Hi everyone. Thank you for attending. This is the 11 o'clock session in our after the harvest preservation access and researcher services of the 2016 end of term web archive. So we'll talk about what that is and we'll kick it off and we have plenty of time for questions and discussion at the end. So there's been a good bit of attention about the preservation of government and presidential web content due to the transition and talk about some of the issues around that at the end and encourage folks to comment and feedback. All right. Hi everybody. So I'm Abby Grotke from the Library of Congress and we have Jefferson Bailey from Internet Archive and Mark Phillips from University of North Texas Libraries and we are three of the many partners, many thousands of partners. Now that's an inside joke. We have about eight partners that we'll talk about, partner institutions helping build this archive. So we're going to talk a little bit about the history of the archive and what we're doing now and also what our plans are for thinking about researcher access to the collections. So we like to say it began a long time ago, far, far away in Canberra in 2006 I think or 2008. Okay. And we were meeting at the International Internet Preservation Consortium meetings during that time and we had just gotten the word that our colleagues at the National Archives who are in the room but we're not going to do an end of term dot gov crawl of or crawl of the dot gov domain as they had done in 2004. So a number of us sitting around the table we were already doing archiving of this nature our own efforts in this area. We just looked at each other and said well somebody's got to do it. So at that time the Internet Archive, Library of Congress, California Digital Library, University of North Texas, Government Printing Office at the time, now they're the Government Publishing Office, gathered together to form the end of term archive. And at the time we're all IAPC members, we're also all end-it partner and DSA members as well. So we were already working together on a number of projects this just seemed like a natural fit. So like I said we were already doing a bit of government crawling our own. I won't go into all the details of this but basically there's a lot of activity from a number of institutions around archiving dot gov. We like to say the U.S. domain is not easily defined neither is the dot gov domain. So various organizations have taken different slices of it depending on their research interests and needs. But by coming together we could really build a community around this and expand our collections. So there were again also some other community efforts and and more in recent years there's something that we're a part of the federal web archiving group. There's other research projects and citizenprojects to document dot gov. So the goals were to again work collaboratively to preserve the government web document the federal agency's presence during a time of presidential transition and enhance our own research collections. Part of the piece of this is that we're all doing collecting but then we bring the archive together and then make preservation copies and share it with partners. So there's more than one copy available of the archive. We also wanted to raise awareness and we can talk a little bit more about this year raising the most awareness in terms of outreach and and making people aware of the importance of preserving government information and web archiving. And we also wanted to use the data to engage with researchers who involved in web archiving and other subject experts. So the distribution of work has changed depending on the year. We started in 2008. We did another archive in 2012 and again we've gathered again for this end of term transition project. So over time we've adjusted who's doing what and what pieces of the web we're all crawling but you can get a sense of of the things that need to be done. Mostly we've been focused on collecting and preserving but we are looking more at access and making things available which Jefferson will talk about a little bit later. But we all sort of pull together collect content. Some of us work on the access side. Some of us work on coordinating volunteers that we'll talk about in a moment. Other people are extracting metadata, archiving social media, things like that. So we have a lot of funding. No, no, we have no funding for this project. We have no grants that are currently supporting this activity. We're all sort of contributing our own institutional resources as a part of our own web archiving program. So we like to joke that, you know, it would be nice if we had a lot of funding coming in but actually there's only a handful of us really committing resources at our own institutions for this. It's not to mean we won't eventually get some funding for some aspects of it and we can talk about that maybe in the Q&A. So defining the web presence has been one of the biggest challenges. We started with the 2008 archive with a few data sets. One was the crawl that NARA had done in 2004. So we had access to that list. We had a couple other lists of seed URLs which was the starting point for the crawler. And we've built, we've grown that list over the years. So we start with bulk lists of domains. There's not one big list that we can consult that has everything. So it's been a bit of a mishmash trying to find all the sources. It's gotten a little bit easier this time around. We have access to more from data.gov and USA.gov. And we actually for the first time this year have received a list of URLs from Google. So they have provided a list of, is that how to articulate what they gave us? Yeah, a list of URLs of anything.gov that they were aware of. So all of this together becomes a starting point. But then we also rely on other folks to help us identify specific things that are of concern to subject experts and the community at large. So a big part of what we're doing is, you know, we have this bulk list but we also engage the community. We've done a really great job this year. We're really excited that we got some press in the New York Times a few weeks ago. One of our partners, Debbie Rubina, who participated in 2012, she actually got a class of hers at Pratt to identify social media content for us. She gathered together a group of subject experts in New York a couple weeks ago and also today, I think right now, she's holding a second one. We're also seeing other events sprouting up that we really haven't done anything to create. So these are coming out of community interest in the project.  So it's been really fun and exciting for us to see the community engage around the materials this year. We also got some more press today, so we expect more interest. There was an article in the Library Journal and also on Motherer Board, a vice publication today. So we're getting a lot of interest this year, which we wish for the quieter times sometimes that we didn't have as much attention on the project. So the volunteer contributions we've had since the beginning, 2008, we had about 500 nominations from 26 nominators. 2012, that increased greatly, and then we've just updated our numbers. So far, we expect this to increase as we get closer to the inauguration. So we'll talk a little bit about the schedule later on. So government websites can be pretty much anything we've discovered in this project. We have .gov. That's an easy one. But there's also a lot on .com and .edu that we discovered in some of the earlier projects that aren't really showing up on some of the lists that we have access to. So that's where it becomes really important that we have the community help us identify some of this content. Oh, Jefferson has good lingo for these slides, and I can't remember what it was. We sometimes jump around, who does the slides? You want to jump in and say, just they're invasive. A web of femorality, sorry. Some websites we don't have access to again in the public list. They're not listed anywhere. So having users who are familiar with this content has been really important to help identify it. There's certain content we can't archive in terms of things behind passwords and logins and databases are a problem, and there's been a lot of interest this year particularly in that and in data sets. There's just a lot. There's a lot of government content. So trying to figure out what it is we need to be preserving during this time and trying to ensure that we are doing a good job is tricky. So the end of term archive, the 2008 and 2012 archives are available through a portal that the California Digital Library is hosting, Internet Archive is hosting the archive content, but the CDL interface does the metadata and search and browse. We recognize that this is probably a bit outdated and we need to do a little bit better. Our partner, our old partner Tracy Seneca is here and she helped us set this up, but that was a number of years ago. So particularly now that there's a lot more interest in this content and making it accessible to research use, we need to do a better job on the access end. Just to mention a couple of other efforts, we have a Twitter account that you can follow to see updates from the project and also there's been other papers published around the work that our volunteers have done, so it's really exciting to see and also think about what might come out of some of these data thons or hackathons or nominateathons, whatever we're calling them. There's also a number of other efforts around this time that are related. The Internet Archive has done an election crowdsource collection, other institutions like the Library of Congresses. We also archive campaign websites, it's