Coffee is fine, morning to you, Diesel. Coffee is fine, it's not very nice though, it's all right. I guess it's not too much of a fine morning, but it's a morning, so talk about a morning to you anyway. I'm wearing my new jeans today, can you see them? Feeling good? Oh, we're gonna walk the weasel. We're gonna send in some papers, the border. Well, I think it's time to go. We've had our breakfast. We cleaned ourselves up, gotten ready, got everything done that we need to get done. Checked the truck out, made sure it was good to roll, make sure it was all safe and all the fluids were full. Tires were full of air and had good dread and all that stuff, it's time to go. Diesel, what do you think? I think it's time to go. I think we should go too, man. So it's 1,151 kilometers to destination. I should be able to get there today. Because once I get into Canada, we're crossing at Sarnia, Ontario. Welcome to Sarnia. Why do they name it Sarnia? Do they name it after Narnia, or did Narnia name Narnia after Sarnia? Maybe Sarnia is Narnia. In the real world, they just don't want us to know. It's a conspiracy. That's where we're crossing into Canada anyways. A port here on is the American side in Michigan. And we're gonna cross into Canada and then we get an extra two hours to drive, right? Because Canada let's us drive 13. So Diesel, I know we need to walk you. Kinda cute over there, that family there. That driver's wife just came, I'm assuming it's his wife, just came to meet him here at the rest area and she brought the kids along and they have a little boy.  He's probably like three or four. And he's so in awe of his daddy's truck. I remember being that kid. I remember being just like that.  So cute. I remember being that kid. Oh, I just thought I was driving the biggest monster truck because I was sitting in daddy's driver's seat. That's a memory he probably will never forget. That's pretty cool. Anyway, so let's get out there. It's not really raining that hard anymore. Let's get out there and walk the weasel before it starts raining again. Just walk in the weasel, walk in the weasel. Every day, we'll just walk in the weasel. Come on, Ethan, we're gonna go further over here yet. We're gonna go to the bush over there. No, no, not that post. That's a very nice post though, but not for you. Nope, nope, not that tree either. Nope. I'm in control. Oh, there's like a forest over there.  Diesel, you wanna go to the forest? He's like, I just need to pull the, I keep pulling it away from all of them. And what, we're gonna go find a nice tree back there. How about that? How about that? Oh no, under that picnic table, straight ahead. See that little black blob? Hey, did you just say cat? Let's go say hello. This is gonna be a disaster.  There you go, Diesel. He's just, oh. So one thing I gotta watch out for if there's any cats around.  I don't know what he would do with them if he'd ever catch them. The only one he ever caught scratched his nose. And then he went on a break. He went on strike. He didn't chase cats for a while. Isn't this a beautiful park? Look at that. Isn't that amazing? Massive trees. I would let Diesel run through here, but it's a little close to the rest area there. It's a little busy right now. And I just saw a squirrel run up this big tree. Plus there's the cat. Who knows where the cat went? You can guarantee, though, the cat's watching us. It's out there. Cats are smart. I've always thought maybe I should get a cat. You know, it's not too feminine of an animal. He can still be masculine and have a masculine cat.   Or something like that. Just a big, massive cat. Because Diesel, with another dog, just gets in trouble. That's all he does is trouble, trouble, trouble. But with a cat, he's lived with cats before. And at first, yeah, they chase each other around the crazy and then they get used to each other. And then they're friends, but they don't get into trouble, right? Because the cat is smart. She's not gonna egg Diesel on, because I don't know. You know how cats are, anyways. Oh, you guys think of that if I'd have a cat. Would that be weird? That'd be weird for a single guy to have a dog and a cat. It's not like I'd have just a cat. I mean, that's sort of sending a weird message to the world, right? She just had a single guy with a cat. Depends who you are, though. I know a lot of single guys who have cats. Perfectly comfortable in their masculine identity. I don't know. Not saying I would do it, but... We're looking for those squirrels that ran up this ginormous tree. That is that big tree. Wow. Mine? Well, you know us. We always like an adventure. So we're gonna go and explore the bush. Diesel, be very, very quiet. There's squirrels. Diesel, come on, man. Yeah, let's go. Can you see them anywhere? Can you see them? Who do you see? I know there's one here. He just ran up here and they're flying around in the trees. Oh, well. I always end up in the bush whenever I stop somewhere. But this to me, I feel natural here. I don't know. It feels good to be out in nature. Sucking that natural air. Then again, all air is natural. I mean, what air do you know of that's not natural? We observe the weasel in his natural habitat. What does he see? So all social media is the same. I mean, Facebook is with text and pictures. Twitter, same thing, text and pictures. Instagram is just pictures. And YouTube is just video. I mean, you can also share video on social media like Facebook too. I think you can share videos on Twitter, right? But Facebook is the biggest social media. And I know everybody throughout their journeys through whatever they do, post regularly on Facebook. I'm pretty sure of it, unless you don't have Facebook. Maybe you post regularly on Twitter. You know, like, hey, this is where I am. Took a picture. Hey, this is what I saw today. You know, it's social media. It's a huge thing out here. I choose to just show everybody in a video. I always found it to be a little bit more personal and a little bit more, a good memory, right? So that's pretty much what I'm doing. I'm pretty much just sharing a giant status on Facebook except I shared on YouTube of my whole day instead of posting every like two hours. Here I am doing this, doing that, doing this like some people do. I just make one giant status. This is what I did today. So we've been a little while since we last spoke where we went on our adventure looking for squirrels. Look outside already, it's pitch black. It's not even that late yet. Days are getting shorter, man. Days are getting shorter. Diesel, how are you doing back here? How are you doing? Let me get some more light on you. There you go, so the good people can see you. Oh, there's a tail wag there. Oh, I saw that, man. So yeah, we are close to the Michigan and Ohio border. We've got about two and a half hours till we get to the Canadian border yet. And then we've got another two hours after that to where we gotta be. Got a bit of driving to do today yet, so I'm not gonna stop here very long. I just wanted to quickly grab something to eat. Fill up my belly, not that it needs any more filling. It's already filling up quite well itself. Need to do some more running. No, we diesel. I'll try to include you in every shot, don't worry. All right, guys, I just wanna touch base and say here we are, it's getting dark early already. So yeah, other than that, I'll probably talk to you in Canada. The next time you'll see me, I'll be in a faraway land. Who wants to talk to me? Well, you're getting a shout out. Who's ding-a-ling-ing me here, ding-a-ling-ding. Text message. Well, hello, dad. Dad touching base with me. I gotta give him a call. I haven't called him in a while. He called me yesterday. But the other day, no, it wasn't him yesterday. Give him a call. All right, guys. I'll see you on the other side. That is once again a wrap. My battery's just about to die on this camera too, so good timing. Thanks for joining me with this day, guys. We drove from Knoxville, Tennessee to London, Ontario. Just about 627 miles, 1,007 kilometers. Full day of driving. Good day of driving, except it's been raining all day. It's still raining. Not very nice, Mother Nature. Well, tomorrow's a new day. Let's hope the weather's a little better. We'll be heading to Guelph, Ontario, and then probably north to Sudbury, Ontario. That's what the plan seems to be. And from there, we're headed west.  Next weekend, I have a Thanksgiving dinner with my family. Because Canadian Thanksgiving is in October. It was already this past week, two weeks ago for you. But we're celebrating a little late because we're a family of truck drivers. That's as soon as we all get together. So, we're gonna go and hang out there. And I also gotta get some work done on the truck. Gotta get my air conditioning fixed. Gotta get my bunk heater fixed. Gotta get it serviced. Lots to do, lots to do. There won't be any time to just sit around and do nothing. Never any time to just sit around and do nothing.  What do you do, Deesa? What do you do now? See you tomorrow, guys.


