Welcome to the After Hours podcast, presented by my Investing Club. I'm your host, Harry, and I'm joined by my co-host, James. And in this episode, we have a very special guest, Joe, the head moderator at MIC. If you're someone who's interested in the world of finance, investing, and trading, then this podcast is for you. We cover a range of topics, including large caps, real estate, and even the future of artificial intelligence. But it's not all about finance and investing. We also share some life stories and talk about our experiences in the industry. This podcast is unique because we don't just focus on the technicalities of trading and investing. We go beyond that and talk about the human side of it, where we share our struggles and successes. And we discuss how we've overcame those challenges in our personal and professional lives.  So sit back, relax, and join us as we dive into the world of finance and beyond in the After Hours podcast. What's going on, guys? We're back with another episode of the After Hours podcast. Today, we have Joe Kelly, who's a returning guest. He is the head mod over at MIC. And he's also one of the main large cap traders that we have. So wanted to get him on, kind of talk about the overall market, talk about a few different topics that we will dive into. So Joe, thank you for coming on, my friend. Thank you. It's always a pleasure, gentlemen. Of course. So I guess we'll dive in. So right now, where we sit, the market, I think, spy, I don't know, down a little bit today, but market's just been chopping around. We just got news that the Fed raised a half a point. And it doesn't really look like they're stopping on their mission of like stopping inflation. So Joe, like, how are you feeling about the overall large cap market right now? And kind of what are you thinking going forward? Well, I think based on what what old Jerome Rome said he was going to do, he's going to do everything in his power to to fight, as he said, to fight inflation. And I think that a half a percent was generous. Like, I expected him to just like come out of the woodwork and hit us with like 1% because if you look at what's happening, bro, nothing's slowing down. Like purchasing hasn't slowed down. Really, truly, we're finally kind of seeing this hail on the real estate market to where there's people that are not really they're not jumping into these really expensive homes. Okay. But, you know, we're talking over 500,000, you know, over half a million dollars. They're not they're not they're not diving into those houses immediately. Just, you know, going buck wild like they did in 2020 and 2021 and even in the first half of 2022. Now we're seeing and I'm logging into my charts right now just so I can I can I've been out on the road all day long, bro. Looking at, I mean, that's that's how we can talk about these properties because, bro, I'm literally looking at stuff. And what we're seeing is we're seeing houses that are just sitting there sitting when they're over that kind of like out here. I'm looking out here in Colorado and out here in Colorado and they're sitting if they're over 600 grand, unless it's just absolutely perfect. Okay. But why I think we bound when in the markets because if you look at look at a chart on spy, like everybody that's with us right now on March 8 2023. Look at that intraday chart. We bought them out at $396.59 in the spy in the SPY and at the end of the close, we did nothing but rally straight into it. And in my opinion, I think that was solely based on the fact that people thought we were going to get a higher rate hike after what Jerome after Jerome's opinion yesterday. I think I think people went, oh, a half percent. Okay. That's really not that. Okay. We were prepped for that. That's all right. So I think what's going to happen in the markets going forward is still going to be this continuation of this sideways chop this full time. I do not think we're going to have any kind of positive reaction out for anybody's like long term portfolios. I think it's going to be flat and I don't I don't see us going anywhere like I don't see us above 420. But in the very, very immediate future based on that reaction like on the webinar that we just did yesterday. My opinion was we were continuing lower. And based that the rate hike was not a full percent or 1.25 or really aggressive as like Jerome made it seem like he was going to do. Then I think the market kind of went, oh, okay, fine. We'll just chop around here. Yeah. So what why is it that you think people are choosing like I feel like when I talk to people and like my day to day life. I feel like people are just ignoring the fact that like inflation is still hot. Powell has said multiple times it's not coming down the rate we want. It's not even really coming down. It's barely budging. And he has said from the beginning, he wants people to not get excited in the market. He wants people to not get excited in their spending, but people are just ignoring everything. And that's what I think scares me long term. But like, why is it that you think people are just choosing to ignore this? It might be better than a point, but that could just mean longer prolonged hikes rather than maybe a few big ones.  I agree. I agree that that's a concern. I agree that that the fact that it's just a half percent now means that there's more coming. He's just not going to do all at once. But I do believe and this is just speculation at this point that people, myself included in 2020 and 2021. 2021, 2020 really set up one of the most phenomenal years that I've ever had income wise for, which was in 21 and 22. Yeah. And I'm certain because dude, I'm not, I'm not smarter than the average bear.   That were in far greater financial positions than I was. I can only fathom what they made. Yeah. And I think that people aren't hurting in terms of money to spend. Yeah. And yeah, no, lower income people, yeah, they're hurting. They're hurting. But I believe the middle class that took advantage of crypto are still reaping the benefits of it.  Yep. That is, you know, and those people that cashed in on that and are still in a profitable position. Yeah. Dude, I think that these people still have money to spend. Yeah. And I think that's the reason why we haven't seen it. They have money to spend. Yeah. And what do you think is going to take them? Like, what do you think it's going to take to drive that out? Or if you think it's going to dry it out at all? Like, do you think we're ever going to hit like a spending slowdown? It's a hard question. You need layoffs, I think. Yeah. I mean, that's the type of hard questions that you guys, that I've heard y'all pose and I'm like, yeah. Yeah. It's hard. I don't know. I could speculate scenarios all day long that I think people could run into, but I think the risky part is anybody that did like an adjustable rate mortgage on their home or they've maxed themselves out on their credit cards or they stretch themselves on car payments. I think it's going to take bankruptcy on people to really, to let that hit home. Like, I think there's like, I don't think homes are going to foreclose. I think this time it's going to be the auto market. I've been saying this for the last year. If you guys were to watch this podcast or NMIC, if you've seen any of my old large cap stuff, a year ago I was talking about how the automotive industry in the US is the next collapse. Yeah. We're just not there yet. We're not there yet and we will be soon. But I think people losing their cars, losing their means of transportation, that's a very real possibility that could for spending habits lower. But truly, that's me grasping for straws at a really desperate point right there. I'm just seeking to answer the question because currently my answer is I don't see it. I don't think it's going to be flowing. Maybe 50% interest rates on revolving credit. The problem is there's just so much money out there that I don't think people even understand. Like, my father does home renovations, kitchens, baths, all that. And he just sold a job to a 38-year-old couple. It's like 500 grand and it was just a full remodel. And it's like, these are not even like loaded people. They have great paying jobs, but there's still just so many people with so much money. But I think what's going to happen is the older generation and then the generation without money, like the younger or lower class or whatever, they're the ones that will get fucked. But everyone else in the middle, it's just going to be business as usual for a lot of people. The older crowd has to worry about the market. If spy tanked another 20%, all the retirees and stuff are screwed.  I agree. And the long-term investment accounts are the ones that are at risk here. The people that are cussing that 65 to 68, you're not going to retire for another 10 years, probably. You're going to be working until you're 80. I think you're going to be working until you're 80 and you can't depend on that to be a scenario, which, I mean, that's the cold hard truth of it all. I wish there was a way that could change that. You know, the socialist then me wants to say that there is, but the capitalist then me just says, birds up, baby made for your own self. Yeah. To be fair, these guys, most of these people have had a decade plus of like unlimited returns.  So if they, I kind of feel it. It's a typical American mentality. Yeah. It's like, I can take care of it tomorrow. Then tomorrow never comes. Yeah.  