Good morning, everybody. Welcome to the 1145 session. My name is James Glopik-Groves-Kleig with College of the Canyons in California. It's my pleasure to convene, facilitate, host this session just to make sure we're all in the right place. This is the 1145 session entitled Cape Town Declaration, Envisioning the Next Decade of Open Education with Nicole Allen and Alec Tarkowski. Just a couple of organizational points. Some of you looking in the hard copy schedule might be expecting two sessions or two topics during this timeframe. That's not the case anymore. Paul Stacey's session will be taking place tomorrow afternoon, I believe. So at 245, thanks, Nicole. In a different room. In a different room. So you don't need to stay here until tomorrow at 245. So if you're looking for that session, please check the online schedule. Also, this session is being live streamed as well as recorded. So please keep that in mind if you're going to make any comments or do Q&A, just keep in mind that it will be recorded and is being streamed. On that note as well, please do use the microphone when you're asking questions or making comments. It will help with the recording and live streaming for the audience as well as people here in the room who might need the mic for accessibility purposes. So without further ado, I'm going to turn this over to Nicole and Alec. Thanks. Hello, everyone. Welcome to our session about the future of open education and discussions that we can have on this topic. Before we go into session, I just wanted to mention that we wanted to have this session quite interactive. If the format of the room doesn't make that easy, we did our best to come up with some ways of getting you into conversations that obviously will not have the kind of conversations you could have. For instance, in a banquet setting, apologies. Having said that, we don't mind that you're spread out around the room. One thing that will be useful for you is to be relatively close to another person because we'll have several conversations that should work between two or three people sitting next to each other. So if you want to participate in this interactive part, you might want to move at this moment just a bit or once we start the interactive part. Anything else we should mention? No, I don't think so. So at this conference last year, we held the first of a series of workshops on the Cape Town Declaration 10-year anniversary. So this process was started last year or two years ago, actually, in 2017, when a group of open education advocates and some of the foundations that convene the first Cape Town Declaration convening realized that the 10-year anniversary was coming up and it was time to sort of take a look back at the Cape Town Declaration and look ahead to the next decade. And those of you who aren't familiar with the Cape Town Declaration, it was sort of one of the foundational documents articulating a vision of the open education movement for the next decade. It was released in early 2008 following a convening in Cape Town during the fall of 2007 with a group of leaders in the open movement who drafted the declaration. And with a number of declarations in the open movement, like the Budapest Open Access Initiative, when anniversaries came around, sometimes when we looked back, it was time to write sort of a new vision or a new version or a new like add-on declaration. But the group that convened in 2007 to have this conversation in Cape Town during the Open Education Global Conference really recognized that the Cape Town Declaration, as it was, set out a vision that was still highly relevant today. So what we ended up doing, the group of people who were there is deciding on setting up the conversation in terms of new directions for the open education movement to recognize that 10 years later the vision is still the same but the specifics of how the movement is evolving and the ways that it's going forward are varied and new. So this is the list of 10 directions that came out of that process. And as I mentioned, Alec and myself and others who were involved in this have been holding workshops at various open education conferences over the last year. Our first one was here last year and it was a great sort of critical discussion looking at these directions and thinking about what's missing and how do we think about the future of open education. And what we're going to do is structure this workshop into sort of two parts. So one is we're going to take a look at these and have some small group conversations about what's here, how it applies in your context and maybe what's missing. And then the second part we're going to talk about next steps in terms of this process and whether we do need a larger movement-wide conversation about the future of open education and collective strategies and how we can facilitate those conversations. So before we move into that, we do want to sort of run through what each of these directions are and just say a little bit about them. And then we can move into some of the discussion questions. So there are 10 of them. Alec and I are going to alternate. So the first one is communicating open and this recognizes that one of the challenges that we often face is how to make people who aren't already engaged in open education or the broader open movement really understand what openness means. There's so many ways it can be confused with free or digital or other related terms and sometimes even now more nefariously conflated by special interests who want to go against the open movement. So how do we better communicate open to new audiences? And the second is empowering the next generation, recognizing that students and early career professionals are the ones that are going to be the leaders of the movement tomorrow and how do we bring them into the open movement? So from the very start, is there forming their sort of practices and future career paths that open is baked into that from the start. So Alec, this is you. Connecting with other open movements tries to acknowledge this idea that in the end there is a broader open movement. So probably for some of you the open education, you come to open education with a focus on education and you might not be working with any connections. I know that for many people in the open education movement connections with let's say open access are important or people work on open data. But there are also some people, I for instance, ultimately I think I approach the open education from the open part and for me these connections are very important. So this direction acknowledges the fact that there's a lot to be gained by interconnecting these movements. And the fourth direction is probably quite obvious. We call it open pedagogy. Some people speak about open educational practices. I think it acknowledges this big shift that has been happening around the conversation on open education. This move away from a focus on resources. And by the way, the interesting thing that it's worth to be aware of is that the original declaration which I think often is remembered as a foundation for a resource-based movement actually had a very strong component that talked about in people, teachers, learners, their capacities, their practices. So exactly this direction. Open education for development recognizing that open education can play a role in supporting economic development and that there are specific ways in which openness exists in developing contexts and helping to understand ways that we can create participatory dialogues with developing contexts around openness and understanding what openness means in those places and thinking about how to connect it to the larger sustainable development coals and development conversations that are happening in international spaces. Beyond the textbook thinking about how do we go beyond focusing on the textbook as the main currency of the resources that we use and even more broadly moving beyond a focus on open educational resources and thinking more about practices as Alex said. This is the moment where you can see that the directions, that the ten directions go in varied directions and not necessarily follow one path because in a way this contradicts the previous direction. It's an acknowledgement that in the end this is still a fundamental work that's being done by a lot of people in this movement. We can say that this is, a lot of people say this is not about pedagogies but still a lot will work on policies that open up publicly funded resources in the US. The core work happening is around this issue in Poland where I come from. This has been our great high-level top-down sort of success. So we acknowledge that this work is still happening. Is that the last? No, it's the last one. This one might feel like an outlier and I think it's in a way maybe one of the stranger sort of directions that were listed here. It's an attempt to connect open education work which is sort of based on voluntary approaches to open with an acknowledgement that our space is also shaped by law and that there are often ongoing copyright reform processes. If you're from Europe you probably heard about the big copyright debate which is probably the regulatory debate on technology in Europe this year but copyright reform process is happening right now also in South Africa, in Australia, in Canada, in different stages. So this was a direction that said we should be paying attention to these regulatory issues as well. And then the last two, data and analytics is a key area and I think even since this was raised as one of the parts of the conversation two years ago, the world has changed with Cambridge Analytica and data just meeting new things in our institutions and data and analytics can be used for good that they can also be exploited and misused in ways that are actually really dangerous for students in institutions. So this is a key area that I think has become even more significant over the past couple of years. And then finally thinking outside the institution, thinking about open education is a way to expand access to educational opportunities beyond traditional schools and universities in addition to the ways that we talk about it is an enabling strategy within our existing institutions. So those are the ten directions. We want to transition now into the discussion portion of this conversation where we're going to we have three rounds of questions. I think we're going to maybe take three minutes, grab a person next to you groups of twos or threes and respond to a series of questions and then share back out any interesting points that are raised in the conversation you have with your partner or partners. Maybe five minutes. So the first question is just find one or two other people introduce yourself and pick one of the directions on this list and say something about how it applies in your context. So that can be a project you're working on, why you think it's important or any other way that you think one of these directions is relevant to where you live and work. Questions before we start? And then for the people listening into the live stream, just to note that we do have a bit here to a Google Doc where you can enter your comments and we'll be watching it and can read it out to the group here. And there's also a YouTube chat you can use to talk with each other but unfortunately we'll not be there because like all good television hosts we've got our hosting to do. Stay tuned for our next season. Okay, if you can hear me, please clap once. If you can hear me, please clap twice. Okay, thanks. Alright, so that's off. I have a question to sharing back any reflections or thoughts about what you discussed with your partner with the whole group. We had an interesting discussion about the meaning of openness and how that shifted over time. Okay, so raise your hand if you'd like to share back.  