This is covering the spread part of the Fandall podcast network Yesterday was just one of those days it really reminds you of how awesome sports are of course I'm talking partly due to myself because we had the Northwest for Wildcats men's basketball team beating Purdue That's one aspect out of just for me, but also last night's game was fun And I think for me at least I love watching Super Bowl with like a group of people because I get the fun atmosphere I watch every game during the regular season by myself. I'm okay Not devoting full attention to just one game, you know, if means I get to have a fun atmosphere People sweating around me and stuff like that. I think that's a lot of fun and watching a really good game where two young Quarterbacks balled out played amazing football and the cheese win that game But honestly, I think we all won it was a fun game It was a fun day for sports and I think a great day to kind of I think it was Implematic of a lot of the key things that we could take into 2023 as better So we're gonna do today is we're gonna recap the Super Bowl first But then also take a look at five takeaways. I've had from this postseason From that game and from the overall year as a whole we can take into our, you know Our betting thoughts for 2023. So I'm gonna go through all that for today We'll get back into talking NBA talking PGA tomorrow on the show. We'll talk some NASCAR on Wednesday So we'll get into, you know, forward-looking stuff, you know, actual bets bet recommendations and stuff like that Wanted to go more big picture for today recap the Super Bowl and break down some betting takeaways from last night We'll dive on into that in just one second This is covering the spread right here on the fan dual podcast network and number fire calm My name is Jim Sata. I am a senior writer and analyst for number fire calm here Like I said to recap last night's Super Bowl 57 breakdown the key takeaways talk about the game talk about the betting angles on it and Take a look forward to what we should learn from it for 2023 We'll dive into all that in just one second But as a reminder, make sure you are subscribed to covering the spread wherever you get your podcast because a lot of good shows Coming up this week. Well, that's an NHL talking there as well. We'll talk some English Premier League It's gonna be a mixed bag as we get out of the NFL season. I just kind of talking about all the sports and action talking about all that stuff I will not be talking XFL. Maybe we'll get someone on the show who will do it for me But not me me I can ask some questions, but not personally but a lot of other really good stuff really fun stuff For this week, so make sure you subscribe to covering the spread wherever you get your podcast Also, check us out over on the faddle YouTube page where you can get these shows posted after the fact The midway point of the NBA season is here and now is the perfect time to download faddle America's number one sportsbook because new customers get a no sweat first bet up to $1,000 that's bonus bets back if your first bet doesn't win just download the faddle sportsbook app It is safe secure and super easy to use then you can bet on everything from the money line to point scores and Three strain plus family that lets you combine your bets for a chance at a bigger payout with a same game parlay So don't miss the chance to get your no sweat first bet up to $1,000 and bonus bets Make every moment more a faddle an official sports betting partner of the NBA must be 21 plus and presidents like states first online a real money wager only $10 deposit required refund issued is not withdrawal bonus bets that expired 14 days Restrictions apply see full terms at faddle.com slash sportsbook gambling problem call 1 800 gambler Or visit faddle.com slash Rg in Arizona one hundred next step or text next step defy 3 3 4 2 in Connecticut 1 8 8 8 7 8 9 7 7 7 7 or visit ccpg.org slash chat in Indiana 1 809 with it in Wyoming in Kansas 1 800 5 2 2 4700 or in Kansas KS gambling help calm Louisiana 1 8 7 7 7 7 7 0 stop in Maryland MD gambling help dot org in New York 1 8 7 7 8 open wire text open wide and in West Virginia 1 800 gambler dot net Okay, so I want to take a quick look back at last night's game and We had a lot of bets last week on the show. We had four separate shows on it So don't have a lot of time to recap Everything we discussed in the show. So instead of doing covering the past I wanted to go through some key takeaways from this game from the post season season overall and we can carry it into this year and Most of those do revolve around some aspect of last night's game and the first thing is that I the chief's Moneyline plus one ten or plus one away depending if you've got a fandal or elsewhere from last Monday, and they were down ten at the half Even with that being true Never really felt like they were out of it Which is kind of annoying in a way because a lot of times it can be liberating be like, okay I've lost this bet I can just enjoy the second half the game Instead the chiefs you're always sweaty because they might come back and but you never are the feeler out of it We'll talk more about what that means later on But I think overall my biggest takeaway from last night was how freaking efficient on offense the chiefs were but also both teams the Chiefs last night average point four four EPA per drop back passing and point two three EPA per attempt Russian Those are via next-gen stats and for some context on that Patrick Mahomes led the league during the regular season in EPA per drop back at point point two two the chiefs were better than that both passing and Rushing last night that is bananas and Joan Hertz did it too. He was a point two nine EPA per drop back passing Which does not count what he did as a rusher all those quarterback sneaks He was actually above he was a point on what is a rusher even if you include the fumble return for a touchdown so These two guys put on a show. It was absolutely insane So sure we could talk about the holding call if we wanted to It was a big play. It was a bummer to have such a fun game Kind of come to an end effectively on a play that while was holding was not blatant He didn't tackle anything like that. It was holding James Bradbury said it was holding and You know that matters I think it's important though to note that that holding called didn't factor into those EPA numbers and the chiefs Their offense was unstoppable last night for the most part the Eagles were pretty unstoppable themselves to one offense So I think we need to give like a round of applause to both teams both coaching staffs both quarterbacks But I think that performance by the chiefs offense Andy Reed Eric B. Enemy Legendary stuff and that was my biggest takeaway is that they're amazing I know it's not a huge takeaway, but like it was just so fun to watch that as far as the MVP last night goes My initial thought was hurts. I thought the jail and hurts despite the loss should have been the MVP That's something they do very often. It would not have been the first time I don't believe but I thought what the way he played Initially my gut reaction was hurts should have still been MVP all the sneaks three rushing touchdowns really good passing efficiency too Some just sicko throws like really good stuff. I thought he should have an MVP then this morning pulling up the EPA numbers. I'm not fretting EPA numbers during the game, but looking at my home's EPA numbers. I kind of get it So I think they would have been justified giving it to hurts given how well he played given the impact he had in that game But I think it had to be one of the two quarterbacks with the show they put on I did push I say if it's echo MVP during during last week, he was 50 to 1 He's 50 to 1 for a reason, you know, maybe if he that third and short call where he Got the end around he got tackling the open field Maybe if that's a touchdown he's in consideration because he would have had like hundred or so yards to touch on at that point You know, it should have been the quarterbacks. It was the right call. I think you Reasonably could have given it to either guy even with hurts losing. I think he could have an MVP So I don't disagree at the call. I think that it was the right call looking at the EPA numbers But I mean those two guys were phenomenal last night Just really fun to watch those two and finally, I think that the the other takeaway I had is that How much fun betting can make things even if there's no money on the line because we were at a Super Bowl party last night I was some friends and we had a pool a picks pool Five dollars each person so super low money on the line and just picked various props You know coin toss the over under for the anthem gatorade color stuff like that And it means that even people who don't like football or don't care can be engaged in the game and have Something to root for and I think that element is super fun at the end of the game You know instead of talking about okay is me MVP We're asking what the gatorade color was I look it up on Twitter You're like everyone's mad that we didn't get to see the gatorade stuff like that It just adds like an extra layer of fun I love that aspect of gamifying sports where it can get more people engaged with stuff that I love I love watching football love love baseball and ask are all this stuff And I like that more people can get engaged with it via this outlet I think that the key part there is It's important that it's done so in a way where if you lose It's no big deal because I hope you had fun last night I hope you had a lot of fun last night, but think about what it would have been if you you know if you had been overextended and It stinks to lose a bit of money like you know, let's say You lose a bit of money, you know, you're gonna be bummed regardless But with a game like that, I want to make sure I am Limited enough in my bets where even if I lose every single bet I