Ah, 10 o'clock on a given Thursday. Our last day of broadcasting here in Pioneer Plaza is very important. And Jane Grudzel joins us on this very iconic day. Talk about Voices of Hawaii, which is very interesting.  We found you through Willie Moore. Yes. He was one of our regular guests, an amazing man, in his own right. He's been one of my supporters. I interviewed him. And since then, we've been best friends. That's well you should have. Well, welcome to the show, Jane. Thank you. So you interview people. That's what you do. And you've interviewed, gosh, tons of them. No, not tons. 75. 75. OK, that's a lot. As of yesterday. Yesterday was number 75. OK. That's my last one for this phase of the project. OK. And this phase of the project, as opposed to other phases of the project. By the way, the project is Voices of Hawaii. And it's a series of interviews that Jane has been doing in order to write a book, publish your books, this year. Rather, 2020. I'm already in there. 2020. I hope so. With these interviews. The interviews will be verbatim? No. Well, that's an interesting thing. I start out, and they would be verbatim. I would just take the interview. And then I let people edit their interviews to make sure they're accurate.  And then I thought, well, I'll just plot that in a book. I don't think there's an audience for that. So what I'm doing instead is taking the interviews and harvesting material, like I might talk to you, or I might talk to Willie, or someone else. And you all talk about some similar topic, maybe TV in Hawaii. So I put it over here in the chapter on media in Hawaii. Or you might have talked about philanthropy, so I'll put it in the chapter about philanthropy. I've interviewed several ranchers, so I'm doing ranching. Voices of Hawaii is the topic. The title made change. Some people aren't happy, because voices of Hawaii means every voice in Hawaii. And surely I've just interviewed the people I know, and the people who've led me. I'll interview you. And you'll say, oh, Jane, you need to interview so-and-so. So I'll call so-and-so and say, would you like to be interviewed? And they say yes. When? Tomorrow? Sure. See you at 9. And that's how the whole thing is gone, just like that. And I've just followed the leads. And when a door opens, I go through it. It takes you. My sort of subtitle that I have for my project is collecting the oral histories of people who have participated in the destiny of Hawaii. The destiny of Hawaii. Isn't that great? People who have participated in the destiny of Hawaii. And I chose dates. I don't know if you knew that my father was a lawyer in Honolulu. And he lived here and worked here as a lawyer from 1941 to 2003. 2004, sorry. Those are the dates I used. That's why the dates you selected, those varied dates. Yes. 1941. 1941 to 2004. That was the year that Garner Anthony changed the telephone number of the Anthony Hottick firm. You remember that firm? Yes, of course. What do you mean? 537, 1941. Because he handled the martial law case. He defended the federal government's determination of martial law in Hawaii. He was so proud of that that he changed the phone number to be 1941. I love that story. I'd never heard that. Oh, that's wonderful. Well, you know, this whole project started because Jim Case, the lawyer, wrote a book called Hawaii Lawyer. And I read it and loved it. And I thought, oh, I wish my father had written a book. Then I realized I knew so many people who knew my father had been hired by my father, trained by my father, worked with my father. And I asked them, there were about 10 of them. And I said, would you let me interview you? We can talk about my father. And we did.  And the most interesting thing was they each told me about what their passion for the law was. And when they began to talk about why they like security and exchange law, which you're thinking is a big yawn, I was going, really? Tell me more. They made it so interesting. Public utility law, tax law, corporate law. It was a gift. And they told me about my father. But sometimes it's an evolution, don't you know? I mean, it's an evolution where you get into it because some senior partner hands you a case. You have no choice but to take the case. And when the case is over, you know something about that area of the law. And after a while, you develop a kind of retrospective affiliation with that area, retrospective defense of your participation in that area. So what they tell you, their reason is for being in that area, may not have been their reason originally. You find that? Well, they each told me that they went to law school for various reasons. Sometimes it was get out of the military or the draft. And sometimes it was because they didn't want to be a teacher and they didn't know what else to do. So law seemed the thing. However, once they got into law school, each one of them seemed to develop a passion for something. One man told me a fascinating story. He grew up in Fresno, California. His grandfather and his parents were both sent to internment camp. He's Japanese. They were farmers in Fresno. They both went to internment camps during the war. Then when they got out, they didn't know where to go. So they went back to Fresno, where they owned nothing, starting all over again. They learned the lesson of how important land is. So they began to put the land in the name of the children who were citizens because they've been born here. This man, then, from this background grows up to be one of the best-trusted state attorneys in Honolulu because he understands the value of law. Sure, sure, sure. Isn't that great? Shrikes me that the book to come, but the interviews that you've done over the past few years, are mostly lawyers, am I right? No. That's where it started. I interviewed 10 lawyers from my father's firm. And I interviewed at least 10 lawyers from other firms. And that was fascinating, particularly because of the racial glass ceiling that many of the Asians face. They talk about it very openly. And so then I can talk about it very openly in my book. I have one section in which I call segregated neighborhoods. And I talk about that issue. And then integrated board rooms. Integrated board rooms is a wonderful chapter because it tells you how people began to realize, we can't be all one kind. We need to have all of us participating. That wasn't a long time ago. That was more recent. Well, that was the years. Actually, I don't know the years in which that happened. But Henry Clark, for example, went to the gas company where he was a board member.  That's the word he used. And our employees are mostly oriental. We don't have any on our board. What's wrong with that? And the board said, well, this is the way it's always been. This is the way it will always be. He said, that's not right. And they said, well, go ahead, do something about it. So he did. He got a Chinese man and a Japanese man to be on the board. And that's where it began. You know, we did a program with the Life State Power Association before years ago. I watched it. Called the, what was it called? The Three-Digit Lawyers. The Three-Digit Lawyers. And we had stories from fellows who'd been practicing right around statehood even before. And they had Asian guys. They had some stories about how these mistreated them, wouldn't give them jobs, had the most racist, possible approaches to things. And it really ticked them off. And it actually defined their thinking about how you deal with such issues going forward. I was fascinated because in my time practicing, I really Yes, I'm a Chapsui Fern Lawyer. Chapsui Fern Lawyer. Chapsui Fern Lawyer. So we didn't know race. But back when there was race, and there was a whole generation of lawyers in the Three-Digit crowd that was ticked off about that, even now. So it changed. It changed. And that's what I was going to ask you. I mean, in talking to these people, and you organized it by subject, right? No, I simply interview you. If you're my interviewee, I say, how did you and your family get together? Then you organized it by subject. Well, I harvest out the material that is subject related. Yeah, yeah. So I mean, I wanted to try. I know this is not exactly what you intended. But I wanted to try to connect the dots. If you're talking about people, lawyers, and otherwise, who have had whose destiny was intertwined with the destiny of the state, then you have to see it in a dynamic fashion. You