So we have in the back and then here. I just had a rant there about open publishing. As I said I'm an editor of an open source journal and as I said what other job would I actually get a bricklayer in and then the bricklayer has to pay me to let him work on me. We get people to write. So the whole copyright and access and one thing I started to learn was copyright doesn't really mean an awful lot. It's actually the licensing and I think there's an awful lot of us. We're so caught up and we're just talking there about the catties to keynote speakers and we're so desperate for tenure and promotion and funding. So we have to publish in the tier one journals that is read by three men and it's Doug and then that publisher then charges my own university for my students to access that paper. Rant over. Hi, we were talking about connecting with other open movements and I could think of open hardware and open software and we were talking about open science but I'm curious to know what other open movements might be that you're talking about connecting with. Well first of all does anybody in the audience talk about this and want to share? Okay. I think the most obvious connections are with open access because a lot of the work is done in higher education institutions and we even had the meeting yesterday where we felt a strategy for promoting institutional policies or approaches to open education could be to piggyback on work already successful work with open access more broadly open science, open data understood both as open research data and more broadly for instance government data, it can be an educational research. Then for instance in the media movement a lot of people look at connections between education resources and cultural heritage resources and work done by cultural heritage institutions and it's good that you mentioned open source and open software because I actually think it's not discussed enough. I'm happy there are talks today and tomorrow about this but this connection is not made enough but maybe someone feels like something's missing in that list. I would add open government to the list. So we talked a little bit about both data and analytics in the opening up publicly funded resources and how they're kind of tight together. So we're a publicly funded, we're a CUNY, we're a publicly funded initiative and so a lot of that requires data to report back and so I think we're a little as an institution also a little leery about learning analytics and what is relationship to open pedagogy really is like if we're boxing everything into platforms that are running data and building proprietary frameworks about how to do adaptive learning is that really an open pedagogical strategy but also try to be very clear about what kind of data are we actually collecting on students who are in these platforms just because you have the data is it something that you should be using and sharing in a lot of ways and then what kind of stories and what's your approach to open data I'm by training a social scientist so the way we approach data is about storytelling right and so there's a lot of different stories you can tell like if your data says something not necessarily positive about what your OER initiative is or what OER really is is that something that you want to share out to getting your opening up publicly funded resources right and so there's a lot of questions I think that we have about this that haven't really been worked out we're not really discussing it because we're introducing our universities to each other but some one topic I always find sort of slips along the way is the topic of accessibility which can close up a lot of things and I just looked at this textbook framework that was presented in the other building and when I hear that they have this really really great offer there to create your own textbooks but for the accessibility there's a checklist and I hope that people follow it I think that is closing too many doors I think that's actually missing with a lot of things and of course the open source topic is the next issue if we don't look at accessibility in open source it's not really open it's open to those who have the budget to buy the license it's open to those who have command of the census that are preferred by that media I mean the next thing that's coming is augmented reality how are we going to deal with that with accessibility I think it's important because then only then we can roll it out I remember a few years back open was the thing to provide education to the world and actually it isn't because it's still providing to those who have the perfect bandwidth and I'm talking about anywhere in the world the west of Ireland a little while ago was not too great with bandwidth I don't know it's like now so I'm not talking necessarily only outside Europe so I think that's a big topic for open that we look a little bit at how open is it really or is it just free so one more comment I'd really appreciate the sort of critical observations or critical questions and we had sort of a medic question about this list very very helpful list but this sort of sparked our questioning about you know who was in the room who wasn't in the room whose voices were there whose voices weren't there you know it's a helpful list but why this list okay that's a really important question and is a great transition to move into the next section where we'll be talking about looking at this list of what is missing and whose voices are missing from the conversation so thank you for that the voices are the next right so this round two now we do too so totally agree I think you know with anything like this if you look at the list of signatories on the original Cape Town declaration like you know you can see how some decisions are made by smaller groups of people and you know as with anything that's going to happen there was a consultative process around this but I think as we're talking about next steps in this in this project making sure that the process is inclusive and globally representative is really really important in fact it's existential for the process okay so round two we're going to go back into groups the question is looking at this list what direction would you add or another way to phrase that is what is missing feel free to interpret the question that way as well so five-ish minutes okay everyone if you can hear me clap once if you can hear me clap twice partly or rarely goes to three claps that means the room is really rowdy back to you who would like to share what you discussed what direction did you pick straight in the back then here we had a discussion and we said open technology open educational technology should be added because then we have covered what I just mentioned that people no matter where can actually adapt and work with it and we can also make sure the accessibility is given would you remove anything we had a discussion about mindset having a mindset for openness and it interconnects with some of the points up there but we thought that it was important enough to have its own bullet point because of the struggles that we're having in our institutions convincing people that open is important sharing open resources open practices and the lack of a mindset to be open that exists in our institution so openness mindset for openness and that's different than communicating open because it's not just about helping them understand what it is it's making them care so culture change might be another term there and then here we actually kind of went I don't know there's been kind of meta or institutional and thinking that the time may be right for unique for doing this is you look at all of these things one of the things that is common in a lot of these things is that they rely on network structures and network behavior and stuff like that we think we need to add to this open governance of how does all of the how do all these movements become governed how do we lead this stuff because we need to be careful that we don't replicate what are in effect authoritative hierarchical structures in how we do this you know like we're already seeing mainstreaming for example in some states for example where a state coordinator of open whatever open textbooks or whatever is being hired well it'd be very easy to begin well then they're going to need control they're going to need direction and for you know we're actually what we need is networked governance where we bring everyone in and go beyond just consultative process because consultative process is still there is the authority in charge they're allowing you to have input and as one of my colleagues at my school says I'm tired of having input I want to be at the damn table when the decisions made all right so here and then so our point to speak to some of these and particularly your point about mindset here that we encapsulated as reframing the institution and so there was a