Before, we will have a descriptor for each interest point, and then be in high-dimensional space, and we want to then cluster them to come up with the words, and that will be our vocabulary. The English language, I look at it before 1060 ago, but visual words, we don't have vocabulary, so we have to come up with our own vocabulary. Yeah. Do you make the point? Oh, okay, so we're called the Scandinavian Institute of Computational Vandalism, which, okay, thanks. Which, one meaning of that, the CV is in part upon on computer vision, and as you just saw, that was a clip from a series of lectures published from the University of Central Florida, I believe it is, from a computer engineering course about computer vision. But it has another meaning. Yes, the name of the Institute is derived from a project from the painter Asger Yorn that started in the 60s, a sort of photographic survey of the arts of the vandals. And the vandals had a very particular characteristic, that they didn't make art from a clean and empty surface, but they would draw upon already existing images. And so, for instance, the most earlier graffiti that we can find in art history come from the vandals. And the idea of Yorn while doing that was to look for a culture where he could find a way to talk about images, using images. And the different publications he made from this archive are what you can see here, a sort of long collections of images that are put next to each other and that are in dialogue. So here you can see a long series of images containing feet or foot. And here, one of his most well-known books, La langue crue la cuit, where he gathered images from multiple sources and highlights. So it's not only a collection of images, but it's also a painterly intervention on these images to highlight the presence of Tongue in surprising ways in the different pictures he has collected. So the presentation we will make is about this attempt to try to engage in a dialogue with images, trying to find ways to not describe the images from the outside with words, with historiography, with textual description, but to try to see how it can make from the image, to make emerge a series of descriptions that come from the image itself. And to do that, what we started a few years ago was to look with curiosity in what computer vision algorithms would offer us to do so. And one of our first, let's say, experiment with that was to look on something called the surf features. Basically, surf features are elements in an image that remain stable even if this image is rotated, for instance. These are elements, many of you are familiar with it, but these are elements that are used, for instance, to create a panorama of different images and to stitch these images together. And we were interested not only in knowing about the existence of these elements, but also in looking into what they are and to sort of use the lens of the algorithm to discover new aspects within the images. So, for instance, what Michael is doing here is to scan through an image that's ordered by size, all the surf features discovered in an image. And of course, the more we go in the bigger details, we see what for the algorithm is important, is somehow what identifies this image proper. Can go to the next slide. OK, press the plus. Yeah, press the plus. Maybe go again, a bit longer. Yeah, so that's how, for instance, this one. So, for instance, what we started to do then was to see how these little elements, these surf features, could, how they could help to connect different images together. So, for instance, here are a feature taken from, sorry, taken from one image and a feature taken from the other. And it's where the algorithm finds a sort of point that is extremely similar between the two images. And of course, it directs our look to completely different parts of the image than what we would do if we want to identify the content of this image or if we want to somehow look at it spontaneously. So, it really changes, it directs our look to a very different vocabulary to talk about the image and a visual vocabulary to talk about it. Maybe I can show the network. So, actually, indeed, as we started to work with, in this case, I started working with SIFT, which is indeed a sort of patent-encumbered, not completely free software algorithm for doing features as well, like surf. And actually just trying to get a grip on indeed what are these features. So, this is an interface, actually, well, actually, I quite like, oh, I didn't pull that one open. So, anyway, this is an interface that you can kind of scroll through a series of images and looking at their features. You can place them back in their original position in the image, eventually kind of putting the image back to kind of see. But you can also really, literally take them apart to start to kind of consider what they are as elements and eventually, for instance, features have a predominant direction in addition to a size. So, you can, of course, like order them in a way by their kind of orientation or look at the scale and eventually consider the entire collection of images in this way, which is kind of a kind of collage method when you start to see, also becomes this kind of very strange sort of chewing monster. But, yeah, and I mean, it was just sort of playful and it was an interesting link, let's say. I mean, continuously, I think we're interested in these kinds of links. Despite the quote we started from, we're interested in actually how the history of kind of visual arts can talk to, let's say, computer vision of today. And so sort of, let's say, taking these tools and considering them actually sort of means of producing collage is very interesting, not just in kind of simulating the surfaces of the past, but in a sense, reinvestigating the materials of the past with kind of contemporary techniques and considering what that could mean. This? Yeah. Okay. Then, so this is an interface, sorry. That, well, we started actually then looking, we made a kind of interface where we wanted to look at actually images in their layers. So in some sense, actually inspired by a kind of GIMP or bitmap, let's say, kind of program, imagining where you could take images and look at, say, red channel, look at the gradients, look at the contours, switch off, actually, let's see. Actually, even in some cases, apply text. Sorry, actually, that was not the same image, but consider actually as well what happens when you throw OCR software at it and look for text within an image. So just actually, in a way, trying to get a grip on this sort of, in fact, when we start to take as something as simple, let's say, as sift, which is not simple at all, in fact, you come to a whole kind of layer cake. We talk about the princess and the pea of there's an incredible stack of actually decisions and representations and algorithms that are involved in picking out a particular segment of an image and considering that a feature, for instance, to do with image gradients. And so we enjoyed this interface as a way to, let's say, look at an archive. So in this case, it's a kind of random walk through the archive where based on each of the different orderings, sorry, based on each of the different filters, you have ways of ordering. Was that five? Five, yeah. Okay, just a second. And so this kind of walks through, actually what it does is here it builds up all the layers of a single image, then picks, in this case, sift features and then it's moving through adjacent images based on, I mean, they're global properties in this case, like maybe total number of sift features or total length of the contour or total amount of text duality determined by using OCR, what's the OCR software, I can't. Okay, sorry, Tesseract, sorry, I wanted to say Tesseract. Yeah, and these are all indeed kinds of ways to, let's say, look at an archive in a different way. For instance, we were also actually using the same, oh, I took it away, but for instance, simply tracing the algorithms. And we were gonna mention this because it's actually, at the moment, this is on display at the Photographers Gallery here in London, a tracings installation where we just take the original photographs from Oscar Jorn's SICV, the original comparative analyzms, photographs and then just apply open CV contour detection and then eventually you start to see the image trace. So it's just a way actually to look again at these images and kind of revalue them, reconsider them. And I think the last thing that we're gonna show, or have I skipped something, I mean, the last thing that we did was an installation which was quite playful and I think looks nice to see, which was we're both working in Constant in an office in Brussels, this is some test images. And in this case, what you have is, was an installation that ran for 40 days in the window of Constant and basically doing face detection. Again, one of the very high level detection, a hard cascade based on a training set of the default frontal face, probably the most popular kind of application of hard cascade. And basically just detecting faces, first in live images, then replacing faces from other faces detected in an archive, in this case, from a Norwegian graphic designer we work with as well, and Gujamsk Gujamskard is his name, who collects Oscar Jorn, so there's a sort of link in there. And we really liked actually, yeah, this kind of, indeed it sort of, and then it's all kind of facing outward so people can actually look at the process of what's happening when it detects faces, finds faces in the archive, shows the original archived pictures with their faces and replaces them and produces these kinds of loops. Yeah, which I think is a kind of, indeed a sort of playful way to make people look at actually the kinds of algorithms that of course increasingly people are familiar with face detection from their cameras. And yeah, I think we're good to end in a minute. And actually there's a particular moment that I quite like and I thought that was a nice ending. Because of course, I mean, part of this is I think a way to maybe ask questions about, increasingly we're in a situation where these techniques are often used for surveillance. I mean, I think it would be a great super cut to put all the kind of computer vision lectures that contextualize their work in terms of surveillance, surveillance, applications. And I think it's really an interesting question, how can you kind of empower people to maybe engage with these, rather than just be scared about these technologies and feel kind of out of control of them, really take them on and consider what they are as materials. And so in that sense, one of the last, yeah, the last image I'll show is just, oh, which one was it? Yes, so this was indeed captured one night, which I kind of really liked that it was somebody both, sort of giving the finger to this face detector, but actually also doing it proudly. This is not somebody kind of hiding away from it, but really performing for the algorithm, which, yeah, I thought had quite some strength. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Yep, for sure. So we have time for like three, four questions. If they're short, anyone has a question for the violinist? Now they're here. Well, we stay. They're staying, yes. I thought it was really interesting particularly that you're sort of exploring computer vision and I wondered in the techniques that you use, whether you, how closely they represent what you understand in terms of how human vision works and visual processing, have you kind of looked into those areas? I mean, do you want to say? I'll start, yeah. Well, okay, so yeah. So, I mean, the quick just response to say, based on, I mean, for me, it was really interesting watching because I would look in on how this particular installation was working and yeah, I mean, of course, it does, you know, there's sort of a beautiful thing that happens with as you get to sort of twilight, images start to pop up as the light changes and as indeed reflections start to become a bit strange and so it's hard not to kind of anthropomorphize in some sense what the algorithm is doing and imagine, you know, it's imagining things at twilight or it become the kind of dreams at night. You know, in fact, I think part of what's, but at the same time, what's very interesting is looking at the mishits. I mean, I think part of what this project, what we tried to feature is the fact that face detection often doesn't work. It's very particular what its vision is and indeed as a kind of recurrent theme with all kinds of machine learning and, you know, looking at how, yeah, it does, it is certainly based on kind of ideas about human perception and indeed sometimes it really feels like it's working in that sense of, wow, it's seeing something, but it's also a very particular, strange kind of vision and so we're as interested, I think, in those kind of more exceptional aspects of it too. I think too often when they're presented, they're sort of overrated. People kind of present facial recognition as something that really works really well and to some degree that's true and to some degree there's something else, I think, well. I think that one of the point most moving, I think, is this strange intersection between what we think human vision is and what the algorithm shows and how, as you say, it looks like it works and then it surprisingly doesn't at some point. I think there is another element that was very important for us is the dimension of scanning and to consider that what we learn from working with those algorithms is that they scan images and scanning is a very strange word because it means at the same time really like going very quickly over something and it means also going very minutely with a lot of precision and this discrepancy between precision and moving across, going through a large quantity then focusing on a sift point that becomes really the nail around which you can articulate a series of connection. This is not so far from something you can experience when I look at the scene here, probably that I will really brush off and then focus on something, so it's not so far but it's really extended to another magnitude of elements and I think that's very important for, because we are obviously working with archives, it's very important I think because it really connects memory and vision in a way because for instance to scan is also scanned in French, it's to make verse and to make verse it's really, it's not just a way to embellish discourse but it's also a way to be able to remember something because it has verses and this whole, what is revealed by all these features, these affinities are ways to sort of anchor memory within the visual. I think that's also a very important aspect of that. So we have time for maybe one quick one. So I noticed that the facial recognition thing seemed to have a bunch of things in the catalog that weren't actually faces. Did you set the threshold low or did it actually pick those things up as faces? Yeah, I think part of what we were interested in in that case was in fact we were using different archives on it and we switched back to this one. That was actually of Gautam's guard, the Norwegian graphic designer and from a book which he calls archive by the way and we particularly liked that book because it revealed something about the kinds of objects he has, he has these beautiful kind of wire instruments or tapestries with particular graphic patterns and that he himself plays with in his layouts as faces. He put or any kind of symmetry like there's a beautiful book, the book of Job, the Bible laid out by Baskerville will detect faces in kind of symmetrical typography. So there was again a sort of overlap between this algorithm, the kind of mishits of a face recognition and something which said something which even Gautam, who himself is very skeptical of all kinds of software, he's in his 70s, 80s and but he has to kind of laugh as well when he sees the results, he recognizes something in it and he's immediately suspicious of exactly how it's working or as at one point we tried to describe what contours were and at some point he says, ah, I understand, it's cheating. Yes, I think so. So, a round of applause for the Wendelist.


I really don't have to do much. Thank you, Satish, to actually talk about it and set the stage for why I would really urge for designers to think rural. So till just last December, I was doing UX for users who are technology experts, sitting in the data centers of the world. And then I decided to do something that can challenge me further, take design and use it to impact lives, use technology to actually make meaningful contribution to people who have either no or negligible exposure to it. In fact, people who are yet to see its benefits. So why do we really need to think rural? The number of people I'm talking about, these people are mostly living in rural areas. Can you tell me really why do we really need to think rural? Why should we have rural perspective in mind? The very important thing, about 68% of Indians still live in the rural areas. And it's only 32% of us who are urban population. And the rural population is big, of course, because India is largely an agrarian country. That means most of its population is still using agriculture as a primary principle means of livelihood. Right? So do you know what percentage of rural households are dependent on agriculture? Any guesses? It's 70%. It's 70% of rural households are still, there is only one occupation that they have. So at the same time, we know that internet population is growing. Rural India is supposed to be contributing to 109 million internet users by the end of this year. And interestingly, lots and lots of people are using phones. There is need of communication even among them. Can you guess what would be the most used app in, say, among farmers? Let me wait for this. Awesome. Awesome. Yes, one out of four farmers today uses WhatsApp. It's primarily, it's, of course, driven completely for the need of communication. And that means that the internet class of 2018 is going to be more rural, more mobile, and more vernacular than the counterparts of today. They're going to be really using internet for lots of different new things that we haven't envisioned at all. And so how is technology impacting their lives? How are we, as designers, are really impacting their lives? What does the future hold for them? So at EggroStar, we are specifically focused on using technology to improve the lives of farmers in rural India. And we are taking one step at a time. Today, we are able to help them to get the agree inputs at affordable prices directly delivered at their doorsteps. At the same time, we're also providing them real-time information through these phones. And also be able to make them talk to experts, talk to, have expert advice available to them. So let's meet a farmer. He's Ramesh, he actually lives in Mansa, which is very close to Ahmedabad, 52 kilometers from Ahmedabad. And he has 12 big land, grows three to four crops in a year. That means, say, he actually grew cotton last season, maybe black gram, a couple of vegetables. He makes around three to four laks, which is also not very steady income every year. It's not just exactly the same. He has his wife helping him. And he has kids going to the private school. He himself can read and write Gujarati. At the same time, the wife goes and helps with the livestock and basically contributes to the family income. In the evenings, say, he is meeting with other farmers. He's very conscious of his produce. He's always finding ways to improve, right? And he's exposed to technology. He knows what's really going around in the world, what's really happening in the world. And can we really say that we can impact his life? This is the question what design at AgroStar is trying to solve. How do we use technology to meet the agree needs of the farmer so that he can grow healthy crops and in turn make a little better life, better living? And trust me, I'm a design addict and I'm a design thinking addict and I really believe the design can do wonders in India. How many of you really believe the same? Raise your hands. That's amazing. That's really awesome. This is exactly what the AgroStar's technology team, everybody at AgroStar, say operations or anybody around, is trying to do it. We do believe that user experience is as important to a rural user as it is important to anybody who is sitting in the urban environments, right? And we want to envision how will the technological inputs really be used by this person? We don't have to really just create simple, easy to use products, but also magical experiences for him. He hasn't had those experience with you and me and have already having, right? So we're trying to envision that. Of course, it's gonna be really slow and we are taking simple, very small steps at a time. When we started, you have to really believe me. Like any commerce or MCommerce group of people wanted to try to reach out to these users. We had product catalog from our partners who also wanted to reach in our farmers because we didn't have to really reinvent a wheel. Things are there, already there. There are good quality products just that they don't reach the farmers. So what we did, we started with that, right? But it was very interesting to see farmers' expectations were completely different. He was thinking in terms of his annual season, his crops, the whole thing revolves around his one year cycle. And we went back to the table and of course, we laid really lot of emphasis on making sure that he is part of the design cycle. And being there on the field, literally, being there on the field and doing iterations only helps in actually making the right solutions for them. So what I have to also say that lot of participatory and co-creation with the farmer has been, that is the only way that we have been able to make him an active member of our business as well as design solutions, right? Design any process that we follow. And currently, we have around 100,000 farmers from Maharashtra, Gujarat, Rajasthan, NMP transacting with us on our platform. And of course, reaching out and at the same time, we are using quite lean processes to make sure that we have an idea, we quickly prototype it and see if it is working. That's how we work. Let me give an example of how actually we had one of the ideas right from the field and how, where it is today. So this is one of the problems. Here it is, how might we provide an ability to a farmer to solve a new problem which he just discovered in his crops by remotely guiding him. I'll have to tell you a story. So first of all, you heard, in fact, it's very interesting, you heard some of it yesterday when the IT minister talked about it. And I was like, wow, he's talking about something like this. So, this thing is like typically what the farmers would do if there is a pest or a disease in the crop, they would have to contact either one of the farmers, other farmers, or they will have to talk to the local retailer and the treatment would be less than perfect, one size fits all approach kind of a thing. So as we started making relationships and we started being, you know, having connections with them and being able to talk to them often, they started contacting us. They started, you know, sharing their issues through WhatsApp, sending images, and that's exactly what triggered. And today, we have a team of people made up of agronomists, developers, designers, and business analysts sitting with users, trying to identify a CD-like system which can actually provide recognized issues in the crop instantaneously and provide solutions to the users. So at that, I really want to mention this. One of the key things that we have to remember, these users have relatively less knowledge and skill of using digital devices as compared to us. And when I say that a simple example to that is, say for example, search for you and me, it's gonna be just a Google text box and a clear statement and there you go. But for these users, even the typing it out is added