separate from this archive but it's sort of all related and I hear the Internet Archive is also doing some work with the White House in terms of documenting the web and social media data as a part of the transition process, so I'm sure Jefferson can answer questions about that later. So handing it off to Mark now to talk a little bit about what we know about the archive we have collected so far. So one of the things that was kind of interesting about this collection is so we tend to get together for the identification for the capturing and we do a big data transfer. Any of the institutions can take a full copy of all of the data, LC takes a copy, the Internet Archive takes a full copy and UNT takes a full copy and then we kind of wait for three years and go about our normal lives and come back but one of the things we kept getting asked was well now that you have kind of longitudinal data, you have 2008 and 2012, surely you guys you've learned a lot and you can tell us what's changed and we don't really have a lot of those numbers. We did a little bit of kind of exploratory research on this for paper this summer at the Web Archives and Digital Libraries workshop around JCDL and that's what a little bit of this is going to be presenting on. But just some of the numbers of the archives, the 2008 is probably the set that we've actually done the most work with. There was a research grant that UNT got to look at classification of the Web Archive and we actually got to dig a little bit into that. But the full 2012 was actually quite a bit larger than the 2008. One of the questions we get asked a lot of time is who coordinates all the crawling so that you guys aren't duplicating effort and when we say no one really is, we kind of just do our own thing and everyone says but you're wasting all of this effort. One of the things we looked at was just PDF content that we had between the 2008 and 2012 and so the big pie chart in the red and blue is the PDF content that was red is the stuff that was not present in 2012 that was present in 2008. So missing content from the archive and then the blue little slice is the amount, the content that we found PDF content in 2012 that was there in 2008. So it's a pretty small set of the pie and this wasn't based on the URLs. It was actually based on the content, content hashes of the files. So the files could have migrated to different parts of the federal web and so there was actually quite a bit that wasn't available just PDF content. And then when we look at the overlap and how much we crawl, so the green, so the blue pie chart is the amount of content that is unique to the Internet Archive in the 2000 or in all of the crawls and it's only a small slice that's actually duplicative of other archives and you see that with actually all of ours. So the more we crawl, the better picture we get. There's overlap but it's the good kind of overlap, it's kind of reinforcing content that we're not getting from others. We also got asked when did you guys crawl and I think this kind of gets into more important ideas on especially these really large collaborations on collection and then you actually have a researcher who wants to use this collection and they have all these questions like when did you crawl it, how did you crawl it, what did you do and a lot of this we didn't really have great numbers on but just this is a nice little graphic of the 2008 crawling process in the 2012. So 2008 was different than 2012 and you see the big green spike which was content that was captured right after the inauguration and then when we went to 2012 and there wasn't a new or there wasn't a change in office we had a little bit different crawling pattern because we knew there wouldn't be the same kind of volatility that we expected from the years with the transition and so I'm sure our graphs will look more like the green with a quite a big spike after the inauguration. We've been doing kind of a slow burn crawl going up into it and then there'll be a spike of activity as we go but a little bit of the breakdown but looking between the two. So the 2008 collection and the 2012 they're roughly the same amount of top level domains, the .coms, .govs, .mills but there's there's only 225 that we have in common between the two so there's some outliers that are kind of interesting and weird. When we start to look at the domain names themselves you see that we obviously have more domain names than in 2012 and that there's actually not a lot I mean there's a lot but you would I would I always expected there to be more overlap in the domains but when you go down to subdomains you get even even more and surprisingly not as much overlap and so you really do see that these these two collections as the web evolves and as the the federal government continued to continued and continues to use the web as a vehicle to communicate its goings on you see kind of this just more and more content that goes out there. We looked a little bit at the biggest change and some of this was planned so one of the things that we did in 2012 was we really started to capture social media so there are a lot more .coms there are a lot more of the the the non .gov non .mil we also said we really need to do a better job of capturing the .mil content we had gotten some of it in 2008 but we really focused quite a bit more so you'll actually see we captured 484 percent more .com content in 2012 than we did in 2008 we actually went down and .gov content which is weird and then we had quite a bit of a bump in the amount of .mil content and then we had this the .ly we had a huge jump in the amount of content and we we actually saw a lot of evidence of one of the things that happened between 2008 and 2012 was link shortners and we hadn't really had a whole lot of evidence of that and then suddenly in the 2012 you see that all over the place so our two largest changing sets are .ly and ME and GL and these are all variations on link shortening which is what's really kind of an interesting phenomenon that when we look at the web and we look at the web archives we know but we don't necessarily think we're going to see in all of this content the biggest when we just look at the .gov and the .mil content we see the the biggest change we had was in the the house and the senate or sorry not the biggest change but like the the top the top sets and you can see the change over time the biggest ones you see we have osd.mil and navy.mil and this kind of goes along with the idea that we said we would capture more .mil and we can show that yes we we did improve that and then we gained quite a bit in the house and senate because of some of the different ways that we were calling that over time as well. Some interesting things to look at are also things that existed in um 2008 that weren't in 2000 that domains that just didn't exist and and not only just domains but like domains that had lots of content there and sometime and usually this is really well planned um you there was there were some initiatives that went through and have gone through to reduce kind of the the growth of the domains in the federal government and reduce and make it simpler um and you see some of the effort there but you see um the like geodata.gov got folded into some other work um there's uh a number of others and these are the the URLs the number of URLs that um were present in the 2008 that there are no traces of this domain anywhere in the 2012 content um which is kind of interesting. The other thing that happens then is content that's new and so these are the the new parties to this to the set and so you have a lot of the .mil content that we weren't getting and then you have a lot of the initiatives and like if you're familiar with the obama administration which I'm just slightly as kind of looking at this you see some of the things like the transparency.gov and some of the initiatives that we kind of associate with that administration coming in and becoming more um more visible in the archive and so as we go through and and look at the 2016 once we're set and done with that we'll be able to actually start to look at this longitudinally over three different sets um we wish we had you know more more sets in between but you know at least we have these four um four-year data sets as we go forward but um I will turn over to Jefferson now. Hi uh so yeah one of the things that we have been trying to do especially because it is this longitudinal snapshot ish it has some organic character to the end of term collections uh is figure out how to support researcher access in a variety of ways so not just uh computational analysis which obviously is growing in popularity uh but also just insight to some of the things that Mark mentioned about like provenance uh capture information uh and information about the crawl beyond just uh replay of the web pages so one of the projects that we did uh started about two years ago or so uh was work uh in providing uh working with a third party which is uh Altascale which is a sort of Hadoop in the cloud service provider uh the people that created Hadoop at Yahoo spun off formed Altascale uh and they do a lot of uh support of data mining projects and computational infrastructures uh for research use uh and so we extracted a lot of the .gov content including a good bit of uh the end of term collections uh put 100 terabytes into their research cluster uh and then waited for people to show up uh and the build it and they will come model maybe not yet quite mature enough for data mining research at least in the sort of academic social science community uh but we did have uh at least three or four users probably uh the most successful ones were