The music will be helpful. A very good afternoon to all of you. A warm welcome to this session on the future of intelligence services. I think some of you were probably present at the last session, which was the future of militaries. And I will say once again, just as I said then, that this is historic first, because while the World Economic Forum has been discussing almost all conceivable topics, we have never ever had a panel on the future of intelligence services. As such. And there's no coincidence that this is happening right now, at the beginning of 2015. We've been through a remarkable and rather dramatic year in many aspects 2014, which in a sense both saw the further rise of asymmetric challenges, most typically illustrated by the rise of the Islamic State, which is not only operating in the Middle East, but also has many links to terrorism going on in other parts of the world, including close to here. And at the same time, something we did not conceive of a year ago, the full-scale conflict in Europe, in Ukraine, which is basically a total collapse of trust between Russia, the European Union and the US. So we're living in a dramatic world. And the intelligence services have a complicated role in trying to help understand what's going on in this complicated world, which is in many ways getting more difficult. For a few years, the discussion about the intelligence service and surveillance was marked by the Snowden revelations and by strong emphasis on containing the work of intelligence services. I think today maybe there is a slightly new tone to the debate, given that after all the public good that is provided by intelligence and surveillance agencies also has prevented, for instance, terrorist attacks. So it's a big question with many dimensions. We are extremely fortunate to have a brilliant panel helping us to understand this. We have General Kjell Granhagen, who is Lieutenant General Granhagen, who is head of the Norwegian Intelligence Service. We have John Sawyers, who until a few months ago ran the MI6, the British Foreign Intelligence Service. And we have Jean-Marie Guignot, who has had the distinguished career in the UN, now head of the International Crisis Group, but who was also involved in the major overhaul of French security, defence and intelligence thinking a few years ago. So that's the cost. And I would actually like to challenge General Granhagen first. Say a little bit about how your work looks, given the complicated developments in the world, and what are your main concerns and challenges when it comes to the service that you are leading and the services that you are cooperating with. Yes, I think in order to discuss the future of intelligence and intelligence agencies, it would be of interest to look back a few years. I've been in the job for five years and I've seen the tasks of intelligence changing a lot during these five years. I'll make four points. First of all, the change of the sort of terrorist threat that we are facing. Five years ago, terrorism was something that foreign intelligence agencies worked as something happening out there in the world that could be projected into our societies. Today, obviously, as we've seen illustrated in recent weeks, that has changed completely. Terrorism is now something that is among us on a daily basis. Homegrown people, some of them going for jihad abroad, then returning, some only influenced by terrorist organizations out there, urging action in their home countries. So obviously that challenges intelligence agencies in order to operate quite differently, cooperating much more between external services and internal services in order to deal with that. The second area that has developed significantly is cyberspace. Five years ago, that was not on top of the agenda. Now it definitely is, with two aspects, really. One is foreign intelligence agencies are crucial in determining the threats that face us in cyberspace because we have the global outlook and foreign intelligence agencies are those who are able to attribute threats that we observe to certain actors out there. The third important change relates to what you pointed out, Espen, the reappearance of interstate conflict very close to Europe. For my agency, we have always followed that potential risk or threat coming out of that, but I think for many intelligence agencies, both in Europe and elsewhere, that reappearance of interstate conflict is something that has forced us to change focus to a large extent. And finally, of course, the fourth point, the Snowden leaks, which put a great focus on intelligence agencies, portrayed in media in the way that intelligence agencies pose a significant threat to individuals around the globe, to privacy and to the right of individuals. Something that in my view has been largely overstated, in my view, very few, if any, intelligence agencies around the globe are really interested individuals, except those who actually pose a major threat to societies. So even if some intelligence agencies collect enormous amounts of information, there is a significant difference in my view between a mass collection of information and what is called mass surveillance. I think it's very important, and I think you indicated that in your opening statement, that seeing the threats that now are clear and present in our part of the world, there is more of an understanding that intelligence agencies have a very important job to do to balance the activities that intelligence agencies will have to do with privacy and individual rights. That is something that our politicians must look into and find that right balance. There will never be anything like 100% security. There will never be 100% privacy. Striking that balance is the challenge of our politicians. Johnson, you are the very recent head of MI6, one of the world's most known, for intelligence services, particularly thanks to a relatively famous film. What have been your thoughts about striking that right balance as the world moves along? What balance are you talking about? Between security and... I'm not sure there's a trade-off between security and privacy. It's not as if the more security you get, the less privacy you have, or the more privacy you have, the less security you have. In a free society like we enjoy in the West, your freedoms are guaranteed by security.  And meanwhile, if the security goes up, their privacy goes up as well. Så jobb av Westen Governments er å finne de optimale løvelser av privacy og seguritet, så både de maximiserer. Hva gjør de som du, eller hva de services, har gjort som en public good? De gjør det. Vi hadde en recent survey done by The Edelman Trust Barometer av trust in various groups of business and government and NGOs and the media. And they're all going in the wrong direction and they're all below 50%. I think NGOs were just above 50% but descending quite rapidly. Actually, the police and the security intelligence services were up around 70%, which Richard Edelman described as numbers to die for. And I think that does reflect the fact that, first of all, we are contributing to a very real public good in the sense not just of national security but combating crime, contributing through our significant agency to child protection and combating pedophilia and so on. And defending national institutions and the companies based in the UK from cyberattacks from overseas. Everybody recognises these are real threats. I think actually one of the big changes of the last five years, over the last ten years probably, is that the intelligence services are now the front line in national defence against the modern threats that our societies face. And that's put us more in the spotlight. It means we've got to accept a degree of greater openness and accountability. And I think that in turn will reinforce the level to public support that we enjoy. Thank you very much. Let's come back to the issue of trust because I think it's a key issue in this. But first to Jean-Marie Genot, building on what Jean-Soris just said, then based on your work on national defence security and intelligence in France, which I think in many cases are typical issues for any large modern country. How do you place the new challenges to the intelligence services in that broader context? Well, I think one of the challenges is that the distinction between the domestic issues and the international issues is eroding. You have nationals who are connected to international network, like the terrorists who did the attacks in Paris. And of course the laws that apply to nationals are not the legal framework that applies to international operations. And so that raises both legal and operational challenges. The legal challenge is what legal framework will be able to protect the liberties, the