have to see the changes that happened in their lives. And in their subject lives. And figure out from that, perhaps a whole new look at the way Hawaii has developed since statehood. Did you feel that happening when you were interviewing? Yesterday was my 75th interview. And I will tell you, after every interview, I'll call my brother and say, John, this is the best one ever. Everyone. So yesterday was the best one ever. That's great. That's wonderful. And it put a lot of things into perspective for me in a way I hadn't thought of it before. It's very difficult to put it all into words. The main thing I want to say is that I'm not a sage and I'm not a philosopher. I'm a collector of stories. My experience is to sit with somebody and hear the glory of their story. It's such a gift that people will sit and tell me their stories that my job is to, to the best of my ability, convey that to my audience. And I want to be clear about one thing. Even though it started as the Marshall Goodsill story, because I wanted to know what my father did at his office. Despite the fact that I worked there for a long time, a messenger girl and receptionist on the weekends, I had no idea what my father did at work. It has grown so far beyond that. And I've interviewed everybody from every top and bottom of the socioeconomic scale, width and breadth of careers. So, let's go back again. Your question is? Well, I have another question. Yeah. That is this. More and more in this conversation, it appears to me that this is this application of yours and the book you will publish. It's really an extension of your time at that firm, time with your father, whether you knew what he was doing on his desk or not. It's an extension of my having grown up in Hawaii, grown up here and having ownership of this place. To what extent is this an ode to your father? To what extent are you expressing a relationship with your father in doing this? The private part of this book is that I have discovered an entire new Marshall Goodsill. Oh my goodness, the things he could accomplish, the people he could motivate, the lessons he learned, the breadth of which he could practice law. One of the interesting things, Jay, is back in the day, there was no communication with the mainland. So you couldn't send work to be done over there by experts over there. So you had to become an expert here, which is what my father did. He became an expert. He did all kinds of law. People say that's rare about lawyers. So the private part of this is that I have developed a deeper relationship with my father. Of course, I knew him as a person, but not as his profession, which was his superpower. I think of him as Clark Kent, the mild-mannered reporter, but underneath, brilliant intellect. Now I know that part of him. But this is not the Marshall Goodsill story. It's evolved from that. Now this is Hawaii's story. It's the voices of Hawaii. And I may or may not even put the part about the law firms in there. You were born and raised here. I was born and raised here. So you could see that, but maybe not fully integrated until now. I had a similar experience doing this. You talk to somebody like this, like one-on-one like this, and it's a special experience. Never forget it. Never forget any of these interviews. And so you learn things. You have thoughts you would never otherwise have. People educate you all along the way. And people can talk about the same subject. There are many issues that are controversial. Bishop of State and all the controversy. I talked to Oz Stender and he tells me one side of the story. I talked to the people from Command Man. They tell me the other side of the story. But what you do is you get the heart of it. You understand this and this. All the same. People are all trying to do the best they can. Come up with the best possible solution. You like all the people you've interviewed? That would be like a miracle, wouldn't it?  I asked one man if there were a lot of racial slurs when he was growing up. And he said, of course he's older than I am. He said, of course there were. And I said, did you ever cast any? He said, I would never admit to such a thing. But do you think I would ever admit to not liking somebody I interviewed?  You got it. Good answer. What about when they don't tell you though? But you know when people show me their heart, I love everybody. Yes I understand that. You do. Even if their heart may not be in the same place. Well, even if they don't agree with you or even if they have a different political opinion or a different life view. When you understand it from their point of view, all of a sudden it melts away. As long as it's sincere. As long as it's sincere. And dignified, you know, creation. What about when they lie to you? I don't know that I've had any lies, and if I have, that's their lie, not mine.  Do you still include it in your record of the interview? I have no idea. I haven't come up with that yet. Never even thought of it. OK, so we talked about this before the show, but I want to sort of get a handle on how you do this. This is a professional inquiry. Oh, excellent. So you call them up, and you meet them somewhere. Maybe coffee shop, maybe somebody's home. Oh, no. It's always got to be quiet, because it's an audio tape to interview. So here's been the most amazing thing. These are people I don't even know, right? So I either meet them at their office, my home, or their home. People I don't even know. Yeah, sure. Never been a problem. And how do you open it up? What do you say? How do you make them comfortable? I say I'm going to record this, then I'm going to have it transcribed, and you'll be able to look it over. So any changes that you want to make in it, you're welcome to do. This is a collaborative effort. And then I say, let's start by my asking you how your family or your people got to Hawaii. And then let's talk about your ancestor. And then let's talk about your life, and let's talk about how it unfolded. So it's personal. It's their personal life. You want their life story. You want the stories of voices of Hawaii, stories of Hawaii. It reminds me of the descendants of the movie. That was a Hawaii story, which I always felt we did not, we, the state of Hawaii, not capitalize on that because some guys out of Hollywood put it together. But if we looked at it, the people in Hawaii, some familiarity with the way things work, if we made that movie, it would have been a different, a better movie. And by the way, there's lots of stories like the descendants stories. There are lots of stories. Now that's an interesting thing. There are a lot of descendant stories, people who descended from the missionaries. There are also a lot of ascension stories, people who came over who were basically indentured servants for the plantations, who did what they needed to do, and then rose up. And then I've looked into two Supreme Court justices in Hawaii who came from nothing. And ended up Supreme Court justices. They're remarkable stories. Talking to my wife about that this morning, she grew up in Kaloa, in Kauai, right next to the plantation. I'm like, right, I think it was. And the men, mostly men, but their women too, on the plantations, they were the greatest generation. They were made of stern stuff. They knew how to work. They knew how to get it done. They were efficient. And they were kind to their families. I mean, the whole thing was a model in citizenship, if you will. What level of people are these? Are these the managers, or the workers, or all of the above? Short story now that you're interviewing me. I can't help myself. My wife's family had a groaning board table. And after work, when the whistle blew, everybody came to their house. And they offered them food for hours, and food and drink, and all that. One day, one fellow couldn't come. And he called him and said, I can't make it today. Why can't you make it? I got promoted to a Luna. I can't make it. Why can't you make it? This be a celebration. Well, I've got to go down to the county courthouse and register a Republican immediately.  If you're one of the other guys, you have to be a Democrat. That was really fabulous. Could you continue to party with them? Or did he need to separate himself? Oh, sure. Oh, sure. The groaning board went on every day. That's a great part of the story. It was a technicality. