We've talked a lot about the CHIP Act, the CHIP Act, where $52 billion of the CHIP Act are going to be used to subsidize the production of advanced CHIP technology in the United States. We've talked a lot about why I think this is a bad idea, and even if it was a good idea, it's just not going to happen. It's just not practical in the United States to build these things. It's not practical because of our own policies, because of bad laws. Bloomberg, the editors of Bloomberg, to their credit, these are not exactly laissez-faire capitalist advocates. Point out exactly the same thing. The chance that we are going to increase CHIP manufacturing is a significant way in the United States because of the CHIP Act. That case is very dubious and unlikely to actually happen. In 1990, 37% of all the CHIPs made in the world were made in the U.S., and some of the most advanced CHIPs in the world were made in the U.S. Today it's 12%, and the most advanced CHIPs in the world are not made in the United States. 90% of those are made in Taiwan. Now this has national security implications because about 1.9 billion CHIPs are consumed every year by the Defense Department. Just let that sink in. 1.9 billion CHIPs are consumed every year by the Defense Department. Now hopefully they're consumed in weapons that are aimed at protecting us and not at technologies that are aimed at violating our rights. Let's assume this is for protection. If that is the case, then having a regular supply of these CHIPs is important. Not clear that in order to do that, you need to have them produced in the United States. After all, both Taiwan and South Korea and Japan, the three largest producers of CHIPs in the world, are all friends of the United States. Of course, the challenge there is that if there is a war with China over Taiwan, some of those shipping lanes to the United States could be disrupted and it would be good for national defense reasons. They have some CHIP manufacturing in the Western Hemisphere, whether in Europe or whether in the Americas. It doesn't have to be the United States that's part of that issue here if you're really thinking about strategically. It just needs to be in a friendly country that one can easily access supply chains in a time of crisis. It could be in Mexico, it could be in Canada, or it could be in Western Europe. It could even be in some more stable countries in Latin America, although now that I think about it, are they stable countries in Latin America? Good question. One of the reasons it's unlikely that we manage to make enough CHIPs in the United States in the future is that today it takes 25% longer to make a CHIP in the US and it costs 50% more than it does in Asia. It's faster, more efficient, more productive, and cheaper. Not because primarily of labor costs, but primarily because of greater productivity. Asia is much more productive in the production of CHIPs than anywhere else. Now, there are three serious impediments today to deploy significant money in order to build FABS, CHIP manufacturing plants in the United States, three big impediments beyond the issue of the government centrally planning, the government picking winners and losers, put all that aside. Let's say we decided, let's say this was a good idea somehow and let's pretend that that was the case, but let's even pretend or let's just say that private enterprise wanted to invest heavily in CHIP manufacturing in the United States. There are three reasons why it just can't happen. Even if there was private capital, 50 billion of private capital, 100 billion of private capital to go in and build CHIP manufacturing plants in the United States, you can't do it. Why? I mean the United States is the place to build stuff, isn't it? Used to be. The number one impediment for building CHIP plants is red tape. From 1990 to 2020, the time required to construct new CHIP plants, FABS, in the United States rose by 38%. That's just the time. The Clean Air Act, just getting a permit for the Clean Air Act takes 18 months. The National Environmental Policy Act allows for reviews that can last four and a half to five years. There are another half dozen federal laws that come into play, plus endless state and local, not in my backyard, laws, variations. They just slow everything down and of course make a lot of money for lawyers, but slow everything down. At every step, there are regulations, there are agencies, there are bureaucrats who want a piece of this, who want to establish their authority and get to give this a stamp of their permission to feel that they are powerful and they are meaningful. But of course, a delay of four and a half years to get the environmental permissions, if four and a half years technology shifts in an instant, technology shifts so fast, in four and a half years you're four and a half years behind cutting edge. And you might have to build a completely different plant.  It is, I mean people talk about we've lost manufacturing jobs to China, we've lost this, yeah. When you make it so damn difficult to build in America, when you make it so damn difficult to construct anything in America, this is what happens. You want to see a renaissance of industrialization of America. You need to get rid of the red tape.  Build, build, build should be a platform for some political party. And of course, as a consequence of this, the delays, the difficulties, I mean who's going to invest their money? This is why private money will not be invested. And even though the government is now throwing money at it, they have to have private money to match it, they have to have private interest involved. And the government is not cutting red tape even though it's a government project. The Biden administration is not reducing any of the regulatory constraints. Quite the contrary. So the US is just not going to be a serious competitor when it comes to manufacturing as long as these kind of obstacles, this kind of red tape exists. In Japan, it can take maybe to build a world-class manufacturing plant, to build chips, a fab, it can take maybe 580 days in the United States, it takes 740 days. That's a lot of time. It's a lot of time in the world of technology. Why invest the time in the US if you're going to do it? Another challenge, of course, we've talked about this before, is the US just doesn't have the labor force for it. We are probably about these new fabs that are already underway, the projects that are already underway, are going to require about 300,000 skilled laborers. The United States doesn't have one. It doesn't have them. The number of US students pursuing advanced degrees in fields that are related to chip manufacturing has stagnated for 30 years. Now, there are lots of international students enrolled. There are lots of international students studying in American universities that could be used for fabs, could be used for manufacturing advanced chips. But we make it almost impossible for them to stay in the United States, stay and work here. And as a consequence, companies like Intel, TSMC, who are trying to build in the United States, they can't find workers. They're literally struggling to find workers. If you look at the main degrees that are associated with chip manufacturing, electrical engineering, 74% of electrical engineering graduate students are farm-born. Of computer information sciences, 72% are farm-born. Industrial manufacturing engineering, 71% are farm-born. Chemical engineering, 54%, material science, 52%. We educate them. We subsidize their education often. We get them at an advanced degree, a master's or even a PhD, and we kick them out of the country. I mean, is there a single policy that is dumber than that one in terms of just shoe economics and want to be successful? I don't know of one if there is. And then finally, a final obstacle to the United States actually producing chips is political. It's all the rules that the Biden administration has placed on companies that receive this subsidy. They have to advantage labor unions, which only raises the costs. And again, skilled laborers, they're going to be members of unions. They have to favor demographics. They have to be diverse. They have to empower community partners. They have to offer community investment. They have to give all kinds of benefits to employees, including affordable, accessible, reliable, and high quality childcare, determined by, I guess, the common bureaucrat. Basically, we've just allocated $50 billion to subsidize an industry that we cannot compete in because we, America, has created obstacles to our own competition, our own ability to compete. We have a ridiculous, you can't build anything in America attitude. We have a ridiculous attitude towards immigration and we have an absurd attitude within this law that is trying to establish social policies while trying to, you know, in the name of national defense, establish a significant chip industry in the U.S. It really is insane. It really is crazy. And as usual with crazy and sane things, nobody seems to care. Nobody seems to care.  You know, I haven't seen anybody in the house.  Why don't they pass a bill, even if it's just symbolic, eliminating a lot of these environmental regulations, streamlining the process of building things in the United States. You know, telling local and state governments that they can't intervene in these projects. But getting the EPA out, pass the bill. It won't, Biden won't sign it, grant it. But then we can blame the Democrats. Then it's clear, the Republicans have provoked this, Democrats against it, cool. Where's this bill? Republicans passed it? Republicans offered it? Any Republican? Any Republican? Even talking about it? There is no pro-growth, pro, you know, pro-market political party in the United States anymore. Suddenly no pro-build, build, build, which is what we need, an attitude towards best building. Thank you for listening or watching the Iran Brook show. If you'd like to support the show, we make it as easy as possible for you to trade with me. If you get value from listening, you get value from watching, show your appreciation. You can do that by going to iranbrookshow.com.  Also, if you'd like to see the Iran book show grow, please consider sharing our content and of course subscribe. Press that little bell button right down there on YouTube so that you get an announcement when we go live. And for those of you who are already subscribers and those of you who are already supporters of the show, thank you. I very much appreciate it.