real sense here that there was you know the kind of environment around universities was so volatile which was the word we chose at lunchtime at break time but also a real need to think about what is the purpose and the value of the university given the fact that boundaries can be porous and are porous and who is making the decisions and where the vision is coming from and so what there is a real lack of is really good arguments about why to do this that are couched in the terms that will respond to the different people who need to hear these arguments so going upwards about whether you know what the value is that's been retained in the university if you're giving away some of the content and going downwards you know how you can do this without having to go through a massive home of extra work in order to make some of your content open so and need to kind of understand what the purpose of the organization is and to have arguments ready that speak to different constituent communities wonderful so another one more up there oh sorry can you run the mic up there oh sorry here yes go for it so the thing I'm a big copyright geek so I was looking at the copyright reform for education and I think an additional dimension of this is not just reform but reform is a very difficult process and there are large well funded lobbies that are against the sort of reform around anything to do with copyright law and there is a certain level of latent flexibility in the law fair dealing fair use which I think and the work that I'm interested in around copyright literacy raising awareness of copyright to know that you can make risk based decisions which I think people need to be able to make themselves around what they do and that they are part and parcel of making something open that you can't always be 100% sure that what you're doing is totally risk free and that people should there's a fear around copyright and that might be a limiting factor in the wake up and creation of OER and that should be more than just the reform of the system but working within the system according to the rules they stand so we talked I think largely about how a lot of these sort of intersect with the word that a lot of us don't really understand what exactly it means was sustainability right and like what are we talking about we're trying to maintain this as a movement maintain this as activity and so one of the things that came up for us was technology but also is labor right you know I think there's a lot of talk about this that you know really kind of revolves around just assuming that people are going to do the work and maybe not get compensated for it do it at a volunteer level and so some of this comes in to tenure promotion if we're in an academic institution some of this just really comes about are we sustainability I think Charlie said is that funding a precarious position for one year or is it actually funding it into your institution and valuing that labor as something that really builds value for everyone involved I would just also add sustainability of the long-duration as well so not just you know over the next horizon but just more in terms of preservation as well librarians okay so I think we'll probably stop there I had a conversation during the break one that I think is glaringly missing is something about equity and inclusiveness of resources there's power in having the words written on the list and you know obviously those were conversations had in deciding on this list but it felt to sort of let's make sure equity is reflected in all of them in the write ups of all of them do reflect equity but it's not on the list and I think it should be my opinion okay so last group discussion I think we'll probably make this one a little bit shorter but want to take some time to think about who is missing from the broader open education conversation who should be included and you know what are some of the ways that we can include those voices so some of these already came out in the answers that you've given so far but talk a little bit about who's missing and maybe the other way to frame this question is if you were designing such a process if you were told okay so we want to collectively define directions how would you go about who would decide maybe it's about getting certain groups and getting a certain balance maybe it's about the process great three ish minutes alright Alec is not going to do the clappy thing but please give your attention back up to the front we have what six, seven minutes left do a quick share from this conversation and then we're going to wrap up with a few words about next steps so who would like to share your response to this question well in an old academic tradition let me answer the question by asking a question a conversation the question came up if you're asking who should be involved in the conversation what's the question you want to ask and for different applications of different areas you would have a different community there is no real global answer I think that's a very important observation it takes work to define the questions and find how to include people in those conversations and it's not all going to be the same here sorry I can't okay thank you so I just thought about examples and the first one we talked about just a moment ago was including students because I'm a student and they're oftentimes overlooked but when you just asked your counter question I thought about another counter question so who should be included then why don't we ask who should not be included so is there anyone whom we shouldn't include in this conversation and there was just a thought in the blink of an eye that I just had thank you for that so one thing we discussed was dissenting voices people who disagree with openness surely they need to be part of that conversation and that conversation may in fact shape how you consider openness so why are the reasons behind taking a proprietary approach to something and understanding in some context that's rational and maybe there's room for both just doing that to keep him fit it goes a bit in this direction we're always talking about academics and trainers and teachers and the students what about all these people who learn outside institutions in formal learning I remember we had this series of OER camps in Germany and I offered a workshop on how to include non pedagogues and I had ten teachers sitting in there who were almost shouting at me how could I dare to say that someone who has no training was actually allowed to do this and I think they need to be included because learning is not just formal learning thank you these are all great suggestions so recognizing that we only have a couple of minutes left I think we're gonna wrap up noting that this is a Google doc here if you had an idea that you didn't share I tried to capture a lot of the ideas please feel free to go in there and stick notes and add your name to the list we wanna wrap up by just sort of sharing some reflections on the workshops that we've held at conferences over the past year I think what we've learned is that the ten themes are a useful framework for having these conversations you know they are broadly applicable they're not perfect but I think the conversations about what's missing are often the most interesting ones and are important and we think there is a need for a broader conversation about the future of open education that encourages us to think bigger and think critically and think about how new directions can you know be applied across our communities so what we're gonna do now is think about sort of what's what are the next steps in this process do we need a Cape Town plus 11 plus 12 plus whatever and what does that look like and I think this last question that we discussed is a really important part of that what voices need to be part of the conversation and how do we structure a conversation that is inclusive and participatory and so in a way we feel this discussion has wrapped up a certain arc a certain cycle we won't be organizing more discussions that event about the ten directions for Cape Town declaration we're thinking a lot how to move forward and in a way closing this process is a commitment to opening a new one and the questions we're asking are sort of structural so how do we have a better conversation how do we create a situation where on one hand we are able to collectively define you can call it directions or values or strategy you name it but we reach some agreement but we also feel it's not a small group speaking on behalf of a large community that we're missing some voices and so on so this is a conversation we've started between the two of us if any of you are interested in this discussion or in a sort of improved process of this sort looking forward but in a lot more diverse and equitable way we're inviting you to join us you can find us here at this event or on the internet you can, thanks for coming thank you very much enjoy the rest of the day


Welcome to the Tick-Mill Update, I'm Kiana Danielle, the founder of the Investiva Movement. On Monday, we found that Japan's current accounts surplus rose 38% in October, the Swiss unemployment rate rose from 2.2% in October to 2.3% and that the Canadian housing starts trend was essentially unchanged in November. On Tuesday, we have the UK monthly GDP and the Eurozone's Zoo Economic Sentiment Survey. Today, I'm looking at the Euro-Yen pair, which has not yet found enough bullish momentum after breaking above the HM cloud in October. We normally do expect the pair to temporarily pull back towards the upper band of the HM cloud and that's exactly what the pair has done, but it's now maybe taking a little bit too long. On the positive note, for the bulls, the pair is still being supported by the upper band of the HM cloud while hanging around the 38% of the Monashi Tracement level of 120. Another positive bull note is that the Kijun line, which has crossed above the Tenka line, which is another bullish signal. So this may just be the calm before the storm that we need to wait out before reaching our profit targets of 121 and 122. Of course, trading in the financial markets involves a risk of loss and you should only trade the money that you can afford to lose. If you liked this video, give it a thumbs up and subscribe to the Tick-Mill YouTube channel. I'll get back to you with more updates tomorrow.