uh political science department at University of Washington which does a lot of poly informatics and is already doing data mining uh of government content legislative and and digitized materials at scale uh and Rutgers which is looking at uh the sort of uh communications and social aspects of uh government content and change over time so uh they have both published on their papers and looked at things like uh term frequency changes over the course uh of uh you know the two end of term collections uh how uh government properties around specific topics uh emerge, disappear, content changes, content drift um so there are a couple publications out there if you look for like end of term or .gov data mining um and there are there are good examples of this uh but we haven't necessarily gotten the uptake we would have expected especially since this was a fully subsidized project people could basically log in use the data uh all the compute was also subsidized uh by all to scale so it was basically uh come and use the infrastructure and I think there's still a lot of hurdles for all of us to get over as far as providing the sort of support mechanisms the educational uh aspects the training even just like account administration uh of using data mining platforms uh so I think there's work to do there but we've certainly seen a lot more interest and gotten a number of researcher emails already and you know we've really only started crawling maybe a month or two ago so I think there'll be a lot more of this type of research in the in the future another way we're trying to give access to researchers is through derived data sets so for people that don't want to deal with 100 plus 200 terabyte collections or don't have the infrastructure to take a copy of that uh we will do data mining internally in our own cluster uh and try to create data sets that can inform specific type of research so uh there's sort of extract certain metadata from each individual resource like page title uh links anchor text things like that and put it in a small much smaller file that still contains uh useful information for data mining across the whole collection uh but as much easier to deal with uh we also do link graph files uh network analysis is quite popular so this is uh what links to what with the timestamp and you can of course track that uh over time and there's been a couple of efforts around this with uh the Canadian government content uh which we've worked with some folks in Canada on and there's uh if you go to webarchives.ca there's a good network analysis of Canadian political parties it's a little more political parties not necessarily government uh but you see how uh departments and agencies link to each other and then don't and then get in fights and stop linking to each other uh and so forth so graph analysis is is super popular as far as web resources over time uh and then we also extract uh named entities so uh that's people places organizations and those names and all of these of course are associated with timestamps they're associated with the URL that they came from um so you can do data mining like that and these can be delivered usually is JSON files that people can interact with and we've also been uh building APIs on top of them uh the other another angle of research support is sort of uh the more hackathon community uh oriented model so we do uh work a good bit with archives unleashed which is uh mostly NSF funded uh project to get researchers to use web archives more we had an event at Library of Congress uh in in March June uh and one in University of Toronto I guess was March uh so two last year we'll have at least two uh coming up in uh next year and a lot of these we use the .gov data sets not all 100 plus terabytes but smaller portions of it like just White House dot gov or things like that uh that people can work on locally at their laptops with uh engineers and archivist and and collection people there in the room with them so those have been super successful uh there's web archive CA uh and we've also supported similar style hackathons using .gov data uh in Europe so the .gov stuff is public domain so it's very easy to give out to give to people uh and gets around a lot of the issues with trying to get permissions or rights or whatever uh so a lot of hackathons that are doing uh working with web archives end up using the .gov stuff uh so a semi semi affiliated but I figure I'd mention it uh is uh a lot of this the site search capabilities that we're putting on way back machine at internet archives so web-beta.archive.org uh and some of the things there are driven by the same desires to give information insight and provenance to captures um and that is useful for .gov so uh one thing here on the left is there uh APIs around capture information uh at a host and domain level so for instance here like justice dot gov or White House dot gov uh you can actually hit this end point and look at certain MIME type the number of MIME type captures uh per year as well as information like is it a new capture or is it a revisit so something we already had that hadn't changed um and so that's super useful for people that are interested in looking at a domain change over time uh and then there's similar visuals uh on top of each domain so graphs around how much content was image or how much was media uh and so uh there's a good bit of those we've also been doing uh extraction projects uh for specific uh domain level or even host or sub-domain level uh around specific type of content that people would be more interested in uh so we have a PowerPoint and PDF search and it's basic faceted search you can look by the domain the year uh the MIME type uh and then do uh a sort of keyword searches kind of thing which is mostly running on anchor and meta tag and title text so it's not necessarily full content text but once you start mining across domain and year and content type you can get uh pretty good search results um other extracted special collections so this is one that we did for our 20th anniversary uh which was extracting every PowerPoint from the dot mill web domain so if you're interested in looking at military PowerPoints uh there's like 50,000 of them in this collection um all associated with uh hosts that they were captured from so you get some pretty insane graphics so I I it was it was there's a great article about military PowerPoints uh if you search for Paul Ford military PowerPoints uh and it's just this sort of mind boggling mix of uh of war bureaucracy and in PowerPoint culture and I have no idea where that ends up but it ends up somewhere very weird um so this year uh so for the EOT 2016 we actually had a number of new partners join uh so the core partners of course remain uh but George Washington University Libraries which is here in town is uh has built the social feed manager tool it's talked about a little bit in the last session um they are using this as an API based capture method so they're not crawling they're hitting like Twitter and Weibo and the not for government but uh Tumblr and a couple others uh and doing social media capture via API as part of the project so that's super cool and exciting uh Stanford University Libraries which has a big government documents program is coordinating a lot of other FDLPs and GovDoc libraries uh to contribute to the to the seed the the crowdsourced mining method uh and then the federal government web archiving working group has also been contributing um uh they have helped us in occasions like when the Senate blocks our crawlers which happens quite often they have good connections to the congressional body so they sometimes help when we encounter technical difficulties on the on the server side uh so our time frame you know we sort of kicked off in the summer we have been having regular calls regular meetings lots of outreach especially around the public nomination of URLs we've all been crawling for a good while now uh and the sort of time frame for the crawling is that will stop before the transition the day before the transition and start uh the day after so that there's a little segmentation between the pre administration change crawl and the post administration change crawl and it'll run a couple months after that so there should be uh a good documentation of change at least immediate change uh once the uh administration turns over uh it'll take a little while for the full tech search and metadata and get it into the public access portal but all that should happen uh sort of mid next year uh and I'm excited at least to explore other research opportunities uh so what have we thought about this year uh expanding acquisition I mentioned the API based harvest so we're using a number of different crawling mechanisms uh that's not just regular link hop crawling uh but also browser automation, browser based crawling, the API captures so there's definitely uh uh sort of uh panoply of crawling strategies that we're doing a lot more of which a lot of us are doing you know in our day to day uh capacity anyway we're exploring some of the things like the new search tools, new indexing tools so we'll probably do uh some language analysis to see what type of uh you know the volume of sort of Spanish language content on the dot gov domain uh which is also something we're working on uh we've seen a lot more community engagement around nominating seeds but we've also had a good bit of interest from the federal government itself as well as uh for helping us out get seeds so we've been using things like the U.S. digital registry API to get all the social media accounts uh a number of other government APIs uh some of which have just they've given us dumps of