freedom of the citizens. And the operational challenge is a question of cooperation. So that because the threat is mobile. And so you can't deal with your territory and ignore the territory of the neighbour. And that cooperation requires trust. So you need trust between the intelligence organisation and the population it protects. You need also trust between the various intelligence organisation. Og så er det en nødvendig nødvendig. La meg bytte på en interessant punkt. For alle i denne audience og alle andre på planetet er det kanskje sidenst om en eller to steder. Det betyr at de er fornøyende i 192 eller flere steder. Da rullet protecter nationals er det bedre fra fornøyende, og da siden intelligens servicier deler med fornøyende, det betyr at min nationall er din fornøyende, og din fornøyende er min nationall. Hvilke kvalitiser har denne international kooperasjonen lydt i denne aspen? Det er en nødvendig region. Du må ha så mye til å worry om det i vår service. Og også i vår system i U.K. Og i den europeiske unionen er det at du ikke diskriminerer på grønnsen. Når ikke alle landene har denne arrangementet. USA er bedre. Det har bedre protekter for U.S. nationals og non-nationale. Men for vår intelligenskollektion er det fokuset på de som har rett i vår society og de som kan provide intelligens sent til nationals sikkerhet er det ikke baseret på nationall. Nå, kooperasjonen er virkelig viktig, og Jean-Marie Gaynor har sagt kooperasjonen mellom servicier i en stat, og selvfølgelig de gamle støvpip-systemene som du har en støvpip-system og sygsinntagency og d Finish Security Service som Hong Kong er forrestort i denne støvpipen. Det er det som det har vært frem. De serbinterarat sammen, Jean-Marie har sagt de harrechtige tattene i Paris to minutter. De har koneksjonser i Franksk og i året. Og som vi våre monitorer de aktivister der opptager alle former av intelligens, og i en slik legalt fremverk. Det også trenger intensivt kooperasjon i andre lander, ikke selvfølgelig, fra europei og amerikanske partner. Det er relativt stort. Det er mer komplikat i andre sosies som ikke har de samme valgene eller de samme deger. Men en deger av kooperasjonen er nødvendig. Det er kjære å være regulert. I stort point om... Jeg vet at snoden har skjønt kjære til å få en kjære, en kjære kjære kjære. Det er en små proportions av noen av de samme kjære. Det er alle om de massive kjære vi har. Det er ikke bare kjære og cyberkjære, men også kjære som er stort av kjære eller staten som er eratisk eller illegalt. i andre partier i verden. Vi har selvfølgelig tatt en frå på hverandre, for å si at det er en nød til å kunne følge hvilke næsjoner du er gjennom i farver, og de regnene som kan være kollaborativt, men ikke på standarden. Så det er en svært måte. Ja, absolutt. Vi ser det i det samme måde i Norge. Fokuset er på de som kan poste et sted til vår søsid, hvilke næsjoner som er foreigners, eller noe som er nødige næsjoner. Nå er det en ny dimension over de seneste årene, som jeg mennes, er faktet at næsjonene er gjennom ting som de ikke har gjennom i tid, og som trenger oss til å følge for det aktivitet når det tar stedet ut av bordene. Bordene i oss er det interna seguritetsserviseringen som gjør det. Det andre som kommer ut av det, er det lage nød for en forhållende koordination mellom interna seguritetsserviseringen og hva vi gjør inn i stedet. Du mennes generell, at det er en av cyber. Koldvården var 25 år siden, og det var et webbordet 25 år siden. Det var ingen koneksjoner, men det betyr at det hele det seneste kvartet av året har virkelig gammelt den måten vi kører og kommunikerer i måten som ingen hadde tatt om før. Er det hjelpig for serviseringen her at folk lever videre online? Ja, selvfølgelig. Men jeg tror at det her er en av kvartet som har vært interessant. Det er en bra svårighet og en bra hjelp. Vi bruker å fokusere, jeg tror at alle organisationer bruker å fokusere på neder. Du vil gjøre servædien på en annen individu fordi han eller siden må være et sted. Nå er alle data interessant, fordi hvis du har gode computer, vil du detectere den anomlige som kommer til en potensjøsrisk. Det er problemet med masse kollektjoner av data vs. masse servædien som var menet av det generelle. En intelligensiske organisation i dag bruker en ganske løsning på teknologi på å få veldig stort computer som kan bruke masse data som kan være kollektivt. Mange av de data er data som ikke er et sted. Det er data som kan være kollektivt fra telekommunikasjoner, metadata, hvem som heter hvem, etc. Men det er også data som er veldig avværende. Det intelligensiske organisationer er ikke de eneste som er kollektivt i data. Alle de mage med internet og Google som er de mest famige kan gjøre det. Da er det noe som kan være kollektivt at det masse kollektjoner av data besøker løsning, og at det har vært overrørt i disse løsninger som er veldig komplikte fra en teknologisk sted. Det er ikke det samme som omkring en løsning i en traditionell system. Jeg vil sørge på Mr. X, og du producer en file, og en judge ser på den, og ser på at det er ok. Hvis du skriver til en kommission en algoritm for å si at vi vil gjøre det, det er en stort aktivitet for å kontrollere. Det er det som skjønner publiken. Jeg er nødvendig å forstå det. Jeg er nødvendig, for det kan være løsning, og det kan være forstået. Jeg tror at vi har en sikkerhetsapparatist som en enormt hjelp, men vi må forstå kvaliteten av å forstå at det ekstraordinære multiplier som teknologiske forståelser ikke har vært forstået mellom organiseringen som bruker teknologisk og generell publik. Generell. For å follow-up på Jean-Marie der, during the time of the Snowden leaks, we often got the question, why do you have to do this mass collection of metadata, for eksempel? Why don't you just concentrate on the terrorists? That of course applies very well to those terrorists that you actually know from before. But the problem now is the terrorists you don't know about, and the threats you don't know about. And in order to find those threats in my view, threats in my view, it is very difficult to avoid collecting data more broadly. So how can we do that and maintain the trust of these societies? In my view there are three very important things there. First of all, it is intelligence activity, including foreign intelligence activity, has to be regulated by national law. There has to be a legal framework for what we do that is very well understood and in all parts of society. The second one is we need authorization mechanisms for the various efforts and the various methods that we have to use to do this. This also has to be legitimized in the societies that we live in. And the third element is oversight mechanisms. In Norway we have a very thorough oversight mechanism, which I appreciate very much. I find that very useful to what we're doing. It helps my people doing their job correctly and it gives legitimacy in the Norwegian society, both at the political level but also among the population. So if we are going to do these things that to some extent or is at least perceived intruding into private lives, we need to build that trust with those types of mechanisms. Thank you, Tom. I agree with Jelle on those three points. Obviously our lives will be much easier if all these terrorists and so on use the single system, badguys.com, and then we could just go there and cover that, but sadly they don't. And it would be slightly bizarre if all the advances in technology and the use of bulk data analysis, which are improving the performance of business, improving the healthcare delivery and so on, somehow national security won't allow to use it. And that would be a very odd thing to say, the most fundamental element of a government's responsibility can't use modern advanced technology. So I very much agree that we need to be able to move forward in this area but with the right level of regulation. The second thing I'd say, and you asked Espen, about whether moving onto a virtual life makes life easier, well, up to a point, because the way in which the technology companies have reacted in the wake of the Snowden leaks means that the level of cooperation between technology companies and intelligence agencies has gone down and that's added to the threat in some ways that we face, because the intelligence collection is not as effective as it was before. And the advances in technology mean that you could create complete no-go areas on the internet, which is just impossible for there to be any supervision or monitoring of what's happening on those systems.  