All right. Hello. This is Stefan Kinsella. It's August 18th, 2023. And my friend Jeff Barr is here who's a lawyer in Las Vegas. We did an episode about a few weeks ago. This is going to be Kinsella on Liberty 418. I think we did 415 or 414. In the meantime, I did three other episodes on Larkin Rose as a new movie. I don't know if you heard about this or saw it, Jeff. But anyway, his movie, Jones Plantation.  We kind of meandered through what we agreed on. You conceded a few points, which was a intellectually honest of you. Well, I think you conceded a couple of points too, but which is awesome. I never conceded anything. Well, if you don't mind, I don't want to bury the lead. And so I'd like to just kind of summarize my position. That's all right. Yeah, but let me set the stage. So what we're going to talk about is we're going to we're going to we're going to finish up on where we left off, which was we left off at this point about agreements or title transfers related to future things. I think that's the crux of our sort of disagreement because it plays into loan contracts and debtors prison and theft and implicit theft and breach of contract and all these kinds of issues. So, all right, go ahead, Jeff. All right. So as you mentioned, we did have this long previous discussion on title transfer theory and the importance of legal title and possession and I do think that it was important to discuss that to get some foundation. My position is that a contract, of course, in the libertarian legal system is always a simultaneous exchange of title, exchange of legal title. An example that we have to hold up does it have to be an exchange or could be one way like gratuitous or don't talk about gratuitous and gifts in a minute but in order for a contract for lack of a better word. Because I don't know. And you'll see where I'm going with this we'll talk about gifts I think in a minute but at least I want to get the concept of contract and exchange that I know that you have some thoughts on, you know, exchanges and economic term not a legal term. Yep, yep, yep, yep. Well, I think that you have some, I think that you have some predilections against the common law here and consideration and that kind of thing but we'll we'll get there but. My position really is that a contract at least in a libertarian sense is always a simultaneous exchange of legal title and the example we've talked about is I give you I give three bucks for a cup of coffee. I give legal title to my three bucks to the barista and she gives me legal title to the coffee. But in that exchange or in that transaction. There's also a near simultaneous exchange of possession. And I say near simultaneous because no, it's really rare that you have an actual you know, I slide you my three bucks you slide me the cup of coffee right there's always some time element in the middle of this. So I take possession of the coffee and the barista takes possession of my $3. So there's both and there's an exchange of legal title and an exchange of possession. Now, if I take the cup of coffee without transferring title or possession to my $3 I've committed a crime. I've taken. Say that again. Yeah, if I take the cup of coffee without transferring legal title or possession to the $3. But they're different, which which which one, which one is the which one results in the failure or the or the implicit theft or whatever. No, I think I think they're not different. I think that I think that I think that it's the failure. If I if I if I fail to get legal title or if I fail to get possession. Okay, but how do you give legal title. Yeah, there's an implicit there's an implicit exchange there right but but what I mean is what I mean is you give legal title by a communication of your consent, correct. Yes, certainly. So you've already communicated that before you receive the. No doubt. I'm trying to show is that there's a little bit of a time element but there's a almost near simultaneous exchange. There could be in a simultaneous exchange that's just one type of contract. No doubt, but you would agree with me that this that there's this near simultaneous exchange of legal. Of course, of course, but by the way, but that that's that that mismatch between the timing between the transfer of title and the transfer of possession is understood by both parties. Yes, which which means that for example, you hand me the candy bar. And I hand you a $10 bill. And you've got to go back and make change there's a little time delay between when you give me back the money that now you owe me as part of this complicated arrangement. And, but we understand that so we would say that for like a couple of minutes, the owner of the store is in possession of my $7 and change. Right. But he, but I own it already because you haven't given up legal title to. Well, besides, well, the owner, I gave up legal title to $3 of my $7 and change you've never done so. So now he owes me $7, which means that he's got $7 in his register and I own that already but he's possessing it, but the fact that he's possessing it for 10 minutes or five minutes before he's able to make change is not trespass because that's understood by both parties so it's consented to. Correct. Correct. I think we agree on that point. All right, let's take the case of alone. This is a little more sticky but there's still the time element right in the case of alone Murray gives Hans title to $1,000 today and of course I'm using dollars just in a generic sense here. And in exchange, Hans gives Murray legal title to $1,100 with the condition that Hans delivered possession of the $1,100 one year from now and title. Well, no title exchanges right then and there. The legal exchange of title is simultaneous.  It has to be for it has to be for it for for a simultaneous exchange contract. Hold on. The change the exchange of title is simultaneous. It could be. Now it always is. You'll see in a minute, you'll see in a minute. What I want my point is is that the exchange of possession, however, is asynchronous, meaning it's different timing. Of course, it has to be for a future for a future for a future performance or a future title transferred or for a future possession transfers you might call it, it has to be asynchronous, but the title has to be today. The title exchange has to be today. It's near simultaneous. Why, why does it have to be because because how do you how do you decide what Hans, what Murray owns a year from now in other words, who's there could be multiple claimants on that $1,100. Who has the better claim on that $1,100 a year from the owner. Who's the owner. The person with a better claim. That's a very lovely circle you just circle I mean so the better claim is the person. Yeah, we just go back to the first principles like so we go to the Lockheed homesteading principle right and contract principle and so. And so, if you look at the rest of the world. Who are we using Hans and Murray in this example, Hans and Murray yeah. So, Hans is the debtor Murray's the one in the world except for Hans and Murray they all have an inferior claim to this to this reason to this 1100. So, wait, who do they have an inferior claim. Because they have no claim to it. Why, what if Hans, what if Hans turns around after the day after he makes the loan to Murray he makes the loan to Gito. I mean, you're, I think we need to establish the fundamentals first before we talk about this illustrates the fundamental just priority. Of course, the law week. People listening might not realize this and as you and I both know the law has a has a detailed series of rules that that determine priority in cases of a of a dispute between. Two or more other claimants right so so let's give a simple example just to set the stage didn't go to law school. I own a farm. Yep. Let's make it Hans and Hans owns a farm. He, he sells a, he sells the naked ownership what's the word in the common law he sells the, he sells it to Murray but retains a life estate. Okay, so he gives Murray title to it but but Hans retains the right to use it until he dies. Okay, which means that we've divided the title of this real estate up so that the, what in the civil law we call naked ownership I forgot what they call it in the common law, but ownership and fee, the absolute. No, but it's divided so it's not it's like the reversionary. Murray owns the fee. Yeah, Murray owns. So Murray owns the fee, but Hans has life estate correct, which is a real or property interest, which he that means he has the right to use it until he got the right to possession. Yes. He can't sell it because he doesn't own the fee but he can sell his life estate. But he can't sell the. The point is when he dies that burden on the fee simple or fee absolute whatever you call it, the total, a low deal ownership of the land that disappears and now Robert, who previously owned the fee ownership in the land, but he didn't have the right to use it during Hans his life. Right. We should have switched his example because Hans is old Hans is younger but whatever. So when Hans dies that his life estate evaporates and now the ownership interest of Rothbard is 100%. So he's the full owner of it, correct something like the owner and fee simple absolute yes as the common. So the question is, so let's say a year after Hans gave sold Murray the fee, the fee ownership. Yeah. He sells it to someone else too. Right. So that's what I like saying I give you this land. Right. So now when Hans dies Murray steps on to the land but then number two says no no no, I paid, I paid Hans a million dollars for this land. A year after he did it with you. So I'm the owner. So now we have a dispute over the land. So then the question is who owns it and so in a court we would say in a property right in a court applying property law, the court would say, um, well, we have to go back in time the owner the original owner was Hans. On day one, he gave part of his rights to Murray by contract so now Murray has a better claim against Hans because of track right and against the rest of the world because from the point of view of the rest of the world. That is not including Hans and Murray, right. They were not homesteaders of the land and they didn't get by contract. But then the second guy says well I have a contractual claim it's like yeah but you got a contractual claim from someone who didn't own what he purported to give you because he had already given it away. Right. I think you would agree with me on that. That's why number two would lose to Murray in a future dispute. So the law rules about priorities like this. Let's be very clear about this why because really what you're articulating you're making my point for me. But I'm not just reading with that part of your point. I think the prior owner has the better claim. How do you establish that he's the prior owner. He's got to have legal title. Yeah, you trace it back to where it came from. Right. And therefore if the title is not today, if the title transfer is not today, the near synchronous exchange of titles, then you can't establish priority. That's fine. I think that you keep mixing this together with this exchange idea which I think confuses the issue especially if we do it alone where it's $1100 and $1100 and like it looks like the same thing. It's better to do either isolated one way transfers to analyze it or to have different things transferred like I'm going to loan you five cows and then you owe me $1100 in a year. Like it's better to separate it so we don't conflate these things. But the point is I don't think I would necessarily disagree with you that the way we characterize the effectiveness of a current transfer of a title to a future thing is that we characterize it as