Okay, so now on this video we're going to connect the boundary layer and the flow conditions at the boundary layer with sediment transport. And one of the key things is the Bernoulli effect, which is how the flow overgrains creates a low pressure on the upper and downstream sides of the grain, and that low pressure helps lift the grains up into the flow. Okay, so we're going to analyze the forces on a grain bit by bit. So here we have our surface, and we have a grain on that surface here. So we will use purple for our forces. So the first thing we have is that gravity is holding the grain downward. So we have our force from gravity. And we also have various amounts of pressure. So I'm going to use P for pressure, and pressure comes from molecules colliding against each other and against objects. And so, for example, if you have a grain sitting in a water, those water molecules are jiggling even when the flow speed is zero, and they're jiggling and they're bumping up against the grain. And because our flow speed down near the bottom here is zero, the molecules are just jiggling in place, and you end up with a pressure that's pushing in on the grain. Okay? So you have, we'll just say it's a medium pressure, even though the flow speed is very low here. So we'll say that our grain reaches somewhere up into the boundary layer, and the flow speed will be faster at the top of the grain than at the bottom of the grain. So here I just showed the molecules jiggling. Here they're jiggling, but they're going downstream, and they're colliding with the grain. And that creates some extra pressure, and the higher up on the grain, the stronger the downward direction of the flow is, and the less the molecules sort of jiggle above the grain where they're not actually impinging on the grain, they're going downstream relatively fast compared to the other grains. Okay? So on the upstream side of the grain here, and our flow speed left to right, what we end up with is a high pressure on the upstream side of the grain. Now, as that flow impinges on the grain, it can't actually flow through it. It goes around it, and it's still being pulled downstream. So we end up with a low pressure on the downstream side, because any water molecules coming from around the grain are still moving downstream. And then we have this really interesting area right on top here, and this is where the Bernoulli effect comes in. When particles are moving really fast past an object, they exert very little force on that object, and you end up with a low pressure active on the grain top itself. If you put something across the flow like this, you'd feel a very strong pressure on it with all the molecules colliding right into your hand, but if you put your hand sideways, the very few molecules collide to that surface, and it creates a low pressure. And that's actually how airplanes fly. And so you have the airplane wing, and it's shaped so that the flow goes over the top of the wing, and almost none of the air molecules collide with the top of the wing, and it creates this lift, this low pressure, this suction that pulls the airplane up into the air. And so if you look at an airplane wing, they're shaped like this, so the air in this case would be going this way, this distance versus this distance, this distance is longer, and that makes the air flow faster over the top of the wing, and so there's a lower pressure at the top of the wing than the bottom, and that pressure difference is so big that it overcomes gravity, so 747s, heavily loaded, can still fly using this pressure difference effect. It's also possible to feel it if you're just driving in a car with a window open, things can get sort of sucked out the side of the car because the side window is the air is moving very fast past them, and it creates this low pressure that can pull things, pull things out of the window. So we have a medium pressure relative to a low pressure in this zone, and a high pressure here, and we end up with a net force from the fluid, which goes up and downstream. So this is the combination of the fluid forces, the downstream force coming from the high flow in this area here, and the lift coming from this Bernoulli effect on the top of the grate.


Speak more about the city of light Sarasota. I'm in Florida and have always been drawn to that area As far as I know they're seated with intention when you put your intention into it That's how you manifest a city of light. I want to show you this picture This is the prism of light in Sarasota and I got this from an article called Sarasota a crystal city of light I'm just gonna read a small excerpt from that. It goes on to mention the numerology of Sarasota And this is another reason why Sarasota will be one of the 22 cities of light Florida is a master number 11 reflecting brotherly love on a grand scale Sarasota if you do the numerology, you know each letter has a number associated to it.


From Austin, Texas, it's theCUBE, covering Pure Storage Accelerate 2019, brought to you by Pure Storage. Good morning from Austin, Texas, Lisa Martin with Dave Vellante at Pure Accelerate 2019. This is our second day. We just came from a very cool, interesting keynote. Dave, whenever there's astronauts, my inner NASA geek from the early 2000s, she just comes right back up. Lila Melvin was on. What a phenomenal story. Talking about technology and the feeling of innovation, but also a great story of inspiration from a steam perspective, science, technology, engineering, arts, math, I loved that. And... And fun. Very fun. One of the better talks I've ever seen. It really was. I had so many elements that I think you didn't have to be a NASA fan or a NASA geek or a space geek to appreciate all of the lessons that Lila and Melvin learned along the way that he really is inspiring everybody in the audience to take note of. It was, I thought it was outstanding. That was incredibly accomplished, right? I mean, scientist, MIT engineer, played in the NFL, went to space. Some really fun stuff when they were doing, messing around with gravity. I never knew you could do that. He had this water bubble. I've never seen that before and they were throwing M&M's inside and then he consumed it and choked on it, which was pretty funny. Yeah, well, it was near and dear to me. I worked with NASA my first job at a grad school. I did and managed biological payloads that flew on the space shuttle. And the mission that he talked about that didn't land Columbia, that was the mission that I worked on. So when he talked about that countdown clock going positive, I was there on the runway with that. So for me, it just struck a chord of... So this is, of course, the 50th anniversary of the moonwalk. And you know how I have this thing about watches, kind of like you have with shoes? I had to... Hey, handbags. Is that not true? Oh, it's handbags for you? I know, that was a terrible thing for me to say. But you have great shoes. So I just assumed, but not good to make assumptions. So I bought a moon watch this year, which was the watch that Neil Armstrong used not the exact one, but the similar one, right? And it actually has an acrylic face because they're afraid if it cracked in space, you'd have glass all over the place. So that's a little nostalgia there. Well, and one of the neat things too is you look at the mission that President John F. Kennedy established in the 60s for getting a man in space in that 10-year period, that being accomplished. And kind of a parallel with what Pure Storage has done in its first 10 years of tremendous innovation. This keynote, again, day two, standing here only, at least about 3,000 people are so here. Storage, as James Governor said, your friend and also who keynoteered after Leland this morning. You know, Mark Andreessen, software is eating the world, storage is eating the world. We have to have secure locations to store all this data so that we can extract maximum value from it. So nice parallel between the space program and Pure Storage's achievements. James is really good, isn't he?  