This is covering the spread part of the Fandall podcast network Every year for the Super Bowl there are tons of different markets you can bet into and the typical ones You know the reception props the touchdown score is MVP But there's a lot of other nonsense out there that you can bet on too and I'm not gonna be an expert when it comes to those Who are gonna bring on an expert for today in Joe Ostrowski picking his brain on all the odd markets I have no idea about because Joe has done the research He can educate us and where there is value potentially for Super Bowl 58 over at Fandall Sportsbook and beyond This is covering the spread right here on the Fandall podcast network and Fandall research My name is Jim Sonnis I am a managing editor of digital media for Fandall research joined here as mentioned by Joe Ostrowski Check him out on Twitter at Joe Ostrowski and find one back QL daily every morning It's also on every Saturday morning at 670 the score in Chicago as well Joe It is a pleasure to have you on for today. How you doing Jim? It's I love this annual tradition that we have here speaking early on in Super Bowl week So that means the last time we spoke I was in Arizona covering the Super Bowl last year And I I vaguely remember it because I was in the process of getting COVID One of those days I actually left after a couple of days, but I'm not blaming you I don't think it was our internet connection Okay, you know, but I'm blaming the fat the the fat guy that was coughing all over me on the on the flight out to Arizona I was like in my head. I'm like this guy's probably got COVID and then like a day later. I'm like, yeah And now it's nice me. Yeah. Yeah, so how long do I have to stay in the hotel before I have to go back? I don't know. I don't know So does that mean that we're cursed is that official that like our our discussions here are cursed or do you not buy into that? No, I've been sick over the last month. So now we're clear sail. Oh, okay. It's fine. Yeah, clear sailing Okay, so we got it out of the way. We're good to go and we can break down these props with with no sweats, right? Yes, 100% I can't wait to talk about some of this stuff. And yeah, it's we we saw line movement last week Very little prop movement, which I find interesting But we could talk about different strategies early versus betting late because we still have at the time of this recording six days to go So I do think a lot of things are going to change But I can't wait.  Well, we've got we've got plenty of those We can talk about potentially as well every movement every prop I've seen move has moved towards the overall Maybe that means you can if you're looking for some unders take them out check them out later on this week You know, maybe we'll talk about that a bit later on today as well But we got a full week of shows here on covering the spread We already broke down the game in depth with dr. Ed fang can find that by going to the covering the spread podcast He had broke down what his number say about this year's game also talked on an interception prop with Ed You can find on the covering the spread podcast feed the fandal YouTube page Fandal TV plus tomorrow I'm breaking down same game parlays. I like for fandal sportsbook for this game We have got a full player prop breakdown With Joe's guy Ryan Williams coming up on Thursday along with Tom Vecchio And of course we'll talk some live betting with Ed Miller on Friday all right here in the same feed and also on the fandal YouTube page And fandal TV plus happy Super Bowl laws to all who celebrate from fandal America's number one sportsbook fandal has so many ways for you to end the season with a W or two or three Not only can you bet on who will win the Super Bowl? But also fandal has bets like who will score a touchdown how many points will be scored and so much more new customers Join today and you'll get $200 in bonus bets if you're first bet of $5 or more wins Make every moment more with fandal an official sports betting partner of the NFL must be 21 plus and present in select states Fandal is offering online sports waging in Kansas under an agreement with Kansas Star Casino LLC $10 first deposit required bonus issued is now a trouble bonus bets that expire seven days after a seat say terms That sportsbook dot fandal calm gambling problem call 1-800 gambler or was a fandal calm slash RG in Colorado, Iowa, Michigan, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania Illinois, Kentucky, Tennessee, Virginia and Vermont Call 1-800 next step or text next step to 5334 2 in Arizona 1-888-789 7777 or is a ccpg.org slash chat and connect it 109 with an Indiana 1-800-522-4700 visit chaos gambling health commie Kansas 1-877 770 stop in Louisiana visit MD gambling health at Oregon, Maryland 1-800-gambler net in West, Virginia 1-800-522 4700 in Wyoming hope this year visit gambling helpline ma.org or call<PHONE_NUMBER> For 24 7 supporter Massachusetts or call 1-877 open Y or text open Y in New York Now Joe our primary objective for today's identify Nonsense props to bet but you know you're a football guy, too So I figured I would selfishly also ask you about this game We got the 49ers by two and a half right now a fandal sportsbook total this game is 47 and a half So overall read for you on this game from a football perspective it is wild Jim because Early in the week like every time you check your favorite sportsbook, which I'm sure many is fandal You're gonna find new props posted. Yeah, and one that I know you're gonna have your eye on I just found one that says not will he but how is grunk going to miss the kick of destiny? Wow How a white hit the crossbar wide left wide right? No thing to hit an upright. No faith Oh is double-doink on there not to sorry, Chicago I Double-dog I see it's all pretty solid plus money wide left wide right hits crossbar hits left upright Is it is it wait if he makes it but well, there's another problem. He there is a will okay make it one Okay, cuz like I've spent the last week. I've the amount of my life I spent reading house rules the past week is mind-numbing. I can't I know golf for you I had NASCAR 2 it was like his NASCAR the clash and like fandal was refunding all bets at the driver didn't make to the main event But not every book did there were like couple hours it didn't it's like it influences so much Like I spent reading that and then I had the Wyndham Clark ticket for for golf on Sunday and it's like I'm just so sick of like Google literally said you visit often to a sportsbooks House rules and I was like this just seems like rude like why are you being passive aggressive here? Did anything work out in your favor because it feels like it never does. Oh, it did. Yeah, so I bet Wyndham pre tournament 80 to one. Yeah, and That book so like fandal and I think some others had it where if it's 36 holes an official winner is declared then you didn't get a payout this one is 54 holes for a pga tour event and 36 for a year or two or event, but they had done 54 and it was a pre tournament wager, so I was okay But like I had to like you know that paranoia or you think you're not gonna get the money and you keep checking Oh, that's why I asked that's why I assumed that you were on the negative side of this No, it was paranoia because I it was a good thing and I was worried it wasn't gonna come through But if you I had bet with somewhere else there was a chance that you I think most books with the with the bet That I made because it was pre tournament I think most books that I read through would have honored the bet. Yes. Okay. Yeah, it's like I was good, which was nice well as far as Zooming out on this game. It's it's like These teams are similar, but they're also not like there are certain elements of this matchup We're like, okay. I Understand why they're similar if we're removing my home's Purdue because I Purdue Sorry thinking about yes, sir. I'm still mad about that. Did you see the officiating anyways Wisconsin game? Yes. Yes, I feel like every game the officials are trying to make sure that I mean they did it's Northwestern So, I know it's why I brought it as well as top of mind talking to you Discrepancy I'm not one to complain about it, but I was with Chris Collins on that one Chris Collins will complain about it Don't you worry? He's covered. I know he will so outside of the