can still enjoy myself I don't want to deprive myself of Having fun like I did last night because I'm too busy bed or too busy sweating bets Sports are supposed to be fun So make sure you keep your bets in check so that you can just enjoy the game Rather than getting frustrated if things don't hit I think that that's a key takeaway always it is always important to never bet more than you can afford to lose always always always It's especially true for Super Bowl because like there are so many markets so many dumb markets You can bet on and stuff like that. I want to enjoy the game It's a lot easier for me personally to enjoy the game if I have less on the line So I do like the betting aspect of it. I love that it can get people engaged but Responsibly, I like the the low dollar aspect of it when we're betting socially with people and stuff like that And I don't change my process in terms of betting Super Bowl I want to keep things in check there as well to make sure I can just enjoy myself and not be sweating things constantly But it is fun when you can add the extra layer people who may not be huge football fans So that's my thoughts in last night's game I want to spin that forward though and take a look back at Kind of lump it into the postseason the whole the 2022 season the whole and talk about how we can spin Those takeaways forward to betting 2023 and obviously we don't want to overreact to just one game Because you can lead you down a bad path I think that honestly had a bit of that last year like with the Jalen Hertz game against the Buccaneers and the playoffs like I think I Overweighted that game in my head So it's important not to over weigh one game in your head But I do want to use last night as kind of a vehicle for discussing other takeaways I've had this year that I want to carry it next year And I think the big thing for me goes back to what we discussed before the cheese were down 10 Never felt like they were out of it because passing is still king And that's my first takeaway years of passing is still king the cheese were down 10 didn't matter because having an efficient passing Offense means you can make up ground in a hurry now That's true at the Eagles too if they had gotten behind I probably wouldn't have felt like they were out of it because they could throw a Negative game script for a team with a good passing offense is not a death sentence They can make up ground and score points so I've talked about the The entirety of the year by how I'm running two models for this year one model weighs passing pretty heavily and The other one is more agnostic about passing versus rushing But it separates early downs and late downs early down EPA late down success rates and I thought the old one be better because I Thought that the old or I thought that the new one would be better because the old one might over weigh passing and I like the the idea of the having early down EPA late down success rate I love that thought process and that's why I built that model, but didn't seem to be the case so I ran both models concurrently from week 13 on and I wanted to see which one performed better and That'd be the one I'd use primarily for next year's its competition. It's a sample of 104 games So it's a small sample and that's important to keep mine But I wanted to compare the two using mean squared error if you're building a model mean squared error is your best friend Basically, it tells you how far off were you from the final score not factoring in the direction So let's say hypothetically. I had the cheese fair by three last night if they had lost by one Area there would be four negative four depending which way you want to go and then you square it so that it's non directional So the mean squared error from off by four points is 16 If we go from week 13 on the old model on tuesdays had a mean squared error of 137.61 The new model was 143.19. So the old model beat the new one there the markets on tuesday for context So like the betting lines were 141.45 So the old model beat the tuesday market and the new model did not and that's kind of the key thing is If it's better, but doesn't beat the market who cares um So the old model was better there Same thing with the close after adjusting for injuries the old model on game days had a mean squared error of 135.23 the new one was 143.12 and the market 141.45 so again the old model beat the market and the new one did not The new model still had a positive ROI not sure how sustainable that was given that it had a worse mean squared error than the market did but If I look at just spread better recommendations from that model from week 13 on it was a positive 13.87 That's just really good. I I love to take that typically, but the old model in that sample 36.3 percent ROI, which is not sustainable That's not going to stick And I think that it's important to mention that the the older model did not do that well for the full season If I just bet every spreader recommended for the full year the ROI would have been 13.1 percent Um, I didn't do that. I did not have a good year in nfl this year. I should have done that did not do that So the model was good. I was not and I think that's important important distinction to make Although the model did well. I did not have my great year betting nfl So in the news in the sample I looked at here The new model kicked the old or the the old model kicked the new model spot I think a lot of that is because of how heavily it weighs passing It was high in teams like the lions like the jags due to their passing efficiency And the Bengals too up until the conference championship where I thought they were overvalued there And those teams performed really well so if you're building out a new betting model for the nfl and I think with the proliferation of legalization I could see a lot of you trying to dive into that first time this off season I would segment efficiency by rushing and passing and make sure passing Has more weight even than like overall the epa potentially that's that's mine has. Um It gives you multiple routes to a win or a cover because even if you fall behind You still have a shot and stay there in defense to you are passing efficiency Passing and defensive efficiency matters more than overall than rushing defensive efficiency and stuff like that so I'm going to roll into 2023 With the old model being my base model I'm still going to run the other one too to expand the sample, you know, it's on only 104 games It had a higher correlation to the market which I think matters I think you want to generally be pretty close to the market um but my win total bets be based on that old model and As opposed to calling it the old model which seems dismissive I will stop calling it that I will call it now the base model my primary model and then The new model will be the alternate model. I think that's why I'll phrase them going forward So it's not old versus new because new implies that one's better which it clearly was not Down the stretch. So take away number one passing is still king And I think that that old model performed better because it put more weight in passing than the other one did Second takeaway is that You can still find good betting value during the playoffs When I first started betting I was worried that there wouldn't be a lot of betting value during the post season because There's a lot of money on these games a lot of attention and a lot of attention means Smart people are putting money into this market and likely making an efficient. That was my thought process at least um We had John Sheeran on the director of trading of fandal sports We had him uncovering the spread Four or so years ago. I think and he said no actually with so much attention you get a lot of non-smart money in the market and That can lead to still decently inefficient lines And I think we saw that if we look at just the post season My primary model saw value in seven seven games so seven out of 13 Just over half and the team that it said to bet on covered in six of those seven games The one miss was the 49ers against the eagles. That was not close. That was a bummer I also the bucks plus three as one of my bets on the show but that was based on the new model and that one That bet did not work. Um did not come close That model went four and one uh with that one being the one loss this year But it found value in just four five out of 13 games versus seven out of 13 the other model so I think the takeaway for me is I can still get a decent number of bets in If I don't change my criteria for betting just because the post season just because there are fewer games So to me it's kind of make sure you keep your process in the post season Make sure you're not betting games that you wouldn't bet if they were during the regular season because There's always next year. There's always other sports. You can bet and stuff like that I don't think you should change your threshold in order to get more bets out during the playoffs That's a really good way to lose some money. So And those bets were profitable too. So the takeaway is don't change your standards for the playoffs Be okay Not having bets like there are gonna be games or days where you don't have bets out there. That should be okay You know, it's okay being comfortable with that Taking the long view and realizing that there'll be more bets down the line because you can find value in the playoffs It can be good value and if you possibly find value in a decent number of games Just don't force it. Don't change your standards just because there are fewer games to bet on for that week Another takeaway from me from last night is that scoring is not dead um And it can be high when guys are healthy. I think there's a very important caveat to make because My initial thought when I saw that the total for the super bowl was 49 and a half and open I thought my numbers would stay under because eagles defense is solid they run a decent amount which means that