Internal Revenue Service IRS tax news. Two tax credits that can help cover the cost of higher education. But first, an attempt at a joke, I apologize in advance. Wall Street is so confusing.  I'm guessing some politician named it during a border dispute. Half the people wanting border security, half wanting open borders. Politicians quote solving the problem, by collecting money for infrastructure, planning to build either a wall or a street. Then doing nothing, except naming the area Wall Street. A perfect compromise. It's kind of like an art student turning in a blank canvas and calling it something clever like a depiction of the inner workings of President Biden's mind. Half the population proclaiming, hey politician, what are you doing about the out of control immigration? Politicians stating, well, you know, we have been working on collecting tax revenue for the wall part of the street. Tax revenue paying for the clever name that is, don't say the quiet part out loud. The other half of the population proclaiming, hey politician, we need more immigration. Politician responding, well, we have been working on collecting tax revenue to improve the street. Tax revenue paying for the clever name that is, or maybe Wall Street was just an attempt to stop the bears with the wall, while attempting to let in the bulls at the same time with a street. IRS tax tip 2022-38, March 10th, 2022. Higher education is important to many people and it's often expensive. That's for sure, bit of an understatement possibly. Whether it's specialized job training or an advanced degree, there are a lot of costs associated with higher education. There are two education tax credits. There's a link to that here designed to help offset these costs. The American Opportunity Tax Credit and the Lifetime Learning Credit. There's links to those items here. Taxpayers who paid for higher education in 2021 can see these tax savings when they file their tax return. If taxpayers, their spouses or their dependents take post high school coursework, they may be eligible for a tax benefit. To claim either credit, taxpayers complete Form 8863 Education Credits. There's a link to that form here and file it with their tax return. These credits reduce the amount of tax someone owes. If the credit reduces the tax to less than zero, the taxpayer could even receive a refund to be eligible to claim either of these credits. A taxpayer or dependent must have received a form 1098T from an eligible educational institution. So you'll typically get the 1098T, which will give you the information needed, most likely to make the credits or to fill out the information with regards to the credits. So there are exceptions for some students. Here are some key things taxpayers should know about each of these credits. The American Opportunity Tax Credit is worth a maximum benefit of up to $2,500 per eligible student, only available for the first four years after eligible college or vocational school. So typically the American Opportunity Credit is the one, when you're thinking about these credits, by the way, you can generally take only one or the other of them, the one that would be most beneficial. Typically then first you're thinking about the American Opportunity Credit, which has likely the most possibility or the most benefit if you were able to get to it, but it's got the most restrictions as well. If you don't qualify for the American Opportunity Credit, then you're looking to the second credit, which might not be as advantageous, but you're still gonna get a benefit from it. So that's the general thought process you wanna be thinking about. For students pursuing a degree or other recognized education credential, partially refundable people could get up to 1,000 back. So when they say refundable, that means that if your tax liability goes below zero, you might still get money. You can call it back, but it's not really getting money back. It's not really a refund. That would mean it would be kind of more like a benefit type program at that point. So it's got like a refundable component or part to it. The Lifetime Learning Credit is, so if you can't qualify for the American Opportunity Credit, then you're saying, okay, well then can I qualify for the Lifetime Learning Credit? So it's worth a maximum benefit up to $2,000 per tax return per year, no matter how many students qualify, available for all years of post-secondary education and for courses to acquire or improve job skills, available for an unlimited number of tax years. Taxpayers can use the Interactive Tax Assistance Tool. There's a link to that on irs.gov to figure out if they're eligible for either of these credits. More information can be found at the links below, a Compare Education Credits link and a Publication 970 Tax Benefits for Education link. There's links to that here and other links that we talked about through this thing here and there'll be a link to this in the description.


We almost have our model complete now. The only thing we now have to decide is how much pressure in meters of sea water is still safe. We need to know the maximum values of nitrogen loading. M values. First you must understand that half times and m values are related. Remember that a small halftime means tissues fill up quickly and empties quickly. And that means it can handle a lot of nitrogen. If a tissue can handle a lot of nitrogen it has a high m value. After all that is what an m value means. And of course by the same reasoning slow tissues have low m values because they cannot handle a lot of nitrogen. During a dive there is of course always one compartment that reaches its m values first. It can handle no more nitrogen safely. We call this the controlling compartment. It controls your dive. It is the compartment that ends your dive. Let's see what happens on deep dives and shallow dives with quick and slow compartments. On deep short dives slow compartments do not have time enough to reach even their low m values. They do not matter. This means that deep short dives are controlled by fast compartments. On the other hand on shallow long dives fast compartments are not placed on the high pressure enough to reach their high m values no matter how long the dive is. So shallow long dives are controlled by slow compartments. Let's do an example with numbers so you can see for yourself. Let's look at two compartments. A fast compartment with a halftime of 10 minutes and a high m value of 25 meters of seawater and a slow compartment with a halftime of 60 minutes and a low m value of five meters of seawater. Let's first do a deep short dive to 40 meters of seawater for 20 minutes. Let's first look at the fast compartment. For the fast compartment 20 minutes is two halftimes so the compartment is 75 percent full. 75 percent of 40 meters is 30 meters of seawater. That is way over the m value of 25 meters of seawater. Now let's look at the slow compartment. For the slow compartment 20 minutes is only one third of a halftime so it's basically empty. It did not reach its m value before so we can see here that the fast compartment controls the deep dive. Now let's go on a long shallow dive. A shallow dive to 10 meters for 60 minutes. Again let's look at the fast compartment first. For the fast compartment 60 minutes is six halftimes so it's full. The pressure is 100 percent of 10 meters of seawater but that doesn't even come near the m value of that compartment which is 25 meters of seawater. Let's look at the slow compartment. For the slow compartment 60 minutes is one halftime. It is 50 percent full and 50 percent of 10 meters of seawater is 5 meters of seawater. Now remember that is the m value for that slow compartment. Therefore the slow compartment controls the shallow dive. Different models use different m values. Lower m values are safer but they give you less dive time. Low m values are usually called bullman limits. Computers often use bullman limits. This is because computers give you longer dive times already. They use the real dive profile instead of assuming the maximum depth during the whole dive. Lower m values do not limit your dive time as much when you use them with computers as they would do with tables.


The essential idea of the twist port is that the radio and antenna connect on a waveguide. That means the connection is virtually lossless. There are no traditional coaxial connectors, no pigtails, no cables.


I'm Admiral Mike Gilday, Chief of Naval Operations, and on behalf of the sailors of the United States Navy, I want to wish the United States Space Force a happy first birthday. No doubt, space is the next frontier, and what you're doing is vitally important to our national security. Thank you to all the men and women currently serving in the Space Force, and we can't wait to see what you'll achieve in the months and the years ahead.