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I have collected some stories from people who grew up on the plantation, so I call it plantation days. Just little vignettes. Nothing in my book is long or tedious. It's easy to read. Just little vignettes of people's memories. Making Hawaiian, how they learned it, how they unlearned it. You know, the people in Hawaii, the Hawaiians had unlearned their own language because it was outlawed.   And you have the background and the standard to ask good questions on that. So how long would these interviews last, an hour, two, three, what? Oh, never go more than two. I'm a therapist by trade, a psychotherapist. And there's a reason why therapy sessions are generally about an hour, an hour and a half long. People get tired. So usually about an hour and a half between an hour and a half and two, depending on the depth of the story, and the succinctness of the interviewee. Sure. Some people talk too much and some too little. People repeat themselves a lot, so it takes a long time to tell the story. But this is the marvel of being able to edit, because it becomes very streamlined. They love it. They say, oh, I sound so good. Yeah. So you just put some tape recorder on the table. You use your iPhone. You just use your iPhone. And then you send it directly to your files and it's stored forever and all time. And somebody transcribes. You can send it to somebody to transcribe. I pay a transcriber on the main line. She's an Ollie girl, but she has learned more about Hawaiian. She does now. OK, you get it back and then you circulate it to the person, the interviewee, for, I guess, accuracy and comment. Now, suppose the interviewee has said something that's embarrassing, because if you do a good interview, it's likely to happen. He's likely to tell you something private. What do you do then? Do you take his word and cut it out? Oh, no, I ask. I will highlight this part in red and say, Jay, you talk about in your family background and something about the finances, you might not want everybody to know that. And your choice. So then when you edit it, your choice. And one guy used a name. He said, when I met with so-and-so, he was a great guy, but I had to count my fingers afterwards to make sure they were all there. I said, I don't think we should put this guy's name in. I don't think this is right. There is a line there somewhere. So I confer with them and say, I would leave this out. I would edit. Or this is how I would edit it. Sometimes if they're talking about something very complex, a legal issue, I say, it's beyond me to be able to put this into words that people wouldn't understand. You take a crack at it. So you're going to have active editing, active conversation with them after. That's kind of an interesting thing in oral histories, because many oral historians don't want you to touch the original document. That's it. That's what the person said. You leave it all in there. I don't believe that. I worked for the county historical commission where I live. And I believe an edited product is more authentic and accurate. Sure, because people make mistakes when they speak. And they say things they really rather take back. And if you give them that opportunity, it'll be a better reflection of who they are. That's right. And much more interesting to read than all the ums and all the starts. So then, OK, you've accumulated all these, 75 as of yesterday. And you're going to just splat, put them in a book. How's that going to work? No. I don't know how I'm going to handle that part of it. First, I'm going to harvest things from the interviews and put them in voices of philanthropy, voices of the ranchers, voices of the warriors, voices of the old Hawaiians, voices of conservation, whatever, all my topics. And print that book, publish that book. Then if there's a big hue and cry and people say, we think you should get these transcripts out there, maybe I'll find a way to put them online. I don't know how to do it. But someone can do it. Yeah, cool. Oh, how nice. Thank you. I will. Be careful, because when a door opens, I walk through it. So if there can be an archive of these for historical record and research, it would be wonderful. It will be. But it's dense reading. Not everybody's going to want to do it. But you might want to look at, maybe you're interested in lawyers. Maybe you just want to download 10 of them, the rest you're not interested in. It should be your prerogative. I think we're in a time down, don't you, Jane? And maybe this is what motivated you a couple years ago when you started out. We're in a time that we need to take stock of the living legends, if you will. That's what we call the bar thing, the living legends. And we have to talk to them before we can't talk to them anymore. It's like Steven Spielberg's Showa project, where he talks to the Holocaust survivors, because soon enough, there won't be an ANU. You won't be able to record anything. And he did it in video, but it's the same idea. And so we have the bar association thing. We have the descendants, the movie, for what it's worth. I think Hawaii, don't you, is in a time of, it's a pivotal time somehow. And we really need to find ourselves. And the way to do that is to do what you're doing. I hope so. I think in a way, every time is a pivotal time. All the years that we lived through from 41 to 2004 were pivotal times. People made decisions then that affect us now. So now we're going back and looking at what happened in the last 50 years of the last century. We kind of see what happened, how we got to where we are. Some place is good, some place is not so good. But now it's time to maybe, it's a new sort of a fresh way to look at how the sausage was made. So some of the people that you have talked to, I'm just reading off the email correspondence that I've had with you and Bill Moore. Ron Moon, lawyer, Bill Tammy's a lawyer too. Lawyer. Alice Gill, she's the philanthropy. Well, here's the story about Alice. I meet with her because a friend says you have to interview her.  And I'm not a phone caller. If they can't text or email, it doesn't work.  I say, when? She says, it's afternoon. OK, so I'm there. And we talk for two hours. And at the end I say, this feels good. Have I got most of your story? She says, oh no, we've just talked about my family. We haven't even talked about my career. I've known Alice all my life from growing up years. I never knew what her career was. I said, OK, let's spend another time. So I go back for another two-hour interview. She's the only one who's four hours. But she had that much material. She told me all about developing Alamoana. She told me all about the renovation of the Elani Palace. Priceless stories that need to be recorded. She says she's recorded everybody in her family and nobody's ever taken an interview of her. So I gave it to her. And she said, I don't know if I want to turn this over to you to write a book about. I might want to write my own book. In which case I go, good for you. Have it. This is my gift to you. Can I use a couple sections? Stories. Yes, of course. But you know, so. Well, you know, it gives me the thought, which we talked about a little bit. Is that you? It's interactive. Any interview is interactive. You're asking questions, of course. You could ask this question or that question and get a completely different approach. And then, of course, you're saying things. You're telling that person a little about what your orientation is. And so it's a relationship. It's a relationship. So you take these 75 people. Had you not interviewed them, you would not know them nearly as well or have that relationship. I have 75 brand new best friends. You bet. After talking to you, if I need help figuring out how to put these things online, I will call you. And it will be heart to heart. You can either help or you can't. But we have this relationship. This is, you know, you said, what's going to get chills about this? What's the point of all this? The point is when people meet face to face, that it doesn't matter really what the divisions are between us, as long as there's something heartfelt, there can be love. There can be aloha.  And these people don't like it. This was this person's job. And then I say to this person, what do you think about that? And they say, that was their job. I didn't like it, but they were representing their clients.  