Mahob's Purdy Comparison you look at the head coaches both offensive geniuses and that's why I find it interesting What's been going on this offseason in the the hiring cycle if you look at the clear weaknesses on defense? It's the same for both teams. It's stopping the run Is that going to impact this game? I don't know. It's certainly something that everybody's talking about. I look at it as Resure it's that important because both these teams are terrible at it and they're both playing in the Super Bowl So I don't know that if that matters all that much both strong at tight ends Pretty strong at running backs. So that's where the props could come into play going against poor rushing defenses Obviously Kansas City's passing defense is much better But you know overall we're going to talk about Reed and Shanahan and the quarterback play and some of these the offensive star power, but why are these two teams here? Defense It's defense and I find it amazing the total started at 48 It ticked down to 47 and a half early sharpish money But it I don't hear a lot of chatter about the total gym. It is not budged in over a week We've been sitting at that number of 47 and a half now We saw early movement on the point spread KC money And then we saw some large wagers on San Francisco. So people are labeling that Sharps on San Francisco public on KC. I don't think it's quite that easy Yeah, because there are sharp betters that are also on Kansas City. They're gonna back my homes as an underdog Like so many people are gonna talk about this week. But yeah, they're similar, but they're also not I think not talked about enough in this era of NFL Three Super Bowls in five years is a dynasty. Yeah, and my homes is one game away from that And the storyline that I'm truly interested in even more so than my homes Kyle Shanahan, are you finally gonna break through? Are we gonna see it? We've seen a Super Bowl loss a couple of NFC championship losses And maybe the biggest blunder of his career 28 to 3 when he was the offensive coordinator in Atlanta A lot of people still blaming him Because he was going too aggressive at a time where that's what we want out of coaches unless your name is Dan Campbell And I'm okay with criticizing Dan Campbell But yeah, it's is Shanahan gonna break through because if he doesn't you could say it's Reed It's my homes. What are you gonna do? But I think a lot of people are gonna call him a choke artist depending on how it goes down if they end up losing So a lot of interesting storylines to the to this game and you know, they're similar, but they're also not Well, I think that going back to that 28 to 3 game The issue that Kyle Shanahan had back then was his running backs were Devonte Freeman and Tevin Coleman for that game It's hard to run the football when the opposing team knows you're gonna run the football, but now it's Christian McCaffrey I think that makes it a very different dynamic for him and also we've seen him buck the narrative He can't come from behind the fourth quarter with the comebacks against Green Bay and the comeback against Detroit So I feel like it's a different version of Kyle Shanahan than what we've seen so far because he has that running game But also with Purdy in this this passing you're doing what they're doing I think he can kind of win even they do fall behind early too And as you alluded to it, you're right. The perception is oh my god, this guy can't come back but also Um, why don't we talk about the record of all NFL coaches done by at least eight points in the fourth quarter It's not going to be good The problem is when you have that zero there people end up harping on it and you know Most coaches it might have a couple of of comeback wins in that spot. You're right about that You're not able to bleed much clock if it's a three and out and you're trying to run the ball at least a couple of times So that's that's one of those situations that's always easier said than done and also in this instance Yes, McCaffrey and also Debo and also, you know, purdy's been using his legs and the Kansas City rush defense Like we talked about that's the big weakness on that chief side But game script can certainly come into play. You've got to make sure it's not We've seen a couple awful purdy games And I know people that that's where people point to and say see this is why he's not an mvp But you know, it could happen like we saw a four interception game from this guy not that long ago Right, it can happen. He can have bad games, but he can also come back from down 24 seven He did benefit from a ball off of a defender's face mask like that was luck That was not purdy magic. That was very much luck But I think showing that ability to come back is interesting. I think one of the thing too is Andy Reid was also thought of as a choke artist before he got the job done Timeout, you know two minute management was hideous for him So yeah, I feel like with a coach it's kind of like you don't have the ability to win a big game until you do and Has shanahan gotten there yet with that win over the the lions I think you could contend yes, but I understand why There would be hesitancy to crown him before he actually does it on this stage. It's also like The thought process on this game with a lot of people. What are you valuing more? Okay, the reason that san francisco is favored to win this game Is what they did over the larger sample size of the regular season when they were the super bowl favored all year And the team that's played better is kansas city But because their quarterback is patrick mahomes, nobody's talking about them getting shut out in the second half Right the last time we we saw them play. So that's the other, you know Push and pull as far as this matchup. I don't know about you jim, but I'm having a tougher time with the side Yeah, I feel better about the under if i'm looking at side or total I would feel better about the under 47 in the hook Then picking aside. I get the argument for the kc side, but also part of me I'm having a tough time getting there. It's such a short number history tells us that most likely The team that wins this game is going to be the team that also covers the point spread We're not talking about a situation like it was in the nfc championship game like either San Francisco game where they're going to win and not cover the point spread because it's such a large number, right? I laid the two With the Niners when it got there like at open and then I saw it go to one like 15 minutes later I was like, oh gosh, I made a massive mistake and I feel a lot better now But I felt real stupid for a bit. So I do I hear people say that but Okay, what are the chances it's going to fall on one or two Well, see that was when I was talking about it when we recorded last Monday It was one and a half and the money line is minus 118. It's like Sure the odds that it falls on one or not high like I think it's like three It's like four percent of all games land on one But the gap between the implied odds for the money line versus laying the one actually did indicate the money line Is a better play there now it's minus 130. That's different. So I think we're in a different situation now where I you know I get what you're saying for sure I think uh throughout the rest of this week. It's going to be similar to the movement last week. I think We we've seen that the the ground floor is one, right? Yeah, it's not getting to pick them because that was the conversation a week ago Oh, there's so much steam on the chiefs that could this get to a pick up Could we see a flipping of the favorites like we saw last year? No, right? I don't think that's going to happen unless we get some crazy injury news it feels like it's going to be between one And you know two it's not going to be either. I don't think no chance no chance One in two and a half and vandals the only one stepping out there are two and a half Which I find really interesting you look everywhere the consensus seems to be two But for the last like five days vandal has not been worried about Putting two and a half out there, which I would assume is bringing in even more kansas city money Which is also telling me that vandal isn't worried about taking more kansas city money Yeah, we've talked to john shear and the director of trading. He's okay taking a stand on certain