OK, good afternoon, everybody. I want to talk to you a little bit this afternoon about data privacy. And the original title is the Economics of Data Privacy. But I want to go a little bit beyond economic analysis, per se, and talk about some of the broader sort of political policy and even sort of conceptual issues related to privacy. It's kind of funny that we've gone within less than a decade to being really excited about social media, the fact that our devices can interact with us in a lot of valuable ways, and that things are really customized to us. That when you go to Amazon, you get a home page with reading recommendations that are specific to you. That's great, but now people are getting a little bit uncomfortable with the amount of information that your devices know about you. I have an Android phone. I don't know if this is also true for Apple, but those of you with Android, a lot of times you just be walking down the street, and Google will say, I'll get a notification on my phone. I'm walking by a McDonald's. Oh, how did you enjoy your experience at McDonald's today? I just this morning I was looking at my phone and it said, people around you are talking about Mises Institute. Would you like to comment on Mises Institute? Like, wait a minute, what's going on here? Now we're a little bit creeped out by that kind of stuff. And again, within a very short time, we went from being really enthusiastic about this technology, now all of a sudden to having some concerns and some doubts. And I started thinking about wanting to do a lecture on this topic back earlier in the spring when Mark Zuckerberg was appearing before Congress to talk about whether Facebook had allowed Russian bots to steer the election toward Trump, but also more generally, whether Facebook was doing enough to protect its users' data privacy. You may remember the details of this kind of, I guess, scandal, at least a Washington DC scandal that for years, part of Facebook's business model, of course, is that it compiles profiles of users based on their likes and their browsing habits, what pages they visit, their comments, and so forth. Then it packages that information and uses it to target advertisements to individuals. That's the main way that Facebook raises revenue, but there's some third-party app developers who can also get access to your data. I don't know if you ever wonder why somebody, some programmer took the time to create the What Disney Princess Are You quiz, right? It wasn't just for fun, I mean, that's done as a way of when you authorize that app to access your profile so that you can find out what Disney Princess you are. I wonder what David Gordon got. You're letting the app developer have access to some information from your profile, your Facebook profile, which the app developer can then use for marketing purposes, can sell to third parties and so forth. So there was this issue that a researcher with this firm, Cambridge Analytica, had developed an app that extracted some user information and then gave it to a political consulting firm, possibly in violation of Facebook's own internal rules about transferring this information. This firm consulted with the Trump campaign and so forth. There's no evidence that this had any impact on the election, but it made people very nervous. It made politicians nervous, of course, the threat that someone could interfere in the electoral process and the democratic process. And so Zuckerberg was hauled before Congress to explain what procedures Facebook is taking to protect people's privacy. So we still like our apps, we still like our personalized devices, but we're now very nervous, we're all nervous about who knows what about us. And again, for the purposes of this lecture, I'm only talking about private commercial use of information. I'm not talking about the National Security Administration, not talking about what the government knows or doesn't know about you, which is also, of course, an extremely important topic, but one that goes beyond the scope of my lecture for today. So I don't know about you, but if I can't remember my password to something, I just kind of shout it out and hope that the NSA will. Could you please tell me my password? Because they know everything. I don't know if you noticed this, but earlier this month, it's around the 4th of July, was the Plain Bay episode. I don't know how many of you were paying attention to this. I only found out about it later, but apparently over the July 4th weekend, there was this case, there was this woman named Josie, something or other, who's sort of an aspiring screenwriter. She was on a flight, I think it was from New York to Dallas. She asked to switch seats with another passenger so she could sit next to her boyfriend. That's her on the right and the boyfriend. And there was a young woman, the young woman she switched seats with, sat in the seat in front of her. And next to her was an attractive young man and the two of them struck up a conversation and this person started live tweeting it. So she kind of live tweeted this romance between two strangers on a plane and her tweets went viral and got hundreds of thousands of retweets and celebrities. Everybody was talking about it. The guy, that's the guy right there who apparently is a retired former professional athlete, I think a soccer player and kind of a wannabe celebrity himself. And so he became known as hashtag plain BAE. And she became known as hashtag pretty plain girl.  It was on today's show, it was like a big deal. And then the young woman who is right there complained that she had been, I guess you call it doxxed. So various internet sleuths, although the person live tweeting the romance had tried to cover up everybody's face. But various internet sleuths sort of dug around and they found this person's Instagram account and so forth and revealed her identity. And apparently she got a lot of harassing calls, texts, whatever. She claims that she had to close all her social media accounts and I don't know if she lost her job or whatever. But she claimed that she was being harassed online because of this incident. And she says, there's a gross violation of my privacy. I'm sitting on a plane, I'm talking to the guy next to me on the plane. It's none of anybody's business, what we're doing. And now I have been harmed because somebody tweeted about this and it went viral. And apparently she's threatening litigation, presumably against, I don't know if it's against Twitter or against the person who did the tweeting. And now all these celebrities, there's good old Monica Lewinsky. Now all these celebrities who retweeted and wrote about the on the plane romance are now apologizing for doxing this person and whatever. So I mean, what privacy rights do you have on a plane? Is it okay for another passenger to take your picture? Is it okay for somebody to tweet about you against your, without your consent? I mean, from a legal point of view, these were not issues that were dealt with in the common law where they didn't have social media, right? But so the courts are sort of working out the boundaries of this, but let's try to do some analysis and see what we can say from the point of view of Austrian economics about what privacy is, how privacy protection might work in a free market, how various policy proposals about privacy would work, what sort of impact they would have. So let's just start by talking about privacy itself. Is privacy a thing? Or to put it in Hungarian terms, is privacy an economic good? Well, I mean, there's not a lot of literature on this but there is some literature that is analogous going back about 20 years now, so-called information goods. There's an influential book by Carl Shapiro and Hal Varian published about in 1998, I think, called Information Rules. It's a very good sort of mainstream economic analysis of markets for information. So information goods are online directories, profiles about you, how-to guides, YouTube videos and so forth, those are bits of information. They're things that embody information. More recent book, it's also pretty good by Joshua Gans called Information Just Wants to Be Shared which is another kind of updated analysis of how some markets for information goods work. The problem is information is not an economic good in Carl Manger's sense of what it means to be an economic good. Remember, for Austrian economists, an economic good or service is something that can be, you know, parceled into discrete units, can be bought and sold, can be exchanged on markets, can have a price, right? So there has to be something that can be owned, that can be exchanged, that can be given away and so forth. I mean, information per se is not an economic good. However, there are goods and services that you can buy and sell in the market that are related to information or embody information like a book, right? Books are economic goods. There's a bunch of them down there in the bookstore and Chad will happily take your, let me sorry, Brandon will happily take your money or Drew in exchange for these books. So books are economic goods, movies are economic goods, movie rentals, movie purchases, tickets to a movie theater, you know, networks are economic goods, a wire is an economic good, a satellite dish is an economic good, a server is an economic good. There are information related services that can be bought and sold on the market just like other kinds of labor services, you know, consulting. When a company hires a consultant, what are they hiring? Well, it's not physical labor, they're hiring the knowledge of the consultant or they're paying the consultant to do some research and obtain some new knowledge and pass it on to the client. If you hire an attorney or a stockbroker, you're hiring that person to gain access to certain kind of knowledge. You know, you take a class, sign up for an online course or enroll at a university. You're exchanging dollars for what? Well, I mean, in an abstract way, you're buying knowledge, but if you enroll at a university, technically speaking, you're not buying knowledge. In exchange for your tuition dollars, you get the legal right to walk into a certain room and sit there and listen to what somebody is saying and take an examination and get some kind of certification, right? There's a specific discrete bundle of goods and services, legal rights and responsibilities that you obtain in exchange for your money. Why are you doing it? Well, to get smart. Well, I want knowledge. Yeah, I mean, colloquially we can say, oh, I'm buying knowledge, but technically speaking, it's not knowledge per se that is traded. It's specific knowledge related goods and services. Likewise, privacy is not an economic good. You cannot buy a unit of privacy on the market. You don't own privacy. You can't compute the marginal utility of privacy. Privacy is not a thing itself. Now there are what we might call by analogy to information goods, privacy goods, the sunglasses that Hollywood celebrities wear when they go out. So no one will recognize them, but of course, that merely draw attention to them, right? Okay, we call that a privacy good if we want.  I mean, yeah, okay, so the fake beard is an economic good, just like a bottle of water or an automobile or anything. Window shades, if you have these shades at your house, call that a privacy good if you want. A fence that people can't see over or how about just buying a lot of land so I can build my house way back from the public road so no one can see my house or into my house or what's behind my house. You could say, oh, I'm buying this land just because I want to buffer between myself and my neighbor, but you call that a privacy good if you want. In digital space, right, there are lots of goods and services that are economic goods that are exchange in markets that are related to privacy. Encryption software is an economic good. Some add-on that blocks cookies from your browser. Has anybody heard of Bleachbit? Bleachbit became famous. This is a program that wipes your hard drive completely clean where even a forensic computer expert cannot extract any information from it. Became famous last year because this is a year and a half ago. This is the software that was used on Hillary Clinton's private email server before it was turned over to the FBI or whatever. So yeah, I mean you can buy stuff that will protect your privacy. And my point is we would analyze those things the same way that we would analyze a bushel of wheat or a chair or a computer or a car or any good in service. We don't need a special kind of economics. We don't need a different body of economic theory to explain the price and quantity and market characteristics of Bleachbit. I mean, I don't know how much it costs to get Bleachbit. You can probably get a demo version for free and you have to pay more to get the premium version. And in the old days it would come on a disk. Now you just get the legal right to download it. Oh, who knows? We can say what's the equilibrium price in the short run. What Mises would call the plain state of rest price. We can imagine what would happen to that price in the long run. We can say, well, in the evenly rotating economy what would happen to the owners of the Bleachbit servers and so forth? And we just theorize about it the same way we would any economic good or service. So there's nothing unique about privacy in this respect. So what do we actually see on the market? Well, because consumers place some value on privacy as an abstract concept, right? We often see goods and services on the market that