The real meaning of the word, right? Reminds me of the Mission House program at Oahu Museum, if you've ever attended that. Oh, yes. They go over and they give talks about this decedent and that decedent. And the most wonderful part is when one decedent is talking through an actor, tells you about the other decedent. And he says, oh, that guy, he was mean to me. And then you go down the road to the other side of the cemetery. And you hear the actor who is representing the second person. And he says, oh, that guy, he was mean to me. And you begin to understand the whole social process in the state. You have got it. You put your finger right on it. That's it, Jay. That's been the experience I've had. And it's not my job to make sense of it. I quote this person, and I quote this person in the same paragraph. They said it, not me. You're right. Well, you say you want to give people an insight into how their lives were and enjoy them as people and so forth, just as you have. You want to share the joy of the interview with more people. I fully appreciate that. But you know this more. It's more because I think whether you realize it or not when they read this book, they're one, they're understanding the dynamic, the social dynamic, maybe the business dynamic of the state. If I can capture it, this is my job. Yes, yes. And finally, and this is what I think I would be looking for, I'd be looking for the historical dynamic, how things were changing within the life of each of them and in parallel, all of them, to learn about what core culture point, the core sociology, the core development of the state really is. I know that's another book, entirely different book, but I think some people will look at this book and look for that. Well, I say to the publisher, now in my second book, and he says, well, if your first book is a bestseller, there may be a second book. Okay. If not, not so much. I said, well, okay then, I'm gonna put everything I got into my first book. I could keep going like this. I have a lot more energy to do this, but we'll see. I mean, this has been led by the universe in a very divine way, and it's not me, I'm just the storyteller. And I just get to highlight some of the people. That's your story. That's my story. Thank you, Jay. Thank you, Jay. Good, so let's be a delight. Thank you. So nice. So nice to talk to you. Thank you, Jay. Aloha. Aloha.


I'll refer to Dev. Dude, when we first started dating, she used to brag about the dudes that she had smashed. Devon slept with a lot of guys, gentlemen. Any man who marries a woman past the age of 23 years old, you're getting leftovers.  Listen, Dev is 45. My brother, George Bruno, told me that Donovan called him and asked him if he would marry him and her. So what does that tell me? That tells me that he married her.   I can't expect you guys to pay $800 for a woman's course if you don't see that I know what I'm talking about.


It's great to have you here at Slush today. So you and I talked a few months ago, and since the last time we talked, I mean, and I'm sorry to kind of like start with Facebook, but I think that it is a really interesting kind of conversation to have around it because of the reporting that the Wall Street Journal's done recently and the release of the information that showed that Instagram was well aware of the damaging it was doing to teenagers regarding their mental health. So we're having congressional hearings. We have strong words from politicians in the EU. We have promises from Facebook and others that they will change, but very little has actually changed in the last, you know, ever since we've been having this conversation. So I guess my initial question for you is, why is it so hard for lawmakers to get their arms around this real important challenge of our times? Right, so there's a lot there. And first of all, thanks for having me. It's great to be at Slush for the first time. In some ways, we talk about Facebook too much, I think, because there's a systemic problem with a lack of access to information about what happens inside of companies that could be harmful and how we must understand it as societies, not just as CEOs and engineers. But what we've learned now causes sort of new momentum, particularly in the United States. And I think if we compare the United States Congress and the European lawmakers, there's a world of differences. So if you say that, you know, why is it so hard to come to grips? The EU is actually plowing ahead with, you know, proposing proactive rules on content moderation responsibilities for platforms on more clarity about their role as gatekeepers, so clarifications of competition and antitrust rules, rules around political advertising, artificial intelligence, data governance. So actually a lot is in the pipeline there. I think the big question is, can the US move, particularly as it is so deeply polarized as it is? And what would be your view on that? Is it able to actually sort of really make progress in this area, or is this stuff fairly low priority for the administration? Well, I think there's a political side and then there's the legal side. And so when you look at protecting children, when you look at lying to advertisers, when you look at human trafficking, when you look at all kinds of misleading information or promising and not keeping those promises as a company, I'm pretty sure that the courts could investigate some of the behavior. The SEC, for example, could do an investigation. But then there are also areas where clearly there need to be guidelines. And I think particularly that question of access to information so that we don't have to rely on whistleblowers, on leaks, on incident reporting, but that we can get a more systematic sense of what is working, what is not working, when there are harmful consequences, whether data is processed with respect to rights protections and so on and so forth. It shouldn't be scandal to scandal to scandal, hearing to hearing to hearing. There needs to be a systematic solution which should also lead to more predictability for the companies. And so clearly the era of self-regulation is over. Do you have a view on the Facebook oversight board? Has it been effective in any way? Or is this just window dressing and gives a kind of a heat shield for the executives at the top of the company? Well, so if we conclude that self-regulation hasn't worked and I think that's a safe conclusion to draw by now, then you have to wonder what a Facebook oversight board is going to add. Facebook funded, Facebook selected, but more importantly, a Facebook pipeline of cases that they can deal with and other issues that they cannot deal with. So I have a lot of respect for the people who are on the board. A lot of them are excellent intellectuals and civil society leaders. But I think as a governance construction, it's a distraction of what Congress needs to do, what kind of truly independent oversight is needed. And so whatever you may think of the oversight board, I'm on the sort of counter board which we call the real Facebook oversight board, which is kind of a pun to say that there should be actual independence. But whatever you may think of the oversight board, at least make sure it's not a distraction of democratic legislation and oversight that is desperately needed, not just for Facebook. I mean, YouTube gets away with so much harm and damage without ever being in the headlines. I don't think the CEO of YouTube has ever testified before Congress. So I would much prefer a broader view than it's kind of the flavor of the day right now to go after Facebook too. So you confident that we're now moving into a time when it's not going to be the boardrooms that are deciding what the limits of free speech are but actually legislators, lawmakers? So speech is one aspect and it's immensely important for freedoms, for the rule of law, for all kinds of other rights protections. But it's certainly not the only problem or right that is at stake when we look at the online environment. So what about freedom from discrimination? What about competition? What about public health? When does the amount and the effect of disinformation bleed into a public effect to the extent that people are dying because they believe that the vaccine is the poison instead of the solution? And that kind of trajectory, when it scales, when it goes from a small group of people to a significant percentage of the population, you cannot only focus on the need to protect speech. You cannot only speak of