Okay, cool. So let's hit let's hit traffic. Let's hit and then you can you can either title everything below or do it as you go, but it's up to you. You tell me. Yeah, hit the drop down and just let's title everything now. Okay. So this will be specific to this specific webinar so. Yes, so whatever I kind of do this on whatever the video is so whatever is going to help you. Because this isn't this is going to have a specific end date this is just going to go for seven days. Yeah, that's fine. All you're doing is naming it so whatever so in here in the parentheses I put traffic. I just name that normally whatever video it is so perfect so traffic and then scroll down so you have two other. It's fine you can name them as we go, but there was two more below that. No, it's all good. So right here. Okay, so now we're going to we don't need any special ad category so scroll down. And then you can leave that one off just go next. Okay, and this is yeah just name it at the top. What, what do you usually use for the name on this one. Same thing. Well, in the second tab, which is this asset title I normally name it like all whatever helps you identify it when you're looking at the dashboard so whether it's the city you're going to target or whether it's the country you're targeting or whether it's the the demographics you're targeting the gender like whatever is going to help you like know what add this is when you're looking at it at on the dashboard side. So yeah retargeted perfect retargeted. Okay, so scroll down. And then we don't need any dynamic creative. You can go daily budget you can go lifetime budget up to you. Same dollar amount. And then just go. And then also here's another thing to keep in mind here's and here's here's a yeah really good thing to keep in mind. When you're retargeting us an audience. It kind of. It's not that it doesn't matter what your budget is, but you can kind of set it for almost whatever not too too low not too too low but it kind of doesn't matter on the on the on the on the maximum because even if you put at $75 and let's say that audience wasn't even as big enough it wasn't big enough to even use all the 75 bucks. Facebook won't spend all the 75 bucks.  So, you don't need to put a whole lot right there so lifetime 75 bucks perfect let's see if they even spend it so but yeah for sure set the date, the 29th. 6am. And then and then yeah stretch it out seven days.  It's like 1112 bucks a day so yeah they probably they. Yeah, we'll find out we'll find out if they even spend it all. Webinars at April 15 at 4pm. Okay, perfect run right up to 3pm. Actually I would go straight up to four, like straight up to four, like yeah, perfect it'll stop right at four. Okay cool so scroll down and then right there in the audience custom audience all you're going to do is click on that and then find your custom audience, which we're going right here you see all of them but as you build out a shitload then you'll want to click on custom audience at the top to really see which one it is, but this is fine. So yeah, right there, the 25% yes the same thing so that's cool right there. And then you, it might be a good idea now to exclude to exclude anyone who has landed on that thank you page. So, your words that it's the, it would be it would be your pain subscribe know it wouldn't be the look alike it'd be yeah be pain subscribers. And would it be demo requests as well as a demo crest request a lead. Yeah, but no one's ever clicked that that's okay. Perfect so then paint subscribers is who is who you'll for sure exclude. Okay, cool. So then locations, this is where you would choose, you know, any other location or if you're running any other locations. This is where we wanted to do Australia. So what we'll do also here let's let's do this let's um, let's go ahead and, and, and we'll re or retargeting, we're retiring so that would be good for conversions but that would also be good to set up as multiple assets. So, you'll want to separate those take away Australia. In this case you're only you're running traffic and you're retargeting a custom audience. So, wherever that custom audience maybe that's location you want to you want to put so you're running in that custom audience in these in any other country. I think we dig. I think the video is global. Is that how you ran it. You ran it worldwide. I did but I could be wrong. I'm going to go back and check. Yeah, you might as well check real quick because whatever, whatever that targeting was is what you want to match up over here. So let's. Yeah, click on click on the edit. And actually, check the box to the left check the box of very, very left, and then click on the middle tab, assets, the middle tab. Yeah, right here. So click on the edit below the title here. You have targeting PJ golfers. Let's click on edit and then let's find out down here. Okay, so down here we have yeah okay so then so then in that case you'll want to just go and you went. Scroll down, you went all genders you went English English okay cool so then let's set let's set the same. Yeah this is I'm glad we looked at this. So let's do the same for this let's just scroll down and go worldwide. And then go English all and then and leave it as as as is. So, yeah you can leave that you can leave that as this but take away Japan and just type in worldwide there. Perfect. Okay cool so always hit the drop down always hit region. That's when you're looking for and then scroll down and then just change it to English all. Okay and normally when you're retargeting, you don't really need to put anything else other than other than the country, or countries or worldwide, but the age you shouldn't have to change the age English all. That's fine. That's fine we're good. Okay so we're good on everything else. So automatic you can leave it at that and then that's it so hit next. And then just. Yeah, you can go just name that. Okay cool and then create add right there hit that drop down and just go existing. And then that's. And then select post. You'll see it to the left select post. Yeah right there. Awesome and then just add your add button your call to action button and, and then. We change this copy here. Do that should have been done before. Let's see if we can go to your business page and change it. You may not be able to at this point, unless we just completely turn this add off or delete it, and then start it again which we could totally do that but let's just double check. Refresh this page real quick just refresh it. Well, I meant more like. Like I want to have a general language on the Facebook page but have specific language on the ad. Well that is the ad. So video and create a new instead of using the post we just created put the video up and do different copy or no. You can you can, but the moment you shut that add off, it's it's off right so it's not on the page anymore. I just always put it on the page, because you're spending money on it so you might as well leave it on the page. Well, well after it's off, but you can you see if you can hit the three dots see if you can edit this. Yes just just see if you can edit post yeah perfect so let's see if it allows you to. You wouldn't have copy that specific to this webinar. Hell yeah I would like so whatever. Yeah, dude for sure I thought it was already specific I thought you already set it up is proud to launch our live webinar series featuring. Okay, so check our video learn more. This video, this webinar is featuring a PGA professional doing lesson on working. Okay. You wouldn't put, you wouldn't put that in here. Sure, like for sure for sure. So whatever. This is the ad so this this post, this is the ad so whatever you want it to say there for sure like put it in. When I made this post on my Facebook page it was more like a general post just to have it up there. Now let's if that's the video we're going to use and yeah let's just edit this text and make it make it more specific to registering but I think, I mean that's pretty specific as well I don't know what you can add whatever else you want, but um. Yeah, whatever we put here that that's the ad. Alright, I can leave this and then the image one be, you know more specific. Yeah, you could you could do that. But you can also do it here so whatever you want. You let me know you what do you think because I mean, I always had it as like the general stuff goes on my Facebook page and then the specific stuff goes in my ads. No it's it's one it's just it's one whatever video you're going to use for an ad right out that text as if it's an ad right now. So as you posted this whenever you did. If you knew this was going to be a video ad, then right off that text. Well, it is a video ad and it goes I believe it goes to our schedule of all of our webinars. Now I want to do an ad specific for this one specific webinar coming up. Okay, so then. So then repost it on the page then repost the video again on which I don't think you can I don't know. Let's see if it allows you to post this I'm pretty sure you can pretty sure you can you can post the same video again. Yeah for sure you do that. So yeah so just upload it to the business page again and then just write out the text right at the text specific for that webinar.