they drain clock a bit more and 49 and a half was a big number But when I ran my numbers before injury adjustments to the cheese, it was a 51 It was a 49.97 after grading down for what I thought would be more guys missing than what wound up missing And then we saw what happens. Uh, the market did go up I think as we got a good idea of the health of the receivers. So It went up and I think that was totally appropriate And the reason why that worked was because we had two really good quarterbacks in this game two really good offenses and that'll be key entering week one because If you're talking like health at least Quarterback play is likely to be the best it'll be all year entering week one So if you show value in an over based on, you know, your betting process Don't be hesitant to take it just because you're worried about, um, how low scoring was this year I think the the overall scoring average wound up being around like 44.15 or somewhere in there Which is a pretty low number compared to what we saw in 2020. I think it was lower than 2021 as well So you could be worried about that if you're seeing value in some overs, but Recency bias could skew us towards unders. Uh, there were a lot of bad quarterback play the final month the regular season There's a lot of wind a lot of cold was an impact the way teams played it even though I don't know why fact that more and I guess for myself but we can still get points when quarterbacks are healthy and when the guys around them are healthy and I did not take the over in this game because it was fair value to me, uh, but it made sense It played out. So I think going into next year if you Like an over where quarterbacks are healthy receivers are healthy offense. A lot is healthy and stuff like that I wouldn't get too worried about it just because what we saw this year. I think that It comes down to quarterback health a lot of the time the reason that scoring can be down Other times. It was also there were a lot of heavy rushing teams and stuff like that but Don't worry too much if you see value in overs because if teams are healthy, we can still see a lot of points Put up on the board fourth takeaway from me and this one specific to last night's game is Don't factor in against the spread record when trying to predict what a team will do going forward I saw some analysis this past week saying that the chiefs were going to be overvalued in the Super Bowl because they went 7 11 and 1 against the spread to that point and I can't get behind that kind of thought because the against the spread record shows that they had underperformed expectations to that point But the market reacts because if people keep losing money on the cheese They're not going to bet the cheese and people aren't betting the cheese That means that you're going to get less money on the cheese. That's going to have the market react We saw this with the Super Bowl With the the money coming in the Eagles probably partly a reaction to my home's health the receiver health the Eagles being very good stuff like that and The market will react to this stuff So that against the spread record is descriptive not predictive and it's baked into the current number so You're using something that happened previously and is accounted for And using it to predict what will continue to happen But there are a couple flaws in that the first thing is that as as discussed It's already factored in in a way The second is that The goal during the regular season is not for a team to cover It's for them to win and the chiefs Played with their food a lot during the regular season We saw that pretty consistently where I know that they covered in that Rams game I think the spread is like 14 and a half and they won by 16 but like They were absolutely playing with their food there Their goal is not To cover it's to win so that they're up seven spreads nine and a half who cares So in a lot of ways that against the spread record Doesn't matter like they don't care I don't think we should either if your model says that they've been efficient Who cares what their spread against the record is so I think it's fine to cite this stuff It is okay to mention it. I mentioned how the Jags have been good to me That's basically a similar line of thought where I've been betting them without the marcos undervaluing them But I'm not telling you to bet the Jags because they've been good to me I'm betting them because my numbers continue to show value So make bets based on what you think will happen in the game Not what has happened in the past And this is kind of true for all frenzy type stuff like, you know Mike tommy is an underdog Tom Brady is an underdog stuff like that If it I think that what you want to do is if you look at that stuff Ask yourself does this matter and ask yourself Is the market accounting for it? They does this matter thing will lop off a lot of those frenzy type bets If it matters and the market is not accounting for it, you're good to go That's probably a good thing to focus on, you know If I mean I think passing efficiency is underway in the market stuff like that If it matters If it doesn't matter if it leans on outdated data or it's accounted for by the markets Try to find some other route for deciding what to bet on or just don't bet the game at all That's always an option too So it's okay to look at that kind of stuff Like but just make sure you tread lightly because it can oftentimes lead you down very bad paths If you if you already have like a thought in mind of who you want to bet Using that as a justification Maybe you should find a different justification. Maybe your justification for them is weak So it's okay to look at that stuff. It's okay to talk about it But do not use it as a reason for making it bet the cheese against the spread record Doesn't matter Effectively like yes, under falling relative to expectations matters. It should bump them down But the market was accounting for that because they were one and a half point underdogs to the eagles in the Super Bowl Pretty clear they were accounting for that So if you're using that number to analyze this game, I think that's pretty flawed thinking so I know that we'll see like against the spread record like on tv graphics and stuff like that You'll see it cited online Just be wary if it's accounted for already be wary of it if it's not accounted for sure You know whatever don't if you think the market is still undervaluing them That's one thing but don't use as your sole justification for betting a team Now finally other thing the final take away from me is we need to continue to weigh situation heavily and by situation I mean Play uh play callers past catchers offensive line the infrastructure around a quarterback and I care about it a lot It's something that I want to emphasize But I think I may I may have underweighted it a bit with the eagles this year My preseason win projection if I go back to my preseason win totals, uh had the eagles at 9.8 wins That was above the bookmakers by a smidge. They were nine and a half Was 55 54 percent to go over that number. So basically right in line of the bookmakers But it didn't have them anywhere near the best team in the nfc. They were behind Tampa Bay Green Bay San Francisco a bunch of teams were above them And I think that the reason I had them lower than I should have was because I underweighted the addition of a j brown and I paid for that financially early in the year Across the first eight weeks my numbers told me to bet the spread against the eagles five times My numbers in those games were one and four so That was not good. Eventually my numbers did catch up because you know Obviously new data is factored in and that that adjusts But if I had a higher baseline on the eagles coming in I would not have lost that money early in the season so Situation infrastructure has been a big thing for me for a long time But I think I need to recommit to it this off season Obviously, there are times where that would not work because That process could have led to you to being too low in the chiefs this year Um, they were still atop my priests and power rankings with the bills So like if you trust Patrick my homes, you wouldn't go that way But like it could lead you down that path and it also could have led to Potentially being too high on the jets. They did go over the win total but like you could have been Betting the jets a lot and that down the stretch that would not have been a good thing So it can go poorly But with jaymond hurts he had proven He could be a solid quarterback. He could have solid efficiency numbers in a good situation So I should have been higher on him in a great situation, which is what he had this year So I want to remake sure That I am emphasizing that my process this year emphasizing infrastructure emphasizing play calling Situation around the quarterback now. It's really good and the quarterback has shown Some semblance of competency. I feel pretty high in them I was not low on the Eagles this year, but I was lower than I should have been and I think that if I had Wade in the age of brown edition more weighed in the offensive line Had some trust in Shane Steichen and Nick Siriani Maybe I'd have been higher on them and I wouldn't have lost those games earlier on so situation matters a lot unless you're Patrick my homes And it's important to factor that in pretty heavily When you are making preseason priors betting early on and stuff like that So those are my takeaways from this year and I want to caveat that with those are my takeaway specifically if you disagree with me Cool, that's fine. Um, you should disagree. It means you're critically thinking and like coming to your own conclusion Those are just my takeaways and that's how I want to make my bets But you got to find your own individual process. I got to find routes like maybe you think I'm wrong about passing efficiency Sweet, like, you know, if you if you can find Good profitable bets based off of that. That's awesome. Uh, my process though Is that and it's important to formulate your own process Via going through this stuff via thinking critically via thinking, you know Okay, what did I get wrong here? Did I get something wrong? Was it just variance? Was it whatever?  