But James is very strong. He's funny, he's witty, he cuts to the chase, he always tells it like it is. He's a very, Monk Chips is very focused on developers and they do a really good job there. One of the things he talked about was S3 and how Amazon uses this working backwards methodology, which maybe a lot of people don't know about, but what they do is they write and rewrite and rewrite and vet and rewrite the press release before they announce the product. And then even before they develop the product, so they write the press release and then they work backwards from there. So this is the outcome that we're trying to achieve and it's a very disciplined process that they use and as he said, they may revise it hundreds and hundreds of times and he put up Andy Jassy's quote from 2004 around S3. That actually surprised me, 2000, maybe I read it wrong. No, it was 2004. S3 came out after EC2, which was 2006, so I don't know, maybe I'm getting my dates wrong or I think James actually got his dates wrong, but who knows, maybe he got a copy of that from the internal working document, working backwards doc, that could be what it was. But again, the point being, they envisioned this simple storage that developers didn't have to think about that was virtually unlimited in capacity, highly available and dirt cheap, which is what people want. And so he talked about that and then he gave a little history of the Dell Technologies families and I tweeted out this funny little, basically Pivotal, VMware, EMC and Dell and their history. Dell was basically IPO in 1984 and then today. There's a few things in between, I know. But he's got a great perspective on things and I think it resonated with the audience. Then he talked a lot about Kubernetes, jokingly tongue-in-cheek how Kubernetes, everybody thought was going to kill VMware. But his big takeaway was look, you got all these skills, virtualization skills, core database skills. I would even add to that, understanding of how storage works and I always joke, if your career is based on managing loans, you might want to rethink your career. But his point was, which I liked, it was look, all those skills you've learned are valuable but you now have to step up your game and learn new skills. You have to build on top of those skills. So the history that you have and the knowledge that you've built up is very valuable but it's not going to propel you to the next decade. And so I thought that was a good takeaway and it was an excellent talk. So looking back at the conversations yesterday, the press releases that came out, the advancements of what Pure is doing with AWS, with NVIDIA, with the AI data hub, for example, delivering more of their portfolio as a service to allow businesses, whether it's a law firm, like we talked to yesterday, a utility or Mercedes AMG Petunas Motorsport to be able to access data securely, incredibly quickly, recover it, restore it, absolutely critical and really can be game-changing depending on the type of organization. I want to get your perspectives on some of the things that you heard anecdotally yesterday after we wrapped. In terms of the atmosphere, the vibe, the thoughts on Pure's next 10 years. Yeah, so several things. Just some commentary, so it's always good at night. You go around, you get a lot of data, we sometimes call it metadata. I think one of the more interesting announcements to me was the block storage on AWS. I don't necessarily think this is going to be a huge product near-term for Pure in terms of meaningful revenue, but I think it's interesting that they're embracing the trend of the cloud and they're actually architecting cloud solutions using Amazon services and blending in their own super gluing, their own, I mean it's not really super glue, but blending in their own software for their customers to extend. Now, some of the nuances, I don't think they're going to have better write performance, I think they'll have better read performance, clearly they have better availability. I think it's going to be a little bit more expensive. All these things are TBD. That's just my take based on looking at what I've seen and talking to some people. But to me, the important thing is that Pure's embracing that cloud model. Historically, companies that are trying to defend an existing business, they retreat. They denigrate, they don't embrace. We know that Pure's going to make more money on-prem than it does in the cloud, at least I think. And so it's to their advantage for companies to stay on-prem, but at the same time, they understand the trend is your friend and they're embracing that. So that was kind of one thing. The second thing I learned is Charlie, G, and Carlo spent a lot of time with them last night as did you. He's a bit of a policy wonk in very sort of narrow areas. He shared with me some of the policy work that he's done around IP protection and not necessarily on the side that you would think. You would think, okay, IP protection, that's a good thing, but a lot of the laws that we're trying to be promoted for IP protection were there to help big companies, essentially crushed small companies. So he fought against that. He shared with me some things around net neutrality. You think you know which side of net neutrality he'd be on, not necessarily. So he had some really interesting perspectives on that. We also talked to you, and I won't share the name of the company, but a very large financial institution that's betting a lot on Pure. It was very interesting to me. This is one of the brand names. Everybody would know it if you heard it. And their head of storage infrastructure was here at the show. Now, I know this individual and this person doesn't go to a lot of shows, but this person shows to come to this show because they're making an investment in Pure in a fairly big way. And they spent a lot of time with Pure management expressing their desires as part of an executive forum that Pure holds. They didn't really market that a lot. They didn't really tell us too much about it because it was a little private thing, but I happen to know this individual. And I learned several things. They like Pure a lot. They use it for a lot of their workloads, but they have a lot of other storage. They can't necessarily get rid of that other storage for a lot of reasons. Inertia, technical debt, good tickets at the baseball game, all kinds of politics going on there. I also asked specifically about some hybrid companies products where the cost structure's a little bit better. So this gets me to flash array C. And we talked to Charlie Jean Carlo about this about his flash prices come down and it opens up new markets. I got some other data yesterday and today that that flash array C is not going to be quite priced, we don't think, as well as hybrid arrays. It's closing the gap. It's between one and one and a quarter, one and a half dollars per gigabyte. Whereas hybrid arrays, you're seeing half that, 70 cents a gigabyte. Sometimes as low as 60 cents a gigabyte. Sometimes higher, sometimes higher as a dollar. But the average around 65, 70 cents a gigabyte. So there's still a gap there. Flash prices have to come down further. The other thing I learned, I'm going to just keep going. Go ahead. The other thing I learned is that China is really building a lot of fab capacity in NAND to try to take out the thumb drive marketplace. So they're going to go after the low end. So companies like Samsung and Toshiba, Toshiba just renamed the company. I can't remember the name of the company, but Micron and the NAND flash NAND manufacturers are going to have to now go use their capacity and go after the enterprise. Because China fab is going to crush the low end and bomb the low end pricing. Somebody else told me about a third of flash consumption is in China now. So interesting things going on there. So near term, flash array C is not going to just crush spinning disk and hybrid. It's going to get closer and it's going to slowly eat away at that. As NAND prices come down, it really could more rapidly eat away at that. So I learned some other stuff too, but I'll take a breath. So one of the things I think resoundingly that we heard not just yesterday on the program day, but even last night at the executive event we were at is that from this large financial services company that you mentioned, Pure Storage is a strategic partner to many organizations from small to large that is incredibly valued to your point. This gentleman only goes to maybe a couple of events a year and this is one of them. This is a company that in its first 10 years has embraced competition ahead on. I loved how you talked about yesterday, 10 years ago, they just drove a truck through EMC's market share and sort of ripping and replacing. They're bold, but they're also doing it in a way that's very methodical. They're working on bringing, changing companies' perspectives of even backup data as becoming an asset. So put it on flash. Because if you can't rapidly restore that if there's an outage, whether it is an attack or it's unintentional, you know, human related, and that data can't be recovered quickly, you're in a big, big problem. And so them as a strategic component of this as in any industry, I think was a very resounding sentiment that I heard and felt yesterday. Yeah, this ties into TAM expansion, what we talked to Charlie, Giancarlo about. New workloads with AI as an example, flash, or AC, lowering prices will open up some of those new workloads. Data protection backup is clearly an opportunity. And I think it's interesting, you're seeing a lot of companies now announce, a lot of vendors announce flash-based recovery systems. I'll call them recovery systems because I don't even consider them backup anymore. It's not about backup, it's about recovery. Oracle was actually one of the first to use that kind of concept with the zero data loss recovery appliance. They call it backup, call it recovery. So it's all about fast and near instantaneous recovery. Why is that important? Because as companies move toward a digital transformation, and what does that mean, what is a digital business? Digital business is all about how you use data and leveraging data in new ways to create new value to monetize or cut costs. And so being able to have access to that data and recover from any in access to that data in a split second is crucial. So Pure can participate in that. Now Pure's not alone. You know, it's no coincidence that Veritas and Veeam and Cohesity and Rubrik, they work with Pure, they work with HPE. They work with a lot of the big players, and so Pure has to work to do to win its fair share. Staying on backup for a moment. You know, it's interesting to see behind us, Veritas and Veeam have the biggest