Has he got a teleology? Has he got a vision of what society should be like, other than what I got from your speech, something like a pre-socratic society with about 5% nobility maybe and the rest are all slaves? That's sort of my question. The other question is for Sean Gabb about the Savile case. I live in England as well so I've got a close view of this. And I have a slightly different view of this. Could it be seen as a revolt of the people against the trend to debauchery? I think it's a kind of Gramscian tool to destroy the middle class and finally it got too much as seen by the Savile case and there has been a kind of uprising against it. Can you see this as part of this phenomenon? I think Nietzsche is imagining a kind of elite, maybe a very ancient, maybe a very barbaric way. So he didn't wrote that directly but I think this Dionysian world is a world of maybe a few barbaric leaders surrounded with poets and musicians and deliver a very vital and maybe funny and cruel life. And they're surrounded with people, they adore them and they adore them because they give them sense, these people. And the thing that got back is food and help. It's a very ancient and rural society. It's something that doesn't exist anymore and I think will never exist. Yes, Robert, thank you for your question and I'll begin by saying that when you are dealing with a mass phenomenon like the Savile hysteria there may well be no single cause and part of the hysteria may well have been a reaction against the perceived debauchery of British life by trashy entertainers like the late Jimmy Savile. Another way of looking at it however is to see post war British life as a progression but a progression in which one part passes into another. Now in the 1960s and 70s we had what is called the permissive society, everything goes. Some of you may have seen those awful carry on comedy films in which middle aged men run around chasing young semi clad ladies or perhaps the Benny Hill show which was rather higher class. But during the past 20 years there has been a sharp reverse of permissiveness and we are now living in a much more puritanical society in which people are expected to conform to all sorts of new standards. Indeed we are often told that modern England has a much more tolerant approach to homosexuality and in a sense it does because whereas homosexuality used to be illegal it may now be regarded for some purposes as compulsory. But sorry I borrowed that from Bob Hope. Forgive me. Something that needs to be borne in mind is that if Oscar Wilde were to commit today in England the offences for which he was sentenced to three years hard labour in 1895 he would get a much longer prison sentence. Because many of the rent boys with whom he was consorting were considerably under the age of consent and so in that sense many of our sexual standards and the laws underpinning those standards are harsher today than they were in the past. And this is a fairly recent development. So yes what happened in the Jimmy Savile case may have been a reaction against the permissiveness of the 1960s and 70s or it may be an example of a reaction which had already taken place against that permissiveness. It is difficult to say because as I said we are talking about something done and believed by very large numbers of people all of whom may well have had slightly different motivations. I just mentioned something that I was told it's an anecdote and of course I believe everything I'm told but this chap had worked for a very long time for the BBC back in the 1950s and 60s. And he said that the reason Jimmy Savile was employed in the first place was that he was vulgar and was perceived to be a working class and at that time the BBC was run by upper middle class people who had lost their belief that they had a right to set the standard for society. So they looked around for someone whose behaviour was horrible and they found Savile and they employed him. And the demand for people like Savile actually didn't come from below in the first place. There were no people marching through the streets saying give us more vulgarity on TV, we want more vulgarity. It was a decision by the BBC elite. I have a question to Sean Gep. You mentioned that England is ruled by American Marxists but I wonder what happened to the Fabians and how was it possible that this movement was as far as I know created in England. Very well. Again I'll say that we are dealing with and with a progress through time. The Fabian socialists were not Gramsian Marxists, the Fabian socialists believed in authoritarian state socialism which is rather different from the authoritarianism of the people who rule modern Britain. The people who rule modern Britain, and I'm now talking about Britain rather than England. The people who rule modern Britain are not terribly interested in who runs the railways or the telephone network or indeed whether the universities are formally private or are royal corporations. What interests them is that whatever the system they should be in control and that they should impose their moral and cultural standards irremovably upon the whole population. So yes, there is a native British tradition of socialism but it is a different tradition from the one which has taken hold in modern Britain. I didn't call the American Marxists. What I'm saying and I'm not entirely original of this, I owe this observation to a mutual friend of Robert called Ian B. The initial inspiration came from European Marxists and Neo-Marxists, as I said, Antonio Gramsci, Louis Al Tussier, Theodore Adorno, a group of people who were developing Marxist thought for the changed conditions of the 20th century. But it is quite possible that these people would have remained obscure foreign thinkers, completely unknown in England except among a rather eccentric elite. But for the fact that many of these people, Herbert Narcuse for example and even Michel Foucault, moved to the United States and became very influential within American universities. And it is from America that these European Marxists and Neo-Marxists were able to gain a decisive influence over English life. That is how it came in. But again, we are dealing with intellectual developments and actions among very large numbers of people and there is always more than one way of looking at it and there is certainly always more than one cause. But I suggest that the scheme I've just outlined is at least a useful way of trying to explain what has happened and what is happening. Not just in England of course but also in your countries because we are all nowadays cultural satellites in the United States. And that is why developments within the American universities have been so important in England and in other countries. But as I said, the United States has a certain limited immunity against these intellectual infections so far as they have a strong native religious right and an entrenched constitutional order which is still taking a long time to subvert completely whereas countries like England have no religious right and no entrenched constitutional system and so what has given America a cold has given us terminal pneumonia. I would like to thank all four speakers for great speeches. My question goes to Sean Gabb again. I would like to point out the role of British humour being a fan and great admirer of British humour. What happened to the role of British humour against the authority? Lastly, if you have any prominent comedians that you would like to recommend us to follow from the British comedy. Yes, and you did ask me this question earlier so I've had time to think about it. If I sound rather polished it's not spontaneous. British humour in the 1960s and 70s was anti-authoritarian in the conditional sense, not in the intrinsic sense. That is, these comedians did not regard authority or authoritarianism as bad in itself. They regarded it as bad because it was the wrong kind of authoritarianism. As soon as these people reached middle age, and I think David Frost might be a good example, as soon as these people reached middle age and their friends got into positions of importance in England, political satire died. It died suddenly in 1997. Right up until then the television was filled with savage political satire and invective against the authorities. The moment their man Tony Blair was in Downing Street, political satire just vanished. It vanished from the screen like some disgraced Soviet tractor factory manager. British humour has been at rather a low level ever since then. There are anti-left humorists in England. I suppose someone called Jimmy Carmichael might count as one and he just about gets by on television. But for the most part subversive anti-authoritarian humour is in short supply in modern England because it doesn't get an airing on the BBC. Why do you need to subvert something which is by definition the best of possible worlds? That is what the average BBC bureaucrat would ask. Let's take a vote. How many people in this room have heard Mr Cameron tell a joke or say anything funny? Dr Daniels, your presentation reinforced my sense of optimism as to both how and why so much of human action is becoming decentralised. It goes back to some of the understanding that's deriving from the study of chaos. Chaos tells us that the more complex a system becomes, the more actually it becomes impossible to make predictions. And there's probably nothing more unpredictable, more non-linear in terms of behaviour than the individual human being. And I just wondered of what extent chaos theory itself is going to help make efforts to predict both harms and benefits from collective forms of medicine, completely meaningless undertaking. I regret to say that I'm completely unqualified to answer this question because I know nothing really about chaos theory. All I can say is that from my reading of the medical journals experiments have continued to be done on huge numbers of people. And there is a fundamental rule I would have thought that if you need vast numbers of people to show to establish benefit, then the benefit can't itself be all that great. And that seems a thought that doesn't occur to people who do experiments on vast numbers of people. But I'm afraid the specific thing about chaos theory I'm not in a position to answer. So my question is to Eugen on Nietzsche. Nietzsche claimed to be an apolitical thinker. And he didn't say much what he was for in politics, but he said quite a lot what he was against. And he was clearly against socialism, against democracy, against equalitarianism, against the state. And, you know, when the Danish critic Georg Brantes that discovered with both Nietzsche and Kierkegaard, in a letter he labeled Nietzsche a aristocratic radical, and Nietzsche quite liked that term, quite liked that label, and perhaps that something says about him. And I was wondering, you know, I agree that Nietzsche is certainly not a Rothbardian. He's not an anarcho-capitalist. He lacks the ethical structure of anarcho-capitalism. But wouldn't you say that it's fair to say that he is a right wing anarchist of some type? Right? You could say