So let me start by thanking the organizers for putting together such a great and diverse program and Running such a smooth conference. So it was really a pleasure to be here and maybe at the end of the session Things I can say this So what I want to report in this talk is actually I want to report on two works So one work the first work was done in collaboration with the Jena all-stars collaboration So there were two students driving the project Benjamin Knorr and Stefan Lipphold And then I also want to explain something that I did with my students in Nijmegen Which brings to the title of this talk so since you are probably not all quantum gravity persons and I'm the only asymptotic safety quantum gravity talk in the plenary here Let's explain what our goal is So what we want to do is we want to derive a consistent and predictive description of the gravitational force valid on all length scales so we want to start at the Planck scale or at sub-Planckian energy scales where Space time might be widely fluctuating and then we want to connect this quantum gravity phase down to large Large distances. So here are typical distances that we are interested in So at this distance we form the cosmic microwave background Particle physics typically happens at the order of 10 to the mile minus 19 meters If we talk about solar system tests of gravity We are talking at distances of 10 to the 12 meters and down here in this plot This should be an illustration of the visible universe. So then we are talking about the largest possible length scales that we can possibly observe and Looking at the distance scales you see why you want to do Rg So you want to extrapolate physics over 60 orders of Magnitudes and this is something that will be very hard to do for example in a Monte Carlo So Rg methods are predestined to explore these connections So what should be the ingredients of our program? So we want to approach this problem of having gravity at all forces from a bisonian perspective and The first thing we need to do this is we want to have a fixed point of the random realization group flow Why is this important? So first we want to have this fixed point to control the ultraviolet behavior of our theory So in this case we can control the UV divergencies the short distance behavior and If the dimensionless coupling constants associated with this fixed point is finite This should ensure that also scattering amplitudes don't have unphysical divergencies We want the construction to be predictive. So this translates into a property of the fixed point So essentially we only want to have a finite number of relevant deformations So the Rg flow that is tracked into the fixed point at high energies dispense the UV critical surface and What asymptotically? Conjectures is that our world actually lives on such UV critical surface Then our goal is to pinpoint where we are on this Critical surface and this is typically done by measuring relevant parameters of our theory So by ensuring that the surface has finite dimension we ensure that we can locate us with a finite number of measurements Finally we want to be able to connect to our real world So we demand that the Rg flow emanating from our fixed point approaches a regime where Classical general relativity is actually a good approximation So in this regime we can then recover all the successful tests of general relativity like the classical tests of perihelion shift Gravitation lensing results nuclear synthesis and many many more So these are the three basic requirements that we demand for this program to work So the question why are we not there? So we know how to quantize theories for a long time and we have a classical description of the gravitational force so here We start with general relativity at the level of the action. This is encoded in the Einstein-Hilbert action We have a Newton's constant. We have a cosmological constant in the game and What makes this action very different from what we write down in the standard model is that Newton's constant actually comes with a negative mass dimension Then we can analyze the consequences of this finding using a Wilsonian approach So we want to compute the flow of this coupling constant. Okay, canonical way. We introduce dimension less quantities So here I introduce the Rg scale k and then we write down the beta function Whatever this beta function will be due to the canonical mass dimension There is a part of the beta function that just is given by the mass dimension and quantum corrections then come perturbatively at the order of G Then you notice from the structure of the beta function That the Gaussian fixed point where this coupling constant vanishes is actually a subtle point As a consequence if you start with a theory with a positive Newton's constant You will not end up in this free fixed point, but you will be driven away from it So this is the statement that general relativity is not asymptotically free So this is not how people started out within this program So people were interested in actually Computing counter terms So this is the famous work by Gore-Rhoff and Sanyotti And they started from the Einstein Hilbert action leave out the cosmological constant Then you find that at one loop order There's no counter term on shell counter term that you can write down So you have to push your computation to two loops and then you see there's indeed a non trivial counter term That you can write down this contains three powers of the wild tensor contracted here And it comes with a non zero coefficient So then you notice that this type of counter term is not of the form of your initial action So it cannot be reabsorbed by redefinition of Newton's constant as you would do in a standard perturbatively renormalizable field theory So then you would need to add this new piece to the action in order to get rid of your divergencies that will introduce a new free parameter and You expect that this will go on at three loops and in the end you will end up by an infinite number of free parameters So in the perturbative language, that's the same as we have seen before The statement is if we start from this action, we end up with a perturbatively non-renormalizable theory Okay, so maybe this is not the good fixed point Let's see what fixed points are on the market that we can use instead So the Gaussian fixed point here I described what goes wrong with this fixed point So if you start with the Einstein-Hilbert action you perturbatively quantize in G this doesn't work to describe gravity Then people thought about okay, we can add higher derivative couplings to our action That cures the problem of randomizability But it raises a new problem We get negative norm states and perturbatively you don't want them So this is also not the theory that you are looking for Then there is the proposal by Weinberg that there could be a non-gaussian fixed point sitting on the theory space of gravity This corresponds to an interacting field theory and here I should stress that we are essentially working at a relativistic quantum field theory at this stage So if this fixed point persists then gravity could fall into the class of non-perturbed if we renormalize with field theories Recently there was a second proposal so this playing a variant of a gaussian fixed point and Instead of working with a relativistic theory you break Lorentz symmetry at the fundamental level So that leads to an interesting class of unisotropic fixed points where you can combine the features that we have above Here so you get higher derivative terms, but they come without the price of having negative norm states So in essence this could also be a feasible option for UV completion of gravity But for the purpose of the talk I will just focus of this idea that we have a relativistic fixed point So focus on asymptotic safety, but this is the outline of the talk introduction. We have just done then I Should quickly summarize the activity that has been going on in the field in the last couple of months and Then I will focus on three particular questions So what is the role of the two-loop counter term in asymptotic safety? How can we go towards real time computations in our framework? And I will briefly comment on the question of unitarity from our perspective. Okay What has been going on and in the last So the primary tool for investigating the asymptotic safety hypothesis So it's based on the Wetterich type flow equation We see we use a background formalism to set this up So G bar here is a background metric and we look at fluctuation around the background Related to the discussion that we have in the in the auditorium There are three remarks I want to make here about this equation So first it's the role of the background formalism if we set up this equation for gravity This is not a choice, but it's a necessity So if we do standard in quantum field theory, we get precisely such a background for free That's either our Minkowski metric or Euclidean metric. So in quantum gravity the background metric essentially has to fulfill the role of also Providing us the background that in a standard quantum field theory comes for free So it will be hard to actually get rid of this point where you are standing on Then the formulation itself so we don't need to specify the initial action that we want to quantize so we can search for this initial action Dynamically on our theory space. So since we don't know what the action associated with our fixed point actually is This is a highly desirable feature and certainly it brings in plenty of approximation schemes Which we can use to construct RG trajectories of this type Okay, so over the years this has been used at the background level There were many many truncations of the gravitational action that have been tested so the story started out with Einstein Hilbert now polynomial are Approximations including R to the power of 35 have been studied and people also included tensor structures There is a new perpendicular direction to this diagram coming up So this corresponds to vertex expansions, which are made on top of Specifying the ansatz for the effective action. So this is not shown in this diagram here So here is a summary of recent works and developments so The brief summary in many of the studies that we have seen all essentially show the existence of a suitable non Gaussian fixed point Both at the background level and at the level of the vertex expansion We understand that this fixed point has a high predictive power So the number of relevant directions could be low and as low as three For my personal perspective This here is an important result So if we study the field theory that is associated with the non Gaussian fixed point in two dimensions This can be linked to a unitary quantum field or conform a field theory So this is the first link which could provide an intrinsic definition of our fixed point And then there has been a lot of structural analysis going on Understanding the gauge dependent the background dependence of our assault people were interested in deriving C theorems Deriving closures of the RG equations. So there's a lot to be done So this refers to the case of pure gravity Branch that came off. So instead of gravity by now. There's also a lot of developments studying Gravity coupled to meta systems. So the central results here in this area is that The non Gaussian fixed point that we see in pure gravity has the analogous Fixed point if we include the meta content of the standard model There was the famous prediction of the heat Higgs mass based on asymptotic safety arguments There are studies of Higgs-Yukawa systems on the way and a lot has been going on in terms of studying cosmological implications of asymptotic safety so a lot of activity on the other hand The discussion and this conference showed that there are lots of open questions Which are still discussed among the people in the field. So here are my favorite ones So non Gaussian fixed point are the critical component Exponents really complex What should we do with the background field? Well, how can we generalize our finite dimensional truncations to an infinite number of couplings or? Does asymptotic safety manifest itself in? phenomenological signatures So these questions indicate there's still a lot that needs to be done in this program So let's focus on the questions that have been around So this is a rather old question. It already started at the beginning of the program So given that we have this asymptotically safe fixed point What happens if we study the effect of the go off uncertainty counter term will our fixed point be destroyed by Adding this particular term to our truncation So the setup in which