sort of presence here. Rubrik has a presence here. I'm sure Cohesity is here maybe some way, somehow, but I haven't seen him in a big way. Maybe they're not here. I'll have to check that out, but Veeam is actually doing very well, particularly with lower ASPs. We know that about Veeam. They've always come at it from the mid-market and SMB, whereas Cohesity and Rubrik and Veritas traditionally are coming at it from a higher end. Certainly Cohesity and Rubrik on higher ASPs. Veeam's doing very well with Pure. They're also doing very well with HPE. It's interesting, so Cohesity announced the deal with HPE recently, I don't know, about six months ago. So everybody thought, oh, maybe Veeam's on the outs. No, Veeam's doing very well with HPE. It's different parts of the organization. One works with the server group, one works with the storage group, and they're both companies are actually doing quite well. I actually think Veeam is ahead of the curve because they've been working with HPE for quite some time and they're doing very well in the Pure base. So it's by partnering with companies, Pure is able to enter that market much in the same way that NetApp did in the early days. They have a very tight relationship, for example, with Commvault. So the other thing, I was talking to Keith Townsend last night, totally a non-secretary here, non-secretary, but he's talking about outposts and how Amazon is going to be challenged to service outposts. Outpost is the on-prem Amazon stack that VMware and Amazon announced that they're co-marketing. So who is going to service outposts? Is it not going to be Amazon? That's not their game in professional service. They're going to have to be the ecosystem. The large SIs or the VARs, the partners, VMware partners, because that's not VMware's play either. So Keith Townsend's premise, I'd love to have him on theCUBE to talk about this, is they're going to have trouble scaling outposts because of that service issue. So believe it or not, when we come to these conferences, we talk about other things than just Pure. There's a lot of stuff going on. New Relic is happening this week. Oracle Open World is going on this week. John Furrier just got back from AWS Bahrain and of course we're here at Pure Accelerate. We are, and this is our second day of two days of coverage. We've got cause on next, so I think it's never been on theCUBE. We've got kicks on later, a great lineup, more customers, Rob Lee's going to be on, so we're going to be digging more into Pure's cloud strategy the next 10 years, how they're going to accelerate that and pack it into the next couple of years. I tell you one of the things I want to do, Lisa, I'll just call it out. An individual from Dell EMC wrote a blog ahead of Pure Accelerate. I think it was last week, about four or five days ago. And this individual called out like, they were one, two, three, four, five things that we should ask Pure. So we should ask them, we should ask cause, we should ask kicks. There was criticism, but of course they're biased. These guys, you know, we always fight, they have these internacing wars. Sometimes I like to call them, no I won't say it. So scale out, question mark there, we want to ask cause about that and kicks. Pure uses proprietary flash modules. They do that because it allows them to do things that you can't do with off the shelf flash, but I want to ask and challenge them that. I want to ask about their philosophy in tiering. They don't really believe in tiering. Why not? I want to understand that better. They've made some acquisitions. Compuvera is a one acquisition, it's a file system. What does that mean for FlashBlade? I want to ask that. And we didn't hear anything about that yesterday, so that's a good point that we should dig into that. Yeah, so we'll bring that up. And then the Evergreen thing, competitors hate Evergreen because Pure was first with it. They caught everybody off guard. I said yesterday, competitors hate Evergreen because competitors live off of maintenance and if you're not on their maintenance, you know they just keep jacking up the maintenance prices and if you don't move to the new system, maintenance just keeps getting more and more and more and more expensive and so they force you, you know, they locked in, force you to move. Pure introduced this different model.  To your point, competitors hate it. Customers love it. We heard a lot about that yesterday. We've got a couple more customers on our packed program today, Dave. So let's get right to it. Let's wrap up so we can get Kaws on stage. All right, awesome. All right, for Dave Vellante, I'm Lisa Martin. You're watching theCUBE from Pure Accelerate 2019. Day two, stick around, Kaws, John Calgrove, CTO and founder of Pure will be on next.


We have, in the past, covered the astonishing discovery solely made by Dr. Sam Osmanagat within Bosnia, long thought to have merely been a hill, completely overgrown and neglected, with many locals even building upon and farming its inclines. Dr. Osmanagat, however, after studying the geology of the area, realized the reason for precise angles of this supposed natural formation, eventually confirming that it was, indeed, an enormous ancient pyramid, one that, after long arduous research, has been found to rival even those of Giza, indeed, even its plateau, especially if one takes into consideration the following exposé. Regardless of constant mockery, objections, resistance, and dismissal he has predictably experienced from mainstream-funded academia, Dr. Osmanagat has not only unearthed vast portions of this ancient structure, proving beyond doubt that it was, indeed, an ancient pyramid, but has also successfully penetrated its inner sanctum, along with many other highly intriguing ancient sites located within the local vicinity, all littered with stones that seemingly give off resonance frequencies that are not only being ignored by mainstream scientists, but baffling all those who valiantly decide to explore their features. Yet, thanks to Dr. Sam's continued efforts, our understandings of the incomprehensible, astonishingly true scale of this site has increased dramatically, and indeed, the feat that whoever built it went through in constructing the site truly unbelievable. Jock spent 16 months as official videographer for the Archaeological Park Foundation, a Bosnian NGO non-profit organization created by Dr. Sam Osmanagat, during which, and thanks to the considerable effort of hundreds of volunteers who since 2010 have been involved in the backbreaking excavations of the site, clearing many tons of rock and earth from the area, including the Ravni tunnels. Such tunnels are apparently widely known locally for their healing powers, which, upon investigation, many alternative investigators have recorded unusual bio-electromagnetic energy levels within. Yet, Jock and Sam's most recent personal discoveries is the connection of these tunnels, located a fair distance from the pyramid itself, interwoven with all the local ancient sites, a result clearly intended by the past intelligence responsible for their creation. These tunnels backfilled 4,600 years ago, for reasons that many have postulated, was done to avoid further degeneration of the original civilization's work. Thus, we're clearly a conservation effort that, just like I have postulated on several other videos, are the purpose for the casing stones, which can still be found upon the great pyramids, were done by groups who clearly revered these sites. Furthermore, regardless of this connection of tunnels, Jock and Samir have also realized, thanks to these contributory excavation efforts, something truly astonishing regarding not only the Bosnian pyramid, but the entire surrounding area, which, just like the pyramid, were long presumed to have been merely a natural geological landscape. However, all of the curious sites that had been found dotting the surrounding area were not only undeniably man-made, but that the entire landscape was actually once carved out by hand or possibly machine. With the river Fonica, which runs through the entire site, masterfully designed to permanently remain placid, also man-made, and due to the fossilized stonework found, enabling this water's manipulation, according to Jock, indicates it could have possibly been completed millions instead of thousands of years ago, successfully creating a river which gently meanders through the site. Who built the Bosnian Plateau? Who had such tremendous earth-moving and water manipulation capabilities, seemingly many hundreds of thousands or possibly millions of years ago? As the investigations within the area continue, it is slowly growing into one of the most enormous, most compelling areas of evidence of ancient advanced lost civilization to be found anywhere on earth. Thank you very much to Jock for bringing all this astonishing information to light, furthering all of our understandings of their past capabilities, and as the research grows, so does the compounding proof of these past, highly capable civilizations. We will, of course, keep you posted through our connections, a place that is undoubtedly highly compelling. If you enjoy our content, if you think our battle worthy, please help us to continue our voyage of discovery in unraveling the mysteries of history. Links to donate can be found within the description. Without you, we cannot survive. Thank you.