It's the same on the internet. If you create a completely closed sector of the internet, which is completely impenetrable and impossible to monitor, you're creating, you may feel a bit better that if you use it, no one can access your bank account or no one can see what you're saying to your friends and family, but you're also creating the perfect environment for evil doers of whatever types they may be to go about their trade. This latter point is extremely relevant here, since I'm sure in the audience there are many people from the IT or telecom or service provider industry. How would you ideally like to see the relationship between the service you just led and them be? Well, I don't have a monopoly on wisdom on this. The technology companies have got serious interests that need to be respected. They're contributing hugely to the advances in modern society. I think there needs to be a serious exchange, a serious dialogue between the technology companies and governments. The attack we had in the UK about two years ago, where a soldier was killed by a couple of young thugs inspired by Islam. Well, there are exchanges on Facebook that could have revealed the air intentions, could have attracted surveillance towards those individuals and prevented that atrocity from being committed. I think the technology companies do want to contribute to wider public goods, but they've been seriously put off by some of the populist reactions to the leaks that came out from stone. We need to find a new balance in here. So there needs to be a proper dialogue. It needs to include all the elements that Shell was pointing to on the intelligence side. And on the technology company side, they need to be able to provide commitments on privacy. But that doesn't mean that they should be completely isolated from the agencies that are preserving our society's security. Very interesting. When John Podesta reported to President Obama recently, I think it was about 18 months ago, on the use of bulk data in government, Podesta highlighted the intelligence agencies as having the most advanced and sophisticated systems of protecting privacy in areas of use of bulk data, far, far advanced from those that commercial companies operate. And that's not bad for John Podesta to have said that in a report to President Obama in the wake of the Snowden leaks. So I just put that on the table as the sort of standards that we have. We in the security community care about privacy. I do sometimes have a concern that those in the privacy advocates, they just take security for granted and don't realize that it has to be worked for. I don't totally agree there because I do think that there's a big question on how you ensure security, whether you do it through a very centralized system of oversight, where of course there is no go area, there is no no go area, or whether you, in a world where if you weaken the systems to protect communication, the bad guys will also use them. And whether the future for security is not in having strong encryption that cannot, where there is no backdoor, there is no possibility of breaking that. So yes, it is a no go area, but it fragments the cyberspace and protects every actor. And that will also make life difficult for the bad guys. It's a different model. But I'm a little nervous that the notion that we need system that we can access, they will be accessed also by the bad guys. That's very important when you think of cyber warfare, where you can, through cyber attacks, you can kill a lot of people if you disrupt water distribution system, electrical and all the vital infrastructures, is the best way to protect the systems to have the capacity of the state to go everywhere. And so have the backdoors, or is it by making sure that there is a kind of gradual strengthening of encryption that will make it very difficult for anybody to exploit the weaknesses of the system. I know you have a view on this, but I'll open it up for the audience for a second. The first question is here. We have a microphone coming, and then it's Antoni Pleisig. Mohamed Jaffa from Kuwait. My question is for you, Sir John. How effective has the intelligence community been at propagating the message to the public that they are there for the protection and for the promotion of security? For the longest time, people didn't know about the agencies. There was a Snowden effect suddenly, and what you've written about in the Financial Times, what you're repeating now about encryption, that we're allowing the hoods to walk the streets with a mask, but we're not allowing the police and law enforcement to go into these streets. I think that's a very powerful message, but hasn't been spread enough in the social media. We'll collect a few questions, and Antoni Pleisig. Thank you very much, very interesting. I just think one issue that came out clearly in some of the lessons we need to learn from the post-911 period is perhaps lack of oversight and perhaps abuse by intelligence communities, and have we learned from these lessons? And for one, and the second question is, there is a difference between intelligence for the sake of national security and then intelligence for the sake of criminal prosecutions, which is a vital part of our response, because ultimately these terrorists are committing terrible crimes and they need to be brought to justice, but is there a blurring of lines between intelligence for national security and intelligence for law enforcement, and is that a good or a bad thing? Good one. Last question. Let me put you on the spot, John. I think we can all agree with what you said, that there needs to be a discussion about the supervision and oversight of intelligence agencies. But what specifically would you propose? OK, well, if I can have a first shot. You can. Certainly the first and third questions. I think on the first question, I think the era when a publicly funded institution could just operate completely behind closed doors, that's behind us. And I think those agencies that continued to work in that way were caught out by the Snowden revelations, the Snowden leaks, because they didn't have a body of public understanding about the positives that they were working to. I've certainly tried during my five years as chief of MI6 to open us up a little bit, to do it in public, through public speeches, through appearances, open appearances in front of our parliamentary committee, and also to involve more people from the media and from parliament and business, bring them inside our famous headquarters on the Thames, and to explain a bit more about what we do. And I think you have to, in a modern society, you have to earn the trust. You have to keep on building the trust. You can't just assume that trust. So we do have to adapt to this, very much so. In terms of the specific oversights and controls, in my time as chief, we saw a strengthening of the law, which enhanced the role of the parliamentary committee, so that they get right into operational detail. And it's quite bracing when you're up before Malcolm Rifkin and his committee to respond on how certain operations were managed, and whether they were effective enough. We've had a strengthening of the two judges that provide ongoing oversight, one of intelligence operations and the other interception operations. And they are expanding their role into areas like bulk data as well. And it's like having an ongoing judge-led inquiry into the work of the intelligence agencies. Now, I don't say we've got it perfect. It's not perfect for all time. But the combination of clear ministerial authorisations for what we do, judicial oversight of the legality of what we do, parliamentary oversight of the appropriateness and accountability for what we do, I think these are pretty strong measures in place to ensure that what we're doing is indeed in the public interest. As I said, I think the high levels of trust that we get from the UK, much higher than most of the other sectors of society, actually reflects that. Blurring of lines, is it happening? Is it a good or bad thing? And I would add, is it possible to avoid? Then why should we? Blurring of lines between the national surveillance and foreign intelligence. Is it intelligence and evidence collection, I think you were saying. Was that what you said, okay. So the question was on intelligence and evidence collection. Yeah, well, in terms of gathering evidence in Norway, that is solely the role of the internal services and the police. So we don't have any role in that at all. Our two major tasks here is to give warning in the cases that we can give warning or threats to the society, to the country. But also in general to collect the information that will help our politicians make better decisions. Realizing that information does not only come from open sources. It also comes from information that is not generally accessible. I, in our country, I don't see a blur of lines here. I think it's clearly distinguished by law. There is