are bundled in a certain way so that they include varying degrees of privacy protection. Okay, I mean, normally when you buy a house it might come, there might be trees in front of the house that block the windows or it might come with a fenced backyard. You could say, oh, well, I'm getting the privacy of the backyard that can't be seen from the street or whatever as part of the house. Okay, maybe you can add that on later once you've bought the house. But if you think about in the sort of electronic space I mean, you can buy an encrypted, you can buy devices with various levels of encryption. You can buy encrypted software. There are all kinds of ways that you can protect your privacy depending on which apps you use. Don't send regular text messages. WhatsApp is supposedly encrypted. Apple Messages is encrypted. Would they give you up to the feds if the feds are coming for you? I mean, maybe they would. But those of you who are really into it and of course the libertarian gathering, there's always a lot of people who are really into this stuff. You can use Tor or whatever. There's all kinds of and probably illegal ways that you can encrypt your information before you send out a chat to your friend about what movie you're going to tonight. If you don't like the fact that Google is tracking you and that Google knows so much about you, well, don't use Google as your search engine. Don't use Chrome as your browser. Use DuckDuckGo as your search engine because this is a search engine that doesn't track your searches and so forth. If you don't like Facebook, there's MIUI. There's a lot of other attempts to create social networks that have stricter privacy protections than Facebook. A lot of it, of course, depends on trust between consumers and providers. If you believe that Facebook would not follow through with its terms, would not protect you in the way that it has claimed to protect you, then regardless of what it says on Facebook's privacy protection page, you can choose to use a different product, right? That you believe will protect your privacy more. So the point is, you're not compelled to use social media apps of any particular type that do or do not protect your privacy in any particular way. This is something that sort of worked out on the market just like anything else. And of course, it might be that people don't care about this at all. And I think in the early days of social media, most people didn't think about it and didn't care about it. Now it's a big deal. People care about it more. So entrepreneurs have an incentive to be more explicit about their privacy protection and to follow through on whatever claims they make.  In fact, look at this crazy outfit, right? It even has an explicit statement about how it will or will not use your personal data. And people who care about these things can look very carefully. If you're not comfortable with the privacy policy of this particular organization or you don't believe that this organization will follow through on its claimed privacy protections, you can go to some other horrible website instead of this wonderful one. Now, just as an empirical fact, Rothbardian demonstrated preference suggests to me anyway that on the margin consumers don't care about privacy as much as they say they do. People are not really willing to pay much on the margin for additional privacy protection, right? Now there's been some reaction by incumbents to increasing privacy concerns. Again, making their policies more transparent. There's some chat apps that increased their level of default encryption and so forth. But there are lots of options for people to load up on extra privacy or to choose bundled services that include higher levels of privacy but maybe lower quality versions of some other attribute and people don't seem to be switching, right? So besides me, there was another social network called LO that was popular a few years ago that was a completely non-ad-supported privacy a site that really emphasized privacy and it failed. I suppose me we will probably flop too. Back in the spring, I was seeing hashtag delete your Facebook all over the place.  He sold us out to the Russians. We're gonna show him and delete our Facebook profiles and not that many people did, okay? A lot of people are especially conservatives and some libertarians are really upset at Facebook, sorry, at Twitter because the founder of Twitter, Jack, what's his name, Jack Dorsey. I mean, he's a very openly progressive, I think he's like a Bernie's type supporter and there are a lot of claims that Twitter deliberately, they removed the blue check marks from all the right-wing accounts and they're hiding, they don't use just a regular feed, a linear feed, it's an algorithmic feed and they claim that they're demoting Twitter feeds of people who have politically incorrect views and so forth.  Delete your Twitter, don't use Twitter, use something else. Not that many people seem to be switching. I mean, look, if you really, really care about your privacy, you don't want the NSA to have any access to your encrypted data stream because you think that Facebook built in a back door and they gave the keys to the feds. Well, I mean, you could use carrier pigeon, right? You could write down, if I wanna give some information to Timothy back there, I can write it on a little piece of paper and I can stick it in a thing and put it on a pigeon and send the pigeon to Timothy. I mean, I guess the pigeon could still be captured by like a CIA drone or something, right? But it's be harder to get that into the NSA database. You're worried about your, you're keeping a personal journal and you're worried that it's on Google Docs and Google's gonna take it and give it to the Russians. Well, I mean, you could put it on a piece of paper. For a while, this is what they called the hipster PDA back when PDA is personal data assistant, right?  Now, my point is when, if you do a survey of, you know, send out surveys, how much do you care about privacy? Are you worried that various internet firms are not protecting your privacy strongly enough? People will say, oh, I'm very worried about it. But in their actions, they demonstrate that they don't seem to be that worried about it. Or rather on the margin, they're not willing to sacrifice the benefits of being on a social media platform that all their friends are on in exchange for greater privacy protection, okay?  How many of those have you actually read? None, right? Nobody reads these software licenses, so-called click-through licenses. Some people have argued, well, if people really knew, if they did read all this stuff, they would be very uncomfortable with what these companies claim they have the right to do with your data, et cetera, et cetera. And it's not that people willingly consent to giving up personal information to social media or whatever, it's that they don't know, they don't understand that Facebook has the right to do this. I mean, Facebook has always had the right to construct a profile of you based on your habits on Facebook and use that to target advertisements to you. That's the whole point. That's how it works, that's the business model. And it's very explicit in the click-through license that that's what Facebook is gonna do. But if you think nobody reads those, oh, well, then maybe those shouldn't count. Well, I don't think that's a really good argument because there's been some litigation in recent years about whether consumers should be bound to conditions they agreed to when they clicked okay to install that app. And the courts have ruled, again, this is not all that new. It's a common law thing that, what does it mean to consent to a contractual relationship? There has to be a certain level of awareness on the part of the person who is consenting. And there are certain conditions under which courts for centuries have ruled, no, you're really not bound by the terms of this contract because you were incapable of understanding the terms that you agreed to. So in other words, it's not the case that these licenses de facto allow firms to do things that make people very uncomfortable, okay? Courts are typically applying a standard, kind of a reasonableness standard and not holding consumers to every single statement that's in the click-through license. So it's not that people are being bound by things they didn't want to be bound with. You're really not being bound by them anyway. I just might add a few curious things. It was curious to me about what do we see kind of in the data about how privacy is priced and how privacy, goods, or price, how people seem to behave in the new era. Well, one thing it seems obvious to me theoretically and seems to be borne out by a lot of mainstream empirical studies is not surprising. There are huge efficiency gains from people's willingness to share certain kinds of information. On Airbnb or whatever, I mean, you're revealing some information about your preferences and your priorities and so forth as is the person renting. To be able to find a match in lots of different kinds of markets, it is, that matching process works much better when the matching algorithm has a certain level of detail about the people being matched. I mean, dating sites, right? Dating sites went from being kind of weird to being totally mainstream in just a few years and yeah, I mean, you don't want, if you sign up for a dating site, you don't want the dating site giving all your information to anybody. You don't want them to be giving your information to MSNBC or something so they can put it on TV. But of course, there would be no point in signing up if you kept everything completely private, okay? In fact, in the sort of mainstream literature on sharing platforms, there's some concern that these platforms work so well, they're so efficient they lead to outcomes that from certain policy points of view may be considered undesirable. For example, that there's more racial segregation in some of these matching platforms. And if your starting point is that you want to, that public policy should eliminate or at least discourage any kind of racial or gender or ethnic or age or whatever kind of separation, then you might be concerned that yeah, these things are working so well, they're letting people, sort of supporting people's preferences that are bad. People only want to associate with other people like them and we should prevent that. But these algorithms are so good at finding a match that's a good match for you that now there's more segregation and discrimination. But again, even if you think that's a public policy concern, it's further evidence that these matching platforms do a really good job of putting buyers and sellers or different kinds of partners together. There's also quite a few studies on efficiencies from better storage and exchange of certain kinds of information like medical records. In most countries and certainly in the US, we don't yet have a kind of generally agreed upon standard for how medical information will be recorded. There's not like a single database format. And it's actually kind of annoying. I don't know if any of you, if you've moved to a new town lately or anytime you go to a doctor in the US and it's your first time for that particular doctor, what do they do? They hand you a clipboard. It's always an old fashioned paper clipboard. We have to fill out a survey about yourself, all your personal information, what kinds of illnesses you've had, what kind of illnesses people in your family had. And it's kind of annoying because you wish you just had that on your phone and you could just click something and that new doctor would get your health profile. We've not yet developed a system like that but there are some hospitals and some health associations, private ones that share information like that internally and it's great. I mean, it works better. It works much better than the old fashioned way. But of course there's a concern. People say, well, I don't want my medical history to be worried somebody could hack it. I don't want people to know that I had some health problem a few years ago. I don't want potential employers to know. So obviously both from a technological point of view and sort of a legal point of view when you sort of figure out or allow patients to decide how much of that information they want to reveal to their health providers. By the way, I don't know about you guys but when I have to fill out those forms like at the doctor's office, they ask for date of birth and they often ask for social security number and I usually leave the social security number part blank. Sometimes I don't even fill in the date of birth and occasionally they'll give me a hard time about it but usually they won't and I think, okay, well just, if you know anything about identity theft, if somebody has your birth date and your social security number, it's pretty easy for them to spoof your identity or engage in one of those kind of phishing, PHI, S-I-N-G kind of scandals. By the way, that's the whole thing with the Russian hacking of the election and all that. Maybe some of you can correct me on the technical terminology but I always thought the word hacking was reserved for like sort of physical intrusions into machines or some clever network tricks for getting into somebody's computer. Now the way they hacked into the Democratic National Hacked into the Democratic National Committee's computer was just the old fashioned phishing scam somebody sent John Podesta, Hillary Clinton's one of Hillary Clinton's top campaign deputies. One of those emails from the