Good evening everyone and welcome. This is Melissa Arma with StocksWish and here today I'm reviewing BABA I called this as an option trade today very early this morning before the open sent the letter out for the option letter and It was a huge call. I'm just making call after call lately. I really do have I have the golden Midas touch myself here This is still higher Whoever the earnings are next week So the thing to do is to exit the trade before the earnings because you don't you don't know what it's going to do After the earnings, although it could continue higher So I called the 120 calls in an option trade on BABA this morning It ran up into the strike and it and obviously it still has several days left Before the earnings, but I called the trade out for past that it's just you know You've got to get out of profit here and today was a here. This is get this is moving up tonight Which is up in the aftermarket just seen that now 120 14 Yeah, that's on its own So this is doing its own thing So BABA made a brand new all-time high today in the trading day and it's higher and it's it's it's higher So it was a really really nice call for people in the letter and how do I do this? The the the ironic thing is I call this today. I started teaching a bullish gap class today The stock gapped up this morning and I saw it. I don't even know the reason for the gap up It doesn't matter. I saw the gap. I saw it would rally. I saw 120 was in sight The closer you can get to this strike the more beneficial it is for you Obviously sometimes you pay up for that, but the price of this was good It was not crazy and it did run up. It ran up all day it power-trended basically the whole day and You know the market made new highs again today in the QQQs So this worked where does it go tomorrow? We'll have to see I can't tell until I see where it's actually gapping in the pre-market tomorrow morning But tonight in the post market it is up 709 it's up tonight and it and it got near that area which it touched I mean it looks like if this market hadn't closed at four o'clock Which is when we closed that they would have traded up higher. I mean it looks like it just ran out of day Look here. Actually. What was the close was actually right at? 199 I mean it touched 120 and then basically the market closed Poor thing You know bottom line is you could still be in it It's got time, but the earnings are next week So you were the best thing to do when you're up in this trade which you're up And if you did it today you could get in today get at it today You kind of get in it today you can hold it until next week. You could have a nice big push run up I have to see where gaps tomorrow, but I see follow-through in this for sure Whether it happens tomorrow or takes one to two days 122 123 125 dream target on this before the earnings, which is the 18th I have to look and see if it's in the morning or the night time Bob I usually reports in the morning for For us, so it's probably morning of the 18th But either way this should have a follow-through rally And even if you did it this morning in the call and get out today was a really nice trade I mean to be able to take something to have to go right into the money is always the best thing to do So we'll keep watching we'll keep seeing we'll keep We'll keep seeing what once we get and I will be watching this after the earnings as well to see if it gaps up If it gaps down if there's a call on it was it anything to do if I can day trade it if there's any options in it I will look at that after it gaps after the earnings, but for now I call this this morning. It worked I'm just on fire lately. I'm gonna stay focused. I've got to stay really serious I have to just stay focused focused focused sometimes when you're calling a lot of good trades and and I've absolutely am you You got to remind yourself every day stay focused stay focused read the chart Because sometimes you can you can get all crazy and excited about the money and the trades, but I'm just gonna stay focused here and what I'm doing in concentrate So wonderful one here today in Baba. Good job. Those of you that did it in the gap option letter And we'll see you we get tomorrow. Have a great day everyone


Move it. Oh, yeah, he likes the dirt. Oh, yes. Oh, yes. Oh, yeah, quick Can't quit get that lunch angle down yet. Ha working it. Nope. We ain't going anywhere. No Worked all night to get these seats and he's gonna perch in left field. No There he goes He gone He's in cruise control now Ran into the scoreboard down goes the goose. Oh the poor thing He's okay. Thankfully seems to be okay now


Now, without further ado, we have here my colleague Zach about talking about DevOps for the.NET Engineer. Let's go to him. Hey everybody, my name is Zachary Deptawa. I'm a Cloud Advocate for Microsoft, and I'm excited to be here today. I'm talking about DevOps for.NET Core Devs. So let's just jump in. So what is DevOps? We've often thought, do we actually need DevOps? Is it a question of, is this something that we should even be focusing on now or in the near future? Well, we know now that you absolutely need DevOps. It's critical for businesses to innovate at the speed necessary in today's world. If you ask people, what is DevOps? If you ask five people, you'll probably get 10 different answers. So I can tell you what Microsoft's view of DevOps is. DevOps is the union of people, process, and products to enable continuous delivery of value to our end users. Notice I didn't say continuously deliver code. I said continuously deliver value, because if I just continuously deliver code, I can push it up in a source control, but I end up with a mountain of code somewhere. Unless it's delivering value, it's not really worth anything. So why is DevOps important? This is a big one. So if you're not currently using DevOps best practices, I can guarantee you your competitors either are or they're going to be very soon. So what that means is your competitor will be able to out-innovate you, they'll be able to do things at a much quicker pace than you can, and that might make you obsolete, and nobody wants to be obsolete, believe me. All right. So we always thought about this DevOps thing, right? We've got some manual processes. We're going to start to automate them. Things are feeling good. It's kind of a theory right now. Let's get things going, but now we have actual data. We can see the empirical data that says that companies that use DevOps actually innovate much faster than companies that don't use DevOps. It's not just by a little bit, it's by a lot. So when we think of DevOps at Microsoft, there's really three pillars that you need to pay attention to, and number one being people, number two being process, and number three being products, and we'll dive into those a little bit here. So admittedly, the hardest part of all of this of adopting DevOps best practices, in my opinion, is the people, and people they're averse to change, but not only that, you have to have this idea of continuously delivering value to your end users. From the very top of your organization to the very bottom, everybody has to be in line saying, yes, we want to continuously deliver this value to our end users, and that's really going to be the hardest part is making that shift. The process, now that's a little bit easier because really all the processes is finding something inside of your organization, inside of your team that works for you, that allows you to innovate quickly, but also allows you to maintain a high standard of quality for your applications. So that's probably the easiest of all three of these. Now let's talk about the products. So this is where you're going to find things that will help you use the DevOps best practices and methodologies. You need products that will help you plan and track, things like work items, bugs, impediments. You need things that are going to allow your developers to push and pull from source control, but not only that, that will tie back to that planning and tracking. So you can see where your work is actually making an impact. You also need something that's going to bundle up your code for you automatically. So your dev should be able to push their code for testing and have something fire off that's going to bundle that up and push it out into a testing environment for you right away. After you have everything into production, it doesn't stop there because you need to monitor and watch what's actually happening inside of your application. You need to know, is your application up? Is your application down? How are the response times within your application? You need to be able to see what your users are actually doing inside of your application. I don't know how many times I've talked to clients that say, we built this app to do this thing, but our customers are using it in a much different way than we thought that they were going to use it. So what that data allows you to do, is you can look and say yes, we're absolutely delivering value and that's great. Now we can double down on this and we can move forward in our next sprint and do way more cool things for our end users that will deliver value. If you're not delivering value, that's awesome too. You see that data, so you can pivot and make sure you deliver value on the next sprint. So all of these things, there's a ton of tools that can do all of these things, and these are all great tools. You can pick and choose these tools that will fit what you're doing. You have to make sure these tools can communicate, you have to make sure that there is no problem with that communication, and you have to make sure that it's set up accordingly and they work great, or you could replace all of these things with something like Azure DevOps Service. You can target any language, targeting any platform using Azure DevOps, and that's what we're going to talk about today. So what is Azure DevOps? Well, at a high level, it's a suite of five products. Azure Boards being the work item, task tracking management, you can track bugs, impediments, features, things like that. Azure Pipelines being the Git repository system for private Git repos inside of Azure. I'm sorry, Azure