that the Greek policy, the antique Greek policy is a kind of right wing anarchy. If you think so, that this is the right term for that, then it fits. This was a world without, a world dominated by families. They have their slaves, which was in the former times a kind of employment. It was not that slavery that you can see in films, that what people do with black people, that's another thing. People that live around these families and they have no land that they have no things to work with. They went to these people and these were the slaves who were living in the houses and the other ones are working in the mines. That was a bad thing, but it is not. It was a kind of employment. Maybe we should never forget that the Greek policy was based on slavery. This is one of the reasons why the philosophers said philosophy is a high thing. The phyllaches, the warriors, that's a good thing. People work, that's dirty, that's not interesting, that goes on money and such things. We are above that, we are in politics and that's much better than the economy. We still have kind of this approach in some universities in Europe that look down to the economy from the standpoint of politics that's much higher. This is, I think, a bad heritage of the ancient Greek time. Thanks. Question for Anthony Daniels. If the thrust of what you were saying was to allow patients to make decisions including parents in relation to their children, you spoke about the amount of misinformation that is out there about treatments and the impact of treatments and so on. How do you get past this issue that individuals are making decisions in relation to a subject where they have no direct information? They are dependent upon information sources which may all be wrong, particularly in an internet age. You can google up any disease and you can read all sorts of stuff which no doubt is all wrong. We'd be all in favour of free decision making by individuals but if the free decision making is all based on stuff which is 99% rubbish, how do you think about dealing with that? I think that it's a very difficult question when people begin to make decisions on behalf of children which are obviously from a more rational standpoint, completely rational and very harmful. Then it is a question of how you deal with that and whether at some point there has to be an authority saying that you will not treat your child in that way and how that authority will actually be arranged. Now where the dividing line is is of course always a very difficult question because there is a slippery slope to be gone down. For example Richard Dawkins in his book The God Delusion suggests that bringing up any child in any form of religious belief is a form of child abuse. Now either he's using the words metaphorically in which case it's a dangerous use of metaphor or he means it literally in which case presumably he means that there must be some public authority preventing people from bringing up children religiously. Now where you draw the line or whether the line has to be drawn at all is a very difficult question and I think it's a matter of judgment rather and common sense rather than having an answer that is suitable to all cases. Should there be laws against female circumcision? I suppose most people regard it as at least an abhorrent practice but I suppose if we have laws against female circumcision we should also have laws against male circumcision. And yes I agree with Anthony it's extremely difficult to draw the line. As a rule of thumb I would say yes if parents circumcise their daughters they should be sent to prison if they circumcise their son you just shrub and look the other way but I wouldn't like to say more. I have a question from Mr Gabor, Dr Daniel. You spoke of this idea of tolerance in the British society. I'm thinking of the causes perhaps that have brought about these conditions you described. One could not think of tolerance and not think that other nations are equally as tolerant even if more so. This is an example of the Netherlands, Scandinavia, Denmark, Germany or Switzerland or Austria. Yet the tolerance that we see in continental Europe has not really come down to this degradation of moral relativism that we see in the UK and I bring in some of the writings of Dr Daniels which describe it in far starker terms than we have heard today. And I wonder why that is the case if you can compound it. I think in the UK the only thing I can think of frankly is this at the same time as this idea of tolerance has come about there has been increasing intolerance towards for example God or religion or the church. This has not been seen in continental Europe and I wonder if there is a connection between the two. This idea of moral relativism has grown disproportionately than other places in the world.  I'm sure you'll give one as well. I must say that what has happened in modern England to some extent puts a question mark over the whole earlier history of England which I still regard as a time of unalloyed glory. Traditionally, or at least since the middle of the 17th century, England was a remarkably tolerant country for all manner of reasons but one of the main reasons was that the toner society was set by a landed hereditary aristocracy which did not feel threatened by any particular set of religious or political or cultural. And so because they didn't feel threatened by anything, they tolerated everything. Why? Even the panic of the 1790s against French Jacobinism was relatively mild in England compared with many other parts of the world which were threatened by French radicalism. And with the decline of aristocratic values which continued to dominate English culture for several generations after the decline of the actual aristocracy, with the decline of aristocratic values you see the debasement of toleration from what we would mean by toleration into some kind of celebration of diversity. So long as the diverse people are of different colours, different races, different religions, different heights, different body sizes, different sexual preferences, but so long as they all believe in the same silly left wing views. And so that is the main difference between toleration in the traditional sense and toleration in the modern sense that makes your eyes turn up. One possible explanation I wouldn't claim that it has any scientific validity is that for a considerable length of time before present developments we had a culture which valued and perhaps overvalued self-control and restraint. And when you get a moral gestalt switch as it were then you go to the opposite extreme so that people think that what was formally regarded as a virtue is now a vice and what is a vice is now a virtue. So people now think, for example, young people there and talked quite a lot, they think that getting absolutely drunk in public is actually virtuous. It's good for them and it's good because it is expressing themselves irrespective of the fact that they have nothing to express, of course. And actually if you listen to young British people on the train and I do and I enjoy it and they're talking about the wonderful night they had last night, the main evidence of this is that they can't remember anything about it, which is a rather dismal view of the view of their possible pleasures from social intercourse is the best that you can hope for. Is that you can't remember anything. So I think that and of course the traditional values did come under the kind of satirical attack that Short has described and people therefore concluded that the opposite of those one time virtues were now virtues. So people that we have in Britain, I think for the first time something which I wouldn't have believed possible, ideological drunkenness, people believe that they should get as drunk as possible. They believe it's a good thing to do it. It's not a lapse or anything like that. They aim at it. Of course I agree that there is a link between aristocracy and culture and civilization, but according to my Swiss approach, I think there is also a link between aristocracy and war. And this is a price that we pay for this type of culture and I have to remember that culture started with agriculture. That's the starting point of every culture. And so it makes sense what I mentioned this morning that the farmer is higher than the king. But of course you need to, if you have to separate culture from politics, that's a good thing. But you should never forget culture. You should combine it with economy. You should put culture and economy together and separate politics and culture. That's the most important thing we have to do. Yes, I suppose so. Sorry, I've plagiarised Bob Hope. Let me plagiarise somebody else you may recognise. In England we had aristocracy and we got the scientific revolution, the industrial revolution and the rise of modern liberalism. In Switzerland you had farmers and you invented the cuckoo clock. Sorry, that's a completely gratuitous comment. But I do think that aristocracy is a very important principle and just because I don't happen to be a member of the aristocracy does not in the least lessen my regret for the passing of aristocracy in England and indeed in every other country. I envy the Swiss not for the cuckoo clock but for their self-reliance, their independence and for their sense of privacy and their ability to maintain their civil liberties into an age when most other peoples have manifestly lost virtually all of their own civil liberties. But I would admire Switzerland even more if it had an aristocracy. I stand corrected. For Sean and Tony, feel free to jump in. I'm a naturalised British citizen and one of the things that always shocked me about being in England is that the immigrants like me and my friends seem to actually love it a lot more than the native British. Not just because we couldn't remember everything from the night before, I hasted to add. But for either one of you, do you feel that if, and I know this is looking like an increasingly unlikely possibility, but if the Scots left the Union, do you believe that maybe a lot of the left wing gobbledygook would also leave with them and that England could go back to a more landed gentry aristocracy type of place? Because it seems to me that there are a lot more right wing than the rest of the place. Or am I completely barking up the wrong tree? They have a good arching that first. What you're doing is you're inviting the pair of us to lapse into the kind of fault that many Americans fall into. You ask a couple of Americans a question about particle physics and they'll start telling you what Thomas Jefferson said in 1786 or something. If Scotland were to leave the United Kingdom, it would be much better for England, not because all of the really nasty socialists are Scottish, though a surprising number of them are, but because at the moment we'll have a general election in two years' time. I shall vote Conservative in that election, not because I think David Cameron is doing a very good job, but simply because I do not want Labour back. If Scotland were to leave the United Kingdom, that would be 65 Labour MPs who would not be