we studied this question consists of the Einstein-Hilbert action down here And here this is the two-loop counter term That was found in the perturbative studies Before actually Understanding what the effect of this term is let's recap what's going on in the sector down here So this is our ansatz for the effective average action We have two flowing coupling constants g and lambda we can compute the beta function and From the beta functions we read off that there are two fixed points We have the Gaussian fixed point and we have a non Gaussian fixed point At positive Newton's constant and positive cosmological constant So this would be the good candidate for UV completion of gravity So it's UV attractive in both g and lambda and we see it has the potential of Attracting the RG flow from the classical regime and provide the UV at completion of our trajectories at high energies Okay, how does this picture change one this once this operator is included so following the RG Perspective we added precisely this term to our truncation ansatz and we equipped it with a running coupling constant Then you can again introduce dimensionless quantities and start computing the beta functions In terms of structures, there are two surprises coming up actually So the first surprise was that once we include precisely this term It does not feed back into the flow of the Newton's constant and the cosmological constant So the beta functions for g and lambda are precisely the ones that we had before Why is this the case? It has to do with the geometric structure of the counter term and the way that we construct our beta function So this is the term that we added on the right hand side our Flow equation we have the second derivative of this term with respect to the fluctuation fields And if we work on background level we then evaluated this flow Setting the fluctuation fields to zero that means whatever I can do here in terms of taking two variations of the metric The result will always be proportional to one power of the wire curvature then it's By construction whatever index here. I construct the contraction of the wire curvature term vanishes So if I have such a term it cannot contribute to a structure that is linear in the Ritchie scalar So that tells me that the coupling constant sigma cannot enter into the beta functions in the Einstein-Hilbert sector Okay The second surprise is that we can write down the structure of the beta function For this new coupling constant It will be cubic in the new coupling sigma with the coefficients C0 to C3 being functions of g and lambda Again the argument follows from taking two variations of this. So again, we have the equation that There is at least one power of the background while tensor Coming and if I expand my flow equations in power of the curvature then I get vertices I take the vertex to the nth power and This expansion in terms of curvature will give rise to a term e to the power n multiplied by the nth power of my coupling constant and Down here. I get additional terms Which are lower power in the coupling constant Since I'm only interested in terms which are cubic in C bar I see that if I put this to 3 the series will start at Finish at sigma to the power of 3. So that explains this highest power here And from this lower power here as we get the terms in sigma squared sigma and the constant terms Okay, these are the structural insights now in order to understand what's going on with fixed points We have to understand what these coefficients C0 to C3 are And then Computer power came into the game. So we put the system onto a computer I have to thank Andrea Swift at this stage for providing the computational power for doing this computation and in the end The result took a rather simple form So these are the coefficients and the important takeaway message is that this coefficient C3 Is always is found to be non-zero then you see here you have a cubic equation in sigma and If you have a cubic equation this equation always have a has a real root So that means that as long as we have this coefficient C3 Bigger than zero Then there is an extension of the non-gaussian fixed point to the level of the go off and so not the counter So here are the numbers that we found so if we compute Analyze the beta functions. We have the Gaussian fixed point with canonical scaling dimensions And here's the position of the non-gaussian fixed point and it turns out that the new direction that is added is Actually irrelevant. So if we have This additional coupling added to the game that means we don't get an additional relevant parameter And this is in contrast to what you see in perturbation theory so The counter term does not increase the number of free couplings in our theory Then you can integrate the flow diagram that is depicted here And you can also check that the crossover from the non-gaussian fixed point to the Gaussian fixed point is actually intact So our go off and so not the extended fixed point still connects to a classical regime down here So this settles the question. I think in favor of asymptotic safety Okay new results So the motivation for looking into the effect of a causal structure is the following So so far we have done all our computations in the Euclidean setting However from experience, we don't live in a Euclidean world. So we experience that time passes also in my talk So how do we can can we include the time direction in our framework? and the basic idea is we don't want to encode our Decrease gravitational of decrease of freedom in terms of a covariant metric We want to resort to the ADM formalism So in this case what we do we take our space time and we put a fallation on our space time So there are spatial slices which come at equal time and space time is built up by a stack of these spatial slices Effective you have a preferred direction and you associate this preferred direction with time The decomposition of our metric to ADM variables that is well known So here we have the line element This can be written in terms of the covariant metric G mu nu or in terms of these ADM fields Which tell you how to go from one time slice to another and how you measure distance on the spatial slices and here is the Decomposition so instead of having one field we have a lapse shift vector and metric on a spatial slice and This decomposition is non-linear Okay, you decide for this set of variables Then the Einstein-Hilbert action that we had before Assumes is likely different form. So we still have Newton's constant cosmological constant But the curvature term splits up into an extrinsic and an intrinsic curvature Then you also notice that not all of your fields are dynamical so the lapse function and the shift vector hidden in here are actually Lagrange multipliers which Do not propagate a priori Okay for Computing the beta functions. It's convenient to specify a background And the idea is you can use a Friedmann-Roberts and Walker spacetime Then there's a canonical parametrization of your fluctuation fields So this is precisely the parametrization that is used by cosmologists If they want to study effects in the cosmic microwave background. So this is what we borrowed from them And then it turns out that if you start from this action There's Unique and canonical gauge fixing that you should come up with to complement this action of course these two functions are the two functions that you would immediately write down and You have to see where this thing comes from. So if we compute the second variation of the sky up here Here is the list in terms of component fields So then you see and you notice that not all of the fields acquire a typical dispersion relation, which is energy squared plus spatial momentum squared In fact, this will fail for most of the component fields. So if you look at the VV It doesn't work if you look at the EE it doesn't work and so on Moreover, you get square roots of the Laplacian, which you also don't like So what's the gauge fixing that I wrote down then actually does is It equips all these components fields by Propagators that are actually well defined of the form energy squared plus momentum squared Moreover, you see all the propagators come with a time direction and spatial derivatives So in this setting you are at a very good position to actually big rotate your theory to real time and then Run your flow equation Actually having a real time direction around So upshot we have a unique gauge fixing which leads to a well-defined Hessian for all the component fields That are sitting up here Okay Based on this you can run the usual procedure of constructing your beta functions and Determining the corresponding flow diagram and then it came to our surprise So we recover the fixed point that we have seen in asymptotic safety based on Covariant variables, but there is a new fixed point appearing up here Saying this fixed point D if you trace where this fixed point actually comes from it comes down here from the singularity So at lower dimension it splits up from the singular point and it moves up there This has the effect That in particular this sector if we start from this ag flow flow down We end up collectively in this endpoint C down here so in this case we have a Completion of the flow at low energies, which is provided by this particular point all the other things stayed as previously so while Adding the causal structure doesn't seem to affect the microscopic structure of our space time It might be of relevance if we'll ask questions about long-distance physics Okay, this is what I wanted to say about Bringing time into the game. So given the discussion that we had in parallel session. I wanted to make Two comments about unitarity So we set up a framework which allows us to precisely test this question So we started from Einstein Hilbert We added a single scalar field to the game and what we allow here is a momentum dependent structure function and in the end The structure of this function in terms of momentum Actually allows you to determine the decrease of freedom that are sitting in your theory So ideally you want to determine the form of this function at the fixed point So currently due to technical limitations. We cannot do the full functional flow of this So currently we are limited to approximating this fk to a polynomial And then you see that if you are at the level of the polynomials you run into a problem So if this Polynomial has more than one real root then you run into the problems that you encounter in Perturbative quantization. So that would link The theory to Otsukowski in stabilities This can be avoided if your function f star actually is the product of a p squared Times an analytic function, which is actually positive. So in this case your decrease of freedom are precisely one massless particle and Having this extra momentum Dependence will not introduce extra decrease of freedom So how far are we in the computation? So we are at the level of having the beta functions for a Piece p to the fourth term we integrated the better function. We saw that our Asymptotically safe fixed point still persists. It still has the same crossover behavior, but there are two additional fixed points Now what is remarkable of this diagram is if you are sitting at these UV fixed points You see that the mass of the additional decrease of freedom is shifted to infinity So despite working with a higher derivative theory, you don't get any extra decrease of freedom sitting up here However, if we trace the flow to the infrared we see that currently we cannot take Approach a region where the mass of this extra states Becomes infinite so we can make it arbitrary high, but not yet infinite. So that's the status here This brings me to the conclusions So in terms of analyzing fixed points, we are in good shape So we have seen fixed points which could provide the UV completion of gravity at transplanting scales They have a transparent connection to classical low-energy physics At the level where we could test it. They can extend to gravity meta systems And by using the ADM decomposition, we are now in the position of making real-time correlation functions and cosmological investigations based on the FHG Okay, this brings me to the outlook and the final announcement So we will have a road map workshop on precisely these questions to be held in the Netherlands in Leiden So this will be February next year and Announcement will follow over the asymptotic safety mailing list. So if you are not on this list in scribe Thank you


is offering to provide training for the trainers here to make sure that these telecenters are fully equipped to provide the facilities for all the community. Thank you very much.