Pipelines being the CICD portion. This is the build in the release portion. This is the automation. Azure Repos being the private Git repository portion. Azure Test Plans is the testing infrastructure inside of Azure DevOps, and Azure Artifacts is the artifact repository inside of Azure DevOps. So that's great. That's a ton of talking. I got it out of the way as quick as I could. Let's jump into a demo and see this in action. So what you're looking at here, this is a.NET Core app that I have deployed. It's an actual app that's running. You can actually go to that if you want to. But what it's doing, this is an app that simply tracks my exercise and it tracks my nutrition for me. But what I noticed, actually what my co-worker Abel noticed, is that for some reason, we're tracking the color of our food, and honestly, we don't care about what the color of the food is, we just care about the important information. So we have this board here inside of Azure DevOps. This is our.NET Conf demo project, and this is our board, and you can see our tracking here. We have in sprint, a swim lane, we have a super-duper important swim lane, and you can see we have a bug here for food tracking should not track color. So this is really awesome. I'm actually hosting the code inside of Azure Repos here. So what I can do, I can click this little button here, create a new branch. I'm going to call this food color tracking, if I can spell, there we go. It's going to be based on the.NET Conf demo repository and the master branch. What's really awesome is because I built it from that work item from that bug, it actually links right to it. So I'm going to create this branch and it's going to link from my work item to that branch. So now on this branch that work item is there. So now I have a new branch, food color tracking. Let me drop over to PowerShell, and this is just a normal Git stuff that I'm going to be doing. I'm going to do a Git pull because I just created a new branch. I'll do a Git, if I can spell. Oh my goodness. Okay. Check out and let's not that. Okay. Git. I can't spell today. Okay. There we go. Now we're back on track. I checked out the food color tracking branch, and so now that I have that checked out, let's actually go edit the code. So I don't care about this color field in my database. I'm going to delete it inside my SQL file here, and I'm going to save that. I need to comment some stuff out here really quickly. I don't need these things. Okay. I'm also going to comment out here as well. Let's get this commented out. That's not necessary. All right. So now that I've made these changes, I'm going to save this. If I go back over to my PowerShell, I see that I've changed those three files. So I'm going to do normal commands, a Git add. I'm going to do a Git commit dash M, and this is just going to set a commit message for these changes, food color tracking removed. I'll do a Git push. So what this is doing is I'm actually pushing the code that I just changed into my food color tracking branch into Azure DevOps repos. So now if I go back over to my repository and I refresh, Azure DevOps, the repos, it actually saw that I updated my food color tracking branch, and it says, hey, you just updated this. Do you want to create a pull request? Well, if I wasn't done with my work, I wouldn't create a pull request, but I am done. This is all the work that I need to do. So I'm going to click create a pull request. It pops it up for me automatically. I'm going to be merging food color tracking branch into master. That's great. The title and description are pulled from my commit message and you can see that my food tracking should not track color bug is actually attached to this pull request. I didn't have to do anything and you can see my changes here that I made. Everything looks good. Let's create this pull request and boom, I've got a pull request. I can check out the files here and take a look, but not only that, I can make comments. I can say inline, this is the best code I've ever seen, which is totally true. I can hit comment, there's the comment inline, and now if everything looks good, I can go ahead and approve this. Now in the wild, you probably don't want to approve your own pull requests, but for the purposes of this demo I am. So what's really awesome is inside of Azure DevOps, I have a build and release pipeline, and I have it set for continuous integration. You can see this little blue here. That means that it saw that I made a change in my master branch and it kicked off my build automatically for me. This is happening in real time. We're actually watching these tasks run in real time. But even after the fact, I can drill in and get a look at what happened if I need to. If I need to go back for troubleshooting or just want to see what happened. While this is running though, let's take a look at what a build is actually comprised of inside of Azure DevOps. All right, here we go. So this is a build. You can see that we're getting the source. This source we're pulling from the Azure repo that I have, .NET Comp demo from the master branch. I could pull it from another source if I wanted to. Also, this is an agent-based task runner. So what's happening is I'm running tasks on an agent. These are the tasks that I'm running. But what's really cool is you can use a hosted agent that's hosted inside of Azure, or you can run an agent anywhere you want to run it. I'm actually running my agent on my demo server, and that's just something that you can do if you'd like to do that. But you can see because this is an ASP.NET Core app, I'm using NuGet, building the solution, testing my assemblies, copying my Dacpack, and I'm going to publish this to an artifact. This artifact is what will be used in the release, and you can see my build finished. So let's go ahead and take a look at this artifact real quick. So now that the build finished, here's the artifact. I've called it Drop, and you can see I've got my Dacpack, and I've got my web app.zip. I've got everything that I need for my release, but not only that because I have continuous integration and continuous delivery set up here, it's already kicked off my build into my development environment, and that is so powerful. I didn't have to do anything besides make that pull request and merge it. So let's take a look at releases real quick. So the way that I view releases, you can set up stages and such that you have one for each environment. So I have a development environment, a staging environment, a production environment, but you could do this in any manner that you want to if you have a different way that you like to set that up. You can also have stages that run in parallel with each other if you need that. You can see that we're using the artifact that was built, and also I can drill in here, and just like my build, I can watch this happen real time or go back and look at the logs if I need to, while this release is happening though, let's take a look at how a release is created and how a release is set up. So you can see that each stage has jobs and tasks, and for each of my stages, they all look the same, but it's the same set up for my build. So this is a task runner that runs on an agent, it can be hosted in Azure again, or it can be hosted on an agent on a server like I have here for my demo. But I'm deploying my Azure App Service, deploying my database and running Selenium, and that's the gist of my releases. Let's take a look and see where we are. Okay. So my release finished to development, but you notice it's blue here, it's not green, it's kind of weird, right? Let's take a look at what's going on. So I set up a post-deployment approver required. So now that this has kicked off, it's done my development deployment. I have an approver that's required to say, yes, everything looks good, I've tested it out. Let's go ahead and roll over to our staging environment. So I'm an approver, so I'm gonna go ahead and approve this. I can say, looks good to me, approve. I could also reject if I wanted to, but everything looks good. So theoretically that should have kicked off my build, right? Let's take a look. I mean, I'm sorry, am I released to staging? But it looks like it's hung again. So what's going on here? I set up a pre-deployment approver as well. So yes, someone that looked at development, made sure everything was fine, they were able to approve that, push it over to staging, but now someone from staging needs to go and take a look before it blasts that code into my staging environment. So whoever is managing that environment can go and say everything looks good, but not only that, if everything looks good, they can also defer the deployment for later. So say somebody like me decides I wanna push code at 5 p.m. on a Friday, which is not the best idea. Well, it can roll out to development, I can even accept that in my post-approver acceptance here, but it won't blast into another environment until somebody from that environment can take ownership and accept it. So that's really awesome. I'm just gonna go ahead and approve this though. And now it's in progress and it's rolling into my staging environment. So you can also set this up to where it's manual only, you don't have to do an automatic release if you don't want to, but that's just how I have this configured. So this is all really cool, but I wanna show you kind of a neat trick here. And actually, you know what, let's make sure before I do this, let's make sure that my changes are working. There we go, the color field is gone. So my changes look good, not only do my changes look all right, but if I go back to my boards, that bug that I was tracking that I opened this branch for, because the branch closed in that pull request, it actually resolved this bug for me. I didn't have to come here and do any of this, it just moved it right on over. So that's awesome and it's also tracking that. If I drill down into this bug, you can see that it actually tracks what happened with this work item. And so now that looks all great, but let me show you something awesome.  