the content uh so we've seen uh those you know the seed nominations and how we discover things and Abby mentioned that Google was interested in the project and it's also helped out uh we've been getting just much more stuff to crawl uh which is exciting uh we've also seen more educational opportunities uh we mentioned the Pratt class but there's there will be a couple of other classes at other LIS programs uh or undergraduate programs that are going to be talking about dot gov uh in the into term project and looking at you know government change and how it's represented on the web uh and then researcher engagement so I've mentioned most of these already so I'll tie it up so that we can uh chat a bit now uh what are the we've talked about all the positives so what are the challenges uh you know content is complex there's much more dynamic content on the web uh than there than there was for eight years ago uh some of that is challenging to capture with you know the with scalable crawling technologies uh there's obviously just much more content on the web uh the social media registry alone had over 10,000 registered social media accounts for government agencies and those are just the people that bothered to register uh with the gsa registry which is probably not all of them so uh that's a pretty mind boggling number itself uh and obviously it's uh it's a best effort what we can do with our time and and resources and and such so uh there's not necessarily a high degree of qa beyond uh the automated qa methods that a lot of us use uh already there's a lot more partners so a lot more partner management and project management work uh and a lot more seeds uh so yeah and uh technical and time limitations obviously the the presidential change will happen regardless of our crawling strategies um so there are some challenges uh uh the uh what we have as far as seed list uh I think we have over about over 200,000 unique domains that we know about that are in the crawler uh google gave us a very big index dump that we haven't finished parsing yet uh but that's url specific it's not domains so the domains are basically set up to scope in subdomains scope in directories and all that sort of thing uh so I think we'll have a very definitive uh list we also mine a number of search engines the global way back historical uh as well as third party sites uh and we get donated list of uh domain registries so we're not lacking in seeds I'll say that uh how you can help uh judicial branch websites uh sometimes we've heard from a number of people around the uh environmental and climate data sets this year uh we were getting a very good capture of data dot gov but there are sometimes ftp servers uh are other directories that the crawler might not discover because they're hidden or their url is generated in a really wanky way um so if there are sort of sub directories are very hard to find or many hops off uh that have rich content in them even if that content is not necessarily uh you know direct links uh those things uh are very useful to identify we've had a lot of back and forth around gov sites on non dot gov um and that's a judgment call with some of those like the frb's federal reserve banks are not dot gov but clearly their government entities uh national parks are similar so uh the more nominations the better and we'll probably just crawl it all anyway so it might as well nominate it um so there is a nomination form here's the url you can probably google it to you uh and it does allow for dedupe so if somebody's nominated something uh you know you'll know that as well as adding some metadata so that'll be useful for when uh this all ends up going into the portal um so what's our plan we're crawling as much as possible and we'll probably crawl even more uh as the as january 20th comes up uh access uh there are i think obviously there's the portal for looking at the captured pages and sites um but i think there's other access methods that we'll think about for this year uh we do share all our data across the partners and that's uh open for sharing with others as well uh and then there's regular communication and outreach so we did get some uh press today there's a the mother board article in a library journal article so it's been really interesting to have uh the media entities reach out to us i'll say one uh can i say one of the challenges one of the challenges is that some institutions may have some political sensitivities around uh framing this project entirely as a um hysterical hysteria driven rescue job due to uh imminent changes so this project was predicated on the idea that uh web content does change drastically at every presidential administration certainly this upcoming presidential change uh given past statements has even more potential for volatility and immediate disappearance and politically driven ephemerality instead of just benign neglect ephemerality um but sort of talking to the media about that has been has been interesting uh because i think it's it's it's a valid point but it's also one that is informs the project but does not necessarily uh drive the project outright so i think that'll be an interesting uh point for discussion hopefully so that's it there thanks


Hi, I'm Wayne Bentie, school teacher and a frequent user of the IRD portal. As a teacher, I try to stay open to learning new and better ways to accomplish tasks. The IRD portal is a perfect example. I use it at least three times a year for filing my taxes and checking to ensure that all is accurate and properly saved. At first, I was reluctant about using the portal, but I had to follow the advice I give my students. Go ahead and give it your best shot. You'll figure it out and I did just that. All my information stored securely. It's user-friendly, very reliable and takes much less time than the old paper method. I gave the IRD portal an A+.


What's good, George Boros back again with another video.  Very entertaining. We had some very great segments throughout the show. Promo segments throughout the show, had some good in ring wrestling. Great storylines progressing into WrestleMania and they ended it off in such a fantastic way. We're going to talk about some of the highlights tonight. I can't go into great detail in everything because you got to go check out some of the highlights from this show, man. This was this felt like a WrestleMania go home show for sure. Chicago was lit. The crowd was electric throughout the entirety of the show. Some good segments. I'm here for it. But we got to talk about the most noticeable stuff, the stuff that really stuck home today or tonight. And we're going to get right into it because, man, this was fantastic. So they start off the show with Cody coming out there to cut a promo. He basically let it be known how he feels and what Roman has said on the podcast with Pat McAfee were on his show and stuff like that.  Some of the stuff that I really wish he would have told them in person when he's seen them these few weeks.  He destroyed their Wankfest because he won the Royal Rumble and he messed up everything for them. Cool. Then the Rock pops up. The Rock was only advertised to show up on next week's Monday Night Raw to go home show in Brooklyn, but he showed up. Crowd goes crazy. It's a huge pop. He gets in there, crouching.  Rock comes out there. They're having a little standoff. Rock puts his hands behind his back. He steps up to Cody and he whispers something in his ear. And then he walks away. Cody's looking confused, dejected and shout out to everyone that was able to catch it, that watched it back on social media over and over and over. We didn't know what he said at the time, but essentially what the Rock said, he basically said, I'm going to make you bleed tonight. And Cody looked confused and dejected and just his reaction. So we didn't know. So they come back from commercial break. One of the interviewers in the back asked what the Rock said. What the Rock had said to Cody. And the Rock said, you go ask Cody what I said. So in another segment in the show, they asked Cody, what did the Rock say to you? And basically Cody said, I'm not going to say what he said, but just know it's not going to happen like you think it will. So it kind of confirmed that that's what the Rock was saying that he was going to make Cody bleed tonight. So, but that's not even just where things really pick up and pick up towards the end of the show. But we got to talk about the CM Punk, Seth Rollins, Drew McIntyre segment, Chef's Kiss.   We all knew CM Punk was going to be there tonight. Drew McIntyre out here trolling on social media, trolling CM Punk once again, doing some of his best work, best heel work. Love it. CM Punk comes out there. Huge chat, huge pop. And I love CM Punk because CM Punk gets straight to the business.  He's going to tell you how he feels. So he comes back and he lets it be known.  He sends shots at Roman Reigns. He let him know he's like, whenever you're coming down on your mountain and I'm coming up that same mountain, we'll cross paths. I'm like, I love that. Planning seeds for the future. Love that. Then he even mentioned the Rock. He's like, yeah, the Rock hasn't really said my name. You want to know why he hasn't said my name? Because 10 years ago, I told him his arms are not long enough to punch with God, to punch with God. Like, I like that the, that, that tie back to that infamous promo they had where he said your long, your arms ain't long enough to, to punch with God. You know what I'm saying? Like you can't hang with me. So I like how he, he mentioned the Rock. He said, Rock hasn't mentioned me because he knows that this is not the smoke he wants. I like, he mentioned him. Then he mentioned Seth. And you know, he said there's no love lost there. And you know, he, you know, he has his platform heels and all this other stuff, wearing his wife's clothes, whatever, essentially a joke, but he's not really concerned with him. You know, like there's no love lost there. That's cool, whatever it is, what it is. And then he got to Drew. And he got to Drew and that's when business picked up because Drew has been saying his name a lot on social media then drew music hit, drew music hit.  