Hello and welcome to the session. In this session, we will discuss y, the x coordinate of the points where the graphs of the equations y is equal to f of x and y is equal to g of x intersect, are the solutions of the equation f of x is equal to g of x. And we will also discuss how to find solution of system of equations approximately using graphs. Let us consider the following system of equations y is equal to f of x is equal to x square plus 2 and y is equal to g of x which is equal to x plus 2. Now, let us see graph of these two equations. Here we see that the equation y is equal to x square plus 2 represents an upward parabola with vertical shift of two units. So, this represents the equation y is equal to x square plus 2. Now, the function g of x that is equal to x plus 2 represents a straight line and here this blue straight line is graph of the equation y is equal to x plus 2. And from the graph we see that the two curves intersect at two points that is point a which coordinates 0, 2 and point b which coordinates 1, 3. And these points are the solution set of the given system of equations. It means at these two points the values of both the functions are same. Thus we say that at point a which coordinates 0, 2 f of x is equal to g of x. Also at point b which coordinates 1, 3 f of x is equal to g of x. That is when the value of x is 0 then the value of y is equal to 2 for both the functions similarly when the value of x is equal to 1 then the value of y is 3 for both the functions. Now let us put values of f of x and g of x in equation f of x is equal to g of x. We get f of x that is x square plus 2 is equal to g of x that is x plus 2 which implies that x square plus 2 minus of x minus of 2 is equal to 0 which further implies that x square minus of x is equal to 0 that is after simplification we get this equation as x square minus x is equal to 0. Now we will see that x is equal to 0 and x is equal to 1 will satisfy this equation. Now when we put x is equal to 0 in this equation we get 0 square minus 0 is equal to 0 which implies that 0 minus 0 is equal to 0. That is 0 is equal to 0 which is true also when we put the value of x as 1 in this equation we get 1 square minus 1 is equal to 0 which implies that 1 minus 1 is equal to 0 that is 0 is equal to 0 which is true so we say that both x is equal to 0 and x is equal to 1 are solutions of equation f of x is equal to g of x. Now let us discuss how to find the solutions of the system of equations approximately. Now consider the following graph of the system of equations y is equal to 2x and y is equal to square root of 1 minus x square. That is this blue straight line represents the graph of the equation y is equal to 2x and this red coloured semicircle represents the graph of the equation y is equal to square root of 1 minus x square. From graph we can see that the two graphs intersect at one point if we carefully see this point of intersection we have the value of x approximately as 0.4 the value of y as 0.9 approximately thus the approximate solution of the system of equations is given by the coordinates 0.4 0.9. Now let us see its actual solution by substitution method. Now here we are given two equations y is equal to 2x and y is equal to square root of 1 minus x square. Now we put y is equal to 2x in the equation y is equal to square root of 1 minus x square and we get 2x is equal to square root of 1 minus x square. Now squaring both sides we get 2x whole square that is 4x square is equal to 1 minus x square. Which implies that 4x square plus x square is equal to 1 which further implies that 5x square is equal to 1 which implies that x square is equal to 1 upon 5 which further implies that x is equal to plus minus of square root of 1 upon 5 or we can write it as plus minus of 1 upon square root of 5. So we get x is equal to 1 upon square root of 5 and minus 1 upon square root of 5. Now we put these values in the equation y is equal to 2x that is first we put x is equal to 1 upon square root of 5 and we get the value of y as 2 into x that is 2 into 1 upon square root of 5 which is equal to 2 upon square root of 5 also when x is equal to minus 1 upon square root of 5 this implies that y is equal to 2 into x that is 2 into minus 1 upon square root of 5 which is equal to minus 2 upon square root of 5. So we have 2 points with the coordinates 1 upon square root of 5, 2 upon square root of 5 and minus 1 upon square root of 5 minus 2 upon square root of 5. Let us check these 2 points in the 2 equations. Now for point with the coordinates minus 1 upon square root of 5 minus 2 upon square root of 5. Now we put this point in the equation y is equal to square root of 1 minus x square and we get y that is minus 2 upon square root of 5 is equal to square root of 1 minus x square that is minus 1 upon square root of 5 whole square which implies that minus 2 upon square root of 5 is equal to square root of 1 minus minus 1 upon square root of 5 whole square is equal to 1 upon 5 which further implies that minus 2 upon square root of 5 is equal to square root of now taking LCM we get 5 in the denominator and in the numerator we have 5 minus 1 that is 4. So we have minus 2 upon square root of 5 is equal to square root of 4 upon 5 which implies that minus 2 upon square root of 5 is equal to 2 upon square root of 5 as square root of 4 is equal to 2. So here we have got minus 2 upon square root of 5 is equal to 2 upon square root of 5 which is not true. So this point is not the solution of the given system that is the point with coordinates minus 1 upon square root of 5 minus 2 upon square root of 5 is not the solution of the given system of equations. Now we shall take the same for the second point with the coordinates 1 upon square root of 5 2 upon square root of 5. We put this point in the equation y is equal to square root of 1 minus x square that is we put x is equal to 1 upon square root of 5 y is equal to 2 upon square root of 5 in this equation. And we get y that is 2 upon square root of 5 is equal to square root of 1 minus x square that is 1 upon square root of 5 whole square which implies that 2 upon square root of 5 is equal to square root of 1 minus 1 upon square root of 5 whole square is equal to 1 upon 5. 5. This further implies that 2 upon square root of 5 is equal to square root of, now taking LCM we get 5 in the denominator and in the numerator we have 5 minus 1. So we have 2 upon square root of 5 is equal to square root of 5 minus 1 whole upon 5 which implies that 2 upon square root of 5 is equal to square root of 4 upon 5 which further implies that 2 upon square root of 5 is equal to 2 upon square root of 5 as square root of 4 is equal to 2. So we have got 2 upon square root of 5 is equal to 2 upon square root of 5 which is true. Now again we put this point with the coordinates 1 upon square root of 5, 2 upon square root of 5 in the second equation that is y is equal to 2x and we have y that is 2 upon square root of 5 is equal to 2x that is 2 into 1 upon square root of 5 which implies that 2 upon square root of 5 is equal to 2 upon square root of 5 which is true. So exact solution is given by the ordered pair 1 upon square root of 5, 2 upon square root of 5. Thus we see that the approximate solution of the system of equations is given by the ordered pair 0.4, 0.9 which is obtained graphically and exact solution is given by the ordered pair 1 upon square root of 5, 2 upon square root of 5 obtained using substitution method. We should note that sometimes we have such non-linear system of equations which cannot be solved algebraically so we can only find their approximate solutions by graphing. It is always better to draw the graph of non-linear function to know the number of solutions of the given system of equations. Thus in this session we have learnt why the x coordinate of the points where the graphs of the equations y is equal to f of x and y is equal to g of x intersect at the solutions of the equation f of x is equal to g of x. We have also discussed how to find the solutions of the system of equations approximately using graphs. This completes our session. Hope you enjoyed this session.