What went well? Why did it go well or why did it? Why did I benefit from variance there and stuff like that? I think that just that having A couple minutes to yourself before next year thinking through All these things are still fresh in your mind Thinking through what you did this year what you want to tweak for next year put it down to google doc or something like that To make sure you have a note of for next year because it's important to learn and I think I learned a lot this year And it's been helpful for me Hopefully can make me perform better next year because again my numbers do all this year But I didn't have a great year So I want to try to refocus that for next year and it's okay if you disagree with the takeaways I discussed here These are just my my personal diary basically heading into 2023 That is all that we have here for today on covering the spread as I said We are back to regular bets coming up tomorrow gonna brandy gadoo on to talk about some golf will talk some I believe nba as well We're in talks NASCAR on wednesday with dr. Nick giffin to get you set for the day tone of 500 and plenty more coming up Throughout this week so make sure you are subscribed to covering the spread wherever you get your podcast Check us out on the fandal youtube page as well. You want to watch a video version of the show If you've got any questions from me or if you want to tweet your takeaways from betting this year at me Love to hear those. I'm on twitter at jim sonnis and j i m S a n n e s you can also follow the fandal podcast network at fandal podcast want to thank you all for tuning in for today Hopefully last night was a fun one for you. Hopefully it was a profitable one for you as well But hopefully again Having fun the most important thing will talk to you once again tomorrow This has been covering the spread right here on the fandal podcast network


Hello, everyone. My name is Tim Bird. I'm a Principal Software Engineer at Sony Electronics. And welcome to this session of Embedded Linux Conference. I'm going to be talking about issues with open source license compliance in consumer electronics. So I usually like to put the abstract inside the slides in case people come along afterwards, but you can see that online. And this is the agenda that I'm going to be talking about today. I'm going to go through a little bit of the legal disclaimer. It's important for a talk like this. I'll talk about aspects of compliance and give a little bit of the license history. Talk about some of the gotchas that you may encounter as you're dealing with compliance and then give some of my own personal recommendations. So let's start with this disclaimer. So first, it's important to recognize that the law is way different than code. And there's a lot of armchair lawyers out in open source, but it's important to remember, well, so one, I'm a software developer. I'm not a lawyer and I'm specifically not your lawyer. So there are a lot of unexpected things in law that unless you have legal experience, you're not going to know about. So don't trust what you read on the internet or even what you hear from me. People will make strong statements about what's required by licenses, but it's just their opinion. The same goes for this presentation. There are actually very few legal court decisions that have been made about GPL and the language of the GPL in a couple of places, it's a little bit ambiguous. And I don't know of any open source license that includes a choice of law, which means that it might be interpreted differently in different legal venues. And I know for a fact that German law in terms of licenses and contracts is a little bit different than US law. And so there's unexpected things that can occur in different jurisdictions. So you should always check with your own company legal counsel when you're making decisions that you think might have some legal risk. And it's really important for me to let you know these are my views. I am not speaking on behalf of Sony Corporation, even though I've got the logo on my slides. These are my viewpoints. And so let me get started. Part of the reason for this talk is because I do have some pet peeves. I've been doing Linux for over 25 years now, and I hear this a lot on forums and stuff. It's trivial to comply with the license. Just post the source code. What's the big deal? Well, it's actually not as trivial as it sounds. So that works when you have an in-house product and you're in complete control of all the source top to bottom. And that's true for some products, but there's a lot of other products where you're getting components from other places and just doesn't in particular with large products like a mobile phone. I think the last time we, there's one product at Sony that I measured the code on. We had 58 million lines of code that came from multiple vendors. In case of a mobile phone, you're talking about code from Google, MediaTek or Qualcomm and Sony.  So it's not as simple as having all of the code just in-house. And there are some business units that do black box or what we call white label products. I'm aware of some old security cameras that were just relabeled by the vendor and they'd come from a completely separate vendor. And some business units are not in the software business per se. So Sony B2B is a business unit that does IP and AV suites for stadium packages for stadium suites. And so they do not have the same level of expertise as like system level developers inside some of the other Sony product teams. So it's much more complicated than people kind of assert. But having said that, let's talk about what is required. So these are the aspects of license compliance. You have to know what's in your product. I'm going to talk about what types of things you have to provide and some of the requirements around those. So let's get into that. The first thing, and this is really important is you got to know what's in your product. If you're dealing with a large product, by large, I mean lots of lines of code, lots of components, then you can expect to maintain a spreadsheet possibly with thousands of lines of rows. And most people will look at a package, the list of packages on a website and say, well, there's not that many packages. It's like, well, but there are that many files and the license granularity is not necessarily at the granularity of the package. So you have to know what's inside your product. There are tools to assist with this, both commercial and open source. And you can go look at those. There's lots of resources to find out about those and how to use those. I have found, in my experience, that most often the problem comes from suppliers. So there are some suppliers out there who do not take their responsibility seriously. And there is a working group in the Linux Foundation called Open Chain and they focus on education and certification. So there's a standard and it's actually an ISO standard. It's either it's already been approved or it's on track to be approved, but for open source processes within a company. And this is really important because as products become more complex, you're getting software and hardware for more and more suppliers. And all it takes is one supplier to kind of screw it up in your supply chain. And so we're, as Sony, we're a platinum member of Open Chain. We're very interested in seeing that this education and these processes and methods that improve open source compliance are used throughout the industry. I think it helps not just us, but it helps helps the entire industry. So the first thing is you got to know what's in your product for it. In order to do this, it's very helpful if you can actually build what you get from your supplier. So that is interesting. Sometimes the software is embedded. And so deeply embedded. And so it's not, you can't do this 100% of the time, but it's useful if you can validate the source that's provided to you and that that matches the binaries on your component. So some of the, one of the things that you have to do is you have to provide what we call attribution. Most licenses, even, even permissive ones like MIT or BSD require that you give someone notice about the presence of that software and possibly the copyright or the authors somewhere in the product text. And some, some licenses require this to only accompany the source and others require that accompany the product. Well, and so it used to be that we just put stuff on a paper manual. But as we've been used more and more open source, it's gotten way too long for that. So here's some of the requirements for different licenses. Different licenses like MIT or BSD requires stuff either to accompany the source or they require that it accompany the binaries, which means the product BSD for actually required that you give notice in the advertising materials. That is a super obnoxious clause that the, actually, the whole industry kind of worked hard to eliminate that. I don't think you'll find much BSD for licensed software out there, but that's an example of, you know, there's a big variety of places where this these requirements required you to put place, put things. And so in order to simplify things, most companies will just gather everything, the licenses, the attributions, the copyrights licenses, and they'll put it on a single page in the device. And that's accessible by a menu item. And so if you look on your own phone, I have an Xperia phone here. So if you look under about and legal information on your phone, you'll see this huge long screen. In fact, the scroll bar I think is only one pixel big is or two pixels. It's hard actually to get to the scroll bar, but and, but you have all this information it's