The radical, fundamental principles of freedom, rational self-interest and individual rights. This is The Iran Book Show. All right, everybody. Welcome to Iran Book Show on this Friday, Friday, week from the beginning of Ocon. Hopefully, I will meet many of you, see many of you at Ocon. I'm looking forward to it. I fly in on Thursday. Opening reception for Ocon is on Friday, exactly a week from today. Should be a lot of fun. I think you can get my talk on Saturday, so a little bit of work still to do on that. All right, let's see. We've got a full new show today. Tomorrow we have our AMA. So if you're $25 or more, you can participate on a monthly basis. You can participate in the video by Zoom. If you haven't got a link, let us know. We'll provide you with a link. So the AMA is tomorrow at 3 p.m. east coast time. If you've got a question out of nowhere, if you want to participate, if you don't usually do shows live, but you want to ask a question live, please join us. Tomorrow AMA 3 o'clock. We'll have both live contributors and we'll take Super Chat. I'm still wondering about, I still want to do a member show, either Sunday or Monday. I'm curious about from some of the members out there, what, if you have a particular topic, what do you think about just doing something like on favorite TV shows and getting everybody to participate and talk about on the chat their favorite TV shows. So I'm thinking about something lighter, more, I don't know, more social, more fun rather than a, you know, another. Yeah, I know. I do a poll on Twitter, polls on Twitter. Who has time for this stuff? I don't have time for this stuff. Anyway, no, I don't have time for it. So, but, so I'll just pick something. If people want to suggest something or want to comment on my idea of favorite TV shows, then you can do so in the chat or send me an email or, but you're on it, you're on bookshow.com or any of the, all of them. All right, what else? What else? Oh, if you want to do a poll on Twitter and let me know what the results are. That'll work. Just tag me on Twitter on the poll that you do on Twitter. Yes. And then we're going to do seven deadly sins on Tuesday. So we'll kind of wrap up a Christianity theme before Ocon and after Ocon we'll move on to somebody else to pick on other people. But yeah, Tuesday we'll do seven deadly sins and the morality that's implied by it and contrast that with the objective of seven virtues. All right, let's jump in. So over the last couple of days, the Prime Minister of India has been visiting the United States. Modi has been here and has met with Biden and spoke to Congress and, you know, signed deals and cut deals and a bunch of different things. And it is a, you know, from every perspective, this is an important visit and important relationship. India is by population the largest country in the world. It has the largest population in the world. It has exceeded China. So, and it has a relatively relative to China, relative to the US, relative to much of the world. It has a young population. It also has a lot of upside. That is, it's still a very poor country, still poorer than China. So there's a lot of upside. There's still a lot of poor in China that have not been made more productive by, in a sense, bringing them to the cities or increasing infrastructure or giving them the tools to be significantly more productive. So it's an enormous amount of upside in India. India is also, you know, considered the democracy. How free India really is is a question. Modi has certainly made it in many ways, God's less free. Modi is responsible for a lot of kind of civil rights violations and individual rights violation and a clear kind of anti-Muslim, 15% of the population of India are Muslims, clear anti-Muslim agenda. But it's still a relatively, relatively free country. Modi has also increased, unfortunately, the kind of central planning, the role in the economy of the central government. So Modi is kind of a typical, I'd say, new right.   So there's certain typical in that. On the other hand, as I said, India is relatively free, certainly freer than China, which it is often compared to. And this is the importance of, I think, the relationship between the United States and India is the fact that India is positioning itself as a real alternative to China, both in a geopolitical sense of, you know, ultimately a military and economy that is significant of size, a geographic location in the south of Asia, along many of the world's most important trade routes going from the Middle East to Asia, then on potentially to the U.S. and to the Americas, or from Asia to Europe, all go through the Indian Ocean and through India. So India has a strategic, a very strategic location. India has also conflict with China. China and India, which I think in the 2000s, early 2000s, were viewed as a potential block, a potential alliance that could challenge the United States and could challenge the rest of the world, Europe. That block never really materialized. China and India have very different interests as governments and as... And there are real disputes, territorial disputes between China and India that once in a while turned bloody, where there's actually shooting between Indian forces and Chinese forces. Most of those are in the north, but China and India have grown further apart rather than together. And this is, of course, an opportunity for the United States to enter and have more influence in India and to counter the growth and the influence of China. I'll also mention that business, from a business perspective, business is trying to diversify away from China. There's a lot of worries about China, the crackdown by the Chinese authority on American businesses, the loss of appetite by many Americans to do business in China as China becomes more authoritarian, as China becomes more oppressive. While India, you could argue, is semi-free, China is not free at all and has become less free over the last 10 years, certainly over the last five years. And there is a significant push among business leaders in the United States and in the West to move away from China, and yet outsourcing is important, particularly a presence in Asia is important, cost of labor and skilled labor is important. India has a homegrown, highly educated population that knows English, that is trained in English, many, many engineers, and the idea is that a lot of production that happens in China will ultimately move to India. Whether that happens or quickly, that happens hard to tell. Finally, India and the United States are also working on significant military alliance. The United States, U.S. companies are going to be building some military hardware in India. One of the interesting things about India is India has been a steady buyer over the last, I don't know, 20, 30, 40, 50 years of Russian and before that Soviet military equipment. You would think, and I think this is absolutely true, that the one Ukraine has given India pause and the pause is that the Russian equipment sucks and, you know, seeing it in action, seeing it in a real war, opposite and confronted by Western equipment, U.S.-based made equipment, shows how pathetic that military equipment is, and I think this is going to have a lasting impact on Russia's military industry, military production industry, their ability to sell military equipment all over the world. I think a lot of people out there are going to hesitate and the only buyers they're going to have are countries that cannot buy from the West because the West embargoes them or won't sell it to them like Iran. But I really do think countries like India are thinking twice about whether they want to buy military equipment from Russia, given the quality that we have seen of that equipment. So one of the consequences of the war in Ukraine is going to be a decline in the use of Russian military equipment. So they're turning to the United States. We're trying to do the whole South Asia in 15 minutes or 20 minutes or whatever. But one of the challenges India has and one of the reasons India has been buying military equipment from Russia is that the United States has been selling military equipment kind of shockingly to India's enemy, a country that India's fought a war against, a country that India has territory disputes with, a country that is Islamist, that has a strong Islamic faction, that has many terrorist groups acting in it, that has worked against America's interests in Afghanistan and in the rest of Central Asia. And that is Pakistan. America continues to give Pakistan weapons. And that causes, I guess, India to hesitate when becoming friendlier with Pakistan, with the United States. So maybe this is a shift away from the suicidal policy of supporting Pakistan. The United States should have nothing to do with the Pakistani government. It should have nothing to do with providing them with weapons. Pakistan is, to some extent, an enemy of the United States, not a friend. India is much more likely to be a friend. India shares many of the same enemies as the United States, thus certainly within the world of Islam. This is why, by the way, India and Israel, over the last, I'd say, 10 years have gotten a lot closer, Israel sends, sells India much military equipment. As a consequence of that, closeness and friendship. Again, because India also faces a threat from jihadis and Islamic totalitarian. So that is, they share that with Israel. And I think they share that with the United States and it's time the United States recognized that. So I think this is a positive move. I think watching kind of the rights violations happening in China is something that's important for the United States to do. I think the U.S. will have hopefully leverage over India and trying to convince them to not move in that direction further and to have more respect for their own population. We will see. But as an alternative to China, as an opportunity to open up, this is going to be important. One other aspect of this that I almost forgot about but is important to note, which kind of contradicts all this in some ways, but this is the complexity of international relations, particularly the complexity of India. India is the great beneficiary right now, since the Korean War started, of the, in a sense, embargo and cap that was placed on oil prices from Russia. India is basically buying almost everything that Russia will produce in terms of oil. It is buying well over 50% of all the oil produced in Russia, at least of all the oil being transported by ship, which is a vast majority of that. India used to be a major importer of oil from the Middle East. It basically doesn't import very much oil from the Middle East at all. It now imports oil dramatically, predominantly from Russia. Therefore, it is a huge provider of revenue for the Russia war machine and it's violating kind of the embargo that the U.S. set. It isn't participating in that. It's working against, if you will, U.S. interests in that sense. But in India's favor, it is buying that oil at a discount. It's getting really, really good prices, which I think is helping the Indian economy and improving the Indian economy situation. So India is enormously benefiting from the fact that Russia has to sell its oil for cheap and that oil is flowing most into India. How much of that oil then gets repurposed and put into other ships and shipped to Western Europe maybe? Who knows? Who knows? And somebody's making a nice profit over the arbitrage between those two prices. Certainly at the beginning that was happening. I don't know if that's happening as much today. But, yes, India is certainly a beneficiary of Russia's problems but also Russia is a beneficiary by getting a lot of money.  