efforts, right? So it's not as simple as just designing, you will just carry forward those things. But these users are definitely eager to know what technology can do for them. And it was very interesting. I thought that it's very important to share those lessons today with the vast group of user experience people right here. So I'm gonna do that, solve the most crucial problem first. Look for those non-negotiable implicit requirements which you cannot not work, right? So trust me, we had no UI for two years. That means we had our 1,800 number on which farmers were giving us miss call. It went to viral and we were still able to solve, right? Second, be conscious of perceptions. That means that really understand what the system should really do for them, how they perceive how it should work. That also helps us to go closer to their real needs because the more you get closer to them, the more you understand them. Design for the user's inhibitions. Trust me, one MB of data means more money spent. That means every time you are taking out a rupee from the pocket, you have to give three-fold value back. You got me? So it's not, there are always these, there are always these things that you have to do, conflicting problems to solve, richer experience versus data consumption. And I would have to say, of course, I have to look at what the user can really spend on, right? So really if he's spending on, it has to be very, very valuable for him. For nothing is obvious. I would really say that make it more explanatory, avoid using jargons. We really don't have to use those terminologies which we use in urban areas. Understand them first. Many of the current trends are not familiar. They're not apparent at all. And see if actually mobile as well as web user interface has these, it has a language, right? And we have to design for non-speakers. We have to design for people who don't speak that language. That means widen our, we have to really make sure that our assumptions cover broader perspectives. There are new mental models which we have to discover and follow models that are currently existing in their real life incidents. Adapt to local circumstances and local language. I think we really don't do enough justice to the fact that there are so many languages in India and we don't design for those languages. The moment we start designing in languages other than English, we will be able to really know this 68% of the population. And for me, I have to give you a very simple example. So cotton was Kapas in Gujarat and in Hindi, right? And in Gujarati. And in Marathi, it was Kapos. And in Rajasthan, Kapas didn't ring a bell. And trust me, we all will think that Rajasthan is a Hindi speaking language state. It should definitely be understood. It was Narm for them. We learned it a very hard way. So trust me, if you really need to know them, know what they speak. And make it easier to learn and reach, teach, when I say that, that means that our users feel great when they really figure out things by themselves. At the same time, we have to give them tricks that work everywhere, everywhere. And there is a lot of mediated culture in these places. Lots and lots of mediated culture. We should definitely leverage that. When I say that mediated culture, they don't feel odd when she would explain me something or I could explain it to her. And it's quite normal. It's really, really normal for them. So basically, I feel that designers have this, it's only us who can bridge the gap between that digital divide that exists between rural and urban by providing them really great experiences and great experiences are simple. Simplicity means clarity, nothing else. It's not about volume. And of course, doing simple is not always easy to design. It only appears that way, right? Yes, we are optimists and we are eagerly tracking, learning from our solutions as the farmer is towards his journey of having a safer and stronger line of work, a better future. Quite deservingly, the future must belong to them. They have been feeding us from yours. Thank you. Questions, anybody? Okay, I don't think that's the only solution. That's one of the main solution that can do lot of things. Today, we are doing soil testing for them. Today, we are doing image processing to understand the diseases. Isn't it technology? It is impossible to not use technology. Even for two years, when we were using the missed call basis, just to read the right agronomist so that he really hears the right solution for his problem, it was technology. We have a lot of field staff out there. How are they talking to the agronomist? Because we can't have so many agronomists actually going and meeting the farmers right there. So we have this model in which we are, it's like an Uber model. If you are having a phone or you have a bicycle or a bike, that's all we are making entrepreneurs in every village who can be the main person to reach out to the rest of the farmers. So trust me, even there, we need technology to be able to make him an entrepreneur, that one person in that particular village. So I think it's combination of many things, but at the end of it, at the core level, it is definitely some bit of technology. We have to give credit to it. Aspect and everything else will be peripheral? It is about human relationships, first of all. I would say, like once we develop that, only then we can make use of those technologies. Unless we know what problems we are solving, so those human relationships help us to identify the real problems to solve. And the moment we do that, we then use technology to find out what we can do with that. We don't start, definitely, I think none of us should start from technology at all. I hope that's okay. Thank you. I have a question here, like when it comes to a rural area and farmers, so how they are connected with the technology? Are they are the ratio increasing when we give a mobile application to solve a problem to them? How they are friendly to use the devices and are we going with a different approach in terms of building a mobile application considering UX as a term for a rural area and their space of knowledge? How they can adapt to the technology? A very good question. Actually, I have to tell you how much we have to not do what we are doing like a typical UX, right? Like user experience, especially in the mobile world and mobile apps. So what we are not doing is more important than what we are doing. So even, say they have never bought online, right? So we are actually not selling online at all. They don't really know a concept of cart, right? So what our app is doing, it's triggering a call to us. That means we are knowing this farmer needs the help on this particular crop and this particular disease, say for example, as simple as that. So when you ask, did I understand your question, Will? Could you just? My other part of question was like, what is the ratio of people using it? And is that increasing or is that stagnant? Okay, good question. I'll tell you what, we have more farmers. Okay, roughly we have three million farmers right now calling us, of course, much lesser through the app. There is somebody in the family who has a phone. It can be smartphone or it can be a normal phone, like just a dialing old phone. We still get more of our calls from the missed call number than the app, but we are improving it and we are making sure that, of course, it's not for all the farmers. I can't say that we are solving for everybody. We're solving for say, progressive farmers plus people who are joining the gang. There are a lot of farmers who have their kids helping. So kids like you and me are gonna be doing it for our parents and parents are the real farmers. And that's quite interesting. Like I said, lot of mediated culture is there. So again, it's not for all the farmers, but we are getting more and more farmers on board, thankfully, because we have started entering into each village and making entrepreneurs within those villages. Yeah, farmers are little tough personas if I consider because they're not tech savvy and when it comes to selling a mobile app to them, it's really tough. So when we design enterprise products, we look for wow factor. And how do we end up with that wow factor is like we bring fancy interactions and all and try to convince our customers. So when it came to farmers, what were your USPs when you were designing the UIs? Every day was amazing. It's been a year, actually little less than a year. Yeah, almost a year. And trust me, every day has been like, whoa, really? I have to give you an example. So one of the key things that I saw was when the app raised a call and in a few seconds, he got a person talking to him from AgroStar and we know which crop you're growing and where you are, what problem you had. That was seriously, you already know what crop I have. So it's amazing the way people didn't know that technology can do as little as this, right? And the fact that we are able to give them a bill because trust me, all these local retailers, all this while have not been like, it's not their fault and whatever. We're making it as simple as that. Or if we give them instructions on how to use it in his language with images, he's like, I don't need to go to someone else to ask, right? And the good thing is, as simple as Tarpaline, you know, Tarpatri, so there was always these cuts, I'm not talking about UX on mobile and all these, we are doing UX to that last point, that product that came to him and how does he use it and how long he needs to use it and all of that. So it used to get cut, right? And whenever I used to go to field visit, I'd be like, when did he buy it? So I will figure out when did he buy it? And then I'll see that, oh, it gets cut. There has to be some solution as in, can I help him to prolong its life? And therefore we figured out that in, with every Tarpaline sheet that we are sending to a farmer, we are giving him instructions on like, these are the five things how you can increase its life. And none of these, and it's not, it's nothing that I just, I just Googled it, frankly. And I made up proper this thing, which I chapified on top of it. And it goes with every Tarpaline that we sell. And isn't that amazing? Then the farmer calls back to agro stars, this thing that, oh, you sent this too, that's great. You send me five, I tell my friends to send them too. So we're like, yeah, next time that guy will come to you, he'll send it to you. The thing is that we started small. I know it's not so easy to scale it, but we are doing it. It's not impossible. We're already in four states. Looks like it's possible. Thank you. Yeah, just one small thing. But farmers are actually from different age groups. So when you were designing your UI, you kept home as the target. Okay, for this one is the one based on that. Maybe this is the simplest thing I'll do with. Awesome, very good question. And I have super challenges, right? So we have a lot of farmers who are above 65 and all, right? We keep it till around 47 years of age, six, 50 years of age. But also, trust me, there are older farmers who can be taught and they learn very fast. Like if I, the simplest thing I've done is make it easy to tell someone how to use it. Like, okay, select your crop, select your issue, select your product. It's as simple as that. I mean, it's not, I know it's not rocket science that I'm doing, but the point is that we restricted ourselves to younger farmers because we already knew that we have people like us who have someone in the family, like who the elder farmers always had someone in the family who is tech savvy, little bit. Like they have phones and it's not, like I told you, farmers one out of four farmers are using WhatsApp. They're conversing with us using those of just, they don't want to write, right? Because they don't know really to write. But they can send us pictures, they can send their own voice. There are lots of things out there to do for those set of people, but yes, we restricted ourselves. Because otherwise it was impossible to design for everybody.