included with the product. Now, so what happens if you have a product that has no display. And there are some products that have no paper docs either. And there are even some products that have no display no paper docs and no packaging. So what people do and I'm not, I'm not going to make any judgment about whether this is sufficient or not but what people have seen people do is they put a web link, either on the product packaging if it has packaging or if there's no product packaging I've heard of people describing a web link on the product itself. So, I think in that case that's about as well as you can do. And then of course at that link whatever the website is you have to keep that website up and you have to have the information, all the relevant information there. The other thing that you have to provide is you have to provide source code, or an offer for source. So the GPL gives two options for this so let's let's talk about those two options. So, one of the things you can do is provide the actual source code with the product itself so the GPL says accompany it with the complete corresponding machine readable source code on a medium customarily used for software interchange. Some of your options here you could include physical media like a USB stick or CD ROM and I've actually seen examples of this and, and those are fine some some products that you can actually put it on the internal storage in the product itself. And this is an interesting option it does solve some issues. It makes certain other things easier so you don't have to create a download site you don't have to keep it populated for a period of time. You don't have to do physical fulfillment after the fact you once you've done it in the product you don't have to. Yeah, I don't have to keep doing it in the in the future and you don't have to give the software to anyone who asked for it you only have to give it to your product recipients is kind of baked into your product delivery. The reason that this is not used very often there's a couple reasons one. There are products that don't have sufficient internal storage. Right, we are talking about embedded products here deeply embedded. But even, even then, if you're going to do firmware updates, you're going to do those over the air. You can't be shipping a USB stick or a new CD ROM with every firmware update their size issues, even if you wanted to kind of include the source with the CD update so ultimately, ultimately, this is a solution that is not used very often in the industry so the other solution is to provide an offer for source instead of the source itself you provide an offer. And the wording of the GPL here is a company with a written offer valid for at least three years to give any third party for a charge no more than your cost of physically performing source solution, a complete machine real copy of the corresponding source code on a medium customarily used for software interchange. And that last part is kind of key. So most community members feel like an internet download site is sufficient. However, I've talked to a fair number of lawyers and most lawyers believe that this should be interpreted that language should be interpreted as the medium used for software interchange in 1999 when the license was written. So offering only on the internet is not sufficient. So an offer of a CD or something up maybe a mag tape. I don't know that be rude is is required. And then I want to take a little segue here. So it, but it varies so different venues may interpret this differently. So the I already said the licenses don't include a choice of law. So something that may be made a decision in one country may not apply in another country. But if you're dealing with a large multinational corporation which I am with Sony. You have to look at all the different countries. The license can be interpreted in different countries actually in Germany there is case law there was a court case said you must provide the option to obtain physical media. So there's a legal precedent there and German courts have taken the GPL seriously, including details about the source offer so you have to be careful. I just want to take just a tiny bit of a segue here or a detour certain effects of or features of German law were used by one litigate to gain a lot of money with a particular legal strategy. So, and I'm not going to go into the details of that. I have a resource page at the end of these slides that has information about that case it was the litigate was his name was Patrick McCarty. And the bottom line there is don't sign any consent agreements or compliance agreements in Germany without consulting a lawyer and reading up on the strategy there. Anyway, I'll just leave it at that. So, there are places where you need to be careful with your interpretation and your fulfillment of the license requirements. And then, even within a single country, you can have different contributors to a project who interpret the license differently. So, so it's, it's, it's not as clear cut, you know, fulfilling all the requirements is not as clear cut as a lot of people say. In terms of duration, so how long do you have to offer the source code well, it's not three. So you have to offer it from three years for the last shipment of the binary. So you're distributing a binary to someone and it's three years from from that date. But that's not the last shipment of the product if you do over there updates you're going to be providing updated firmware, and that's going to be another distribution of the binary and it and it doesn't mean three years from the date that you last put the firmware on your website. It's three years from the last from the time someone last downloaded the firmware so the firmware could be up there really long time even after the lifetime of the product. You have to keep providing software so that people can obtain it within three years after so this is usually however after having said all that. It's usually not a big problem. There's virtually no incentive for companies to take software off their sites and stuff just hangs around a long time so technically you could be removing stuff. But most people don't do it so the duration is not that big of a deal. And then I'll just make one observation. If someone is asking you for physical media. They are most likely a person who has more interest in your compliance and how you're doing with that then they do with the source because if your source is out on the internet site that's easier for people to obtain. So I just a red flag handle requests for source promptly and carefully. So now to the source itself what must the source include so for the GPL license which is the main license that requires people to distribute source says for an executable work complete source code means all the source code for all modules it contains plus any associated interface definition files, plus the scripts used to control compilation and installation of the executable. So there's a term used elsewhere in the license and by most lawyers there's an acronym that's used complete and corresponding source code or CCS you'll hear that for short. So, the GPL also says the source code for work means the preferred form of the work for making modifications for it so that means you cannot deliver obfuscated code. And it needs to be something that actually can be worked with by human in terms of modifying it and rebuilding it. And it's unfortunate but I actually have seen examples of supplier providing obfuscated code. I'm not going to name names because they, they came clean and and and provided an obfuscated code later so we're, we treat that as an anomaly. But you, you should not do it should be something that some developer can actually use now about rebuilding so you does the definition of CCS require that a recipient can reproduce binaries exactly. And I would argue no. So it's very difficult to read reproduce binary in exact form in fact there's a whole, there's a whole. Not industry but there's a whole movement to try to do reproduce builds and this has been a source subject for decades so I think that's too high of a bar to require of a vendor. Does it does the definition of CCS require distribution of compilers linkers ID user proprietary tools. No, it does not you don't have to provide the compiler. You don't have to provide the any proprietary tools. It does raise an interesting question and in my opinion and I'm not going to talk about this a lot but is it compliant to use proprietary tools to build open source software so can I use a commercial tool chain. But you can keep doing this thought experiment for longer and say well is it compliant to use tools that are unavailable to the public can I make my own tool and use that. And I'm not even going to get into that I don't know. It's never been tested to my knowledge and people don't actually even talk about it. But having said all that my view is that what is required is the scripts used to control compilation and installation. And this means auto tools configure scripts config files and makes files and that's sufficient for most packages. Now another issue that comes up sometimes is reinstalling. Because the license requires scripts used to control that installation. It has that phrase in it some people interpret that to mean that you need to be able to install the software on a particular device. So license does not actually say that doesn't mention the act of installation or the target of installation it just says the script used for installation. And I'll talk a little bit about that so industry practice. In fact fully supports the use of GPL software in read only memory or ROM. So you can put GPL software in a ROM where it cannot be reinstalled in place on the same device that it was delivered on. And that's been a practice that's been supported and and there are even quotes about GPL reinstallation not applying in that case. So I don't think the license requires reinstalling. So