OK, ladies and gentlemen, it gives me great pleasure to introduce our next speaker, someone whose appearance here has been much anticipated by the genetic genealogy community, and it is Mike Sager from Family Tree DNA. Now, Mike never expected to be in charge of the Tree of Mankind. He certainly was lumbered with this task, which has become a passion project for Mike, and he has done such a wonderful job putting together the Tree of Mankind, and he probably of all the people on the planet has the greatest overview of how mankind has evolved and branched into different branches over the course of time. So I'm really looking forward to this presentation. Please give a warm welcome for Mike Sager. All right, thank you very much, Mr. OK. So today I want to talk a variety of topics, the Tree of Mankind, not necessarily the FTDNA Tree, but the Tree in general, maybe some tips, tricks to interpreting the Tree, how FTDNA is building the Tree, and a little bit of history behind it, and I want to touch on some of the more notable samples that FTDNA has produced recently. So I'm going to try and stay away from a real basics talk, but I do want to cover a couple of things first. So the white chromosome is passed down unchanged from father to son. Because of this, we are able to trace back an entire line all the way back up to essentially the root of mankind. So what we're able to do is, if no other data exists, that I could take every male in this room, sequence them, and then build a tree and tell you exactly how everybody is related to everybody else about how far back in time and about how closely you are related. So FTDNA is very unique in that aspect. So just a little bit about it. The white chromosome is currently about 57 million base pairs long, which may seem like a lot, but it's actually the second smallest chromosome behind chromosome 21. Again passed down, father to son. We do white sequencing, we have to have something to compare sequences against. So we have what is called the reference sequence. There is actually nothing special or unique about it. It's just a universally accepted sequence which everybody uses to compare against. These are updated regularly because we don't actually know the entire sequence of the white chromosome or any chromosome for that matter. There are regions that are difficult to access, very repetitive, stuff like that. So new references are being updated all the time. The latest one was in December of 2013, one before it was 2009. So we may have a new one coming up soon. That actually doesn't have much to do with genealogy because again the advancements on the reference are usually going to be more fringe elements that we aren't using for genealogy. Just a basic structure of the white chromosome here that this gray part is a very large portion which basically we don't know what's in the reference sequence. These parts in blue up here are called the U chromatum and this is basically where all of the great stuff for genetic genealogy and the tree building comes from. So it's actually about half of the chromosome that we are using. So SNP names. The information contained here, the first part when you see something like RM269, the first letter is always a prefix that is basically whoever named or discovered a particular mutation. In these examples, BY is family tree DNA. It's what we use for our SNP discoveries. We did switch to FT when big Y700 came around and we basically did this because we were up to about a quarter million variants and getting a hable group of JBY238713 can be a little bit cumbersome. So this next part is just a sequential numbering. BY10000 is simply the 10000th BY marker that was named. This here is the chromosomal location. Again, the Y chromosome is about 57 million base pairs long and so BY10000 simply exists at position 13,354,622. So it's basically just the address of the mutation and then it also describes what the mutation actually is. The ancestral base is a T and it mutates to an A. This is just a sample of the naming entities. So you may see a whole bunch of prefixes BY, FGC, Y. This is a not exhaustive list. You can find this on ISOG. There's about half of them but there's anything from academics to citizen scientists looking at big Y or other NGS data and then consumer genealogy companies like FTDNA and FGC. So typically the tree is built around the big Y or next-gen sequencing data. After we sequence a sample it goes through automated variant calling and matching. New SNPs are identified at this stage and FTDNA names them usually within about 24 hours of a sample posting and then we post those SNP names online. We can talk about that quite a bit but we are trying to get names out into the public because there used to be a lot bigger problem in the past of double and triple naming. A lot of our SNPs were being renamed by other companies, by other interpretive companies or by other analysts and it causes a lot of confusion so we just wanted to try and cut that down. Still a bit of a problem today but not nearly as bad. Samples are then placed onto the FTDNA haplotree. This is before I have really had a chance to look at them and then at that time matching variants and equivalent breakers are identified and tree structure is reviewed and I'll go on to about that here in a minute. Some people seem to have a bit of difficulty interpreting the tree. One of the things I like to suggest is to view mutations as actual men's names because in all actuality and all practicality that's exactly what it is. BY-10,000 had to have existed and occurred in one man in the past and one man only. You can just view all of this clunky information as say, Mark. An example of that in use. So here we know that Bob is a descendant of Tom and then we know that Tom and Bob are descendants of all these men here but you'll see all these men here are stacked up into the same line or the same block. These are called philo equivalents and that simply means that we do not know the order in which they occurred. So everybody tested to date either has all of them or none of them. So now say a tester comes and he tests negative for Bill, Charles and Arthur. So what does that tell us? That tells us that we know Bill, Charles and Arthur occurred more recently while everybody else occurred first, more distantly. So then we can update the tree and we know that Bill, Charles and Arthur down here in this block and the others remain up top. And so more testing may shed light onto the order of these but that's just typically how equivalent breakers are dealt with. So a little bit of history on the tree itself. In the 90s and early 2000s there was a lot of different researchers, academics, pursuing their own trees and phylogeny naming snips their own and that led to a whole bunch of confusion within the academic community. So a lot of them came together and decided to form what's called the Y chromosome consortium in 2002 and this was in an effort to unify the tree and make something more universally accepted. So this first tree contained 245 variants and 153 branches. Haplogroups A through R are defined, Mr. T over there, you're not known about yet. Haplogroup S is not yet discovered and actually there was a little bit of a caveat Haplogroup T is known about but it simply resides here at the root of Haplogroup K. So typically a new branch is not added to the tree unless it is viewed into men, thus the term haplogroup. Anything else if it's just observed in one person it's viewed as a singleton. However, this initial tree they just wanted to gain some structure so that where singleton branches added and so Haplogroup T actually does exist here but as a singleton. So it was not named yet. Okay, all branches today maintain what is called monophiley which simply means that they all share a common ancestor. So if you look here at Haplogroup E you'll see that everybody in E has the same common ancestor and that is E, the root of E. The only exception to that is the oldest Haplogroup which is Haplogroup A. And because of the nature of it we keep discovering older and older branches, many people in Haplogroup A are more closely related to people in Haplogroup R than they are to other people in Haplogroup A. So that's kind of an interesting way to look at it. Haplogroup A is as old as everything else down here combined and yet we know the least about it. And Haplogroup A double zero which is the oldest Y chromosome that we know is even older and we know even less about it. So there are also several interior nodes here that would later go on to be discovered but not by the YCC. You'll see here under K there are many branches. There's P, O, N, M, L and then several singleton branches. So the internal structure grouping these is not yet known. Haplogroup naming. In 2002 they also came up with a system for nomenclature for the tree, two main types and those two main types are still in use today. The Haplogroup by lineage which is what you're familiar with with R1B, E1A1, that's still used by ISOG if you go to their website and it's used by FTDNA but only internally it's useful for coding the structure of the tree and moving things around. But it's a little bit more difficult for actually communicating lineages because it can change over time. If we use that for some of the people that we have in Haplogroup J we'd have Haplogroups that are 30 characters long. And any change to the structure of the tree it'll change year after year. The most commonly used one is this nomenclature by mutation and so that's what you're more familiar with something like RM269, GM201. Those will never change regardless of how the tree structure changes. RM269 will always be RM269 so there's less ambiguity and it's a little bit easier for the community to use. I just thought this was interesting in this example that they put out. They show how to do a branch split and they showed here in Haplogroup H what happens if M52 and M69 split off. Well that actually did happen not too long ago but it was in the reverse order M69. It's proven to be the parent of M52. In 2003 two of the authors came up with a slight revision to it or an update to the YCC tree and in it they expressed their desire to resolve multi-fercations into bifercations. And that's just simply a fancy way of saying that they are looking for this internal structure here to add branches to places where branches could exist they just haven't discovered them. One example that they did find here was grouping Haplogroups N and O so they notated