Hi, my name is Alex Mullins. I'm a Program Manager working on Visual Studio Team Services. Today, I'd like to introduce you to the new package management features we've added to VSTS. In this video, we'll walk through a demo of the package management experience, and then look at some scenarios where package management fits into your continuous delivery workflow. Specifically, we'll look at how to discover and use packages from a VSTS Nougat Feed in Visual Studio, and how to integrate package management with your existing team builds. Package management enables scenarios where your team needs to share package software components within the team or with other teams. At Connect, we're launching in public preview with support for Nougat packages, and we'll be adding support for package types like NPM in the coming months. We've built package management to be deeply integrated with other VSTS hubs like Code, Build, and Release so that package management can become a seamless part of your existing workflows. In package management, we store packages and feeds.  Feeds also let you control access to your packages with simple permissions for readers, contributors, and owners. Feeds are where you'll tell package clients like Visual Studio and Nougat.exe to find your packages. Now, let's take a look around. Package management is built as a VSTS extension. So to use it, I'll first need to install it from the marketplace. For this demo, I've already gone through the installation. If you're following along, just install the package management and Nougat package management extensions. Now, once I've installed the extensions, all of the projects in my account have a new package hub. Let's take a look around. Before we do, I'll set up the scenario. For this demo, I'm creating a new physics-based game. Another team at my company has already created a physics engine code base that they've published as a Nougat package, and I want to reuse that package in my game. So let's head to the package hub to find it. On the left, I can see all of the feeds in my account. It's important to note that in package management, all feeds are at the account level, even though the user experience appears within a particular project. We did this to enable consumption of packages from feeds across projects. For instance, the physics engine package I want to reuse was produced by the physics engine project. However, I don't need to go there to find it. Instead, I'm going to select the physics engine release feed while I'm here in the new physics game project. Once I've selected a feed, I can see a list of all the packages in it. I'm going to select the physics engine package. When I do, I can see various details about the package from its manifest, as well as some commands to install it. Since I want to use this package in a Visual Studio project, I'm now going to add the feed as a package source in the Visual Studio Nougat package manager. To do so, I'll first copy the URL from the connect to feed pop-up. Then I can open Visual Studio, open the Nougat package manager, go to the options and add a new package source. Now I can install the physics engine package into my project, just as I had installed a package from nougat.org. There's one more thing I need to do. I need to update my continuous integration builds to ensure they can also restore the physics engine package because that package lives in an authenticated feed. As part of the package management release, we've updated the Nougat installer and Nougat publisher build tasks to understand authenticated feeds. So if I edit my build, add a new build step, I can simply go to the package category and add the Nougat installer task and my CI build will be good to go. That was a quick look at the new public preview of the package management service in VSTS. We'll be building out more features in the service in the coming months, so stay tuned for the latest updates. Thanks for watching.


Hi everyone, Joe for Jaspy's casebreaks.com coming at you with 2021 Top's Chrome Baseball Hanger Box Break number sweet 16. Three different dice rolls happening here. First of all, we're giving away eight spots within the Hanger Box Break. Second dice roll will be the break itself. And the third and final dice roll will be the 2019 National Treasures Baseball spots. Big thanks to this group right here for making it happen. We just have to do one more filler and then we're in breaks on that 2019 NT Baseball. All right, first, let's give away these spots. We're giving away eight spots here. So let's roll it and randomize that list. Five into two, seven times, top eight after seven. One, two, three, four, five, six, and seventh and final time. After seven, congrats to the top eight. Corey, Jared, Harry, Tanner, Kevin, Michael, Jeremy, and Lonnie. So congrats to you. Little buy one, get one action here. Let's put those rooftops next to your names so you know that you won that spot. So now let's do the break itself. All 30 teams are in. And let's randomize names and teams six into six, 12 times. One, two, three, four, five, and six, seven, eight. And 12th and final time. After 12, we've got Lonnie down to Richard, six into six, 12 times, four of the teams. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, and 12th and final time. All right, there's the first half of the list right here. There's the second half of the list right over there. And let's print and rip. Got a Joe Adele rookie car. We've got a out of 150 Joe Adele as well. Nice, not bad. Angels. Dan O. A couple Joe Adeles and there you go. All right. So nothing too crazy there. Nice parallel though. Let's flip back over here. The main point of this is who's going to win those 2019 NT baseball spots. Let's gather everybody's names one through 30 for the third and final dice roll. Good luck everybody. Let's randomize that list five and a four, nine times. So it'll be the top eight after nine. Good luck. One, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, and fingers crossed ninth and final time. So it's only the top eight. So from nine on down is sad times. Harry, very close. Not quite though. We'll get him next time. But everyone from nine through 30. Thank you. But there can be only eight. Corey, you're in that extra spot coming in handy. Michael L. You're in Tanner, Lonnie, Richard, Michael, Dan, and Kevin. Congrats. The top eight. We'll see you in that NT break. Jaspy's casebreaks.com. Bye bye.


Finding upside a pitcher tonight and daily fantasy baseball is simple because we have Spencer Strider, what else could you possibly need? At hitter, it's a bit different because a lot of the pitchers on tonight slayed our skilled at either suppressing hard contact or suppressing fly balls. We want hard contact and fly balls and tonight we mentioned to pick either one or the other. So the pitching section, easy. Stacking section, not so much. We'll break down what y'all offenses I'm okay with despite the red flags and get you ready for Tuesday, Wednesday night in MLB DFS. Welcome on into the solo shot. That's right here on the Fandwall Podcast Network and NUMBERFIRE.com. My name is Jim Saunders. I am a senior rider and analyst for NUMBERFIRE. Here to break down a seven game and main slate on Wednesday with lock set for 707 p.m. Eastern for tonight. The one weather note onto this slate is that in New York for the Mets and the Rays, winds are in from left at 11 miles per hour. I would downgrade offense a bit there. As far as the temperatures for tonight goes, not a whole lot in terms of good weather for tonight. We only have two games or three games with temperatures above 61 degrees and a lot of those involving very good pitchers. Corbin Burns, Spencer Strider, Nathan Evaldi and then a couple of guys with weird bad at ball profiles in Drew Smiley and JP France. So we want to seek out hot weather. It might be kind of tough for tonight adding to our dilemma when it comes to stack. And we'll talk about what that means and more in just one second. The first day reminder to make sure you're subscribed to the NUMBERFIRE Daily Fantasy podcast feed wherever you get your podcasts or PGA DFS podcast for the PGA Championship is now up breaking down our thoughts on roster construction, the course, core plays and much more get that wherever you get your podcast you can all show the show over on the Fandall YouTube page along with every episode of the solo shot. If you like what you hear, give us a thumbs up on YouTube or leave us a five star rating over on Apple podcasts. The second leg of horse racing's big three is here and Fandall is the best place to bet the preakness stakes because right now all customers get a no sweat preakness bet up to $20. That means you'll get up to $20 back if your win bet doesn't win. Bet the preakness with America's number one sportsbook just visit racing.fandall.com for your chance to get a no sweat preakness bet up to $20 this Saturday. That's racing.fandall.com, age and residency, restrictions apply, offer valid on first win wager, refund issued in Nong, the travel racing site credit that expires on June 12th, 2023. Restrictions apply see terms at racing.fandall.com gambling problem call 1-800-GAMBLER. Pitching preview for this Wednesday main slate, Spencer Strider justifiably, the highest salary guy on Fandall coming in with a salary of $11,500. Garrett Cole is 11,000 flat. Nathanian Baldy is at 10-8. Corbin Burns, 10,000. Chris Bassett back up to $9,500. JP France, 93. Kode Senga, 92 with Drew Smiley at 9,000. We have Brian Beyo and Peyton Battenfield as the others at $8,000 or higher. Now, when Spencer Strider is on the slate, you probably know who our top pitcher is going to be. That's going to be Spencer Strider. And so that is no different. It should be obvious he is the top guy for tonight. I think that if you look at the other good opposite of the slate, they're fine. But Strider, even relative to Cole, Ivaldi, Burns, et cetera, separates from the pack. He's