You know, he likes to type and say things, but I like to fight. So I may have one arm, but if you got something to say, Drew in Chicago, we handle it in the street. So what's he going to do? Drew comes out there. And you know, this is why I love seeing him pump because once again, he doesn't give an F.  We don't want to hear this. Cut his music before Drew could even say anything. He said, hey, enough of that talking.  Chef's kiss. Love that. Just straight to the point.  What's up? What are we talking about? Love that. Love that so much.   I don't care.  Let's go. Then Drew goes all the way to the other side and then he was talking about the merch he has, the new shirt he has. And he said at the top, you see where it says I entered CM Punk as one of the checklists. And then CM Punk fired back. He's like, I never needed to put another man's name on a t-shirt to sell it.  I'll lay on the mat. Get in here, bro. I'm a one-on man. Get in the ring. What are you waiting for? You just talking. I love it. Seth Rollin comes out there. Seth Rollin comes out there. He's like, yo, yo, yo, yo, what are we doing? What y'all over here bickering and arguing about? What's going on here? You know what I'm saying? Y'all over here trying to make things happen without the champion himself being involved because they're going back and forth on either we'll see him punk, be a commentator, maybe a referee who knows. So Seth like, yo, I make the decisions about this championship match. And he tells him. He tells CM Punk like, look, bro, the end of the day. I haven't been worried about you. You've been an afterthought since the last time we interact in the ring. I ain't worried about you. You know, if anything, if you do commentary at the at WrestleMania this year, it'll be a cool moment for you to commentate on my greatness and my victory from your voice. Now be the closest you'll ever get to this championship talking his trash too. No love lost between all three of these guys. Love it. I was eating this up and even asked the crowd. Should he be on commentary? Seth Rollins and the crowd was chanting referee and they had to bleep out CM Punk. He's like, I'ma be honest with y'all man. I don't know if I can be impartial to two of the to both of these dipshits. I was like, yes, this is what I love from CM Punk. So finally they're going having a back and forth CM Punk. Well, not back and forth, but mostly Seth just letting it be known why, you know, at the end of the day, he's not worried about either of them because he knows how the story is going to end for him being retaining his championship. And I love what CM Punk said at the end. This was so cold. He was like, look, if I'm on commentary, whatever the case may be, that's fine. At the end of the day, I'm going to be doing something that y'all haven't been able to do since I've been going. I'm going to be able to make people care about y'all. I'm going to be able to get y'all over. So doesn't really matter what I do. At the end of the day, me doing anything involving in this match is going to help y'all in the long run. And he walks away, music plays, Drew McIntyre's over like, cut his music, cut his music. He starts talking and the way they framed it up, he's focusing on CM Punk.  He's just letting them talk his trash, whatever. And then Seth Rollin kicks him right in the face, kicks him right in the face, and then hits Drew McIntyre with the curb stomp. And that's how the segment end. Seth walks up the ramp right past CM Punk. This was great. Chef's kiss.  So him being involved in the match in some capacity, it's going to be very interesting. Seth made it very clear. Do not get in my way in their interaction. So there's going to be this. I don't know which way they take this because now that CM Punk most likely either going to be on commentary. He's going to get involved in that match. He may not be the referee, but the ref is going to get knocked down. He's going to get involved. And however he gets involved, it's probably going to be a reason why one of the other person wins. So definitely added some layers. Fantastic segment. This is the Seth I like to see when Seth channeled his his his passion. He wasn't out there joking around when he was going back and forth with CM Punk. That's what I want to see more of Drew. He's been killing it. He's been killing. He's been holding his own as well. So this was fantastic segment. We cut to the back. You see, I think the new day and DIY talking to each other. And then you see in the background, you see Paul Heyman talking with Drew McIntyre. So I knew something's going to possibly happen. He's they're having a conversation. So before the main event, which was J. Uso versus Shizu Nakamura, he's doing his little promo and all of a sudden you see solo and all of a sudden you see Jimmy and Jimmy says no. Oh, it's gonna be some shenanigans before J even gets out there to the ring. Seth said, I have a bad feeling about this. Me and Cody, we got your back out there. You go get the win. So we let me believe. Obviously, there's going to be some shenanigans. And as we thought, there were some shenanigans before the match even ended, you had Jimmy and solo come through the crowd. But that's when Seth and Cody Rhodes came in to run interference, Cody and Jimmy started fighting up the ramp into the back and then Seth was trying to handle solo. But that's when Drew McIntyre comes out from nowhere, taxing from behind and hit Seth Rollins with the future shot DDT onto the floor taking out Seth Rollins. That was his his part into what was going on with the bloodline. Thought that was good. So I'm thinking Jay's about to lose after this all on his chaos, but Jay ends up winning. Jay ends up defeating Shinsuke. They cut to the back and you see Jimmy and Cody, Cody giving the beats, giving them the beats. Solo comes out there into the back.    He beats them all the way outside. It's raining. It's cold. Got this dude Cody crawling on the ground, the wet ground.   Obviously it didn't didn't look real. Didn't look like an actual blade job, but he's busted open right blood everywhere right and now he's starting to really get into it. Now the rock is getting sick because then all of a sudden he starts mentioning Mama Rhodes and then he pulls out a custom weight belt that says Mama Rhodes on it.  This is what's happening to your son right now. He caused all of this and was just beating them up in front of his bus. This was fantastic and the last shot is Cody Rhodes laying face down, bloodied up shirt ripped up in the rain. Fantastic. Fantastic and that's how Monday night rock goes off the air. I said this and I'm going to make this very clear. Rockin Roman is going to be there next week. Cody. That's it. We're going to get our bra next week. We're going to get our bra next week. This was a really good Monday night raw on the road to WrestleMania, bro. We are going to get our bra next week man because if I'm Cody, there's nothing to talk about.  Because you know Roman in the rock, they're going to have security there. You know they're going to play back that image of what happened. They're going to be talking their trash. Cody J Seth you going there come through the crowd. They start brawling and it gets to the point where Cody gets in that ring and you see the rock and they start fighting back. They need to have a surprise attack. It's nothing to talk about now. It's war. It's all out war. The go home show of raw should be nothing but a bra. It should be chaos and Cody needs to be leading it. He needs to go out there with steel chair start cracking people over with it, bro. I'm I'm ready for next week raw. I'm excited because we're going to get we're going to get that bra and Cody going to have to put in some work. No more talking straight fighting. They didn't bust it. You open this disrespect at your mom. Disrespect at your family. It's up now. Come through the crowd. Have your music.  So was that. Hey, this raw was great. I don't I don't even know what to say. This was a fantastic Monday night raw. One of the better raws this year so far. I'm not going to hold you and this is not even the go home show. This is great. Can't wait for the next week. Ready for WrestleMania. This got me hyped. This is probably some of the most hyped. I've been. This was fantastic. They gave us a little bit of color. They added a little more dangerous dangerous threat to the story. I love it. Fantastic. Comment down below. Let me know what you guys rate this Monday night raw man. I gave it a 10 out of 10. This was fantastic. Also let me know what was your favorite part from the show favorite segment, favorite promo, whatever favorite match. Let me know what you enjoyed about this episode of Monday Night Raw so much. And also let me know what type of time Cody needs to be on next week. What type of violence Cody needs to be inflicting next week. Put that down in the comments. Let me know down below what type of violence this man Cody needs to be inflicting. Y'all let me know. I appreciate all love and support. Road to 150k and I'm staying on speed of YouTube Wrestling Champion of the World. Appreciate y'all kicking in with me. See y'all next one. Peace.