So, we'll move on now while the next presenter's slides are loaded. I have the pleasure of introducing our next speaker, Mr. Peter Wynne. Peter currently serves as the Acting Chief Privacy and Civil Liberties Officer of the United States Department of Justice. The CPCLO is responsible for ensuring the department's compliance with the law's regulations and established policies designed to protect the privacy of individuals, as well as ensuring that concerns about privacy and civil liberties are appropriately considered in the development and implementation of law's regulations and policies related to the department's mission. So, warm welcome from the open group please for Peter Wynne. I will duck out Peter and your slides will appear as very shortly and you can take them through us, but welcome Peter Wynne. Thank you Steve. I'll wait for my slides to come up, but while I'm waiting I just wanted to highlight a couple of things. One is that my apologies for the abstract. I had for some reason this is American parochialism. I just assumed that this was a group that was going to be limited to the U.S. and suddenly I discovered it's actually probably more international than U.S. but that's good. But just forgive me for my U.S. centric points of view here. I also wanted to thank Lisa for the focus of her presentation because it dovetails very nicely with the kinds of things that I'll be talking about. Although I'm afraid you're going to see my presentation as being a bit more law-centric and a bit more philosophy and history-centric and hopefully you'll be able to see the connection at the end. The general point I'm trying to make in the talk today is really the transition that's going on between the concept of privacy as a right of individual control to the idea of privacy as being something that reflects trust, not only individual trust but trust within a group of stakeholders and a wider society. And what the point that I'll be trying to make is that in that transition, standard-setting organizations are playing and will play an increasingly more important role because that transition involves transition also from more of a top-down approach to law to a bottom-up understanding of law. So with that introduction, I also wanted to say that I'm here today really in my individual capacity. I'm not speaking on behalf of the U.S. Department of Justice, but then what I'm going to be saying really doesn't implicate DOJ equity so much in any event. But I did want to highlight that I've been struggling myself in the role that I play in the government to come up with a better way of thinking sort of in a big picture way about the role of law, the role of standard-setting organizations and the way in which that can ultimately improve our understanding of what privacy is and its relationship to trust-based systems. Lisa uses the word zero trust. I'm going to be talking about trust but trust in the sense, the same sense that Lisa was using it, which is a multi-stakeholder idea that trust is something that is earned, it is not something that is assumed. So with that in mind, now I'm going to have to figure out how to, here we go. So I want to begin with a story of privacy in a state of nature. And the state of nature, this is a schoolyard, the state of nature, depending on your point of view, maybe a Hobbesian or Lockeian to joke, you know, it could be a state of nature where life is nasty, brutish and short on a schoolyard or it may be a state of nature where everyone's getting along great. But it's a state of nature in the sense that the teacher on the playground is not supervising the kids.  And you know, Radio Free Sally, we know what Sally's about to do. She yells out to every kid on the playground, Annie loves Timmy, Annie loves Timmy. Right. Annie is mortified, Timmy's embarrassed, Sally gets a lot of attention. The teacher does not intervene. What happens? Well, the kids have their own self-governing privacy system, right? It's called the Blabbermouth system or it's called the Tattletail system, whatever you want to call it, but basically Sally is stigmatized and there's a graduated system of sanctions.  What happens, the critical thing to be thinking about here and the relationship to standards is that the kids' self-governing privacy ecosystem pauses the kids to internalize the social norms of trust. They think it's important to be trusted. They think it's important to be a person with whom others can share confidences with security and trust. In the teacher, the only time the teacher really needs to intervene, if in the kids' self-governing ecosystem it starts looking like they're going to be the lord of the flies, you know, that they're going to start eating each other. But otherwise, it's a hands-off system and if the teacher were to intervene, the kids would start playing the teacher against each other and the system would not nearly be as effective at internalizing these norms of social behavior. So, now, that's no law. That's a system where there's no formal law other than a light touch by the teacher to keep people from hitting each other. And what's the relationship between that and law? Formal law. And so I wanted to just talk about certain kinds of formal law. In the United States and overseas, there's constitutional frameworks, there's statutes, there's regulations that agencies promulgate, and there's common law, which is basically the law that courts create by precedent. And so you can see this in privacy where the Fourth Amendment of the United States Constitution, the EU Convention on Human Rights Article 8 is kind of a constitutional framework. And then below that, there are statutes, Privacy Act in the United States. There are various other privacy statutes that are referenced. The UK, for instance, has a statute, the Data Protection Act of 2018. These are privacy statutes that either the Parliament or the US Congress passes. Then there are regulations that are issued by government agencies. These can be the HIPAA regulations in the United States or the EU General Data Protection Regulation in the EU, which is issued by the EU Commission or ratified by the Parliament. And then there's a common law, which is you'll have courts create property, recognize property rights and enforce property rights because the critical part of protecting privacy is protecting your property. In the United States, we have development of invasion of privacy torts. And in the UK, they really develop breach of confidentiality ideas as well. And these are common law doctrines. Now, I wanted to say something very quickly about ways in which people have a thinking about privacy and how it's transitioned from the idea of privacy as control to privacy as trust. But traditionally, going back to the 17th century, privacy was something that was thought of as being protected by property. John Locke's idea that property comes out of the person that you are. And you can see this in the next century in UK common law, very famous case where the court conceptualizes sort of a fundamental idea of property as protecting privacy, where the seizure of private papers, in this case with a general warrant, was declared contrary to the common law. And therefore, the trespass is the seizure of the paper. So the paper is where the information is stored. And the information, the private information, is protected by the right of property in the paper. You can see this reflected in the US Fourth Amendment, where it protects papers and effects. But what happens in this framework is it, and again, that framework presumes that the primary medium of information is paper. At least it was after the invention of printing. But in the 19th century, you started to see through the invention of electronic communication devices, whether it was the telegraph, the telephone, is that the information was now communicated through wires that were no longer owned by the sender. They were owned, usually by the communication provider. And so property rights ceased to protect individual privacy in connection with that electronic information flow because the property right, the individual's property right whose information was being communicated was no longer protected when they are on the wires of the phone company. Now the phone company had a property right, they could sue for trespass potentially, but they might not want to. So if somebody tapped into the wires, there was no common law trespass action that the courts would recognize. And part of that was recognized early on, also in the 19th century, by a very famous Law Review article, Charles Warren and Louis Brandeis. And they basically looked back to the property model and they said, we've got to do something about this new world of information that we need to sue, we need to create a property right in the information. And they hypothesized, they said, why don't we imagine an intellectual property right, which can apply to information as applying to protect privacy. Now that idea caught steam, it just never took off. But it became one of those ideas that you can't get rid of. And later when Louis Brandeis became Justice Brandeis of the United States Supreme Court, he also dissented in a very famous case, where again the government had obtained information to get a conviction through a wiretap. The court said, hey, there wasn't a trespass, though it's not a violation of the Fourth Amendment. And he said, no, no, no, we need to imagine this to be a property right. Now that was never adopted. And ultimately, when they began to recognize constitutional rights to privacy, they adopted a different approach. But the basic problem is paper-based information builds a control out from an individual property right. But when information is electronic form, it's connected to other information. It's constantly moving in a system of relationships, which are no longer within the control of an individual. So I mean, a good way to imagine if you're damming up a river to get electricity, you don't want to finish pouring