specific law regulating the police and the police security service activities. And there is a specific law regulating the work of the foreign intelligence agency. And in general, none of the information that we collect abroad can be used in proceedings nationally. On the blurring of lines, I think it would be a very dangerous thing. Because the whole idea of a judiciary process is that the accused has access to all the elements of the accusation. And an intelligence organization cannot divulge all its sources. And so it's really two different logics. And on the oversight, I think we're still badly lagging in democratic countries in terms of having effective oversight for signal intelligence. Because interception is one thing, but big data, management of mass of information, that requires a whole new level of sophistication, technological sophistication to supervise that. The supervisor needs to understand it. And that is not there. Let's take two more quick questions. One is here. The technologies which are being manufactured, the new programs are being introduced by the United States, or by British, or Norway, or the other countries who can really be brought into the world for the security point of the view. I'd like to know the panel, what's the concept on that. Yes, right. We had a question here. Countries in Europe are increasingly diverse. Hva er det som er fokuset på denne diversiteten for å be able to tap into all the resources of human intelligence that you can get, or you need to get? Hvordan går det? The lady back in the back here first. Fascinating panel, thank you so much. One thing that we haven't heard about is the role of human intelligence. How is that changing, particularly as part of the terrorist strategy that's homegrown. And I think the last one will be here. Actually, it's part of my question. Aren't we trying to rely too much on data and cyber intelligence, and putting completely aside human intelligence on the ground? And aren't we at threat on an organization that would intentionally not be on any form of social, whatever cyberspace places, and be completely in the dark until the moment they're going to hit? John, will you still need James Bond, or can you...? The film about the computer won't be as fun. James Bond is a great set of movies, but actually the reality is not individuals out there operating on their own, but very close teamwork. But I rather agree with this sense that there has been a big focus recently, partly because of Snowden, on signals intelligence.  And so human intelligence provides you with a quality and a feel for what is happening inside another organization, or a hostile, somebody who's hostile towards you, that signals intelligence doesn't provide the same degrees. But it's a combination of the two, and increasingly the two are working together. And any policymaker will want to know what is the policy analysis, what is the signals intelligence saying, and what is the human intelligence saying before they come to a decision. And just to make the point, the diversity point, I'm not sure quite what diversity you're referring to. But any successful organization these days has to be diverse in every regard, has to have a whole range of skills. You have to have professionalization within your organization on technology, on finance, and how you manage your talent. You need to draw from the full spectrum of society. There was a time, certainly when I first joined the intelligence service back at the end of the 1970s, women were a rarity, except as in support roles. Now women play an absolutely central role on the front line. And likewise people of different ethnic minorities and backgrounds. It's diverse teams provide a much stronger outcome than the monochrome teams do. Humans in this context, obviously not only operators out there, but also the people to interpret all the data. I guess the more information you have, the more it's necessary to have the human brain to actually understand what matters. Absolutely, and I would draw the attention to the fact. My agency is a multi-source intelligence agency. We do signals intelligence, we do other types of technical intelligence like network intelligence, imagery intelligence, open source intelligence is extremely important in this. So there is a multitude of different ways that we collect information. And as you point out, on top of this, it is the analytic process that puts all this together. And it's able both to put together a picture of the facts, but also to make predictions on what will happen in the future. Those are the very important roles of an intelligence agency. So there is more than just signals intelligence and human intelligence. But I fully agree with John that human intelligence is still going to be extremely important. And there are things that you cannot replace by technical means that needs to be done by humans in the future. Especially if you want to disrupt as well as inform. Thank you. We're coming towards an end. I'll give you the floor. Or I just want to say that the products that the services produce, of course, can be specific on a defined target. But also a very important analysis of larger trends. Some of that information might be very useful beyond the borders of the state that produce it. Maybe also for the global public good. The World Economic Forum is here to improve the state of the world, as we say. Is there any way, for instance, to go back to your UN background, is there a way to build on the collective intelligence that has been created by advanced intelligence services for more sort of long term global good? I think there is, because we are focused, I think, in this debate largely on tactical intelligence. Where you need to combine the humans and the sygian to know whether there is going to be an attack in Paris or Oslo. Or any other capital, London, any other capital. That's one thing. But then there is the understanding of the world, the prevention. And there is now a continuum between the kind of work that intelligence organizations can do with their computing power. The kind of work that private companies like Google can do with their own computing power. And the need of the general public, which does need to make the use of those data to be able to anticipate. To see that there is a situation deteriorating in that particular place. And that, since prevention is so much better than cure, how you can address that. And there I think we need to see how intelligence organization can work more cooperatively with the United Nations. Not just to provide tactical intelligence to peacekeepers so that they don't get killed by a terrorist attack. But strategic intelligence so that the United Nations, the world and globally can be more in a preventive mode than in a reactive mode. And that's in a way the most fundamental issue. Very last question. Is this an area where we can foresee some kind of public-private cooperation? Well, I wouldn't go as far as a genre, actually. I think if you want to have effective intelligence and security agencies. You have to accept that they're going to have to operate largely in secret. Accountably, but largely in secret. And although I'm very fond of the United Nations and you and I worked together in New York's genre in previous roles. But the United Nations is not a place where you can put in sensitive information and have reliability that it's going to stay secret. So you have to build a degree of a large degree of trust here. And you know, people's lives are at stake. We've talked about human intelligence penetrations. The individuals who do this work are phenomenally brave and committed individuals who are very exposed. And if a piece of information which only they could have access to becomes public. Then they get exposed and they get subject not just to arrest but quite often the potential of torture and death. So we are a huge responsibility of these people who are contributing to the defence of our societies. And we have to accept that one cost of this is that a lot of the information is going to have to remain secret. I think the futurologists have not been very successful in the last 15 years predicting what the next threats are going to be. I think we as intelligence agencies, we can try and contribute to the best understanding of trends and areas of instability and threats and so on. But above all we have to have the capability kept fresh and live and deployable quickly in order to react effectively to when new threats emerge. Thank you. Here at the World Economic Forum we do not predict but we do strategic foresight. It was really good to have this panel. Time was short. It was the first but not the last. Thank you to all three of you for speaking openly about this and thank you for the audience.