And that funds their war machine to a larger extent. But of course, as I said, the United States pays Russia billion dollars a year for the uranium. So it's not like India is unique here. The United States emboggles them with one hand and buys stuff from them with the other hand. Foreign policy, the United States foreign policy is just a complete and utter, unmitigated disaster with no principles and no strategy and no consistency. All right, that took way too long. All right, we're a year away from, we're a year from the Dobs' decision where World War II's weight was overturned and the right to have an abortion was basically denied and where the issue of abortion was left completely to the states.  Most of the South is basically an area where you cannot have an abortion. It's basically almost completely restricted. Texas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Arkansas, Missouri, Mississippi, Alabama, Tennessee, Kentucky, West Virginia and then in the North, South Dakota, North Dakota and Idaho. These are our states where you pretty much cannot get an abortion. Some of the states have made it very difficult. Georgia and Arizona and Nebraska in particular. Other states that everybody thought would restrict abortions like Kansas have not, have restricted somewhat, but have left access to abortion for some women still intact, the same in Iowa and Indiana, Ohio and Pennsylvania. And then other states have made it, you know, still completely have no restrictions really on abortion. Oregon, California, Washington state, Maine and much of, you know, Massachusetts, Vermont and New Jersey. So, New York of course. So, you know, the country has become very bifurcated, very, very bifurcated about this. This of course has created a lot of stress and distress among women all over the U.S. but particularly in the states that have limited access to abortion. It's unclear whether this, all of this has actually resulted in fewer abortions. There have been 25,000 fewer legal abortions. It's not clear though how many illegal abortions are happening out there. Nobody, well they're illegal so there's no tracking mechanisms of it. What we do know is there's a massive shift on where the abortions are happening. There were 94, almost 94,000 fewer legal abortions in states that banned or severely restricted abortions and there was an increase of 70,000 basically legal abortions in states where abortions were being legal. So, the travel industry has been one of the beneficiaries of DOBS and it's just horrible now that women have to get on a plane or drive long distance and incur significant expenses to get something that I think is a right that they should have access to as a right in the land of the free and the home of the brave. The travel times to an abortion facility have increased threefold. The largest increases of course in the south, in Texas, particularly in places like Texas. You know, American Indians, Alaskan natives, black and Hispanic populations have experienced the largest increases in travel time to abortion facilities. You know, requests for medication to end pregnancies has increased significantly also in the 30 states where you can get those medications. Well actually, they've increased 42,000 in some states but they've increased across the board in all states. Physicians, fewer physicians now going into OBGYN so generally physicians are less interested in women's health it's just too complicated, too risky. They've heard too many stories, horror stories about doctors getting in trouble for doing abortions. Why bother when you can get into another field? So there's, you can expect, I definitely expect a rise while declining the number of doctors and a shortage in OBGYN generally which will hurt not only the ability of women to have abortions but also it will hurt the ability of women to actually go through pregnancies and have births and have healthy, all of that be done in a healthy way because OBGYN are crucial to all of that so you might see an increase in maternal mortality which would be tragic and horrible and sad and barbaric and primitive and all of that particularly in the states that abandon abortions and where I think OBGYN doctors are going to flee and going to leave. You know, the flip side of this is interesting and that is that support among Americans for abortion is growing steadily, has grown significantly since Dobbs. It is now true that 70% of Americans who are polled support abortion in the first three months with no limitations. That is the highest, probably it's ever been, certainly the highest it's been in the last 10 years but I think the highest it's ever been. 37% support abortions in the second trimester with no restrictions, again that's the highest it's ever been and the last three months, supporting abortions the last three months is now at 22%, again the highest it's ever been. So across all abortions in every phase of pregnancy the support for those abortions is now at record levels and that is again a backlash against Dobbs. We will see how it all plays out and if that holds over time but that is the only good news I could find in Dobbs' ruling. So yes, a sad one year anniversary. Quickly, we're getting older. We as the big we, not me because I'm not getting older but we are getting older, Americans are getting older dramatically, significantly older. The median age in the US, the median age is that age in which half of the population is older and half of the population is younger, is significantly older is now almost 40, so we have half the population basically under 40 and half the population over 40. Well it's not 40, it's 38.9, so it's almost 39. 39, that's of 2022. Just in 1980 the number was 30, so the US population is aged on average if you will by 10 years. This is a consequence of having fewer babies, this is a consequence of less migration, particularly younger migrants. I think a lot of the family unification is brought to the United States older migrants instead of focusing on young migrants and going into their peak productive years which would be a lot more productive, a lot more beneficial in every respect. So the United States is joining the rest of the world as being a country that's getting older significantly. On a state level the oldest, the highest median age is in Maine. Yeah, I mean young people don't want to live in Maine, it's cold, it's boring. 44.8, I also think that part of New England has some of the highest deaths of despair in the country, Maine, Vermont, I think have really high, I mean it's a beautiful country but it's also dark and gray and yeah. 44.8, guess which state has the lowest median age? Almost at the same level as the United States had in 1980. What would you say the youngest state in the country is? This shouldn't be that hard if you understand who has lots of babies. If you know who has lots of babies you should be able to tell which state has the youngest. No, Texas, God no. Yeah, Ian's got it. Utah, of course Utah. I mean it's got to be the Mormons. They still have eight, nine kids. I mean they still have a lot of kids. That's from each wife. I'm kidding. So yes, Utah has, the median age in Utah is 31.9. I mean the fact is that even in Utah that number is going up. That is, even in Utah they're having fewer babies. So about a third of all states have a median age over 40 years. Seven counties in the US have a median age over 60. I wonder how many of those counties in Florida. This news story doesn't have that so I don't know. All right. So finally, let's pull out this one last story. Canada just passed Bill C18. It is a law that mandates that tech companies pay content fees to domestic media outlets if they link two articles in those media outlets. In response, meta, Facebook in other words, Facebook is basically going to end the ability to link to Canadian media. So you won't be able to link to Canadian media stories, at least in Canada. I don't know if in the US you can still link to Canadian media, but you won't be able to link to Canada. California is thinking about passing a similar bill and Facebook has announced that if California passes that bill, Californians will no longer be able to link to local California media anymore. This is interesting. We'll see how this all plays out. Australia passed a law like this last year. Facebook initially said it would not link to any newspaper. It blocked that. It blocked users from seeing or sharing news content on Facebook. And within about a week, Facebook relented. They went back on them because they didn't want to pay or they hadn't arranged contracts. They relented. The Australian government changed the law and gave Facebook time to negotiate with media outlets the fee, the rate. And I think today Facebook does pay local media outlets in Australia, but only after they've had time to negotiate it, negotiate those rates. It's hard to tell here what the right thing to do, but you'd think that the media outlets would find a way to negotiate a rate and get media. And there's a whole with AI and everything. There's a whole realignment that's going to happen in the tech industry around the ability to use their content without paying for it. And I think tech AI is going to have to start paying for media in one way or another. And it's going to be interesting how all this plays out. But we will see. We will hear in the Iran Book Show. We will keep track of that story and see. But if suddenly you can't link to certain stories on Facebook, now you know why. All right. I wanted to spend three minutes, five minutes, just saying something that's not very newsy and really demands a bigger show. And I'll devote a larger show to it. And that is, but it comes out of some aspects of the submarine story or the submersible. I keep being told it's not a submarine. It's a submersible. I don't know the difference. I don't really care that much. Submarine submersible. So be it. And that is that so many people not only are saying things like they deserved it because they were rich to have died, or they should have never been allowed to go into this because it was a dinky submersible. But people are saying, in a sense, people should not be allowed to take risks. People should not be allowed to take risks. Or it's evil and irrational so people take risks. And then some of them take the next step. And therefore they deserve to suffer the consequences, which I think is horrific. But this is one of the biggest problems in our society. One of the biggest problems in our society is our attitude towards risk. We cannot live without taking risk. We cannot thrive without taking risk. We cannot have fun, enjoy life, flourish, succeed, thrive without taking risk. Whether it's financial risk or even existential risk of living. And this is also important for the AI debate. Risk is part of life. We want to understand it. We want to be rational about evaluating it. We want to be aware of the risks we're taking and how much