sent to sit in the House of Commons, which means that we would not risk a Labour Government again. Without the risk of a Labour Government, without the threat of a Labour Government, people like me do not have to vote Conservative. We can vote for something that we actually want instead of voting against what we are terrified we might get. That will be the benefit, I suggest, of breaking up the United Kingdom. It might actually be good for Scotland to give another example. I had a ringside seat for the break-up of Czechoslovakia in the early 1990s, and many people said, if the Slovaks go their own way, they'll be putting up swastika flags within three years. Well, no, what happened was that left their own devices without the possibility of subsidies and guidance from Prague, the Slovaks pulled themselves together, and I won't call Slovakia an economic miracle in Central Europe. But it is a credibly prosperous, stable, semi-liberal democracy, and it might be the same for Scotland instead of voting for crazies and kilts, that they might start voting for people who will pay some regard to the interests or at least the wishes of the taxpayers. I don't have much to add. I think it probably would be a good thing for Scotland, actually. It would be a good dose of reality because the constant national dependencies doesn't breed gratitude. Of course, it breeds resentment, and I read in the spectator, and I don't know whether it's true. I like to believe it's true, so it is true, that there are only 15,000 net taxpayers in Scotland, and if that is the case, or anything approaching that is the case, then obviously Scotland itself would have to change very profoundly, which it won't have to do so long as the union is maintained. People don't like to lose their subsidies, and I believe that, again, more people are in favour of Scottish independence in England than in Scotland, so we might have a unilateral declaration of Scottish independence, but not by the Scottish. I have several friends who are thinking of moving to Scotland and registering themselves to vote, so that they can vote yes to independence. The thing is, the Scots, however, are very talented people, and I believe that they could make a very good go of it if they could get rid of this terrible dependence, so I think they would probably benefit more than us. Right, I have more people on the list than we've got minutes left. I have a question for Dr Daniels. You told us that we are now all pre-ills, so the logical next step due to bureaucrat activity is that we will be all patients. Imagine that you are a high-powered bureaucrat on the WHO. Do you have any suggestions to do the next transfer to patient-ness of all of us? What will actually happen to make us... What will be necessary in your eyes as a high official of the WHO to make us all patients instead of just pre-ills? Well, one thing one could start doing is suggesting that people are penalised for not taking care of their own health. I don't know whether you know the book by Samuel Butler, Erowan, in which crime is illness and illness is crime, and we are approaching that. So I think that's one possibility that we will actually be penalised. On the grounds that we are imposing costs on other people by not taking care of our health, not to the next end, that already happens. I don't think the WHO actually has a kind of conspiracy. It's just in the nature of those organisations to expand like fungus all over the world. Hi, for Sean. I love your little piece there on the influence that American intellectuals have had on the UK thought. I guess my major concern is that we still talk a lot about socialism, but in America we don't talk about socialism. We talk about what you would call cultural Marxism, and I think we talk about it under the term postmodernism. Why is it that we don't have a movement of this nature? Why isn't the generational shift changed to be critical of that rather than an economic model that everybody is already abandoned? Sorry, I think you might catch the last bit of your question. Why are we talking about socialism when actually everybody is given up on the institutional model and actually the problems become cultural? In other words, a normative discussion rather than an institutional one. Okay, well Paul Gottfried and I and many other people have written about this. It's just that we belong to various movements which have spent a century or more opposing socialism, and now that socialism in any meaningful sense has been destroyed, it is very difficult to recognise the new enemy as something different. I remember reading a book by Sir James Mackintosh published in 1790 in which he was discussing the French Jacobins, and there was a repeated typing mistake thanks to the typesetter which wrote Jacobins as Jacobites. The Jacobites having been an earlier threat to Britain. It's said that generals always fight the last war, and in the intellectual sense we do. It's quite fun to call Tony Blair a communist or President Obama a socialist radical when quite manifestly these people are not socialists in any meaningful sense, and the left wing socialists who denounce these people as non-socialists are not deluded, but bearing in mind that we won the war against socialism it is very comforting to keep insisting that our present enemies are of exact the same kind, whereas in fact we are facing an entirely different kind of enemy. Totalitarian humanist is the phrase used by an American philosopher called Keith Preston. My friend David Davis uses another phrase which Robert might be able to remind me of. There are many names for these people, but we haven't agreed on a single name for them yet, but they're not socialists, they're something else. I'd like to address this to Robert Neff. I thought it was a very nice point that all the rest of the world other than Switzerland was a special case, and that the paradigm was Switzerland. The question is, is Switzerland changing and is it becoming a special case in the sense of the other countries of western Europe? I think it was part of my lecture that we shouldn't overrate these specialities and that in fact we do all the wrong things of our neighbors that just lead with the slowlier, but that's a unique selling position to be slow by going in the wrong direction. Of course our politics is more or less social democrat, it's a mixture of everything and when I am asked what would you change, I say less of all. But it's hard to find the way out of the trap, it's hard to find the way back. I tried to tell it in my last sentence, we should not go back to the ancient times of Switzerland, of Lanzke-Mainazone, but we should reinvent what worked and it was a lot what worked, it was the money system that worked, I didn't mention it and a lot of those things. So Switzerland is in this way and I repeat it, it is not a model to copy, but it's an experiment that's worth to learn from it. Okay we can allow one more question, that's the end then. Thank you. It's interesting the juxtaposition between Switzerland and the United Kingdom and I know you've blamed all your faults on the colonialists and the Americans here. The interesting juxtaposition is that it appears from Dr. Daniels you're writing in your presentation this morning that it's a problem from the top down, from the intelligentsia, from Gramsci coming over to Columbia and making an impact and influencing from the top. And yet it appears from your presentation in Switzerland there's this tremendous vitality in the local communities and from the bottom up. Is freedom, and I know this is somewhat of an esoteric question maybe unable to answer, is freedom best preserved from the bottom up or the top down? We're looking for the top down solutions but there seems to be a 500 year history in Switzerland that seems to sustain it from the bottom up. And yet there is really a lot of connections between the British and the Swiss and one of the most important business in Switzerland is tourism. And it has been invented by the British people liking the arts but the Swiss didn't like it themselves. We didn't know that it is beautiful and that it is nice to climb but we had the people from your country coming here and they liked it and in fact thank you very much. It's good business. But of course in the 19th and 20th century there was a very strong connection between Germany and Switzerland. This connection has been destroyed in the first world war that destroyed a lot of things. It was one of the big catastrophes of the civilization. And after this we still have good connections. We have also kind of an island feeling in Switzerland and this makes maybe good and English is kind of our fifth official, non-official language because the French speaking don't like to learn German. And the Germans speaking they try to learn French but it's very difficult to speak a good French and so it starts that young people start to communicate in English. And I am sure that in maybe 20 years it will be the normal language in business and the normal language between the young people communicating with each other. So of course English is not only British. It's a world language but it went on on spontaneous order. Nobody really said you have to speak English here. That the French tried to do that. That maybe it was really a mistake that they tried to put language and politics together. The British never did it and so it developed and now it's the global language. Thank you. The Russians believe they have a saying a fish rots from the head down. But to which one can add but it does rot. So that even if the rot in Britain has spread down there is that actual rot now. So if you like it's a dialectical relationship dare I say it with the word dialectical. And so now what is necessary is a change I think of mentality of the entire population. And that's why I'm not really very optimistic. But something can rot from the head down from the top down but the rot is real enough. As far as freedom is concerned it depends on circumstances. In Switzerland quite obviously freedom is sustained from the bottom up. And it may be though I'm speaking of a foreign country which I know very little and one should be cautious of doing that. It may well be that in the United States there is a strong determination to protect freedom at the bottom. In England and I don't have much time for Nietzsche but I am somewhat of an elitist. In England freedom was most effectively guaranteed by a liberal aristocracy and gentry. Of course there were persons from the bottom who added to the canon of classical liberalism. But when you look at the classical liberals when you look at vaguely libertarian politicians they were nearly all drawn from the upper reaches of society. And it has been with the decline of the old landed order that freedom has seen its greatest decline in England. And so at the moment we are left, at least I am left with the only available option in England which is to hope that there will be a reassertion of rights from the bottom up. But I suspect that freedom is most effectively guaranteed in the long term by a vaguely liberal upper class.