And then one day when the grim reapers knocking, we ain't ready. And that, that's the, you know, if you always think you can do it tomorrow, you're never going to do it. Yeah. What do you guys think about? I saw Ford came out with a new patent.  What do you guys think when you saw that? Like just, I heard Joe mentioned the auto industry, which has been a theory that would has been kind of like projected for a little bit by like various people as well. And I haven't heard too much about it. And then when Joe brought it back up just there, I kind of like thought about it again. And then I thought, hmm, that's interesting this week. I literally saw a headline about Ford making that patent for that vehicle repossession to drive itself back. It's going to put tow truck drivers out of work. Yup. Dude, I, I just want to take this real quick. I absolutely love it. I think it's not only what should like if technology was there years ago, it should have happened because it's just a quick story. When I bought my last car, I'm sitting there with my buddy who owns the dealership. And I'm sitting next to like his office is right next to the finance office. Right. And I hear this kid in there buying a 21 Corvette C8. Right. He's financing it. The monthly payment was like $2,300.   And I'm sitting there thinking like, this is insane. He's going to lose that car.   That's a big, you're welcome there from the Ford. I love it. I think it's hilarious. Yeah. Well, Ford was the one of the few automakers that during the 2000 something whatever 2008 price or whatever the hell it is 2001. They were the one, they were the one automaker that didn't take the bailout. Right. Yep. And I've always said that Ford has been on the, they've always had a pulse on the market that unlike any other, unlike any other automaker Ford has always and not just because I worked for Ford in the past, but they've always had a close pulse on the market and they've always positioned themselves to take advantage of it. Yeah. The one, if an automaker is filing a patent for cars to repossess themselves, then what do you think that that says the automaker thinks about all the decisions that these dealers made and the finance companies made during 21 and 22? What do you think? We think it's probably trash, right?  When you start running DTI and PTI debt income payment to income numbers, you're going to discover that $1,400 and $1,200 is the maximum allowed amount for a person that makes nearly six figures a year. And sometimes, in most cases, not sometimes, in most cases, anyone that bought after 21 is, they have a car payment near $1,200 right now, $900, $1,100 and they did not buy like fag wagons like James drives. Wait, can we edit that out somehow? Do I have a guide I can edit that out? Oh my God. Yeah, you do right here. I want to, I just want to tell a quick story. Just from that.  So I learned about car repossession from a young age where my best friend, he went out and he bought a BMW. Everyone told him it was a bad idea. I told him it was a bad idea. Used BMW. We're graduating high school or so. I believe we just graduated or so. And so anyway, he goes out, he buys this like used BMW. He's like, man, like, don't worry about it. Like I'll be able to make the payments. I'm fine. And meanwhile, he was working at McDonald's. That's where he was working at. And so anyway, he had had it for a good like two years or so, but there was still a lot more to pay on that loan, obviously. And it happened and I was home from university.   And it was gone.   And he's like the little grim reaper.  If that type of scenario happens, do you think it could be kind of the bottom of the housing market right now? Because if they start cutting rates or whatever they do, you know, I mean, that would signal housing to start kind of going up. So if that type of scenario happens, could it be that this right now is the bottom of the housing market? Do you think? No. And I get where you go. I see where you go on, but I think it comes down to making homes unaffordable for buyers on the lending side. So in the U.S., the maximum DTI on the back end that a mortgage wants to have is like 54%. And what it's going to take for that to really take effect is they're going to have to make interest rates so high that buyers can't qualify based on income, no matter the credit. They can't qualify based on the lending standards. So they literally have to raise rates to a point where they can't. Like people that are trying to sell their homes, the only people that can buy them are people that are paying cash. Or putting a boatload of money down to get that payment underneath there. Because, for example, if you use like an 8% rate, if you use 8% on a $600,000 home, you're probably going to be about $5,200 a month. And if the payment is $5,200 a month, you have to make nearly $200,000 a year on paper before taxes to qualify for that home. And there's plenty of people that make less than $150 that are still qualifying for half a million dollar homes. So I think what you have to do is you have to price out the buyers. And you're not going to do that with the home prices. You're going to have to do it with the interest rates. You're going to have to do it to where you can't lend. We can't lend any more money because people can't qualify based on the terms. What's happening here in Boston? If the Fed prints money again, to talk to your point here, if the Fed prints money again, the interest rates are going to drop again, and the housing is going to rally again. Yeah, exactly. We need years that this goes stagnant. Three years, I'm thinking. We need until 2026 at a minimum that the real estate market just goes. Yeah.  It was delayed. We made a mistake. We're sorry. We're going to print money again. That would signal the housing. We're going to rally. To rally. So theoretically, if we did go into a recession and the Fed pivoted with that, that could signal maybe, like if that is big. World War III is coming. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. World War III is coming if that happens. We'll delay a recession for a few years, but then the recession that eventually hits us, like I think what you're getting at is eventually the recession that hits us is going to be so damning and drastic, it's going to be worse than 2008. They've got to stick to the plan. They've got to stick to it. If they don't stick to it, it's going to be destruction. I don't think Jerome Powell is going to move on this one. I think he's, like I said in the past, he's not going to lose to inflation. Like Volcker is his hero. I will stick with it. He's not going to give up on this fucker. And he can't because the problem is we're already at a point where people are breaking and we haven't even really started, which is crazy. Like it feels like, I'll think about Senator Warren comments. Yep. Senator Warren's comments, like you don't feel any remorse for the risk of two million jobs. And he's like, he didn't even, he's like, this is what's happening here. People in Boston, like these are, this is a nice area. Right. These people have jobs. They can save money.  They can't afford a house. You can't afford a car. And we literally are at the tip. I feel like this is 10 years in the making of us catching up to ourselves and like trying to fix this overspending problem that we have here. Again, people who make 200 grand are trying to buy a million dollar plus houses that probably can't really afford it.  And right now here, this is the problem. People who have overpaid for houses in this area will refuse to sell their house for any less. So if they've already overpaid, they need to make a certain amount to get out of it and clear it free. But most people can't afford that cost.  And we're at what? 6% interest rates? And if they keep going? But here's the case. Here's the case, dude. So the house that we have in Texas. Texas is far less expensive than any of these other surrounding areas. Hence why everybody from California and New York started to crowd in. Hence why I'm leaving. Like all these Californians and New York people with their, never mind. They just got overpopulated. It is overfreaking populated. And it's proof that every single year during the extremes of summer and the extremes of winter in Texas that we're losing power in Dallas, Fort Worth, Metroplex. That should not happen. That should not happen.   They build high rises. They build multifamily 200, 300, 400 unit properties that are just sucking energy out of everything. And they're book solid. Yeah. And because summer, summer of 22 was, and dude, I was like, I had a real estate license in the summer of 22. And dude, all I did was just write contracts from home with my house. That's crazy. Didn't even have to do anything. Writing contracts with people that are going to rent houses. Because bro, that is, I was talking to Tyler, the moderator, the junior mod in MIC. And I was talking to him today. We had a meeting today. And one of the things I was talking about was like, dude, I know a lot of people want to become a day trader and they want to do that forever. But that's a commitment. That's a lifelong commitment that is your job and that is what you're going to do. For me, what worked best for my personality was using day trading to leverage myself into other avenues that allow me the time to spend with my family and the time that I don't have to be 150% on the screens every day of my life. Yeah. And that's a hard level to operate it every day. That's a difficult level to operate in order to make that massive amount of money. Now 21 and 22, dude, that's what I was doing because I was like, now's the time to push the freaking pedal. And I was pushing as best I could. And when it was done, honestly, now, dude, I'm burnt out. I am burnt out. And because of the avenues that I leveraged myself into using day trading, I'm making more. I've made more in these first three months. It's not even a third month in. I'm making more in the first three months than I did in the first nine months of 22. Yeah. And interest rates are terrible. Market is terrible, but I leveraged myself out of the market in my opinion at the perfect time. And when the market improves, I'll be right back in it. Yeah.   