the concrete before you ask how the salmon are going to get upstream. That it's not simply between the telephone company or the electricity company and the users who are buying the electricity. There's an ecosystem that you're trying to manage here. And just as in that environmental analogy, when you have electronic information, it's flowing like water in the river. So water is generally good unless it's in your basement. Information is generally good unless it's the name of, for instance, the confidential informant in the wrong hands, in which case you've suddenly got a dead confidential informant. So it's a management problem as opposed to a control idea. And you start to see the courts in the law do the same thing. So they reject, when they finally recognize a privacy interest is being protected under the Fourth Amendment, the court actually rejects the idea of privacy as individual control and goes to a more social idea of reasonable expectations from a social point of view. And you see that same idea developed in the development of what are called the Fair Information Practice Principles. And these are the principles that underlie most privacy frameworks. Notice no secondary use without consent, access, rights of access, rights of amendment, security and enforcement. Now that idea, if you go back to its origins in 1973 in the book called the HEW Report that we saw in just the earlier slide, this slide, they reject again the definition of privacy as individual control and say privacy needs to re-redefined as the idea of mutuality or trust protecting the shared interests of all stakeholders. So where does this take us now? The challenge is that how do we govern personally identifiable information, information that identifies somebody or says something about somebody or would if it was combined with other information? This is a resource. How do we govern that resource? Now, for instance, the General Data Protection Regulation implements these Fair Information Practice Principles by creating a right of an individual control. So it takes that brandicine idea of individual control and jams it on this idea that was developed as basically a stakeholder trust model. And there you have this individual right enforced by government agencies and individuals can go to court to enforce their right. And their control structure is based on consent. But that idea fundamentally is pushing up against what is basically a relational model of knowledge when we go to electronic information. And you can see this if you just look at Claude Shannon's famous article, Mathematical Theory of Communication. We measure information not in terms of a thing like a piece of paper. We are measuring information in terms of the communication. And for there to be communication, there has to be a relationship. And Friedrich von Hayek in almost the same same year that was that Shannon published his famous paper. He also highlights the same problem, which is, and here it's a different context. He distinguishes scientific knowledge from practical knowledge. And he highlights how important practical knowledge is as a social resource. But then if you just look at that idea of knowledge that he begins with or information, it almost perfectly overlaps with the idea of personal data under the General Data Protection Information It's always practical knowledge is nearly always information that will say something about somebody or could if it was combined with other information. So you start to have to see what we think of as privacy or quasi-property as something that's really a social resource. Okay, assuming that this is a social resource, how do you manage it? How do you control it? How do you keep the resource from being polluted or overused? And this leads us and this is a common assumption that, well, if you've got a social resource and you want to keep it from being overused or mismanaged, we often use this idea of the tragedy of the commons. The tragedy of the commons is this idea that if you don't have a property right or if you don't have some kind of administrative command and control structure, one or the other or both, the commons, the area of the pasture that anybody can graze or cattle on will be overutilized and the soil will be ultimately ruined. What was interesting is this was assumed to be conventional wisdom. I mean, it's still highly assumed and it's actually utterly false. A woman who won the Nobel Prize in 2009, Eleanor Ostrom, realized when she went around the world looking at self-governing ecosystems and her focus was primarily on natural resources, fishing waters, forests, irrigation systems. She realized that most of these things were not governed by property rights or by command and control structures, but they were governed by something that was a lot closer to our blabbermouth system that we saw with the kids. And what she highlighted were certain basic criteria that indicated when those systems would be successful and when they would not be successful. But when they were successful, they were much more efficient. They were much better at managing the resource. But one critical aspect that she highlighted was the importance of having that self-governance system recognized by higher-level authorities. In other words, the teacher needs to make sure that the teacher recognizes that the kids are running their own blabbermouth system. And so that's really what I got interested in. And this is where standards come in because a standard-setting organization and the standards that result from that are much more bottom-up. They are much more focused on the kinds of things that the kids come up with on their own and they become much easier to internalize for businesses when the businesses adopt them. And given the fact that the standard-setting organizations are coming up with these really robust, wonderful governance structures, what's the relationship between those governance structures and formal law? These are both kinds of law, but lawyers tend to think of law as being something that's segregated from the bottom-up stuff. And so what the U.S. government in OMB Circular A119 has is the idea is we want agencies to have more interface with these private sector standards to have public-private partnerships. These were developed earlier on. Consumer product safety is a good example of food and drug, but you're starting to see those things being explored in privacy much more so. And Article 40 of the GDPR uses codes of conduct and in the U.K., Liz Denham has done some really remarkable work in this area interfacing, she's the privacy commissioner in the U.K., and she's done some wonderful work with business to integrate the GDPR principles with codes of conduct or standards. In the United States, the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act has developed all so-called industry guidelines, but they're basically the same thing. And these guidelines are recognized by the Federal Trade Commission and they are, you get high levels of compliance. And you're starting to see that in proposed legislation as well. The SAFE Act, which is a bill in Congress right now, talks about voluntary consensus standards. And then you have a draft Uniform Law Commission model private stuff for the state level that also has this idea of an interface with private sector standards. This is all pretty good. The question is, where is this going next? Assuming we're able to have a more, less dysfunctional, I should say, interface between formal law and private law or private sector standards, where is this going? And the next stage is really the stage that Lisa was talking about. You see this in the U.S. government with OMB Circular A130, which is thinking about information governance as a strategic resource. So information is a resource that needs to be managed. And of course, I would refer you to Appendix 2 where they talk about how you make privacy. You recognize that personally identifiable information is also a resource that needs to be strategically managed. And this is actually something that I think I borrowed from NIST, which talks about the way in which you do the old Plan-Do-Check-Act structure as you're implementing this from a total enterprise point of view. And of course, the open group itself is approaching this in the risk management frameworks that it's pioneering. So where does this leave us? It leaves us thinking about getting away from the idea of privacy as a thing that belongs to a person and thinking of it more as a form of knowledge governance and thinking that information is always going to be entangled as opposed to control, that we're going to look for trust or how we earn trust and what do people care about as opposed to thinking of this as protected through adversary relationships in court, for instance. We are thinking of information as in contexts as opposed to rights that belong to individuals. We're thinking of an ecosystem approach as opposed to a physical world, you know, controlling the physical world. We're thinking of it as emergent and dynamic and constantly moving as opposed to fixed and static. And we're thinking about standards as opposed to rules. And this, I think, is the future. And so I'd be interested in any questions. We don't have very much more time, but I would invite any questions. Peter, thank you very, very much for that. I don't usually admit this, but since I'm among several hundred friends here, I'm an attorney by training. So I like the story behind this a lot. It's great. So yes, we'll move to questions. So GDPR that you referenced several times is four letter word, four letter acronym for many companies. Do you think it's fundamentally a good or bad thing from the individual, from the individual's point of view? I think that's yet to be seen. I think that if the I don't think the compliance rates in the GDPR are very high. Right. My budget and I'm only responsible for the Department of Justice's compliance, but the compliance framework in the federal government is very similar to the GDPR. There's almost the same kind of fair information practices that are required as well as the information governance and risk things under the government act. So we have a very similar framework. And I'm struggling to get the Department of Justice compliant, right? I mean, but I know where I'm not compliant. And on a good day, you know, I could sort of imagine maybe 90% on a bad day, I'm about 80 something, but you know, we've got a plan to get there and we're getting resources where they need to go and we're getting the training and we're measuring and we're getting better and better every year. My budget at the Department of Justice, I have about 150,000 people, including the contractors I'm responsible for is less than half the budget of many of the data protection authorities in Europe. They're responsible for millions of systems. I've got about 650.  