to generally a week or so in what's your read on this this team that you're a part of a week or so in something that I kind of already knew but extremely talented and I'm happy to finally be on this side of the line here I've been on the receiving end of a lot of good Yankees teams over the years and I'm happy to be on this side and then you shared a clubhouse for a short period of time with Corey Kluber a few years ago just what do you remember about watching him work and and would you admire about you know what he did on the mound or what he's capable of doing on the mound you know on the mound honestly it spoke for itself I mean he was completely it was lights out I mean he was the horse and you know for me what I admired off the field was you know the the diligence and what's he worked his consistency on the daily basis his professionalism and you know he didn't leave a lot of questions as to why he was as good as he was so I think that you know from his preparation and his work ethic and the way goes about his business it's very telling as to why he's had so much success I'll take the next one from Dan Martin what do you view your role here as being you know when you try to make the roster here and you know why did why did you choose the Yankees over whatever teams you might have also had offers from it yeah you know I view my role as someone who has the ability to play both corners of the outfield play first base DH when needed and you know provide the the left-handed power that you know the Yankees have you know been looking for I guess and you know for me I want to be available and a viable option at all those positions and all those in all those scenarios and able to in order to help and it's a you know for me the reason I chose the Yankees because I want to win a whole series I want to be sorry right now how do you get back to the form that you had a couple years ago I think it's health I think it's all health related I think that if I'm healthy I'm myself and I think that's the biggest key you know last year I had a couple soft tissue injuries the year before I had kind of a freak elbow deal and you know if I'm healthy now I'm on the field yeah I think that my number of my track record shows that I am a viable option I can help any team out there


Good morning from cold dark Iceland It's 9 a.m. Still pitch black. Sun doesn't come up till about 11 30 a.m. We landed last night at about midnight. We're gonna go to the blue lagoon. It's gonna be a lot of fun. I can't really imagine living in a place that is so dark all the time in the winter. The sun comes up at 11 30 a.m. right now. It is mid-December so we're close to the shortest day of the year and it goes back down at about 3 30 p.m. That's kind of crazy, but also cozy in a way. Lots of cuddle time here in Iceland. We're hoping to find some food and we figured there'd be some places open. It is 9 in the morning but a lot of these places are not open. We found the grocery store and it's open 24 hours. Yes! This is the stuff they were advertising on the airplane. He says give Iceland's secret to healthy living. This Icelandic grocery store pretty much has everything that you would see in a normal grocery store but the crazy thing is they really have to ship this stuff from far far away. Iceland is in the middle of nowhere and that's why it's very expensive. I'm a fan of the Icelandic yogurt. It's very thick and creamy, delicious. Music You're probably wondering why we're hitchhiking. Well the one bus that was leaving from our hotel to the Blue Lagoon left at like 8 30 a.m. We were not on that bus and there's no other buses from that hotel. So that's why we're doing this. Not because we're super cheap. No, just kidding. That's playing a factor in this because the buses to the Blue Lagoon are like $50. Also we wanted to have this romantic sunrise walk. Yeah, that's a good point. This is an adventure. These are the best days where you wake up and you're like we're just going to figure this out. We're going to see what happens. We're hoping it's going to be good and it usually always is good, right? Long to keep good attitude. That's right. If you ever want to hitchhike successfully, always put the cute girl out in front. They have a lot higher success rate. It's like ordering a drink at a crowded bar. Put the lady in front. Music All right, we have somebody who stopped. We're going to 43. We're trying to get to the Blue Lagoon. Thank you. Hello. How are you? Hi. Have fun. Yeah, great to meet you. Thank you. Bye-bye. Okay. Yep. We got it all. Bye-bye. All right. That was awesome. Our new friend, Osk. All right. 10 kilometers to the Blue Lagoon. We could run this. Oh, what? You want to give us a ride? Yeah. Yeah. Sweet. We didn't even have to ask. People here are so nice. Nice land. Get it? Hello. Nice land to the Blue Lagoon. Hi. Hi. How are you? I'm great. Thank you. All right. We made it. Wow.  She got her grandpa to stop and pick us up. So we booked our tickets to the Blue Lagoon in advance because they say to do that it's so popular. I'm not usually a fan of tourist traps. This is definitely one of them. Everybody pretty much goes from the airport to here on their layovers and back to the airport.  Oh, it feels so good. Oh, it's dreamy in here. This is pretty otherworldly out here. I'm a fan. Oh, it feels so good. It's the perfect temperature. It's cold outside, warm inside. This water is really salty because it comes from the ocean. And I just read a sign over there that says that this water is pumped up from 2,000 meters below the ground. Geothermal seawater. That's pretty neat.  Can I get some water, Ally? The water in Iceland really does taste delicious. I have no idea what silica is supposed to do for your face, but hopefully it's something good. Yeah, this is smooth. It feels like clay. Like clay dough. I think they said to leave it on for 10 minutes and then you look 10 years younger. I'm not wanting to go to spas and do fancy face stuff, but I kind of like this. Teamwork. Silica high five. Oh, yeah. Look, I got some silica on my nipple. It's going to make my nipple look 10 years younger. Can't wait. I think my mask is done. I feel younger. I feel warmer for sure. It's really windy out here. Iceland is known for its wind and it's definitely windy. But there's a sauna and a steam room and all sorts of other fun places go high when you get cold. Our $80 entry does include a free drink and I got a banana smoothie. Allie got prosecco. Cheers, Allie. Kiss and drink. You know, Allie, I've always been told that you shouldn't really drink alcohol in a hot tub. I guess I'm going to find by that Iceland. Everyone in here is drinking. I hate to say it, Allie, but it is time to go back to the airport. That was it for the blue lagoon, which was amazing. I loved it. I think you did too. Yeah, that place was super rad. It's definitely just visually stunning and it gives you a nice eye massage while your body is just relaxing. My voice even sounds a little calmer, right? Yeah, very calm. I'm relaxed down to the bone right now. Which is great because we're going straight to the airport and we're going to get on a long flight home back to Denver. Never before have I sat in a hot spring for five hours before a flight. This is going to be great.


Representative Rick Nolan will face a challenge from a fellow Democrat for his northeastern Minnesota congressional district in 2018. Former FBI counterterrorism analyst Leo Pfeiffer announced a bid for the DFL nomination over the weekend. Pfeiffer had been weighing a run in the eighth congressional district over the summer. The 33-year-old Pfeiffer was born in the district, currently lives in Isanti. She notes that the Democratic party in the region is hurting, especially after the 2016 election. President Donald Trump solidly captured the iron-range district, but Nolan held on to win a third term. The battleground district has been among the most expensive races in the country for several years. Republican challenger Pete Stalber is already in the race. If you've enjoyed this segment of Lakeland News, please consider making a tax-deductible contribution to Lakeland Public Television.