being effective now. Yes. That's correct. I think that your current statement of intent and consent now, but it's about a future thing that you might own is effective now, but it's only about a future uncertain thing. That's the difference between us. Yes. And my point is that you would agree with me that at time zero when whatever economics are involved in the transfer. If you don't like the word exchange, whatever economics are involved. I don't like the word exchange is that I don't think that it's essential like this would apply. It should apply to a one way transfer to like. We'll get there. I'm not sure that that's the case but just so that we understand. No, to think about this, an exchange of a payment for a service, because there's only one title exchange, but that's an economic exchange. I'm not sure that that's the case, but I'm not sure that that's the case. But the simplest is five cows for $1,100 in the future, right? You're transferring title to the $1,100 today and possession in the future. Well, it depends on the terms of the contract. I mean, maybe the creditor doesn't want possession. Whatever. But the point is that somebody's got the right to exclude. It's not necessarily possession. It's just title. Oh, that's fine. That's fine. It doesn't have to be possession, but somebody's got the legal right today to exclude the rest of the world from that $1,100. They will have the right to exclude. No, they have it today. No, they don't. Yeah, they have to. Otherwise, how can you establish priority if they don't have the right to exclude today? How do you say that they have a better claim to the rest of the world? Because all action is in the present. You cannot act to exclude someone from something in the future. It makes no sense. No, no, no. Your position makes no sense. How do you establish priority then? I agree with you that we've already, the way I look at it is when I make this communication, it's in a sense irrevocable. It's irrevocable because property is alienable. Okay. Our bodies are different. So we can, I don't think we want to talk about voluntary slavery and all that kind of stuff. That's a whole different issue. If we talk about owned objects that come into our possession and ownership by an active homesteading or an active contractual exchange or contractual donation or gift, then the will of the owner makes sense. And so the fundamental dilemma or paradox or question for us is, it's not too hard to explain why the contemporary, sorry, contemporaneous present owner of a physical good is entitled to express his consent and get rid of it and sell it to someone else, right? Yes. I think you can understand that. The question is, does that owner have the ability to sell his future things by making a statement now? No, I think you do because, as you mentioned earlier, most contracts necessarily have a future element, if only because there's no such thing as simultaneity, really. Yeah, that's right. There's almost no near simultaneous, I slide to three bucks. I would say there really is no such thing as simultaneity. Just like in Austrian theory, we talk about money prices and we talk about future prices, which are just predicted and forecast by entrepreneurs, and we use present prices as an accessory of appraisement to forecast them. But if you want to be technical, there are no present prices. There are only future prices and past prices, which are historical. That's right. There are only immediate past prices, but there's no such thing as a present price. A present price is just the price on a being offered by a merchant, which is like a bargaining point. But it's not a price until someone pays it. And once they pay it, it's a past price. I mean, I'm not saying there's no such thing as a present because we act in the present, but there is no such thing as a past price. It's a present price. So I guess I would say that by the same token, there's no such thing if you're going to do a contract that is an exchange. And like I said, not every contract has to be an exchange. That's why I think that's important to make that point. But if sometimes people do exchange things, and that's an economic phenomenon, and sometimes they want to use the law to have a legal framework to back that up, right? So they want the legal side to match the economic side. Well, the legal side always has to match the economic side. Correct. Otherwise you've got to cry, right? But it depends upon the nature of the economic exchange. No doubt. If the economic exchange is one owned item, one currently owned item for another currently owned item, then it's a more or less simultaneous, excuse me, economic exchange, not completely, but more or less. And the law recognizes that and deals with it by separating possession from ownership and saying, okay, well, if you need a few minutes to transfer, then it's not trespass when you're holding, it's not conversion or trespass when you're holding on to it. Because that's contemplated by the nature of this arrangement, right? I think we agree on all this, right? Yeah, well, I would say that what you're identifying this time function is just a matter of degree and not a matter of quality. In other words, that the length of time is 10 seconds or 10 years doesn't change the legal nature of the transaction. Well, no, it changes it in one sense is that when we make this agreement, if it takes 10 minutes, at the moment we make the agreement, the things both exist and title already transfers. No, but the change doesn't exist. You presume that the change is going to exist, but the change doesn't exist. That's $7. No, no, no, no, it does exist. What if the store burns down in that 10 seconds? What if a thief comes in and steals that? No, no, no, let's be let's be precise then. At the moment of the exchange, let's assume that the owner has plenty of cash. He owns the sufficient amount of money to make change. Okay, so at the moment of the exchange, the buyer is now an owner of $7. Let's assume there's $7 and change that he's owed, right? He's the owner of $7 in the till that's sitting behind this cashier, correct? Right. So he's the owner. He's not the possessor yet because the guy hasn't had time to turn around and hand it to him, correct? So he's the owner of $7. Now if the store burns down, then the owner of the store loses a lot of stuff and I've also lost $7 because my $7 was unfortunately burned down and this store is a fire, correct? Sure. There's no dilemma here. Well, well, I'm going to suggest there is a dilemma. There's no theft. I'm going to disagree with that. There was an exchange. That $7 was always mine. Correct. And you didn't give me that $7. Who's risk is that? Well, that's a different issue. Now if we have an insurance contract and we have a whole different other contract. Let me do it this way because you're suggesting that intent matters and I'm going to suggest that intent doesn't matter. Not intent. It's consent. It's communication. It's what the contract is and what the terms are. Let's say I have $7 and I just hand it to you, Jeff, and you're holding it and I decide not to make the purchase and so you have to give it back to me. Right.  Uh-huh. And you stole the $7 from me. From the point of view of the victim, I don't think it matters. Well, the victim is the burned up cashier. Yeah. In other words, no, the cashier didn't steal the money from me, the flamethrower person. Of course. And if the store burns down, then. It's a negligent. It's a freak accident that harmed the property of the store owner and also me because I foolishly entrusted them to be a caretaker of my property for three minutes. And in that minute, in that three minutes, then my money got destroyed. Now, if I had a side contract saying, Hey, you have a navigation to repay me, whatever I lose, if you're not, if you're negligent in the storage facilities. Okay. But that's just a second contract. But again, you're, you're, you're, you're from the point of view of the victim. It doesn't matter whether you intended to defraud me of the $7 or whether it was an accident that you thought it's deceit. Where's the deceit? Okay. It's not it. Okay. From the point of view of the victim, it doesn't matter that you denied me possession of the $7 accidentally, or that you denied me possession of the of the $7 intentional. Either way, I am out the $7. Well, but if the store burns down, that is not, that's not being caused by the person who is safekeeping your money temporarily. So what, what does causation left. So you're saying that there's an intent element in the libertarian concept. Well, it's got it's more about cause than intent. It's like, I mean, let's assume you have your grandfather's watch in a safety deposit box in the bank down the street. Now you own that watch, but you don't have possession of it. Correct. It's called a bailment contract for those of us. Right. Or in the Roman laws called a regular deposit. Right. Irregular is fungible stuff that could be commingled irregular is like you own that particular thing and they're more expensive because you have to have your own box and all that. That's why for money for gold coins, we just let them mix it together. You haven't a pro rata claim. Anyway, but for yeah, so I own this watch in the bank down the street. Now the bank burns down and my watch store or the let's say the bank is robbed.  Well, now there's a difference. Right. There's a difference there because the actor. The actor is the robber. Right. Now maybe the bank is on the hook. I don't know. Maybe depends on the contract. That's right. Depends on if we have an insurance contract effectively. But a typical bailment contract includes I'm giving this to you for safekeeping. I presume you are going to keep it safe if a robber comes in and robs me. Yeah, but that's a negligence. I mean, but the point is what's what is. Yeah. Yeah. So basically there are subsidiary or ancillary conditions to all to all contracts either explicit or implicit. And so one would be that yeah, I'm giving you for safekeeping. I'm paying you a fee. So that means you're supposed to do something else. And if you don't, and my watch gets stolen, then you owe me some money. So that that would just be another title transfer saying, okay, we were transferring to you future money that compensate you for the watch if we were negligent. But if, if you know if 20, 20, you know, 20, Saudi Arabian, 19 Saudi raking Saudi Arabian hijackers come into the bank with Uzis. And they just steal that one watch because they know the owner is, there's a libertarian who hates whatever. Then, I mean, is the bank negligent for being robbed. Again, you're mixing concepts here from the point of view of the victim. It doesn't matter. The bank who was entrusted with the safe deposit box item, the watch has now lost stolen, whatever is now deprived me of my property. No, I just agree with you the way you're characterized you're saying that you're calling me a victim. But that implies that there's someone who victimized me. What you're saying is the banks, it's, you're assuming that the contract is this absolute liability thing, which is, it's, it's, it's not necessarily the case I mean the contracts can be all over the map. Lots of contracts have, look, we're not liable for this.  