I went off on a tangent. I honestly have no idea what the question was. No, that was, no, honestly, that's good because I think one, it's like a massive lesson that like learning to trade is like anything else in the world where it's just, it's a skill to have that you can turn it on and off like a faucet. Yeah.  I remember what I was talking about. But the reality is if you don't leverage yourself, as Joe was saying, into other avenues, when times like this happen because right now, even for small caps, which is what we trade, the market's okay. It's not amazing.  Like that. You're doing great. Yeah. Yeah. It's, but it's, that's it. You have the ability to do more.  Every day.  I love that dude's attitude. I just think it's, it just cracks me up. How just like, he's always at like 120, 150 of his personality. He's always pumped and dude to operate like that and never relax whatsoever. Right. I mean, I got a wife and three kids growing two dogs and trying to make moves and all the other avenues. We got to, we can't ever get any amount of time back no matter how much money we spend, we can't get any amount of time back. And so I think the most important thing in life is spend as much time as you can making memories more than making money. Because at the end of the day, when you leave this earth, the only thing that's left behind is the memory, not the money that she gets pissed away real quick. So I'm like, dude, leverage yourself into atmospheres where you're going to make an impact that people really know. Yeah. But what I was, what I was talking about before I got off on the tangent of the diversification. Sorry. Was the fact that homes are so less expensive in Texas. And we're selling our health. I know, right? Like, here's a fun back game problem. Yeah. Not even connected. Sorry. So like the properties in Texas, they're so much less expensive than California and New York, right? Then all these inflated areas that people flock to Texas to come to. And then all of a sudden there's an influx of the population, everything. Right now, our house is on the market. We bought it in 2019 for $228,000. $9,000. $228,000. Quarter million dollars. Dude, that is nothing on a home. And right now we're listing it for $350,000. And I'm like, as I'm sitting here doing this, there have been two people walk through the home in two days. It's been on the market for two days. This is what I'm telling you. It's been on the market for two days. And we have had 15 different buyers walk through it in two days. Yeah. 15. Ready? Of those 15, 30% have committed to offers. That's crazy. That's what I'm telling you. Lower priced homes are still selling like hotcakes. If they're updated, like our house is updated. You guys, we talked about my kitchen renovation, the fact that I had to live in a non-renovated put together kitchen for a year because of like James, the freaking contractors are so backlogged that it doesn't matter what you want to pay them. They're like, you can pay me whatever, but you're going to get online. And dude, it has the most updates and the most everything. And it's going to sell fast because it's a beautiful home. If it wasn't a beautiful home, it might sit there a little longer and give people to think about it, but it's drawing people that are ready to buy out of the woodwork that we're just sitting there waiting for the home to come on the market. Yeah. And we're going to be, I think we're going to be in a multiple offer situation. And so these people are not priced out. So back to what Harry was asking was, dude, we've got to price them out. But they better not get priced out before I'm able to sell.  I love it. I love it. I think one important thing that everybody can just get fucked. No, I think that's one important thing. Sorry. That's the capitalist in me. Yeah, exactly. The socialist in me, which is everybody's 401ks were doing better, but the capitalist in me is like, nope, birds up. I'm out. I don't have that in me. I think one thing that Joe mentioned that was like really important that like maybe we didn't talk about enough was that, you know, and also James mentioned it as well was the fact that when you're a trader, you know, you got to strike when the iron's hot. And when the iron's not hot, it's not the time to be pressing, you know, I'm talking to a lot of people who are like long traders and that might see and they're like, Hey, man, like I've been having a little bit of difficulty. Like are the patterns not working? I'm like, man, the market is choppy right now. We don't have a whole lot of like really bullish sentiment or really bear sentiment. One day we might get a really good day. One day we might get all day faders. Like I talked with James about this daily. And that's why I've also been working on some different strategies to just kind of run my trading on all the pilot too, you know, some different swing strategies, some different, you know, overnight hold stuff like that, things that I've been kind of like looking and just keeping an eye on because, you know, I think for me as well, the day ones are good. And yes, you can, you can make money doing that, you know, that's great. But, you know, you can also make a lot more money with like the thing is, is that I'm trying to make more money with as little stress as possible, you know, and usually those two things don't go together. But, you know, at this point in my trading career, that's why I'm trying to get into some swing stuff and to get into some multi-day holds and to get into other things like that because, you know, as far as as fun as it is to be long in the day ones and waking up every morning, slamming buttons, you know, I've kind of gotten to a point where I just want to, you know, try something different and kind of run it on autopilot and do some things like, you know, Joe said, whereas like, you know, I don't know. I just feel like that's where my trading is kind of starting to go just because like of the way the market is.  It was really fun when I was on the come up and now it just seems like we're in a situation where it's just like, the range isn't really there. The volume isn't really there. You wake up and everyone's writing the Zeds in chat.  But I was watching OCEA, you know, back before it even ran a long time ago, you know, and, you know, I'm still new to a lot of this stuff. But, you know, I've been trying to kind of like dig deep into filings and stuff like that and just, you know, look at some other strategies just because I want to position myself in the best position, you know, going into these kind of market conditions, you know, this is what it is. I'm not going to fight it, but that's what I've been kind of working on, you know. Let me, I want to tie this all together and wrap up on one last topic. You need to make yourself non-replaceable in every, that's why it's nice to have a million different strategies in trading, like have different ways to trade, different sources of income. Because at this moment in time, the biggest subject out there that everyone talks about is AI. And in jobs, it could be trading. It could be in real estate. We don't know. There are a million jobs where we don't know what AI is going to start stepping in and doing and taking from us in a weird, non-kind of, you know, end of the world kind of way. But I know that's something we've been talking a lot about. And, you know, Joe, like how do you, how do you see AI coming into our world and like affecting jobs and stuff like that? Because we're already at a point where there's so many less people working and less people working on skills. Like we see it at MIC. There's not as many people, we see it on the internet everywhere, interested in obtaining these skills, like trading or real estate. They just want free everything. And do you see a point where AI comes in and just takes it all from them and there's nothing left, no diversification that can be had?   