Hey everybody, this is Brett with Summit Auto, and today I am super excited to show you this brand new 2023 Jeep Wrangler four-door high-tide edition. It is in the hot color of Sting gray clear coat, paint code PDN on that one. It has the 3.6-liter Pentastar V6 engine, 285 horsepower, 260 foot-pounds of torque. It's going to get you 24 miles per gallon on the highway, 19 city, and an average of 21 miles per gallon. That's brought to you by the 8-speed automatic transmission. So the high-tide package is a brand new package for 2023. I've done a couple other videos on this package, so I'm going to go through most of it again on this one just because this one's a Sting gray. We're going to get right into it. If you like the video, remember to like, subscribe, and share on the YouTube Challenge is YouTube.com slash Summit Auto. So starting off, we get the LED lights, the LED headlamps, the LED running lights, the LED fog lamps. That's all standard on the high-tide edition. And you also get these gloss black inserts on the front bumper, which you'll see on the original window sticker when we take a look at that in just a second here. We're also going to turn all these lights on at the end of the video, so stick around for that. You get these seven-slotted grille, of course. You also get the high-tide stickers on the side. I've seen Jeep Charge 250 bucks to 495 bucks for stickers, just decals on the various Wranglers. You'll also notice that this one comes with the bigger wheels and tires. That's because it comes with the Extreme Recon 35-inch tire and wheel group, which comes with a lot of stuff. So that package in itself is $39.95. You get the fender flare extensions. You also get the BFG All-Terrain TAK02 tires. These are LT31570R17s. They come with these 17-inch by 8-inch beadlock-capable wheels.  The other thing you get is premium brakes, performance brakes on this one. You also get the rock rails, so the performance brakes are also part of the Extreme Recon package. You can take these doors off, of course. The high-tide package also gives you the gorilla glass for the windshield, and you can really only see the performance brakes in the back. It's the only difference. They got little slots on the rotors back there compared to the normal ones. Here's the original window sticker. I'm not going to go through everything, so feel free to pause this because this gets very tedious. Stingray, V6, 8-speed automatic transmission. The high-tide package is a $12,095 package, so you can see you get the Extreme Recon 35-inch tire group, which includes those tires, the wheels, the body-colored hardtop. That is a big deal. This hardtop and the front hardtop pieces are all the same color as the rest of the vehicle. That's a very expensive option. If you were to get that as a standalone option from the factory, you also get all the LED headlamps and everything, power-heated mirrors are also part of that high-tide package, remote keyless entry, anti-spin differential rear axle, the rear window defrost, you get the molding color bumper with the gloss black accents, all other floor mats, and the hinge gate reinforcement by Mopar, which is supposed to be part of that 35-inch Recon group. Then everything else on here, you get the technology group for $1,095, convenience group for $9.95, the 8.4 radio and premium audio group for $22.95, and the 8-speed automatic transmission for $42.50, the $5.25 for the cold air intake, total MSRP is $58.740. If you want to get your summit price in the upper right-hand part of the screen, it's a link to our website with rebates and incentives on this particular Jeep, three-year 36 bumper to bumper, five-year 60 powertrain, and then you get your miles per gallon and safety rating. So one thing I did is I priced out pretty much everything that the high-tide package gives you, and you can see everything on there from the Extreme Recon for $39.95, the color match hardtop is $28.95, anti-spin differential $7.95, LED headlights and fog lights are $14.95, Sunrider tops $8.95, tint windows $495, the Gorilla Glass is $295, all weather formats are $170. So this is a sport, this is based on a sport, it's not based on a sport S, but it gives you the power locks, windows and mirrors, and the total difference from a sport to a sport S is $2,665. So total improvements, now the other thing was I couldn't even get a price on the rock rails because those come standard on the Rubicon and you can't really add them to any other package, so they got to be worth something, $200, $300, $400, not really sure. But even without those, total improvements is $13,700. You look at the price of the high-tide, $12,095, I think it's definitely worth it. Get the all weather floor mats there, the power locks, power windows and everything. Let's take a quick look. One of the Easter eggs you're not going to find on every video on the high-tide or the Extreme Recon Group is that you get these extenders on the back brake lights and then you get Ralph for right and it's a little dog there, so right for Ralphie. And then you get Louis on the left, he's bulldog, left for Louis. You also get the camera extension on there with that hinge gate reinforcement as well. And that's just because it's a bigger tire, it's wider and it's heavier as well. Back storage area is pretty nice. You get the subwoofer back here, storage underneath for the bolts and everything. You also have the JL badge back here as well. You can take this hard top off, we actually did a demo, take all the bolts out, two quick disconnects. That video is in the upper right hand part of the screen and linked in the description below. You also get the LED license plate lights. Now this one just has the halogen lights and like I said we'll turn on all the lights and turn off all the lights in the picture studio so you can see that heated power mirrors. You get the enter and go system part of that convenience group. The black cloth interior driver seat height adjuster. They do have side airbags standard on the Wrangler now. Auto head lamps, power locks, power mirrors. You get the 7-inch LCD display. The leather wrap steering wheel, Bluetooth information center controls, cruise controls and audio controls on the back of the steering wheel as well. Tilt and telescopic steering wheel. If you ever wanted to know if your windshield is a gorilla glass, you got to look for the gorilla. Also it says Corning Gorilla Glass there. I'll show the back seats real quick. Get those headrests that can stay down for better visibility when nobody's riding back there and those seats go almost completely flat. Get the all-weather topographical floor mat back here as well. I like those a lot and child safety locks on the back doors. Note that you get those fender flare extensions on the back wheels as well. Keeps rocks from hitting up on the side of your vehicle but I think it's also there for state laws and stuff. Your tires can't stick out past those funders in most states. That's pretty much it. Let's turn on all those lights and turn off the lights inside the picture studio so you can see just how bright they are. I did this once and people were mad that I didn't turn off the lights in the picture studio so now I do this all the time. Actually there's your Sunrider top. It's like a soft top that goes on the front pieces there and then it folds open. You can easily fold it back closed. We actually did a demo on how to install that. That's in the right hand part of the screen as well. So I'm going to turn the lights off in just a second. So you can see just how bright those lights are. I would not recommend getting a Wrangler without the LED light group. I mean you can always add the LED lights later so it's not detrimental if you get one without the LED light group because you can add them but I would highly recommend upgrading them or just getting them from the factory because they are extremely bright. It's the nice bright kind of bluish purple light. Very very nice and you'll notice on the back here these are just normal halogen ones. License plate lights are LED but you can see that. So really really a nice ride and I wanted to get a video because Stingray is one of the it is the most popular color that we have on the Wranglers and everybody wants to see them. Everybody wants to see the different packages with Stingray on it so I like doing the videos and everybody seems to like this color the best. We can take a quick look under the hood as well. 3.6 liter Pentastar V6 engine 285 horsepower 260 foot pounds of torque there's look at that cold air intake and when you got all those lights on you can hear the wine the electrical wine on it. Anyways 24 miles per gallon highway 19 city average of 21. Now I don't know if you're going to get that with those big rims wheels and tires on here. You also get the 456 gears with the high tide package that's part of the extreme recon 35 inch tire and wheel group as well so you probably get a little bit worse than that.  This would be number one on my list because I don't need a Rubicon for what I do daily and but I like the stance I like the look I like all the options that come with the high tide package and I think it's probably one of the most one of the best packages Jeep has made on the Wranglers. So anyways thanks again for checking out the video remember to like, subscribe, and share on the YouTube channel. If you subscribe and click the bell notifications you'll get updates every time I do videos on our new and used inventory as well as access to one of the largest catalogs of vehicle walkarounds on YouTube. I'm not kidding I got over 9,000 videos on there almost 9,000 videos so lots and lots of vehicles on there to watch. In fact in a second you will see a link to subscribe to my YouTube channel on the upper left linked more Wrangler videos like this one the upper right link to this vehicle on our website in the lower left and a link to one of our latest YouTube videos in the lower right actually I'll link some of the hard top and door removal videos in the corners there so check all those out remember to like, subscribe, and share thanks again for checking out the video and thanks again.