facing the Rangers, which is not a fantastic matchup. They do have some power in their bats, but they will strike out 24% strikeout rate against righties on the current active roster this year. And they also don't have drawn out plate appearances. The Rangers active roster averages 3.86 pitches per plate appearance against righties, which is better than average for this slate at least. And that's good for Strider, who, as we know, is hyper inefficient in that regard. He does still rack up strikeouts despite that, though. He has eight plus strikeouts and 12 consecutive starts. He's hit double digits in five of those 12 starts, including each of his past two games. Plenty of those 12 starts have come on the road, which is where he is for tonight as well. That's not a massive concern here. Strider's batted ball beta has been at least good enough to get by. We have a 17 start sample on him with his slot usage being up. And in that time, he has a 39% hard hit rate with a 39% fly ball rate. Obviously you'd like those numbers to be better, but when you let up so few balls in play, it's a lot less of an issue. I have Strider projected for 9.7 strikeouts tonight. That is a very high number. He is tops in the slate by 2.5, and I'm very happy to load up on him here. So Spencer Strider, to me, deserves to be at the top of our pitching pool, even with a salary at 11.5, we can make that work with the offense as we'll want to stack for tonight. The second slot tonight behind Strider is pretty tough to decide. It's between Nathan Yevaldi and Garrett Cole. Cole is on the road against the Jays, whereas Nathan Yevaldi is at home against the Braves. It might be dumb, but I think I'm going to give Yevaldi the edge here in the number two slot behind Strider. Yevaldi's looked great so far this year. His most relevant sample is his past seven starts because he didn't throw many splitters in his first earth this year. I've seen it a lot with guys that throw splitters, you know, want to ease their way into that pitch. Usage has been up since then though, and it's been up relative to where it was last year as well. And in that time, that seven start sample, Yevaldi has been lights out. His skill interactivity array is 3.03. He has a 27% strikeout rate with a 3% walk rate and he's also getting ground balls. So the rate stats for Yevaldi are very good, but he's also getting a huge leash right now. He has gone 113, 107 and 113 pitches, his past three starts respectively. And we saw Yevaldi get 12 strikeouts in one of those games. He's facing the Braves tonight. That is a very tough matchup because they do draw a lot of walks, but they also will strike out. I have Yevaldi projected for 7.3 strikeouts tonight, which is enough to be viable. And it's also enough to give him the slight edge over Garrett Cole, though both these guys are fun and both these guys will be in play on most slates. So to me, the breakdown of pitch tonight is Spencer, Strider one, I'll go Nathan, Yevaldi two, Garrett Cole number three and all three guys, really good options and guys who can feel good about putting into our lineups. As for the value play, Brian Bayo has had some decent starts recently, gets a high strikeout matchup at home tonight. And I think there's enough there to make him our top value on the slate. Bayo is facing the Mariners at home and they will strike out 25% strikeout rate versus righties on the current active roster this year. Bayo himself, not really a high strikeout guy. He's at 21% across nine starts since he cut back on his foreseeing fastball in favor of his sinker. Typically not gonna be a high strikeout move and it has not been one for Bayo, but he is working decently efficiently. He's had five plus strikeouts in three consecutive games. He had a 15% swinging strike rate against Atlanta last time out, which is as high as he's had so far this year. And he also in that game through 100 pitches, which is a career high. He gets ground balls, get some strikeouts, been getting more whiffs recently, at least in that Atlanta game. He's at home against a high strikeout team. I don't think Bayo has the juice to hang with Strider, Yevaldi, Cole, but he's not bad. And all those guys, Strider, Yevaldi, and Cole have had some issues with batted balls, so it's not a given that they will perform tonight. So I think that Bayo is worth a consideration here at $8,500. I don't think it's the worst idea to consider him at that mark. I do wanna talk about one more picture and things to watch, we'll get to them there, but as of right now, Bayo is my top value of the night. That's the easy part, the pitching. The stacking, not so much. It is pretty tough to identify stacks at check every box. And that's why the White Sox are our top stack tonight. Their offense has not been great so far this year, and they're still missing at least one key piece. So they might not turn it around super, super soon, but I think they've got some fun pieces and they get a good match of Forced Knight, which puts them at the top of my stacking list. They're facing Peyton Battenfield, who is struggling with hard contact. He has allowed a 50% hard hit rate across six outings in the majors so far this year. And enough of those are in the air as well. He's letting it pay 13.6% barrel rate, which leads to a 5.36 expected ERA. The actual ERA for Battenfield is a bit better, but given all the hard contact he's allowing, all the impactful contact he's allowing, I'm not sure I expect that ERA to stay where it's currently at. The minor league numbers for Battenfield show he's not likely to be a high strike out guy. And we have seen some blips in the results despite the overall good numbers in the ERA category. But a foreign runs twice so far and those came against the Tigers and the Rockies. Both games were in Cleveland. So he was at home against good teams and he sputtered. So yeah, the White Sox are not great. The temperature for tonight is lower than he'd like it to be, but neither are the other teams that have gotten to Battenfield. It's not like a situation where he's been getting beat up by bangers. So I think that does give us the green light to stack the White Sox here and feel pretty good about it. And also does help here at the White Sox that they have gotten some fun pieces back. You on Moncada, Jake Berger are both back. Moncada, before he had the IL, very small sample, but a 256 ISO in that time. He had a 41% hard hit rates and he's had some hard contacts since getting back as well. The rehab center from Moncada, pretty solid too. Berger this year, a 333 ISO went deep last night and that's just against righties, a 333 ISO against righties. So the White Sox are not perfect by any means, but they're better than they were. Now that Moncada and Berger are back and I think there's enough here to make them viable. I think we can get to five guys or four guys in this lineup very easily for stacking. So to me, I feel best about the White Sox and I feel pretty firm in saying that based on the rest of the stacks available on this slate. The other Sox are also in the stacking consideration, the Red Sox facing Marco Gonzalez who has looked better recently, but there are still some issues with his peripherals. And I think we can stack the White Sox against him. Now I do think some of the shifts that Gonzalez has made are going to stick and be good alterations for him. His cutter last year was a pretty bad pitch. He had a 372 expected WoB against it and he threw that pitch 20% of the time. So 20% usage on a pitch that was not good to him, probably not a great formula. We did see him cut back big time on that cutter in his third start this year. And he's been throwing it less often for the past six starts now, that's a good thing. And so it's not a surprise to see Gonzalez's ERA him at time at 3.98. It's been a good shift and I don't think that's a fluke. But it's still not perfect. Even in just those six games, he has Gonzalez has led up a 4.70 skill interactive ERA with an 18% strikeout rate. So minimal strikeouts, even if it is more than it was last year and he's letting up a 37% hard hit rate. That's better than average, but it might not be better enough if that's a phrase we can use to get by with how few strikeouts he gets. We saw some of the downsides of that when Gonzalez faced the Jays. He let up five earn runs across three innings. So you can still get to him. The bummer here is that the Red Sox have a ton of lefties, especially the best batters in this lineup, pretty much all left handed. But despite that, even with that account of four, they still have a 105 WRC plus against lefties, which is above average and definitely not too bad. So I think we can still stack them despite the fact that Gonzalez is a left handed batter. They have a lot of lefties in the lineup. Gonzalez last year actually had a worse Woba against lefties and righties. That's partly because only the best lefties would stay in the lineup to face him. So that is some selection bias there for sure. But I think that all things considered, the Red Sox, a viable stacking option for tonight. It also does help that a lot of the righties are lower salary. Keke Hernandez sounds like he should be back for tonight, Justin Turner, as it lefties well enough. Rob Reft-Sneider, not regarded as a high upside bat, for good reason, but his ex Woba is 366 so far this year, makes decently hard contact. We were looking at him just against lefties. He has a 185 ISO since the start of last year. He can occasionally add a steal. His salary is $2,400. Should have bat pretty high in the order. So if you wanna get to Strider, I don't mind it. I would probably be looking to get two lefties in a Red Sox stack. With Rafael Devers being one of them, I think that he's good enough against lefties to justify that for sure. Tristan Casas plays, he's been good against lefties in a very small sample this year. Yoshida good against lefties too. So I think he can have to be okay taking on two lefties if you stack the Red Sox, but that's fine by me. I don't mind Turner, Hernandez, Ref Snyder, but I only want two of them if I can influence it at all because they're not the highest upside guys. Connor Wong is okay too. But if you wanna stack the Red Sox, just go in with the mindset of, I'll probably need to use a couple lefty on lefty situations within this stack. As mentioned, all their stacks in the slate involve serious imperfections, primarily the bat of balls. So we're gonna either target guys to suppress hard contact or who limit fly balls. I think our best option is going to be going out one of the ground ball guys, which means stacking the bets against Josh Fleming. Even though the wind is in tonight, Fleming is the ground ball guy, it's not ideal by any means. Fleming will start for the race today. He has primarily worked as a bulk reliever for them, but he's not gonna get any strikeouts. He has a 7.2% swing and strike rate this year and he's walking too many guys as well, but Fleming is getting ground balls as he always has. He has a 62% ground ball rate this year, which is up from 59% for his career. But if you look at Fleming's career, it's still a 4.82 ERA, it's 5.40 since the beginning of last year. So teams, despite the ground balls, are still scoring on him. He's just letting him too many base runners and the way to strand base runners is getting strikeouts, but he doesn't do that.  