Artificial intelligence has to rely on previously given data to create something completely new. It cannot do that. If you look at all the inquiries like from, from like chat GPT and mid-journey and all of these huge AI bit Jasper AI, they all require data to feed from. They cannot create something truly original. So I think the people that use AI to free up their time, to create something truly original in either a business or in their own life or whatever it is, I think those are going to be the people that are most productive. And I have a question for you guys. What do you think about these YouTubers that are creating AI bots? Like trading, trading, probably not going to work. You know, I have a hard time. Is it AI though? Yeah, but I mean, I have a. It's not AI. It's smart. Trading algorithms that existed for 20 years. Yeah, exactly. These, these are not AIs. The only thing that's writing the code is the AI, but it's not improving on itself. It requires a trader that has a working knowledge of the market to take the AI and tell it what to write. Now, could the AI eventually learn from those inputs and do something? Yeah, maybe, maybe, but it requires somebody that has the working knowledge. These are not AI bot. Think about the services that sell algorithms, think about these guys on Twitter that have always said, well, my system is fully automated. That's not AI. It's just an algorithm. Yeah, exactly. Our AI learns from itself. AI bots do not exist in trading because it cannot learn from itself on the retail side, institutional side. I can't speak to that. I have no idea if an AI exists on the institutional side and it would not be a surprise if it did. 100% it was, I think. But we throw around this AI term in day trading too much. Too much. You've got people like Humble creating these like AI bots to trade. No, it's just an algorithm that they use chat DPP to write. It's still an algorithm that people like, for example, Triforce Traders has been writing for 15 years. The dude's been writing code for 15 years successfully and selling those algorithms. They're not AI. They don't change. They don't modify without human input. Renaissance has been around forever and they're all code. They're all algorithms, but my opinion is if right now we're so green and I don't want to say, in my opinion, it doesn't happen anytime in the immediate future, but there will be a day where in my opinion, day trading will be a thousand times harder than what it is as a human now, because how in God's name will you compete with something that's always getting better and always adjusting itself and can operate faster than any of us ever can?  And if you are creating an environment... You've got to have done, matey. Yep. If you're creating an environment where retail can't win and retail can't feel like they can win, then you're going to have no one trading and no one playing the game. And you need people to play the game and entice them. You need that one big runner a month that keeps all those longs vying. And you need... Well, the stock market will always be there. And this is how I feel, because no matter what, there's always going to be the big companies, right? And as long as the stock markets open, there's going to be people who also can't afford to buy the Apples, the Amazons, the Googles and all that stuff. So what are they going to look to?  They're going to look at the small caps and the mid caps. So they'll always be the people, and I don't put anyone's job down, there's always going to be the mechanics. There's always going to be the people that work at stores who just can't... They think they're going to buy that one stock. The idea of pumping cheap stocks has been around for a hundred years. That's not going anywhere, in my opinion. But at some point, they lose a lot now. They lose 90% now. That's going to be 99% this time. They're not... That's how I feel. The competition's already there. Now let's talk about something along that side. These things that people are generating that they're like that... I forget the YouTuber's name, but he's like that young kid. The haze... The haze... Whatever. I can't pronounce it. He calls it chatGTP.  Can't even get it right, man. Oh my gosh. Come on. Anyway, so you did... chatGTP. Here we go. And... So the dude... I watched a video of this guy, and he claims to have made an AI bot. And he did this scenario where the AI bot wrote a strategy that basically said buy when it's oversold and sell when it's overbought using RFI. That strategy has been written in a book a hundred times. So all AI did was reference the written database that it's received, grabbed that strategy that someone created and fed it back to that person. That's not artificial intelligence. That's just freaking queries. That's Google. Yeah. That was faster research that was done by a language model that had the ability to read it back and understand it at a better level than Google could. And... the difference though is that we as humans have agency. Which is the right to choose. The right to make a choice for ourselves. We have intelligence and agency. The right to choose. And if we have intelligence and agency in the right to choose, we're going to choose to try to... let's say the outcome of a situation that we made a choice on was not good. We are going to... we have the ability as humans to choose a different outcome in hopes that future outcomes are going to be good. Right? AI does not have that without human input right now. And none of these bought. Huh? Right now, yeah. Yeah. Sure, it could have that chance now. But that's why I think it's so important that if if there's somebody that fears AI taking their job like Stout Park, serves, if they feel it's going to take their job, figure out how to leverage it in your job. Make yourself valuable because I fully believe that there are going to be people to understand how to manipulate AI in order to use it in their jobs and that's going to become a skill that gets monetized. Yeah. If you don't know how to use AI you're not going to get the job when the dude next to you knows how to use AI to get rid of all of those remedial tasks that take forever and to leave you up for more creative process optimization and creative business ventures. Yeah. I was talking to someone in real estate and they have their own small real estate office and they just hired a kid who believes that he can work with AI and basically get him to eliminate all of his office workers and not real estate agents, not people who are going to sell the houses but the people who are writing the contracts the people who are emailing people to set up appointments he believes that that's what they will be able to do. They will get rid of everybody. Got it. So here's a question that I was watching one of the recorded podcasts and James was like I disagree with Joe and so now I have to bring it to his face because I'm looking at him in the eyeballs.  The situation was do you think AI is going to overtake Google and I basically said Google has so much data they just haven't monetized it in an AI format they have more data than chat GPT does they have more access to more data than chat GPT ever could but what James said was that versus Googling we can go to something like chat GPT and Google the answer Google the question and get an immediate response like that but I just lost the headphone I don't know if that was a tooth or something I'm all hyped on this side man it's just like blah blah blah we're going to have to get the editor to like focus in on that as it falls down in this time stamp because that was pretty good but how do you know that the response the AI is giving you is the right answer okay so how do you know so without research through Google I can go first through different sources how do you know that's the right answer this is where I actually just listened to a really good podcast on this it was the all-in podcast and they were talking about that however the problem with AI right now is it is it really can be at the discretion of the creator of the AI you can almost you can almost let like we're seeing it in a political view we've seen people ask the AI questions about Joe Biden or Trump and it'll answer positively about Biden and then about Trump it'll either be negative or it won't respond or whatever so we're already seeing instances instances like that and I think that that is going to eventually entail its own sort of like government agency that is like the truth of AI like it's going to have its own uh I don't want to say ministry of truth but at some point if the if AI is going to be as big as everyone thinks it is then it has to be a more trusted source but now how can you trust with Google because I feel as Google is when you type into Google depending on your searches and everything like that like if you're a staunch Republican I feel like your searches are going to be more geared towards your viewpoint just as everything on the internet is yeah so I agree so but but I think the problem is like you're saying and this is where after we had one after I gave my point and I heard this I started to change my stance a little bit is that right now on Google you can still make a choice you can choose the article you can see something and get away from it AI is just going to generate you an answer and if that's what you end up believing then you don't have any other choice to choose but see this is what I'm talking about that's why we have the agency our responses on this in our stances we have the agency to choose what we take is the source of truth so if you GP chat GPT to answer which is what I do every freaking day now I'm not asking it ampers but for example a lot of what I do at the right copy you know I do UX stuff I build I build sites I build stuff like that and a lot of that is putting in word that dude took free eight to come up with a freaking paragraph in my head just like that time and it eats up valuable time so all I do is I go to chat GPT and I say this is a page that's about blah blah I want to write a brief description about this header and it goes like done there we go now I can plug it in I can read from that I can optimize from that but it's using my input to go from there so we have the agency to choose if you're going to search and answer a question you're going to search a question and chat GPT and you want to validate its truth what's the first thing you're going to do what are you going to do I'm going to Google it I'm going to go to Google that's the problem you're going to Google it because the database is billion of gigabytes of data compared to chat GPT less than one terabyte