Hi guys, welcome to the channel. It's makes from the next question. If it's your first time come across Yes, you know, please consider subscribing. By the way, don't forget to hit notification bell because it's only the way that you will get Those updates wherever I upload a new video and wherever something that we've cooked out is new you will be updated in today's video We are going to look at the latest announcement by the Ministry of Emitriation and Human Resource in the UAE. What is the announcement that we have? What is the latest development or what is the breaking news we have? The breaking news we have is what you call the midday break during what you call the summer periods Remember when we are talking about the summer periods in most of these Gulf countries, there's a period where it gets extremely hot It gets extremely hot from the time of 10 o'clock until 3 o'clock in that very situation Depending on which Gulf countries you are remember this exposes most of the people who are either either working what you call out to do people working those projects that are out to do to serious threats of life or Serious threats that may be caused by excessive heat or what called sunshine and sometimes this is going to lead to what we call heat stress Because of the excess sunshine that you get to work in and extreme heat that you get to work What now what are the latest developments in the UAE the UAE government Announces what we call the midday break for all people who are working in open places People were working the construction projects people were working in those areas that where they have Direct contact or direct contact with the sunshine or direct contact from the heat to avoid it The further if it of either each stress or that may be caused by what you call Too much sunshine. This becomes as the latest development and definitely as per the latest announcement It is going to begin from June 15 until September 15 between that period a worker is only allowed to work from 10 p.m. until From the break will be from 10 p.m. Until 3 30 p.m For people who are working out those for people working construction projects for people working in those projects that you Have to be outside or in open doors You are not allowed to work beyond to work within that time frame that is to be later Further to show you that the government the the means of hermetization and human resources is very serious with the issue It is also urgent the public It is also urgent the public to report any company or any project of the workers that are Fond working between that period of 10 p.m. Of 10 a.m. I beg your pardon of 10 a.m. Until 3 30 p.m That should be a break because by that time they consider him to be the sanction and the heat is too much to avoid disastrous effect Still also the ministry urges the workers or urges the employees and the workers to Abide by what is put in place or to abide by the time period that is being stupilated Or that is being put to them or guided to them by the ministry such that they do not fall force what you do not follow What you cause face what you call Reparations and when you talk about repercussions we definitely know this what you call Overcharge or what you call penalties that will be given to this company So between that period all people's work in the UAE in open places will not be allowed to work from 10 a.m. Until 3 30 p.m That is according to the last the directive that is coming from the ministry and between that period the public is also argued to report anyone who is violating the law was violating the rules that are being put in place Remember it is starting from June 15 with effect from June 15 until September 15 That is going to be the midi break from 10 a.m. Until 3 30 p.m Thank you so much for coming back to this channel is makes from the next creation by the way Don't forget to follow my tiktok account still for the latest updates wherever you get to miss out You can catch up my tiktok account for those followers. Thank you so much for the support see again in the next video It's makes for the next creation


My fellow Americans, again, when we are deluged by a blizzard of economic facts, figures and predictions. I hope you'll keep in mind that economic forecasting is far from a perfect science. If recent history is any guide, the experts have some explaining to do about what they told us had to happen, but never did. When our economic program first began in late 1981, many of the doom criers had warned it would push inflation and interest rates through the roof. It hasn't quite worked out that way. We inherited 12.4 percent inflation in 1980. Today it's 3.2, and the prime interest rate has dropped from over 21 percent to 11 percent. Last year those pessimists were back again.  One forecaster said we were on the brink of a major collapse. Another one of Wall Street's favorites made headlines when he said the recovery would be, quote, one of the weakest on record, unquote. I'm not trying to belabor a point, but these predictions just aren't panning out. Far from being weak, this recovery has been one of the strongest since the 1960s. More people are on the job than ever before in our history. From solid growth in housing to new frontiers in high technology, from a healthy recovery in real wages to a big improvement in productivity, and from record increases in venture capital to new highs in the stock market, America is moving forward, getting stronger and confounding everyone who said it can't be done. Well, like the little engine that could, it is being done. I only wish this would convince the naysayers to let up a little, but they don't seem willing. This year we're hearing a new variation of their gloomy refrain. Not about inflation or interest rates taking off, not about the recovery that won't happen, but about the recovery that can't last. Government deficits, we're told, will kill the recovery by draining capital needed by business to keep the economy expanding. I happen to believe those who underestimated the strength of this recovery may be wrong about the size of future deficits, too. But let's be clear that deficits do matter. The problem is, they were created by a pattern of overspending that began 50 years ago, and it's been hard to break. We must bring deficits down and work toward a balanced budget. The question is how? By spending cuts and economic growth, or by tax increases. I don't think you need to be an economist to understand the evidence. We don't face large deficits because you're not taxed enough. We face those deficits because government spends too much. Even with our tax reductions now in place, families are still being taxed at near-record peacetime levels. Yet as fast as taxes have gone up, spending has gone up even faster. In the past, raising taxes simply encouraged government to spend more. And since people had less money in their pockets to spend or save, economic growth was hurt. So fewer people were employed and able to pay taxes. Deficits went up, not down. The World Bank has released a study showing that countries with lower tax burdens have consistently enjoyed higher growth rates. Japan, where I recently visited, has had the lowest tax burden and the highest growth rates of all the developed nations. We must try harder to reduce spending. Back in 1967, as governor of California, I asked a group of business executives to survey the state bureaucracy and identify potential savings. They made about 2,000 recommendations, and we implemented most of them. Their work helped return fiscal integrity to a state that had been spending a million dollars a day it didn't have. Now, we're trying the same approach in Washington because, believe me, there's plenty of fat to cut. The Grace Commission, comprised of nearly 2,000 leaders from private industry, has just presented us a blueprint for reducing wasteful spending. The Commission recommended that the federal government upgrade its computer systems. This could save $4 billion. Tracking certain incorrect pension payments could save $4 billion. These are but two of some 2,500 examples that could save taxpayers billions and billions of dollars. And as the latest Senator Everett Dirksen said, a billion here, a billion there, pretty soon you're talking about real money. We should prepare for strong protests from Washington-based representatives of the many special interest groups. They will fear that implementing such management reforms means cuts for their favorite programs. What we're really talking about is doing things more efficiently without hurting people in need and without compromising America's security. Yes, we have a deficit problem, but let's be sensible about it. When warnings about deficits seem to be hysterical, just remember the lessons of recent history. Predictions are often wrong. Some may be using predictions to mask their favorite pastime, raising your taxes. Others may underestimate our ability to cut government down to size over time. Like death and taxes, the doom criers will always be with us. And they'll always be wrong about America until they realize progress begins with trusting the people. With your support, we'll make this year's batch of pessimists as wrong as last year's. Until next week, thanks for listening. God bless you.