that one and then they notated R2. R2 was discovered and that's a primarily Arabic Haplogroup actually quite rare. Still missing are Haplogroups S and T and at this time the Coy San and Ethiopian Y chromosomes were believed to be the oldest but it would still be many years before we find Y chromosomes that are hundreds of thousands of years older than or tens of thousands of years older than these. The next update wouldn't come for another five years and basically they doubled the size of the tree. They went from 153 branches to 311. They went from 243 variants to 599 and finally Haplogroups S and T are documented and to date no other new Haplogroups have been discovered. They did add a couple of intermediary branches CF and IJ is finally joined but they would never find any of the resulting structure that consumer genealogy would later discover such as I and J will wind up being grouped with K and then H will be grouped with IJK and there are several other interior nodes that actually genealogy will solve rather than academia. So the YCC ceases to update. In 2005 FTDNA released its first tree which was basically a mirror of this YCC tree. Shortly after then within a couple months ISOG updated a tree and what their goal is was to kind of centralize the effort to make a standard where the YCC is no longer active in it. Archived ISOG trees are readily available from 2006 all the way through today it's still being updated and at this point is when basically the genealogy community begins to outpace academia. I'm not going to spend a whole lot of time on this this is just some graphics that show the growth of the tree over time you can see it starts with 100 snips a year 200 snips a year and we start to get into about 1,000 a year. May 2015 is probably about when I started a little bit before then I did and then we start really with the introduction of big Y and other next-gen sequencing we're able to really grow the tree at a rapid pace. And if we had today on here it'd be somewhere around 215 to 220,000 variants on the tree. There's a graphic that shows the FTDNA branches over time as you can see we're just over 25 I think if today was on there would be right around 27,000 branches. So what the YCC was able to do in five years jumping from 153 to 311 we're doing that easily weekly really about every other day or every couple of days we're adding that same kind of growth. So the big Y700 was a new product that we came out our goal was to sequence as much of the Y chromosome as we possibly could. For a validation of this we chose 88 samples most of these were we picked as many different haplogroups as we could A00R. But then we also chose 11 samples from haplogroup which is JZS1716 which is Bennett Greenspan's haplogroup. FTDNA estimates this to be about 1,000 to 1,500 years old. So what we wanted to do is we wanted to see what big Y700 uncovers that 500 could not. So we used SNPs that were called in a minimum of two samples and then we used Amanda was one branch upstream at BY101 as an outgroup to eliminate variants above that level. So what the original big Y showed we found 16 variants and seven branching points with the old one big Y700 retained all 16 but it also uncovered an additional eight new variants which is coincidentally we're covering almost exactly 50% more of the Y chromosome and then we got 50% more SNPs in just this branch. Six of these eight proved to be equivalents to known branches and two proved to be new branching points. One of these branching points if you look under ZS1724 we have S5, S6 and then BY171904. So we had three known lineages behind this. We knew, however, that S5 and S6 were each other's true closest matches. We know that because that's actually Bennett and his son and these are this BY171 group over here is I believe their second or third cousins. But the old big Y couldn't find a variant that would group them but big Y700 did uncover a variant that we called FT1. So now they have their own branch on the Y tree. Similarly under ZS1716 what we thought were three lineages we had BY170013, ZS1707 and then this lone man out here S11. Well we actually uncovered a variant that groups S11 with this BY17003 group so that is a new intermediary branch that we call FT2. So I just had to include this graphic. I think it's one of the most beautiful graphics of the tree that I've ever seen. It gives you a real nice perspective of saturation in certain haplogroups and the absolute lack of it in others. Haplogroup R is young. In the Y tree it's one of the youngest haplogroups that there are yet obviously it's the most well-defined, well-tested. And here A0 as old as everything else here barely gets an honorable mention up here. But you see that R, I, and J really dominate at least the growth that has been driven by genetic genealogy. And this is the actual tree structure, the FTDNA tree structure. I just love that graphic. So I'm going to give an example of how the FTDNA tree is built off of everyday results. So I took an example. This is from haplogroup J, a branch called Z18271. There were a wave of big Ys that came in from this group. And so what I do is I take the person's novel variants and other variants that are unique to just that group that have at least one ancestral value in this group. So currently there are seven people at this group. We call them A through G. And then we have these shared variants here. These are the variants. Ref just means that their reference or their ancestral, they don't have anything there. And then this T, these green boxes, indicate that there is a variant present. So just a simple reordering shows that there are three branches within this group that could be added to the tree. First, we have this single variant here that is shared between samples E and F, simple enough. Then we have another block here that is shared between samples D, B, and G. You'll notice here that sample B has no coverage. That's what this N means, that he has no coverage for these SNPs. However, we know that because he forms a branch with D that he has to have these mutations. So it's not necessary for him to have coverage here. In actuality, what this is, D and G have big Y 700s. And sample B was from big Y 500. So here is the third branch. Now, for a little bit of a trickiness added into it, this down here is a thing that I run for the total number of alt calls for the total number of SNPs that are viewed in the FDNA database. And I'm finding three people with this variant. Well, I'm only showing two here. So where is this other SNP? Well, it's occurred in the 2 Z 18 271 min that we mentioned. And then it also occurs in this branch, which is very close to here. So what exactly does that mean? If we go and look on our tree, these men are currently placed up here. And they're negative for everything downstream. But they share a mutation with this man. So how could that be? Another way to view this is if I search this mutation in all of these men. Everything highlighted in yellow here is everybody downstream of Z 18 290. You'll see that nobody has coverage, except for the single big Y 700 right here. So we know from this that everybody in this group has to have this mutation. So being that we know that, we know that this SNP is actually upstream of Z 18 290. And so when we add that to our tree, we have a new big Y 700 branching point downstream of Z 18 271. And then the two branches that we referenced in the discussion are down here. So there were actually four branches of the tree that were added. So there is a bit of trickiness comparing big Y 700 to 500. But it's really uncovering a lot of neat branches like this. And this is just a low level one. We're finding a lot of higher level ones that are proving to be quite interesting. This is just a block tree view of the same branch that was added. OK, so I want to talk a little bit about some of the, what I think are the more notable samples that FTDNA has produced within the last year, year and a half or so. So when somebody takes an STR test with FTDNA, we give them a predicted haplo group. We don't predict very far down. We're very conservative with them. But EM2 is actually one of the places that we predict to. Well, we had a man come in from Saudi Arabia that actually split EM2. It's the first time I'd seen somebody split a branch that we actually predict to. It's that high up in the tree. This is almost a primarily West African haplo group. You can see some of the countries here that are most common in our database, theorized to have an east to west expansion. And so who breaks it? Of course, a man from east of West Africa. Again, you'll know from our previous example he's negative for all of these mutations. And then there's about a couple hundred mutations that are still blocked up in this EM2 block. Early R1B splitters. There was a neat result that came from France, actually. Late 2018, a man split P310 and L151. Now, these are way high up in the tree. These are the parents of P312 and U106. So that was pretty neat. We have nearly 18,000 big-wise and tens of thousands, not hundreds of thousands of STRs downstream of these branches. But also in the end of this year we found another man who fits into this exact same line. However, they do not form a branch to each other. So we actually uncovered a third line. So another way to view this is we have three distinct lineages from P310. One with basically our entire database. Lineage B has only one person. And lineage C has only one person. So I mean, in such a heavily tested group, it's really hard to wrap your mind around how amazing that is and what's still left out there to be found. Here's another recent split in what ISOG calls half a group E1A. This is another West African branch found very predominantly in places like Mali. It's actually very common in the US. It was brought over in the slave trade. FTDNA estimates this branch to be about 51,000 years old with a TMRCA of 18.4 and who was at this split, this branch, a Saudi Arabian. So when I was talking about the STRs and we run, for unpredictable people, we run what is called the SNP Assurance Program, which is a small number of SNPs to give somebody an actual half a group. So I've done tens of thousands of these. In 2018, a customer came back, and I was scoring his backbone results, and he came back as CT star. So a star or an asterisk simply means that he's negative for everything downstream. So he's negative for, this is a visualization of the backbone of the tree. So he's positive for