we're willing to take. Because our life without risk is death. There is no such thing. And yet we have created a regulatory state. We have created a mentality. And part of this is how we treat young people and children and particularly boys. We've created a childhood where we're denying people the ability to take on risk. And therefore we're denying the ability of people to thrive and move their life forward. Now I don't understand why somebody would want to go into a metal tube and go three kilometers under the water. I mean, I can't even contemplate that. I mean scuba diving, I guess. Now I get that seeing the Titanic under the water would be super cool. Not in my risk-reward category doesn't even come close. But for some people it does. Some people are worth, you know, it's for them worth taking that risk. That's true of people who skydive, which is not particularly risky but I would never do. Rock climbing, which I don't know what the risk factor is but it looks super scary. Flying a rocket into space or into semi-space or whatever they call it. I mean, or taking a quote untested vaccine. Like, I would have taken the vaccine in August COVID-19. That's how much trust I have in biotech. And I figured the risk was small, young, healthy. Certainly if I was 75, 85, I would have jumped to take the vaccine for COVID vaccine in August of 2020. But no, I mean, what's particularly insane right now is that people who used to think we don't need an FDA are now saying, oh, the FDA approved the COVID vaccine too soon. Really? With no FDA, we would have had a right to try and you could have signed a disclaimer and signed a waiver and you could have taken the vaccine much earlier in a free market without an FDA. I mean, the precautionary principle, the environmental movement, the regulatory thing about you can't build this, you can't make that, you can't do this because it's risky. The nuclear power, the fact that we don't have nuclear power. All of these are consequence of society's negative attitude towards risk and their negative attitude towards risk has come across in spades over the submarine issue. People should be free to take risks with their own lives.  I mean, this submersible, I mean, the owner of the company was in it. I would consider that. I mean, I always think when I fly in a plane and I think bad thoughts about flying in a plane, oh, the pilot doesn't want to die, right? So the pilot's going to do a good job. He's not because he doesn't want to die. Right here, the owner of the thing was piloting it and it still imploded and killed them all. I mean, at least they died probably fast and they didn't have to suffer through the slow torture of dying slowly from suffocation. So this issue of risk tolerance, we've got to allow people to take risks, experiment, push the envelope. That's how civilization advances. And yes, civilization doesn't advance by somebody climbing the Everest. But it's that mentality of somebody willing to try to climb Everest and go for it. It's that mentality towards life, of living life to the fullest in a sense, if those are your values. Now again, there are irrational risks that we don't want people to take. But it's their responsibility. If we start capping it, restricting it, limiting it, we're going to live in a, not a stagnating, a declining, a declining civilization. We're going to end civilization. Civilization is built on the freedom of individuals to take on risk. Yeah, we can, we can judge certain of those risks as irrational.  All right, that was my spiel. And I will, I need to do a longer show on that because there's a lot of issues that that brings up. All right, we are only about a third of the way to our $250 goal. So if you, if you want to ask questions and if you have, and if you want to support the show, please do so. The shows have a, they have a target, a fundraising target of 250 to keep them going and to keep them funded. All right, let's just jump in. And you can also use a sticker. 60 people are watching live right now. So $3 from everybody live right now would get us to our target. So if we get 60 people to do $33, we're cool. All right, Michael says, while I reject the libertarian movement, you noticed 10, 15 years ago, no one knew what a libertarian was. Now that concept of more individual freedom and autonomy concept is more mainstream. There are more judges who are influenced by this orientation. Well, I don't agree with you on the 10, 15 years ago. I mean, I was active 10, 15 years ago. And if anything, I think, you know, certainly 10 years ago, the environment, the libertarian movement was even bigger than it is, or not bigger, more visible than it is today. It had real tentacles into the Republican Party. It had real influence on people, you know, the Tea Party and people who sought power, sought office were very influenced by libertarian thinkers and their economic policies in particular. You know, they really influenced the Republican Party. I think that influence has been mitigated. It's much lower today than it was back then.  But you know, and one of their great successes maybe is the legalization of Moana, one of the reasons I think they succeeded theirs because they aligned themselves with the left in succeeding. They have not really succeeded anything by aligning themselves with the right. That has not led to any increase in freedom anyway, even though libertarians have tried that and are still trying it. There are more judges. That is going to change because as I've told you, the new generation of fed socks is much more interested in common good conservatism. Then in the old style free market kind of conservatism that was influenced by libertarian thinkers. But so yes, as certain judges were, I don't know if that will continue sadly. So I think there were more influential, 10 years ago than it are today. Today the new right has become much more influential and the new right basically wants to shut out the free market libertarian types from debate, from discussion, and they kick them out. All right.  Thoughts. Yeah, I mean I think those useless kind of comparisons because at the end of the day both should be illegal, both are clearly violation of rights, which one is worse, is the adult living up to their potential, not living, I mean, when she started getting into those kind of descriptions, then I think it's very dangerous. I would say that killing an individuated human being is wrong. Period. No matter what age. And it is murder and it should be illegal. And I don't think we should rate it to scale it. Andrew says, you've covered this trend for a long time, but with the chips and electric car industries, the mercantilism of the U.S. on both left and right has become very apparent. Yes. And I think that, I mean, there's always been a tendency towards mercantilism in the United States. It's always been. Even Reagan, back to Reagan and the restrictions of Japanese imports of cars and chips and other things. There's this tendency to satisfy a pressure group that's pushing for some restriction on trade has always been there. Oscar, thank you. Really appreciate the $20. Really appreciate that. It's always been there. But it intensified with Trump. Trump gave it legitimacy in a way that it never had before. And it's really accelerated under Trump. All right. Let's go back to L. Is it harder for companies to compete in a free market in their country if a competitor is heavily subsidized in another country? Could tariffs be a way to mitigate the effect of subsidies in foreign countries? It is harder. It is harder. But you don't mitigate an evil with another evil. You cannot mitigate it with subsidies. The fact is that some people are going to go out of business because in other countries stuff is subsidized. Overall, your country, you know, the country that is importing the stuff is overall benefiting from that fact. A particular manufacturer might suffer from it. Overall it's benefiting because we're buying stuff from other countries cheap at the expense of other people's taxpayers. That money gets, you know, the savings get allocated into other industries and other productions in our home country. It is never, you don't, when other countries shoot themselves in the foot, which means subsidizing their own industries, the answer to that can never be shoot yourself in the knees by giving subsidies yourself to your countries. And there's no end. You subsidize the industry to compensate for their subsidies. So they increase the subsidies. So you increase the subsidies. So they nationalize the companies. So you nationalize the company. There's no reason to violate individual rights which a subsidy is in, let's say, the United States just because the Chinese are violating individual rights in China. We don't start camps for people we don't like in America because China is starting caps. The same thing appears in economics. We're not violating the rights of their own citizens in economics by having tariffs, subsidies, whatever. We don't violate our rights by doing the same thing. I talked a lot about this when I talked about tariffs and Trump in the 2017, 18, 19 period when Trump was partisan. I did a lot of shows on tariffs and tariffs for countries that are unfree that are supporting their own industries. Tons and tons of shows on that. I talked a lot on YouTube. By the way, we're exactly halfway. If somebody wants to come in and do $100, we'd almost be there. Short of that, it's going to be hard to reach the goal today. All right, Wesley says we only got two questions. Pro-CDC abortion restrictions have not led to any increase in births. Does that surprise you? No, because I think you're getting one illegal abortions and I think two people traveling to places where they can get abortions. And the other aspect of this is generally the trend has been fewer births. But it's tragic that we're making it more difficult, more dangerous, and more expensive for women to get abortions. Okay, last question unless somebody comes in. Michael says I'm skeptical. Altruism can really go all the way in America. Too many egoist roadblocks. Maybe not all the way, but I think it'd go a long way, unfortunately. A long way, unfortunately. It has a lot of roadblocks, but we better start reversing those roadblocks and getting, in a sense, and going not on the defense, but on the offense with an alternative to altruism. We better start making progress on that. Otherwise, I don't see how you stop altruism from ultimately leading to some kind of authoritarianism in this country. All right, everybody, thank you. Really appreciate the support. And thank you to all the superchatters. Thank you for the value for value. Those of you who'd like to support who are not listening live, you can do so on, thank you Laboratory L, who just added $10. You can do so on your own bookshow.com. You can also do it on Patreon. Yeah, it would be great if we saw a significant increase in people on the monthly contributions on Patreon and subscribe star and your on bookshow.com slash support, which is basically PayPal. Thank you again to the superchatters, both the people who asked questions and the people who did stickers, and I will see you all tomorrow at 3 p.m. for the Ask Me Anything section. Hopefully you have some questions. Yeah. All right. See you tomorrow at 3 p.m. East Coast time.