what's to say people don't start just choosing to believe chat GPT instead of choosing the option what if this is the what if to give you some thought and this is the video podcast too so write it in the comments I want to hear what people think what if Google stops feeding what you want to see what if they stop based on AI tailoring your searches to what they think you're going to want just give you the fire hydrant what do you think is going to happen people are just going to go to another fucking source I don't know people what's going to be the source though I don't know as twitter they'll go to some random place I don't know where the fuck they'll go they'll go on facebook they'll go from twitter facebook twitter go till they want to feel validated what do you feel gives you any what do you feel gives you a source of truth like if you ask a question and somebody tells it to you how do you know it's true my mom says it's true it's like go back through your own belief system it filters back into your belief like how do you believe things to be true the only way is that from your point of view how you navigated life your belief system have you ever read the book have you ever read the book from George Orwell in 1984 yeah I read that in high school read it again read it again and consider today I think that dude was very very very very right but he's just off on the timeline by about 80 years just like the recession just kind of but anyway write that in the comments guys everybody that's watching that's anybody that listens to it write it in the comments to what you guys think what it would be like if Google did not tailor your searches based on its own data that it has read from you then how are we going to decide what the source of truth because if you go to a political side of the political view you've got the republican side this is just us right this is just us US only makes up about it makes up less than 17% of the world's population like a tiny fraction of us are republicans and democrats a tiny fraction the rest of the world what's that source of truth Kim Jong-un Kim Jong-il what are they on what are we on now Il-oon son I don't know what yeah I don't know what what level we're at there maybe Zelensky will be a source of truth maybe Putin will just be like and then that's the that they were like there we go okay fine cool and I think that you know Trump was the disruptor of the of the whole system he pointed out how many untruths there were Trump was a moron an idiot beautiful businessman very talented man but he's an idiot just because I support that side of it that he pointed out a bunch of untruths it just made the rest of it consider what we're receiving from the media what we're receiving from any other sources of knowledge that we consider what that's a true way how do we prove it the truth for me when I have a question I've got to prove it with math or science now if it comes from from a point of like logic and ethics yeah that's my agenda on this podcast Jesus I wasn't headed there actually where do you think I was or not so I'm going to create a spin-off podcast where I talk about that though I want to be on that podcast talk about my gender but I do have to wrap this up in a second but I do want to say I don't think we're that far from kind of what we were saying like how do you identify truth people just choose like you said people choose their own truths and that's how you can tell we use COVID as an example people chose to believe it whatever they wanted about COVID but the virus whether it was for whether it was as deadly as it was told to us or if it wasn't if math worked or not people are at this point now where it doesn't matter and I guess this can go back to AI because you're just going to google you're going to search for me I'm not saying I do but you're searching JAPT is wearing a mask good or bad you're going to choose to believe it add an additional query to it just add an additional question okay chat GPT thank you for that answer please provide me with some studies that have proven that is correct people don't do it though we have to have some kind of study that proves that that was the situation or you're just going to take it at face value and that's the end of it but the first thing we're going to do is I just have waited so long for this moment and it's so sweet it's so sweet I just wanted to go all right James what are you going to do if you don't know if that's the truth he's be like google it I'm going to revive asked jves and that will be my ministry dude I don't give a shit jves was the original he was the original what is the what is the dude the adventures Tony Stark's assistant oh my god that's bad how do I not know it's just because I'm putting it to us like this oh my gosh Harry come on the ai is assistant Tony Stark's assistant he's going to say pepperpots James is already on it help her Jarvis I'm such a herb God I'm a real life NPC God bless America oh man sorry blue shirt guy over here didn't comprehend it Harry just quick back story I say now anytime you're just having a moment and you're just like a dumbass you're just an NPC now you're just like a non-player that's my favorite shit bro okay we'll finish on this Harry I'll just tell you back story real fast take 30 seconds then I'll let you guys bound I have to pee so bad boys she's gonna a year and a half ago James calls me or I called James I was like what's up man can just check it in like a year and a half ago I called him and he's like you know man he's been to the Apple store and got some new stuff and I was like oh yeah what do you get and he was like Airpond and he goes but I feel like I shouldn't have bought him I'm really having bars and more and I was like why well it's a store and I had to sales and I said you know my my Airpond's gonna have it I hate that they don't have a battery life they always lose connection and it's just I'm just not happy with them so I mean what are the new ones like and he's like well the new ones that have worse battery life they still lose connection quite often they're pretty terrible and then James the NPC just goes oh that sounds great perfect I said I said that like I was a sim like I was like oh holy shit oh you put wires back on them too oh my gosh I love that I could play yo-yo with them I bought the Airpods and then I got the cord so I don't lose them that's actually what I did alright I'm fucking wrapping it up thank you Joe for coming thank you guys we'll talk soon guys see ya


Brandon, you wore a very nice tuxedo t-shirt outfit for this wedding. Oh, you know, I like to dress apart. What's up, players? What's going on, Zendu Nation? Good morning. Today, we're going to watch Zen Master Ep get married. That's right. Get married here in Columbia. You ready for this? All right, you two love birds. I'm really excited. Currently, I'm living in Columbia illegally. I would like to live here as long as I want to live here. So my girlfriend, Sarah, is going to get into a civil union with me, which allows me... Free union. Dude, she's a bald girl. Free union. Getting into a civil union with you, bro. It's a free union. Free union. My mistake. Okay, so I'm not actually getting married, but after two years, if we don't tell the government that we're no longer living together, it becomes marriage.  Ah, are you a psycho? Psycho? Psycho. I'll be officiating this wedding. Sorry, no, I'm just kidding. I wish I could though, but I'm sure they're going to do it in Spanish, so... Here in Columbia, you need to go get this free union, and then you take that free union, and then you go to Bogotox, we're in Medellin right now. Bogotox, the capital, to get the visa. The first step, though, is getting someone to give us a free union. Unite! Let's get married, baby. Let's get married. Do you like my voice? Yeah. It's good, man. Yeah, I'm like, I'm pretty good singer, so... Brennan, you wore a very nice tuxedo t-shirt outfit for this wedding. Well, you know, I like to dress apart. Some are sunglasses. So, are you guys going to kiss? No. We have to pay $30. Get the cash, money, cost, clothes. This is how to... Brennan, what did you get there? I got some fruit water, fruit water, fruit water. All right, guys, now we have a call about some kind of accounting software that we're using, get some questions answered, and we're going to do our workout. So, guys, I know there's been a little confusion around which workouts you're supposed to be, like which day of the challenge it is and which day of the Getting Lean course. Just log in every day and do that day's workout. That's how this challenge is going to work the best. We're following our Getting Lean course, but it doesn't necessarily match up with every single day. So just log into YouTube and whatever workout we post that day, do that workout. Last night, we had an epic sandwich night, and we recorded a little bit of it. Go. Turkey. This is salami. The onions. Tomato. What we got? What we got? Avocado. Avocado. Brie. Brie, because we're fancy. I made a sandwich, too. And that's epic sandwich night. We're looking out for that more frequently because we love to eat epic sandwiches and get all our nutrients. Workout time before the rain. Food, ready, go. A little steak, some fries, and a salad to break the fast, baby, and a little reggaeton. You know you can't eat without reggaeton. What you got there, B?  I told the man, give me the thing that has the most protein on the menu. Caffeine is ahead of the drug. That was lunch. Now we're going to edit some video. That's all I got as far as we got.