Now what this does is this actually scaffolds out an entire DevOps and Azure DevOps project for you. So you can see all the different languages here that we have built in, you can bring your own code if you'd like to. I'm gonna click .NET and ASP.NET Core. I'll add a database. Let's go ahead and use Windows web app and let's name this .NET comp demo nine. We'll go ahead and choose an organization that I have access to and I can change the location here. Let's go ahead and put this in East US. There's also some additional settings that I can set. I can change where my application insights are and I can change where my database lives as well. I'm gonna put them all in East US just because and here we go. I can click done. And now what this is doing is super powerful. This is actually building out my Azure DevOps project for me. It's building out my repository, it's building out my builds and my releases all for me and it's actually going to do a deployment. Now this takes a few minutes to set up because there are several moving pieces and it is doing a deployment but I have one that's pre-baked right here. And so you can see when it's done building you have your CICD portion. This is the DevOps portion on your left side. You can see your Azure resources on the right side but what I find really cool is you can go into these and these are deep links into Azure DevOps. So if I click here, this will throw me right into Azure DevOps into this project and now I can see that it actually gave me an ARM template for what it deployed. I can see my application here. I can fork it, I can clone it, I can do all the things that you would normally do with a Git repository and that's awesome. And I can see, I can drill right into the build, I can drill right into the release and I can also hit the application. This is a live application. This URL will work for you as well. It's just a demo application so it's nothing robust but it is an application nonetheless. So something else that I want to mention that's really cool, you can build this scaffolding right using a DevOps project inside of the Azure portal. But once you have that built, this is an ASP.NET app, that's all it is. So I can go in here and take all this code out of my repository, push up my ASP.NET core app and have it deploy automatically to my testing environment. Now it gives me a quick and easy way to test this without having to set up all the bits and pieces myself. Not only that, if you don't want to mess with this repository, you can actually go to your builds here and this is just a normal, just like the other build that I showed you as a hosted task runner and my sources are right here. So I can change the source here that my build is actually pulling from if I want to. So you can set this up, you can change out your source or you can just change out the information in your repository and you are instantly or almost instantly working with a fully DevOps project. And so that's really powerful. I implore you to go check that out and try it out. But yeah, so my work here is done. Let's go back to this. And that's all I have for you. If you want to connect with me, I'm on Twitter, I'm a cloud advocate, like I mentioned, and I'm at ZDevTowah. And here's some good links if you want to take a screenshot of this or a picture of this, make sure to follow at azure DevOps for the latest information. And that's it. Thank you so much.


Going on everyone Sam here with late sports cards been one box of 23 Bowman Chrome University football hobby for Ben Elk Let's get up here Ben. Let's do a buddy Purple mini diamonds Braylon Allen's 299 Robbie Ashford. Nice Brennan Presley on the yellow auto to 75 Oklahoma State Drake May first Club Nick and apprentice Jarquez Hunter first base auto for Auburn Next Jeremiah Hunter purple shimmer Zina Tavion Sanders and base Michael Hall jr. First refractor OSU Green shimmer Bucky Irving. That's a nasty color match and he's kind of a stud at Oregon too. That's sweet To watch any of the Oregon and Washington game When that kid came in to kick the field goal, I was like, there's no shot this No shot he makes it Revlon Manchelen, right, which I know is messed up.  Ooh got a third auto Jalen Berger to 499. It's the first time I've seen extra auto Nice one there Johnny Wilson Michael Pratt that does makes that makes more sense. Yeah, yeah, yeah, they're close tonight Corey Jackson Arnold Chris Hilton Marvin Harrison first Will Shepherd and Ty Simpson Estimate Rue Aller Jeremiah Hunter Purple Malik neighbors to 399 Rashad Da Binyon Yeah, more tomorrow night with Kyle Tori Horton X-Fractor first Tonya Williams Christopher Vizina first refractor refractor Tyler van Will do it for your break there Ben. Thank you for the sport buddy. Good right out to my man


Welcome to the series Photographic Chemistry presented by the Foundation of the American Institute for Conservation of Historic and Artistic Works. This program was made possible by grants from the National Endowment for the Humanities and the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation. Each program in this series is presented as a short video. Depending on your video viewer, you should be able to pause, return to a previous section, or skip ahead to a later section by using a scroll bar or on-screen icons. You will find an outline of the course and short quizzes to test your understanding on the course webpage. There are other point defects which also occur in silver halide grains that have an impact on the sensitivity of a silver halide film or paper-based emulsion. And these are impurity defects. These are areas where a silver or a halide should be, but instead another ion has taken its place. There are two main types of impurity defects that can be seen in silver halide chemistry. These are monovalent and divalent impurities. Remember back on the emulsion equation that I showed in the very first slide that I said back in the day they were using cadmium and lithium salts. When they did this, they didn't realize at the time when there was no expectation of the concepts of latent image theory, they didn't expect that using these salts, they would actually produce a silver halide emulsion that was less sensitive than if these impurities were not present. If you think about what I'm saying, if we go back to the idea of silver mobility being extremely important, what if I place another equally charged or even more positively charged ion right in the middle of the works, if you will. Another positive charge of a different type of ion is going to impede this silver flow. And so if silver is not able to freely move by these frankel defects within the grain, you're going to slow down the ability for latent images to be formed, and it will be as if the film was of a slower speed. This occurred with cadmium being present, so a divalent impurity, a point defect where cadmium actually takes the place of where silver should be. Lead has this effect. Copper, sodium, the lithium they would use would have an impact on film speed. Now that was to the negative impact. I could actually have a positive impact to make the film extremely sensitive by placing an impurity defect which is negatively in charge. I died has this property and a more important one sulfide has this property. The sulfide is a big two minus charged anion. If you think about silver mobility a little bit later in latent image theory, we're going to talk about that silvers need to congregate and they congregate faster if they are pulled to a certain location within the grain at about the same time. This is what the sulfide ion does. There is a classic story in the history of Kodak where back in the middle 20th century they were sending out brownie cameras and these brownie cameras were coming back for development and the film was coming up fully exposed. Fully exposed. All the film was black at a full silver density. It was hard to believe that everybody's cameras were being overexposed at the same time. So they're starting to get the complaints. This effect, this problem in the product almost sunk Kodak back in the middle 1950s. And they did some research of trying to find out what was going on. What they found out was they changed their gelatin source and their gelatin was coming from the Midwest and I believe it was somewhere around Iowa where the feed for the cattle which they used to make the gelatin was very rich in sulfide. So that when they were making the gelatin there was a lot of sulfide present. They didn't anticipate the sulfide being there and so when they made the emulsions they were making a much more sensitive emulsion than was anticipated without the sulfide being present. As a result with it what was considered to be a normal exposure was actually an overexposure by several stops in the film. And again if they hadn't caught this problem as fast as they did and knew a little bit about the effects that impurity defects could have in silver halide emulsions we might not have seen Kodak beyond the middle 20th century. So positive impurities as shown on the slide has a way of modulating the sensitivity of a silver halide emulsion by slowing it down it does this by displacing silver and it lowers ion movement or conductivity. On the reverse negative impurities are often added for two purposes. One to control habit growth we've already talked about this where if the halide is in excess we tend to get non-cubic crystal structures but in the context of this discussion negative impurities also have a way of creating what are known as these ion traps which affect sensitivity and increases the sensitivity. Ion trapping is what we're going to talk about in latent image theory and it becomes a very important concept again. So silver mobility, silver conductivity is influenced by all these point defects that might be present during the emulsification process. You have completed this unit. Depending on your video viewer you should be able to scroll back to any point in the video as desired. The short quiz found in the course materials on the website may help you confirm your understanding of the concepts introduced here. Many thanks to the instructor, production editor, coordinator and the collaborative workshops in photograph conservation committee for their work to make this program possible.