So we're here with Playtronica and who are you? I'm Sasha, I'm the founder of Playtronica and we're producing these devices which can turn a human touch into sound. So here you can choose the scale and the tone of the sound that you want to produce and you can use any synthesizer or software to make sounds. And together with some other people you can jam and make music. So we're using the field of electricity through the body? Using resistance. So we're just changing the resistance when we're pushing this fiber. Is this the same thing here? Yes, it's a conductive rubber. We have to say that these are not our materials of course. We manufacture the boards and we create the experience around them like we do it today here. But that's part of the reason why we are at ID Tech X to actually wander around and meet with people who create these materials, get the samples, play with them, create something new and use them with another bottle. Yeah, we have more stuff here. What does this one do? This one also works with conductivity and it turns... I will take volume. So we use any conductive material to turn it into a music instrument. We usually play on vegetables but you can also... We do it on vegetables? Yeah, you can play on the cat, you can play on the spoon. You can play on the cat? You can play on anything that is conductive. Even humans. For example, if you touch this and then I play on your... No, I'm not conductive. Yeah, you're just touching this one. Alright, so where are you based? We're based in Paris and in Moscow. We have two offices. And do you perform? Yes, we do. And you have performers? Yes, we have DJs, musicians, they play on vegetables, they play on... I don't know, many things. So this is like perfect for the new vegan culture, right? Right, exactly. After each performance we make a really nice dinner and everybody is filled with music. It's really energizing. Nice. So people can find this on your website? Right, exactly. If you go to Platonica you can buy it for 75 euros. Which one? This board. Like this? Yes. Same price. But this is completely new. What's it called? The Touch Me board? The Touch Me board.


Boundaries is such an important thing for mental and emotional and relational health. A boundary is a place where I can love you and me simultaneously. Where I can be safe inside my boundary to love you as much as I can and able to without betraying myself and letting your life and your energy and your agenda overrun my boundaries. A boundary protects you. It's not about controlling them. Though they will feel your boundary is about controlling them. Never adjust your boundaries because of someone's emotional reaction to your saying no.


thank you it's so cute hi guys welcome to a new vlog today's video is going to be going to the louis viton store and buying a louis viton never full from the louis viton store crossing my fingers they have the bag um and stock i have a feeling they do don't know um but i do know that sometimes they some of this stuff so i'm wearing my little high-waisted skirt got my other louis viton bag and then my little mustard color shirt sherry over here's there on her black and white i am today wearing this special necklace i love this necklace and then the rest everything is like black this is all black and white we're off off in a way i'm so excited most people make this disclaimer of like i'm not trying to brag or whatever and i'm really not it's just this is just like a luxury thing that i like so i've saved up money for this it's not like this is going to take my whole bank account and i don't know like i've just kind of budgeted in a sense for this and i only have one other one i did end up selling my other louis viton bag so that is going to help pay for this one so it's not like i'm just sending i did sell something to get this bag so i just want to make that like disclaimer um i did end up selling my other bag and this is going to help pay for this one that i'm going to get um and i'm filming on my phone today because i don't want them to be like wise girl have a camera that is why we're on the phone today right sherry i'm ready let's go okay so we have made it to blooming dales and i can barely see anything because it's super bright out but we're ready i'm so excited guys all right there it is i'm so excited we're gonna go to the bathroom first though right sherry uh i mean that must be like a men's one why is there like two oh man oh my gosh that's exactly the one i want and you said you had only one i do this is the last one in the rose ballerina okay sold like i you have the pouch right the pouch comes in it i've been watching so many videos on this bag beautiful okay so lucy the lady helping me she was like oh you should try it on and stuff so there's this way you can wear it and she's getting us water right now i was hoping that they would ask us like look at how cute this is she actually sensed the sides but you can wear it like this and then the inside of the bag looks like so the pink interior hold on i'm like struggling here how does it look on me sherry i'm gonna take a little picture real quick okay so there's my bag the lady's been talking to me um all this time and everything it's so pretty in here sorry i'm not getting a lot of fish all right guys so i got my receipt this is the girl who helped me and my bank accounts looking sad but that's okay that's what credit cards are for right thank you you're very welcome it's beautiful thank you so much absolutely it's my pleasure i'm so glad okay so i don't know if i vlogged this but we also got bottles of water at the louis baton store um i said she was getting us water but i don't know if i showed it in the vlog now we're just walking around the mall because it's not every day that you get to walk around with a louis baton bag so yeah i just like flip the camera around because i can't do it while it's recording and we went to the ermez store too because we just got an ermez in this place and there was some really nice stuff there i don't know what else i'm gonna have video i'll probably include the unboxing in this video um just because unboxings don't really take that long like it's only like one bag that i'm like gonna unbox or whatever so i'll do that when i get home we are just walking around probably gonna go to like macy's or something right okay so we got some starbucks because sherry was really thirsty and needed something with ice so she got a vanilla green tea frappuccino and i got uh this one it's my chai tea latte with two pumps of pumpkin spice okay so we were going to go to um the ikea store but we decided not to because we don't want to leave this thing in the car because it's kind of asking someone hey break in so we can steal it so we're gonna go home i'm gonna unbox if you guys and kind of tell you why i chose the one i got and kind of like just talk through because unboxings don't take a long time and i just want to make this video a little longer probably um to give it a little bit more substance so yeah we're just gonna head home sherry's chowing down green tea frappuccino share your thoughts on this experience it was very fun i love watching alex get what she wants she worked hard telling sherry that i was nervous sorry the air's on i know it's probably loud no it's all right i'm hot i was just apologizing because it's probably in the video i was just like really nervous and excited that i had like this like sweat on me okay so i'm just gonna keep filming on my phone just so everything's pretty consistent with this video and it's not like weird so i hope that's okay we're gonna unbox this beautiful beautiful bag let's just get started all right so this is what the box looks like beautifully packaged now i could untie this bow oh look how pretty it is but i don't really want to so i think i'm gonna slide it off actually no i'm just gonna untie it it's fine because there's this other thing that came in the box that came on the ribbon i don't know really what this is oh look it's like a little envelope oh it's sealed shut oh i think this is if it's a gift it's because it's like a blank card okay so now i'm gonna slide this off this is the magnet box oh that's cool mother's in the background but here it is louis Vuitton dust bag oh my gosh this is like a huge box okay i'm gonna take it out now and i think what you can do with this is like i don't know i thought you could like flatten it see a little tab at the back see a little blue tab at the back yeah if you pull that oh yeah i don't want to do that i just want to keep kind of the box in fact it's very cool you can make it flat somehow okay but i'm too nervous i don't want to like damage the box okay here it is here's the grammar feel guys we've been waiting for this thing for so long i'm just so excited about it here is the straps with a little pushet as you guys saw when she was showing me oh my gosh it's so beautiful they have different colors of the insides uh the inside i mean you have a pink color are there different colors yeah there's red and i think it was on the shelf there's one on the shelf with red i just wonder if that was the same thing beautiful like everything about it is just awesome and like the way it fits on me right now i'm going to put the little bag organizer in it so you guys can see that i'll do a whole what's in my bag so i'm not gonna go too in-depth on the bag organizer and like what's in the bag look how cute the pushet is oh my gosh so adorable like i will definitely be like using this as like a wristlet and stuff like everyone says the zipper is perfect easy to open and close so there's the inside it has like a little pouch there and then the main pouch like compartment thing i'm so thrilled so i'm gonna go get the bag organizer so this is the bag organizer i have this is pretty much what i have in it so far don't have a lot of stuff but um i'll link this down below if you guys want it um it's not necessarily only meant for like louis baton bags or whatever it's kind of made for the neverfull but you could stuff this in any other bag i put this in my kate spade kennedy in the park sophie tote it would fit perfect and you could totally use it like that too i hope it doesn't like make the bag too like structured because i kind of like how the neverfull looks kind of like oh it doesn't change the shape that much thank goodness because i was like nervous i didn't want to have the bag like sent up the sides kind of a little bit my organizer's not that stuffed so i could so you could i'm not planning on it right now but yeah this is what my bag looks like on the inside now now that the organizer's in there so it's a lot more organized it's not so much of a bucket bag i got a bag organizer number one because my other neverfull would get like my tiny one would get kind of like unorganized and stuff and i wanted to protect the inside of this because this rose ballerine color is very like dainty and stuff and i don't want it to get too too messed up on the inside so i'm gonna go into why i picked this bag and not one of the other prints so i picked this design because number one color transfer this bag as you guys know and i am obsessed with and love so much like you guys don't understand i hunted for this i paid way too much money for this small of a bag they're still really hard to find um but this blue skirt i'm wearing you see this this whole backside turned blue i cannot have a tote and have it change colors on me um when i'm carrying it so that's number one number two this vichetta strap just recently i got caught out in the rain i cannot have this get wet or else there's gonna be like a bunch of marks on it um i did and have used it when it was sprinkling i knew that was gonna come with the territory when i bought this bag um it does have some spots on it but you have to be a little bit more careful with it with this treated leather kind of stiff and whatever but you can go out in the rain with it and i'm about that life especially when i'm carrying this like to