The point is in all of this is just to get back to sort of first principles here and again my position, which is, if you deny some of going back to Hans and Murray for just a second. If Hans fails to pay Murray the $1,100 years, regardless of why, from the perspective of Murray, Hans is the primary of the possession of Murray's property. That is a crime or a tort or a delay. Yeah, that's my position. Now, why is it because you said the word Oh, which means you're still stuck in the in the conventional concept. I'm not. Hans transfer title on the conditionally transfer possession 11 year from now, Hans fails to deliver the possession. It's got nothing to do the condition so let's just focus on the one title transfer that you that you so what you're saying is. Wait, Hans borrowed the money. I'm far the money. So, Hans on day one transfers to Murray $1,100 in the future to Murray correct. Hans transfers $1,100 today transfers legal title today. Well, a future one to a future $1,100. He still he he he transfers possession. No, he doesn't. I already we already in the future. He transfers possession in the future. He doesn't necessarily transfer possession. He's agreed to transfer possession in the future. Sure he does. No, he hasn't. He hasn't necessarily. If Hans is a bank Rothbard might be perfectly happy with Hans holding on to the money for him. That's a little different contract. That's not a loan contract. That's a bailment contract. Yeah, but I never surrender title or possession of my walk. I agree that the typical loan contract would say that would say that I'm transferring $1,100. $1,100 future dollars to you now, which means that in one year when this this future $1,100 comes into existence. If it does, then Rothbard is the owner and now he can demand that Hans, if he's in possession of it, that he turn it over. Yeah, and this is where we just disagree. What do you disagree with what I just said there? I disagree that I disagree that there's these implicit condition that the document exists in the future. Or that I'm sorry that the Jeff, the future is all inherently the future doesn't exist yet. I don't know anything in the future doesn't exist yet. That's right, but I don't think that there's a implicit condition in every contract. Otherwise there would never be any tort or crime. Why? Because I just say it doesn't exist anymore. I don't have that $1,100. Well, I think you cannot steal something that doesn't exist. Right. So there is no such thing as crime or tort, which can't be right now a crime just a crime means that I violated your rights, which gives you the right to use force against me. There's no example of that. I misspoke. There's no, there's no theft that can occur. No. If someone commits theft that means they use your property without your consent and that that that's an act of trespass or aggression. Right. And that gives the victim of this act of theft some right to retaliate or get resolution from the from the aggressor. And how do I establish that there's been some interference, derogation. Because you we can establish by property principles that you own something and someone used it without your permission. That's right that I have legal title, which gives me the right to do something back to him. That's right. It might give me it might give me a right to a claim on some of his currently owned resources. But if you have any resources, I can't get those from him and his inability to repay me is not theft. Okay. The theft already happened. You're double counting. Okay, so so let's let's go with that for just a second. You would agree with me that because there was a chance chance transfer of legal title. I have some claim on the assets of the in the in the loan. Yeah, in the loan. I think that that's a subsidiary condition of most contracts either either implied or explicit but sure. So if, so if I loan you a thousand, if Murray loans Hans $1,000, then what he's getting in exchange is number one, a current, as you would say a current transfer of title to a future $1,100 and subsidiary transfers in case the $1,100 doesn't exist. So for example, it would say something like, so if you have liquid cash in a year. You have more than $1,100 and liquid cash $1,100 of that money becomes mine and now you have to turn it over when I demand it. And if you don't know you're guilty of trespass or conversion. If you have $1,100 and liquid money, then, then if you own a home, I can, I can claim that home, or other, or maybe some of your stocks or whatever. And if you if you're totally penniless, then in the future whenever you come into money then you owe me the $1,100 with interest, either either out of money or out of your current property. This, this, this, this, this web of conditional title transfers. But the lender has to realize that there, this is always a risk because the future is uncertain. And so there's a chance that he will never get his money back, which is why he has to be paid interest to lonely left the $1,000. He's taking a risk that will number one the future is less valuable than the present because of time preference. So, so the, the debtor may never be able to repay him, even with this network of conditional transfers. That's true. And if he's unable to pay it's not necessarily theft. It's just, I took a risk, I took a gamble and he didn't pay a game. The reason I brought up the civil idea and I'm sure there must be a common law analog of sale of a hope. Like, I need to, I need to plant my wheat field this year. And so I say, well, Jeff, I need some money to go buy seeds and to hire some workers.  And I will give you one third of whatever the crop yields in a year. Yeah, but that's not the same. That's not the same thing here. Well, but the thing is, I'm transferring to you now ownership to one third of my future crop. It's the exact same thing. And but that's a that's called a sale of a hope because it's a certain it's an uncertain thing. And the law to its credit recognizes that as an uncertain thing because they call it a hope. But my point is, if you think about it, all future title transfers are sales of a hope. So, let me let me get it this way, from the point of view of Murray, the guy who's been who's out $1,100. Does he care why he's out the $1,100. Does it matter. I don't know I think I think if you trip over a dog on accident or if you kick it on purpose the dog might know the difference. The dog is still kicked, regardless.  Does it matter. Yeah, no, it doesn't matter from the point of view of the matter. Of course. Okay, wait, wait, wait, wait, from the point of view of the victim, it doesn't matter the victim suffers the same damages like the kick dog or the accidentally stumbled dog has the same broken ribs. Right. I have a seizure and my arm swings out and hits you in the face. It's the same amount but I'm not even, I'm not liable at all because it wasn't intentional. Why? You are sneaking in an element of intent here. No, you are saying it's not about intent it's about cause. It's like the question is, when you're damaged. What is the cause of that damage. If it's just a universe then okay it's not it's not fortunate for you but you can't blame me. I'm only blamable if I caused it. And yes intent plays has a role in that because cause is something that you, it's one of your actions and actions are always intentional. That's right. So you're sneaking in an intent element. This is, this is sober, this is sober Rothbardian analysis. I'm not being, I'm being above board about I'm not sneaking at it. There's nothing wrong with blaming me. What you're saying, what I'm asking you is you are saying that there must be an element of intent. Well, and that and that that I'm saying people are responsible for their actions. Okay. If I don't pay you regardless of the reason why I have not I've intentionally not turned over the possession of the 1100. No, I think it so this is so this is the thing. intentionally not turning over could could be for different reasons that I think the reason does matter so for example, if I if I'm in possession of the $1,100 like let's say I'm a millionaire and say you need to pay me. My $1,100 back. Yeah. It's actually not back because it's new. It's not the original 1000. So you need to pay me the $1,100 that you owe me or one precise way is you're in possession of $1,100 of my money. That's right. I have a title to that I have legal title to and now I own possession and you should turn it over. If you don't now you're stealing my stuff. Right. So if Hans refuses to turn it over. That is an act of theft. Right. That's an intentional that's there's some intention there right. It's not about intentional. Well, sure it's it's it's it's it's intentionally refusing to respect someone's property rights. Sure. That's right. That's right. But if Hans is bankrupt and penniless and Rothbard says, give me the $1,100 and Hans says I would love to but I don't have any. He's not refusing to turn it over he just can't. He can't turn it over currently, but that doesn't mean that Murray doesn't have a claim on that $1,100 in perpetuity. Right. I agree. I never disagree. I never deny. Does it matter why Hans is bankrupt. It depends upon the terms of the contract. So if Hans is bankrupt because his snowball stand his snow. I keep saying snowball I should say snow cone right. Yeah, if Hans is snow cone stand just doesn't work. Well, then that that was just a business risk that both Rothbard and Hans took. Like Rothbard knew that I mean all entrepreneurial investments are uncertain, just like the future is uncertain. So that was a risk within the scope of the original ambit of the loan agreement. So Rothbard is taking the risk that Hans won't Hans is venture won't succeed. And he won't have enough profits to repay Rothbard he's taking that risk. Now he has some recourse. The recourse is. He has a claim on future property Hans comes into with and with an interest or crewing. He might also have recourse if he does a security device like he says. I mean, but the simple contract is you're taking a risk that the future, the future amount owed will not be there. But no matter why that future amount is not there. However, I would think that most loan contracts would have implied or express conditions on the conduct of the debtor. But it depends on how much overhead draft for that. I will tell you now draft. You can do some like a thousands of contracts you cannot draft for every contingency. You can't draft for every contingency so that's why we put things in there like good faith and arbitration clauses and no doubt. But you could have something saying like, listen, I'm giving this money for the purpose of starting a snow cone stand. Sure. And every month you owe me a report. And if at any given month, certain thresholds are exceeded, then that gives me the right to demand that you pay me now. Whatever you have remaining of the principal that I loaned you and stop this endeavor. That's right. So, so, so let's say we have a contract like that so ha Murray own low loans Hans 1000 bucks. And in months in month six. Hans sends Murray the report, and it shows that the snow cone stand is losing money. And Hans has 500 bucks left. And Murray says, Okay, I'm going to exercise that clause of the contract and say, Okay, I'm stopping I'm halting the loan. I'm freezing in place the principal that I loaned you and now that 500 bucks is now mine again. That's right. I'm accelerating. And then upon spends that money, then now he's stealing, of course. Okay. But let's just money. You can craft all kinds of conditions. Yes, what happens when the loan documents are silent. Then you have to, then you have to, then you have to use supplement of provisions or, or, or custom customs, or, or gap billers, right default rules, or you have to go to a judge who tries to guess what their intent would have been. All kinds of ways the legal system has to figure it out, but the ultimate goal of this process is to supply and answer that these two parties failed to negotiate in explicit terms. So in a way that's their fault, because it was too expensive for them to do that. And they both. It is too