And so that's a challenge. The way to solve the challenge, I would incur, I mean, my colleague and friend Liz Denham in the UK is working with industry to come up with stuff that works that industry buys into through codes of conduct. But I think she's one of the very few data protection authorities within the sort of GDPR world that's really exploring and developing these codes of conduct that are available within the statute, you know, within the regulatory framework of the GDPR to the extent that you can create a good interface with private sector standards, you can make the GDPR work to the extent that they do not coordinate with standards to get a real bottom up buy-in. You know, I think they're gonna have the problem that in Texas, anyway, there's a Texas expression where I practice law for a while. And it's called walking in the graveyard. You're over a lot of people, but they're not all listening to you. Yeah, absolutely. I was reading either last night or first thing this morning about, so we might get a real test on, legal test on GDPR regarding Uber drivers who've been fired according to an algorithm apparently, rather than a human decision. And that is, I think it's article 22 of GDPR, something like that, that is gonna get tested for the first time. So the interesting thing to see how that plays out. Question from one of the members of us, one of the attendees today. How about shared personal private information, Peter, where two people have equal rights, like twins, for example? Well, I'm not sure that twins are the best case. What about when I send an email to you and we both share that information? Whose information is it? I think that that's getting to the point I was making about the electronic, the nature of electronic information. And really, Claude Shannon's point about the nature of information itself. Information is always when you drill down a communication. It's always gonna be a communication from one person to another, one thing to another thing, person to a thing. It's going to be existing in a relationship and relationships exist in contexts. And when you start thinking about information that thing, that way you can't think about it anymore as just a data point that belongs to any particular person. It explodes. And this was the point that the HEW committee made in 1973. And the chairman of the HEW committee was Willis Ware, who was, you know, he studied with Alan Turing. Oh, he was a friend of Alan Turing. He's a good temporary. They both studied with von Neumann. You know, they were doing the first computers in the 40s. And Ware was, he could see that computers were fundamentally different from paper. He knew that this was in relationships and he knew that the game was trust and to get away from the idea of individual control. That was what was so essential. Yeah. Understood. Just if we can one minute, Peter, but if we can just squeeze this question in a long time valued member in the open group asked this question, he cares very much about our ODEF standard, data standard. How does standards to the DRES information management get exposure within the DOJ? I want to probably decline to comment about that. One of the problems that lawyers have is they, and I can say this to you because you've just confessed to being one, is that standards are generally invisible to lawyers. That lawyers think of law as being something that's just kind of out there and it's, you know, law is what judges do in fact, right? Actually, law is what people do in fact. And standards understand that and the standards are a bottom-up structure because of that. Interestingly, Justice Holmes, when he is often thought of as the judges are enforcing the formal law, right? And that's what people understand when they hear the expression law is what judges do. In fact, it's not what's in the statute books. But actually Justice Holmes, when he was in Massachusetts before he became on the Supreme Court, he was on the Supreme Court, but then the Supreme Court Justice is what actually sit as trial judges as well. And as a trial judge in Massachusetts, he was the first judge in the United States to recognize an industry standard as establishing the standard of care in a tort case. Right. That's, that's, didn't, I did not know that, but interesting, Peter, we have to leave it.


Yeah.  And guess what? Actually, Leona is the elder. So she's big sister. Sorry about that, Ammon. No, I'm the younger. Oh, the youngest. Oh, sorry. I just so close in age. And neither one of you has hit 20 yet. All right, that's good. You have a fantastic superstar story to tell.  I guess I'll tell the story. So I think about what, six years ago? Yeah, so six years ago, me and my family, we moved to a tent on the big island. And while we were there, that's where me and Leah discovered that we could write our own music. And I remember it was a rainy Sunday, and I was being super lazy. And my dad told me to go write a song as a joke. But you know, I thought he's being serious. So being a good son, I went to go and try write a song. And then a couple hours later, I showed it to my family. And I think that's what inspired Leah. So I think I'm Leah's inspiration. And ever since then, yeah, we've been writing music and trying to pursue music. Definitely my inspiration, for sure. Yeah. So you took this song and you made a Zoom show out of it, a Zoom meeting, I guess. And you sent it to American Idol. Can you tell that story, Leah? Yeah, the audition process was so interesting because of COVID. They actually had virtual auditions for the first time. So my mom actually found the auditions for American Idol while she was just searching up on Google for a way for us to get more exposure. And sure enough, she said, hey, you guys want to travel for American Idol? And I haven't watched American Idol in years. And I haven't seen what's going on. But we didn't think much of it. And we said, okay, yeah. So we sent in the Zoom audition of our original music. 24 hours later, the producers called us back and they say, hey, we want you in Hollywood in two weeks in front of the celebrity judges. And I didn't know that there were six other auditions before you even get on TV to the celebrity judges. So the fact that they just wanted us to skip all that and just leave right away to California, it's still so unbelievable for me. But we went over there, we did our audition and we made it past the first round and got our golden tickets. And the process was so fast, but it was so cool. Still unbelievable to think about those sometimes. Yeah. That was what, a couple of years ago? Two years ago. Yeah, 2020. Oh, 2022. Yeah. So, you know, what happened at American Idol? I mean, you probably had expectations, but maybe you were surprised? Well, yeah, I was definitely surprised. I mean, when you watch American Idol on TV, the room looks really small.  And it's like a warehouse. And it's so big. And then you're in the very middle of the warehouse. And there's what, 40 cameras, 40 cameras, tons of lights. And the celebrity judges, they're like a little, the ground they're on is higher than what you're on. So it feels like they're kind of looking down. Yeah. It's kind of like, oh, this is really scary. But I'm so grateful I had Leo with me. So that definitely helped. Yeah. Yeah. Were you nervous? Oh, definitely. Yeah. So how did it go, Leah? I mean, how, you know, what, what song or songs did you sing for that? And how did it go? How did you feel about it? What you were performing on the stage that day? It was actually a really cool experience because Emma and I actually auditioned with an original song, which is actually a really big risk on our part because nobody really tries out with the original music. But we were so young and we had a lot of faith and confidence in our writing. And sure enough, the music blows up when it's on, you know, video to like 14 million views. And then Emma and I were like, okay, maybe we can do this for a living. Maybe ready music is our forte, but the judges were so nice and so supportive. And they gave such good advice and ones that we still keep to this day and will use for the future. Wow. Wow. So what did they say they liked about it? They said that we were definitely something new, something fresh. I think they even used the word unique. Like we're kind of creating our own genre in a way. So it's something very different than what's usually being played. And I don't know, that sounded pretty cool. Yeah. And then Katy Perry said that our future is going to be like signed to labels. It'll happen very, very soon. So hearing from that from a celebrity and somebody who has made it big in the music industry, I'm like, yes, okay, I got some faith in myself. Wow. Wow. What an experience. I want to be clear that has never happened to me. Never. So can you guys give me a few bars from the song that you sang in American Idol? Yeah. Yeah. So this is a song we sang together. And then it was originally called Listen to My Heart. But when we sang it on American Idol, everybody started calling it boom, because there's like a lyric boom, boom. And then now it's called, what is it