What is used as a CAT 5 tester? A CAT 5 tester can be a simple continuity tester where 8 lights confirm if the 8 cores, 4 pairs, have been terminated in the correct order. However, these testers give no feedback about the transmission capabilities of the cable. In addition, there is no feedback about the quality of installation and terminations of the ends. Therefore all data cabling should be tested with a cable certification tester such as a Fluke DSX. These types of testers show a chart of tests that show the performance of the cable and any effects of installation or poor terminations. Furthermore the actual effect on the cable and whether it is capable of transmitting as it should. A group of charts and calculations are given on a single page per cable and a summary green tick pass or red cross fail is noted.


Most times that Messi plays, he is the smallest player on the pitch. But if you watch him, he never gets knocked down. If he does, it's because he got fouled. But as far as individual battles or shielding and protecting the ball, he is very strong. So size does not matter.  You need to be strong when you're on the ball. I will send the better in one day soccer blueprint to anyone who comments hashtag soccer on this video. So just because you're strong doesn't mean you're actually using your strength. There's a lot of big strong guys who are easy to knock off the ball because they don't use their strength. So especially when you're dribbling, you have to be strong. Any time there is body contact or I'm trying to get between two players, I have to be strong. Okay, I have to use my strength. If you like this content, check out the soccer success planner. You can download it for free. There's a link in the description below. For advanced training, check out the Online Soccer Academy.


Hello and welcome to the next session and I'd like to introduce an old friend, Virginia Rodis from Uruguay and she's going to talk about emergency openness and agency, the adoption of open educational resources and repositories in overcoming the educational crisis during the COVID pandemic. Over to you Virginia. Thank you very much. It was really nice to see you again. Nice memories from the last time we saw each other in all ways. Well, very happy to be here also in the all year 21 and to share the open show. Today I'm talking about the GoGM Fellow that I'm developing regarding the fellowships that GoGM is, it was the first edition of the GoGM Fellows and I'm going to talk about the preliminary results of the study. Well, let's start. This fellow is aimed at investigating the way teachers adopted all year and also repositories in Uruguay during the pandemic emergency lockdown in Uruguay during the last year. Open educational sources have had a relevant role in overcoming the educational crisis and the previous findings of this study that was my PhD thesis allowed us to identify various strengths in the context of the COVID-19 emergency and accelerated the adoption of all year by K-12 teachers in Uruguay. This fellowship was a method to investigate the agency of teachers of public primary schools in their practices of creating, renews and sharing resources. A study made possible by this GoGM research fellowship is being carried out focusing on how processes were developed within the situation of the stream vulnerability of the educational communities. A qualitative methodology was implemented based on the previous critical conceptual model of the adoption of all year that I made in my PhD thesis that is a critical and Latin American conceptual model. Individual interviews with high school principals and group interviews with teachers, I'm going to show the instruments I applied in the interviews were focused on integration into practice, how much were incorporated in the teaching plans, the integration into teaching practices and how do teachers integrate into teaching, if teachers differentiate between all year and other types of contents and what are the common creation and reducing practices in these times. Next, the other focus is our perceptions and attitudes and mostly related to the perspective on open education have changed and lessons learned and what changes do we need to improve the access on education and continuity and the recommendations that teachers have made and also the personal impacts mostly regarding how did they feel throughout the process and how has it impacted in a personal family level. And the theoretical sample was based in three cases studies, one school in Montevideo and the capital of Uruguay and a second one school in a metropolitan area near the capital and the third one is a school in a province located in the north of the country and the subjects were three school principals of each school and seven teachers related to the case studies. Well, I'm going to share with you some results of the analysis that involved 10 hours of interviews to 280 calls and 1039 quotations and these are the preliminary results. Sorry if you heard, this is the gas that is coming to the sound scenario of Montevideo, perhaps you are hearing some noise. Well, the first result is integration into practice, regarding integration into practice is the ICT appropriation. Mostly face-to-face, the tension between face-to-face and virtuality is the most important aspect that teachers include in this course. In every time they come, they were really, but virtuality was really a driver to the adoption of ICT and they make more focus on what happens before and what happens after. Need was another driver, they talk about time and fear as problems to develop their practices. Regarding open education, collaboration is the most cited item regarding open education practices. They talk about training, coordination and communication mostly with students and between teachers and parents. Creation, use and open of digital resources. I want to highlight that creation was the most important practice that they talk about and also reusing and sharing, but they only mentioned earlier less than creation, reuse and share. This happens because they didn't differentiate between OER and other educational resources and they didn't realize that what they do is doing OER. Most of the work is doing it starting teams, policies are important, also quality and also incentives. Regarding OER formats, we found mostly videos, digital books, learning paths and virtual classroom and games and with less representations or presentation, photography, interactive images and posters. Regarding repositories is very important because the most used repositories were the institutional ones. There are the plancival, portal and library. Other sites are also used and we saw that there are not many information about if they can use the resources that are in the other sites and also the way Duca that is a platform of the Ministry of Education. Practices were mostly storage and search, not sharing in the repositories because sharing is happening in other spaces that I'm going to talk about later. Training and promotion and awareness were a focus of their discourses and also copyrights when policies and incentives and they talked about adoption strategies and organization and infrastructures. Regarding educational technology, CREA, that is the Scoloshi platform that is also by plancival, is provided by plancival to the private and public schools in Uruguay. It's the most cited, it was a huge amount of use of this platform during the COVID-19 and currently it's already in use. PAM, that is in Matific, there are platforms regarding mathematics and Uri Familia, that is a platform for a connection with families. Conference is a big blue bath on technology that is provided to make online classes that is institutionally provided by plancival and also Zoom and less Google Meet and WhatsApp and email. There are many apps that they mentioned that are generally CAHODES 11, so they use many apps that are provided by the free but not really open, but they use the apps that are in the internet, also Google Drive, but they talk about inter-resources for students that do not have a good internet connection. Also regarding integration into practice, continuity of learning is the most important thing for teachers and they talk about the students' digital practices, but the most important thing for teachers was students' retention and in this area access technology was the most important thing because in the beginning of the pandemic there were many problems because in the students' homes there were no availability of access to internet, not always regarding this, for example, laptops because plancival provides one laptop per child, but mostly regarding access to internet, but also participation, meeting peers, keep contact were very important things for teachers, also accessibility and motivation. Regarding curriculum change in the didactic contents, teaching practices have changed, there were a lot of reflective practices going on in education and innovation. In the organizational context, the organization of work and the environment of the center were very important and also the internal relationships and the external context, they talked about school and society relationship and the quality of mind and influence like the policies of the educational system and also the sanitary policies. Regarding the other categories that are perceptions and attitudes, I want to share with you some lesson learners that I think are very interesting because they bring the teacher's voices. Teacher's role is fundamental in the classroom, I do not know if authorities became aware of the amount of resources stated by teachers in these three months, an infinite world of possibilities because a lot to do with our biographies and trajectories as well, at least the fear has been lost, you had to learn and was someone who supported another. Returning to resources to be able to work, to analyze data actively, to be