speech when there's data harvested, when there's micro-targeting of ads, when there's data brokered, you know, collected and sold and assembled and repurposed. So I think we've had a little bit of a speech dogmatism, particularly in the United States because of its First Amendment of the Constitution, a very strong tradition, but a lot of the issues and harms with social media are not just speech issues. There are rights issues, there are data governance issues, there are oversight issues, and all of those deserve the same attention. So if we determine that this commercially amplified content is causing damage to society, to individuals, how do we set about drawing the line? Like, at what point do we say, actually, this is damaging society in ways that are not tolerable and are undermining, you know, democratic rule of law and social order? Well, so I think there need to be a couple of baseline provisions that also have to do with manipulation that can be glanced from the platform. So for example, if you have an account uploading an allegation of a crime every three seconds for 72 hours, you can be pretty sure it's not a person. Right. And so besides looking at what is posted, you can look at who is posting it and the kind of behavior. So for example, pattern recognition or, you know, the creation of, I don't know, 5,000 accounts within 48 hours from a specific district must be suspicious. So I think there can be enforcement of platform-made rules about what authenticity of accounts might mean, what kind of behavior is tolerated. But then we also truly need to understand better what the business models do as an effect, what machine learning may cause as intended and unintended consequences. Because, you know, what strikes me is that we often hear these promises by the platform companies. For example, they, after 14 years, Facebook said we're not gonna allow Holocaust denial anymore. Long overdue, but at last it happened. Even after that commitment was made, Holocaust denial content would pop up over and over and over again. On Amazon two weeks ago, the top one recommendation was an anti-vaxxer book. How is this possible in the middle of a global pandemic? I can't answer that. You know, I don't have the full view. My colleagues at Stanford don't have the full view. But the fact that we need independent research to understand what is happening, whether promises are kept, and what could be the unintended consequences is essential. And only then I think we can make better decisions about what needs to happen next. So that's a great question. There's still kind of, you know, the black box. We don't know what's inside it. Like how do we get to a point where civil society, where journalists, watchdogs, researchers, academics get access to this. Because we hear from, you know, people in technology companies constantly, oh, politicians and these kinds of people, they don't understand technology. They don't understand what we do whilst at the same time not giving access. Clearly there's intention there. But I guess the question is like, how do we ensure that, you know, actors on behalf of civil society understand what is actually going on with some of these algorithms? Yeah, so I think we need provisions, mandates for access to information that may differ. So, you know, the non-discrimination watchdog, the antitrust regulator, they need a different kind of level of access to information. Already the competition watchdog can probe information, emails going years back. You know, they have a mandate to ask that. If you knock on the door as a journalist, forget about it. I mean, they would never hand it over voluntarily for members of parliament. I think it would be the same unless they may have to be forced to testify under oath. But, you know, this kind of access to information for regulators is unique, even if journalists and civil society and citizens also deserve to be able to scrutinize the kinds of services that, you know, are impacting society, are impacting their lives, the lives of their children, and so on. So I think it will be a matter of access to information guarantees, you know, with specific sort of levels and purposes. But certainly that's necessary. But I also don't want to give the impression that there's nothing that can be done now. You know, looking at the amount of cases of antitrust investigations, it shows that there are real concerns about lying, about mergers and acquisitions and bundling data, about other kinds of promises made and practices engaged in when it came to company behavior. So not only will we see a wave of regulatory initiatives, we will also see a wave of court cases playing out. I wanted to ask you about antitrust. Do you think that the laws that we have in place right now, are they fit for purpose? Do they really work when it comes to digital economies? I think they need a new interpretation and ideally a speedier process. Because, you know, for good reasons, companies can also appeal rulings. You know, companies have rights protections too. But these processes can be dragged out for so long that the effect of a sanction or a ruling can almost be, you know, foregone. You know, if there is an allegation that impacts the market today, but we will only find out in seven years whether there is going to be a punishment, then the company's hurt will have been bankrupt, you know, for decades. The founders will have already moved on and done new projects. So it needs to be faster. And there's obviously a challenge with which kinds of sanctions bite. I mean, a couple of billion dollars is an astonishing amount, but it's not when you actually make exponentially that. So it needs to be proportionate so that it actually has an effect, a deterring effect. And then there are questions about how to measure harm. So traditionally in antitrust, one of the big yardsticks was price. Right. So how does a consumer pay too much? And now some of the services are free, but you pay with data. So how to take account of that sort of cost or payment? I think are areas where there needs to be a clarification. There are other areas. If you look at Lina Khan, the lead of the Federal Trade Commission in the United States, she is actually alleging that excessive market power doesn't only have economic effects, but also societal effects. So I think there will be a big discussion and question of whether antitrust rules can be stretched to cover all those goals, or whether it's also legitimate to say, look, if democracy is under pressure, we're gonna go for measures that target those harms specifically. We're not gonna hope that market instruments like antitrust, which serve a very important purpose of keeping competition fair, but we cannot simply hope that the side effect of fair competition will be a better democracy. Sure. So I'd like to move on from Big Tech just for a moment, because I've read a piece you wrote in the FT, I think last month or the month before, about spyware. So we've seen the EU tighten these rules around export of surveillance technology, following the revelations about the NSF, Pegasus software. Do you think that we now need to get in place some kind of agreement between democratic states that goes further and actually brings into play surveillance technology, facial recognition technology, and that we need to have this kind of like, almost like a global agreement put in place? Well, absolutely. So the rules around spyware are a starting point, but they're actually a starting point but they're actually not comprehensive enough. For example, EU member states can still use spyware that they import, and there's no rulings about that, even though you really have to ask yourself, when Victor Orban is spying on journalists with Israeli-made software, there should be consequences. And so I think there's a number of areas, you mentioned them, facial recognition, some other technologies that basically have either disproportionate harms on human rights. I mean, spyware is sold as a counter-terrorism tool but it's used much more widely and I think the question is, is it proportionate to the stated goal? Is the proliferation, so the spreading across the world of these systems, not too much of a danger to legitimize the use in the United States or maybe even Finland, who knows, right? And so I think it is time for democratic countries to come together and say, this is where we draw a line, this is where we think