Prince of Nigeria or whatever. I can't remember exactly what it was. Oh, your Google password has been compromised. Click here to reset it and he just clicked, typed in his Gmail password and now of course it was a fake Gmail password reset thing or whatever it was. Now they had access to his Gmail. That's how they got all of those emails that were then sent to WikiLeaks. It wasn't some cloak and dagger, super sophisticated hacking scheme. It was just the old fashioned phishing scam and he fell for it, just like that. Same thing with credit histories, right? A lot of people say, do you guys know what your credit score is? A lot of people don't want to know because it's like, I'm worried about my credit score. But the fact that we have credit scores and agencies that track and pay attention to credit scores actually is great for making, it makes capital markets work much more efficiently, right? And so having electronic versions and summary scores that capture people's credit history actually makes mortgage markets and other markets work much better, notwithstanding all the problems in mortgage markets that were in the wonderful movie, just explaining the wonderful movie last night. I'm trying to throw a compliment here, okay? And one thing also that's somewhat surprising is you might think that, okay, Amazon knows a lot about you. So when you go to amazon.com, if you go to their homepage, you see personalized recommendations of stuff that Amazon thinks you might wanna buy or eBay or whatever, you might think, oh, if they know so much about you, then won't they charge different prices to different consumers based on what they expect will be that consumer's willingness to pay, like the old price discrimination models of the textbooks? And you would think that online vendors have a lot of information about you they could use for price discrimination, but apparently very few of them are doing it. There's no evidence that consumers, different people are being charged different prices based on information that the seller has. Recent Journal of Economic Literature piece that summarizes a lot of this literature if you wanna learn more about it. Okay, let's talk a little bit about the regulatory aspects. So should the government regulate privacy in some fashion how might different privacy kinds of regulations work? Well, I mean, there's some analysis going back several decades about sort of markets for information in general, right? So is it better from an overall point of view if people have more privacy, meaning they disclose less information to other people? Or if people have less privacy, meaning they disclose more information to other people? Actually, Richard Posner back in the 80s wrote a piece on it was not about digital privacy but just about privacy in general, essentially arguing that privacy is socially harmful, right? As a society, we're better off when people know as much as possible about other people. Why? Because privacy can be used strategically and opportunistically, okay? You guys ever put together a resume to apply for a job or apply for grad school or something? Do you put everything on that resume that you've ever done? No, of course not. You only put the good stuff you've ever done, right? If there's any bad stuff, you leave that out unless you're applying for a subprime mortgage, then you include it. But yeah, I mean, the point is if people can choose what about themselves to disclose and what to keep private, they could do so in a non-transparent opportunistic way to potentially mislead other people. You know, you might deceive an employer into hiring you or deceive a bank into giving you a loan. And Posner argued, no, everybody should be forced to disclose everything about themselves and then we wouldn't have to deal with these kind of problems. George Stigler had a piece that made sort of a similar argument. You know, in the last 20 years there's a lot of interest among mainstream economists about sort of markets for disclosure from the point of view of asymmetric information theory, signaling theory, screening theory, and so forth. And there's not really any clear conclusions that come out of that literature. There may be some cases in which making people disclose more, provide some social benefit, other cases where privacy can actually be beneficial. It kind of depends on the circumstances. What about the kinds of regulations that are increasingly popular in Europe and now in the US about what they call data portability? So one kind of legal regulation, well one kind of potential regulation will be something like the following. Okay, it's okay for Facebook to collect your data. But any information that Facebook has about you, about your Facebooking habits and your likes and what you comment on and how long you stay on different pages and what you click on and so forth, that all needs to be encapsulated in a database, some kind of a database with a transparent structure so that if you decide, oh, I wanna quit Facebook and I wanna go into one of these alternative sites like Miwi, you should be able to download a file that basically has everything that Facebook knows about you and could use to monetize its relationship with you and you should be able to take that file and upload it to your Miwi site and Miwi would now know exactly the same things about you that Facebook knows. I mean, so from a technical point of view it's not really clear how you would do that because Facebook doesn't just have a list of every website you've ever clicked on because that would be millions and millions of links. It has some complicated and proprietary algorithms for mining that data to come up with some bit of information that it can use to sell you an ad. So it's not even obvious how you could do that but the claim is, look, it's my data. It's not Facebook's data, it's my data. So if I wanna leave, I should be able to take that data somewhere else. If I don't like the apartment I'm living in, I can take my couch and my chair and my suitcase full of clothes and go to another apartment and be able to put them in that apartment. Why shouldn't my data be treated in the same way? Well, aside from the technical difficulties, let's assume that those can be overcome somehow. I mean, the major problem is forcing providers to store the data in a way that makes it portable and giving the user the ability to take that data and delete it from Facebook and send it somewhere else. But basically makes it harder for Facebook to operate because Facebook's revenue model is based on the idea that it has this kind of proprietary, almost tacit knowledge about you. It's not literally tacit because it's an algorithm but it's difficult to communicate to third parties. So Facebook would have to find some other way of staying in the black if it were not allowed to use and monetize these data. So what would that be? Well, more kinds of advertising. I mean, the truth is, I mean, my personal view is, platforms like Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, I don't find the advertising all that intrusive. I mean, on Facebook it's mostly on the side. You know, Twitter has some promoted tweets. I don't know what social media apps you guys use the most.  YouTube is super annoying because almost every time you want to show like a 10 second video clip, you've got to watch a 30 minute ad beforehand unless you pay for proprietary Facebook. I mean, sorry, proprietary YouTube red or whatever it is, which I haven't done. You know, I use Google News to quickly scan kind of what's going on but it annoys the heck out of me that Google News does not let you choose your feeds. It doesn't let you choose what sources you want. And my Google News page is dominated by links from links to the New York Times and Washington Post both of which are paywalled and neither of which I have a subscription to.   Okay, imagine all social media apps were like that, right? That every time you click on something on Twitter or Facebook you have to sit through a 15 second or 30 second ad. That would drive people away from the platform but that's a much more intrusive and annoying aggressive kind of advertising. But that might be necessary. The reason that advertising on those social media platforms today is relatively harmless and not that annoying is because the ads are very profitable because they're targeted to you, right? Even if there's a smaller chance that you will see and click on the ad, the fact that the ad is for something that the algorithm thinks you would like makes it valuable to the company who's paying for the advertisement. Therefore they're willing to pay a high price for that ad and therefore the platform can be profitable with that kind of sort of light advertising but they would have to have much more in your face ads to make up the difference if they were not allowed to use your data in this fashion or maybe they'd just charge you a fee.  You might pay something but most of us would prefer not to pay even if it means they have some of our personal information. You could make a kind of a coast theorem argument and say, well, it really doesn't matter what the legal standard for data portability or privacy protection is. The market can just sort of sort that out, right? And even if the law says you're not entitled to own your own data, if people are willing to pay something for the right to portable data, then it will be in the interest of some entrepreneurs to supply that, okay? The EU has actually been much more aggressive than the US in imposing uniform privacy restrictions. And in fact, there's some research suggesting that privacy protection, privacy protection is actually better in the US than the EU because we don't have a national standard, right? We have sort of decentralized competing standards for privacy protection. It's probably not all that surprising. Okay, last point here is just talk about this from sort of a legal, political and even sort of philosophical concept. Can information be owned? Can you own information? Well, I mean, this has of course been a big discussion topic within the libertarian literature for many years. As you know, so Rothbard originally argued that patents were illegitimate grants of monopoly privilege by the state, but that copyrights, trademarks and those forms, intellectual property protections that protect the sort of creative expression of an idea were legitimate and probably would be recognized by a libertarian court. Others have argued that that's not the case. But think about it this way. If we're talking about Facebook information or whatever, what do you own? What kinds of things are ownable? Well, you own your computer, your laptop or your tablet or your phone or whatever device you're using to access that social media platform, at least in principle, you can own that device. If you pay for an ISP to come to your house, you have the legal right to get so many megabits of information per month, whatever you've paid for. If you paid for Dropbox Premium, you have the right to whatever was agreed upon in that contract. But you don't own data. You can own physical media that store and exchange data, but data per se is just information, right? A certain series of ones and zeros. You can't own a series of ones and zeros.   No, I think that's not, I think that's not correct. That doesn't make any sense. You don't own your data, right? Because data is information and it may be information that other people have about you. To put it more specifically in the context of privacy and then we'll wrap it up. What is privacy? Right, well, privacy deals with other people's knowledge about you.  If I had put on my Bob Murphy disguise, you'd see that you'd think it was Bob Murphy, which of course you would expect him to be in a place like that and my privacy would be protected. But my privacy, you know, it is embodied in what you know about me. Do you know or not know that I was in that place at that time? Well, I can't own your knowledge. I can't own what's in your head. I can't buy and sell something in your head. It's like, I wasn't at Walter Bloch's Ask Me Anything, but you know, Walter Bloch often talks about things like blackmail. Did he talk about that at all?  Your reputation is what other people think about you. And if someone claims to say something bad about you that will harm your reputation, well, that's unfortunate, but you don't have a legal claim against that because you don't have the legal right to prevent other people from knowing certain things about you. Right now, if somebody broke into your house and stole your diary and broadcast it, yeah, that's a violation of your rights because they broke into your house. Not because other people now know something about you that you would prefer they not know. That is not per se a rights violation, okay? So in the context of privacy, well, I mean, from a moral point of view, you can respect someone's privacy or you can violate someone's privacy. Clearly the woman on the plane who was tweeting about this other woman violated that other woman's privacy. And as, you know, from a moral point of view, from an ethical point of view, we might have a problem with that. But you can't really steal somebody's privacy because privacy is not a thing that you own and can be stolen, okay? So in having these kinds of discussions, I think it's important to stick to the basics of what is or is not an economic good, what you can own, what you can not own, and any kind of government policy that tries to sort of violates those basics is gonna run into problems. So thanks a lot. Thank you.