BTCT, negative for everything here. And F is the parent of IJKLR. So we're going to run a big Y on this person, of course, with his permission. But there is only 10 possibilities that could come out of such a result. And every one of them are going to be essentially groundbreaking in terms of the tree. Possible things, he could be a true CT star and form a new branch down here that is probably 140,000 years old. He could fall down DE. It's a branch that we don't test for in the backbone because nobody ever falls on just that branch. They're either D or E, CF, another branch that we don't test for because nobody belongs there. And he could also split any of these groups here because all of them have equivalents, and we just test for one. So he could split D, C, E, CT, DE, CF. Doesn't matter which one of these occurs, it's going to be quite interesting. And big Y is about to figure that out. And what he actually did was he split the root of haplogroup D. FTDNA has estimated that this split is about 65,000 years ago. So that means a man lived 65,000 years ago, has descendants of life today that the community had no idea about. The fact that people are still out there like that, even in under tests, that haplogroups is still just, it's mind blowing to me. So he was found to be derived from only 13 out of about 250 SNPs at the root of haplogroup B. The participant could trace his lineage back to Al-Wajj of Saudi Arabia along the northwestern coast of the Red Sea. This is between Egypt and Jordan. So we ran a big Y on him. And then we also asked him for his most distant known paternal relatives so that we could run a big Y on him. Unfortunately for him, he was not able to trace his male line back very far. And the best we could get was a first cousin. So we ran him. We found only one SNP difference. But then we added this branch to our tree and called it DFT75. Or it could also be referred to as D2. And so this branch formed about 65,000 years ago, but everybody in it has a common ancestor of about 100 years. Haplogroup B is an exclusively Asian haplogroup. It is found nowhere else. There are no instances of it in Europe, in the New World, in Africa. It's dominant in Japan, Tibet, and the Andaman Islands. Very low frequencies in Central and Southeast Asia. It was conspicuously absent from India. It had not been seen there. But recent studies have actually found very ancient Indian samples to be haplogroup D. So this is just a view of the tree after we split it. So now this is the new D root. These are just the number of SNPs below the root. This is what used to be haplogroup D, this M174. And then our new branch that we added here, but with about 700 more mutations in that block. So what we wanted to do is we wanted to have to find more structure within this group, as opposed to just a man and his first cousin. So we took the proactive approach and started mining our STR database and find particular people that might belong to this branch. Actually, there is a well-known FTDNA sample that has had the haplogroup label of DE star since 2011. This came from a Nat Geo kit. I think there might have been some hesitancy about if he was really DE. So the enthusiasm wasn't necessarily there. But then we decided to take a second look. And we ran a big Y on him. And he actually does belong to the new D2 branch. But he's not closely related to these men at all. He was of the 700 SNPs that we used to define D2. He was ancestral for over 250 of them. So this is about a 25,000-year split from a 65,000-year split. So the original two breakers that we identified got a new branch called FT76. And so you see the structure here. We decided to do a bit more. And we found another prospective D2 member from Hawaii. Again, he had very limited knowledge of his paternal history. But you can see his autosomal results, primarily West African. And he clusters with the original two big Ys that we did. But still, it's a pretty ancient relationship. As he lacks 58 SNPs than the original two shares. So we estimate that about a 5,000-year split. So the original breakers get a new branch. So now they go from D to FT75 to FT76. And now they're at FT155. And one last time, we found another man who had very unique STRs, but didn't match anybody closely at all. He could trace his paternal lineage to the tab plantation. So it was, again, brought over by the slave trade. As my origin showed, primarily West African. And he came back, again, related to this D2 lineage. But he was another 25,000-year-old split in this. So in all, we ran five big Ys. We found a split at the root of Haplegrup. DS made it be 65,000 years ago. We found three distinct and independent lineages. So our lineages, 25,000 years old. In one of these, we found another 5,000-year-old split. And we documented the first cases of Haplegrup D outside of Asia. So it's actually in the Middle East and in Africa. I tried to take a picture of what it looks like on the FTD nature. You see this giant block. This is the small block. I couldn't figure out any way to get FT75 to look anywhere close to being good enough to be shown. But it'd be about three or four times the size of this block. The information over here is, we've already mentioned this. So while we were doing this, at the same time, another researcher by the name of Haber had actually discovered this line as well. And so he put out a paper at the end of 2019 where he found this new D2 lineage in Nigeria. And in the paper, they refer to it as Haplegrup D0. It's similar to what was done with Haplegrup A. When we found something older than A, it was referred to as A0, found some older. It's A00. ISOG, I believe, refers to this as D2 as well. Now, the paper references only three samples with a TMRCA of about 2 and 1 half thousand years old. The sequence data for these are still locked up at the moment, so we don't have access to see where exactly they fit in. But there was enough information in the supplemental material that I was able to see where his Nigerian samples fit in with the five that we ran. And so this is an overview of basically everything that we have discovered since then. This was the old root of D. This is the new split. So now this is D2. We have a 25,000-year-old split. Right here is D2A. Here are the original two. The man from the tab plantation actually matches up perfectly with these Nigerians. And this whole group shares a common ancestor about 2,500 years old. But then we have the Russian, who could trace his roots to Syria, and another African-American man that are 25,000 years removed from everybody else. So there's still quite a bit of diversity in this newly discovered branch. And that is my talk. So thanks. Thanks very much, Mike. This is absolutely amazing, the work that you're doing. I'm sure there's got to be loads of questions. Is this being published, or how do you communicate the? We have not published anything yet. The Haber, coming out with his publication, kind of stifled that a little bit. But we're thinking of at least putting out a note to supplement their findings with ours. But we're working on that right now. And of course, publication takes a long time. It's three months, six months to review. And by the time the paper comes out, there's more discoveries that have been made in the meantime. Is there any plans for a blog, or an ongoing? Roberta Estes wrote a blog about it, I believe, late 2019, when we first added the new branch to the tree. It's something you could easily Google. Roberta Estes, haplogroupd. She has a nice blog post about this. And to what extent, I mean, obviously, this is changing the way people think about the evolution of mankind. To what extent do you work closely with archaeologists, with linguists, who are doing the same kind of research from an entirely different perspective? But it's obviously going to be very complementary of the work that you're doing with genetics. Personally, none. I'm dealing with new data all day, every day. And it's not much collaboration outside at the moment. Where would you like to see that collaboration going forward, or how could it be coordinated? There could be some very interesting things done. One of the things that we want to do is to start analyzing more scientific samples, such as the 1,000 Genomes Project and other things. And we are working on that. There's a lot of technical difficulties with that. Again, it's a completely different testing platform and getting those results into our database in a meaningful way is a bit tricky. The analysis isn't getting them in there properly is a bit tricky. And that was something that we discussed in Dublin, the genetic genealogy Ireland in October, when Lara Cassidy from Trinity College, Dublin, she was presenting the results of 150 ancient genomes from Ireland. They're putting them out. They really are. I mean, every week, they just keep pumping them out. It's fascinating. It really is. And it would be great to get them into YDNA warehouse and somehow find out where they're all. A lot of them have very poor coverage samples. You can make a lot of mistakes drawing inferences and getting too aggressive with your analysis on the ancient samples. It's not like a customer big Y where it's very clean and most of my decisions are very easy. You can make a lot of mistakes. And they can go unnoticed unless the right people look at it. You have to be very careful. Well, it will be interesting to see what happens when we finally get those ancient genomes into the database because, of course, a lot of them will be in radiocarbon data. And so that will actually help us to assess, calibrate, the mutation clock on the tree of mankind. Yeah, exactly. We have a question here from Derek. Come. Thank you, Mike. Actually, I have 100 questions. But more than everybody allowed me one or two. So Mike Welch, who you're probably coming to with, he's done some very good analysis. What interests me is the L21 branch, which stands for most in Ireland. And we're interested in surnames and plans and steps and so on and so forth. He has taken 100 surnames, where at least three branches contain the same surname. So we can make that probably the new branch for that surname. And 50 of those are Irish-related rest of Scottish Wales, so very, very interesting. Do you have any plans to actually do that systematically on the victory? No? Well, no, I'm working myself through the limitations that privacy is always going to be the big one. So I'm pretty sure you're referencing Alex Williamson's big tree. Yeah, and