things And I don't know if that means that they're higher on the niners than the consensus market is or If they're just okay taking more bets. I honestly don't know Uh, because I had not talked to him recently with regards to this But it is different from the market where you have mostly twos out there right now Now joe you'd mentioned props. Uh, you were talking about the running backs You're talking about movement you've seen the prop market any traditional props You're looking after this uh for this game Yeah, you know, um first as far as the movement goes Not a ton. It's been kind of minimal. We always expect some of the big name players for for the props to jump up Um, but there is one common thread and it's brock purdy There's been movement on the majority of his props which I do find interesting The passing yards have decreased by three not something we typically happen Super Bowl week. We've seen the pass attempts drop one full pass attempt 32 and a half to 31 and a half And one of the props that I did like Um, and I'm not saying I'm changing my opinion because because of the number But I did circle purdy rushing yards last week. I did like that number It was 10 and a half and now we're up to 12 and a half In the two playoff games. He's had five six attempts So even at 12 and a half, I still like it. Obviously, you're gonna like it a little bit more 10 and a half 11 and a half. So certainly looking there also rushing other rushing ones Pacheco um Now two of the chiefs playoff games have been blowouts So they've been leaning they were leaning on him in the game is obvious what was going to happen He was getting 24 rushing attempts Is that a possibility in the game? Yeah, I I think it's a possibility if if there's one side that has blowout factors Strange as this is sounds I would lean to the underdog more blowout factor because just it just doesn't happen with moems He's he's not gonna sure he could lose. He might not cover the spread But as far as uh getting blown out. Yeah, that's not going to happen There's a reason like whatever number it is you can just tease kids pretty especially when they're getting points Like if you had another game to go with it I think a lot of people would be talking about that If especially if you expected to be a lower scoring game that you could get a plus eight and a half With patrick behold, that would be pretty darn appealing. Um, those are a couple of the rushing ones that stand out uh receiving Kelsey and I know it's going to be so popular He's been on a tear and then if you look at san francisco's defense the amount of times that they were lit up this year By tight ends they gave up 105 yards to the position against detroit um, remember mcbride going off The cardinals had 172 yards from tight ends in that match up late in the season Minnesota, I mean, you know, you've got a great weapon there and hawkinson the rams recently too They're not good at defending the tight end and how many players does mohomes trust at this point? It's that's it, right? It's just him and rice right That's what it seems like so And he's been going off in the playoffs like late in the regular season. What's going on with calcy? Oh, maybe he's going to retire at the end of the year and then the playoffs started and He's been going on an absolute tear So i'm surprised that we're not already at the mid 70s. I think this will take up once we get to later in the week So 70 and a half isn't a isn't a bad play, you know the other tight end spot I was not expecting To be making a case for this one But the number is so low on kittle It's 46 and a half at some spots 46 and a half receiving yards like oh, man. I know it's a tough pass defense but you look at kittle and I kind of think that yeah 50 we can get to 50 And in garbage time games and i'm not saying this I expect to be a closer game But I did look at at the few san francisco garbage time games Like date pretty just goes to him non-stop He had 176 another in one of the games 149 and another so because of the number I lean kittle like the others that I mentioned more And I was looking into mvs as well. He played 86 of the snaps He ran the most routes in the team in the conference. Yeah So I was looking at longest reception for him. I believe that number was 12 and a half Uh when I was taking taking a look at mvs So, you know, I'm sure part of that was a a hardman punishment, which I bet under I think it was 10 and a half For him and he played one snap jim one snap So are we are we going to see a repeat of that right now? I haven't even seen hardman props being listed He played one snap which meant that all bets and understood. It was great. Yeah, it was awesome It was awesome. Thank you so much. Maybe they knew that Uh, is are they going to post numbers for hardman this time? I'm not quite sure But uh, yeah, no, I mean, this is what a lot of People that get a lot of money down on props are going to tell you Early in the week and I still consider this the early part because the majority of bets that come in are going to be Friday, Saturday and Sunday Early you target the overs and that's why I ended up talking about a lot of the overs And then late if you want to come back on the other side a lot of times there's opportunity But a lot of the pros that's sunday Super Bowl sunday. They're betting a lot of player prop unders Right, and that's the time to do it. Like I said, I was talking before about I So I think mbs is a terrible player to bet baseline receiving yardage numbers on Um, I did take his over 18 and a half receiving yards because I was like that's just way too low He's better suited for these alt markets because he's crazy volatile and you want to benefit from that volatility versus being Stuck by it but like for him. It was so low. I took it Um, I think that the better markets for him are 40 plus is plus two third 50 plus is plus 360 That's where I want to go for mbs, but you mentioned kettle and 47 and a half is a good number His his average yards and streamage per game in games. They've all been healthy at 62.4 So he's well above that number. However, joe I think there's a better market for george kettle. Okay, and that better market is 70 to one for mvp potential. Oh, no Hypothetically no no no no no Okay, 70 to one. Okay, I gotta take the number into account 71 for a guy Give me just that line. He needs for to have a real conversation voters are like, yes George kittle over those other offensive pieces. What kind of stat line are we talking about? I think that a stat line that could win him that would be three receptions, 67 yards, three touchdowns, which is the exact stat line he had against Dallas on October 8th. I think that stat line is winning MVP. He did that this year. He can get you 100 plus receiving yards. He's done that a good number of times. He can get you multiple touchdowns. I think if he does that with how much the universe despises giving Brock Purdy credit for anything, I kind of think that's in the range of possibilities, especially when it's 70 to one. I took it to 80 before the conference championship, thought I might get a better movement in my favor on that number, has not budged a ton. But I think it's 70 to one. That's where I kind of want to go for my kettle exposure. Okay, there are some things you said there that I agree and some that I disagree. Give me the disagree first. Okay, the disagree part is that he can win it with three touchdowns. Now, okay, when a couple of weeks ago I was actually looking at this and I circled that exact same game. I'm like, we've seen this before. Kittle can have a three touchdown game. I know the number and it's hard to get away from the conversation of the number. But if Kittle has three touchdowns, that means my homes probably has at least four, right?  