From the enchanting streets of London's literary tales to the vibrant campuses of India, Arpita Karva's journey unfolds. After capturing the essence of London in her vlog series, she embarked on a transformative college tour. In colleges across India, Arpita ignited the love for literature, shared UGC Net Insights and personally answered questions about both literature and career. Today, we present a snippet from Arpita's impactful lecture at Christ University, Bangalore. Get ready for a dose of literary inspiration as Arpita shares her journey and insights at Christ University. We are honoured and eager to have Dr. Aakta Thakalva as the Distinguished Speaker for the next year's Oath beyond the page English Literature, Career, Free Filament and Federal Resilience. Dr. Aakta Thakalva is a Gold Meditist from Radha's Honey University and a PhD voter in English Literature, whose passion and dedication to the world of literature served happy to the creation of the renowned startup www.AaktaThakalva.org a beacon of trust and knowledge in the value of English literature in it. Dr. Thakalva's journey does not end here. She has also ventured into the world of online education, attaining remarkable success on a YouTube channel with 5.9 intellectuals worldwide. Dr. Thakalva's passion for key literature in an engaging way led to an unassassinating journey. Her block series bought us on this passion to cut to Europe, where she explored sites related to famous authors. Over the past five years, Dr. Thakalva has worked closely with psychologists in the biggest mental health, allowing her to create a profound understanding of the challenges that students often face during their academic journey. Her commitment to policy education has led her to fund ink-pad from work showings on English Literature and seminars on mental health awareness. This session will provide us with a wealth of knowledge as she insights on various aspects of English Literature, career opportunities, UGZ industry relationship, entrepreneurship and student leadership challenges. Once again, we are delighted to welcome you, Ma'am. Either in a few words to the insights that can be shared with us. As we have a little time constraint, I might have to rush you through the slides. So please, you know, pay your full attention because I will not have a lot of time to explain a few topics. So I would also want to take you through my journey because I believe that I have been attached to the field of English Literature since a long time. I would want to ask from each one of you, what do you think is the difference between a dream and a goal? Difference between a dream and a goal. Get employment. Okay. Now, one thing. So, get employment is not a goal, I would say. It is more of a dream. In dream, you have more emotional investment compared to the goal. Okay. I would slightly disagree because when you work towards your goal, you get more attached to it. We all have dreams, right? And our dreams keeps changing. According to me, a dream is a vision for future. Just like the gentleman out there pointed out, I want employment. I want to like get, I want to get a good job. Now, it is a vision of future. It's a beautiful vision of future where you see yourself, you know, dressed up in a good suit and going to an office every day at 9 in the morning. That is a vision of future but it lacks a plan of achievement. So, where I just said that, you know, what you mentioned was a dream and not a goal is because employment in itself, employment in itself is a very, very vast term. You don't know which kind of job do you want to get. How do you get it? How much hours do you have to work to clear that interview? You don't know what kind of salary package do you want. It has to be very, very specific. Another interesting thing that I would want to tell you right here is that it is very important for each one of you to have a LinkedIn profile and be very, very active on LinkedIn because LinkedIn as a platform gives you endless opportunities. I was able to connect with so many brilliant people on LinkedIn which I thought would never accept my request and would never respond to my messages. I hope you must have heard of Ankur Wariku, right? So Ankur Wariku was a YouTuber which I've been following since like long and recently, two, three months back, I just like watched one of his videos and I was really gaga and I thought of sending him a message on LinkedIn sharing my feedback about the video and next day I saw that he replied to my message and then we started a conversation where I showed my interest in like meeting him and his team and he was like, why not? We are going to a place near Uttarakhand for a vacation. I am going with my entire team, so why not you join us and get I'll introduce you to my team and you can also suggest us some people who are really enthusiastic about working with us. So it is as simple as getting in touch with these people which we think would never respond to our messages. So something of this sort if you start at an early age you get to make a lot of new connections. And another interesting thing is in startup get into entrepreneurship is this challenge that we don't have resources. We don't know a lot of things. We don't have money. So how do we start? And this requires a big setup and we don't have money for that setup or we don't have resources for that setup. How do we do? Just want to tell you it's very very simple to start something. No company started directly by opening a factory. They started by pitching products to normal customers on a day to day basis from their dining table. Mama arts and a lot of fashion brands they all started from their house. They had the production happening in their house. The products were getting packed in on the dining table and that is how they were couriering it to the people. And only after getting a successful response they could get out in the market and look for investors. So the journey is long but then it starts with no resources is what we need to understand. So I think with that note I would like to end the session. I hope the session was beneficial and you were able to take some key pointers with you and definitely I would really want you to implement those key pointers because there is no knowledge in mind only after implementing these things is something that is going to take us to the new heights. So thank you so much for being such a patient audience.


Patriot Prime Reviews is a channel for adult collectors and may not be suitable for children under 13 years of age. Viewer discretion is advised. Hey, what's going on guys? Patriot Prime here once again with another video. But before I get started with the subject of this video, I want to give a huge shout out to my sponsor, toyhacks.com. Toyhacks is a company that provides upgrade decals for modern transformer figures along with reproduction decals for the vintage ones. While visiting Toyhacks, make sure and check out the Toyhacks Armory to see their line of Transformers weaponry in multiple colors. And toy stages for awesome display backdrops. Each purchase from Toyhacks earns you Robocents that you can use for future purchases. You can check your balance anytime in your cart. Toyhacks is a company run by collectors for collectors. So make sure and check out toyhacks.com and tell them Patriot Prime sent you. Now, on to the review. The featured bot in this video is the brand new Transformers Legacy Bulkhead. And I got to give a huge shout out to my friend Alex who found Bulkhead for me at his local Target and shipped him my way. So Alex, thank you so much. So real quick, let's take a look at the packaging. As you can see, this is the brand new Legacy style packaging. Transformers there on the side, Transformers Legacy here. We've got some great artwork of Bulkhead in his vehicle mode, front and center. And Bulkhead himself right there in that open window. There's no more plastic. You can reach right in and mess with your figure. Top of the box, Transformers Legacy. This side of the box, you got some great artwork of Bulkhead in robot mode.  Back of the packaging, robot mode transforms in 30 steps to vehicle mode. And there is a QR code. I'll have to check that out and see what that does. This side of the box, we've got more of that Legacy artwork featuring Optimus Prime, Hot Rod, RC, Blaster and Bulkhead. Now, before I break out Bulkhead Alpha's packaging here, real quick disclaimer. I remember Transformers Animated. I love Transformers Prime, but I never collected any of the toys. So I really have no connection to the original Bulkhead figure. So to me, this is going to be a brand new experience with Bulkhead. So I have no nostalgia whatsoever to this figure. So that being said, let's get Bulkhead open up out of the packaging and check him out. And welcome to Patriot Prime Reviews.  And what it did was open up his tech specs. So you can see Bulkhead, Autobot, Alt Mode, Army Van. His Alt Mode is not an Army Van. Function, Heavy Munitions, Special Unit, Team Prime, Origin Universe Prime. Then it shows his signature weapon is the Energon Gatlin Blaster. Rapidly fires rounds of Energon Blast. His Bio, Bulkhead may be a gentle giant most of the time. But this wrecker is always ready to kick some tailpipe. Then it has his skills, strength, intelligent, speed, and firepower. They made him kind of a dummy, didn't they? So anyway, once you get Bulkhead all opened up and out of his packaging, you'll see he does come with a sheet of instructions. And as usual, these are very well illustrated and fairly easy to follow. There was one spot that gave me grief with these instructions. Bulkhead also comes with his shield slash truck cover. His wrecking ball mace weapon.  That thing needs to be so much bigger. And then of course we've got Bulkhead himself. Now, taking a closer look at the figure, I think this guy looks amazing. Right off the bat, you can tell this is Bulkhead. Especially with that head sculpt, with that very prominent jaw. He's got that animated slash prime look, but still retains that kind of realistic, dare I say it, G1 look. I know I'm going to take some people off with that one. But I like the looks of this guy. He's really, really cool. The blocky aesthetic just works for me. Of course, I am a G1er and I dig it. I love the color scheme on the guy too. Very military green, minimal paint applications. You've got the silver for the face, blue eyes. A little bit of silver right there on the crest. Silver up here on the shoulders for the biceps and hands. Silver down there on the thighs and knees. And of course you've got the black for the tires. Black here on the bumper with blue headlights. And a red and Autobot logo right there below the windows. I do like the sculpted details on this guy too. You can really see it in vehicle mode. But check out the windshield wipers. That is awesome. He does have a translucent chest due to the fact the chest is the front of the truck mode. But honestly, it doesn't look too bad. I mean, look at him that way you can tell he's hollow. This is dark enough where you can't see all that hollowness through the chest. So fairly cool. I mean, not a lot of gaps other than the chest. Just don't go under them and look up. Articulation head is, yes it is on a ball joint. Can do a complete 360, look up and down slightly. Arms can do 360 as well. They can go out, they can go in. Bicep bend and bicep rotation. Very tight joints and there is a wrist rotation. There's also waist rotation. Well, more or less crotch rotation if that's the thing.  