technology harms democracy, fundamental values and human rights, and we are going to together create a critical mass and have rules around these systems, which will certainly not ban them everywhere, but it will begin to put more credibility on the side of democratic governments to say we are not going to engage in mass surveillance, we are not going to have social credit scoring systems, we are not going to hack the phones of our journalists because we actually stand for press freedom, for freedom of expression, for the right to privacy, whether it's online or offline. Another technology, and we're here at Slush, that a lot of entrepreneurs are working in the space of crypto at the moment, we've seen governments act way too late on the harms that social media companies have, the way the social media companies and misinformation has played out, how do you think we can avoid making that mistake with digital currencies, with crypto? Like how can we put in place rules that kind of create, you know, prevent harms from occurring? Well I'm smiling because I so vividly remember the days when I was still in the European Parliament and when the concerns about money laundering through crypto currencies were first sort of surfacing. And of course the question came, should we regulate? And then so many investors, founders, tech experts said, no, no, no, no, no, if you're going to regulate now, you will stifle innovation, which is always the magic sentence to oppose any regulatory intervention. And so actually, the EU has deliberately decided to hold off on regulations and also to make sure that, for example, an effort to prevent money laundering, which I think is legitimate and needed, but does not actually impede other uses of blockchain technologies, which have nothing to do with financial services or money laundering or whatever, can still be growing and experimented with. You know, fast forward to where we are today, there will be a sort of showdown between regulators, central banks and crypto companies. I have no doubt about it because, for example, I learned this week that 25% of young people in the Netherlands invest in crypto, you know, and invest slash speculate. It's a huge number, a huge risk. And so I think states will be more and more concerned of having a grip on their monetary policy of being able to manage risk because, you know, if it's a bubble that ends up bursting, the cost will spread across society. People will lose their savings. There will be possibly panic. There will be ripple effects. So I think it's to be expected that there would be guardrails put in place. Yeah. If people complain it's too late now, they can learn the lessons of, you know, being pushed against regulation when it was still early. Sure. Well, I mean, obviously the Netherlands being the place where the original speculative bubble happened with the two bit bulbs. Right. So just thinking about this and thinking the way that, you know, crypto could potentially move markets. It could have really, really significant effects on whether it's currencies or whatever. And technology now, technology companies are global actors. You know, we have, you know, kinds of situations with various EU countries, the US, the UK, not allowing sort of like Chinese companies maybe to be part of their critical infrastructure. How do you think about, how do you think that technology is going to play a role in geopolitics moving forward? Like how important do you think this is that we establish kind of like very clear norms and guidelines that, you know, are the international standards that everyone can kind of follow the rules so we know, you know, we know how to protect especially to like democratic institutions and democratic norms. Well, I think the moment where technology companies play a geopolitical role is already upon us. It is not the future, it is the present. Because we've seen a huge amount of outsourcing to companies to not only build critical digital infrastructure but to defend it. And now part of defence is also offence, especially in the United States has, you know, declared the practice. And so you can see that a number of tasks and responsibilities and roles that were historically squarely in the hands of the democratic state are now entirely or partially outsourced to companies. And I think concerns about that balance will grow and that there will be a rebalancing. But there's also a question mark. For example, if you look at the relationship between the state, the Communist Party in China and companies there, the question of how much autonomy will big, huge tech companies have and take in either adhering to rules or trying to circumvent them. So for example, a lot of US tech companies are on the one hand vying for government contracts, right? Very lucrative context, Department of Defence otherwise, but on the other hand, they have market interests in China or they have supply chains in China. And so will there be a moment where a choice has to be made, where the two cannot go hand in hand, you know, and will companies decide to stick with the democratic government that's their home turf or will they seek to maximize profit like the spyware industry has, completely devoid of any declarations of values, norms and principles. And so I think the power of some of these geopolitically relevant tech companies is already such that they may opt to sort of go it alone and drift further apart from the states of the countries where they were once founded. And of course the other area that is much discussed at the moment is how we implement ethical, artificial intelligence. How do you think about that? I mean, we've got three minutes left. Okay, great. I'm not expecting you to solve it, but what are the kind of like the top-line thoughts on how we approach that? So ethics is such an interesting phenomenon because it sounds so fantastic. And I think everyone in every process can use some ethics. You know, it's good to think about ethics at school, ethics in healthcare, ethics around how we deal with each other now in the COVID pandemic, but at the end of the day, ethics is a soft, debatable philosophical concept. I would encourage everybody to read the AI ethics guidelines of China. Just, you know, read them, and they will sound very accessible, almost similar to what may come out of ethics guidelines of the EU or civil society consortium or what have you. But the question is how can they be enforced and what real change will they ensure? And so I think ethics in that sense will not be enough because often they seem to be declarations of good intentions. Sometimes they are used as a PR exercise, and so I think you need hard backstops and more serious and forcible oversight over AI enabled processes just like we would with many other technologies used to achieve something. There seems to be, and this is a broader comment than just AI, but a sort of expectation that the use of technologies should somehow be free of oversight and regulation. And there has been a window where there's been relatively little, but that window will close and just like many other industries, transportation, automotive, chemicals, you know, there are risks and there are opportunities and it's important that there's also safeguarding of the public interest of people's rights, of public safety. And we've reached that point now with technology and I think with AI particularly, there are new challenges of how to understand the processing of data, how to assess the risk coming from unintended and unforeseen consequences and where should that risk play out? Can you just see what happens in society or should there be more research in a sort of guarded environment, draw lessons only then to decide how to move forward? So AI presents new questions already, new harms, right, of bias, of sort of unintended consequences compared to what it was designed for, but oversight will come, there's no question. Well, that's probably a great place to end on. Oversight will come, no question. What's going to be interesting is, you know, since the last time we talked so much has happened, you know, in Australia and elsewhere. So I'm fascinated to see what the next six months will bring in terms of regulation and the way that we really stop addressing some of these systemic challenges that you outlined at the beginning. So Marisa, thank you so much for your time. Have you here at Slush? Thank you so much.