Then after Fleming, then that's the face to raise bullpen, which is definitely not their strength. So it's not fun. I hate targeting ground ball pitchers, but I do think on this slate, it is the right call. So to me, the Mets are the number three stack here despite the wind, despite the ground ball matchup, despite their face in the race, I think they are number three for tonight. I think Starling Marté is pretty interesting here. He got pushed down to six in the order because he was struggling so much, but his hard hit rate is up since going down there. It hasn't resulted in any extra base hits yet, which is a big issue for DFS, but he can get upside via speed. His salary is $2,700. I'm not sure if Marté is breaking out of his slump yet, but the speed means he could still be fine for DFS even without going deep. So Marté, tentatively buying back in, I was in on him earlier this year, which did not work out very well, but tentatively buying back in, in case the shift down the batting order can ignite a bit in his bat for right now. Things to watch forward, and I'm not really sure what to do with my Clevenger. I've been stacking against him and that has worked pretty fine so far, but his peripherals have picked back up since he went back to his cutter three starts ago. He's facing Cleveland, so it's our revenge game here. This offense has been retched so far this year and now Jose Ramirez on the bereavement list. So probably not gonna get a whole lot better. So I'm probably okay going here for one-offs if you wanna go someone like Josh, I guess not, you know, I think you can go some routes here with the Guardian's offense, but I don't know, it's not great, especially if Josh and Taylor can't play, it's not ideal. So they're fine for one-offs, but I'm not actively seeking them out by any means. I'm not sure if Matthew Liberator will be added to the Fando player pool for today. He's not in it right now, but he's at least somewhat interesting if he is added at some point. The Cardinals AAA team was letting Liberator go deep in games earlier this year. And you'll see it a lot in AAA, but he's hitting like a hundred pitches, 97, 98 pretty consistently. He's facing the Brewers who with a ton against lefty, so we saw last night at Jordan Montgomery. If Liberator is added, his salary, I'd probably need it to be like $8,300 or lower. If it's down there, I'd be okay taking a swing at him potentially above Bayo just because there's a bit more unknown in the positives of Liberator than there is with Bayo and it's a good matchup too. So at least check out, you know, when you open up your Fando player pool, type in Liberator, see if he's in there. I'd still prefer to go with Strider, Evaldi and guys like that, but I think that Liberator would be a consideration if he is added. Two other guys with annoying batted ball profiles for JP Frans and Drew Smiley, both those guys facing each other in Houston, which is one of the few warm games on the slate. Smiley has led up just a 29% hard hit rate this year. France, great at suppressing hard contact in AAA and his hard hit rate is 33% through two starts in the majors. I don't mind stacking out of the Astros of the Cubs, but I am worried that the batted balls would continue to be an issue here. So keep that in mind for sure. When it comes to stacking for today, nothing's perfect. Maybe you wanna go just go with the good weather, go with the Cubs and the Astros, but it's tough regardless. Dinger calls for today. Talk before about how if you're gonna stack the Red Sox, you have to be okay using left-handed batters in a lefty-on-lefty matchup. I think that's more okay with Rafael Devers than with most guys. This year been very good against lefties in a small sample. Go back the last couple of years, the numbers, the power numbers for him were not as good against lefties, but they were still fine. I think that given how good he's been overall, I think it's okay to be high on him in the situation. And I think Devers also do for some positive regression given how hard he's hitting the ball right now, decent plate discipline numbers. So like Rafael Devers, the boring, a run call for today. The fun one, let's go Jake Berger. I know maybe it's not boring given, I think he has like nine home runs or something like that so far this year, but making a lot of hard contact. He's barreling the ball right now, even against righties and gets a decent matchup against Battenfield for tonight. So home run calls for today, Rafael Devers, Jake Berger. And if you think Berger is not quite boring or fun enough, we'll go Gavin Cheats as the alternate home run call from that White Sox versus Guardian's game. That is all that we have here for today on the solo shot. We are back once again tomorrow to break down Thursday's main sites. So make sure to subscribe to the Number Fire daily fantasy podcast. And also check out our PGA DFS podcast breaking down the PGA championship. If you've got questions for me, I am on Twitter at Jim Sonnis, J-I-M-S-A-N-N-E-S. You can also follow the Fandwall Podcast Network at Fandwall Podcast. Want to thank you all for tuning in for today. Good luck to you with your NLB DFS lineups. We'll talk to you once again tomorrow to break down Wednesday or Thursday's slate. This has been the solo shot right here on the Fandwall Podcast Network.


This will be a lot quicker than the first episode of Wheel of Two Gathering, most of you know the rules by now, but there's a couple tweaks. First things first, I want to show you the team. This year we're changing things up. I was the Detroit MMG last season, it's kind of lame. This year! This year, it's the same year.  What, are you waiting for a punchline? Are you waiting for me to say I'm joking? I'm not. I'm a misogynist.  I think men are superior to women. I believe women are inferior. There's no joke here. Don't look for it. The Seattle Misogyny is composed of, this season we're 90 over of, with all amethyst, except I got the go invincible, Dirk Nowitzki. So my overall team is worse, but I do have a God to carry us. I love using Dirk Nowitzki. You guys know this. Like absolutely ridiculously good, and I love him so much. He's my father. Then I got CP3 Luka Donchich. Love it. Kevin Durant and Shaq on the starting lineup, with Kyrie Bradley, Bill Larry Bird, Scalabrini. I got to pick the end with this. I want another goat on the bench. And then Joellen Beats. So right now, power forward is probably definitely our strongest position. Not probably, it's definitely. Now, let's get into the rules. This is Wheel of 2K revamped. As far as games go, we're doing the exact same thing. The end goal of Wheel of 2K revamped is to have the best record possible. That's my goal anyway.  It's a 12 episode series, and depending on how my record ends, I will have to complete one challenge. All of these challenges were made by you guys in the comment section of the finale, and they're pretty damn good. If I play 12 games, and I don't win a single game, I have to publicly apologize to EA. I'll post a full YouTube video slurping their schmeat. And to be honest with you, I know that's not going to happen. So it really didn't matter when I put it on 12. There's absolutely no way I lose 12 straight games. But we won 8 and 4 last season. I don't see it happening.  The thing is, my mom is so gullible too.  I think they're so dumb. That being said, I know my mom would fall for it, and I know it's stress the hell out. It would be actually kind of funny. It's just something that I despise and don't want to do. If I was 2 and 10, I think this is the first challenge that's actually possible. I will livestream myself on Tinder. We will all just hang out and just talk to girls. That might honestly be illegal. I don't even know if I'm allowed to do that on livestream, but I'll take the charge, baby. You can send me to prison, because if I go 2 and 10, I deserve it. I go 3 and 9. You guys will choose one spot on my body that has to get waxed. And I will take the camera in. If it's something I can't video, record, and post on YouTube, I'll do a little blurring out. But I'll make sure I bring a videographer, and we actually make that video. If I go 4 and 8, I'll take one body shot from Destroying. I'm talking he can put on the boxing glove, and as hard as he can, I'll take one full-fledged punch from him. Presumably in my stomach or chest, something like that. Not to the face. No way. This is the moneymaker. 