You know, there's a difference between spirituality and religion. I believe that humans were designed to be spiritual, but we were not designed to be religious. And sadly, most humans don't know that. So we finish up only ever knowing the church's version of spirituality, which is just spirituality. Religion is the organization of our spirituality. So we are made to be naturally spiritual all of our lives, but religion takes hold of spirituality and organizes it and chops it up into compliance. Religion says that spirituality is expressed by doing this and doing that and being here and being there and being part of this and saying that and thinking that way. So what religion does, it starts to proscribe behaviors to us, that it tells us when we do those behaviors, particularly in the church, that we are therefore spiritual people. And the more we are doing those things, the more spiritual we become. And it's just not true that human beings were not designed to be religious. God has nothing to do with religion. We flourish better when we are able to explore our spirituality and express it uniquely and in a best spoke way. And of course, I love the church. I spent 30 years pastoring in the church. And I think I found out too late what I'm telling you now. I think I was part of passing on this flawed understanding and of course was subjected to it myself for years. So you pass on what you know. But at the latter part of my pastoring, I figured this out. I didn't have the words for it back then, but I figured out that human beings are designed to be spiritual. And just because they don't fit my one size fits all idea of that in the church by behaving in a way that I want you to as the pastor or the leader, I can't conclude that you're not spiritual because I don't know what your spirituality looks like, nor you mine. And spirituality is bigger than the church. So you can have an expression of your spirituality in the church, but you are more spiritual than that church service or that Christian behavior. That is one aspect of your spirituality. But there are many other aspects of it that your soul needs you to experience and discover for you to continue to flourish as a spiritual being rather than fear. The limitation of your spiritual development is inside the four walls, if you like, of a church experience. So I think often we mistake spirituality for religion, and I don't want you to do that anymore because I did for years and I think I didn't help people figure out what I'm telling you now. So I wanted to come and say in this version of me that I give my time over again. I think I would have celebrated much more people's unique individual best spoke ways of being spiritual. I would have taught it more, I would have celebrated it more in the church so that people in the church got the idea in the culture I was creating that I do not have a one size fits all idea of what I think can legitimately be called spiritual. And I think that's what I did sometimes by default because I didn't know better, but I know better now and I want you to know better now. So please don't let religion tell you this is what spirituality looks like and then condemn yourself if you don't feel you match up to that requirement because your spirituality is vast, vast, vast, vast. And your church experience is only a small expression of that. So spirituality and religion are different things. You were created to be spiritual, not religious. Don't let one become the other.


If you're trying to get logged into our Moodle system on the Moodle mobile app and you're getting the maintenance error. This error says this site is undergoing maintenance and is currently not available. That probably means you had logged in previously to our old system so just tap OK. And at the bottom right you see the three horizontal dots. Tap those and at the bottom tap Change Site. Now the site you see listed there is our old site. At the bottom right tap the orange plus and type in Moodle.linbenton.edu. That's the new URL and tap Connect. You'll be taken to your single sign on login page like usual and from there you'll be in the Moodle mobile app. It's that simple.


I really appreciate that everyone's here. Hi, I'm Adrienne. I'm going to talk about KDE on FreeBSD. And I would like to remind you beforehand that KDE is a community. People talk about it like it's software, but KDE is a community.  Some of it is called KDE Frameworks. That's 80 some-odd libraries that build on top of Qt that give you useful desktop integration, useful extensions to Qt. It also builds KDE Plasma, which is the desktop part that everybody always thinks about. It also builds KDE Applications. The applications range from the simplistic color paint type applications to advanced video editors. But as a community, we build a whole lot of software and people call it KDE. There is no KDE 5 except in ports because it had to have a name. And the previous one was called KDE 4. And ports numbering is complicated, so that's why it's called this way. But the software we install is called KDE Frameworks, KDE Plasma, and KDE Applications. And then you run GNOME applications on top of that because some of them are really good, like Glimps. So KDE runs everywhere, right? It runs on laptops and desktops and phones and tablets and things. And even on other operating systems, and none of us care about this list, right? Because we really want to have FreeBSD on the desktop. At least until NetCraft confirms that FreeBSD is on the desktop. So I'm going to talk a little bit about how we do KDE on the desktop. Sorry? It's going off-screen. Oh, yeah. No, that's right. It's supposed to go off-screen. So the three main KDE on FreeBSD people doing the maintenance of the ports is Tobias, myself, and Kai Knobich. Tobias is more on the FreeBSD side. I am slightly more on the KDE side. And Kai is stuck doing Web Engine.  Maybe not everyone knows that, but it's 600 patches where you're fighting upstream, and that's no fun at all. So we really appreciate that Kai deals with that. There's a shark over there. You may want to visit the shark. Go ahead. Aside from the main porting team, we've also got Gleb Popov, Loise, Rafael. They all incidentally do porting work or do supporting work. Gleb, ROD, is responsible for BS disks, which is very useful. I'll talk about that briefly later. We also work together with the desktop app group that's recently been founded to bring together all the FreeBSD on the desktop developers as one maintainer group. And about half of it is GNOME. That's why GNOME is at the bottom here.  