and from work it's always raining here in florida so i definitely need something that i can be kind of hard on when i say that it doesn't mean like i'm not gonna take care of it and not gonna like you know hurt it but i just don't want to be like babying something and like i say i always buy i buy a bag to use it i'm not gonna like keep it in its box um for the entire duration of my owning it i'm gonna use it i'm gonna use it as much as i can and like get you know wear and tear i understand that but i just wanted one that didn't have to like baby and coddle and make sure that the straps like stayed even um that's another reason why i sold my other one so i really liked this print because of all those factors and the inside pink is one of my favorite colors obviously so i'm just like brown and pink that's just the way to go and my bag organizer matches surprisingly really really well so um i do know that there's some bag organizers that don't look the same color as the rose ballerine but this one does so i am pleasantly surprised before i end this i also wanted to show you guys if a macbook would fit in here this is a 13 inch and it fits comfortably in here the bag organizer kind of makes it look funky but actually it fits in the bag organizer if you guys can see so my computer can fit in here it makes it really heavy oh my gosh but fun fact this thing can hold 200 pounds i know that's kind of like a random fact but i was watching videos about this bag and um it can hold a lot so i just wanted to show you guys that it can in fact fit a macbook pro so anyway that is going to be it for my Louis Vuitton experience slash buying something in store i really hope you guys enjoyed this video i was so excited to film it and i couldn't thank you enough for watching me and supporting me on this journey because um you guys kind of actually helped me buy this bag in a way i saved up a lot um from my job and like somewhat youtube i do a lot of investing in my own channel like with giveaways and stuff so if you are new here make sure to hit that subscribe button and turn on the bell um because i might be having some giveaways in the future that i'm super excited about but anyway i'm gonna stop rambling now and i'll see you guys in my next video bye


Hello, everyone. I am here alongside Riley Kimball. First, Riley, your overall thoughts on the match. I thought we played really well, especially the second game. The first game, it almost was we played down to their level. But I thought this game, we definitely stepped up. We definitely pushed through a lot faster and we took care of business. And in this second match against Altoona, you guys limited them to nine points. What roles did you're both often, both offense and defense play in the first set? No, yeah. Our offense was just unstoppable. They were getting every ball. They were taking advantage of every swing that we got. Defense, same way. They weren't letting a ball drop. All effort was on the court, and that's something we like to see, especially going into some of our bigger matches this week, like York. And lastly, you spoke about York on Wednesday. What do you expect from them? Definitely going to be a tough game. It's nice that we have them home this year. Last year, we played there. It was a good game. We won. So hopefully we can take this win streak and go into that game. Awesome. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you.


Okay, thank you everyone for staying that long during this session in the last one of the conference and the last one in presenting. This is an honor to present to you these results. This is a very ambitious project and it's the first time that has an economic audience of economists and people interested in development mainly. It's also joint work with people in the University of Adriana here in Bogota, Angela Fonseca is here and Santiago and Andres from Javediana and Emil Bruno who was based at the University of Pennsylvania and passed two years after tomorrow, right. So the main, well we have been during these days, these couple of days in the conference, the experts, I mean our senior economists have mentioned the word convincing people, motivating people as crucial actually key for the solution of reducing inequality, how to promote behavior and in particular we focused with this project. We started in 2019 to draft and the design for this project motivated by the fact that this motivation or this convincing people was related to increasing prosociality and there is already literature that shows how in theory is very beneficial for especially in the global south when we have plenty of situations of incomplete contracts and also there is also key for development. We have already very well documented evidence on how prosociality is very important and in particular there is also now a growing literature on empathy and how empathy is key to increase prosociality. Here by prosociality I mean this willingness to sacrifice some of your well-being not only to improve others but also yours, maybe a common good, it could be that too. So in a way when we're thinking about reducing inequality we're asking people to be prosocial, sacrifice a bit of their well-being in order to improve will be enough others for the whole society as well being in general. So one example of the of how relevant is empathy and prosociality is intergroup conflict and what we have actually is very descriptive experimental evidence on it unfortunately well or fortunately we have social psychology alone in terms of measuring prosociality in intergroup conflict. We also have prosociality alone towards migrants in Europe and there is evidence on that and prosociality within groups in ex combatants here in Colombia and in Afghanistan but in particular for this dimension of prosociality that I want to focus on this presentation today that is preference for the distribution. We have the classic, the literature built on the classic determinants of these preferences measured by surveys only and these are position income, the position in the ladder as very important is the determinants ideology and the presence of the outgroup members in active presence in the community. However, now recently for moving towards measuring perceptions and attitudes towards how welcoming are the in-group members towards the outgroup members. There is a nice initiative by the United Nations recent and they just one month ago they launched the results for a large study in Latin America capturing perceptions and attitudes towards the willingness to receive openly or integration by outgroup members. Unfortunately these measures are not very well, they don't produce what we want in terms of the results and it has to do with the ability to capture these perceptions or attitudes and also there is no relation in terms of how these perceptions are related towards other kinds of prosociality like trust or generosity which is actually very important when we're talking about preference for redistribution. So one particular case in terms of what the literature shows is that despite of what the efforts by governments and other organizations to implement interventions that reduce exclusion and promotes integration there is no causal evidence on which interventions work and there is not much actually very very little and there is some in terms of media interventions, media interventions capturing information about the outgroup members hoping that when the in-group members are informed about the characteristics of the outgroup members of the point in common or the willingness of these outgroup members to integrate there will be an improvement in terms of prosociality but it's not the case necessarily and there is effective evidence on that but unfortunately it's not in the medium term it's not permanent so we need something that will change this structural change that everyone is talking about in terms of motivating or convincing people but we want them convinced for a long time we don't want them to change their mind in the medium term. So what we have also is mixed results in terms of casual evidence and there are several cases that I will describe to you because it's not a it's not a complete nice picture but it's still the efforts of many academics that are trying to fill the gap in terms of in terms of measurement and finding the cause of relationships so we have reconciliation in Rwanda information information in the intervention and prosociality towards Germany refugees in Germany we also have labels forcing interaction like this contact with the outgroup members and empathy in Israel and Palestine and media interventions towards XFARC which actually was very effective and is part of this project and I will explain that later and role models and information with migrants in Latin America with mixed results and not very not very not convincing totally. So what we have here is a multi-disciplinary approach to how to design an intervention that will work always but we well I will show you that it actually works and is the mechanism so we went a step back what is the mechanism we want to use to improve empathy and prosociality and what we do is to stand on the shoulders of the large evidence in social psychology on how to tangle empathy. So empathy is I mean it's still I mean it's still recently researched in economics and used in economics for designing behavioral informed interventions but still economies we fail in terms of what are the structural theoretical dimensions of empathy that we need to tackle and empathy is not emotions so the even as economies we may we can easily upset social psychologists with the way you approach to empathy. So what we do is just let's talk to the social psychologists and they will tell us what do we have here in order to obtain a very well-informed socially a psychological informed intervention tailor-made design that means that is for the particular group for the particular community that will work and it will work in the sense that we use the same the dimensions that we that they already know that are the dimensions that work and that those dimensions are for this hard for some of you will be new and the humanization prejudice warmth and that is actually the closest that we have to emotions in psychology and social psychology um malleability uh blame and and so on and if we have time it will explain that to you but the this intervention in particular tackle three three main dimensions which are prejudice the humanization unwillingness to integrate by the in-group members or malleability also the ability to integrate if I'm an in-group member and I see that um that or perceive that this group is not actually able to integrate I will reject integration so that's why this is very important in psychology we also well with this a mechanism that we know this informed intervention aims to improve empathy and we are sure that it will it does what we want to see is is actually improves prosociality and also preferences for redistribution there are not the the aim of the psychologists so that's why we work together our intervention is a five-minute mid-intervention that is it's made from interviews we conducted with XFARC in Colombia and with Venezuelan migrants and it has the same structure the videos the two videos or there are two different videos we use the same producer the film producer the paper with XFARC is already published in nature so we're in a safe ground in terms of the results are very consolidated there for ex-combatants but not for migrants and it follows the same structure in the sense of the dimensions that I just meant just mentions but also um how is crafted for the video of the ex-combatants for in the study nature they compete the the researchers put different kinds of videos with different structures to compete so we have a long work behind in terms of what was the best intervention to use for the case of the migrants we played safe using the same structure that means the same number of Venezuelan migrants interviewed