There's a knee bend, legs go out, legs go in. There is a rotation right there at the hip and ankle tilt. So this big bulky butt has lots of moves. Now let's take a look at his weaponry. And the first thing we'll pull out is the shield slash truck canopy. Now there's a couple different ways you can use this. He's got a little peg right there. And I guess you could peg into the side of his arm like so. This is one way you can do it, but it doesn't really work. That peg is mainly used for the storage on the back. What you want to do is take this longer peg here and now you can utilize, if I can get it back on there, it pegging onto his arm like so. Kind of like a riot shield. That's what it looks like with the open window right there. The first peg where I screwed up and showed you first, this is for storage on his back.  And he's just kind of fold the canopy around his back. So you got storage that way. Another option comes into play when you bring in the wrecking ball. And I love how this works.  So once you put the peg in, that folds over the fist. And I love how that covers the fist up. It looks so cool. Like his hand transformed into that wrecking ball. And with the wrecking ball attached, you use that peg right there. You can peg the shield on and now he can hold it in front of him. I do like how that works. Now with this wrecking ball, if you want to put it on his left hand, if I can get that open, and it's in there tight. Okay, now if you want to put it in his left hand, you need to put the peg underneath the fist. If you look, it is molded according to the fist. If you try to put it on like the other fist, it doesn't fit right. See, you have to put the peg through the bottom of the hand. Then it's going to fit perfect. Then you can actually peg the shield into his left hand and then bring in his Gatlin blaster here, which like I said, I think is way too small. And I hate that we're coming back to the translucent weapons. And there's something that's going to be going on with these other figures because it's got a hole right through the center. So you can take the Gatlin pistol, put that in his hand, and there you have bulkhead all armed and ready for battle. Another option for this little Gatlin cannon. If you look right there, there's some holes. There's little pegs on the side. You can peg this in. So now he has a shoulder mounted Gatlin cannon, but it is going to aim up and it really doesn't peg in tight. So I'm not a big fan of that. I much rather just put it in his hand. So there we go. He is ready to kick some Decepticon tailpipe. So now let's get bulkhead transformed into vehicle mode. Now the first thing you want to do is remove all of the accessories. Now the instructions say you can leave the shield cover on, but trust me, don't. It'll make things a lot easier. Now what we're going to do is go ahead and move bulkhead's arms forward and then unpeg these little black sections here away from the chest. So you get those up and out of the way. Then you're going to take this whole chest section, bring this up, and then it's actually going to separate all the way, and then you're going to take bulkhead's head, bring it down. It's going to snap into place right there, and there's this black section here. You're going to bring that up. That's going to fill in the section where bulkhead's head was. Now that this is all out of the way, you're going to bring the arms forward. They're on these little hinges back here, so you're going to bring these hinges around. And what you want to do, if you look right there, there are these tabs. You want to get these together. Sometimes it can take a while to get them lined up just right. Once you get them snapped in, go ahead and bend bulkhead's arms at the elbow all the way that that cab keeps falling in the way. Go ahead and bring those arms up, and then that cab will just kind of snap into place, and there you have the front of the vehicle finished. Now you're going to take this section here, push it down, and then flare these wheels out, and go ahead and get the cover. That's where the shield is going to go. Let's get that out of the way. Now this here was the part that confused me in the instructions. You're going to take this black section, untab it, and now there is a section right here. Let me see if I can find it, because you want to bring this up like so, and then right here, where this black section is, you're going to pull this out. It's not going to do it for me. Like I said, this is tricky. There we go. This section right here pops off, and I could not figure that out in the instructions or nothing drove me nuts why I couldn't get him to transform. Now that you've got him this way, you're going to go ahead and bring the legs in, kind of like at a kneeling position, and you're going to bring all of this up. Go ahead and get this pushed down all the way. Make sure those wheels stay flared out, and there's two tabs right there that are going to line up right there in the back of the cab. Go ahead and get those pushed in, and now you got bulkhead looking like this. Go ahead and flip these panels up on the back of the legs. Now you're going to swing out the fuel tanks. They're on a ball joint. Just kind of rotate those around. And of course, when you transform, it just comes right apart. Doesn't stay really tabbed together good until you actually get him finished. So go ahead and squeeze the legs together. Bring the gas tanks down, and now you just kind of push everything in and it'll kind of lock into place. Go ahead and bring the tabs or the gas tanks down. They're actually going to tab right there. It's one of those things that's easier said than done. So there's one. Also, there's another tab right there. It's going to tab into bulkhead thigh. So get everything tabbed in. Now once everything's tabbed in, you're going to go back here and close bulkhead's feet, and then bring the feet up. They will actually form a tailgate. Now you're going to take his weapons, take the Gatlin cannon. It's actually going to peg right here in the center, like so. Actually turn it this way so it handles facing toward the feet. Then you're going to take the wrecking ball weapon and make sure and turn this to where the flat section is against the Gatlin cannon. Peg that in. So you've got that look going on. Go ahead and take the shield. Move this section right here to where you can attach the shield via the peg, just like how it connected on his back. Then you're going to bring the cover down. And there's some tabs right there. Go ahead and get the cover tabbed in place. And once you have everything in place, there you have bulkhead in vehicle mode. And I love the looks of this military vehicle. This is actually based on a Raba H-18 Hungarian military truck. And this thing is awesome. It just looks so good. And check out all the sculpted details. I was talking about that earlier. But man, they really pop in vehicle mode. You got the gas tanks there, the details on the cab with the doors, the vents. Even the wheels look really good. I think they're just clip-ons again. But they do have lots of nice details, even there on the tires. You can tell right there that could actually be wood. And then you have the canopy here, or the shield, the cover. And I love the sculpted details on that. It actually looks like fabric. He did such a good job on this. And the feet.  It always had their feet hanging off the back of the vehicle. Hasbro made it work for bulkhead. This is actually, you know, the gates, or the tailgate. So he can go and put things in it if you want. If you actually take the weapons out that he comes with, there is room in the back for other accessories. Maybe even MicroMasters. But yeah, this vehicle mode looks awesome. And if you want, you can take the Gatlin gun and it will attach up on top for a little extra firepower. Yes, vehicle mode, it rolls really, really good. Now, another thing to take note of in bulkhead's vehicle mode is he has minicon ports. There's one on each side. So I happen to have a minicon right here. Let's see if these work. That matched up. And yes, you can plug a minicon onto bulkhead. So with this being the legacy line, you know, we've had our battle masters and MicroMasters. I wonder if we're going to get the return of minicons. Now, I know you die hard bulkhead fans may not appreciate this vehicle mode, but trust me, in hand, it's awesome. And now for some quick size comparisons, here is Transformers Legacy bulkhead with Generation 1 Optimus Prime, War for Cybertron Siege Hound and War for Cybertron Kingdom Warpath. In my opinion, the Transformers Legacy series kicked things off with a bang. I think bulkhead here is a great figure.   I mean, that would look awesome in the hands of bulkhead.  So there you go guys, Transformers Legacy bulkhead. So, does a Transformers Legacy bulkhead belong in your collection? Absolutely. I love this figure. He's got a cool robot mode, very cool realistic military truck mode and I just think he's tons of fun. As I said earlier, I'm not connected to the original bulkhead toy at all. So to me, this was a brand new character. Now for those of you who do have that connection to the animated or Transformers Prime bulkhead, give this guy a shot. I've seen lots of people complaining about him on Facebook and Instagram, but pick him up. I think you'll be really surprised with what you get. Now guys, if you enjoyed the video, don't forget to like, don't forget to subscribe and don't forget to click that bell icon to get notified when I upload new videos. Also, if you're in any position to help out the channel, I do offer channel memberships here on YouTube and I gotta give a huge shout out to my current channel members because it's support like yours that helps keep this channel growing. Once again guys, this is Patriot Prime, signing out.