In this short video, I wanted to share some updates that I've recently made to my course, mastering the SharePoint framework that I just finished publishing today. I want to share what's new and what's next with the course. So, stay tuned. Hey, I'm Andrew Connell. This episode is also available as a blog post on boytonnells.io and as a podcast on boytonnells.show. Check out the description below the video for links to these other resources. Hey, I'm Andrew Connell. If this is your first time here, make sure you subscribe to see future videos for the Microsoft 365 and Azure Pro Developers. It's been a while since I updated you on what's going on with the course and I thought that now was a great opportunity to do it because this week we just published a complete refresh of two chapters in one of the bundles of the course. So real quick, if you're not familiar with what this is, if you head over to our site, go to the courses menu and select mastering the SharePoint framework. This page here has got all the information that you can need about this course. What it is, different bundles, what you get with it, all of that stuff, tons of sample projects, et cetera. The course is available in three different bundles. There's a starter bundle, a fundamentals bundle, and an ultimate bundle. The changes that we just published this week are two completely re-recorded two chapters in the fundamentals bundle. Now, whichever bundle you get as you build up, you get access to more and more content. So the starter bundle, I recently re-recorded that and published everything late last year, a couple of months ago, and that is three chapters that are available. That course is completely free. In fact, I've got links in the description below where you can actually watch other videos that I've published to the YouTube channel with all the content in the starter bundle if you want to watch it there. The fundamentals bundle is great for people who want to get started, it's great for people who don't know anything about the SharePoint framework, and who really need to understand how to do all the core stuff, building web parts, working with extensions, data access with the SharePoint REST API and Microsoft Graph, working with React, all that stuff. Then if you go to the ultimate bundle, you get more content, but you also get this interactive stuff as well, like access to a mastermind group, access to monthly office hours, et cetera. So you get a lot more stuff with that. You can learn more about this entire thing, what was actually updated, or what about the course. You can get all that from the site here, and I don't want to spend too much time here, so I want to focus on what's new and you can go look at this whenever you like. So let me show you what kind of changes that I made to the course. Now the best way to do this is probably just to go right into the course and show you the changes. I'm going to go over here to your library, which I've already logged in, so it's giving me access to my access to all the courses I have access to. The starter bundle, those are the first three chapters that I, again, that I completely rerecorded and refreshed and republished late last year, a couple months ago. The fundamentals bundle is where the changes that I've applied, the updated chapters here inside of this bundle. So if I scroll down here, I'm going to zoom in a little bit, what you'll see here that's changed is these first two chapters. So it's the one about creating your very first SharePoint framework project and then digging into the SharePoint framework. The reason why I went through and updated these two chapters first is because these two chapters are the ones that were probably the most dated. A lot of stuff has changed since I originally published the course over the last couple of years. I mean, adding content to it over the last couple of years. Specifically around these two chapters, the tool that we used to create new projects has changed a lot, the Yoman Generator for the SharePoint framework. The project structure has changed a lot. There's a lot of things that are no longer there that are there now and vice versa. So I figured a lot of the changes that I intend to make to the course over time, I'm going to come back and refers those throughout the different chapters and courses as necessary, but these two chapters, they needed a complete redo. So I went through and completely re-recorded these guys. There's some features that I've added to the viewership or the consumption of the content as well that I think that you'll really enjoy. These are only going to apply to the chapters that I've updated and I'll show you in a second how you can actually see where those different updates are. So it's these first two chapters. And if I come over here and just look at this first overview, this overview lesson, I've got the sound muted so there's not going to hear me talking over myself, but the animations have been refreshed. Things are a lot cleaner. They're a lot less like sterile. There's a little bit more engagement to the videos. So it's harder to get bored or harder to get distracted, where I try and do a lot less of work with slides and a lot more time with me trying to teach you showing you things and explaining stuff. So you saw one little technique there where the video jumps around a little bit just to have a different perspective on the camera. Let me come over here to the second lesson, though, because this one's got some really good stuff in it that I want to highlight. So a couple of things I want to highlight with this is that first, if you come over here, you'll notice that I've got these different chapter links here at the bottom of the video. So when the video loads, it will open up these chapter links. But what this does is it allows me to jump to different sections in the video if I know that I'm looking for something in particular. That's going to save you a lot of time using this as a reference to just do deep links, jumping into different areas to be able to find the content that you're looking for. Another thing you're going to notice, too, is that you see here with this little animation going with the slide, I've tried to get away from traditional PowerPoint slides and focus more on demos and just using a slide for annotating something that I want to say or augmenting something. So over here, if I go to this one about creating a SharePoint framework project, or actually let me back up a little bit farther if I'm not mistaken, I sometimes will have a full cover-over slide like this. But the idea is to be able to just focus on the content, focus on the demos. That's why you see these animations and stuff popping up here. Those links, those chapter links, I've got those throughout all the different lessons. I used them in the past, but I didn't use them as gratuitously as I'm using them now because I figured out a way to go through and to automate the inclusion of them as I'm producing the course. Another thing that's really cool about this, too, that is a big change from what I used to do is if I jump over to, believe it's right about the two-minute five-second mark. Yeah, there we go. Let me pause this for a second. There's something that I reference, like in this chapter, I'm referencing another link somewhere else. Before, all of the lessons, you had to wait for a little thing to pop up on the screen and it would show a link that you would then have to then go copy down separately. You couldn't copy the link from the video. It was actually part of the video. It wasn't clickable. Second of all, if a link changed, it was hard for me to go back and go in and change those links at a future date if something got expired or broken. Not anymore, though, because what's cool about this is that these are actually real links. I can hover over this link that shows up at the top and if I click on it, it opens up in another tab. In this case, I'm using it as a way to cross reference between different chapters, but I use it in a lot of different places to save for Microsoft documentation and resources in different places. Furthermore, all of the links that you'll see that are listed here are also going to show up down here in the lesson notes. You see here this one about lesson in the fundamentals bundle about digging into the SharePoint framework that you can take this. You'll be able to just jump over straight into that link to be able to have access to that like somewhere else. That's a nice refresh, a nice change because you can see the links that are in the course both in the lesson notes. If you wanted to just right click and copy that link or if you wanted to click on it from down here or if you want to click up from inside the video. Just a couple different ways you can do it, a lot easier for me to maintain it. Another thing that I did that is also really going to be a nice feature for the course consumption piece is all of the lesson notes are dynamically generated. What that means is that they're all dynamically generated, they're all published when I make updates to the course and when the page loads to watch your lesson, it's going to automatically go fetch those notes from that I'm storing somewhere. Now in the past, I had to go into every single lesson, take my notes, convert them over to HTML, and then go into each page on the site where the