I mean, I'm Purdy. I think they will pass on Purdy because it's Purdy. I think if he has four passing touchdowns, they're not gonna give him the MVP. I don't know, man. If it's all the Kittle, that's my thought process here is people seem very, if it weren't Purdy as the quarterback, like if it were, I don't know, like Rishi Rice, and he scored three touchdowns. I think they're giving him some homes there. But because it's Purdy, I think there'll be more resistance. Really? Yeah. Okay, I actually agree with that statement. And that's why I found myself looking for value on the San Francisco side in this specific market because I think they'll be looking for anyway to not give it to Purdy, just like we did with the MVP conversation. So that's why, if I'm playing long shots, I'm looking on the San Francisco side. On the KC side, I think the list is two, and maybe I'm being a little bit generous. But yeah, on the San Francisco side, so let's stay there. I think that's fair. I think it's funny that the dog quarterback in this game is the favorite and it's not close. That's how people feel about Purdy. Now, I'm not going to knock somebody that says I'm betting CMC at plus 450. That makes sense to me. He's going to be the offensive player of the year. We'll find out that on Thursday night when he's awarded that honor. And people love him. They think he's the engine that makes everything go. And I have a tough time arguing that one. So CMC is a good bet. Can, you know, last week, a few weeks ago, the number that came down the most on the San Francisco side with the MVP was actually Ayuk. His number was cut in half. It's like, wait, why is his number going from 100 down to 50 to one based on what? You know, Debo, that was the talk going into the NFC title game. Is he going to play? OK, if he plays, it's just going to be a decoy. Well, that was not the case, too. Like there's a possibility that he could make it. I did take one San Francisco long shot a long time ago. And the number has not changed. It's kind of annoys me. It doesn't mean I'm good. I guess I want to win a CLV trophy or something. I bet on Nick Boso while back at Triple Digits. But whatever, do I think he's going to win it? No. What would he have to do? He'd have to do a von Miller. Probably have to be a lower scoring game. Two and a half. Sax minimum, even though he has the reputation. And he probably needs a turnover or a touchdown. I'd say touchdown for most players. But with Boso, maybe he doesn't need a touchdown because of everything that he's already accomplished. It's been a while. Like the last couple are von Miller and Malcolm Smith. I mean, that's it on the defensive side. So that's a difficult one to land on someone. I mean, maybe somebody has a crazy game like green law, which you could find way down the board. But probably not. I understand your case on Kittle. I was there. But then I was just like, yeah, if he has three touchdowns, and the stat line you gave was three catches. So then it was like, ah. I think look at the receivers that have won it recently. Cop and Edelman. Volume. Volume. Yeah. Volume. So if I'm going elsewhere, that's where I would go. Try to find someone that brings volume to the table. I mean, Rice is 70. That's a lot. Yeah, I wouldn't. He runs in the Mahoma. It would have to be a low scoring game. Double digit receptions, maybe nine. But yeah, he would have to do that. OK, let's throw out the other name that we're not talking about. And we have to because of Tay Tay or whatever you want to say. The number's been dropping. What are we at? 17 to 1? It was like 26 a week ago, I think. 25. I know right when the Super Bowl was set, it was like 20. And it was bet down. And we've been at 17 cents. Yeah. I think that's the best number in the market that Fandle's offering. Did you realize that 20% of the MVP vote is fan vote? Oh, I had no idea that worked, honestly. Yeah, I don't know if that's a recent change or what. But it's a big part of this conversation, is it not? Yeah, that is it. It's very relevant. If these are voting, whether the Chiefs win or lose the Super Bowl, Kelsey is going to take that 20%, right? Interesting. Is this like delegates? Like, do we get like a percentage of the 20% or how does that work?  We need Steve Kornackie up on the board. I know it's not an NBC game, but Steve Kornackie and the khaki pants, like, let's get in in here. I think people would love that. Kelsey has a, I said two on the Casey side. Obviously, I'm talking about Mahomes and Kelsey. If he continues, he throws up another stat line, like he has in these other playoff games, that's going to be real. And people might just give it to him. Let's say Mahomes is going to get back again. He already has Super Bowl MVPs. Probably going to win another. Like, let's just, I mean, what he's done, it's not the number one sports podcast. It's the number one sports, number one podcast, period. Like, it's just, when you take a step back and how popular he is and his brother and her, like, it is unbelievable. I know a lot of us in our realm are so sick of it. I love it. I'm great. You know, I love it because my nine-year-old daughter's asking me who I think is going to win in the game. Exactly. And you know what, we would never have that conversation otherwise. Yeah, absolutely. It's always Taylor Swift. Yeah. So bring everybody in. I'm fine with it. I don't mind it, but I understand why some people are sick of it. You know what, guys? In a week, you're going to be sad because we're not going to have any football. We're going to have no Taylor Swift props to talk about. You won't like that feeling either. But Kelsey's got a real chance, man. I'm thinking about taking that 17 just because of the fan vote and how he's performed lately. And like, that's a big part of it, too, is he has a 30% target share during the playoffs. He's getting some deep work. He has a 27% red zone target share, too. So it's not just like the narrative. Like he actually is like, I don't think the gap between him and Rishi Rice should be as big as it is. That part to me is kind of weird. But like, I think other than that, like there is a lot of reason to think Kelsey is like, at least live, especially once you factor in what you mentioned the fan vote. I think that's very interesting. So but also Rice is not as established as the other receivers that have won this award. Sure. That's the that's the other part. But he gets the volume aspect because he has a 28% target share during the playoffs, but he's not getting a lot of downfield work. That was always my issue with Cup 2 is like not a lot of downfield work. But like, yeah, I think there I get why he's 70. I don't think that gap should be quite as big as it is. I'm not going to back Rice. I'm not going to bet him. But like, yeah, I think that as weird as it is, Kelsey may still be the better bet at 17, despite the fact I think that gap is too large. Yeah, yeah. No, I agree. He should be lower. Why is IU so much shorter? Yeah, right? Why are the 49ers receivers? I guess that's the party effect. It probably is the party effect. Yeah. And they're slight favorites, too. So I think that that part is there, too. OK, let's get to the reason we brought you on here, Joe. Let's talk about the nonsense. So we got a lot of weird props we can bet here. In Illinois specifically, we can bet on the Gatorade color and the Anthem length. I'm sure you've been grinding some Reva Mac entire tape out here the past week or so. So what's your read on those bets? The ones we can actually bet here legally in our great state of Illinois. OK, so the Reva one is fascinating. Now, I'm a person. Jim's team me up here because I bet on the Anthem every year. If you're telling me, Joe, you get one bet on the NFL. You get one bet on the NFL Super Bowl. Like, what is it? I'm probably picking the Anthem. I don't know why I obsess over it. And I've just I got to stop. Don't you love it on Twitter or X, whatever we're calling it? Like, as soon as the Super Bowl is about to start, everybody screenshots their stopwatch on their phone. Yep. And they all put it out there. This is what I got. What do you got?  And then you see a rapid line movement. The whole thing. I just bring it all on. I love it all. Now, typically, we're guessing just shot in the dark, waiting on information. We have no idea. It's someone that has not performed the National Anthem. Not in the case of Reba. No. Quick YouTube search. You're going to find it all over the place. Now, what have we seen in this market? It was 83 and 1 half seconds early on. It is 90 and 1 half now. Yep. Yo. I do not agree with that move, Jim Sanis. OK. Reba's quick. It's like, how long do I wait? When am I being greedy? Right. Do I need to keep playing this all the way up on the under? Or am I just going to be wrong? Like, she's a lot older now. Does that mean she's going to take her time? We hear that every year from people.  