5 and 7. You guys can choose an Instagram picture that I have to take. You name the location, you name what I have to do. I'll take the picture, post on Instagram, you also make the caption. I'm really actually horrified at that one, and I don't know why I put it at 5 and 7. That was not smart at all. Now that I look back at this, I can't really go back now. 6 and 6 is the henna tattoo.  You guys get the idea of that one. If I go 7 and 5, I'll make a group chat with all of my ex-girlfriends. I don't really want to think about what I have to do if I have to do that. So I'm just gonna pray that I don't go 7 and 5. I didn't think this through at all. Why did I put that at 7 and 5? If I go 8 and 4, this is a really good one. I will simp excessively for one day. So basically, you guys can take over my Twitter.  You're gonna tweet at Summer Ray, Karina Kof, I don't know how you say her name, whatever. And I can just you take over my Twitter and simp for whoever you want for the whole day. If I go 9 and 3, I have to call 25 people in my phone and ask politely if I can clap their cheeks. If I go 10 and 2, I'm safe. It was 9 and 3 last time, but I went 8 and 4. I was almost safe. So I made it 10 and 2. If I'm 11 and 1, I still want that essay. You have to type a full paragraph essay on how handsome I am and put it in the comments If I go 11 and 1, and if I go 12 and 0, you already know what's happening. I'm clapping your mom's cheeks. You don't have a say in it. I might impregnate her. I don't care. This is the Wheel of 2K cheat sheet.  Right now, we gotta spin the wheel, spin the challenge wheel, and then hop into a game. The only thing we're adding rule-wise really is the challenge wheel. Completing the challenge wheel lets me open one of any pack from the store. One wheel spin to add a player to the team. Our challenge wheel, we hop in and claps with cheeks. Our first episode of Wheel of 2K, baby, let's get it. I'm about to get butt naked. Y'all already know this is our first wheel spin of the game. Oh my God, let's go. Dude, I also updated the wheel like crazy. I just put this on there, bro. This is my team Dark Matter Premier Pack. It guarantees a random Dark Matter player. I'm actually ready to go. I don't have to do anything else. One Dark Matter player. As long as it's not Dirk, it's going to be sick. Let's go. Boom, baby. Come on now. What do we got? Western Conference, 99 overall. Number 17. I have literally no idea who that is. No. Racist. I have Dirk Namitsky, Luca Dodgers, and Jonas Valenciunis. I don't want you, bro. I'm not racist, you guys. I'm serious. I'm not racist. I have tons of black friends. Just ask anybody. So Shaq's coming out, and then I'll take and beat off the bench because I do like the 91 Shaq, and 91 Shaq will go to the bench. Valenciunis, bro. What? I got Lithuania, Slovenia, and Germany on this starting lineup.  This is a really good poll. It's at Dark Matter. And I got Dwayne Wade's white brother, Dean Wade. I'm racist. I figured it out. That gives us a 93 offense, an 88 defense, and a 90 overall squad. All right. Let's get it, too. The Willa 2K Challenge, you'll maybe the first time we've ever used it. I'm really excited to see what we can get. Only one player could score from 1 quarter to 10 points. Shit. Shit. 10 points with the worst player means 10 points with Dean Wade. 69 overall power for Dean Wade, who desperately wants to be Dwayne Wade, but is not. If you know how I feel, why would you say that? Shit. Wow. That was not optimal for the first challenge we'll spend. Well, you know what? I said this three times it would be a banger, and it's going to be a banger. Also, of course, a huge thank you to Raycon for sponsoring today's video. I've got my everyday earbuds right here in this awesome blue. Raycon is so awesome because they make premium wireless earbuds, but they're about half the price of the other stuff you used to see. My personal favorite is they fit in my ear so well. I've used other brands, especially when I go to work out, they just fall out. Raycons do not, so I love these things. And of course, they sound amazing, too. Six hours of playtime, seamless Bluetooth pairing, a more compact design, and more bass. Makes these puppies awesome. They also have dope colorades and a variety of fit options, so it'll definitely be staying in your ear. And it was co-founded by RayJ. Celebrities like Snoop Dogg, JR Smith, Mike Tyson, they all use Raycons, and they all love them. And a 45-day free return policy. I don't think you use it, though. I think you're gonna love the earbuds. And for me this summer, my Raycons are coming with me five days a week to the gym. So to get some new earbuds, click the link in the description box or go to buyraycon.com forward slash MMG to get 15% off your Raycon purchase. Raycon, thank you for your sponsor, guys. Enjoy the rest of the video. Okay, he has an absolute God Squad of Galaxy Opals and Dark Matters. Well, I guess I wouldn't call it a God Squad, but compared to my team, that is God Squad. To be honest, I don't even like getting the tip of the tip. That sounds bad when I say it like that. I don't like getting the jump ball at the start, because I like to have the ball in the second and third. Good day, Chris Paul. Luca, you want a pull? Nope. Space Jam LeBron on 91 Amethyst Lucadonchich. Wow, dude. I'm disrespecting the jersey. Oh, okay. I'll take a free bucket in the drink.  All right, Valencia Unis. Valencia Unis is starting out pretty good.  Also, I think you guys need to give me more credit. I'm going to be totally honest. You guys need to give me more credit. I'm not a 2K YouTuber. I don't play a lot of 2K, but my name pronunciations are usually pretty good. And I'm not horrible at 2K. Hold on. And I'm not horrible at 2K. And I'm not horrible at 2K. Chris Paul into the lane. Dirk out wide. He closed out late. It wasn't enough. All right, bro.  He's pulling from deep in. This dude's got Dark Matter. He's going to kill me with him. And I'm wearing a Dorchester's. Yup. Got him jumping. And that should be a dunk. Oh, come on, buddy. Maverick on Maverick crime. 6 to 6. He's just going to bully me out there. I don't know how I'm going to stop that. Ooh, that was... Oh, he missed that. That was such an easy shot. I have no idea how I'm going to get past this, Luca. Oh, easy roll. Easy roll. That's a bucket.  Are you kidding? What kind of sorcery was that? Oh, my God. He's bringing another one from up here. Amethyst Durant is open. And he hits it. That's clutch. With minimal effort. There goes Dirk. All right, we'll take that. 17-11, though. Where's the help side? Honestly, for what feels like a massacre, I really don't mind a 6-point game. Scalabranu. This guy, with all his Dark Matters, is honestly kind of struggling versus my Amethyst squad right now. I have only Amethyst in. It's a 4-point game. And look at Kyrie. Go right... Oh, I thought that was a free bucket. All right, now you knew about that, bro. Good morning, first quarter. But I think in the end of this, I'm going to lose by about 21. You know what I might do? I might just concede that I'm not going to keep Jonas Valenciunas, even though he's playing like a beast. And I might bring Dean Wade in to try and get my challenge build done. Dude, you're off-balling my Amethysts. You're actually a beta male.  You're off-balling my Amethyst team.  I respect that, my friend. I respect it. Dean Wade, number 32, plays for the Cleveland Cavaliers.  All right, so he's going to clamp up Dean here. Oh, he's not going to clamp up. That's a good shot. That's a good shot, Dean. You're 5% covered. We take those, buddy. Honestly, dude, yeah. Dribble in circles, run pick and roll. I can't stop you and I know it. It's okay. I just need buckets for Dean Wade. He's just not going to guard it up. Could he make that very open? He can't make it right now, but I'm thinking if I keep giving him a couple shots at it, he might. Hey, Larry, legend. Where's Dean?   I need the screen to come from Dean. Exactly. Perfect. Yes. Cut to the wreck. Give it to Dean. Dean. That's the black Dwayne Wade right there, baby. Yes, sir. The challenge is doubling. You know, I can always complete the challenge and see if I can get back in the ball game. Dean Wade. Get clamped. You just got clamped by the Asian Dwayne Wade. Yup. Give him a pump. Get him jumping. Get in the paint. You're small. Dean says you're small. Dude, he's literally the Filipino Dwayne Wade. Look at that, dude. He just clears out. You're going to give. You're going to.  I wonder what his three-point shot is. Probably like 50. Dude, so Dean cannot shoot. It appears. It's definitely going to be up to our two-point bucket from Dean. Oh, he's got six already just in the second. I think I could have made that challenge a little harder. I love to see it, Dean.  We got to get you back in the ball game. Oh, bad ball. LeBron is shooting the lights out. Dude, it's such a bummer. My opponent is not that good. I wish I had a decent team. I would be clapping this man's cheeks if I had a decent team. Valencia, you own his spaces for three and all. Dude, six points for the Western Asian mixed with a black dude, Dwayne Wade. Hey, there's the man. Oh, he's had Delavadova on him. Stop letting him shoot. He's going to scrap it. Clearly the Pacific Islander Samoan Dwayne Wade. Let's go. Oh, he's got Delian, bro. He's got Delavadova, who spaces to Sean Bradley. Dude, don't let me do you up. That's no fun. I want to cross you. Oh, my God. Dude, Dwayne's almost just... We both just lost the ball standing there, but he picked it up. That's a bummer. Oh, Valencia Unis is in the passing lane. Dwayne. Hang on to the ball, buddy. I need you there. Yeah, we kind of know you're shooting that. Come on, Dwayne. Get you the paint. He's going to get 10 off of that. Dial it in, baby. Dial it in with the black Dwayne Wade. Boom. He didn't want more. They could pull you. Lost him. Lost him. Lost him. Now you're small. And one. And another battery free throw.  