A warm welcome to this discussion session, we have been having these discussion sessions where I invite my teaching associates to join me and participate in the discussion as the teaching associates essentially represent all of you who are participating in this course and they bring before us here some of the questions that have been discussed hotly or some of the questions which require some explanation or some of the discussions which require more elaboration or some other questions which they themselves have found to be important to answer. So, I am very happy to have with me today Siddhant Rana Day and Siddhant is one of my teaching associates he has been very active some of you must have seen him answer some questions on the forum and he has some very interesting points to discuss today. So, without further ado let me ask Siddhant to put forth his points one by one for discussion. On the discussion forums we had a question where the there was a system defined in the following way. So, where y of t was defined to be equal to x of t square u of t. So, there was a lot of discussion on this in the discussion forums and so many of us gave actually incorrect answers or misleading answers. So, and we learned it later that we were in fact wrong. So, I would just like to ask sir to clarify it. Yes, this was a very good question in fact some of my teaching associates had framed this question and it is one of those questions which illustrate you know that you can solve a problem both algebraically and graphically and there could be advantages in one approach to the other and what I am going to do first is to explain the meaning of the system. What does the system do? You know very often in the domain of signals and systems it is important not only to be able to write the algebra or write the algebraic description but also to be able to interpret it properly. Interpretation is critical in many concepts and signals and systems otherwise it just remains a mass of symbols you know it does not really give you a meaning and the meaning is what really gives beauty to the subject. Now, for example, here let us look at the description it says y of t is in fact let me put u t first followed by x of t squared. Now, let us forget about the u t for the moment suppose we took y of t. So, I will call it y 1 t y 1 t is x of t squared. Now, what does this really mean? See it is interesting you have to think of a mapping here. So, query any t for example, take t equal to plus 5 and take t equal to minus 5 it would say y 1 at plus 5 is x at plus 5 squared and similarly y 1 at minus 5 is also x at minus 5 squared but which is the same. So, you know when you write an equation like this. So, y 1 at minus 5 is x at minus 5 the whole squared which is also x at 25. So, when we write a system description like this you must interpret it as follows you are saying for this t calculate the output as follows from x and as follows comes here. So, you know you pick any t and your reading of of course, in this case you are luckily your equation is not implicit in the sense that you know it is not recursive. So, then if it were recursive then there is trouble in fact then you do not even know if you properly have solutions or not you know but here it is very clear definition is clear there is no ambiguity about the definition and I do this. So, it says at a given t pick up the value of x at the square of that value of t. Now, what is the problem with this system? This system can only take positive values in the argument here this argument can only be positive. So, it will always pick only non negative values is not it only non negative value greater than equal to 0 values are taken. What is the implication of that? It would mean that for example, if I had an x t like this only this part would ever figure in the output the negative part of t is lost forever is that right.  Now, you are multiplying by u t and u t is of course 1 for t greater than equal to 0 and 0 for t less than 0. So, now you are saying y of t is u t times x t squared meaning the first thing you do is whenever t is negative y t is automatically 0 because u t is 0 and then when t is greater than equal to 0 y t becomes essentially x of t squared and t to t squared is an invertible mapping for t greater than equal to 0 is that right. You see there is a 1 to 1 mapping as long as t is non negative the mapping is 1 to 1. So, there is a point in x which corresponds to the to the point in y of course, what it does is in some sense to compress and expand. So, between 0 and 1 of course, all the values between 0 and 1 get mapped between 0 and 1 and all the values beyond 1 get mapped beyond 1 and 1 is the point of transition 1 goes to 1. But before that you know there is a movement backwards and after that there is a movement forward. So, if you have a number greater than 1 it moves to a number it gets pushed you know. So, for example, y 1 of 2 is x of 4 you know on the other hand y 1 of half is x of 1 fourth you see it is a complicated system in that one can neither think of it as pushing things forward nor can you think of it as pushing things back. There is a non-linear transformation on the axis there. So, the system description is unambiguous now having understood and it is easier to see this graphically having understood the system description. One can then describe certain operations algebraically or graphically as one chooses and now Siddhant actually has thought a lot about this example if he is going to put forward some of his thoughts now in the discussion to follow. So, Siddhant go ahead tell us more about what you understood about this system. Suppose you give the input x 1 of t equal to let us say t to the system and so for that input you will get the output y 1 of t y 1 of t which is equal to x 1 of t square as per the definition of the system which in turn is equal to t square for t greater than equal to 0. It is always 0 for t less than equal to 0. So, this will be the output for such a system. So, now suppose you define another system. So, this was the question in the forum. So, suppose you say that your input is not x 1 of t but x 1 of t minus 4 and you are giving this input to the system. So, the important thing about x 1 of t minus 4 is how you interpreted. So, x 1 of t minus 4 does not mean that the input at time t minus 4 is x 1 of t minus 4, x 1 of t is essentially just a function. So, x 1 of t minus 4 is the value, you can treat it as the value of the function at some point. So, x 1 of t minus 4 does not mean that the value of the signal at time t minus 4 is x 1 of t minus 4. It actually means that the value of the signal at time t is x 1 of t minus 4. So, instead of writing x 1 of t minus 4, you should write it as let us say x 2 of t. So, this is a much better definition for this signal. So, this is equal to t minus 4 and if you give this function as an input to the system, you will get y 2 of t square. y 2 of t square is just essentially replacing t by t square in this expression here, in this expression. So, you are just replacing t with t square in this expression. So, this is t square minus 4 and just to check that things are all working fine. Let us define the signal x 3 of t as x 2 of t plus 4. So, this is essentially just t. So, this is equal to x 1 of t and this is just to check that the system we are not doing anything incorrectly. So, this leads to the output being y 3 of t square which is replacing t by t square in x of 3 in x 3 which is just t square. So, you can see that. So, if you do it like this, if you write x 2 of t instead of writing x 1 of t minus 4, you will end up with correct expressions. Yes, that is very correct. So, what is Siddhant's try to point out is that you know some of I remember see in this discussion there was this whole issue of whether one should meticulously go through the algebra or whether one should do it graphically. Now, let me explain what Siddhant is trying to say. He is very correct in that he is saying that if I take t minus. So, when he says x 1, if you had x 1 t, let us begin with x 1 t again. So, x 1 t being equal to t would lead to the corresponding output y 1 t given by t square u t. So, simple you know. So, it is t square for t greater than equal to 0 and 0 for t less than 0. Now, when you take x 2 t which is described in terms of x 1 as x 1 t minus 4, we know the interpretation. You see if replacing t by t minus 4 means you put there see at t equal to 4, it takes the value that the original signal took at 0. So, what is that 0 goes to 4? In other words, you are pushing the signal forward by 4 steps and then of course, everything else gets pushed by 4 steps too. So, now you know you have to be careful. So, one way is now I will ask you to you know try and attempt the same thing graphically. So, how does this look? You had t, t would look like this. So, this was this is x 1 of t which is essentially just a straight line passing at 45 degrees to the origin and x 1 of t minus 4 in the same graph is this pushing the whole thing forward by 4 steps. Now, what would this system do? This system would essentially take whatever is here either in x 1 t for the first output or in x 2 t for the second output and then make a non-linear transformation on it and what you need to verify now is that what Siddhan did algebraically is this done graphically. So, you essentially as I told you the mapping is very clear. There is a one to one mapping for all points. Anyway for t less than 0, the output is always 0. For t greater than 0, you essentially pick the point t squared from the output and put it on that value of y. Siddhan has explained to you how to deal with the problem algebraic. You know you can and as I told you in my email sent to all the participants and in the discussion 2 which I recorded as a response to all of you. I said you know you need the skill to also decide which might be more strategic in a given situation. So, this was a very good question put up by my teaching associate and it was one of those where you really need to decide which skill is more experienced.


That's right. He is a Hall of Famer, five time All-Star, 13 year vet, Tim Hardaway senior joining us now. I know you are in Indy. You just told us that. I didn't know. I'm not cheating here. And you've done a ton of All-Star games in your career. Do you have a favorite memory that stands out as we get things kicked off? Yeah. You know, one year I suppose has started and magic had retired because of, you know, the situation that he was going through. And I was on a starting team and magic was able to play. And they said, yeah, he can play an All-Star game. And I said, I would give my starting job to him. And he went out there and got MVP. He took my MVP. So yeah, that wasn't on land though. So yeah, that's one of my moments that I had at the All-Star game. Every time I see magic, every time I see magic, you always thank me. He said, thank you, man. I appreciate that. I say, yeah, Tim, in five of those All-Star games you played with or against Michael Jordan. And one of those games he had a triple double. Which is kind of crazy in an All-Star game. What was the most impressive thing you saw him do during those All-Star games? Was it the triple double or was it something else? Well, you know, we played against Michael, you know, at least five, six times during a course of the season when I was with Miami Heat. So, and I played against him during the summer in Chicago too. So, you know, it nothing amazes me about Michael because I played against him so many times during a course of my career and, you know, coming out of Chicago too. But it's just every day of him coming in no matter what.  And that, you know, that's every game. I remember we used to play also against Chicago Bulls. He went out that day and shot 36 holes of golf. Came in to the game that night and almost won it for him. He was like six or eight for like 30, something like that. But he almost made the two jump shots. They crawled in and out of the basket and they almost won that game, game three. So, yeah. Yeah, I tell you this, he's a phenomenal player, you know, when he was on the court, he was always amazed because he was always prepared. 36 holes and then do that. All right. So, there's a moment when he had 50 against you when you were in Miami. And the legend is that you said something in a paper, like in the newspaper. Do you remember this? Is this what happened? Did I say something? No, no, no. Yeah. That was for Sean Leonard that said something. What was said? Because I feel like you don't say anything about Michael. But Sean Leonard said something.  And that's all that was said. That's all that was said. And we was like, and we come to find out that he was kind of chirping in his ear. He wasn't loud with, he was just chirping in his ear. And yeah, that's what that was. It wasn't me that said anything. Okay, yeah, you know, Leonard just chirping in his ear talking to him. He didn't know. He didn't know. What was it? What was that like trying to try to guard him, trying to stay in front of him at that time? You know, obviously the rules have changed from, you know, that time period until now. But at that time, what was it like trying to guard him? Well, he never took me outside the post. He always because he knew if he dribbled in front of me, I would take it from him. I was good at stealing the ball from him because I count his dribbles and I saw, you know, that he didn't get down all the way. But he always posted me up in his footwork was incredible.  