if you go back and look at the license history. It's pretty interesting so BSD licenses kind of came into effect around 1988. GPL actually v version one came out in 89 and it was generalization of the Emacs license that Richard Solomon had been applying to some of the software in the GNU. Sweet or GNU project. And the history is pretty interesting. GPL v2 was released in 91 and was adopted by Linus Torvalds and then GPL v3. There were some perceived flaws and in GPL v2 and Richard Solomon and others worked on a new release of GPL that came out in 2007. There was a long discussion period on that several years. And for very a variety of reasons, including not really agreeing with some of the intent behind the license. GPL v3 was not ever adopted by the Linux kernel. And so I want to talk here about interpreting the license. I think it's important because at this point people will start talking about, well, what is the what is the intent of the license and first the overriding legal principle is that the intent only matters if the license is unclear. So license does not have its own tent. It is not a sentient being license is an expression of the intent of the copyright owners of the software and it's not. It may reflect the intent of the author of the license, but that's not the person who is making the agreement. It's the copyright owners of the software who are making the agreement. So the problem comes up with Linux and with other projects that have multiple authors as well who whose intent matters. Is it the leaders of the project? Is it anyone? The Linux kernel now has about 14,000 contributors. So I'm sure that there's probably a bell curve of different intents for how the license should be interpreted. And but I will I will say this. So Linus Torvald's intent for the kernel is very clear. He has said on numerous times that the intent is tit for tat and that expression means that I give you something you give me the same thing back. So if I give you source code, you give me source code back. And again, that's been Linus has said that a number of times and a number of different venues. And I think that's so I believe that that is his intent. I've seen other leading kernel developers agree with that interpretation. So what are the license requirements? Again, this is my view. I'm not speaking on behalf of Sony Corporation. But my view is you give people the source, all of the source, including make files, configure scripts, config files. Customers should be able to build the software, but there's no requirement to exactly reproduce what you've built. And there's no requirement to reinstall on a particular device. So if we have if if a vendor has made fixes to bash and you think those fixes are good, you can apply them to your version of bash and use it on your desktop or anywhere else. If we've put a driver in for for a chipset or a feature on a chip, and then you can take that feature and use it on the phone of your own making. So vendors are not required, in my opinion, to produce hardware that can run binaries that are produced by third parties. So bottom line, I believe secure product lockdown is allowed by GPL v2. And I don't think I'm alone in that requirement, interpretation of the requirement. So GPL v2, GPL v3 came about because of because of that interpretation, I believe. So if you look at GPL v3, really the requirements there sought to impede lockdown and change the terms. And GPL v3 does actually require keys to install the software on certain products. And most CE vendors, including Sony, strongly avoid GPL v3 for this reason. So there are a couple of different views about that. One is that the GPL v2 had that intent all along and the changes in GPL v3 are just changing the wording to strengthen that. But another view is, well, if the GPL v2 incorporated that requirement, you wouldn't need to change the wording. So the GPL v3 is a different license. And there are some people, very clearly some people who have been vocal that that was not their intent to disallow lockdown. So take that for what it's worth. And the final thing here is that many projects adopted the Linux kernel and GPL software based on the wording of GPL v2 and not of GPL v3. So you can't hold them. I don't think it's fair to hold them to the standard of GPL v3 or to the requirements of GPL v3. And even Richard Stallman has said it's evil to change the terms of the deal and expect people to abide by a different license than what they agreed to. So now I want to talk a little bit about gotchas.  So what happens is languages change over time and projects change over time. And these are two sources of things that you really have to watch out for. So MPL stands for Mozilla Public License and over time it changed its wording slightly. And so as a vendor, if you're using MPL software, you need to pay attention to the version that's on the license that's on the version of the code that you're using, the version of the license on the version of the code you're using. MPL 2.0 has a complete and corresponding source code wording that's more similar to the GPL and MPL 1.0. Also, well, a similar issue with GPL v2 to GPL v3. So there are packages out there that are widely used packages. And these are, this particular one is owned by the Free Software Foundation that was originally written under GPL v2 but then switched license to GPL v3. And it's not the packages themselves, you can go back and find those old versions of the packages. But the interesting issue comes up with what about patches to that project? So for instance, there's a very interesting and useful patch to plug a security vulnerability in Bash called Shellshock. And the patch for that was submitted simultaneously by the same person or same organization to version 4.3 of Bash, which was GPL v3. And version 3.2 of Bash, which was GPL v2. So what is the license of that patch? Well, I would say it's the license of the project it was contributed to, but it gets more complicated than that. So you can envision places where people are extracting patches from versions of the software that have a different license and are they, you know, can they be accepted in back ports. So there's a lot of factors to that. That's something that you really need to look out for. So just be really, really careful in handling of any packages that are GPL v2 that you know have switched to a different license. And then there's another example. There are other examples where it's not, it's not trivial to figure out the license for all of the outputs from a package. So for instance, in Util Linux NG, it's mostly GPL v2. And if you look at the copying file that's at the top of the source code directory that says GPL v2, I think it may now say GPL v2 and some other stuff. But you have to go look at the headers that are on individual files because there are a couple of files that are actually GPL v3. So you have to be paying attention and looking closely at this stuff to make sure you don't get caught. So this is, this is the part of the presentation. Well, I'll just unlock ability in my opinion is not required by GPL v2, but I think it's a topic that a lot of companies, the E companies are interested in. And there's a lot of discussion in the industry about it. So I'm going to talk about it anyway at at my own legal and reputational peril. So you can have, there's a spectrum of unlockability, right? So you can have a fully unlocked product, a not unlockable product, which is a lockdown product to put in more positive terms with a double negative. Or you can have something that you can unlock and then reinstall the OSS only. So let me talk about those. A fully unlocked product is something where, okay, and I'm talking about kind of a specific class of products that have the ability to stream content and or and or the ability to connect to a back end service. So I'm not talking about some little iot device that doesn't have a whole bunch of other considerations that's like I got 100% open source stack that's that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about a product with a mixed stack consisting of proprietary and open source software.  Okay, so first, this is not required by any open source license, including gpl v3. So open source licenses only cover software that is open source. It doesn't cover the proprietary software or the or the streaming keys or the back end keys. Those are not, those are not part of the open source. And for some products, not for all of them, but for some products, it's simply not supportable as a business proposition. And so the example I'll give out here is video game consoles and network play. So if you can unlock the product and you can alter the operating system, then trust me, you can figure out a way to cheat in online gameplay. And that's kind of the reason that people do this. And so that is an example of a product where is the the ecosystem relies on there being a protection of the capabilities of the individual nodes on the network. Or to make it fair for other players. And so that's part of the reason people buy the software is when they do network play, they don't want people to be playing unfairly. So it's actually kind of baked into the whole business model and and what customers want. So a fully unlocked product, I think is unrealistic. It only works in a world of perfect and honest actors and that is unfortunately not the world we live in. So let's talk about the opposite end of the spectrum, which is mostly companies locked down the product and just don't look back. And so you can argue whether that's good or bad, but the security for this type of thing is often done in multiple layers. You've got encryption for the update images themselves, the things that are transferred from the back end over the air to the product for updating you've got on the device you've got trusted execution rings and trusted protection modules. They're holding the secret keys and stuff you've got encrypted file systems. And