Alright, the next thing is the tether profile estimation, very briefly we will discuss it although it is there in the paper in more detail. So what we do is, starting from the confluence point till the ground, you assume the tether to be broken into small small components, let us say 1000 segments, okay. So now let us take at any segment, so that this is i minus 1, this is i, this is i plus 1. So let us look at this i th and i plus 1, this is one segment of the tether. What are the forces acting on the tether? One is the self weight, the other is the aerodynamic load acting on it because it is a cylinder at an angle to flow. So again, there will be two components, one will be along the length, one normal to the length, so for that for cylindrical body at some renounce number, CD is available by empirical data or from internal testing. So DWI is the elemental weight acting and there will be dry force acting here and the tension will be more here and less here. The tension will keep on, change elemental, okay. Tension will actually be conveyed, so the rope will have the same tension but what will happen is because the weight, weight overcomes the tension, component of the weight is going to overcome the tension. So what will happen is after some time, the net tension acting on the tether will be 0. That is the place where you can assume that tether will not have any curvature after that. So this is how you calculate. You take the tension which will be the force acting into cos alpha plus sign here the dynamic forces acting on the tether and z force will be the weight of the tether minus buoyancy minus the two forces acting and you do this incrementally, calculate the angle of each element and at the end you will find this tension will become 0. That is the maximum after that tether will be, so if I leave the aerostat, it will occupy some curvature and then it will remain flat on the ground. So that is what is done and this is one of the results obtained, right. So now just to show you an example of thin size determination, again we have an M-tech student called Vijay Ram. He came for Zafar recently in the panel discussion also. So Vijay Ram has based on his M-tech, he has published a couple of papers. One of them is on aerostat design and in this particular paper, Vijay Ram has given the same method to calculate the fin area. So I encourage you to read his report and you can see this is the comparison. And then recently one intern who came for 6 months, he looked at all these formulas, put them together into one nice spreadsheet and developed a methodology for conceptual sizing of the aerostat. And he presented or rather I should say I presented his paper in the conference in Kuala Lumpur. So this particular paper is the one which is being quoted now by people. So there you will find the same figure which I showed you. You will find the calculations for moment and equilibrium, the profile after that you will find fin sizing and you will find some results which I will show you very briefly now. So finally, I will just show you an example. So this is one actual scenario for which we did some aerostat design. I cannot name the customer, they are not important for you. What is important for you is the requirements which were actually given. So payload of 300 kg plus 120 kg extra, 800 meter altitude from the ground of 200, wind speed 25, temperatures, temperature range and hood index deployment. We chose this particular shape for the aerostat. We chose helium gas and we chose the integral ballonet. We gave these constant parameters free lift, how much gas purity, gas leak rate, maximum speed, envelope mass, fin mass, tether mass, additional mass and we got the output. The envelope was 2662 odd square volume meter cube and the angle at which it came was around 7 degrees. So at around 7 degrees the aerostat is automatically trimmed. This is the figure profile. So notice that the aerostat is to be deployed at a height of 100 meters from the ground but because of this heavy wind of 25 meter per second, it is having a blow by of so much. So it is actually going much behind but that you cannot avoid. Then we did some analysis as to how the angle of attack. So you notice that when the diameter of the, so what is the diameter of the aerostat? The diameter of the aerostat is 11.31 meters. So it so happens that at 15 degree, 15 meters location XC and ZC, the angle of attack is around 7 degrees, 6 point something degrees and that is the location. If the alpha changes, the optimum conference point changes but at this, they both meet here. And this is how the blow by changes with the wind speed. So you notice that at 5 meter per second the blow by is only 150 meters but as the wind increases to 25 meters it becomes around 400 to 420 meters and as wind becomes more and more blow by is reducing but there is a substantial blow by. For a height of 800 meters, I have 400 meters of blow by which is quite large.  Similar results, we are trimming it at around 2 degree angle of attack. This is the wind speed versus angle of attack. And this is how the payload changes. It changes linearly. In the question I asked you about payload drop and I asked you justify your methodology. Some of you said that as shown in the class, the payload reduces linearly. That is what I want you to understand. The data in the question paper may be linear but that is not your reasoning. The reasoning is that payload drops linearly with altitude. It is something which is known to us. So even here also at a height of 700 meters payload is around 480, 1000 meters it is just 300 kg payload. So in conclusion, we have the methodology for sizing of the aerostat. It can be used for carrying out this analysis of sensitivity.


This is our next speaker. His name is Zeshan, correct? Zeshan. Zeshan, it's so hard today. He's going to talk about the last memory management, and dives, and memory safety. I guess you can start. You can do yourself, and just go. Thank you. Hello, everyone. I wasn't expecting this many people. Say, there are four people because it's 10 in the morning. But yeah, thanks for coming. My name is Zeshan. I work at a small company in Berlin called Kinfolk. It's a far higher Linux expertise company, mostly work around Kubernetes and stuff, container technologies. And I've been fond of Rust for a long time, ever since it was first introduced. It was pretty unstable, so nobody could use it. But lately I've been using it, especially now also at work a bit. So yeah, I wanted to introduce memory management because a lot of people when they come across this new language, they stumble with it, at least I did. I was really having a hard time with the memory aspect of it. So it's good to have an introduction to that. So how many of you know a sensual Rust like some of it? Okay, quite many. So I won't get into a lot of details anyway, but I'll just quickly introduce the aspects that I'll use later in the examples. Well, mainly it's like a system programming language. So some programming languages, they ensure safety. Some programming languages ensure efficiency. But with Rust, you have both of them at the same time. There's the focus on both of these things in the design of the language. So it makes it a really awesome language, in my opinion. And you have a concept of zero cost abstractions. So everything you code in Rust, it will have equivalent performance as if you write it in C or C++. Actually, Sebastian, he's in the queue outside, I think. He's not here, right? He's working on GStreamer. He's writing GStreamer plugins and elements in Rust. And he actually saved a lot of CPU. He made the code perform much better, because in Rust you can achieve it more easily because of the zero cost abstractions that we have in Rust. It has a non-mutable state by default. So if you want to mark something as mutable, you have to use a keyword. So when you have a problem in your code base, so you can know which variables and which parameters to look for, because if it's a non-mutable state, it won't give you any problem, because it doesn't change. So why would it create a problem? So it's a mutable state that you need to look for, and that's why by default you have everything non-mutable. And it has strict ownership semantics. In C and C++, you usually just give a pointer to someone, and then you have to establish some sort of way to make sure that nobody double-freezes it, or especially in C, we have been using in GNOME glib libraries for reference counting all objects, so you have to handle that manually in C, of course. But in Rust, you don't have to do that manually, but you have to think about how ownership works, and at one time there can be only one owner to a resource. I'll show you the examples later how that is. So we will start with a simple example. In other programming languages, something like this, you're passing an array vector to a function and it's just adding first two elements of that and returning it. And in many languages, this would just work fine, but you add that and then you show it, it's fine. But in Rust, this won't work because when you, as it says, when you passed the vector there, you passed the ownership to that function, and you never got that ownership back. So later on, you can't use the resource that you already passed to it because you gave it the ownership. And the main thing is there are two kinds of types in Rust. There's copy types and then there's move types. By copy types, there is the simple types in Rust, for example, integers and booleans and those kinds that can be passed around like as copies without any performance problems, easily copied. Those always get copied. So when you pass it to a function, if in the example, if I was passing integers directly, that example would have worked because it's a copy type. But move types, which are most of the types by default, if you create your own data type, it will be by default a move type. And by move, I don't mean the whole thing moving, but moving of ownership. So