expensive to account for every contingency and they went ahead with the transaction anyway. Then what they're saying is they're willing to take the risk that they have to resolve this uncertain area somehow, and they might lose because they didn't take the time to express it. If you do an arbitrator and the arbitrator awards Rothbard or Murray or Hans the money, or the win in this, in this, in this contest. No one can really complain. But of course what would happen is people would learn from that. And if this became a big problem then people would start adjusting and they would start adding a boilerplate thing in their contracts to that problem. That's right. But my point is that from the, from the victims perspective from the, from the creditors perspective. I don't think it's fair to call him a victim. Okay, from the creditors perspective. I think it's fair to call him a victim, but, but, but, but okay. By the way, to not to be not to be petty fogging, I wouldn't call them debtor and creditor because those are that that assumes there's obligations. That's the old theory of contract but we can, we can call them from the property holders perspective. The property holder is still out possession of $1,100. It doesn't exist. Okay, regardless of the reason why it doesn't exist. Now what you're saying is, there may be some mitigating factors. Right. No, it's not mitigating it's why it doesn't sure it is. Hans didn't do anything. See, I think what you're assuming so the reason I think you went with this, does it matter why, because yeah, there are cases where if Hans basically spent the money on something other than what he was right I guess and put it all on red. Yeah, that's something that's something wrong or blame worthy. Okay, so okay. Okay, but what you're assuming is that if if Hans is unable to pay that in itself is blame worthy. Yes, I think that should be the default rule. The reason is because the simple nature of such a loan is basically Rothbard is financing someone else's entrepreneurial venture. Now, in economic terms what that means is that Hans and Rothbard are both staking some of their property in an uncertain entrepreneurial venture. That's right. Economically. So that's everybody. Which is risky. But that's everybody. There's no, there's no everybody faces the future and everybody's an entrepreneur in that. Exactly. Exactly. So every time we do something where we take a risk based upon a future event, both sides that are co-op and both both hope to gain from it if it works out. And both are taking the risk that they will be out something if it doesn't work like the property hoped Rothbard might might now might not be able to be repaid. And that risk and if the if the entrepreneurial venture doesn't work out. It's not like if someone fails in a business that is not morally blame worthy. Could be. It could be. It's not necessarily could be. Well, only if they violated the terms of the contract. And again, you can't draft for that kind of all those content. You can't say oh Hans was lazier than I wanted him to be sure you could. It's too much. It's too hard to it's too hard to supervise that into their partnership disputes all the time that where they say one partner didn't pull his way. I just literally had one yesterday. No, I agree. You could do that but but it becomes more and more subjective and it becomes expensive to supervise and to define to enforce.  Which is why the default rule should be that if you fail to pay, you have committed a crime or a tort. Okay, well, I think you can't put that in a contract because because body rights are an alien you can't. You can't make a false thing true by default condition and a contract or even by an explicit condition like you couldn't put in a contract. Like, let's make it all explicit. On day one, they do this, they do this loan agreement. They put in their clause 17 which says, if Hans is unable to pay $1,100 to Murray in one year, we hereby both agree that that will be theft. That that is just that's like saying we hereby agree that that the moon is made of gold. They can say that but it's not true. No, no, no, no, no, no, from a libertarian perspective it is always it is always a tort. Again, it's not a tort if you're not stealing anything you there has to be something existing to steal. Well, ultimately I think your problem is you think that you can steal something that doesn't exist. I say your problem my problem with what your argument is is you you seem to assume that it's possible to have a tort, which is basically theft of someone's property, even though the property doesn't exist. The position that position that you've taken assumes some sort of intent, and I don't think you can assume some sort of intent. Why, why it doesn't exist is important function in your determination. So I think that's why that's why you're sort of implicitly determined to find to basically attribute attribute fault to the to the pillar. And because you are your position, your position, inherently requires that determination. Well, I gain. Let's go just for a second let's try one more time I think I think I think we just don't agree on this. Go back to the do you agree that it's possible to have a sale of a hope. Yeah, I think that's possible. So I can sell what you're calling a hope yes. What it means is, I'm transferring title to you now to one third interest in whatever crops my wheat field produces. Now I might be doing that as a donation to you I might be doing it as a gift. I might be doing it out of gratitude I might be doing it because you gave me some funds to hire the to buy the seeds, whatever. But for whatever reason I'm transferring to you now.  And in return I'm going to give you half of my haul. This is common this happens all the time. Sure, no doubt. Now, come back empty. Then you get half of zero. That's fine. That's just what you get. That's what you agree to. There's no victim here. Now, now if I actually caught some fish and then I hid them, and I'm lying to you, then that's a different issue. Well, I assume that, or if I went out on the ocean and I just smoked a joint all day and I didn't even try to catch fish. Right. Why is that different from the perspective of the guy that the victim or the property owner. Because because you could imagine that if they had negotiated that clause in the contract, they would say I'm giving you $1,000 now to fund your fishing expedition. But if you go out there and you don't actually make a make a legitimate effort to fish at the moment you start doing that, then at that moment in time, my $1,000 transfers back to me. You keep adding conditions right. Well, I'm conditions. Contracts. As you said, you can't account for every, every contingency. But what that means is that languages is always imperfect and incomplete and contracts. Every contract is ever existed, except maybe for the simplest most bear contemporaries like you know candy bar for an apple something like that. Except for those they always have maybe a near infinite number of conditions, which could never be specified in language. There has to be always be a dispute resolution mechanism, which fills in the gaps. No doubt. No doubt. And my I'm not adding conditions realities adding conditions because there's always conditions and it is my position that you start with the idea that if the property owner is out his property. That is a crime or a tort. Now there may be some mitigating circumstances. No property. He's not out his property because there is no property. So I have to go, but I want to finish this. This will clearly lead into a part three because you always, you always scurry and run with this. I've got to work. Excuse me. Yeah, I've got to, I've got to be a lawyer. But you know, I'm just doing this law thing till the band gets back together. So, Well, I'm sure that I'm sure that these discussions will help you in your law practice. So, so let me let me let me tie this and we can probably pick this up in a week or two. Why is my position important to my criticism of the limited liability of the corporation. Let me end there that way we can pick this up. Yeah, I'm curious. I was wondering where you're going with this. Yeah, so, so let's be clear what a corporation is right. It's an association of individuals to whom the law provides a privilege of limited liability. Okay. Thus, when as a general proposition and just as a general proposition when the person representing the entity the business entity commits a tort. The modern law limits the liability of the managers and owners of that entity. Thus, if the tort damages exceed the assets of the entity, the victim of that tort, there's the cost of that tort. Certainly, the law socializes the cost of the tort onto the victim of the tort. This is one of my criticisms of the corporate form, where there is a default rule of limited liability. This rule socializes the cost of the corporations torts onto the corporations victims. Again, this is the whole loan kind of concept right that it doesn't matter what. The reason why the tort victim is a victim, whether that's an active, you know, whether that was an active negligence or an intentional tort, the tort victim is still out. And when there's limited live is still out is still victimized when there's limited liability, that when there's government imposed limited liability, the tort victim can't go and recover from those who created the tort in the first place. What I think is this gets back to our previous disagreement on corporations. I don't agree with your definition of corporations from a libertarian perspective, even from a legal perspective, they're not an association of individuals in the law there. They have a corporate personality which is that they are an association of individuals that the law recognizes them as a person doesn't doesn't alter the reality that they are an association of still individuals. Right corporations are collected is a convenient collective now. It's like saying France invaded or invaded Germany. Well, corporation doesn't know it means no means the corporation has legal personality I would disagree with like I think and libertarian law there would not be a corporation as defined by the current law. There would not be a legal there's only individuals in libertarian law. So yes, in libertarian law there would only be associated individuals that have a contract among each other to own property and to arrange their affairs a certain kind of way. And I don't care about the contract between the owners and manage what I care about as the torts committed and furtherance of the entity. Well I think we need to have another talk. I think what we need to do is have a talk about corporation limited liability, because I think what you're doing is you sense that there are some. I will say you sense there's some problems with the argument but you sense that part of our disagreement could be resolved if you can, if you can make this point about future title transfers. That's right. That's exactly. And so you want to tie them together but I think if we're going to go there we need to talk first about corporates corporations limited liability, because that is an interesting topic. I don't think limited liability is a privilege granted by the government because I don't think owners would be liable for the torts of employees anyway. Yeah, and we can discuss this in more detail later but I am running out of time. Okay, well go back to your real job make some money so you can afford to take an hour off every now and then and to add to the corpus of liberal libertarian legal understanding in the world. All right well until part three right. Part three. Until I get back from Iceland. Please travel.