All right, more factors, the schedule of reinforcement. So this is, we're gonna look at the continuous schedules and the fixed ratio schedules and a variable interval schedule, all right? So what I want you to notice here is that the difference in terms of the extinction burst and the rate at which the behavior goes away. So the idea behind the rate is the steepness of that extinction line. So the idea here, we've got behavior on extinction. So probability of response is at one level at baseline. We're gonna put it on extinction. Notice that it bumps up a little bit, not much, just a little bit, and it drops off really quick to near zero and stays there, right? That is, I mean, that's what you see with a continuous reinforcement schedule, so in a machine.  Press the button, get a reinforcement. Press the button, get a reinforcement, right? That's pretty standard. But if we use something a little bit different, if we use a fixed ratio schedule, which is on average, sorry, not average, but after a fixed number of responses, you will then get a reinforcer. So we could set up a pop machine to be an FR-5 to where that you'd have to hit that button five times before it delivers a pop, right? And you only put in your dollar 50, but you gotta press the button five times, okay? So we're gonna press that button five times. Notice what it does to the extinction burst. It causes it to go bigger. And it also delays that, the extinction doesn't happen as fast. It's not as steep. And it's close, but it's not quite as steep, right? Now let's watch what happens with an intermittent, so with another type of intermittent schedule, the variable interval. Look at that extinction burst, right? So that orange line now, so that extinction burst is way up there, right? It's really high. Took a while to get it up there, and look at how long it takes for that behavior to go away, right? So variable intervals, which is on average, X-out behavior will be reinforced after a certain amount of time has passed. So if you see a variable interval or a variable ratio, those things are really resistant to extinction. If you see a fixed ratio or a fixed interval, they're not quite as resistant to extinction as a variable one, but they're more resistant than a continuous schedule. Continuous schedules, behavior's easy to extinguish. Now you might ask the question, why? Well, if we recall back to 324, we didn't, your book covered something called the PRE, the partial reinforcement extinction effect. In a nutshell, there's like five different hypotheses along that are associated with the PRE, but the one that I subscribe to, the one that I think is the most valid, is the one that says the person is unable to realize or the animal is unable to realize that they are on extinction because if they have been on a variable schedule of reinforcement in the past, or an intermittent schedule, I should say. So if they've been on an intermittent schedule in the past, their behavior isn't reinforced every time. So now when you start extinction, they're not gonna realize that they're no longer gonna get reinforced. Why? Because they're already, their behavior wasn't reinforced every single time. So it takes a while for an organism or person to realize that they're on extinction if their behavior has been a on intermittent reinforcement in the past. Continuous, you know right away. You know the moment that soda machine isn't working because it's not giving you your pop and your pissed. So with continuous reinforcement, there is no PRE. There's no partial reinforcement extinction effect because it wasn't partially reinforced. It was continuously reinforced. And again, the one that I subscribe to is one of the people just basically not realizing not able to detect that they're on extinction. That's kind of what I feel about it.


Greetings! This is Luca Bertolomeo, responsible of the industrial and power conversion team in America. Today, I'm going to talk for a few minutes about the IO-Link solutions from SCMAC electronics. At first, let's introduce some basic definitions and what IO-Link actually is. IO-Link is a standard for industrial connectivity at a lower bid rate than the industrial Ethernet, and that is used to connect the mainstream of data to the end nodes, usually industrial sensors in a factory automation environment. The master represents the main controller, the device is the node that is controlled and monitored by the master, and the IO-DT is the IO device description providing the description of the sensor in an XML file. The demo we are presenting today is basically composed by two masters controlling two slaves. The master board is a combination of a nuclear board, in this case with a core M4 microcontroller, and a what we call P-nuclear board that can be easily plugged to the nuclear, and it has actually the actual IO-Link master chip, the L6360. We can stack more than one master, as in this case, both controlled by the same nuclear board. In this demo, we have added also an LCD showing the values of the sensors mounted on the two slaves, in this case temperature and humidity. We can easily understand that this configuration is a representation of the industry 4.0 concept, where the master is monitoring remote sensors. Now, let's talk about the end nodes, where ST can offer dedicated chip for IO-Link devices. The building concept is the same as the master, we have a nuclear board with X-nuclear on top. In this particular demo, we have two nodes. Actually, in the board on the right, we have an X-nuclear with L6362, our single channel IO-Link chip, and on the left, the newest L6364 dual channel transceiver. The L6364 has just been released. It comes with an embedded LDO and DCDC to simplify the design. All the protections for EMC immunity, reverse polarity, over-temperature and overload in a tiny package, QFN20, 4x4x1, 4mmx4mmx1mm, and even in chip scale package, 2.5mmx2.5mm. For your information, please visit our website. Thank you very much.


The study presents a new type of radiative cooler made from a polymethylmethacrylate film with a micropore array and random nanopores, which is highly efficient and low cost for all day and all climates cooling. This article was authored by Tong Wang, Yi Wu, Lan Xia, and others.