That's not Reba's game now. Like, we can go back to the 1974 National Finals in Rodeo, which she took 1 12. We're talking 72 seconds. And we're getting 90 and 1 half right now. So you're looking for Alt Unders is what you're saying, right? 1985, World Series Game 1, St. Louis, Kansas City. 65 seconds. Wow. This is not a joke. On the high end, the Marlins, Indians at the time, World Series Game 3 in 1997. That was a minute 22. OK. We're still not there. We're still actually far away. And that was on the high end. I saw people putting out there that six years ago, she did the Celebrity Hope softball game. And that was a minute 18. Also, under, there's no instance of it over. I don't see any instances of it even being close to the 90 and 1 half, which is currently available. So yeah, when do I wait until? I'll tell you, if you wait until Friday, it's going to be too late. I'm playing the under 100%, Jim. So I cannot wait. And I feel like we have a big edge and people love to bet the overs. So how much of the over money coming in is going to drive this number up? I can't believe we're at 90. Maybe this is the top. Maybe. I would think that it is. I love the under. They also throw out there. I know it's not one that you mentioned, but it kind of goes hand in hand because the performances are back to back. Post Malone. Man, does he drag it out? Does he? This is not listed, right? I don't know. I was going to start looking for it. If I don't need to look for it, we got total Canadian viewers of the game up in Fandall, Canada. We got a lot of stuff. I don't think there's anything on Post Malone here for me. OK. We don't have that. All right. Well, so he's doing America the Beautiful. OK. And it's listed. You could find it at 109 and 1 half seconds. So I was on YouTube scouring and watching some of the covers that he's done. Man, does he take his time? His musicians take their time. I was watching him on Howard Stern doing some Pearl Jam covers. Like, it was highly entertaining. But anyways, and I was looking at other singers and how long it typically takes with this song. Like, I was watching Beyonce singing for Obama. Like, there were all sorts of Ray Charles. Like, they're knocking on three minutes. Yeah. And this is 109 and a half. So anyways, I'm going way over on that one. So Alt Overs for Post Malone, Alt Unders for Macintyre. That's where I'm at. We parlay those somewhere. You know, we'll work on it. We'll workshop it. I'll try. I'll try. But you know, we'll see. Well, there was some spots on the Reba Unders. If you go, if you take a lower number, you can get some big plus money. Oh, yeah. So maybe you just ladder to the Reba Unders. That's right. There we go. That's what I'm going to do. Did you guys did you guys have who the MVP going to think first after they're awarded? No, I don't think so. OK, because I saw like, OK, I saw some controversy, though, because it was like, think a higher power or something like that. And they were like, does that count Taylor Swift? And like, you know, I'm not going to, you know, higher power, a.k.a. Taylor, one or the same, one in the same. There's props like that all over the place. Oh, yeah. Is Hunt going to mention her name? Is Romo going to say Jimmy or Tay Tay first? Like there's all sorts of stuff. Jimmy. Let's go. Yeah. Is he called Jimmy? Jim slash Jimmy. OK, OK. So. Oh, wait, actually, no, we do have this. Fandal Canada has it. I lied. It's right here. Which one? The who will they think first? Yeah, God or religious figure. I think Swift should be lumped into this. I thought I just, you know, I think that that would be an oversight not to deliver. That is that's that's crazy because I've seen very different odds all around. And I've seen teammates being the favorite and we're getting that a plus 290. Got to run to Canada for it. But OK, you're not that far. Like you could make that trip. So could you. You're closer than me by about a half hour. That's true. Yeah, I'll say this. Mahomes last year. Team thanks teammates first. I think Purdy would.   I was so I went back and I watched the NFC championship postgame coverage when they grabbed Purdy on the stage. Yeah, shreyhand did. And what do you think the first thing he said? What which category would this fall into? What do you say? He said glory to God first. Wow. OK, so that could explain why that's the favorite because Purdy the Niners are more favorite. Yeah, the quarterback. It's so maybe. But I still think minus one fifties kind of crazy. Yeah, I think most players end up thinking their teammates first why usually teammates are fans and fans is a long shot here, which coach should be longer. Yeah, who thinks he's nobody's thinking Shanahan or Reed first. Yeah, does Chubba Purdy get credit? If you know, 16 to one, are we really taking thinking Chubba Purdy? You know, is he number one in the list here? I probably not, you know, shot the Chubba, obviously. But no, I think that that's quite going to get the nod there. Team mates has value here. Yeah, OK, teammates plus two ninety up in Canada, Fandall Canada to get that one. I like that you actually look for the tape for this, too. This is the analysis we need because it's usually teammates. And I expected the Reba stuff like that. That I knew going in for you, Joe. Like that's that's baseline for you. Like that's surface level Joe Astrosky looking at the NFC thing to see if Brock Purdy. Thanks God, that's next level. So that's good. We've seen Mahomes talk postgame a million times. How many times have we seen Purdy doing that? Everybody else gets all the credit, but we haven't seen a lot of Brock Purdy. It's he's forgotten about unless he's ripping Cam Newton. That happened over the weekend. Well, the reason I thought teammates for him is because back in week before the Ravens game, he was like McCaffrey should be should be MVP. And I bet McCaffrey because of that. So like, I mean, if he's going to say it like that could start a narrative kind of thing, you know, that's why I thought teammates. But I think the NFC championship game is probably the better template to use for him. So I watched McCaffrey talk to. Yeah. So and like, I don't know how you would he went into the teammates, but the first thing he did was was just like George Kittle to shout it at the fans. OK. So would they rule that fans first? And what is Kelsey's Kelsey's tag line is you got to fight for the right to party. Yes, that's not mean anybody. That's alluding to the fans, though. It's maybe that could be, you know, man, there are so many engagement props out there. It is. There is no scandal. Can they have that? And it got taken off the board because the under earth no got hammered so hard. I don't think really. Oh, sorry. Here we go. Well, there'd be a doink. It all comes back to doinks. It's back. Will the MVP mentioned Taylor Swift in his speech? No, is minus 1100. Why would they say her name? Why? I mean, basically, you just just bet Kelsey to win MVP instead. You can. That's 17 to one. This is six to one. Well, there are a lot of props all of a sudden on Cal use checks, wife. Yep. Just because she designed. Oh, no, the Kelsey proposal is still up. Now it's minus 2000, though. I don't know. Not 1100. Yeah, there's no. He's not winning the Super Bowl and proposing Taylor Swift. We think average Americans, that's cheesy to do at a sporting event. I mean, he does have that cheese, but he is cheesy. Yeah, Swift is not standing for that. No, that ain't happening. The implied odds here are 95 percent. There's probably still value on no out there in Canada for you if you want it. Yeah, there's some. I'm guessing limits on this are not very high. So you might not make a lot of money off. They're fun to talk about. Yeah, they're very fun to talk about. But the reality is neither of us are betting any Taylor Swift props. No, because I'm not trying to Canada, so I'm not going to do that.  