the investment community so stabilise the policies so that they are predictable. One can plan. Planning is not just short, medium term, it's long term especially certain investments and we will also make a particular effort in supporting value addition in our country, increasing the value of the raw commodities that we produce. For example, in today's Xamia, manganese is mined and is sold by and large in a raw form, rocks. And it's only attracting somewhere in the region of $50 per ton but we plan as UPND to value add this manganese by investing in the manganese processing plants in the manganese production areas. That will allow us to increase the value per ton to well over $1,500 per ton. Just imagine the difference, the stark difference. All of that additional value would allow us to export more maybe manganese but more importantly anymore from the manganese that we export and by increasing our foreign exchange earnings the supply side of the kwacha improves, it means sorry of the dollars improves, it means we can stabilise the kwacha. That's extremely important because if you have a shortage of foreign exchange it means that your kwacha keeps on losing value and that will work very very seriously on that. So growing economy, increasing exports and making sure that we reduce our expenditure on consumption and increase expenditure deliberately for that matter on the investment and therefore growth who arise from there inevitably also is not just manganese in the kwacha but it helps create jobs, creates if you like business opportunities for our people including the youth, the women and other citizens. This is very very important but lastly amongst the other factors that will help us and will focus on stabilise the kwacha is to work on this commodity called confidence to improve the confidence in the economy in the market because if you don't have confidence as is the case now the kwacha takes additional hammering, serious hammering. So we believe because of the leadership regional leadership that we have because of our ability to manage the country's resources in the prudent way because of our ability to prioritise where we spend the limited resources as we all know resources are always limited in the investment area and less in consumption area we will not really be buying in the UPND government it will be tabu to buy a 65 million dollar jet for one or two people when we can use that 65 million dollars for example to invest in a solar power station that will give us a lot of megawatts that will help boost the electricity supply reduce load shedding which is extremely important to provide consistent electricity supply energy supply to our factories to our homes to education to health very very critical because you can lose a life on the operating table in a hospital because you have lost energy which is electricity you have lost oxygen which is driven by electricity all those components that are interlinked and will make sure that we drive them in a matrix in a way that will grow the economy and obviously that can only happen because we have the vision we have the leadership which has the vision the leadership which has the ability to manage resources permanently a leadership which has the ability to monitor things that go wrong and correct them quickly that is what will drive more confidence in the market and obviously help shower up we call it shower up the kwacha and stabilize the kwacha and bring about consistency in the currency market as well as obviously in the real economy which is the productive side of the economy


But Jesus was signed with Jazzy Faye. Okay, and the puff daddy situation with boys in hood Yeah, yeah, yeah, that was telling they was telling them, you know, I'm saying this cat named blood wrong from Florida he next One day one with how did you pass it up some past Detroit? You already knew it. No, I just paid him to do a feature The nigga the nigga down in Atlanta. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, I just got in touch with somebody that knew him Yeah, so yeah, I'm on the rock with it. Yeah, so at this time on I know I know you I'm sure you heard of TJ Chapman Yeah, yeah, yeah DJ DJs. Yeah, he took me on it is on his wing and like start taking me everywhere Yeah, you know I'm saying and telling everybody about blood wrong. You feel me like this the next dude out of Florida So I had this Duke this other friend Who used to manage the producer's Justice League? His name Chuck, you know, I'm saying he was worth just as late was working with GZ at the time But GZ was signed with Jazzy Faye. Okay, and the puff daddy situation with boys in hood Yeah, yeah, yeah, that was telling they was telling them, you know, I'm saying this cat named blood wrong from Florida He next, you know, I'm saying so me for coming from Florida. I used to go to Atlanta all the time like you said a strip club Yeah, yeah, we used to see each other in the strip clubs me and GZ like you feel me they throwing money We throwing money like yeah, yeah, whatever, you know, I'm saying so y'all handle them niggas Definitely definitely definitely so hold up when men come into a strip club and y'all throwing money Is it a competition thing? Yeah, definitely competition. Who can throw the most money? Who can come to fly us? Definitely, yeah, all that. All that. We got that. There's ego thing. Yeah, yeah, we want to show niggas what it's always an ego thing with me. Like for real, for real, everything a man do, he want to score points. That's right. Like whatever he do, he want to score points. What are the points gonna get you? A lot of things. It's gonna get you a lot of things. That's right. It's gonna score. It's why you're feeling real good inside the way you can't nobody stop you. Yeah, better believe it. Keep being a creative successor. Exactly, yeah. And nigga, please. Better believe it. Whoever come there, they gonna get it. You said over there, you're getting it. Better believe it. Better believe it. Better believe it. Thank you so much, man. Better believe it. Go ahead. So long story short, like I got on fire in the state of Florida, you know what I'm saying? And what I did with the represent song, I want to talk about this because the represent song came back to bite me. You know what I'm saying? With my federal case. So long story short. So they got you on what you were saying in the song? Well, the dudes that I named in the song testified on me. But I was using it as a lot of the dudes was my was my people. Like there was my homies. You feel me? But what I did was I said, I'm gonna name everybody in my city who getting money. Because I know that if they hit a name in the song, they gonna promote my song. Promote it. I'm the first time my city to ever do it, like to ever be on the level of anything musically in my city. Damn. You know what I'm saying? That's good stuff. I'm telling my almost, the only other person from my city that made it out of my city was Will Witherspoon. He played for Carolina Panthers. He played for a couple of different teams. But I'm telling my the real street cat from my city. I'm the first that ever did it. So it was a big, big deal. Yeah. You know what I'm saying? So I named everybody in my city that was getting money. You feel me? Everybody, they followed suit. We was going to homecoming. We was going to classic. Everywhere in Florida that was going on, we was the Alpala. It was 20D. All my homies. You feel me? Everybody and fixed up cars, jewelry, money. We go from the events to the club. We throwing money. We doing whatever. And my niggas, they pass and I see these. You know what I'm saying? So I instantly, it was bro, it was seven, eight months before I got my deal. Like fast. You know what I'm saying? So I remember we was in Dothan, Alabama a particular night. And Dothan, Alabama is probably an hour and 20 minutes from Panama City from Florida. It's at the line. I was on fire in Dothan, Alabama. So I had a show and Jesus had a show. He had just dropped streets. He's watching. Mm-hmm. I remember that. At my show, it was packed. At his show, it really wasn't nobody. You know what I'm saying? Because he was fresh. You feel me? So they came from their show to my show. And when they came to my show, I was going on stage. My son represent came on. That was crazy. Word for word. They couldn't believe it.  They couldn't believe it. Like, you feel me? He instantly came on stage. Him and Kink, they pulled me to the side. You feel me, Kink? Like, man, what you want to do? You know what I'm saying? Keep in mind at this time, I'm already getting offers from Universal, from Jazz and Faith, from Trick Daddy, from T.I. Like, all these different people is trying to, you know what I'm saying? Hit T.J. Chapman about me. You know what I'm saying? Yeah. So I tell Kink, we exchange numbers. G's are getting on the stage. He like, boy, this thing will blow a roll. Roll.