able to reuse them, to redesign them according to the purpose, changing the pedagogical intention to be able to take advantage of them, to find meaning from that place and appropriate it. I think there are a lot of lessons learned that I choose this because they are very, very powerful and regarding representations, I took this one that are in vivo calls but now the technology looks for its place by itself. Now we are prepared for 2021. It was a shared learning, it was a community, quite an experience, it was to continue or leave teaching. They are very, very powerful and personal impacts regarding the personal identity and teaching professional identity. I want to highlight the emotional impact unless the quarantine and uncertainty, tiredness, recognition, need to recognition and personal growth. In relation to teaching professional identity, teacher's subject, mostly relation with technology was a topic, agency, meaning of teaching and professional satisfaction. And regarding teaching career, professional development was very important and also teacher's trajectory. So preliminary findings, there is evidence of new practices of use of year, available in national repositories. They are reusing practices, mostly they involve few adaptations but it's mostly connected with inspiration based on reuse. Sharing practices are separate between peers and on a human scale in the educational institution or between nearby institution. They constructed, they build relationships between each other and they managed to share in creative ways, not only by using repositories. Lack of knowledge of the difference between your year and other educational resources and creation practices in teacher teams. Also leadership role of the school principal is really significant and there is a relevance of the pre-existence of a professional community in which in service training is shared. The role of teachers already trained in educational technology to promote and lead the work of other teachers in the school but also a high instability of this transformation is observed in the evaluation and sorry in the evolution towards their return from face to face education. So I think it's very important just to finish to highlight the importance of the requirement to establish mechanisms of to promote the realization of creation, adaptation and sharing of our year give visibility to the value of these practices and also give sustainability to the learning created by the pandemic. So these are the preliminary findings. I'm not sure if I have them well in time. Thank you very much. I think I'm unmuted now. We've got a few moments for questions. You can see one of the questions there which is how the project is moving beyond 2021 for example. So what next is the question Virginia? What are you doing next with this project? Well I'm going to do a research paper and also to bring back to authorities and also to the participants of the study, the findings and so as to lead I'm also I'm now a day currently I'm UNESCO chair in open education in Uruguay so I think it could be an activity that the UNESCO chair can lead to make authorities know about what has been happening in schools and what teachers learn about that and how can we make a sustainable action to this learning. Okay and I'm going to pick up another question from the from the chain of questions. There's a particular question and it chimes with me. I have got school age children as well and they were sent home and we were okay because we had devices at home for them. How did that impact you know so that what did the learner were learners sent home from school in Venezuela did they have to study at home was was there a digital divide? Yes it was a digital divide Uruguay hasn't made a lot of efforts during the last decades so as to to make the digital divide lower but they are a structural social and economical divide and cultural divide that impact in the in the appropriation of digital technologies and also the the way that students could manage during the with with their learning and their student practices during the pandemic when families can be with the student and die the theme of her during the connection and during the online activities and everything that is involved in learning students can go on but there were many many students that that have been left so yes and and but what I saw in my study that was that teachers made charitable efforts and a huge amount of efforts to connect with these students with those students are they were looking for them in in in the houses in the in in in in places talking with the neighbors to to contact with them or and I think therefore that the the teachers made in this context to to make that no one is left behind is really really really huge. Listen I've been I've been tweeting away in the background and pushing your message out I think the knowledge of primary teachers in Scotland about OER probably is less than the the knowledge you're reflecting that primary teachers in Uruguay have so I quite I quite liberally tweeted that out to annoy some of my Scottish educational policymaker friends so really useful piece of work thank you for a lovely presentation I'll see you shortly in the in the green room where we go after after this session and I just like to thank you very much and I'm sure other people will be applauding on the on the on the on the YouTube stream so thank you so much thank you


I'm Kathy. I own barbed wire books. We've been here for almost 11 years selling every kind of book, new and used. Now that we're open again, we've got people back in the store. It feels really good. Bookstores are not necessarily about books. They are about people.


Alright, welcome back. Let's just look at Kennedy's question. Kennedy, I didn't understand your first question. As a pastor, how do you handle this yes-yes leaders in the board membership or leadership team? I don't understand what is this yes-yes leaders. Can you elaborate please? Sure, if Kennedy is there. Kennedy, you're there? Alright, what makes... The second part of your question is what makes an average or above-average leader? Let me answer the second part of the question. Hopefully, Kennedy will explain open clarity in the first part. What makes an average or an above-average leader? Now, I'm just going to give you some practical insights. It's not like we are above-average of an average. But we're all growing. We're all a work in progress. We all go through these challenges. We all go through ups and downs as leaders. When we talk about average leaders, it all deals with a couple of things. One is our intimacy with God. Our levels of intimacy with God. Two is our attitude, our approach towards the things of God or the things of the Spirit. And of course, there may be many others. One is our intimacy with God. Now, we know that true ministry is birthed out of the intimacy or anointing of the Holy Spirit. The more we spend time there's more intimacy with God. There's more sacrifice. There's more time that we spend with God. It will almost immediately reflect the ministry. As leaders, of course, once we get into the ministry or this new ministry, we can't expect somebody to be a great leader initially itself. If it does happen, it's wonderful. That's wonderful that God does that. But one is to continually grow in our intimacy with God. The best example would be Apostle Paul. He's come towards the end of his life and he's saying, hey, I forget what is behind and I press on for that, for which God has taken hold of me. He's not saying I'm satisfied with the intimacy that I have with God. Now, the Apostle Paul had enough and more intimacy with the Lord Jesus. Just was there, he had such a close relationship with God. But he says, no, pressing on for what God has taken hold of me. He's not relying on the previous revelations, the previous work that God did in his life, but he's saying pressing on for the things of God. I would say the first one is our time spent in God's presence really matters. That will reflect in our ministry. If you are able to spend time, more time in God's word, more time in his presence, praying, seeking God, that is where God is the source of all wisdom also. Out of that time with the Lord when the ministry is birthed out, God gives us wisdom as a leader to take the right step, to do the right thing. And we will see this over time. I would say number one, as much as possible if we want to be above average leaders, if we want to be great leaders, yes the practical is there but true ministry is birthed out of intimacy with God. So never compensate that time with the Lord for the work of the ministry because it should be an overflow of that. What was the reason for the apostle Paul's success? You see consistency in his ministry for 30 years consistent, same desires, same passion. The passion has gone more and more. Why? Because of his time with the Lord. In the book of, I think it's Efficiency says I bow my knee to the Father and I pray for each one of you. The Corinthians says, I thank God I pray with this spirit more than any of you. I speak in tongues more than any of you. So it shows that his intimacy with God, the time with God knowing God, drawing from his presence really reflect in ministry. I want to share this example and something that I personally have experienced. There will be times we have to lead worship. church, prayers, fasting prayers and I have noticed this. The more I spend time in God's presence, I God bless the songs and all the songs. The more we spend time in His presence the outcome is very simple. We see it. So we see the outcome. Not only me, but something that I have experienced. More I spend time in God's presence. Many times in the time of worship, you just feel liberated. Just feel the power, the presence of God. Going through that one hour of worship is a breeze. But there are times I may not have spent time with the Lord. Maybe because working