you give the ownership to someone else when you pass it to them, if you pass by value and you can't use it anymore. And that's, as I said, in Rust, by default, everything has only one, every resource has only one owner at a time in the code. So it's very clear and it's, then Rust so knows when to free the resource and not to. But the thing is you can't work like that. You have to have multiple owners and stuff. And one of the first ways to do it and one of the most obvious and most used is borrowing, which is like in C++ and C++ by reference, more like C++. So the same example, we just turned the parameter into a reference. So when you pass it by reference, you are borrowing the ownership of that resource to that function you're calling temporarily. And once that scope in which it's borrowed, that's over, then the borrowing is finished and you have your resource back. But if I had kept ownership, for example, if I had set m%v and then assign it to a local variable, it has the same scope as v then and then I could not have used it while it's still borrowed. So while it's borrowed, you cannot use it, but once the borrowing is finished, which is based on scopes and the scope in this case is that function that you called. So when it returns, you've got the ownership back. I went following so far or I have 20 minutes to explain this very complicated subject, so I'm trying my best. But the problem it borrows is, as I said, it's temporary. You get it back and the resource that borrowed it, you can't keep it forever and you don't have the ownership at the same time exactly. So we will start with an example. I fly helicopters, so my examples are related to that. So you have a registration, every aircraft has a registration, so it's a simple struct. And I have an implementation for it. It's just a constructor. Get a registration as a string. This string type is an owned string type, so there's two string types in Rust. One is the owned, one is not owned. The non-owned is a borrow. It's a piece of the string, which could be the whole string itself as well, but it's a borrow. But this string with the capital S is owned type. So from main, we pass it a string, an owned string, and then we want to just use it there. And then after we pass it to the Heli, the constructor, we again use it ourselves. And that won't work because when we pass by value, we gave it the ownership. So as you like last time saw, it's very similar, or actually it's the same, just different context. You move the value and you can't use it anymore. So what would we do in this case? The easiest solution is to use a data type called RC, which is abbreviation for reference counting. And what it does, it's a container type, which you put something in it and it adds reference counting to that resource. So the resource itself, you don't need to copy it around if you want to pass it around and have multiple owners in the same code of the same resource. And instead you just use RC. And what it does is like each time you create a new user for it, you increase the reference count on that resource, contain resource, and then once you are, all these scopes are finished that have borrowed, that have increased the reference count, rust automatically destroys the resource, the underlying resource, because now there is no owners for it. So it's just like any reference counting in any programming languages you must have seen. So in this case, we do exactly the same, but instead of passing the string directly, we now put it in a RC and pass the RC's clone method. So by clone, I created a new reference count, I increased the reference count on it. So when it goes to that one, then when the new function, it decaps the ownership. So now we have two owners of the same resource. So when I said in the beginning that you can only have one owner at a time, I kind of lied, but not exactly because you really can't have two owners, but Rust provides you ways of working around it in a safe way. In other programming languages, you can just really nearly pass things around and ownership, there can be multiple owners. And the language have no way of testing if you will destroy the resource while another part of the code is still using that resource. But in Rust, since you put it in RC, Rust ensures that the resource is always there as long as there's a user of that resource. Sir? No, it's not, it's a, yeah, in this case, it just increases the reference count. Good question. But the problem is RCT is not for multiple threads. If I run this, for example, now I introduce, it's the same example as previously, almost except this time I have added a method and I'm calling that method from another thread. So I launch another thread to call that method and now multiple threads are using the same RC, which we have RC in the struct. So this one will end up in an error, something like this. Rust have these traits, concept of traits and different structs implement different traits and that's how it ensures that different guarantees are met. And in this case, there's a trait called send that needs to be implemented by structs if they want to be accessible by different threads. So we need a different struct, which implements that trait that Rust needs if you want to access it from different threads. And that struct we have in the SDD, in the standard library is Arc. It's just atomic reference counting. So the reference count is atomic in this case. It's very similar to the RC. The main thing is that it's thread safe. So instead of RC, I use Arc. And the same example, it's same code will just work. Yeah. But the problem with then RC is that it's not, sorry, Arc is that it's not mutable. So you can't like get a resource out of it and then modify it. That's not possible. So let's look at example. So this time, it's the same exact code again, except that in the hover method, now we are modifying the resource. And the methods I'm calling is just the normal methods of the string type, clearing the string and then pushing another string on the existing string. But this won't work because I'm modifying it. And the main thing is I can't borrow it as mutable because it's not a mutable resource. I didn't mark it as one either. So for those things, you need yet another data structure called mutics, which is just like a mutics in any programming languages and libraries. You get locks on the resource. So we put arc, mutics in an arc because we want to access it from multiple threads atomic with atomic reference counting. So the arc is adding atomic reference counting and then the mutics is ensuring that you can have mutable locks on the resource. So you have multiple container types. You will see that in sometimes in Rust, you need to have multiple containers to the same resource. But the thing is you have type aliasing. So you can use that to create a new type for your complex type very, very easily. That's just alias. So it makes things pretty easy to follow. Anyway, so this time you just use mutics. You create like when you created the arc, you in there you just do a new mutics and put the resource in the mutics. But in the hover, you take a lock of the, from the mutics. And when you access the mutics, it's since it's contained in arc, you get an atomic reference. So you, it's a thread safe. And once you get the lock, you then you can do whatever you want because you have gotten yourself a mutable reference to the resource. And then the thing is that Rust is very much, the memory management is very much based on scopes. So once you are out of that scope, which is the hover method, the lock that you acquired will be freed automatically for you. So you don't have to free it. If you want to, as far as I know, there is an unlock method, but usually you don't need to, you just use scopes to signal like that. Okay, I'm done with the lock. And similar to the mutics, there is a type called read write lock, which is if you have multiple threads that some of them needs only read access, not write access. So it could be very inefficient if you have, if you use mutics because every thread will have to wait for the other thread to finish access and then be able to access. But the read write lock, you can have multiple readers of the same resource. So multiple threads can lock on the same resource at the same time as a read read lock, but not write lock. So, but if there's a thread having a write lock, then others have to wait for that to finish. Yeah, it's very similar. I'm really sorry I'm going really fast, but I have very little time as I mentioned. So box is a type when you usually create a resource, you put it usually on the stack. And, but if you use those data structures that I mentioned, RCE, ARC and those, you put it on the heap. But it's more heavy. RCE has a reference counting and it needs to ensure that reference count increases, decreases, blah, blah, blah. So you don't want to use it just for allocating on the heap. So if you want to just allocate something on the heap to pass it around and keep the resource around for longer than one function or something, you can use something called box. And it's very simple, you just create the new box. And the five in there is not the size. People think of it as size, but that's just an integer that I want to keep in the box. And then you just use it as if it's not contained in a box. It's usable as if it was just the integer itself, just like in our case of RC and ARC. Another thing with the box is very important is that it gives the resource it keeps a size. So if, for example, this case, in Rust, your enums can be complex. You can have data inside your enum, particular enums. So in this case, we want to create a list that have other nodes in it. So we want to keep a list in a list. And we can't do that because Rust won't be able to tell how much memory to allocate to this because it's infinite recursion. We can break that infinite recursion by using box because box, the list, if it's going to be a list, it's on the heap and you only get a pointer