Mike Welch has separately done this separate analysis. And of course, Alex had a great tree. And part of it is it faded into the FTB name. Yes. The layout or the formatting was inspired from him, just the simple block visualization. But none of the data is transposed or shared. Our tree is completely independent. Here's the thing that the great have. Would you pick on the Irish flag, for instance, and you get all the branches just relevant to Ireland? That would be a lot. Oh, that would be a lot? Great. And then afterwards do it by problems, and then by count, that would be nice. Jared never wants much. One thing, what about surnames? Because on the big tree, you can see the surnames of absolutely everybody. But you only see surnames if you're within a 30-snip distance. Is it possible to, why haven't surnames been put on every single branch of the big white block tree? You don't know. It's privacy. Privacy, we can't publish the names of participants. But just the surnames? I'm not the person to ask about that. I am not. So I'm going to punt that one. Sure. Jay has a question down here, and then Donna up at the front. Mike, thank you very much for your address, but particularly I'd like to publicly thank your bosses for allowing you off campus to come and address us. You were telling me earlier this morning that even while you're here almost every minute, you're backlog of decisions and analyses of new big white tests coming through by the 100 by the day almost. The last 10 days, about 2,000 samples have posted. So you'll be anxious to get back to this. But I'm going to Roots Tech the week after. Well, on the half of those 10 days, even more thanks to your boss. Getting to the note, you mentioned backbone testing. I haven't talked to you about this, but it may come up with other surname administrators. I've got one of my flock who's got a backbone test underway. You can touch on it, but could you go over again perhaps to explain exactly what's happening? I think you're talking... It's not an advertised thing, but here we are suddenly getting something like that that we didn't ask for where you initiated it, am I right? Yeah. Okay, so the backbone that I'm talking about is for people who take an SDR test and we cannot predict what haplogroup that they are going to be in confidently. And we run a few SNPs for them. Now, when it comes to the construction of the haplotree, the haplotree is automated in for the variants that were automatically called by FTDNA. Sometimes I make a call that FTDNA... If FTDNA no calls it, because they're not confident in it, but I look at it and I'm confident in it, I override that. And the only mechanism I have to do that at the moment is by uploading a result the same way that we upload backbone results.  I'm not clear. You're not clear. Okay, we'll talk. Talk to James later. I've just got a really practical question, actually. With all this work you're doing, with all this analysis, do you do a lot of it manually? Is it automated?  What sort of applications are you using to do all this amazing work? It's not like so many people were doing this. It's not... So it was a lot more manual back in the day. And some of the things have been automated, such as generating matrixes to work with. Back in the day, I used to have to hand enter every single mutation into the tree by hand. Enter the SNP name, the position, the alleles. So if I added 100 SNPs, I had to do that by hand and it would take about 30, 45 minutes. It was very, very tedious. Very recently, I've been able to get that more manual then. So some of the things have been automated, but still branches are not added automatically. Everything is viewed by me. So the analysis portion of it is still very manual. But some of the data collection and visualization from my end is a little more automated. Thank you very much for the talk and I can see every day how big the tree was. I've even got my own particular branch, me and my dad. But my question is, I also see hundreds of emails coming through my project for all the mitochondrial tests that are running through. And I know the file of tree number 17 on the mitochondrial has paused in 2016. And I think that other person who was developing it, nothing's happened. I was wandering our family tree DNA going through on you and put your other side onto the mitochondrial tree. Thank you very much. Honestly, it's been kicked around a bit, but I don't see it happening anytime soon. It's a dawning task. And to be honest, I think the Y tree is much easier. But no, I don't see us trying to venture down and do a similar thing with the MT tree anytime soon. Lots of quick questions from Patty. Mike, you said you're still very conservative in predicting happy groups that most Irish men just get or dash M269. I know from running a county project, it's very easy to see that a man is M222 or M226. I mean, I think you could sell out more tests by asking Irish men, do you want to know are you descended from neither than I am most deserving of reward costs and these mythological figures. Any chance of getting more precise predictions off the STRs? So, I believe it was five, six years ago, FTDNA tried to get more aggressive with their STR predictions. That kind of bit us in the butt a bit. Because if we get it wrong, it's on us. If we predict somebody down here and they order a test based off of that prediction and they're wrong, well, then we have to refund them, comp them and that's out of our pocket. So, it was decided to go back. We'll stick with the basics and basically it's more to cover us than the admins can be. And everybody will have their particular tree and people will say, well, you can confidently predict this and I don't see us going back with the more aggressive thing anytime soon. Debbie? Just a very quick question. Are you able to say how many big-wide tests do you have in the family tree? Big-wide 700? So, we just crossed 40,000 a week ago and like I said, we've done about two. So, it's got to be around 42 now. So, about 42,000. Well, unfortunately, I mean we could stay here for another hour or even couldn't be with Mike. But unfortunately, we have to call it a day there. We have Ken and Alison Tate talking next about distance is no object and how family matters can be sorted out through DNA. But, Mike, you'll be standing around the family tree DNA stand for the rest of the day. So, if you have questions, please take advantage of Mike's presence here and come and ask him some questions for the family tree DNA stand. And until then, please give him a warm thank you for a fantastic day. Thank you. I know you enjoyed that.


Today's unboxing is a fountain pen only available at Penchelay created by a pen brand that you thought was gone This is the Delta Penchelay Exclusive Dolce Vita in mid-size In addition to being an exclusive release only available here at Penchelay It's also a limited edition release with only 25 pieces in each color and when I say each color there is this beautiful lapis lazuli resin and One of the pins is all lapis lazuli like this one that I'm showing you first And the second one's gonna be lapis lazuli with a black cap and a black end cap The Delta logo is on the finial and the packaging by the way is immaculate I showed you that first and it comes with that full-size bottle of ink. The spring metal clip is actually springy, which I appreciate the Details are on the back of the pin subtly engraved. The centerband is very Exquisitely detailed and the centerband is in a sterling silver with the rest of the trim being rhodium plated The section matches the cap so with the all lapis lazuli, it's lapis lazuli with the lapis lazuli black It's black the filling system is a cartridge converter Compatible with any standard international size cartridge or converter and it does come with a converter already in the pen Here's a look at the lapis lazuli black Each of these limited edition exclusive deltas is fitted with a stainless steel number six nib plated to match the trim The pins do have a threaded cap and they are postable. Here's another look at these two side-by-side and The lapis lazuli resin is a standout beauty Hope you enjoyed this first peek at the Delta exclusive Delta video mid-sized fountain pin subscribe for more and shop at pinchlay.com


Hello everyone, let's welcome the next speaker Giovanni Becchis with the talk fighting spam for fun and profit Hi, I am Giovanni Becchis I am Apache and open BSD developer and today I'll talk about what happens in the past four years in spam accessing community and What will maybe be the future of the this software first Just to note that Spam as seen is mostly seen as a plug-and-play software by several users that just Installate update rules and never got completely. It's it should be seen as Something different so it should be seen as a framework to develop something on top of it so to get out the most you have to Write your own rules for for your own cannot spam your team because Spam is is different from everybody. So it's different basic basically of The language you speak of the interest and a lot of other things and Participate to mass check that appliance software mechanism now it took more later about it and It's a general purpose framework is not just an antispound software because it's used to protect some web forms and It's in I think in in Holland the does it the not so famous CMS that's integrated in Spam as seen to check web form submission So first was mass check mass check is a client service of tour that's integrated in spams is in it's not deployed with general distributions is It's Leaves on SVN you have to check it out extra and it's It's come it's it takes an input or a spam folder and a ham folder it it downloads the latest version of spam as seen with the old rules and It checks All your your messages for spam and ham with new rules rules are committed in SVN repo In each developer sandbox. So there are some rules that are Never pushed to the public Once the software has detected how new rules are Perform on your sport folder Sent the results to the to an Apache server and the Apache server grab all the the stuff and decides if Spam has Changed in some way and decided So decides to push new rules for example where where are some new bit kind of obfuscation technique This new rules gets pushed to the public and gets new default scores there are Lower or or not depends on how it goes and it's it's it's a good way You can use it on your owner as well So it's good way to know