Suppose you have three data sets and they represent changes in some genome. So in the first data set, these are your positions in the genome, Euclidotide 10, 12, 20, and so on. And this is the type of change that you have in this sample. So in sample one, you have these changes. In sample two, you have something like that, and in sample three, you have those. And suppose you want to merge all of this into a single table and use position as a kind of a common field, a hinge, if you wish to hook all the data on. Let's see how this works. First of all, I am going to create a list out of these data sets. So I'm just going to select them all and for all selected, build data set list. I will call this list samples, for example, and I will hide original elements. So here is my list. Again, if we look, we can see that obviously the list has data of the same type, but of course there are differences. So all data has the same structure, it has position column, and it has change column, but it has different content. So in some samples, site 20 is changed. In some samples, it's absent and so on. So what I want to do, I want to join all of them on that position column. And for that, I'm going to use column join tool. This is a very powerful tool. And in this case, we have collection with just three data sets, but it will as easily work on a collection with 10,000 data sets. So let's select the collection question. And the identifier column, in other words, the column on which to join things, in our case, is the first column. You will also notice that our file, our data set has header. So this is the header line. And so we're just going to tell the tool that it has one, each input file has one header line. And let's add the column name to the header. And this will be our empty character. We'll see what that means. And let's run it. In the end, we're going to get just one data set and let's see how it looks like. So you can see that we have three positions because this is the union of positions in all three samples. And for each data set, we have changes. So this is a changes in sample one, changes in sample two, changes in sample three. And you can see that empty data sets, there is nothing happening in position 12 in sample three, for example, they are represented by dots.


So one of my most memorable experiences being the videographer for Spaulding Decon was the fentanyl plus decom cleanup. Two businessmen from out of state. So their boss hadn't heard from them in a couple days so they called on a wellness check and that's when they were found dead in their Airbnb. The crazy thing is that they actually found traces of cocaine and fentanyl at the scene. I mean from a distance and everything it just looks like a white powder and stuff like that but it's actually extremely dangerous. The bio on the job and everything was still very very liquid. Removing that wasn't the hard part. The hard part was like decontaminating the actual scene of the fentanyl.  And for me personally seeing this be such a long and extreme process just to remove some white powder you know really kind of shows you just how dangerous fentanyl is.


Our topic is deflation. Deflation is a very important subject in economics, not only from a theoretical point of view, but especially also from a practical point of view. Indeed, deflation, the fight against deflation is one of the main justifications of monetary interventionism and central banking in particular. So maybe you should start off with a little reminder of what the problem allegedly consists in, the problem of deflation. And then we'll walk through the theory of deflation in a bridged manner, certainly, but quite systematically. Still, in several points, we'll first then define deflation, then we'll walk through the causes, the principal causes of deflation, or price deflation. Then we discuss the relationship between price deflation and economic growth, and then analyze under which circumstances price deflation might be problematic from a macroeconomic point of view, and then finally discuss monetary policy relative to deflation. OK, so let's first start off with the Keynesian saga, because the Keynesian saga dominates, unfortunately, both the media and also higher education. This is the saga that all students in economics I'm wiped with in the first university year and the second year at latest. So the saga goes as follows. If there is a tendency for the price level to diminish, and this means that by just holding money, by hoarding money, I will obtain a remuneration for my hoarding in the cost of time. The purchasing power of my money units will be higher in the future than it is now, simply by doing nothing, simply by doing them, by keeping them in my pocket. Therefore, I have an incentive to hoard money, so to withhold spending in the economy. If I withhold spending in the economy, companies will have lower revenue. If companies have lower revenue, then the companies themselves can spend less money.  They have to reduce their spending on intermediate products and whatever they buy from their suppliers. And these suppliers, then, and these employees, can themselves spend less money. So we're entering into the next round of reduced spending. And if aggregate spending is reduced, well, then there is a pressure on the price level. So prices will diminish even further. So the very problem, the very reason that is created, the problem in the first place, is reinforced in the second round. So we enter into a price deflationary spiral. And eventually, the economy vanishes into some sort of a black hole. Now, if you might think that I'm exaggerating, but literally, that's about the formulation that you find in Keynes's theory of money, chapter 12. I encourage you, in particular, to find the illustration that Keynes gives is the example of a banana economy.  We'll stay calm and now walk through the theory of deflation a little bit more systematically. So we start off with price deflation. What do we mean by price deflation? We're the economists here. Sir? A loss in the purchasing power of money that is caused by a decrease. No, no, no. It's not the loss in the purchasing power of money. A decrease. No. An increase of the purchasing power of money, a decrease of the price level. So most of it will be a durable decrease in the price level. So if the money prices of goods diminishes, well, that means that per unit of money we can buy more stuff. So the purchasing power of money increases. OK, so that's the standard definition. This is fine for us. So deflation has been defined differently in the history of thought, but we can neglect this. We'll focus on this case, which is the standard definition today. So what are the causes of price deflation so understood? There are four major, more or less, immediate causes that come into play. In causal analysis, you can always start with the immediate causes that come into play. And then each cause, of course, is always a cause on its own, or separate causes on its own. In each of those causes, there's a cause. There's a cause of a cause of a cause, and so on. So it's unlimited. It's the opening sentence of Kanmengas principles. There's no such thing that does not have a cause. All things have causes. So what we are doing are analyzing causes. Now, not all of these causes are universal. So in economics, we are focusing on economic science, particularly we are focusing on universal. That is, constant causal relationships that remain the same across time. There are other causal relationships that change in the cause of time. These are the contingent causal relationships. For example, the motivations of monetary policy. The central bank increases the money supply for different reasons. Today is this reason. Tomorrow is another. Yesterday has been another. So these causal relationships change. But what does not change are some of the objective consequences that result from an increase of the money supply, for example, an increase of the price level. So in economics, we are studying these universals. And therefore, we'll focus just on some of the immediate causes, because they will give us universals where some of the more remota causes are not universal. They are just contingent. So what are the causes? What are universal causes of price deflation? The ban is open. An increase of production versus the expansion of the money supply? OK, are both necessary, these two separate things? If both of those things occur, you'll have a. OK, so what if just one of them occurs? If one of them occurs, setter is paribus. Setter is paribus. Thank you, sir. That's very important. So of course, in scientific analysis, we always analyze setter is paribus. All we do in science, human understanding, is always analyze partial causal relationships. And then if we want to understand a whole, a situation that we observe in reality, that is, of course, always a complex phenomenon. It's the result of a multitude of factors that come into play. Now we are not God, therefore, we cannot understand all things simultaneously. So with human minds, we need to focus on individual causal strains and analyze them separately. Therefore, we need the setter is paribus clause. All other things being equal, if this and that happens, then this consequence will follow. So you said? So if you have an increase in the general output, overall output in the nation, or in economy, and the monetary supply remains constant, then your price level would fall. OK, so can we say if aggregate output increases, then the price level will fall. Can we say this? Setter is paribus? Sure. OK. So we have a first cause. If aggregate output increases, that is, if the quantity of those things that can be exchanged against money increases, then there is a tendency for the