in the box. And pointer is always the same size, so you solve the problem without using any pointers itself. In Rust, you can use pointers, especially an unsafe code when your market is unsafe. But typically, you can avoid it and you should avoid it because that's where the problems are usually. Yeah, I wanted to discuss briefly the lifetimes. And that was another reason I was hurrying up. I have done the same talk before in other conferences, but I always avoid lifetimes. So this is my first time addressing it. I hope I can do some justice to it because people are afraid of it. So as I mentioned, you can pass things by reference. And references are temporary. And the scopes define the lifetimes of things. So in this case, you get two strings in the longest function. It just returns the longest string you have. I'm sorry, I have my pointer here. And so this should work, right? Because you just pass the references, you get the reference to the longest string. And yeah. But it wouldn't work because Rust doesn't know when. And you get very helpful messages nowadays from Rust compiler, so that's really cool. So you borrowed a value and then you return a reference to one of the borrowed values. And Rust doesn't know, well, he can easily can't easily tell which one it is. And you have multiple in parameters and one out parameter. So in this case, you have to tell it how long would the reference that you're returning have to be kept alive. And what other resources it is associated with. So it keeps them both alive long enough. So we can, I know the syntax of lifetimes is a bit, takes a while to get used to. And even when you get used to, you still hate it. But that's how it is. I have no better suggestions, so I don't criticize much. But I know that it seems really, really weird. So you declare in the function definition a lifetime. It's an abstract concept of the lifetime. And you declared that all the resources that you're using, like the input parameters and the return value, have the same exact lifetime. Which means to tell to compiler, Rust compiler, that if A, S1, S2, and the return value needs to be kept alive together. So it can't free, for example, the S1 that is being passed before the usage of the return value is finished, or the same with S2. So in here, in the example, we pass the two values, and then we get the reference back. And this time, the usage is exactly the same as we had in the previous example. It's just that we now told Rust what are the association of the different lifetimes involved. And the lifetimes are more declarative than instructive. So it's like you give hint to the compiler, and it's up to the compiler how it handles those. You just tell it like these resources are related. Don't free them before you free others. Yeah, actually, that's all I had. So I think I have a lot of time for questions, and that's a good thing. OK. Can I ask you a question to the previous slide? Do you want me to move to the previous slide? Yes. OK. You say that you control the lifetime of that to give it pass when the function is already over. In this example, if S1 is returned, S1 has to be kept alive, but S2 doesn't have to be. Can you express that? I'm not used to that. And I was told to repeat the question. The question is that there is a case where S1 is to be returned and not S2. And in that case, we don't care about S2 anymore. And it's the S1 that can't be freed while the return value is still around. That's true. But it's very hard for compiler to find these out. One thing I did not mention is that in Rust, you have something called lifetime elision. Like, one of the code that you saw earlier where I was using references. But you notice that there was no lifetimes involved there. And the reason was that lifetimes are always there, except that in many cases, at least the simple cases, Rust is smart enough to detect, OK, the compiler. And it declares them for you in the code. So you don't have to care for them. But it's like a bit complicated examples like these. Then you will start to, when you have multiple references being passed and then you have a return as a reference as well, then Rust will not know how to handle that. Because it can handle it on its own, but not through the lifetime syntax. Because it's more dynamic. Like, we don't know which string that will be passed is going to be longest. So it's more like a dynamic decision. And Rust does all things statically. So it needs to do it this way. But if you can't express that one of them has to say that if you can't express it, people have every parameter always. No, you can have multiple lifetimes. That's true. But in this case, you need both of them because you don't know before you know which parameters will be passed. Because it's more dynamic thing. Like, you don't know it. When you're compiling just that function, let's say in a library, and it will be used by people you don't know. And you don't know what will be passed. So you will only know dynamically which case will it be. So that's why it's not possible. No other questions? How do you specify different lifetimes to use a different method? You put like in there, in this example, you have like lifetime A. You just put a comma, lifetime B. So you can declare multiple and then you can use them like the same as the, I'm using A lifetime. Sorry, the question was if I can have multiple lifetimes in there, and that's what I answered. Sorry. The question is if the lifetime is part of the reference type. Not exactly, but it's always there like when you pass things by reference. There's a lifetime involved. It just, the difference is whether you declare, you have to declare it or not. Yeah, actually it's implemented through something called generics in Rust. If you look into generics, you will see that the syntax of declaring them exactly the same and that's how it's implemented. If you might want to read up on that, it's pretty interesting stuff, how lifetimes are implemented. Very good code. Is it possible to have functions that override each other's lifetimes? So we have an object that, well not override, but they have some kind of a lesion. So one function accessing the same resource. So the question is if I understood correctly is that in multi-threaded application, is it possible for one thread to override the other resource of others? Is there a risk of one function as soon as a lifetime should be? No, you can't really mess up with lifetime, no. Are you sure? Yeah, I'm sorry. No worries. Thank you very much. No worries. Thank you.


See this is the first time I am doing the jury duty. So I am quite impressed with one simple thing that there seems to be very quick alignment because cases or like CVs or entries which are good they kind of select themselves. So that way alignment is pretty good and also I think there is a whole host of empathy because we all fondly remember the time when we are under 30. So there is a huge amount of empathy towards those entries and that's what I like you know like we all love this kid.


this is obviously a team with some scores that can score multiple levels and a lot of mid-range shots that we don't see that much but when you give up the points and the shooting percentages that you guys gave up in the first quarter really first half was that them hitting tough shots or was that maybe some breakdowns in coverages on your head? I think it was both to be honest with you 40 points in the first quarter is a lot especially when you're playing against teams that are trying to find their rhythm over their last few games we knew coming in tonight that Chicago was going to be somewhat of a desperate team and want to get back into a great position in the standings so we put ourselves in a hole in that first and second quarter coming into half time you know obviously with KBN Special he can only do but so much on his own and we've been talking about even over the win streak just helping them out and tonight was one of those nights where we just didn't make any shots on the perimeter I felt like Chicago on defensive end in the second half they made it pretty easy for us to get some open looks I think I heard Billy saying it not too long ago that they were living with other guys shooting three pointers as long as me and Kate didn't get it and I think we're going to see those looks from other teams moving forward so we just don't lose confidence in our shooters and our ability to make plays and you know take this one on the chin and like men and and get ready for the next two games on his road trip I mean when you have multiple possessions throughout the game you know it's a three-point game five point game but they're shooting 55 percent or 53 percent from the field and you know that we haven't broken their rhythm as of yet makes the game a lot tougher so we put ourselves in a in a deep hole again like I said but for us this is another learning experience whether we you know won or lost this game it's just a learning experience for us to get ready for the bigger challenges ahead okay I mean you guys about to have been dominant the last month this rattle off 12 on the road why do you think the rhythm has been so good for the group in the last couple weeks uh I mean there's a there's a multitude of answers but I think simplifying it to to just saying that we've trusted each other that would probably be enough you know but the little things there's really what's been carrying us over the attention to detail in our preparation I feel like has put us over the hump doing the extra work after practice during practice and after games I think we are really committed ourselves to the big picture into one another and I think I said it the other night too that we just want to play well for one another and tonight just one so it wasn't those nights where we played well enough to get the win I think we had 10 more shots or nine more shots in them but when you look at their field goal percentage you know that's really what carried them over to hump and Fritos