if you are what your rules are are performed and now it's Your rules or in general the rules the public rules are performing with your Mail flow so you can You can for example, there's also a web interface so you can For every On your mail flow, you can detect the score assigned it to messages and by which rule if There are some rules that overlaps so for example if Lot of spam messages are written by two or three rules and There's one rule dates all the messages. It's it could be possible to remove this rule and Say Push up the score as to one other rule So you have the same results, but it would perform better because it has less rules to to perform it and to check so in three Latest release is 342 in September and the previous one was three years and enough and the this big Time was due to some problems. We encountered in development in particular There were some problems with the Apache VM. So the system team have to Recreate from scratch Some infrastructure and The server part of the mass check would be Was was not very well documented. So it will be Recreated from sketch the main problem is that from From when the mass check tool check send the reports to the server and the server In sense to the public to new rules. It's passes a couple of days so If you if you are in a tree on an error or phase in development, it's it's a long time to wait such a couple of days to to know the results of of your code and There were some security info security fixes for PDF info plug-in and for in the core and General security auditing girl has been done and it's ongoing as well and Adorable per bug we we find we found so We are in during the development out of free fortune. We optimized the startup codes and During the regression test we Check out that the parts are Skipped some URL in the emails only on Red Hat systems Do was and the very end the cause was that Red Hat compiles pair with the 45 swoots free option by GCC and this maybe does a bug in a pair itself and and Yet evaluated in a different way In optimization they're part of the optimizations code that In the optimization of the ash it it removes some random data so Which we we changed the code that we're we're working with relapsed to find the The original reason in the code of this bug There were some assortment improvements first of all Faster start up code with some of the visualization finally which took help some a look at the spam c and optimize The code Security so remove the SSL this be three and other Stuff the words are free mail anti-forge improvements. So There are some some code that checks if for example you are you are sending an email As a Gmail user, but you're not using Gmail So it's trying out to check This kind of abuse You can check if mail a previous version you you can check if email is coming from a Particular Nations or from France or whatever and now we can check with continent as well. So if you it's easier if you can block or Score a particular continent without setting a lot of rules for each nation Some improvements in the urela will be a plugin that detects if a new URL in the mail is coming from a particular source and some very bad Father script or leaks in the ticks replugging which is the a plugin that Recognized and stores where from where email an email is coming. So the IP address the The score of the mail that it came saying in a tour So if this in this email a similar email comes from the same EP others with the same the chemist saying that or it's probably Not a spam because it's core a correct correspondence. So it can detect it and lower the the global score and regression tests switch it change it completely to be more performance and to be able to To add better tests Some additions that has been done in in 342 and that will be even better in PMS in for we consider that we will release a free for free, you know, I think in the next weeks and Maybe if passing for this year, I hope is the HBL plug-in yes, it's a plug-in as a which is present in earthpandy as well and It's it's a it's a particular DNF blacklist because he doesn't It's nothing to be blacklist for IP addresses. It's a blacklist of ashes cause serious for example if a Message is trying to A spam message is coming from like a Google server or a Microsoft server. You cannot block all Google or Microsoft net block. So This you can block this hasher and these ashes is stored as this particular email address with this technique and In spama sin for we We develop a new plug-in. Well, the death is from us in for does a Modified version of HBL or if you want to use this future in spama sin in free for there's a additional of plug-in We developed a DNS blacklist For Bitcoin addresses so you can credit DNS To the Bitcoin out the hash of the Bitcoin address dot BLB It is black dot a T and it applies that if it has been Used for fraudulent purposes or not so you you the plug-in scans the email for Bitcoin addresses and check today the DNS and so You can very easily detect a Bitcoin scan emails Then there was nothing the developer was gip to support cause Max mind is the bigger player in Geo-localization and they decided that from starting from latest April that we did not Have more support for the legacy gip that database bar also they Push in for the new version the problems is that the new version with pearl are or very slow or in our 8664 only so We developed the the plug-in For Max mind and we develop on the simple game We had that support also for EP counter adb file as an additional option. It's Different approach. It doesn't use Max mind the databases, but it's a database a created Downloading the Txt files directly from ripe or after a care are in etc. And It's it's very fast. It it doesn't need all the Longer dependencies Max mind have It's not complete as the Max one one cause Max one one as the at least the com as commercial support and it has database for ISP for example or Cd names or a lot of other interesting things Just send a new anti fishing plug-in based on the fish tank or open fish projects in free for two is the it appears it's been developed for free for two and in free for three it has been changed to be very very More fast and More database will be added soon. So it's it's way to try to detect a more Tentative of fishing in emails One other dish interesting this resource limits and it's right to Limits their resources consumption of the server this is One tries to things the main problem is that the mass check is based on the people that are Using this software. So rules are public rules are determined on the span of the People using mass check and the vast majority of people using much as mass check are from us and rules the developers a rule of right truth for English spam, so There are some additional channels. There are some from Italy France Germany, Greece. I think They're trying to write rules specific for Non-English language, so it's very very Efficient to detect If spam if your main language is not English This is new in plug-in in the spama system for is detect if there's an attachment with a macro In word or Excel and it detects if is if is this macro is trying to Doing something shit. It's it's not tame to do So spam of passing for will have a full utf-8 support So there's no more a conversion between the email and utf-8, but it's full utf-8. It will it'll be It will have godd be Support even better than what we have in three at the moment and the better tx rep handling Some fixes for postgres as I mean committed these days and it will be available in three for three Some more would be available only in four If you have any question So we happen to receive a lot of French spam and also Ukrainian spam for some reason and I've actually I've developed like a huge list of of custom rules should I then Actually submit them somewhere or what should I do to them because I use them for myself But I presume other people are also getting this spam. Yeah, I Have a similar problem with with the Italian spam I I put my rules on a web server does a Procedure to at the moment the it means you you write your rules You sign you with a pgp key then you put it on a web server and You you just and on the DNS you have a a particular txt Record so when the the client tries to do downloads It's it just credit DNS and checks if there's a new rule to download or not So it will be I think it there is an official French Channel so you can interact with them to merge the efforts That could be a Yeah, no question in a case where There's a lot of different people behind Infrastructure do you have any advice for? To to make it work because the spam is like you said different for everybody Should there be different instances of the specimens as I'm running in parallel with different rules I I have I had in the past some of this those problems because I had I Had the customer that a lot of traffic with with commercial traffic with China and Then there was the opposite other people that were getting only spam with China and the solution or Was that one solution will be two instances, but the better one will be User preferences dedicated to that different user preferences dedicated to that cast to that customer to this particular and You can use also The base database per user so you can every user can have is by easy and Database you can train for every user and so it's it can Detect this difference Any other question? So, thank you


The ONS is the Office for National Statistics we do all the kind of key economic statistics and we do the census. ONS has come in for a huge amount of criticism for the state of this website to the extent that there was an entire column in the Financial Times that called the ONS website a national embarrassment. We are directly responsible for kind of the outward facing parts of ONS so I'm responsible for things like rebuilding the website which is what this is about. It was important to get out in front use the most modern kind of methodologies and build something that we could keep improving. Fundamentally it takes statistics which are traditionally just lots and lots and lots of Excel spreadsheets and what we really try to do is surface all of that information actually onto the web. It is very specific for the needs of data publishers. It's about charts, it's about data, it's about tables. I think we were able to build something that is quite unique. You couldn't point to any one thing that we've done now that was at the work of any one person. It is just everyone's kind of inspirations and hard work.