Hi, my name is Joshua Diden, and here in this video, I'll briefly summarize our paper, a cryptanalysis of LUV, using the subfield differential attack. This is a joint work by Jim Tygin, myself, Kurt Schmidt, Bishaka, and Zhong Zhang, and we're all from the University of Cincinnati. I'm sorry if I missed pronouncing those names in this video, and I'm going to turn off the webcam so you all can properly see the slides. So in our paper, we attack the scheme called Lifted Unbalanced Oil and Vinegar, which is a multivariate signature scheme based on the Oil and Vinegar's linear scheme. So to start off with, we will describe what that means. Then we'll look into the Lifted Unbalanced Oil and Vinegar scheme itself, and then I'll work on the subfield differential attack. Introduction. A signature scheme is a mathematical scheme for verifying the authenticity of digital messages or documents. We need a method for key generation to create private key, public key pairs, a method for assigning a message given a private key to produce a signature, and a method of giving a message, a public key, and a potential signature of determining whether it was legitimately generated or not. The security of modern schemes rely on the harness of certain mathematical problems, listed below are the three families that we largely use today, as well as the mathematical problem they are based on. Here recently, there's been great developments on quantum computers, which use basic particles and quantum mechanic principles to perform calculation. Peter Schroes' algorithm shows that the previous family is a vulnerable to a sufficiently large quantum computer. So, in August 2015, the NSA declared that post-quantum criticisms were needed. In December 2016, NIST called for proposals of new post-quantum cryptosystems, and they had three criteria, security, cost, algorithm and implementation characteristics. LUV was the round two candidate. As of August 2020, there are three signature schemes left in round three, crystals deletion, falcon, and rainbow. Multivariate signature schemes. In the multivariate signature scheme, the public key P is an M tuple of multivariate polynomials over a finite field. The private key is a way to compute P inverse. By P inverse, we do not necessarily mean that P is an invaluable function, merely that we have a way of generating pre-images. And then something, a hash of a document is just finding a pre-image of a hash. The verification comes in plugging in the signature and getting the hash back. The direct attack is to solve the set of equations P is equal to Y. Solving the set of n randomly chosen equations with n variables is NP-complete. So, this is a theoretical foundation of why this multivariate problem would be good for a signature scheme. But this does not necessarily ensure the security of the systems. Now, for efficiency, we largely look only at quadratic constructions. And we can justify this mathematically because any set of high-degree polynomial equations can be reduced to a set of quadratic equations. As in this example, we just essentially declare X1 times X2 to be Y, and then we'll lead to the following quadratic system. The oil and vinegar signature scheme. The oil and vinegar signature scheme, which is the inspiration for the scheme that we're attacking, was introduced by Patterin in 1997. Oil and vinegar is both simple and efficient. It was inspired by the linearization attack to the Matsumoto micrypto system. Here, the public EP is the composition of two maps, F and T. F is quadratic, but it's easy to compute F's inverse or finite pre-images. T is invertible in linear. It is used to hide the structure of F. We then see that X is equal to the P inverse of Y can be found by first computing F inverse of Y is equal to W, and then T inverse of W is equal to X. Let Q be the finite field to size Q, and O and V be natural numbers, and N is equal to O plus V. The central map, which is what we call F, is an O tuple of quadratic polynomials and N variables. We divide the variables into two types. The vinegar variables, which is X1 to XV, and the oil variables, which is XV plus 1 to XN. For convenience, we have the index set. V is 1 to V, and O is the V plus 1 to N. So that XI is a vinegar variable if I is in V, and XI is an oil variable if I is in O. Each central map polynomial, FK, is in the following oil and vinegar form. And here we see that we have vinegar times vinegar, vinegar times oil, vinegar by itself, oil by itself plus a constant. Notice that there are no oil times oil terms. Thus, by guessing for each of the vinegar polynomials, to either XI is equal to new I for I and V, we have a linear polynomial in oil variables. So here's us plugging in that guess, and we see that the first sum is constant. The second is linear in the oil variables. The third sum is constant, and the fourth sum is linear. Thus, we have a simple and efficient way of finding a preimage of Y in FQ to the O. First, ran the guess for the vinegar variables for each quadratic equation, and Fx is equal to Y. Then, attempt to solve the resulting O linear equations in O variables, say by Gaussian elimination. If a solution exists, then you find the preimage, and the very unlikely event that one does not, simply try another guess for the vinegar variables. The reason that the different variable types are called oil and vinegar comes from salad dressing, where the oil and vinegar involved are not fully mixed. By the composition of T, we see that a public key, P is equal to F composed of T, seems to be a random quadratic system, as the oil and vinegar structure is now hidden. So, there's some broken parameters for oil and vinegar schemes. The original parameter suggested was V is equal to O, which was called balanced oil and vinegar. This is defeated by Kips and Schmier using invariant subspaces. If V is less than O, then by guessing some variables, it has the potential to become balanced oil and vinegar again, which I think can be easily broken. If V is much greater than O, then finding a solution is generally easy as well. Now, the user parameters is going to be something like V is equal to twice O, thrice O, a similar ratios. This is called unbalanced oil and vinegar. The direct attack does not work. The complexity is the same as if solving a random system. Beyond the direct attack, there is the reconciliation attack, which uses the structure of UV systems. It looks for equivalent maps of a special form. Complexity becomes solving a system of all quadratic equations in V variables. Now, choosing V is equal to 2O or something similar is less efficient. The signature is at least twice the size of the document. Therefore, there are many developments in basic UV to improve the efficiency of the scheme. Importantly, one is the round three finalists, Rainbow by Jim Tyding, the D. Deschmitte in 2005. It's a multi-layer version of UV, and it reduces the number of variables in the public key to get smaller key sizes and smaller signatures. Another is LUV, which we will now discuss. Lifted unbalanced oil and vinegar. LUV is a round two in this candidate, designed by Ward Bullions at all in 2017. It is a variant of UV that implements two previous refinements of UV as well as the lifting modification for which it is named. The two previously known refinements will not be important for our attack. We will only briefly discuss them here. The first, originally by Peter Sysbeck, is to choose the affine transformation T in the shape which is follows. Well, one sub V is the identity matrix whose diagonal is length V, and similar for once at O. The second, originally by Albrecht Pentstalt, is to use a seed and a pseudo random number generator to generate both the private key and the public key. The third, from which LUV gets its name for the modification, is the focus of our attack. LUV takes an oil and vinegar private key over a small field and lifts it to an extension field from which it's signed to signatures. This allows more efficient storage at the public and private keys. So to be explicit, let F to the R be the extension of F2 of degree R, and N is equal to V plus O. The central map F still is an oil and vinegar form. Except now, each of the coefficients is going to be chosen in an F2, so either 0 or 1. Further, we choose that linear map T to be in the form where each of the entries are also from the small field F2. From the third modification, we see that the public key P is equal to F composed of T also has coefficients only in F2, but maps F to the R to the N to F to the R to the O. We will call such polynomials lifted. Subfield differential attack. Now let's describe the subfield differential attack, SDA itself. It is a direct attack against LUV, meaning we will try to forge a signature X for a given message Y by directly solving P of X is equal to Y. We first note that the design of LUV makes the domain F to the R to the N with a public key P much larger than the range F to the R to the O. Thus, we can try searching through some large enough subset D of the domain to find the preimage X for Y. D needs to be much more, needs to be much more, needs to be more efficient to find preimages N. Otherwise, there's little point in strengthening ourselves. We thus look for subsets with structure that can be exploited. For SDA, we choose to set F to the D to the N plus X prime, for F to the D is a subfield of F to the R, and X prime is an element of F to the R to the N. Then, the preimage X will be in the form of X bar plus X prime, where X bar is an element of F to the D to the N. This leads to the idea behind the attack. With a differential, we will do solving the original equations over F to the R to new equations over F to the D. The latter will be more efficient to solve. It will be shown that we will only rely on the listed structure of the public key and the availability of a large enough subfield of F to the R. So, let P be an LUV public key and F to the D of subfield of F to the R. We first randomly select a differential X prime and F to the R to the N and X bar will be in the term of F to the D to the N. Then we define a map P bar is equal to P value we did at X bar plus X prime. And this maps F to the D to the N to F to the R to the O. So we've shrunk our domain. We will solve P bar is equal to Y using the quotient ring representation of F to the R. Now to remind us what that is, if I take a base field F2 and extension field F2 to the R, there will always exist an intermediary field F2 to the D whenever D divides R. Now F to the R is isomorphic to the following quotient ring where G of T is an irreducible polynomial of degree S is equal to R divided by D. Elements in F to the R can thus be represented by degree S minus 1 polynomials in the polynomial ring over F to the D. So when we look at the form of P bar is equal to Y, in particular the cave component, we see it's going to, by definition, be Fk tilde evaluated at X prime plus X bar. Now rearranging this and separating out the quadratic terms, it will be in this form. And we see that the quadratic terms are coefficient alpha inside F2, so either 0 or 1. And the linear terms coefficients are random degree S minus 1 polynomials in T, because X prime I is randomly selected. So we can write this again as Fk tilde divided by the X prime plus X bar is equal to some sum of some random linear functions over F2 to the D with a number multiplied to T for all the powers of T from 1 to S minus 1. Plus a single quadratic equation which is not multiplied to T. And we set this equal to Y sub k, which can also decompose into the powers of T. Thus, we can solve P bar is equal to Y by first finding the solution space S to minus 1 times O linear equations. A is equal to Lik X bar is equal to Yik. Now we have S minus 1 times O linear equations because we have S minus 1 powers of T, no T to the power of 1 up to T to the power of S minus 1 to solve. And we have O polynomials and P bar to do this with. Then we attempt to solve a set of all quadratic equations. B is equal to Q sub k is equal to Y0k over S. With high probability the mention of S is equal to N minus S minus 1 times O. If a solution X bar to the above system is found, then the forward signature is X bar plus X prime. Now that we have described the form of the attack, we need to see if there's an appropriate sub field we can use for the parameters used by LUV. Depending on the parameters, there are many subfields of F to the R that we could select. For instance, here's the largest diagram of F to the AD subfields. And F to the AD is one of the choices that the LU, one of the finite fields of the LUV off is used in the initial submission. And we see in this case, we're spoiled for choice which subfield we could pick. Now the most efficient choice is the smallest subfield which the solution is likely to exist. Theoretically, P bar acts as a random map. So we can use the following lima. Let A and B be two finite sets and Q which takes A to B be a random map. For each B and B, the probability that Q inverse of B is not empty is approximately 1 minus E to the power of negative size of A divided by size of B. Here are the smallest usable choices of F to the D for the parameters originally submitted for the second round. And in this table, we see that D is always much smaller than R and our probability of success is almost one in each case. Complexity of SDA. Now we are ready to compute the complexity of SDA for the pros parameters. As the cost of solving the linear equations is small, we will estimate only solving the undetermined final quadratic system of N minus S minus O variables in our equations over F to the D. We'll have more variables in equations. So we will first use the method of timeline wolf which can be found in the following paper solving undetermined systems of multivariate quadratic equations revisited. The method is to use a changer basis which can be found by solving a relatively small linear system to reduce the undetermined system to a determined system. Then the system of O equations and N minus S minus 1 times O variables is reduced to a system of M equations and N variables where M is equal to O minus the floor of N minus S minus 1 times O divided by O. Now after applying this method, we generally lose one or two equations and this is in the following table. To solve these atomic quadratic systems, we will use what is called a hybrid method. We will randomly guess K of the variables and then attempt to solve the new over determined systems of M equations and N minus K variables with an algorithm like VMXL or F4. The exact number of variables to be guessed for depends on the algorithm used and the parameters. Generally, the smaller the field, the more variables to be guessed for. If no solution is found, we change our guess and try it again until we succeed. We will follow yet another analysis in solving these types over determined systems and choose to use read them in Excel in our complexity estimates. For details, see operating degrees for Excel versus F4 slash F5 for generic MQ with number of equations linear and that of variables. The complexity of Excel largely depends on the constant D0 known as the operating degree. Generally, when solving a quadratic system of M equations in the variables of FQ, D0 is equal to this expression. With this notation means the coefficient of t to the D in the power series representation of this function. However, for small fields, when D0 is greater than Q, we can use the field equations XQ is equal to X to reduce this to D0 is equal to this expression. Taken to account the potential K guesses, denoting the operating degree for each choice by D0 to K and using the vehement algorithm, we estimate the complexity in solving the term systems as CXL is approximate to this expression. In the following table, we record how CXL compares to the classical complexity requirements of LU of E. And we see in each case that CXL is smaller than this requirements. So summarizing LU of E as was proposed fails to meet the security level requirements. Two schemes, which claim to be of level two security, do not even satisfy the level one security of two to the power of 143. A possible response and immaculability of SDA do non-lifted schemes. Earlier, we saw that we wanted to choose the smallest possible subfield in which it is likely to find a signature. This depends heavily on the chosen parameters. If we choose R prime and the only subfield of FG of the R is F2, which is too small to use for the SDA we present here. The offers of LUV have put forth parameters which use a prime for R. We and Bo Yan Yang from Tomkin University have made progress in this area of improving SDA to attack fully half of these new parameters. The level one security can be broken in a practical 210 minutes. The extension is called nested subset differential attack, whose E print was submitted in early August. The paper is called invested sub differential attack, a practical direct attack against LUV, which forges a signature within 210 minutes. Before we conclude, let us discuss why SDA does not apply to UV, rainbow or any multivariate scheme which does not use the lifted structure of LUV. The reason for this is that in suppressing out the linear system A in the quadratic terms, it was necessary for the coefficients of the quadratic terms to only be in the subfield F2 to the D. Below is the kth component of P bar again. And we see that if the alphas are random elements of F to the R, then the quadratic terms of coefficients for all powers of T up to S minus 1. Then we would be solving O times S quadratic equations over F to the D and not gain any efficiency. Conclusion. We have seen that though LUV is an interesting development of UV, which reduces the public key size. However, given its newness, we have found an attack which we call SDA, which breaks all the parameters originally submitted for this competition. SDA is based on the elementary representation of field extensions and thus has potential for more complex development. As SDA relies only on the lifted structure of LUV, it will need to be considered if any future schemes want to use the lifted structure. Thanks for watching the video. We'd like to show state our appreciation for the support of the TAF fund, NIST and the NSA. Have a good one.