And his footwork was impeccable. And he has spin moves. He has, you know, jump shot, spin shot, all type of stuff. But his wheel to just put the ball in the basket was incredible, man. Just incredible. It seemed like any shot that he took, it was going in.  And like I tell people today, they say, how can you see the basket?  It's all repetition. It's all them hundreds and thousands and millions of shots that you have taken and repetition each and every time you out there working on your game. So you know where the rim is at.  And you know that it's going in because you didn't shot that same shot at that same spot thousands and thousands of times. So that's where he was. If you, you, you tried to guard him. If he missed, that was a win for you. Tim, this weekend, there's a lot of buzz around the dunk contest simply because Jaylen Brown is in it. And he's the first ball start to participate in the dunk contest is 2017. Do you think he'll kind of kickstart other star players doing this like they did in the eighties and nineties? Like, I tell you this, he better come with some stuff. If he don't come with some stuff, the other all stars are not going to dunk in a dunk contest. So he better, I hope he does.  They was in starting an all star game and he went out there and put on the show, but the dunk contest, that's what they want to see. So Jaylen Brown, my advice to you is you better put on the show because if you don't guys going to be like, you know what, that's why I save my legs. I need to rest. That's why I'm not in the dunk contest. Yes, he better put on the show, but I wish him well. That's what I'm worried about. But that's why we're that's why we're saluting them. Yeah, that's why we're saluting them because we want guys to listen, put all of the fear aside, put on a show for the fans, even if it's not going to be your best outing, the fans at the end of the day, they sign up for all star weekend. They want to see the best of the best, do the best things possible. They want to see him shoot threes and dunk and do all of those things, you know, no disrespect to none of the other guys that's well, well deserved. We love to see the Matt McClungs of the world and in the toppings and all of these guys dunk. But we're there to see our all stars be the best athletes in the world. And so they just got to put some of that pride aside and just sign up for it. It's making me nervous now. I agree with me. I agree. Now I'm excited. Yeah, I hope they don't get scared because this is the step in the right direction. Tim, so we got to talk run TMC obviously. Is that are those years that your favorite time? I know the shirts awesome. Is it your favorite time playing basketball? And if you guys had stayed together longer, what do you think the ceiling would have been? I had first of all, I had great times in Golden State and with the Miami Heat. But starting off with Golden State Warriors, Chris Mullin, Mitch Richmond run TMC. We got the Bay Area rocking. We rolling. One thing we had Alton Lister when he we got him as a free agent from Seattle. He came in and the first game of the preseason he towards Achilles. So that kind of hurt us and put us took us back a little bit. And then, you know, we went to the play awesome played against the Los Angeles Lakers. We was under man because we had to have Mitch Richmond guard Lottie D. Valk and we had to gimmick and all this and all that. So I mean, but the time there was was great. We had a great buzz. You know, we had a future day if we would have kept Mitch Richmond. And you know, Don Nelson finally said that his worst mistake of his coaching career was trading Mitch Richmond. We had a nucleus there. And the only thing we needed was some pieces for us to fulfill. And we would have went far. I think we could have contended for a championship myself. But and I know Chris and Mitch, they think so too, if we would have stayed together. But we had something fantastic there. And you know, it was like when when Mitch got traded, it was the beginning to the end. And that hurt us because we had a great nucleus and we we had fun playing. We knew we were each other was you know, I'm Mitch going 25, Chris Mullins going 26, I'm scoring 22 and having 10 dimes a game or 11 dimes a game. I mean, it was just remarkable basketball. And we knew, you know, how to use our other teammates to get involved and make them happy too. So we just knew how to play and we had fun playing with each other. Yeah, Tim, you mentioned both of them, Don Nelson, Pat Riley, both legendary coaches. Did one of those guys have more of an impact on you on and off the court than the other? Or they both are just awesome to play for? Both was awesome play for both was also our awesome guys on and off the court. You're talking about X's and O's defense of why a lot of people don't think that Don Nelson is a defensive strategist. He is a defensive strategist. He just he likes to gimmick. He likes to do this. He likes to do that.  All right, down. Pat Riley is like in your face. We don't play D. You don't get over pigs. We're gonna blitz the the pick and roll. There's no switching. None of that stuff. But in today's game, I think they they they couldn't adapt to today's game because young players are totally different now.  You know, today's game, they they'd be like, you know, I don't understand it because that's the way they play to you got to understand Pat Riley and Don Nelson played the same way. So when we was playing, we played the same way. But man, those two, the innovators, they understand the game in and out. They always pay the attention to details. And that's what make them great, great coaches. Now, you know, when we break out the basketball dictionary and we look up the word crossover, your picture is going to be right there as the example of who championed the crossover. I got to know, how did you perfect that? And who was who was one of your favorite victims that you call with that crossover?  It was just, I just like to go out there and compete and like to go out there and play. It didn't matter who you were, where you were. If we was in a pickup game and I didn't know you from Adam, I'm still going to go at you the way I go at anybody else. And that's the way I was brought up. That's the way I made up. And I used to practice in a basement. My basement, I had an unfinished basement. My parents did. And we had two beams, you know, like probably about five feet apart, seven feet apart. And I used to imagine it that I'm playing in front of some guys that I wanted to play against in high school or in college. And this is what I do to them. So I'd be down there for about what an hour to an hour and 15 minutes just dribbling the basketball in and out moves crossover move between the legs, spin moves and just perfecting, you know, just the craft of dribbling. And so when I got out on the court, whatever I did, it wasn't new to me. I just did it in general.  That's what I was practicing. And that's what made me confident to go out there and do it against you. So, you know, I didn't know I had a move like that. I just went out there and just played and competed. And when I needed it, I just did it. And I'm going to tell you this, I didn't know that I was doing it. I was just out there just hoping and trying to get myself open, get to Ram, make a play because back then, like I said before, we played in the playgrounds. It's a bunch of it's a lot of physical activity out there. Hands pushing, shoving, grabbing, holding. And in the park, you can't call about all the time. So you have to get through that and you have to devise a move to get your body around people in a box, not out the box. We was always in this little box type box. And we used our shoulders to get past you to make a play. So that's how I was taught. And it just took me to the next level. Looking around, looking around the league with that said, who do you who do you think got the best handle right now? Who do you really like? Oh, you know, Carrie Irving. No question, Carrie Irving. I, you know, my son plays for the Dallas Mavericks. And I get to watch all their games and some of the stuff that did you see what he did? First of all, to, to Wambanyama. Did you see? Here we go. When he went baseline and he kind of shot it over his head.  That's very difficult.  You know, you got, of course, you got to put Steph Curry in there. You know, of course. But yeah, you know, I just think right now, Carrie Irving, if you, if you're on the island with him by yourself, it's going to be danger for you. And it's going to be danger. You're going to be like, you're going to be calling for help, for sure. I'm glad you mentioned your son, 11 seasons. I feel like time has flown on that one. But was there a moment, you know, I think when you're a great basketball player and your son wants to do the same thing, is there a moment where you're worried that he's not going to have the right stuff? Did you know when he did? Yes, I was worried. Yes, I was worried. And I was like, you know what, he may not have it. He may not have it. But it was an instance where he wanted to come out of college after his sophomore year. And I told him, no, you're not ready. He was upset with me for telling him the truth. And he said, what do I need to work on? And I told him what he needs to work on. And he went back and worked on it. And he got himself better. And the next year after he lost in the finals to Louisville, he said, by the way, they got cheated that game, the referee cheated that game. I just want to let you all know that. But a week, a week later, two weeks later, he said, dad, I'm ready. I said, yes, you are, son. Yes, you are.  Sometimes I wish he had just shoot the ball and be selfish, selfish. But he's very unselfish. If he see you open, he's going to pass you the ball and say, shoot the ball and make the shot. That's the way he is. That's the way he's always going to be. And I think that the Dallas Mavericks, I want them to run some more catching shoots for him. Some, you know, some floppies.  They need to have an offense ran for them so they go out there and feel like they're in the game. You know, him just being in the corner, just sitting there. That's not him. He needs to be in the game. He needs to be moving. And I wish they run more, more, more movement for him. Floppies, you know, a couple of staggers for him and just move him a little bit more to get him in a Florida game. So, but, you know, he's, he's out there. He's having fun. He's enjoying himself and he's doing what that he, that I want him to do and he wants to do. And I'm very happy for him. I love just watching them play. I have a joy every time I'm there watching them in person. I'm just in another world. Tim, earlier this year, earlier this year, he actually passed you on the all-time three-point leaderboard. What was that moment like, obviously, as a father to see that happen? I'm going to tell you this. If we shot threes, like they shoot threes, that he would have never caught me. He would have never caught me.   But, but the thing is, is hard way, Tim, hard way junior senior is still in the books. That's all that matters. Perfect. That's fire, man. That's so, that's so fire. Tim, Junior, he's, he's one of the favorites to be in the sixth man of the year conversation. Why are we on the show, make a case for why he should have it?  He's a lethal factor on their team. At times when they, when, definitely when they need a boost, they go to him, they run offense form, and he makes shots and he makes plays. You know, it just like you, Lou, when you came off the bench, you could see the game and you understood what you need to do and how you need to do it. You know what, we not getting to the free throw line. I got to get to the free throw line. You know what, they not guard, they not coming off, they not getting over the screen. They let, they going under the screen. So I, I get my rhythm shooting at three. You always had that little, what you call it, one or two dribble, going left and hitting your guy and shooting and shooting and getting to foul, which I was like, that's not a foul, Lou.  Don't let him drive, don't let him dribble one left. If he dribble that left hand one time, it's going in. So make him go right. So yeah, we knew that, but yeah, he, he, his case is, I want them to run more offense form. When he runs, when they run more offense form, it helps them as a team, be a better team, but it helps him to be involved in more stuff that, that they saying that his team needs and they don't, they don't have to rely on Luca and Kairi for everything on offense. Last question, and y'all was prime. I know y'all games in, in the styles are, are, you have some similarities. Obviously that's your son, but you guys play different. And y'all primes 101. Who doing what? I'm killing him. I'm killing. I'm gonna, I'm gonna, I'm gonna make him move them feet. I'm gonna make him tape them ankles up. I'm gonna make him move. I'm gonna, I'm gonna have them touching them more. Yeah. Come on, Lou. Come on, Lou. That's what I wanted. That's what I wanted to get. That's what I wanted to hear. That's all I wanted. You had to ask.  Yeah. Poor guy. Poor guy. Tim Hardaway senior. This has been a pleasure. Thank you so much for the time. Enjoy all star weekend. We will all be watching slam dunk contest. Come on, stars. We'll be back with some more running back. Y'all doing a great job. Keep up great work. Keep giving people information about everything. And thanks for having me on. I appreciate you all. Thank you. Thank you so much. We appreciate that. We'll be right back. Yes, sir. Like a running back, you know, and all over the map because you make it collapse.