called? I don't want to be alone. Oh, great. I don't want to be alone. I like that pedal. I can see why they got excited. Yeah. So you guys, did you grow up in a music family? I mean, do you have any relatives who are musically inclined? So my mom's side of the family was very musically inclined, always learning classical music and choirs. And so we get a lot of our talent from our mom's side. And because of the Hawaiian culture, music has always been a part of our lives from when we were babies to now it just has always been there. So we knew from the beginning that music would somehow always be a part of our lives. Yeah. And there's actually, I have an uncle who writes his own music too, Uncle Tai, and he's actually the guy that inspired me to kind of try and write music because I didn't want to do music. I thought music was for the type of boys that couldn't handle sport. You can handle them both though, right? Okay. So you found you discovered one one day that you could sing and you could write a song. Writing songs may not be exactly the same as music, as singing, as understanding, feeling it. Where does the songwriting come from? Because that's poetry, Leah, isn't it? It is poetry. To be honest, I think because of that experience on the Big Island of living in a tent, we had so much time to ourselves from the lives that we were living before that I feel like thanks to that time in the tent, it was the only way Emma and I discovered that we could write music. And it was surprising for me because I have never been good at poetry at all. In fact, when I was a kid growing up, I used to try out for these poem competitions. And if you're poem one, you get like these awards. And I never won every year that I tried out, but he did. And I was like, are you kidding me? But now that like we write music and stuff, it is definitely a talent that has progressed over time. So are you the lyrics person? I'm definitely, well, we both write together, but I love writing because it's therapy for me. Honestly, when I feel I cannot express something enough through words, music is the only way that I think people can feel what I feel. So that's what we love about writing. Where's your strength, Emma? Are you in the music department or are you in the lyrics department? So Leah's music, she's been musically trained. So she knows like the format of everything, like how it should be like verse, chorus and stuff like that. So me, I kind of just like go with the flow. So I go with what I hear and what I feel. So when we write music together, I'm kind of like that brainstorm guy.  And then Leah kind of takes it and puts it in a structure. Yeah, she calls it, what do you call it? I called it like creative trash because it literally just throws things out there. And then, but I think a better word for it is creative chaos, I would say. But it's nice for me because if I hear something I like, I'll put it into a structure for it. I'm like, okay, I like that tune. Let's put it into the verse. Or I like that tune. Let's put it into the bridge. So he's kind of like my idea machine just throwing up stuff. And I'm like, okay, okay, okay. I love it. Creative chaos. Yeah. Well, you know, it reminds me of Simon and Garfunkel. You know, I was classmates with Simon and Garfunkel. They were in my class for a long time. And Simon was a music guy. And Garfunkel was a lyrics guy. And yet when they when they put it together, they, you know, you couldn't really tell they they they were creative, so creative. Does it do you think it affects things that your brother and sister? How does that play here? I mean, our relationship wasn't so good at the beginning. So our first song that we just played for you guys. I don't want to be alone. The inspiration behind that song. So me and Leah, we got in a fight. And for a week, we didn't talk to each other at all. Like, it was bad. I already forgave her though. But girls hold on to things just so long that we didn't talk for a long time. Yeah, yeah. But we've learned to compromise and, you know, work and kind of give up on things. And remember what's more important. Yeah, I guess with siblings, the only problem is when you're really close, you get in debates a lot. And Emma and I, being the oldest of nine kids, like we, we have very strong heads. You like, we're so hot head and that's so many things. And so throughout the years of writing, we've had to learn how to compromise with each other's differences. And because of that, now our differences actually work to an advantage instead of a disadvantage. Yeah, I was going to ask you about that, you know, this big, big family, is there anybody else among those nine kids, you know, that has the same talent, that has the same aspiration? You think you'll have several, several, you know, Amon said, Leona's, what do you think? I honestly think my younger siblings are more talented than me. So we have some very talented young siblings, but they know like saying they don't want to do that stuff. They're heather. Hey, but they're back up dancers right now. So that's pretty cool. Yeah, they'll be at the blue note dancing with us tonight. We just released our first album, and it's only on CD. So you can get it at our website at emmonandleona.live. We will be seeing all those originals, plus some amazing covers as well. And if you guys come, we would love to meet you guys after and sign some CDs for you as well. Sounds great fun with a lot of backup dancers and good food and just sick music. But we did release one song. Oh, yes, we did release one song called All For You is on YouTube now. It has over four million views. So, and it's released on all streaming platforms. So if you guys want to listen to that, go check it out. Okay, well, how about another one? How about giving us one more to punctuate the show? Got another one in mind? We're doing acapella though. So this is our album, and it's called Gotta Move On. And we wrote this song because I'm a senior and I just graduated this year. And when you start on your journeys and new paths in life, there's always things that you got to leave behind, but there's something beautiful about growing up and moving on. I'm sorry, I can't remember that. Don't worry, you'll hear it in the meeting. Oh, I've got things to learn. I know it won't be easy. I'll be on my own, but I don't want to be alone. Superstar is very fresh, I would say.  The brother and sister thing counts. That's right. That's what it is. So you know, it's one thing that we need to know about. So, okay, you have American Idol, and you are extraordinarily successful. They love you there, millions and millions of people like you. And that's really something. And then, what, you come back to the big island and sit around and watch the rain? What? vacation and to visit family, because ever since we left the tent, we haven't been back to the islands and we miss it so much. And so just to walk around and relive these memories of how it started and where it all came from is just such a beautiful thing. So that's why we're here.  So exciting. In October, we have the American Idol tour that will be touring over the entire United States. And then we have a Southeast Asia tour coming up. So that's it. Wow. Wow. Well, how did this all happen? I mean, okay, so we know it means a lot to be successful on American Idol, but something must have happened. Somebody must have come up to you and said, amen, you guys are terrific. Let me make you a deal, record deal, album whatnot. How did that happen? Oh, man, it's all thanks to our mother. She's our mama here. She's a superwoman for sure, very determined, the most passionate person I've ever seen.  So thanks to her, we are able to live our dream to share music around the world, and we can do it without our parents. So we have our mom and our dad to thank for all of that. Yeah, and all at the same time, you're still in school, am I right? We had just graduated, but yeah, college. Okay, tell me about your educations these days and how you manage to be superstars and students at the same time. I'm not sure I know how to do that. It was a long process. I'll tell you that much, but we do a lot of online schooling too. At least I did because I was an early graduate. So I did a lot of things online. There are many times I couldn't show up to school and stuff. So that's the kind of stuff you got to sacrifice in order to live the dream that you want. Yeah. Well, you know, it strikes me that your remarkable experience is all during COVID. How do you COVID affect this? Did it help you? Did it hinder you? Was it a no consequence or a big consequence, am I right? It's like a good and a bad thing at the same time because we had so much time that we were able to kind of focus more on music. But since nothing was open, everything was kind of like it was hard to get out there, I would say. But we definitely found this really awesome guy named Eddie and he's the one that kind of directed us and put us in the right direction on how we can get our music out there. Yeah. And it's only been, I'd say, six months since we really started kind of getting out there and putting our music out and we've done quite a lot. So I think it's a good thing, though, we went during COVID time because now looking back on it, I don't think we were that ready to do what we're doing now. Yeah, I was bad during my time. We're all we're all getting better slowly. Yeah. So, you know, how has that been?  Or has it motivated you? I mean, are you are you writing a lot these days? And how have you changed, Leona? You must have changed. We all changed. You must have changed in these past couple, three years. Yeah, for sure. I American Idol was such a good learning and growing experience for me. Performance wise, camera wise, there's always things that you need to learn. And it's a really cool thing when you when you grow up in life, because there's always stuff you need to learn. So it's important to always, you know, stay humble and have that learning mentality, because if you don't, you have no chance in getting better. And I think that's what I've learned these past three years. So in writing music, in meeting new people and interviews like this, it's important to remember that there's always things to learn. So thanks to American Idol, that's the kind of mentality I've had now.  