See? I thought about it. Because we work closely together with the GNOME ports maintainers because we have very similar needs. We're trying to produce a nice FreeBSD on the desktop. I'm sure one of them is more shiny than the other, and the other has a green tablecloth. So it doesn't really matter. It's better to work together. The KDE FreeBSD team maintains the KDE FreeBSD stack, which has CMake in there. CMake is a C++ meta build tool. It's used by about a little over 2,000 ports. A lot of C++ code uses CMake nowadays. We maintain that as part of the infrastructure. That means that every time that updates, which is every six weeks, we get to exprun it and deal with a whole lot of old, horrible C++ code that no longer works with the latest CMake. Anyone want to make snide C++ comment? I mean... Yeah, yeah. We maintain IGN, which is an algebra library. Ninja, everyone's favorite build tool, right? Because it's... Ninja in combination with CMake is fine. I wouldn't write that by hand. The reason we maintain Ninja is that we did experiments. Ninja builds KDE software about 10% faster than GNUmake or BSDmake, and we like those 10% because they're long compiles. We maintain Qt, which is the toolkit upon which KDE is founded. We maintain Poplar together with desktop, together with GNOME, because Poplar is a PDF viewing library, and that's used both by events and ocular the KDE application. So that's where our shared stack comes in. And of course, we do the actual KDE frameworks, plasma, and applications. Frameworks releases once a month, plasma every three months, and applications twice a year. The sharks are over there. So we have very regular release cycles. That means an awful lot of rebuilding and X-brunning, and I would like to take a moment to say thank you to Antoine for pushing the button all the time for us on those X-bruns. So KDE is a desktop. The curious thing is, once you get your desktop up and running, you can't see the difference. Actually, if you look real closely, here's an OpenSUSA logo. So that's what it looks like on OpenSUSA. And if I were to switch into FreeBSD and start my desktop, it would look like this, except the little K logo there. I mean, there really is no difference. And so that's the curious thing. In the end, if you're just a plain desktop user, the underlying OS doesn't really matter, except that in the case of FreeBSD, you get CFS snapshots and jails and all the other coolness that you can also run on your system. But from a desktop perspective, it doesn't really matter. Once you've got KDE up and running as a desktop, everything works almost. This is the list that I took from Tobias. User management is one of those things. There's a KDE system settings module where you can do user management, add users, remove users from the system. And of course, we call that user add. And on the Linux world, that's called add user. Or is it the other way around? I can never remember. Everything is horrible. So user management doesn't quite work. But how many of us actually do user management from a graphical user interface? Okay, so you're our test user next time. And if you don't use KDE, you can be GNOME's test user. Great. Power management is one of those things. We've got a long-standing PR about login.conf, the special resource limit configurations that FreeBSD has. Removable devices is a thing, that's where BS disks comes back in, and ejecting CDs. And I'm going to focus on ejecting CDs because I happen to have a CD drive in my workstation. I'm old school. This is an incredible corner case as far as I'm concerned, but it's also one of those things where if you happen to have one, it's important, right?  How does CD ejecting work? Well, SOLID is one of the KDE frameworks, and it deals with hardware. It's an abstraction layer. KDE loves abstraction layers. We have abstraction layers on abstraction layers built on C++. You get the picture. And one of the backends it can use is HAL. HAL is, of course, the hardware abstraction layer, so that's where we get the abstractions upon abstractions thing. The HAL backend on the Linux side in the KDE codebase has been removed entirely, because nobody uses that anymore. They have better things, namely, Udev. Thank you. It's been almost entirely removed for the FreeBSD side except for one little bit, and that's ejecting the CD. So, and that's why we have a package message saying, turn on HAL. You can, of course, just use the eject command. I mean, that's what I do. I switch the terminal, type in eject. I suppose we could. We can do a lot of stupid things in .desktop files, so it would work out, but the actual code is trying to talk to solid, which is trying to talk to its own backend, and we'd have to special, we'd basically rip out HAL and replace it with a C library system, a user local bin eject. Some, yes, it works. It also feels a bit cludgy. So that's why ejecting a CD from .desktop still needs HAL, and we're going to fix that. And we're going to fix that together with GNOME, because GNOME also has some remaining HAL dependencies. So, BS disks is stuff that GLEB has created. It's basically a shim that provides the kind of interface that it provides a Udev type interface that applications can talk to. So we can use the Linux code unmodified and deal with the API it expects. This is a successful approach, because it means that we write code once to provide an API, translate the API to what we do natively, and then once we've got that, all the desktop environments that expect the Linux API can use it. So that means that we have shared efforts in getting stuff done. So we need to fix up BS disks to support ejecting the CD. Again, it's a terrible niche case, but it's got to be done. Once we've done that, we can drop HAL from the freeBSD side of KDE, and from there we can drop about 1,100 lines of code in KDE upstream, and that will make a bunch of people very happy that we no longer have to deal with HAL at all anywhere. So happiness is in the future. But as always, the last 5% of the talk takes 5 minutes. The last little bits are always take the longest. So we've got to find functioning KDE desktop plus all the KDE applications, but getting this polishing done takes a long time. It takes a lot of coordination, and just finding it.  I kid you not. Yeah, yeah. I like the way you think. So we're connected to many different parts here. We're connected to GNOME where we work together on lots of the infrastructure. We now have desktop apps to unify some of these efforts. Wayland is coming in about 40 minutes, so Rachel will be telling you about Wayland and what's happening there. KDE is also eager to cooperate on that so that we can lift the whole thing into the modern world, and that's sort of the end of my bits. To sum up, KDE runs on free BSD just fine. There's bits and bobs that need work, and we're still cooperating with everyone to get that fixed. Wayland is coming, and we're happy about that. Any more questions? I show my appreciation for you. I refer using Glimps instead of new image maintainers. I see. So more of a question than a... No, more a comment than a question. You should be eaten by monsters for commenting instead of questioning. Thank you for using Glimps. My pleasure. Other questions? One here. Compositing video acceleration, how is that? Compositing video acceleration, how is that? Well, everything goes through OpenGL, and as long as you're using DRM Kmod for Intel, it's just fine. I run two quad HD displays off of that, and it's fine. Does it use watching videos, Netflix? Yeah. I've never tried watching Netflix on my BSD desktop, but DRM might be an issue. Or the NVIDIA proprietary drivers are fine as well. The one time I tried Radeon, things got ugly, but I don't know enough about that. We should talk to graphics people like Nicholas. One more question, then we're done. Last I heard, no one was starting to depend on LoginD. Is that a problem you're also encountering in KDE? The question is whether, depending on LoginD, is a problem. We've got basically the same shim approach as we do with the UDISCs. So we're looking to create the same D-Bus interface that talks to the actual, the real bits behind it. And once we've got that solved, it's solved for everyone. I'm not exactly sure what the state is of that. That was the last question. Thank you for attending. Thank you for paying attention. You've got four minutes to the next one.