You can do that. Any other weird props you're seeing out there, Joe, there's halftime props up anything else you like. Do we have first song? Yes, Canada does. Let me go here. Canadians get everything for I know. OK, so Lil John is now minus one seventy two to perform halftime with usher. That was minus one fifteen today, so that's moved a lot. So they must have eyes on Lil John in Vegas. First song is my way by usher at even money. I don't know what my way is, to be fully honest. And I thought it was a I thought that was a will. I am song. I've not done my research for this one yet above where you are on the screen. Did I see eight and a half and the over and under number of songs? Yeah, oh boy. Minus one twenty five both ways. You got to have a big edge here to like it. Well, do you know how many songs Rihanna did last year? Ten. Fifteen. Yeah. So yeah, there's going to be probably some collabs going on on stage. They shorten all the songs. It feels like they try to get as many songs in as possible. If you go back a couple of years ago, let's see, eight. We had eleven. It looks like eleven or twelve when it was Dre, Snoop, Eminem, Marysha Blythe, Kendrick Lamar. Like I would think that eight and a half is going to be long gone. Right. So last time. Am I sensing a Joe Tripp Canada here now? Is that I'm sensing? Even the weekend went over eight and a half when nobody was there. That was that was the only one that was close. Yes, yeah, I would be all about that over eight and a half. That would be my favorite one on half. I was looking up set lists and. Yeah, is very popular in recent years to open with. OK, I just think of, you know, getting everybody pumped up, standing up at the at their party, dancing, whatever. Isn't, oh my God, just OMG, the the way to open it. Yes, the closer. Like, is there a last song performed? Like you would go there. Plus 200. That's what that to be the the chalk here. Yeah. OK, I do. I agree with you. That's not the first song. There's also some songs like this is a family audience. There are some usher songs, which I wonder. No, no, no. Rihanna, I thought that last year, but then Rihanna came out with B Word, Better Have My Money and like I was like, OK, I'm wrong. That's fine. You know, like, cool, I got this wrong. I'm fine with that. The handicap was off my bad guys. So you're telling me we might hear nice and slow? Maybe. You never know. We might. We might.  That's fine, right? And plus it's like very short. Right. Yeah. We can make that joke, too. Yes, these songs are going to be very short. So they are not. And it's like, whoa, nobody even realized that it happened. Confessions is 23. Confessions part two is 23 to one to open. It's not happening. No, it's not. That's not going to happen. A lot of bad money in this market, I think. But over eight and a half. I know it's weight juiced, but I that's a bad number. OK, I like these. It's not even close. We're get we're getting at the 1215 range most years. And it feels like they're trying to squeeze as many songs as possible. I was trying to see if I can get an alt over on this. But no, we're state. We're stuck in it. I mean, you guys are napping over there. Let's get some alts up for the half time. That's right. So you got to check, though, right? You got to be sure before you before you just close the tab. You got to make sure. Yeah, maybe by the end of the week. I mean, who knows? Like I mentioned earlier, every time you refresh your favorite sports book, like, oh, there's another tab. And I don't remember being there a little bit earlier. So we are on the Reba under at 90 and a half. Yes, we are on Post Malone over whatever number that was. I can't remember 109 and a half seconds. One and a half for Post Malone and over eight and a half songs for usher during halftime usher plus friends during halftime at minus 125. That sounds like a good list to have. Super bright now. Yeah, that's right. I like OK. I like turn Reba the most for sure. Yeah. That is Joe Ostrowski. Joe, this is the exact reason I had you on. This is exactly what I wanted. 10 out of 10. No notes. Zero disappointment. This is awesome. It was a pleasure having you on. A pleasure to talk to you once again. Good luck and enjoy the Super Bowl. You do the same, Jim, and everybody listening to covering the spread. Thank you so much. Always enjoy this visit. Yeah. Find Joe on Twitter at Joe Ostrowski. You can check him out on Beck QL Daily every weekday as well. You can find him on 670 to score in Chicago on Saturday mornings. I am on Twitter at Jim Sonis. You can find me on threads at Jim Dot Sonis and check out Fandall Research on Twitter at Fandall Research Back once again. Tomorrow, talking about some same game parlays for this game. We'll talk to all of you then. This has been covering the spread right here on the Fandall Podcast Network.


maneira say faith ide me e e 즘 still very spec world like digamos Aur en I thought we have gone too far forair ɛ ɨ ɨ ɨæ ɨ aɨ jɡbɪ dɨi Hello people tell me ɪ mai ɣ t cuenta n dressing Pa ty toelyn did dech ho kia doav anyu వానిపిత ఏఠిని, వ� Seven, right? అతౌం lyric It wasn't present for so long. జింanja��� scayaar


So hi, my name is Stefan Haas. I'm a software engineer at NavOps. And today I want to talk about mixed workloads with OpenShift and NavOps or Kubernetes. So on the first slide, I want to show you, I want to show you the main features of our NavOps suit. On the one hand, we have virtual multi-tenancy, which means you can share your cluster, your Kubernetes or OpenShift cluster across teams and applications. We have mixed workloads, which I will dive in deeper in a couple of seconds. We have also the feature of managed resource scarcity. So as you can read here, it will enable you to drive high utilization of your resources. You can define with NavOps application workflows, so to address job dependencies you might have in your cluster. We have features for managed cloud resources. So this means prioritize your workloads if you want to run it on-premise or on cloud resources. And one of our newest features is that you can run methods frameworks within your Kubernetes or OpenShift cluster. But as said, I wanted to talk about today the mixed workload. What is the challenge? So many of the Kubernetes and OpenShift users also run beside the containerized applications, non-traditional workloads, legacy, whatever you can imagine, array jobs, HPC workloads and stuff like that. If you want to re-engineer all your applications, this is most, it's time and most of the, it's cost expensive. So users tend to separate the workloads into different clusters. So on the one hand you have running Kubernetes cluster or OpenShift, and on the other hand you have a cluster for your legacy workload. So as said, this increased cost. This is suboptimal for your resource utilization. Just imagine your Kubernetes cluster is fully packed and loaded and you have services waiting for free resources. But your other cluster for the legacy workload is empty or there would be free resources. So another challenge is if you want to share data and network connectivity between your clusters, so as also we have increased management effort if you have multiple clusters. So with NavOps, we have a solution for that. We are using our product called NavOps command and our product grid engine, which is a batch queuing system. It's based on the SunGrid engine. A couple of you might still remember that. So in the end, what are we doing with command? We are deploying a grid engine cluster within your Kubernetes cluster. So as you can see here on this picture, we have so-called execution demons, which is comparable to a KubeLite in the Kubernetes world deployed in a shared Kubernetes cluster. So in the end, you will be able to run in one and the same cluster containerized applications as also traditional batch and application workloads.  It's your choice what Kubernetes distribution you use, even it can be a vanilla Kubernetes installation, OpenShift or whatever. Additionally, as I said, we have advanced resource sharing policies. We have low latency scheduling in built-ins, which means we are replacing the stock scheduler by ours. You can do fair share allocation, arrangements and stuff like that, backfill scheduling. So what are the benefits? So you can avoid siloed and separate clusters. You will reduce your infrastructure costs. You improve utilization and service levels. You can, at your own pace, move your non-containerized workloads to containerized workloads. So sometimes you even have not the chance to move that. Let's just imagine a certain party application where it is not that easy without the help of the vendor to move that to a containerized application. Last but not least, it will simplify your management. Thanks for your attention.