Yeah.  Do you how do you get the perfect environment to write the song? How often does that happen? Sometimes it's weird for me. So sometimes in the middle of the night, I have like a dream for some reason, I remember like a little tune in my dream. So I have this voice memos app on my phone. I just record that there in sounds and tunes. I do, I do too, but it doesn't work the same way. Yeah, so I either base my song off a tune I hear or a feeling first. And then depending on either the tune or the feeling, that's what I kind of roll with. And I don't know how to play the piano, but I kind of mess around on it. Leah just says I bang the keys too hard and ruin it. She does. He has like, he's so buff, but he has like this unamount, immense power of strength, and he just bangs the keys and like, bro, you got to have something to make it so clear. He doesn't hear or feel like whatever. Now, that's what easy happens, either tune or feeling. And then I kind of lay it out on the piano to kind of get the chords and the smoothness or the vibe I want. And then yeah, that's what easy starts off with. So you do need each other to finish the song? Yes and no. There are certain songs where I'll ask Emma for help, but many times when we write music, it's usually personal messages to us. So the only people we really need is ourselves, but definitely when we write music together. I think we're going to write together too. It's a lot faster. It is so much faster when you got two brains working at the same time. How long does it take you? Um, when we write songs together, it takes us like two hours. Yeah, it's pretty quick when we write together. But when we write by ourselves, it depends on the subject, on the tune, how far we think we can get with it. So, you know, I want to look forward with you. We have a few minutes left and I want to talk about your vision, your vision of yourselves individually and together as a daring duo of superstars in the future. You must have some idea about where this is going to go. Where do you think it's going to go? I think it's going to go, well, not think. I know it's going to go to sold out stadiums in front of thousands of people traveling worldwide on a tour, releasing albums and getting tons of singles on the top charts. That's where I see us and sign up the label. So that's what we're going to be some day. You've got to keep writing, man. And Emma, are you going to be there? You have the same vision? Yeah, we're going to be together. We're going to stick together. Three hit songs. That's my goal. Three hit songs. Travel around the world. Have an awesome tour. So this is, this is, as far as you guys can see, this is the long term deal. Wow. Wow. So and it's geographic everywhere. We like that. Why not? Why not? Well, I hope the world is friendly in the sense that there's so many issues going on in the world now and just speak of climate change all by itself. But if you're determined to travel, you can travel.  So do you think your message will change? Amon, does she want to get on the show too? Never mind. Do you think I don't think our message will change because my brother and I, we write songs based on hope and things that people can relate to in good ways to see how beautiful life can be. Yeah. And I always want to be that message because we don't have very much of that in this world anymore. No, true. Yeah. And the music industry has tried to change me and Leah and they try to split us up and say, like, oh, we're better on our own or we're holding each other back. But I don't think people realize the potential. Yeah. When we're together, we're able to strengthen each other too and make sure we stay. And that's what I can't wait for people to see the true potential of a brother and sister duo from the islands. Well, you guys are great together. That's fabulous. You think you might include, I was kind of asking about this before, you think you might include somebody else in the family in your group, maybe make it a trio? Is that possible? We want to, but none of them want to join you. They're so talented, but they don't like that fame of being in the spotlight. They'd rather just be to themselves. It's just totally fine. Well, you guys shy before, have you become less shy in this experience? Most people would to hear it. Oh, yeah. Okay. Yeah, Leah's the extrovert and I'm the introvert. So we're definitely opposites in whatever we do, but thanks to both of our different personalities, I feel like we've come out of our shell in many different ways. Yeah, so I'm more shy and Leah is more of the extrovert. And because of that, we've kind of learned to balance each other out and push each other in our weak spots, I guess. So Leah, she's able to listen more, which is something really hard for her sometimes. I like talking a lot. And then yeah, I've learned to talk more and to be more comfortable and talking to others. So yeah, we definitely helped each other. And the best partnerships are whether two partners, if there is two are slightly different. Yeah, those are the best part. And we, as I said before, we play off each other. And speaking of playing, can we have another song where we're going to run out of time soon? And I want to get a third song in there. And these are all your own songs, right? Do you prefer your own songs to some song that somebody else wrote? Well, if people like it, yeah. Okay. But yeah, definitely. I know that you came from heaven. I know that you came. I know that you came from heaven. I know that you came. I know that you came from. Wow, I saw some very sophisticated harmonies in there. Thank you. Leo, how are you bouncing all off his melody line? Well, that's great. Well, let's talk some more about this evening, Blue Note, how'd you get involved in that? What are you going to do there? And what it means to you in terms of your career? Because I think part of your career, part of your gestalt, excuse me, is that you are Hawaii. You are a statement of Hawaii. It makes you unique. It makes you refreshing. The world loves Hawaii. And therefore, you know, that's a real advantage for you.  This is not Cincinnati. I want to be clear. This is Hawaii. What does it mean to you to play at the Blue Note? Leona? I think it's such a wonderful privilege, you know, being back here in the islands is just so refreshing and healing. And to feel all the love and aloha from all of you guys is such an amazing support that you don't really get anywhere else because what is all about that aloha spirit.  So I am very excited and cannot wait for tonight. Yeah. And what do you think of it? And by the way, do you think you guys will always be Hawaii style? Yeah, definitely.  I mean, that's what actually inspired me to write music at the beginning because the Hawaiian culture talks so much about family and nature. And those things are so important. And ever since American Idol, I mean, Hawaii has always supported us and pushed us. So I definitely feel the aloha and the support. And I kind of want to give back and we owe them so much. So I would like to ask you what message you want to leave with people, you know, to share your experiences, to share how it's been for you, to share how you found this creative chaos, to share, you know, what you have learned in life so far in this extraordinary experience you've had. Emma, you go first. Well, for me, I think I just like to share that well, in life, generally things are going to get tough and, you know, things might not go your way. Me and Leah, we performed in a lot of crowds where there's only been like three or four people. You gotta start somewhere. So sometimes it can be like a little hard to kind of motivate yourself. But I would say just to remember three important people that really know you and really support you and kind of focus on them to help you carry through those hard times. Because you really do need good people in our lives and it's important that we keep those relationships strong and to help one another out. So that's what I would say. Yeah, such wisdom. Such Hawaii. I feel it. And Leah, what would you say? I think a message I just want to leave with people is if you believe in your dream, be consistent. Like Amon said, there's going to be a lot of hard and difficult times. But you know, it's important to remember why you started in the first place, where you come from, and why you love to do what you do. So just keep going, keep grinding, keep pushing forward. As we say in Hawaii, Inua. Thank you so much for coming on our show. It's been great to talk to you. It's been inspiring. I'm not going to do it myself, but I'm inspired nevertheless by the journey you guys have had. A big aloha and the best of luck to you and your careers. Thank you. Thank you so much for watching Think Tech Hawaii. If you like what we do, please like us and click the subscribe button on YouTube and the follow button on Vimeo. You can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, and LinkedIn, and donate to us at thinktechhawaii.com. Mahalo.


mitochondria are one of the key organelles involved in cellular aging. As cells age, they accumulate defective mitochondria, leading to increased levels of mitochondrial oxidative stress. This oxidative stress can further damage the mitochondria, creating a vicious cycle that accelerates the aging process. To counteract this, researchers have proposed several strategies to reduce mitochondrial oxidative stress, including targeted drug therapies and lifestyle changes such as dietary supplements and exercise. These strategies could help slow down the progression of aging and age-related diseases. This article was authored by Yin Hengli, Myon UK Cooke, Moon Kyung-so, and others.