G'day viewers, my name is Oren Thomas. I'm a Principal Hybrid Cloud Advocate at Microsoft. In this video, we'll talk about how IT Pros can use generative AI to decipher and document administrative scripts in their environment. The job of the IT Pro or Systems Administrator is to keep the servers and systems running that host the solutions that keep the organization functional. One of the perennial challenges we face in doing so is comprehending the solutions that predecessors in our role put in place. In this video, I'll talk about the challenges of maintaining administrative scripts written by your predecessors and how you can use generative AI such as Microsoft Copilot, GitHub Copilot or ChatGPT to assist you in this process. Administrative scripts in Windows Server environments are typically used for automating routine tasks such as system configuration, user management, software updates and more. These scripts are often written in PowerShell as batch files in Vibiscript, Python, Perl or any other language that can be used to administrate Windows operating systems. These scripts are often written at some point to solve or automate particular solutions. Once the problem is solved by the script, the script's contents are unlikely to be revisited unless something goes wrong. Anyone who has gone to work as an IT Pro or Server Administrator in an established environment at some point comes across automation or scripts whose provenance is a mystery. You won't be the first person who can not figure out who wrote the script, why they wrote the script and you may be somewhat mystified as to what the script actually does. If you've been an IT Pro for any length of time, you also know that just because you don't understand and can not figure out why something is present in your environment does not mean that it's a good idea to alter it. Chesterton's Fence is a philosophical concept that you shouldn't remove or change a thing until you know the reasons it was put there in the first place. You likely have enough exciting things to do at work without playing infrastructure jenga by removing or modifying stuff that currently works. Mysterious automation would be less mysterious if it was properly documented. The reality though is that a lot of things in many existing environments are poorly documented. Administrative scripts written by other IT Pros is a common area where best practice and what actually happens at our place of employment are light years apart. So why aren't scripts often well documented? Here is a non-exhaustive list. Administrators often create scripts in response to immediate needs or problems. The focus is on quickly resolving an issue or automating a task to save time in the future. The urgency or pressure to address these needs can lead to prioritizing functionality over documentation. Once the fire is put out, the IT Pro moves on to putting out the next fire. They don't have time to patiently document how the previous fire was extinguished. The original author might understand the script well enough not to feel the need for documentation, especially if they are the primary or sole user. We operate under the assumption that if we wrote it, we will always understand it. Even if that were always true, the reality is we might not be the next person that needs to understand it and may not even be around to explain it to the person that does. Scripts tend to evolve. What might start as a simple one-liner can grow into a complex set of functions as new requirements emerge. We might understand the bit that we're working on right now, but as the script becomes more complex, it becomes harder to comprehend. IT departments are often under-resourced and face time constraints. Administrators might have to juggle multiple tasks, making it challenging to allocate time for documenting scripts properly. As I alluded to earlier, best practice and resource constraints are often in tension with one another. So why do people find it hard to read other people's scripts or their own if they aren't documented? It's well known that it's harder to read code than to write it. Administrators often overestimate their ability to remember the purpose and functionality of their scripts. Trying to work out the purpose of a script by reading the code is a lot more difficult if there aren't hints written in the code's comments as to what each element does. Whilst it might seem counter-intuitive, it's generally recognized that developers may struggle to read their own source code after a period of time. This phenomenon is often referred to as code blindness or coders block. It happens because developers become so familiar with their own code that they stop seeing its structure and logic clearly. Over time, if the developer of the code doesn't interact with that code, their original intent may be forgotten, making it difficult to understand and modify. If each section of the code was clearly documented, the intent of each section of the code would be clearly stated. The book The Programmer's Brain by F. Eonans, which you can find in your favorite bookshop, discusses some of the cognitive issues developers and IT pros face when trying to read and understand code. There's an old joke that one of the reasons developers tend to prefer writing a solution from scratch rather than updating the existing one is that it's easier to start from the beginning with a project than to comprehend the undocumented source code of another developer. There are some links to some articles about the topic of challenges of reading code and scripts in the video description. So how can AI like Copilot or ChatGPT help me? You can use AI like Copilot or ChatGPT to help you understand what scripts do by having them examine the scripts and explain them to you. Assuming the explanations are correct, you can then use these explanations to document the script so that the next person that comes along to deal with the script doesn't also have to ask AI what it's actually trying to accomplish. When writing your own scripts, you can use AI like Copilot and ChatGPT to create comments for your own code. Not only will this save you time in writing your documentation, but it will also allow you to check how accurate these AI tools are at interpreting the meaning of your code. It might even help you put together the code more quickly and give you debugging suggestions if things do not work exactly as you intended them to. Writing administrative scripts and automation has been part of the profession of IT operations and systems administration since the days of the first digital computers. What's changed today is that there are a suite of generative AI tools that we can use to assist us in the task of documenting existing scripts and automation and going forward, making sure that our future scripts and automation are comprehensible to our future selves or anyone that needs to work with those tools in the future. I hope you found this video useful and informative. My name is Oren Thomas. You can find me at aka.ms slash oren. And if you've got any questions or feedback, drop a comment below.


Hello there everyone and welcome. This is Melissa Arma with the Stock Swisher and Revealing Tesla. I looked at this really this morning in the pre-market and really didn't think it was quite up enough. It's set up very well though into the open and hit up over the area. So it's better to wait for I think for the confirmation than to take something unnecessarily. So once it hit up over that area then it was good to go. So I called the 870 calls, the 890 calls, and the 900 calls in Tesla and it almost got to 900 on the day. In fact, just to look here for tonight again, this is the after hours. It did get to 903 right here. Like right into the close or like right after the close, basically. So that was the target. Now could this continue? Yes, but this was a super nice call in. I tend to stack strikes when I call things in the newsletter once I see it's moving and going to be hitting several targets, which this did. So another great call in the options newsletter. For those of you that are interested in this, there is no prerequisites to sign up for the newsletter. If you're interested, email me at melissa at thestockswish.com. The newsletter is $69.99 a year. That's $7,000 for one year. The newsletters are emailed to you. And I'm also working on getting up a tech system set up this year. That's not rolled out yet, but I've been working on that. So nice call in Tesla. Again, markets rallying, strong stocks are rallying, good time to be trading. Email me at melissa at thestockswish.com if you have any questions about options or you're interested in the gap options course.


Hello, and welcome to our 2020 review. 2020 was a terrible year for everyone around the globe. But astronomers and telescopes, ground-based, satellite, they continued to operate. And they came up with a number of interesting observations and discoveries that we'll cover in this video. We have news on the rings around Saturn. We'll take a look at some of the storms going on on Jupiter. We'll see a new comet, an interesting comet that has two tails. We'll cover Formal Hout B, an exoplanet that disappeared. Beetlejuice has dimmed quite a bit, and that has implications, possibly. You may recall a video where we saw the shadow of a nebula. It was reexamined in 2020, and it's moved slightly, called the bat shadow. So we'll take another look at that. And we'll fly through the Orion Nebula, looking at an invisible light and infrared. A little further out, we'll take a look at a wolf riot star, a fading planetary nebula. And the stars in the Milky Way bulge, trying to figure out how old they might be. We'll also see some spectacular nebula in and around the Large Magellanic Cloud, some distant galaxies, a fading supernova, and a very early galaxy, as seen through gravitational lensing. We'll end with a deeper dive into the James Webb Space Telescope. The new telescope designed for the infrared, the near-infrared, that should launch here in 2021. And we'll cover a few of the things that it will look at, like galactic dust and the first stars that ever formed into the first galaxies. I trust you'll find it informative and entertaining. We'll start with Saturn's rings.