Santa Claus took a break from his duties in the North Pole for a brief ride aboard a Los Angeles-class attack submarine USS San Juan as she returned to Naval Submarine Base New London following a schedule underway. Santa visited the submarine capital of the world to greet military children and provide a little holiday cheer along the way. Santa and his helpers passed out toys which were donated by the non-profit organization Operation Homefront to more than 100 children who welcomed Santa to the Groton Base. Operation Homefront is donating thousands of toys to military children living in New York, New Jersey and Connecticut this holiday season. For Commander Submarine Group 2 Public Affairs, I'm Petty Officer Jason Perry.


On May 11, 2022, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration shared the first image of the Western Hemisphere from its geostationary operational environmental satellite designated GOES-18. Its imager instrument captured this view of Earth. The satellite measures energy at different wavelengths along the electromagnetic spectrum to obtain information about the Earth's atmosphere, land, and oceans. Over time this will help us determine if the Earth is warming or cooling.


This study found that manual compression aided by the axiostat hemostatic dressing was effective and safe in achieving hemostasis of the femoral arterial access site in patients undergoing endovascular treatment with a 4-8 francs introducer sheath. This article was authored by Roberto Minasai, Raphael Cera, Claudio Maglia, and others.


Dear Prime Minister, dear Mayor of Moscow and everybody else, ladies and gentlemen, it's a great pleasure to be here. I don't know if you know what a futureless does, but I don't do what a usual futureless does, which is to predict things. I observe things, much like you could do if you had the time to do so, and I try to work backwards into a new reality of what we can do in the near future. I think most of us now, we have to realize one thing, is that we're living in a world that's based on exponential technology. It's very hard for humans to understand exponential, because we are not. We are linear. We don't live faster because we Twitter. We don't have more real friends because we have Facebook. We are not technology. But technology is now exploding in a sense that all of a sudden Moore's law is helping us to understand that the next five years will give us things that look like science fiction, or have given us things already that look like science fiction. When you count exponentially seven times, you get to 128, not to seven. And today we are at four, the next step is eight. So basically what's happening here is that we have a convergence of man and machine, humanity and technology. In many ways it's extremely scary, in other ways it's extremely positive, but humanity will change more in the next 20 years than in the previous 300. And that's easy to say when you're looking at things like book printing or the steam engine, right, it changed a lot. But what we have here today is things happening in the next 20 years will fundamentally redefine what it means to be human. It was already redefined by mobile devices, by the internet. Now we're talking about things that will be the future in the most impossible way that we have perceived until today, where everything becomes a yes answer. Take things like automatic language translation. Skype already has this integrated into the software. Take things like genetic engineering or going into the bloodstream to fix my cholesterol.  Talk about cancer. If you have cancer, or your friend has cancer, of course it would be fantastic if we could fix this, right? I mean think about that reality. But the same technology can be used to design our babies, right? So if you're very rich, you can then go out and have a different kind of baby because you can afford it. This kind of technology will be ready in the next 10 to 15 years. And it's safe to say that technology is progressing at mind-boggling warp speed. But we and our laws and our societies have remained linear. So it's interesting to see that basically as many people have said, the power of technology has surpassed the scope of our ethics. Sometimes we don't even know if it's our mobile device that's telling us to do something or if it's us. We don't remember the phone number of our spouses because it's based in here, right? We go on a date based on what the device says. I mean the things that are happening here already as powerful intermediaries emerged, then the question really is what are their ethics? I'm not talking about religion here. I'm talking about values, beliefs. As the Dalai Lama has said weeks ago, everybody has ethics and some people have religion, right? There's a big difference. We all have belief into what the future should be and what we would like it to be. And now we have artificial intelligence coming and saying that they can basically simulate and emulate our humanness into cognitive computing. The biggest initiative of IBM is cognitive computing and the neuromorphic chip, the chip that acts like a brain. And then we have intelligence amplification. For example, Siri, Cortana, and our mobile phones, allowing us to get smarter by using technology, that will be a very big growth area in the next five years. And we've seen that all around us. Artificial intelligence, alarm bell rings, think about the self-driving car. If you can use the self-driving car to sit in a traffic jam and the car will take over, so you can read your emails or eat a sandwich, that's a good thing. But if the car takes over when you're going into the freeway of 150 miles an hour and decides who's going to live or die, that's an entirely different thing. Do we want machines to decide what our future holds? William Gibson, the science fiction author, once said, technologies are more neutral until we apply them. Everybody in this room that's creating technology is also impacting ethics, society, organization, politics, of course, jobs, employment. We cannot think of technology as being morally neutral when we roll it out. We have to take it one step further. Looking at all the things that are happening around us, Google now, Facebook, MoneyPenny, Siri and Cortana, basically intelligent digital assistants. If you're in a search business, for example, you know that in three to four years, we will not search the internet anymore as we do today by typing in best sushi in Moscow, right? Our intelligent agent will already know where we are going to go to, what kind of budget we have, and we'll have already made the reservation. We are actually going inside of technology. Those devices are us, a digital copy of us. So the next step here, basically, thinking about what that means is devices like Jibo, and there's 20 other ones. This device was invented two years ago. The founder of Jibo says that this is not a robot, it's a friend. I mean, we're already at that point where there's over a dozen devices that act like our friends as a machine. In Japan, we have robot pets, of course, that's already pretty common, right? But imagine a device that knows who you are, right? Think about what that would mean, social robots, machines as partners. You don't have to have too much imagination to think about what the next step would be if you're an entrepreneur. But social robots, I mean, this is basically, the question is, should technology go inside of us? I mean, I have my mobile phone here, I may have it on my glasses. Maybe I have a visor, a hologram, an Oculus Rift, yeah? But technology going inside of me like a plug-in, right? Like people use if they have disabled hearing. Should we become technology? And if I ask people around the world this, I hear the answer many times, people are saying, well, if I can become a superhuman based on technology, I definitely want that. Mostly 15 year olds do that, right? But think about that for a second. How far would you take it from the mainframe to the mobile to an implant? If you're a futurist or a professor or anybody else, would you like a Wikipedia implant? You can hold quicker speeches, not impossible. Think about where that's going to take us in the near future. Should it take us to this point where we are saying, well, looking at ethics, this is a short definition of ethics. We clearly have a problem here because technology does not have ethics. What does a software, an intelligent assistant, a robot, know about ethics? It's impossible and we don't want them to know anything about ethics, right? But a self-driving car has to make an ethical decision when there's an accident that we do in a split second. Think about what that means with things like the singularity that Ray Kurzweil talks about, the convergence of man and machine. 