the same numbers of Colombian civilians that were interviewed though also men women the number of men and women in the video the order how what was the message conveyed by each one of the answers in the characters interviewed and also authorities interviewed that were worked directly with the with the outgroup members in this case the Venezuelans and I think that's in general the the structure we also do it well we do that and check pro-sociality with a lab in the field experiment and also social biases this is one of the another contribution because we have a link with neuroscience how we can we guarantee that we have medium term results if we don't have money to conduct the medium term evaluation for this and it turns out that we can use movement tracking to have to capture the cognitive processing of the decisions that the participants make that means that if the I find changes in the movement tracking of their decisions there that is already a signal given the evidence in neuroscience that there are some processes behind that doesn't have to do with emotions and they don't also have to do with immediate responses but actually cognitive and more stable methods of processing in our brains which is optimistic and our specific way of looking at this intervention so what is that is significance of this research well yesterday was very well explained how critical is the situation in Colombia about the migrant the migrants crisis and also well we have in the internally displaced people and the XFARC we also have well I had updated the data for the for actually compared to what we saw before yesterday which is even more alarming to the numbers that were shown yesterday so I won't go through that well what I could say is for example the IDPs the internally displaced people is critical in Colombia we're talking about a million that cumulative from 1985 so it's been there all the time in my in my lifetime for example and for this combatants despite that they are not much only 27,000 have completed their integration process so it's a still a critical topic now and in terms of what we do for the contribution we test this intervention using a representative sample of Colombians and we use a internally displaced people and the poor as control group comparison groups also you had the pool and a post game survey on social psychology measures to guarantee that actually the video worked in terms of what we knew already that it was supposed to work in social psychology and measures on pro-sociality using games or behavioral incentivized measures of pro-sociality like trust generosity and preferences for the distribution so not service and we find an effect a positive effect on all of them not only empathy as each we should because that's the mechanism but also pro-sociality and the cognitive process that was behind the movement tracking that we captured with the movement of the our thing of the finger of the participant when the participant was making the decisions and they won't talk much more about this here finally we also connected this data with this world value survey waves in Colombia that have plenty of information that we want to exploit for later and COVID perceptions so it's a very complete data set these are our treatments so we have the control no video this is another one passive control this is very important because mainly most of the interventions in economics don't have a passive video and that's very critical for social psychologists when they try to compare the results so we actually use this and this is a video that talks about the tourist attraction in Colombia that is a coffee region is very special and it was used for the paper publishing nature so we also play safe there we have the video with x combatants that is the same one used in the paper before in the paper that is published already and we also use them but in this paper they don't have they don't have behavioral measures that's part of the contribution to and also with migrants that is a video that we actually produced I won't show the video because we don't have time and this is our main tool hypothesis that I just mentioned in the preview of the results so these are the findings and it's my last and best slide and I would hope to have spent some time here we find not only in terms of pro-sociality for generosity that is a dictator game we have an 11 an increased in all the groups with this is very interesting because the exposure to the video of the migrants it was directed to improve empathy towards migrants only but it turns out that migrants are most of them and in the interview they are the poor and they are also very close to very similar to us they're also displaced so what actually find is that all these effects are significant and rob us to manage rob us this checks that we have already performed these and these are percentages in terms of what the the changes in the in the impact that they have but it's mainly between point three and point six standard deviations for all the cases which is a sizable effect for experimental measures so we have 11 percent for the poor seven percent for internal displaced for ex combatants 24 percent so actually participants gave more to the ex combatants when they saw the video the migrants video and for the venezuelans migrants and the 42 percent in terms of trust it also was an increase in all the groups for the slower than generosity but is he but is him it's very important trust because in this sense the person that sends that sense the money is weighing some money back so it's not only in terms of trust but transworthiness and risk preferences so it gave us also in some information about that in terms to these attitudes towards migrants so we have 26 percent of increase preference for redistribution in case of merit because we have two treatments when it was unlawfully patricio explained what does meant movement to be and it's the same design just that we didn't change the cost it was a fixed cost that was zero so there was no cost for the expectator to allocate the money between no it was there was a quantity between zero and five tokens that decided to reallocate from one to another so in the case when they they want the another one which was for example in case of many that is a venezuelan that didn't get them that did the job but didn't get the salary so we have a change with this a very small change which is interesting is because both in this case it was poor and it's so there was some relocation this is a this is internal validity for those for the experimentalist this is a lovely result having a one percent change for the control group but in this case for venezuelans was 17 percent only for venezuelans when it was with the the migrants period and with luck it was venezuelans are also and also ex-combatants for luck it was it was a random assignation of the payment so in the case of luck well they redistribute more which is consistent and we also have empirical expectations in terms of generosity this is important because we this is this informs us about social norms and for what we call first-order beliefs in these cases empirical expectations are the first step to change when we want to have a structural cultural change and that is in generosity and trust in general was 14 and 10 percent for cognitive biases we the velocity improved so that means that actually it's wrong it's decreased that means that I have to think better so when they with the video the person took the velocity was lower so the finger took more longer that means that my cognitive process behind was taking more time and I mean was I was thinking better if I should help the migrant or not which is very important because when I'm fed of xenophobic narrow xenophobic run narrative I just don't think and empathy and I won't show it here unfortunately we had the same results and support for inclusive policies so just to close I will this is a the main result for the migrants video which was the is a novelty we confirm the results when we had the expert video with the paper of nature but also including the prosociality measures is this is basically the same trust but it trust increases only for and for ex combatants and we have also increasing the in preferences for the distribution confirming what it was found in the previous paper by the psychologist this is I will keep this because this was what patricio helped me to explain and just to close and we have lessons on how to actually address and this and no yes I motivating people to for the integration and to receive the odd group members in our societies these are robust results we control I mean we need a tons of not tons but several I mean the key ones collaborative work is very important because it helps us to fill the gaps that the efforts already made by international organizations in terms of motivating or promoting integration are trying to are doing and it's using the right measures which in this case we are very sure has improved we have improved that in terms of what the literature has done so far and behavioral measures are key and that's why also now in psychology psychologists have to use experiments to and to enlighten their enhance their results and the mechanisms continue being empathy properly measured please keep in touch with what is coming in terms of this project because we have results on ideology and income level and attitudes towards a world value survey and for the medium term effects if you have a spare money please call me and and join us to support that it will be great thank you


The NCC is a performance-based code. It requires all houses to make efficient use of energy, particularly the energy required for cooling and or heating. One way to verify that the relevant performance requirement is met is to compare the design with a reference building based on the elemental, deemed to satisfy provisions. This method involves using software to perform two modeling runs. The first models the building, complying with the minimum deemed to satisfy provisions of NCC Volume 2. This is the reference building model, providing the cooling or heating load targets for that building. The second run models the building using the actual design elements proposed, remembering that these still need to comply with the NCC requirements for insulation, thermal brakes, and building ceiling. Heating and or cooling loads are calculated for each model. And if the proposed building loads equal or are less than that of the reference building, then it complies with the requirements. Let's step through an example of using this method. It's made up of six steps. Step one is selecting a calculation method. The software program used must be validated and be capable of assessing the heating and cooling load by modeling the building fabric, glazing and shading, air infiltration and ventilation, and the other elements included in v<IP_ADDRESS> part D. House energy rating software accredited or previously accredited under the nationwide House Energy Rating Scheme or NATAS are not permitted for this method. Step two is to model the reference building. In this model, include the mandatory parameters as listed in table v<IP_ADDRESS>. Step three, calculate the reference building loads. Step four, model the proposed building. Certain building aspects in this model must be the same as in the reference building model, but this time include the specific design which is proposed for the building. Step five, calculate the loads for the proposed building. And lastly, in step six, compare the reference and proposed buildings heating and or cooling loads. If the proposed building has a heating or cooling load which matches or is less than the reference building, then compliance is verified. If not, make design adjustments and repeat from step or use a different assessment method. This verification method is clearly outlined with worked examples in the Handbook Energy Efficiency NCC Volume 2. The Handbook and other resources are available from the ABCB website.