tired, weary, just finished work may not have spent it. Find it difficult to finish that hour of worship or what to do. Just feel this feeling of dissatisfaction. I didn't go as I planned. So yes, I believe that we spend time in God's presence if we reflect in every area. People will recognize it. People will recognize it. That's the thing. We may feel that how do they know that we spend time or not spend time? They will know. They will know. It will show in the way we are in our leadership, in the way we are. It just reflects. Remember Moses, in the time of God's presence he came down. They said cover your face. There's too much of glory in God's body. Cover your face. We can't see it. Because he was in God's presence. The more we are in God's presence, the greater is our ministry. The greater is the wisdom that God gives us. Greater is our leadership. That's one. Two ways. Our attitude towards situations and things that we see, our attitude matters. Imagine we spend hours in God's presence with good leaders but our attitude is not right. They are not good. Or maybe it's just pride. Maybe it is jealousy. That ministry has thousands of people. I'm still in hundreds. Now jealousy can creep. All these things are hard attitudes which we must guard ourselves against. Of course there are many other but these are two things that I personally spend time in God's presence and guard your hard attitude. Kennedy, I'm not sure if you're there. Can you explain? Does anyone know what is this? Yes, yes. Or I don't know if it's a type title. Can you type it out? I think what he just means is someone who just agrees to anything someone who is a man pleaser, a man pleaser. I think if I'm getting Charles' question right, that just goes with anything that everybody says without a without taking informed decision and going with his conviction. Just because he wants to please everyone. He doesn't want to hurt the feelings of anyone yet. Okay, thank you so much for your Kennedy. If that is your question, correct as say yes. Okay, so very important we are not here to please God. Now if there are people in ministry who only say yes, yes, yes, but they don't do anything about it. It's important that we ask them to, you know, you take time with them. Don't give them leadership immediately. Because again, as we talked about as leaders, our heart attitude matters. Whether we are glorifying God, whether we are honoring God, whether God, we have a heart for God, that should be there. If they want to become members of the church, they are free to do that. But when it comes to leadership and we have people like this, we take some time. We work with them. But we never write them off. I say, okay, this person will only talk, but he doesn't do anything. No. You never know what they can become. There are some of them who are willing to take correction and they work on it. But there are some who take correction. They say, okay, and they don't do anything about it. And then there's the other group of people who take correction and they say, no, I will not change. So we need to be aware of these three things. And even as we work with them if they are already in leadership, then you need to be kind of stunned with them. Let them know that hey, what you're doing is going to be impacting other people's lives. You give them opportunities and if you feel that over time there's no feedback given has not been worked on, you can ask them to take a break. But do this all lovingly, corrected love. But be there for them. When you ask them to take a break, don't just say, okay, just attend church. But be there. Help them to get back. Help them to get back that place of leadership that they are in. But if they are pleasing men and you feel that that's something that is going to cause a problem for the sake of the ministry, for the sake of the team, you ask them initially to step down. But you work with them and then help them to be restored back to their position. Christopher says, you please share how you build intimacy with God on a daily basis and how it has to work for the years. I'll just share for just a couple of minutes. So Christopher, when I first joined I just became a believer just like everybody else. It was just that I tried to pray. I really wanted to fast and pray and all of it. But I prayed and I thought it was one hour but I opened my eyes. It was just 10 minutes. I thought, oh man, how am I going to pray for an hour? It was just too difficult. And so I liked worship. So I tried to build on that. Over time I began to understand how the Holy Spirit works. How we have the Holy Spirit, how the Holy Spirit gives to the Holy Spirit, and how we can flow in the gifts of the Holy Spirit over time. I was speaking in tongues. Initially for me it was very... I felt it very... I'm being honest because I felt it very weird initially so I was like, what is this? And I knew that that was not me who was speaking. It was God that is there inside speaking. I began to pray in tongues. I remember it became half an hour. I was so happy. Half an hour. I was able to spend time in God's presence and I also experienced the presence of God. I was able to just receive from him. Of course, reading the Word is spending a lot of time studying the Word. When I was in Bible college, two year course that I took way back I spent a lot of time reading and preparing myself in times of... I knew the Word is something. If I have to preach the Word I have to learn. So basically I dived into the Word. Of course, it was two years where there was no other government. I had to only... I just concentrated on Bible college. But I understand that all of us maybe working, we have things to look after. What I did was I set times, morning and evening and I tried to stick to those timings and when it came to reading the Word, I tried to do a lot of research and hear from God and listen to a lot of stuff. So basically all of us are doing this. Nothing new. It s not like I started off and then I started off with one opera at all. It all started very small. But then when we have a heart for God, when we have this desire to grow nothing can stop us.  Because that is when I realized it s no more Bible college. Now I m ministering to people. So this weight of this feeling of it was a wonderful feeling because I ve teaching and preaching but the responsibility it just added on and I was able to spend more time reading other books. So again, I made a lot of mistakes Christopher. I made a lot of mistakes, many places where I make big mistakes, small mistakes but it is a grace of God that over the years that I had learning and was able to develop myself. And of course being with wonderful leaders who have given me these opportunities is always such a blessing. What everyone is doing, I think me. Start small start with what you have, start with what you know and build on that. Just making sure your foundation is strong. Alright, let s go to our course. We will just do a little more and then maybe we can close. The leader as a coach, so maybe we will do this chapter. Leader as a coach. Now, I m sure all of us have heard this word coach, coaching sectors. Nowadays we have these coaching centers, especially when you get only for school children. But now things have changed here, coaching centers for public speaking for all kinds of things. But why coach people? Here are three points here. You build a stronger team. You enable people to rise to new levels and new challenges and you begin to attract people who desire to be coached. You build a stronger team. And when we have a team, it is powerful the importance of a team is very, very powerful. You can enable people to rise to new levels, new challenges and then you begin to attract people who want to be coached. And so I do know that many churches, many ministries already have, say maybe mentors or coaching leaders. They already have it and that s something that we also at ABC we are we are talking about it starting like mentors just to help each other. That s something that is on the cards but the thing is we have a lot of life groups so we get people connected there but we do realize that we have to take it one step further in having this close coaching. Coaching is a process of equipping people with tools, knowledge and opportunities. They need to develop themselves and become more effective. So coaches develop people, they equip people to develop themselves. What a wonderful thing that is. Coaches don t develop people. They help people or they equip people to develop themselves. Here s what you have to do. You do ABCD, these four points try and follow them, try and do this and we ll come back and we ll see how you were able to be able to do this. So I remember when I began to preach I would always tell people please give me feedback because if I don t get feedback everyone say good good then I won t be able to grow. So I would tell our team and I will just give me feedback whatever it is. It may be something very small. Why? Because it helps us and when we have coaches they tell us what to do they equip us to fulfill the role that we either want to do or we are already doing. So if you are a coach now as a leader, a cell group leader, you can take it that you are a leader and a coach you have both the attributes mixed and you ll have to do both of them and some things to consider when you are coaching. Work one on one take advantage of coachable or teachable methods and guide people to learn for themselves. Teach them how to extract the right lessons from their experiences how to find others who can assist them, how to update feedback information. So for example, you are coaching another person and you know that this person is going to start their own life group. So you tell them hey, why don t you start doing a word study on this book on this chapter or do a character study on these three people. This is the commentary that you can use. This is the other books that you can refer to. This is how I did a word study. So maybe you can use that as a backup as a reference point and you know you can just get them to learn that, get them to do it and see whether they have been able to do it and how they have been able to do it but you don t have to do it for them but what you are doing is you are assisting them and then you are giving them the material that they need, the encouragement that they need and finally you give them some feedback. Good, positive and feedbacks on where they can improve. Orchestrate resources and opportunities. Not only equip people to learn but intervene with others on their behalf. So there will be times, especially this happens in church where church members they come, it s common, they come to the pastor for prayer. What we started doing was we started getting our life group leaders. So we would announce, as pastors we would announce, our life group leaders are here and they will be available to pray for you and pray for your needs. So now what s happening we are giving them an opportunity to step out. We are giving them an opportunity, maybe on a Sunday service or maybe on any of the weekends, anywhere giving them an opportunity to step out.  