Got him jumping. Got him jumping again. Good spacing. I get a pack no matter what. Let's see if we can squeak a win out of this somehow. Luke is a menace, bro, especially on Chris Paul. You know, I'm glad this guy's a good sport. He was out there putting in Delavadova when I had Dean Wade in. This is such a mismatch right here. Oh, thank you. I don't mind if I do. And I still got the mismatch. Valenciunas into the paint. That's easy. Yup. Let's go. Another green for dirt. Nine seconds left. It was a 20-point game at one point. And we're not closing the gap by much, but the gap is closing. I'm not going to lie. It would be absurdly difficult for me to outscore him by fifth. Wow. That's crazy. To outscore him by 18 in the fourth quarter. I mean, I still got to try, right? Oh, my God. Oh, get in there, Scali. Somebody cut. Oh, my God.  What was that? I'm just going to walk this one down the lane. Look at Chris Paul. Look at Chris Paul. Oh, you're getting dirt faded on. You already know it, man. How much time do I got on this clock? That dirt is locked into this team. No matter what happens, dirt is locked in. Great defense. And now we're running. You sure you want this, buddy? Easy bucket. You're small. I'm big. It's that simple. One minute left on the clock. Our torture is almost over. See if we can get a few more buckets before we get out of here. Okay. You want to give me the three? There's the green machine up there, my guy. Yep. As of right now, we outscored him in the fourth quarter. I like that, boys. We showed some grit. And I respect that. Wait a second. Don't hit that. Yep. We outscored him in the fourth. First episode is an L, but I have positive spirits. It was going to be really tough to beat in all dark matter team with our squad. And I get a pack. Now we just have to pray that we get somebody good or at least as close to Valencia Unis because that Valencia Unis is so good. Luckily, the Space Jam packs are still in store. As I'm recording this, we're guaranteed a Galaxy Opal. Hopefully we can somehow get a dark map. So Dirk had 28 points, four rebounds, three assists to steal, and a turn over. 13 for 20. That's honestly really good. Two for four from three. The Mexican Dwayne Wade, bro. 11 points, five for nine from the field. These are second leading score. Didn't play bad by any means. Really did. I mean, Valencia Unis was just a boarding machine, bro. 10 points, nine rebounds, almost a double-double. But sadly, he's going to have to leave our team because we did not win. Scalabrini then was our next leading score. Wow, look at the picture for Scalabrini.  That is nightmare fuel. Shaq had four. Chris Paul, Durant. Yeah. Hey, Gigi's Noah. Well played, my guy. Thank you for letting me get 11 points with the Blasian Dwayne Wade. And Valencia Unis. I'm sorry, sir. You're coming out four. Let's put Shaq back as the starter and then Anthony Davis will come off the bench. But okay, boys, it's all going to come down to this one super clutch pack right here. Oh, this pack has to go so hard. So we have an Out of This World deluxe pack. It takes one player and four items, a guaranteed Out of This World player, which is Galaxy Opal. The only card I don't want is Larry Johnson. Larry Johnson is a power forward. I already got Dirk and I don't want Larry Johnson at center. Let's see what we can get, boys. We're literally guaranteed at least a Galaxy Opal. I would not mind a Dark Matter at all, baby. It's going to be right there if it's there. It's Galaxy Opal, darn it. I don't know why I'm complaining. I got my challenge done. I'm guaranteed a 98 overall player here. And it's totally fine. Eastern Conference 98 overall. Is that Ewing or Larry Bird? It's Ewing. He's back, baby. You know what? I'm not crazy ecstatic about that because we did use Patrick Ewing last season. But hey, you know what? I'm happy to have 98 overall. All right, boys. Patrick Ewing is in. He's been reunited. Basically, we swapped. I had Galaxy Opal, Dirk and Dark Matter Ewing. Now we got Dark Matter, Dirk and Galaxy Opal Ewing. I plan to replace that Ewing though. I want you guys to see different players other than Dirk, obviously. So I'm really happy right now. We definitely need it for next episode. But yeah, I'm not going to do that much with him. We got out with an additional player and a single loss. So technically right now I still can publicly apologize to EA, Pregnancy Prank on my mom. Everything is on the table right now, other than me banging your mom. Because that was 12-0.  I love you boys. Thank you for watching this always. It's going to be another banger season, baby. I'll see you tomorrow for episode number two. And then I'll see you the day after episode number three. It's daily again, baby. I love you. Thank you for watching this always. Peace out.


In this presentation, we will take a look at net pay calculation. When considering the net pay calculation, we can think of it in its most simple form. When we're going to go from the gross pay to the net pay, note that the gross pay represents what would have been earned if there were no deductions from the wages, meaning if whatever the employee earned, we would just then pay that. That would be the paycheck if there were no other deductions, including things like taxes and any other types of deductions. Now, I say theoretically sometimes when I say it would be the gross pay if there were no other taxes. Because again, from an economic standpoint, if we were to negotiate what the gross pay would be and there were no taxes, no payroll taxes, and other types of deductions, then the gross pay could differ. So there's some argument as to who the actual payroll tax liabilities and tax liabilities are falling on, because it's pretty clear that of course, the gross pay may not be the same. The negotiation wouldn't come out the same if there wasn't taxes. But in theory, the gross pay is what is actually being earned. So when we say this is how much money we earned on a yearly basis, we say someone earns $100,000. That's typically their gross pay. So from a most simplified standpoint, then we're just going to subtract out the deductions that will be included, and that'll get us to the net pay. So whenever we see our paycheck, what we have to get, the check we receive will be the net pay. And if we look at the pay stub, we can go through the calculations and see what is included in the deductions to get from the gross pay minus the deductions to the net pay. So then of course, the types of deductions, which we've taken a look at are going to be those mandatory deductions, including taxes, federal taxes, state taxes, so the federal income tax, the state income tax, the social security and the Medicare, and then the voluntary types of deductions. And those are going to be the benefits not typically given or not possibly not mandated by law, but oftentimes benefits given to the employees as an option. So a bit longer calculation would look something like this, we'd have the computation, we start with the gross pay, that would be the earnings before any deductions, then we're going to subtract out the pre tax deductions. So these are going to be deductions that we're going to need to reduce in order oftentimes to get the taxable earnings. And this could be a little bit more complex than just doing this as a one time calculation or one formula like this, but this will be used to give us the idea. The reason we say that the reason I say that is because the taxable earnings would work if we're talking about one type of tax, meaning the federal income tax has different taxable earnings possibly than the social security tax or the Medicare tax. So when you see this type of calculation, usually we're kind of you can kind of think of it as the federal income tax calculation, which is mainly the most complicated tax usually that we'll need to come up with. So gross pay minus the pre tax deductions. And the reason for that is that the social security and Medicare usually more of a flat tax. So usually we can just take kind of the gross pay to calculate things like social security and Medicare on a flat tax basis. We're taking these deductions out in order to get the taxable earnings usually to calculate things like the federal income tax. And then we're going to subtract out those taxes, those taxes that we calculated based on the taxable earnings. So that's the reason we have this ordering. And then we've got the other types of deductions, everything else we need to take out. So the other deductions down here don't have any effect on the taxable earnings. That's why we're going to take them out after we calculate the taxes. And when we look at the register, when we actually do these calculations, we will, this will become more apparent. We'll see how we'll set up the register in a logical fashion in order to take the gross pay, take the deductions from the gross pay, get our taxable earnings, calculate the taxes based on those taxable earnings and then deduct the taxes. And then we can take everything else out before we arrive finally at the net pay, the actual amount that will be paid. Note this deduction can be seen in terms of every paycheck from paycheck to paycheck, pay period to pay period, whether it be weekly, monthly, biweekly, semi-monthly, or it can be seen on a year to date type calculation as well. Similar type of worksheet can be seen. And this is the type of thing that you may see on a pay stub or you should see something similar to this on a pay stub both from a pay period standpoint, what's your gross pay, what's your deductions, what's your next, what's your net pay, and in terms of a year to date calculation, information needed to be given from the employer to the employee. And once again note that this doesn't seem too bad, and it's not too bad from pay period to pay period, but when we have to do it also as a cumulative year to date with each pay period, with each pay stub, it does get to be something that we really need to keep detail track of.