then you've got kernel module application signing so everything's verified before it starts. So these products are really locked down hard, because the industry has shown itself well certain as sectors of the consumers of these products have shown themselves to be pretty agile at breaking in and and doing stuff. But there are counter examples right so I know that there are some experienced phones that are unlockable and some Google Pixel phones not all of the phones but some of them. So it is possible to do some level of unlocking you don't have to lock everything up. And so this is a product. I'm going to describe here that allows you to unlock the product and reinstall only the open source software. And a couple of notes about this so this does give consumers the ability to modify install modified open source software. While at the same time protects the interests of the content industry and consumers who want to stream content. If you if you anyway so there's no obligation to make proprietary software work with open source software that's not in any license. So what that means is may require the removal or disabling of proprietary software. What that ends up doing is so the device once you've unlocked it like this you may lose quite a bit of functionality, depending on the stack it's heavily dependent on what items are in your stack. So the customer the bottom line is customer demand for this is very low this is not your average consumer that's trying to break into their TV set or their phone or, or whatever or their streaming device. But because the customer demand is low it's a very hard sell to your business and so as there's just not enough. You know customers to make it interesting to do the difficult engineering work involved. This can be a one way action. That's most often how it's done is that once you unlock the product you can't relock it again and get back those proprietary software those content keys. That is actually technically very very difficult once you've removed the content keys there are some places in those layers of security where right once operations are performed so you can only. You can't actually rewrite the encryption keys for some flash devices for example. So, okay, so having said all that. Let me let me just dive into what I recommend. So this is kind of the summary wrap up portion here. These are the kind of main things that you need to think about. And what I recommend you do so first in terms of communication. Please please please communicate with your upstream suppliers and do it in advance don't do it as an afterthought. Get your suppliers involved with open chain the open chain project make sure they have processes in place. I is sad but I'm aware of several major vendors who have had what I call OCRUD moments where they found out a supplier was not giving them the right stuff, or was not giving them any stuff and and and that's a really awkward and difficult situation for a vendor to get into. So some of the ideas I have are. You can put penalties in place in your procurement contracts again this is for kind of large suppliers who have procurement contracts for you can put penalties for failure to disclose open source software or you can require permission in advance to deliver components with open source software there's a couple different ways to deal with that. I think it's good if you can get a license manifest that talks about all the files on your device and try and get the license for every single file. So don't do don't don't do this as an afterthought don't have this be during your QA of your product you're assembling all this information try to get it up front. Another thing that you can try. I don't think very many companies do this, and I'm not going to assert that Sony does it in all cases, but you can try to build what you get from your supplier. So I guess that your source be accompanied with a script that doesn't start to finish build. And one of the things you find is that products have a lifetime of product has life in the five to 10 years the build environment changes substantially over that time or what's the kind of the current distro. And so it becomes obsolete and very hard to reproduce so I recommend Docker file to capture things like the host OS the tool chains and other programs. But if you have an internal team if you could have another team besides that team kind of test out the build. This is highly aspirational I'm not saying anybody does this now but I think this would be a good thing for the industry to move towards. And then in source availability this is pretty obvious make an internet download site where people can obtain the source for your products. And there are some people who sometimes play games with only trying to allow just customers to get to it. But I don't I don't see a reason for that just make the source code available to all. And then you do need an offer for physical media. You won't get much traffic you won't have to find yourself burning a lot of CDs but you should make sure you have one and that it works in terms of unlock ability. In my view, unlocking your product is not required by gpl v2. So, but it does make community members and customers happy. And so you may decide that you want to do that there there are good reasons to make an unlockable product. And so independent of what your view is of the license requirements. If you support unlocking, then if you handle back end services or streaming content anything protected you'll have to figure out a way to deal with that and it's more difficult than it sounds. And if you don't support reinstallation, you must avoid gpl v3 soccer that's my opinion. So, final statements. So first, I hope I haven't scared you with all this talk. It sounds like a lot of work and and there are there are some eyes to dot and teased across. But it is possible so people people have been doing this for many years, a compliance with the license is required it's not like it's an optional thing it's part of. The payment that you're making for the open source that you received you've gotten an awful lot of value as a vendor from open source software from the developers to put time and effort into it and giving back to them. What they asked for is is appropriate and and legal. It's not trivial, but it is achievable. And then I, again, I'm going to make my disclaimer at the end here due to legal uncertainty. Make sure you make decisions based on kind of knowledge of the risk and with your own company's legal team. And then my last thing is a plug for the open chain prime really should check out the open chain project and I have a little four leaf clover here on on here so I hope that the information is presentation has been useful to you and that you'll benefit from it and good luck in your compliance activities and hope to see you around the industry so with that I will go ahead and take some questions.


What's up everybody Jason here for Jasper's case base comm we're giving away ten free spots in this break and We're getting away the last five spots in the PSA slab value pack break with this 2022 tops clearly authentic baseball one box break Random teams number four So again guys instead of selling 30 spots we only sold 20 tonight only if we sold it out We're gonna give away ten free spots to customers that bought in which we are then at the end we'll randomize all 30 names and Top five get spots in the Jasper slab pack break, which would be coming up next Get three random slabs in a pack and a $30 spot for only 54 bucks So again dice really here. Here's a customer name. So here's the 20 customers that bought in and we're gonna randomize them 10 out of the 20 we'll get extra spots We'll paste in the names and we're randomized because their names and teams There should be the hits out of the one box break and then we'll have the list here ready With the original list with the winners and we'll see who gets into the main break So here we go dice roll it We got a three and a five Eight times good luck top ten get extra free spots one two three four five six seven eight Eight times Chad Todd Steve Bennett Bennett Danny Steve Wade Patrick and Steve Top ten right there. So you guys get free extra spots Paste you guys in there and give you guys a little character sign two three four five six Seven all right now. I'm gonna copy this list for later And let's do the names and teams for the one box break a clarity authentic So again eight times here now one two three four five six seven eight Eight times eight times Bennett then a Chad right Let's go eight times here on the team now one two three four five six seven eight Eight times eight eight Rangers down to the blue jays Now stick to what you got guys because it is a quick little box break And let's quickly run that and out of 50 for Detroit a keel but do little tops now So 38 out of 50 a keel but do that's for Detroit going to Todd reared Your free spot right there So you go buddy you got the hit Now let's Do the randomizer for the free spots in the PSA slab pack break Dice roll it. It's a three and a sixth for nine times this time top five get free of those spots in the break. Good luck three six nine one two three four five six seven eight nine Boom nine times Patrick you're in Chad right you're in Steve Bennett and Bennett Congratulations, there you go. So three six nine times congratulations to the top five So there you go folks coming up next is the break itself You guys are guaranteed three slaps per spot


I'm gonna random, quick random here for 23, 24, Beaumont, Comu, Basketball, Hobby, and Delight, seven box play, number 15. This is for the non-college cards from that break. So there were no hits, there's just like some refractors in the base. So seven here, they'll all go to one spot. Seven. No, seven.  Telling you to. One, two, three, four, five, six, and seven. Stanford. I mean, I'll literally pay for your buying. Stanford. I don't understand people. All right, thanks again. Moving on.