You are saying, hey, they are there, they are available. Now for them it may be a new experience, it may be a new door, they don t know how to do it but you are putting them at this point. Go ahead, do it as leaders you are encouraging them. You are not teaching them to pray for others but they are stepping out and doing it. So you are just there backing them up. Here are some of the coaching strategies. Again, some of it may be repeated or replicated in terms of making a cell member to a cell leader. First one, forge a partnership, build trust, build understanding to inspire commitment. Motivate the person coaching or leading. Motivate them, build insight. Let them know that hey, this is what you are going to be one day and it s not only that you will raise up other leaders.  So you inspire them for commitment. Tell them to grow skills, build new competencies and know that to ensure that they are growing. This is very important. Never must stay stagnant. Build new competencies. It could be in practical ways, it could be in terms of learning new skills, taking up maybe short term courses. Grow skills. Always encourage them to do that. Then promote persistence, that is build stamina and discipline. Persistence is something very important. Especially as leaders, we need to tell people that leadership, it s not always, when we look at it, sometimes people desire leadership because they are in a place where they can tell people what to do. And that s a wrong understanding. Leadership involves responsibilities. There are lives that are being ministered to under your care. There will be times when you may just get tired, you may feel weak, you may fall, you may be tired. But here we need to promote persistence. Build stamina, build discipline. For them. Finally, shape the environment. Build support. Remove barriers, open doors. Don t force control of manipulate people. Nobody can force anybody to be someone they don t want to be. For example, during those days parents would always say, I want my son to be a doctor, I want my son to be an engineer and this son will be interested in learning music completely in the opposite direction. Sometimes parents would force and say, how can you be playing these instruments, they s not going to get you anywhere. I m talking about 10, 15 years before. But nowadays parents are more open, parents are more do what you want to do because in every field there s growth. Even in terms of coaching people don t force anybody because you can t shake somebody and say, hey, you should become a leader or you should become a self-group leader. If they are not for it, they are hard as not and don t push them into it. They should be ready. Then you push them. Then you gently release them and help them to do what they want what they want to do. Don t manipulate or control don t force them. The last thing that we must do as leaders finally, if you want to coach, be coachable. There will be times when we are coaching people, we are training people and sometimes they may come and say, hey, what you said last week, I didn t like the way you said it because it was very food. Sometimes we may feel I m the one who is feeding this. Thank God we don t feel that way but we may feel that way at times. How can this person tell us what to do? If I was rude, I apologize, ask forgiveness and move on but you don t have to forfeit your leadership just because of that one thing. Remember we all make mistakes. Be coachable, be teachable. Agree for the mistakes you have made, ask for forgiveness and move on. There are no questions. We will just close in press. Maybe one of us can please close. Maybe Prabhakar or Rupa, anybody can close a thread? Yes, anyone. Say go ahead. Hello Spray. How are you Father in Heaven? We bless you for another class Lord and thank you Lord for your son. Thank you for how you have used him to instruct us and how you have used him to impact upon us. What it means to be a leader and the expectations as a leader and what the things we should do and things we shouldn t be doing. We say thank you for this knowledge and we pray that Lord in every capacity you raise us Lord to become leaders. That Lord we will not fall short of all these things we have learned and we pray that Lord you would also put in us Lord the ability and the grace to raise others in the way of Christ and that Lord will also be worthy examples as you Lord in Heaven and as how you led on the disciples and every order once you went on earth. We pray Father Lord for your son who you used to impact upon us this knowledge that Lord his leadership Lord will continue to be an example of Christ and we pray that in everything Lord you have raised him to do and in the future that Lord you will in grace him Lord to do more and more in the kingdom and for the progress of your church. We give you praise Lord as we go into the other class we pray that Lord strengthen us and give us wisdom to understand all that we have put and we pray that all will be done to your glory in the name of Jesus Christ we are praying amen. Amen. Thank you everyone for joining. Have a wonderful week. We'll see you next week. God bless.


Here, Yuri. All right, excellent. I'll share my screen. Can everyone see it? I can see it, yes. OK. OK. Hi, everyone. I'm a 50-year PhD student at MIT advised by Guy Bresler. I'll be talking about my recent work on corrective view of neural networks, representation, memorization, and learning. OK. So as we all know, neural networks are universal approximators that is given any continuous function over a compact domain. We can approximate it to arbitrary accuracy in the L2 metric. So we introduce a novel mathematical tool, which allows us to obtain sharp bounds on the number of neurons required for representation. That is, given epsilon to be the error we want to achieve, what is the number of neurons required for different function classes. We obtain state-of-the-art memorization results. That is, how many neurons are required to completely interpolate data on arbitrary points. And we also gives up polynomial bounds on the number of neurons required to learn low-degree polynomials via stochastic gradient descent or gradient descent. OK. First, I'll briefly describe the results that we obtain. That is, regarding memorization. We all know that neural networks can memorize arbitrary labels over arbitrary data very easily with very few neurons. A long line of papers aim to understand why this happens. That is, why slightly overparameterized networks are able to efficiently memorize these labels via the study of stochastic gradient descent or gradient descent on the data points. So we set up the problem as follows, given an arbitrary point in the d-dimensional sphere. How many neurons are necessary to memorize it? So we assume that the minimum distance between the points is theta. And the maximum error we can tolerate is epsilon. So we show, via our techniques, that two-layer RELU networks require n over theta to the 4 and log 1 over epsilon nonlinear units, which are RELU units. This is optimal in n for two-layer RELU networks. And one of the first works to achieve this via gradient descent. We note that optimal, without overparameterization, we need n over d nonlinear units. This is a comparison of the various results. So we see that the older results require a very high polynomial dependence on n and d. And some of them even have extra factors which might be exponential in d or n, which are not enumerated. And the two other works which come very close to this are the one by Amit Danielli, which show that when n is only polynomially large in d and it's uniformly distributed over the sphere, you need no overparameterization. You can learn it with n over d neurons. And Kawaguchi and Huang, who show with a similar setup that you need o tilde and neurons to memorize. And in our work, we have the same similar results as Kawaguchi and Huang, where we have o tilde and RELU units required to memorize arbitrary data. We don't then n can be even exponentially large in d, in our case. So coming to our results on representation, we want to approximate a function f over rd, which is real valued. And we care about a domain of which is a ball of radius r. And we want to approximate it with respect to squared error using a neural network. OK? The technical condition we impose on f is a sort of smoothness condition, where if capital F is the Fourier transform of small f, then we have the following condition on the integral. That is, its tail must be decaying at least as fast as to be able to integrate mark psi to the ad. Roughly speaking, because of the connection between a decay of Fourier transforms and the smoothness of a function, this means that