Okay, James P. Madonna here at the Royal Hibachi, but they move 46 West out of Brooklyn, Jersey My favorite sign starting off with my favorite sign Of course the people the Polished off the crab soup. I'm not the crab soup. I'm sorry the codfish Described cod fillet. I have to wait now for them to bring out more Because people here attack it like vultures I'm going to have to do a bet of Asian rice noodles may fun and I'm going to cover it with the bouillabaisse mixie Bouillaballs I want to give a shout out to the great drug-free competitive powerlifter and circular strength trainer. Mr. Jeff Zanbele as well as Exorcist Bishop Brian, that's right exorcist Bishop Brian the star of the travel channel show ghost adventures I want to give a shout out to the both of them because the both are culinary enthusiasts Let's put it that way enthusiasts enthusiast Not little necks.  That's not nice Bouillaballs That's all right Fruited Amar the broth of the sea See Jeff Zanbele long spoon knows no spilling no no sticking my fingers in there Jeff Zanbele Wink wink nod nod sarcasm right again my favorite sign You need you need all these signs to be honest with you All right, now we're gonna pay a visit. Oh He's just starting a meal The king the key the other king of Mongolian barbecue. Look at that He's just starting Not much to see let me check out the sushi It just had sushi for whips for whips right now. No hardcore sushi and sashimi All the California roll type of entrees No, not for me. I Like the hardcore sushi and sashimi, you know any mean jelly bean There he is They're all here They're all here. Ah, look at this. What's that toy key? Let me see what that is that might be turkey breasts or might be pterodactyl I'm sorry stuffed chicken breasts with spinach. Oh Man they start they took all the stuffing out look at it. They massacred it They destroyed it. What's going on here? Anyway before I forget while I'm here for the very finest in hot buffalo chicken wings to go for your next scheduled sporting event at home come to Royal Hibachi buffet and buy These chicken wings in great bulk. You can come in and buy it in bulk for your next sporting event party All right for your next sporting event party The best buffalo hot chicken wings could be any sporting event Anything soccer baseball professional wrestling MMA Football you name it How come every time or this looks good Come every time I'm doing a video and I'm narrating Somebody stands right next to me just to bust my balls That's some All right People are really annoying and you know what this this one's a fat.   Let's see if the fatty are buckles massacre the Look at that.   Oh look how nice my My my friend my favorite waitresses. She got she bought me a steak knife But she brought me some lemons Even though I do need more lemons There you go Is the other king of Mongolian barbecue he's got a lot of shrimp and I think there's some noodle Some green peppers onions artificial crab Mongolian barbecue Here at Royal Apache buffet rule 46 West saddle book from Jersey and The vapors of life are ascending into the heavens. Oh He was just helping out now the other the other king of Mongolian barbecue Okay, let's see if the codfish is back Now look look what happened. I'm gonna show I want to show you people something before when I was here There was no codfish at all. They must have brought out a tray.   Oh, there we go. Oh, look at that apple strudel. I believe that's apple strudel It's like a German chocolate cake. The apple strudel looks pretty good. Hopefully There'll be more left, you know kiwi fruit Larry fine style ball headed So it's easy to peel No Mangles have dwindled down Look, look how they massacred the seafood cell Anyway, that's it before I get myself more aggravated. I was able to get lucky come there or Jeff's and go get some some succulent scrod cod fillet Fresh from Davey Jones's locker. I guess it's slowed down.  Oh, look at the grape leaves Maybe There's some bits of feta cheese in here Got cucumbers, tomatoes, black olives. Look at that, Turkish salad, feta cheese, onions, uh, chopped tomatoes Black olives Yeah, I'm gonna pass on the uh Grape leaves.  You're always behind me You know, hopefully I'll be able to get some of those Most likely I won't There look at this this guy this this guy this guy goes there's this is dude that goes Exactly Where what am I balling like whatever am I balling? There's this guy he goes exactly Where where I want to go afterwards He went right for the man. He saw me stop and look at the mangoes this this prick And and he goes right for the mangoes. He sees me eyeballing something else and he goes all right for it unbelievable The general public people suck really I mean I gotta be honest with you.  You know, they all try to act like tony robbins motivational speaker Okay, I meant to tail end of the buffet trying to decide what I want I'm very curious what this, uh purple purple colored Ice cream is it's like somebody put their foot in there.  Well, anyway, it's definitely worth a try I was I was going to get the sorbet but look at look at the mess they made What's the worst that can happen? I won't like it, right?  What do you think? Oh, it's soft. That means there's a lot of kids have been over here What happened? Why is it soft? Is it because of the heat wave outside? The tropical heat wave I hope I hope that wasn't a schlong. That was a day That looks a little suggestive. What do you think? I hope that wasn't a schlong Okay Yeah, what's the worst that can happen? I didn't take a lot of it Worst that can happen is I won't like it Okay, my review on this purple ice cream is very Favorable very positive. It is blueberry ice cream. Okay, very good Things have slowed down here at the royal hibachi buffet And I am ready to leave and head for the dollar zone dollar store which is right next door One of my favorite all-time dollar stores So anyway, I'm happy about this blueberry ice cream Take care until next time This is james beamed on it from the facebook group. Everything is food. This has been a mega live 21 production


Hello, I'm Almodena Vicente-Frankeda and in this video of the Digitally Competent Educational Organization's course by Dane Teff, we will talk about planning and managing a school's digital infrastructure. Learning anytime, learning anywhere, learning alone, but in contact with other students with different levels of knowledge and competences, constant lifelong learning. All of these expressions define different types of learning which may not be possible in real life if we are not able to plan and manage the digital infrastructure that enables us to expand learning beyond the classroom and the physical presence of teachers and students. When referring to infrastructure, the European framework they come or mentions not only the digital infrastructure, but also physical learning spaces that have to be designed in such a way that they will allow the effective use of technologies and new teaching methodologies. In this sense, having a reliable, secure and scalable digital infrastructure is fundamental for any proposal related to the digital competence of organizations. If it's not reliable, there are no guarantees that we can access the digital tools everywhere and at all times, whenever we need them. If it's not safe, we cannot ensure the protection of our personal information, activities and facilities against malicious attacks and against unwanted use of our data. And last, if they are not scalable, infrastructures can become outdated because of the dynamic character of educational organizations or they can work improperly when they use parameters change. Needless to say that planning and managing the digital infrastructure entails certain aspects that go beyond competence. Planning and managing the digital infrastructure primarily depends on the current situation of technology and on the market. Furthermore, market issues related to planning and managing digital infrastructures influence decision making processes that often have nothing to do with educational organizations. The parties responsible for making decisions in this area are public administrations or private agencies. In other words, educational organizations are responsible for planning and managing the digital infrastructures, but their implementation is linked to technology and budget related issues that usually go beyond organizations' competence or intentions. However, even though they don't make the decisions, these schools need to have a clear vision of how the digital infrastructure needs to be in order to ensure effective learning in the circumstances we mentioned above. And they also need to establish what will happen to the infrastructure once it becomes obsolete. In this sense, they come or identify two sub-elements for this element. Physical and virtual learning spaces are designed for digital age learning. The digital infrastructure is planned and managed. These two sub-elements actually remind us that we are at a point where physical space merges with virtual space in such a way that they become one environment in which they give each other constant feedback. But in order for this to happen, we must make sure that digital infrastructure matches up with the physical space and that it allows the users the access to learning in an invisible but critical manner. With regards to the first sub-element related to the design of the spaces for the digital age learning, two descriptors were mentioned. Physical learning spaces optimize the affordances of digital age learning. Virtual learning spaces are optimized. Both descriptors talk about optimizing, that is, finding the best possible relations between all the elements of the physical and virtual environments so that the learning process takes place in the best possible setting. A good starting point in the design of the spaces is the idea of the semiotics of the spaces and infrastructures. The spaces and infrastructures bear and spoken messages of our learning and teaching models and theories and there is a great feedback between all of the components in both the physical component, the epistemological component and the teaching and learning practices. A component becomes effective when the others complement it. In the same way, they block or impoverish learning when there is a conflict between them. This is where the idea of harmonizing both the spaces stem from. In the same way, the implementation and management of the digital infrastructure should be governed by the equal opportunities and elimination of various principles. The educational organization has to show sensitivity to these issues and take appropriate actions so that economically disadvantaged students or especially students have full access to technologies. In this regard, the access to technology is no longer a possibility. It is starting to