2025 will have the first computer that is going to be as powerful as the human brain in capacity. In 2050, we'll have one computer have the capacity of all of the brains in the world. All of the brains. We're talking capacity, computing capacity, right? Not emotional capacity, hopefully. But basically, that is a huge shift for us that we have to think about. So I'm saying that maybe there should be some things that should not be automated. Here's an example, Mattel Industries is a toy maker, launched a new Barbie doll three weeks ago. This Barbie doll is connected to the Internet. It will actually listen to what the child is saying and will give a response in real time that is in the cloud. It will not be pre-recorded. Check it out, a short video. Do we have sound? We don't have sound. Well, I'll explain to you what it is, but I guess we didn't set that up beforehand. But basically, this doll, you can watch it on YouTube if you just put in hello Barbie, okay? You can find out that this doll connects to the web and talks to your child as if it was a person. Now, imagine what your child will learn by talking to this doll, right? The doll says, I love you, you're my friend, it's a great day, and so on, right? It will give predictable answers. Your child is going to learn how simple people interact. Be very disappointed when it comes to real life. We're not everybody is a friend. Some things should not be connected. There's a trend among technology to reduce everything down to an algorithm. Everything can be made into an app. There's 27 apps to get divorced on the internet, right? Maybe it's late for you, it's late for me, but this kind of reductionism and machine thinking is a real problem, right? Because we're ignoring the context of human reality. So we have to think about this. There is not an app for everything. There's not going to be a thing that regulates our data in such a way that we would do it. Now, that is not to say that we're not going to use technology to make things more efficient. We are going to do it, as Jeremy said earlier, there's a potential for us to really solve climate change, energy, food using technology. But technology will not solve social or political problems, right? I mean, it will be wrong if we look to Facebook to be our government, right? As some people have suggested. What's happening here in technology is quite clear. We're moving from using mobile devices on the internet to using robots and intelligent digital assistants to automate processes. TechCrunch, the host moderator works with TechCrunch, was a very important article about two weeks ago about how digital assistants are taken over jobs. Very soon, your executive assistant will be in the cloud. Already is, using Siri or Cortana. You may have heard about transhumanism, the idea that people become technology to become more fitting for technology. I believe that this would be a very bad idea. Because it would reduce us to become machines. We should use machines to be more human, not make us more like machines. This used to be the key question in technology when I first started doing internet stuff in the 90s, right? The question always was, how can we do this? Can it be done? You know what the question is today? Every time you ask that question, the answer is, it can probably be done, right? Yes, we can, yes, we can. You can do all of those things. The key question now is a different one, right? This is the key question. Why? Why are we doing this? Does it serve the collective benefit? Does it serve customer happiness? Does it serve society? I mean, this is a key question that is going to emerge there. Because, as my good friend Sophie said years ago in Greece, nothing vast enters the life of mortals without a curse. Technology can be as good as creating huge energy and profit going forward, but it can also create very, very large issues. To keep in mind that we have to actually look both sides of the fence here. This is why I would encourage you to think about a treaty on artificial intelligence. The most powerful weapon in the future of man is technology data information. Let's think about what happens if we don't regulate or look at regulating this. What would have happened if we hadn't regulated the oil industry? We need to think about what that means for our immediate future because everything that we do on this huge grid of technology will depend on our ethics as to what we want and what we want to go with this. Great article in MIT Technology Review. If you're looking at this graph, basically saying at one point the self-driving car has to decide is it going to kill the driver? Is it going to kill one person on the side of the road? Or is it going to kill other people ahead of me? Because somebody is going to get hurt. That creates a wicked problem. Do we want the car to decide this? Do we want autonomous weapons systems deciding who is a threat and who is not based on an algorithm? I doubt it. I think what we're looking at here is the idea of the unintended consequences. Are we actually going to be in charge of this? It's quite clear when we're looking at this that the new arms race is about data and about intelligence. That is a significant opportunity for those providing those things, of course, right? As most of things come from the military there. But we have to think about do we really want an arms race or do we want to gather the benefit of this? That is a very crucial question. Technology in the future is no longer going to be in this island. This is a 60-year-old paradigm from Paul Barron. Technology in the future is going to be converging humanity and organization. I would maintain that if you're looking at building innovation, you need to look at this in a holistic kind of way. This bar here on the left shows you how many people will be unemployed because of technology. Looking at the top of the period, loan officers, receptionists, paralegals, retail people, taxi drivers, security guards, cooks of fast food and so on. Automation will take a lot of jobs, create lots of new jobs, but the shifts will be huge. So we need a responsible, a holistic and a precautionary approach on this. We cannot just say, let's use technology because it exists. We have done that until now. It's worked out until now, but now it's getting much, much larger the stakes of what we can do or should not do here. We've heard lots of talk about education and why our kids should embrace STEM, you know, science, technology, engineering and math, and I'm all for that. At the same time, we also need to think about what I call HECI, humanity, ethics, creativity, intuition, things that only humans can do. The jobs of the future will be primarily in those two sectors, right? The STEM sectors and the humanity sectors. What I call the humor rhythms. So very important to look at this issue of how those two will be interfacing in the near future. Riffing off Pablo Picasso and I'll come to the end of my presentations who said that computers are for answers, humans are for questions. We should not stop asking questions because computers can provide the answers. We need both. As a great writer on this topic said, Donald Kahneman said, cognition, understanding stuff requires a body, right? It's a body you think with your body, not just with your brain. Can we get them on your back? Thank you, that's good. So it's actually about having a cognitive approach that uses both, technology and humanity. I think if you're looking at the future of innovation, the biggest opportunity is to provide both. Technology, imagination and human flourishing. I'll come to the end. I think it's very important to look at this and say, okay, what's happening here? I think with technology we can say, I would say 90% of that is very positive. 10% has the potential to create huge friction issues. We have to look in both directions. So I would appeal to you for your leadership. It requires foresight, precaution, balance and a sense of wholism. That's my final slide. Embrace technology, but don't become it. Thanks very much for listening.