f has theta of ad bounded derivatives. OK? So we show that under this condition, there exists a two-layer network with n nonlinear units of RELU and smooth RELU kind, such that the squared error between f and f hat, where f hat is the output of the neural network, is scales as 1 over n to the a. OK? So where f has ad number of bounded derivatives. OK, what does that mean? a is, OK, so if f has theta of ad bounded derivatives, we can achieve 1 over n to the a rate. That's what a is. OK? So this sounds bad because of this constant, which might be dependent on the dimension. But in a lot of cases, we have functions with specialized structure where there's a low-dimensional structure, even though the function is high-dimensional, for instance, low-degree polynomials. So in that case, we can completely replace d in all these instances with a q. q and q can be much smaller than d, for instance, 2 or 3 or something like that. So in that case, it really shines. OK? So for previous results, use Taylor series approximation for such functions. That is, if you have theta ad bounded derivatives, you implement Taylor series expansion by implementing addition and multiplication with complex deep networks. They, too, achieve 1 over n to the a kind of squared error. But they have complex deep networks with no known training results, whereas we show similar results under similar conditions with a two-layer network, and which can be trained very easily. OK? So an application of our representation result is about learning low-degree polynomials. Consider, let's say, degree q polynomials over d-dimensional input. OK? So with a suitable random feature sampling, we can learn this class of functions via gradient descent up to error epsilon with the complexity of d to the q subpoly of 1 over epsilon with number of neurons, which are of the RELU and smooth RELU kind. OK? These are the first subpolynomial learning bounds. OK? I just described the main results of our work. Let me go into some technical content. The main idea behind all these results is that we use the corrective mechanism. We first divide all the available nonlinear units of neurons into multiple groups. The first group approximates the function and consideration. The second group approximates the error produced by the first group and corrects it. The third approximates and corrects the error produced by first two groups and so on. Under certain conditions, after a number of corrective steps, we get a rate of 1 over into the a, which was as claimed. And we can do a number of corrections for exactly the class of functions, which have theta ad bounded derivatives. OK? So this sort of gives purely representational results. How do we go from representation results to learning results? We do this by a random feature sampling. For instance, consider a two-layer network that is with one linear layer and one nonlinear layer. Here kappa i are the recombination weights, and w i and ti are the inner weights. OK? We draw w i and ti at random from some tractable distribution. For instance, w i could be uniform over the sphere in the dimensions, and ti could be uniform over minus 1, 1.  So this reduces a nonconvex optimization problem, which can be very hard, to a smooth convex optimization problem and which can be easy to solve. It has been shown, theoretically, that SGD for neural networks with a large number of neurons reduces to this approximately because for a large number of training steps, the inner weights don't change appreciably. OK? So the basic modus operandi of our work is that we pick w i and ti from some tractable distribution, which does not assume the knowledge of f. We show via probabilistic method that there exists recombination weights kappa i naught, which achieve an error at most epsilon. And the random features optimization, that is the linear regression over kappa i, which give kappa i star much to at least as well as kappa i naught. That is, it must produce an error of at most epsilon. OK? So OK, we will apply this to the first toy problem, which is the memorization problem, which is a very simple phenomenon, which is a very simple problem to explain our correction phenomena. Suppose we have data points, labeled data points x1, y1 to xn, yn, where xn is the point in the sphere in the dimensions and yn is the corresponding arbitrary label. We do not assume any structure on the labels or on the data. OK? They're completely arbitrary as long as they're on the sphere, and the distance between them is theta, minimum distance is theta. OK? We construct the discrete Fourier transform as shown here, and we take psi to be a normally distributed random variable, and with sigma to be of the order root n over theta, so that there are some kind of cancellations. And when we do this inverse Fourier trick, it cancels out, it approximately gives you yj, and it cancels out the rest of the points. OK? So doing this approximate inverse Fourier transform, we get yj is equal to this quantity, which is actually an expectation over a cosine functions, or one-dimensional cosine functions. Now we do the standard trick, which was used by Barron and everyone classically in the literature and introduced by Barron first, where we replace the cosine function here with the additional expectation over ReLU by introducing a new random variable T. So this is just replacing the cosine function with an expectation over ReLU's. And this follows from integration over parts formula. For this, we have to introduce a new random variable T, which is uniform in minus 2, 2. So now that we have a formula in terms of ReLU in expectation for each yj, we can go ahead and construct an empirical estimator for this. That is, we draw psi k and tk from this distribution and then construct the following empirical estimator. So via Gaussian concentration inequality, we have the following contraction. That is, this is the error in the labels. y1 hat is the prediction of our neural network for y. And y is the label. And this can be seen as an n-dimensional vector. And there is the following norm contraction, which we can show via Gaussian concentration. And where n0 is the number of neurons we used in the first step, first group of neurons. When n is larger than o tilde n over theta to the 4, there is a contraction. So now, again, y minus y1 hat is just another set of labels over the same point. So we can replace y with y minus y1 hat and estimate it with y2 hat. That is the first level of correction. And we obtain that the error after two correction steps goes like this equation here, where we have a squared, which is a second contraction on this equation. So we don't have to stop it after two times. We can continue for o of log n over epsilon times. And we show that we have the error at most epsilon as shown here. From this equation, we conclude that memorization requires o tilde n over theta to the 4 log 1 over epsilon activation functions, which are completely relu. Now, when we come to representation theorems, we are dealing with continuous domains. The higher level idea is the same as memorization, but there are some technical complications because we have a big measure, which is infinite. And we have to do the appropriate modification, in this case, to use the same techniques. So one of the first things we do is we don't just consider relus. We want to consider relus and smooth relus. In particular, we construct S relu k activation functions, which are same as relu outside a neighborhood of 0, but they are 2k times continuously differentiable. And the construction is very specialized. And we do this because the Fourier transforms of relu is not very well behaved, but Fourier transforms smooth relu has the right kind of decay so that we can do the successive approximation trick. So the main idea behind the representation theorems is as follows. That is, we first have a target function f and be approximated by f1 hat, which is a two-layer S relu k network with n activation functions. We show, via classical techniques introduced by Barron, that the squared error is of the order cf square over n, where cf is a norm on the Fourier transform of f. Now, we also know that after certain modification and triangulation arguments, we show that the Fourier transform of a certain extension of f1 hat is an unbiased estimator for the Fourier transform of f point-wise. Therefore, we can show that roughly the Fourier norm on the error function f minus f1 hat here is contract by a factor of 1 over root n. Giraj, one minute. Yeah. Can I go ahead? Yeah, yeah. Just one minute left. Sorry. Yeah. So the Fourier transform of this contracts, and therefore, we can approximate fm by f2 hat, and we get another factor of 1 over n square. So continuing this way, for a times, we get rate of 1 over n to the a. After each corrective step, the reminder becomes less and less smooth, while further approximation is impossible. We apply these learning results to learning low-dimensional polynomials of degree q over rd. So the state of the art learning result requires polynomial of 1 over epsilon, a number of neurons, but purely representation results with complex deep networks require only a polylog of 1 over epsilon, number of neurons. Our learning result shows that if you have subpolynomial of 1 over epsilon, a neurons, we can actually learn these polynomials using SGD or GD with a two-layer network. So this bridges the gap between learning and representation results. So this is just an application of the representation results. We show that the set of polynomials are infinitely differentiable, and we can apply the correction step arbitrary number of times by paying a cost of higher constant. And we show that if we have n to be epsilon to the minus 1 over a for a arbitrary, we can achieve an error of utmost epsilon with so many neurons, letting a tending to infinity slowly enough as epsilon tends to 0, we get a subpolynomial bound. Thank you. All right.