be shaped as a right in the process of shaping identities and citizenship. It's precisely when exercising this right that schools need to be particularly careful with information processing because these have to comply with current legislation. Apart from that, schools need to ensure the privacy, confidentiality and the safe use of technologies and data for all the members of the educational community. As part of exercising the responsibility, the digitally competent organization can adapt an acceptable use policy. These should describe two sets of behaviors and practices. One that the organization promotes and another one set of behaviors and practices that should be avoided because they present a risk to oneself or other individuals or institutions. In fact, we can think of these policies as means to create healthy behaviors of technologies usage for all the educational community. Planning and managing the digital infrastructure is one of the responsibilities of the educational organization. This entails not only providing the best possible infrastructure for learning, but it also requires the organization to ensure that all members of the educational community make good use of it. At the same time, an onus and transparent management of the budget allocated to the procurement and maintenance of the digital infrastructure is required. In short, the descriptors that allow us to analyze our school digital planning in terms of planning and managing the digital infrastructure are. An acceptable usage policy is in place. Pedagogical and technical expertise informs investments in digital technologies. A range of digital learning technologies supports any time, any place learning. Bring your own device, BYOD approaches are supported. Risks relating to inequality and digital inclusion are addressed. Technical and user support is clear. Assistive technologies address the special needs. Measures to protect privacy, confidentiality and safety are clear. Effective procurement planning is evident. An operational plan for core ICT backbone and services is in place. Needless to say, we are facing an important challenge. Educational organizations have to rely on a significant professional capital in order to ensure that all of these issues are adequately addressed. This can be done either with the expertise and skills of the members of the educational community or with external support. Digitally competent organizations require adequate digital infrastructures in order to exist and grow. However, if an organization lacks digital competence as described here, then it does not make any sense and it's useless to have a certain type of digital infrastructure. Nowadays, we can enchant learning with the help of technology. Nevertheless, only with the help of individuals who are dedicated, competent and willing to learn, can we create learning organizations that teach more and better thanks to technology. Our world is not divided into two with one side being the analog world and on the other side the digital world. The digital environment is just another structure with different ways of doing and of learning things in which we have to find our place. The sense of the digital competence nowadays is linked to individuals who are able to learn in organizations that learn in complex environments using digital technologies.


Everybody forced here ripping 2022 impeccable football hobby three bucks full case number 41 random team style You can always find the results of late in sports cards calm here. We go everybody best of luck. Oh really Carl I've never actually made them myself But I mean it's not not difficult. It's time-consuming of course You have to just put in the effort essentially alright here we go y'all One of my neighbors used to make them every single year around like New Year's You would make a ton of them and you'd give us like Probably like a whole like saucepan full so so so good Here we go That's the bar card will open that one at the very end Printing plate is first card. We're gonna see here start with a one-of-one Niko Collins Texans printing plate nasty Niko as Sam calls him Pat's team in Harris 4 of 10 4 of 10 parallel Patriots Into the autos now rookie out of David O'Jabbo 32 of 35 Ravens dolphins Nice immense patch auto Jalen waddle 49 of 99 great hit dolphins Randy G Eagle Super Bowl auto Chris Long Turkey landscape auto Saints Chris Olave 93 of 99 and Elegans patch and helmet rookie auto breeze haul 4 of 75 for the Jets awesome hit Jets Moving on here moving on I got to go to the restaurant try collards one day next next week Got DJ more to 75 Panthers George Kittle to 59ers and Mike Evans bucks is 75 probably got to send us something If she makes it better you got to send us some Buccaneers Logan to Hall of Rookie Otto 76 of 99 49ers elegance patch auto Richard Sherman 7 of 75 Niners Richard Sherman It's player-worn patch auto there one of the best corners of the past the 15 years So Kim and Reeves, right? Oh, probably I'm really better, but after that This is Jalen Ramsey in that cap conversation and the conversation James and Williams RPA for the Lions 92 of 99 Social media just thinks he gets burned all the time. He's actually still a really good player Nice James and Williams Lions.  Oh, and I pull our tonnies All you need is an oh and then two syllables after it Yeah, that's it. All you need House one ends in the E or an A Anything Yeah, all right, here we go last box everybody Kurt Cousins 14 of 75 Vikings Buccaneers Kate Otten rookie auto 33 out of 75 Buccaneers elegance patch auto Mike All-Star 12 of 15 a train for the Bucks Bucks have a few hits now Get ready for more Bucks get ready for more. Oh, this is a Warren sap Super Bowl champion auto 21 of 25 a Popka legend right there awesome hit for the Bucks Super Bowl champion autos are so cool fire starter rookie auto Trayvon Walker 18 of 50 for the Jaguars My god eight of 15 49ers triple auto Joe Montana John Brody Steve Young Wow That's crazy.  Oh My god, that's got to go in a mag right away Redemption elegance rookie helmet and name plate autos Kenneth Walker the third Seahawks That was a fan Tastic final box of the case right there. Okay, when did John Brody play? Was he like that same time? Yeah, it's no wonder between young Yeah, silver bar Hall of Fame logo Marshall Falk one of 25 for the Rams You go Rams Marshall Falk Troy out to find silver what I want to know is Why is it Nick Mullins on that card for CJ pathard or Seneca Wallace the Seneca Wallace ever played for the Niners Am I just making that up in my head? Before Montana gotcha. Yeah, I know idea Donnie and I would do it. We're not we're not alive printing plate one of one Niko Collins Board of Texans Trayvon Walker Warren sap Mike All-Stott's Got a Kate Aughton bucks it well in this one canvas creations of Jack Ham Jack Lambert not Jack Ham. Jack Ham Jack Ham James Williams RPA for the Lions Richard Sherman patch auto Niners Niners crushed it of course Logan Hall with the Bucks Olavé Chris Long Jalen waddle patch auto for the Dolphins. You got a David O'Javo silver bar was Marshall Falk for the Rams to 25 Seahawks redemption rookie elegance helmet and nameplate auto Kenneth Walker the third congrats Seahawks That'll be a really nice one The elegance is really great in this case patch and helmet is 75 breeze haul jets on the auto Chris Olaveta 35 three color patch and helmet auto for the Saints and triple auto Joe Montana John Brody Steve Young eight out of 15 Which is a Steve Young Jersey number you know that'll do it. Thanks again everybody Got eminence up next now


Hello everyone. Welcome back to a new session on dentistry and more. So today we have two syndromes. It is myofascial pain dysfunction syndrome or MPDS or burning mouth syndrome or BMS. So it is a continuation of our various syndromes last three sessions we have covered various syndromes. So today's session also we will be covering these two syndromes. There are actually various syndromes present in our oral pathology subject but we are focusing only on the syndromes the main syndromes which have been asked for university exam. So the idea is to give you some tips about each syndrome so you can easily memorize this and write it for the exam. So let's see what is MPDS and what is BMS. So we will begin with burning mouth syndrome. It is a burning sensation without any detectable cause.   So usually we know ulcers and other lesions which causes burning sensation but this is without any particular cause. So the clinically no apparent alterations are present in patient's mouth. So what are the epidemiological features of this disease. This is most commonly seen among women that is it is increased with age and it is like 6 is to 1 prediction compared to males that is female prediction is almost 6 times compared to the males. And it is seen among women after menopause that is 3 to 12 years after menopause. It is commonly seen and it is very rare before 30 years. So that is something related to the epidemiology of BMS. Now let's see the classification. So it is classified into 3 type 1 type 2 and type 3. It is based on the symptoms present when a person awake or upon waking that is type 1. There is no symptom upon waking but it increases throughout the day. Type 2 is the symptoms present when upon waking and it is throughout the day it is present and this is the most common type that is type 2. Type 3 there is no regular pattern and it is the least common one. And let's see what are the etiological factors. Actually it is not confined to any particular factor. We cannot say that this course is burning mouth syndrome. There are many factors which can cause the burning sensation in mouth. So those are we can classify that into local and systemic factors. The local factors involves oral candidiasis like in planus allergy or allergy like in planus oral candidiasis and systemic factors involves hormonal changes, vitamin B12, folic acid or iron deficiency, diabetes malitis maybe the side effect of few medications, few autoimmune diseases and salivary gland disorders and some medications like AC inhibitors and even trauma and psychiatric problems. So local factors like danger problems also could be there like ill-fitting, interinsicile space and vertical dimension problems and maybe the median rhomboid glossitis, hypersensitivity to certain food materials like in planus I mentioned already and also oral habits like tongue thrusting and even carcinoma and maybe the prolonged use of chlorxidine mouthwash also could be a etiological factor.  