lessons are and copy and paste my lesson notes in. It was very tedious, take a lot of time and frankly it was one of the things that held me up from doing a bunch of updates. Now that these things are dynamic, it's much cleaner, much faster and you can also see that there's a change log at the bottom of every single lesson where you can see the latest things that have actually been updated. Another thing that I wanted to highlight here too is if I go back to the actual chapter, the roll-up part of the chapter, if you scroll down here on the right hand side, so as always since the very beginning you've been able to download the course materials for the bundle that you're in. So in this case here we'd be downloading the bundles for the Fundamentals Bundle. That's going to have all of the projects that I demo throughout the entire course. What got updated for the Fundamentals Bundle this time is that the demos for the first two chapters have been refreshed to the latest version of the SharePoint framework which right now is 1.14. The Ultimate Bundle didn't get updated. I'm just focusing, I just focused on the Fundamentals Bundle in this most recent update. And then another thing you can do is you've ever want to see like kind of what happened and what the history is of all the changes for the course. You can always go in and use this like get the course updates. That's going to be available to you that link wasn't there before I made this update but it's now it's there now to where you can go in to our main our public site and you can see a list of all a history of all the changes that I've made to the course and as they were made and stuff. So here the Fundamentals course that we just updated in the last couple days completely we recorded two chapters, refreshed the solutions in these chapters to SPFX 1.14 and it was the two chapters your first SharePoint framework project and dig into the SharePoint framework. So those are some of the really big updates that I've made to the course. Oh another thing too that's going to be nice that'll be nice is that all of the new content that I've updated is if you take a note of it notice where it says the quality is 720 everything has been recorded to 1080. So we got a much higher res of the recording that's available to you so everything is a lot crisper, a lot clearer for you to be able to see that stuff. I previously have recorded everything in 720p and that's how the rest of the course is but as I'm doing new stuff it'll be done in 1080p so that's a nice little feature with that. So you might be wondering what's next, what am I working on next with the course? Well let me give you a little bit of a sneak peek on what I'm thinking about here. I'd love to get your input on the changes that I'm working on. Best way to do that, drop a comment below the video. All right so let me come over here and let me show you my list of all the changes that we've got. This is my master list that I'm using to keep track of everything that I've seen is like a an update or a change that I need to make to the course etc.  Well that doesn't exist anymore it's now the CLI for Microsoft 365. There's some changes with it so I've got a bunch of global changes I'm making across the entire course. Anywhere that I'm using the old CLI use the new one. Any links that I use throughout the course make sure those are actually referenced in the notes as well so that they'll be there's something you can click on you don't just see them show up in the in the site updating on the thumbnails, re-recording the overviews etc. In fact the overview for the first for these two lessons in the fundamentals bundle I've published those as videos I'll give you a link to those there's a link in the description below the video but there's also I'll show those at the end as well if you want to see like what what's in these two chapters. But some of the stuff other stuff that I've done here that I plan on making changes to like I got this is the chapter dealing with web parts changes that I plan making to those I've got a list changes advanced web parts so adding lessons for adaptive cards and adaptive card extensions aces for Vivo connections etc and I've got everything kind of prioritized on like things that I have to do things that require an entirely re-record of a lesson things that just really need to be like there's some annotations I need to add to the video stuff like that not stuff I need to do a complete re-record or maybe I can just get away with a partial re-record things like that so those are a bunch of the updates that I want to that I want to add I've got to you know things like extensions that extensions chapter pretty good chance that whole thing is going to get redone because it's got a lot of changes to the at least the the one part they'll definitely get re-recorded is the commands that extensions because the apis have changed and they're much much more robust in terms of event management or in finding out context about the current list that you're on so a bunch of things here reacts can get updated so that I have a lesson on hooks instead of using just the higher components etc so bunch of stuff this plan you can see all this list of stuff that's there I've been collecting this information you know what I think needs to be updated for quite a while got some feedback from people about it as well and as people leave me notes throughout the course and saying hey there's an issue here an issue here you know I go through and I take a look at those things and I make sure that they get updated or they're logged and then I'll up and I make sure that they all will get updated a lot of the changes that I made in this update my intention in a lot of these changes was to change up my my production workflow so that I can I can record produce and ship an update much much faster than I could in the past and that's a lot of the a lot of the automation stuff that I did was really investments to make this easier so you see anything here that you think needs to get done that's more important than others the next chapter I'm probably going to work on first is like the web parts chapter and then the extensions chapter and then from there there's a list of a bunch of ones that I want to work on but give me your input what what do you think should be there if you're if you're not if you're not a student of the course and something's holding you back uh that you don't see listed in the agenda or that is still missing let me know you can have an influence on what I'm going to work on because if it gets somebody else to sign up for the course that's probably going to take a pretty good priority there speaking of that too when it comes to the course make sure you check the description of this video because I've got a special discount that I'm going to give you off the course but heads up I'm only running this discount for a limited time just for about a week or so so don't put it off if you're interested make sure you take advantage of that and the when you sign up for the course it's one time payment get access to it for life and you get access to all the future updates as well so what do you think about these updates nice improvements to the course let me know by dropping a comment below the video I'm really looking forward to refreshing additional lessons with other chapters and with some of these same content updates that I just refreshed in these last two chapters if you like this video make sure that you like it in youtube and subscribe to my channel to get more microsoft 365 and azure pro developer videos in the future and hey I've included links to the overview lessons in each of these two new chapters that I just refreshed in case you want to check them out hey thanks a lot and I will see you in the next video


Hi everyone, Daniele from K-Array here! Today I'm at the concert and there is a very beautiful sound. The sound that I hear, of course, it comes from the PA system that is in charge of distributing the sound energy to the audience. But where does this energy come from in the first place? Well, of course it comes from the performers on stage, from the musicians and the singers and if they are not comfortable on stage, they will not be able to play at their maximum level and the live concert won't be successful even if you have the best PA system. That's why in K-Array we strongly believe that monitors play a very important role and that's why we designed monitors that are loud and strong but at the same time they are clear and enjoyable so that the performers can have a great time on stage. The directivity of our monitors can be adjusted in order to send the energy only where it is required, keeping the rest of the stage as clean as possible. Of course live events are not the only application for monitoring solutions, for example in a TV studio you need high quality, very discreet monitors that cannot be seen by the cameras but can be heard by the presenter and his or her guests. So do you want to know all the unique monitoring solutions that we have developed in K-Array? I strongly recommend that you watch our entire webinar dedicated to monitoring. As always our webinars are available on our website www.k-array.com in the K Academy section. Webinars are free to watch and available in multiple languages so I hope you enjoy it and see you for the next video.