So burning can be seen in these patients. So these are the etiological factors associated with burning mouth syndrome and what are the clinical features? So the most common clinical feature is burning sensation especially the anterior part of tongue and dyscusia and dysesthesia. So that is dyscusia is the altered taste and dysesthesia is itching or pain sensation and it is especially present on the anterior one-third of the tongue. And what are the treatment options? There is no particular treatment options. If it is a milder case we can go for psychological counseling and the moderate to severe cases should go for drug therapy like amy-triplein and alpha-lipoic acid. So burning mouth syndrome is very peculiar because we have many diseases many conditions many lesions which can result in burning mouth but without any specific course without any clinical manifestation the presence of burning is actually known as burning mouth syndrome and it is most commonly seen with women especially postmenopausal period and we have three classification and n number of etiological factors. So now let's move on to myofascial pain dispension syndrome or MPDS. So it is a pain disorder which starts from trigger points in myofascial structures. So what are these trigger points? These trigger points are within the skeletal muscle which is triggered by macro or micro trauma happening to these skeletal structures. So it is a pain disorder as the name suggests it is a pain disorder which is starting from few or many trigger points which is present in the myofascial structures. So these trigger points are elicited or responded by the macro or micro trauma happening to these structures. So it is 30% of the total population is affected and the females are most affected 3 is to 1 predilection and it is most commonly seen in middle age group that is 15 to 40 years. So we have a cycle of events in this etiology. So this is a cycle of events that is stress is causing muscular hyperactivity. Again the dental irritation is also causing muscular hyperactivity. So what happens when there is hyperactivity of muscle the muscle fatigue. So muscular fatigue which leads to myofascial pain dysfunction syndrome. At the same time muscular over contraction can also leads to MPDS. Muscular over extension can also leads to MPDS. So what happens due to MPDS there is contracture, there is degenerative arthritis, there is internal derangement and there is occlusal disharmony. So due to occlusal disharmony and internal derangement the chewing pattern is changed and also due to the degenerative arthritis and contracture the again the chewing pattern will be changed. So chewing pattern is changed due to all these reasons that is MPDS affect the degenerative arthritis it causes contracture, it causes occlusal disharmony and it changes the internal structure that internal derangement. So all these results in chewing pattern. So what happens once the chewing pattern is changed it will again cause MPDS. So it is a vicious cycle. So it starts with stress, muscular hyperactivity and dental irritation goes to muscle fatigue and muscular over contraction and muscular over extension. MPDS goes to arthritis, internal derangement, occlusal disharmony. It results in chewing pattern. It itself goes back to MPDS. So in pathophysiology what happens when the etiological factors so all the etiological factors which leads to micro or macrotrauma to the musculoskeletal system to muscle spasm. So all these etiological factors which causes trauma that is micro or macrotrauma on the musculoskeletal system which leads to muscle spasm. So what happens? So this hyper tonicity may lead to muscle fatigue. So this is what I was explaining hyper tonicity there will be muscle fatigue and accumulation of lots of metabolic byproducts such as lactic acid, prostaglantin, radicanin and histamines. So due to this hyper tonicity and muscle fatigue there will be byproducts that is metabolic byproducts such as lactic acid, prostaglantin, radicanin and histamine. So what happens? The accumulation of these pain mediators lowers the pain threshold to mechanical and chemical stimuli which leads to MPDS. So it is a cycle, etiological factors, micro or macrotrauma, muscle spasm what happens? Then there is byproducts, metabolic byproducts such as prostaglantin, radicanin, histamine, lactic acid which goes pain threshold lowering the pain threshold to mechanical and chemical stimuli which leads to MPDS. So the classification, spasm of lateral to regoid either or it is spasm of elevator muscles or it is spasm of lateral to regoid and elevator muscles. So clinical features includes pain, discomfort, limited jaw movements, the clicking and other jaw noises and who are tendon. So in clinical features so there are basically four categories. So we can express these clinical features in four categories that is neurologic, otologic, gastrointestinal tract and musculoskeletal. In neurological there is tingling, numbness, blurred vision and lacrimation in otologic, tinnitus, ear pain, dizziness and vertigo. In GI tract, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea or constipation, musculoskeletal, there is fatigue, tension, tiredness, weakness and joint pains. So how do we diagnose MPDS? The most common four criteria is the unilateral pain, muscle tenderness, the clicking and limited jaw movements. So these are the four criteria for diagnosing MPDS, unilateral pain, muscle tenderness, clicking and limited jaw movements. And how do we treat this? The treatment is basically we go for seven hours occlusion rehabilitation. So it starts with seven hours. So that is the first one is remove extraction of teeth, second one is reshape, grinding of any occlusion, high points or such things and reposition that is doing using orthodontic treatment and restore any conservative feeling or conservative treatment, replace that is using processes, reconstruct that is TMJ surgery and the last one is regulate that is regulating the habits and symptoms. So remove, reshape, reposition, restore, replace, reconstruct and regulate, extraction, grinding, orthodontic treatment, conservative treatment, processes, TMJ surgery and control of habits that is seven hours. So seven hours involved with this seven hours involved with management of myofascial pain dysfunction. So that's all about MPDS. So this isn't a complete details of any long essay. This might be asked for a long essay, but it is to give a very brief idea and a pilot view. So I would say a pilot view that is what are the basic features, what are the striking features of any syndrome. So you can easily build up the content while writing the exam. So syndromes, we have completed syndromes which are being asked mainly for unicity papers. So I will come up with a different topic in oral pathology. So hope you understood all the syndromes we covered so far, we finished it in four sessions. So anyway, I will come up with new topics in oral pathology. Thank you.


Thankfully, it's November and Appalachian Wireless is offering the Samsung GS8 or the GS8 Plus for $100 off the regular price with two-year agreement. Better service, bigger savings, that's today's Appalachian Wireless at East Kentucky Network Company. It's time now for Mountain Music being brought to you by the Mountain Arts Center, the main stage of the Country Music Highland. We just play what to me is just an Eastern Kentucky style of old-time music, influenced very heavily from our friend Lee and other folks like George Gibson, traditional banjo players more or less, more traditional music, the well that which Bluegrass grew out of. Well it's sort of just the sound of home I grew up, here and then I have an uncle who played more old-time music and just always heard it and there would be a family get together and stuff and as well as things, pretty typical story, you start growing up, you're getting to rock and roll and all that and then eventually I just backtracked to the first stuff I ever heard because it's, you know, it's a little cheesy but it's real. The words to the first tune we did, hard for to love, when you can't be loved, that's the tune to that, it's a very traditional tune, it's akin to a lot of other tunes and there are lyrics in that song that are in other songs. Our version comes from a recording I heard of some folks from around Jenkins, the Shepherd Brothers.


This time we are going to be moving to the next section of our blocks and that is the layout block. The biggest and the newest layout block that I really appreciate is the group block. Now the group block in essence has it has advanced. You can add maybe, NHTML anchor. This group block is called maybe Sink group. So that will be the anchor for our HTML. So what we do is I'm going to just update this and show you where exactly that goes and I'm going to go to the front end of our page and just scroll down. And so I'll quickly look at, I'm going to inspect this. So if you look down here in the code that I'm having, our page now has a new ID called sync group. Okay, now if I went back and just removed this, I'll just cut it away and update, then reload. You'll see that if we try to inspect this location itself, we no longer have the ID in set. It's no longer part of it. It's a way that we can use our anchor tags. That is, we can use links to direct people to this exact page and into this exact location if we give them the anchor link of a sync group. So that's the beauty with this group. So you can use it to link different things. However, this group can also go full width and it can also just stay wide width, spanning across the width of your website. Now this group block was made so that you can group different things together. So we have our group block here. Now the group block was meant to house a number of blocks. For example, I'm going to just drag this block over us and then I will drop it inside our group block. So you realize that we have it already grouped in here. So I can also decide to bring this table and just add it as part of the group. So if you look at this, we have our group block just here. It has a vast and it has the table which is individual in nature and can still have its different pieces fixed altogether. Like its different properties are still intact. The same with this other block. So I'm also just going to move this other block. I'll just group it in here. So essentially we have our group block handling all the different information together. Sometimes it's a little bit hard to move those and get them well but you keep going at it. So I'm going to reload this here and I'm going to show you what it is about. Right now you cannot see so much of a difference of what's going on but you'll find that this group if you look as I'm highlighting over the IDC group you'll see that the different items the vast, the pool court and the table are all highlighted in blue meaning that they are grouped together. So if I go levels in here you'll see we have the pool court, we have the table and we have the vast inside our group block. So these hopes are just grouping things together and having them nested and then you can maybe look them up with your HTML and your CSS.