price level to diminish. It's a very important cause. Why is this so? Which basic economic law comes here into play? Something even more fundamental. Thank you, sir. Diminishing marginal value, OK? Diminishing marginal utility. What does the law of diminishing marginal utility tell us? Hey, you were here yesterday. I've seen you on screen. So as the quantity of goods increases, very good. As the stock of the homogeneous good increases, the value of each unit of that stock increases relative to the value of each unit of the smaller stock that existed before. That's the correct formulation. Now clearly, so if aggregate output increases, we consider as homogeneous in so far as it's not money. All things that are not money that are being exchanged against money, if all things are not money increase in quantity, then the value of each unit of those things that are not money relative to money must diminish. So as a consequence, less money will be given in exchange of each unit of those other goods as a tendency. Now how much less? That depends on the individual case. So we have our first call. That's correct. What else? The confidence in the money is increased. The economy will think that the money will have more value in the future. Of course, the value judgment will increase the purchasing power of the money. OK, that's not false, but there is a missing element in the soul. What does this mean? How does the confidence in the money translate? What does it mean? Are you an economic student? OK. So what's the immediate variable? The immediate cost that is affected by this confidence. Confidence, in fact, is a more remote cost. An increased demand for money. Thank you, sir. That's very good. An increase in the demand for money. Now that's more difficult to understand for people who are not economists. So let me put this very simple. What it means, the increased demand of money is that on the part of those who already own money, they cherish money more relative to other goods that they could exchange for money. They haven't increased for money relative to those other goods. They cherish them more. For example, because they have greater confidence that this money will help them through the next business cycle or whatever. So since they cherish this money more relative to other goods, well, they will exchange it for other goods only if they get higher quantities of those other goods in exchange for their money. So the increased appreciation of money entails a tendency for the price level to diminish. Correct. We have number three. That's very good. That's the last factor. We had this. Oh, no, we didn't have this. No, this was factor number two. That's correct. So decrease of the money supply. Correct. And by which law, economic law, is the decrease of money supply. Does it entail a price deflation? That's not the mission. Still there? That's not a lot of mission. Thank you. That's correct. So it's the same thing as in the case of non-monetary good, but only here from the other side round. In the case of non-monetary goods, if their quantity increases, this exercises a pressure on the price level. And in the case of money, say, if its quantity diminishes, then by virtue of the law of diminishing marginal value, each unit of money now has a higher value relative to the other goods that can be exchanged for money. Therefore, we give less money in exchange for those other goods. So we have three causes already. An increase of aggregate output of non-monetary goods, a reduction of the quantity of money, and an increased appreciation of money that is an increased demand for money. It has a fourth factor, a fourth immediate cost that comes into play. No? Now think. Yes? I don't know if this counts. Roth argues the joke that his colleagues claim victory because they redefine deflation as being inflation of less than 10% a year. OK, so which cost does this give us? I don't want to say it. OK, yeah. We have this in Germany, too. Never miss a good opportunity for a good joke. OK, you're right. OK, now by symmetry, we've talked about the quantity of money and the appreciation of money on the one hand. And we talked about the quantity of non-monetary goods. On the other hand, yes? The increase in demand for goods? Yes, sir, that's it. That's correct. So in the case of the other goods, we wouldn't talk of hoarding. We would apply this word only to the case of money. But we can, of course, exactly by analogy, have the same change and appreciation that the current owners of money have vis-a-vis the money that they own can also exist on the side of those who own these non-monetary goods. They, too, might have a changing appreciation of these goods relative to money. So if there is a decreased appreciation of those goods, you're holding them back less for yourself. So then you will increase the supply of those goods to the market. And as a consequence, more of those goods will be proposed in exchange for money. So by virtue of the law of diminishing marginal value, the price level will diminish. So these are indeed the four universal causes that come into play as far as the price level is concerned. And then each of them has more remote causes that prompt them. The money stock is determined by the laws of production of money. So here the profitability of money production comes into play. So there are different contingent factors that affect this profitability. And if you have a fiat money, then profitability plays no role at all. Separate circumstances that come into play. When we talk about the demand for money and various psychological factors coming to play, but also objective factors, that is more universal factors such, for example, the quality of money. If the quality of money increases thanks to a monetary reform, for example, we introduce a gold standard and put it at the place of a fiat standard. So then we put a money of better quality at the place of a money of inferior quality. And as a consequence, we would expect that the demand for money increases. So the introduction of a gold standard through a monetary reform would entail price and inflationary tendencies by virtue of the fact that it stimulates the demand for money. And by the way, fiat monies have, among other reasons, been introduced precisely for this reason, that they tend to reduce the demand for money. Because the Keynesians and the proto Keynesians who made the case for the introduction of fiat monies, they wished people to hoard less money. They wished people to spend more money. OK, so we have these four causes. Now, this little analysis puts us immediately in a position to discuss the relationship between economic growth and price deflation. Indeed, economic growth, by definition, by its very nature, is price deflationary or exercises price deflationary tendencies. And we've seen the reason why. Economic growth is nothing else but the very first cause that we discussed, namely the increase of the stock of non-monetary goods. Economic growth means that's the very meaning of the world, that we have, at the end of the growth phase, we have a higher quantity of non-monetary goods available than we had before. So as a consequence by the logic of the law of the diminishing marginal value, each of those units tends to have a lower value relative to money, so as a consequence, unit prices will diminish. Economic growth, in other words, is at all times in all places entails price deflationary tendencies. It's price deflationary by its very nature. And indeed, if we look at economic history, we look at those periods when there has been not much monetary interventionism or, in any way, not as much as we have it today, the natural outcome in such situations was that when you have economic growth, prices tend to diminish. And that holds true especially for American economic history. You can see it very well in American monetary statistics. If you look at the evolution of the price level in the US in the 19th century, you will see that the overall tendency is a very strong price deflation, very dynamic economy, very strong growth. The price level diminishes quite vigorously. And the only exception are the two wars that were waged during the 19th century. What are these two wars that were being waged on American soil? War of 1812 and Civil War. Exactly, the War of 1812-14 and the Civil War. So each time the government promotes the creation of fiat money, there was a suspension of payments and so on, so as a consequence the money supply increases because the government uses the printing press in order to finance the war effort. And as a consequence, the price level increases. As soon as the hostilities are over, economic growth creates price deflationary tendencies each time. And the last time this happened was after World War I. So he had price deflation between the Civil War and World War I. And then World War I, same thing. Price level increases quite dramatically under the impact of the war inflation. And then after the hostilities end, after the end of the hostilities, well, prices diminish again. This was the last time it happened because after World War II, for the very first time in our economic history, in Western economic history, we had a constant increase of the money supply and a constant increase of the price level. And that is because for the very first time in our civilization, we have continued during peace times monetary policies that before had been applied only during war times. So we are living in the true sense in the age of inflation. Such times have never existed. And I need to teach you this because, well, you couldn't know otherwise by your personal experience and your parents probably the same. Unless you know something about economic history, you could never have the idea that this is somehow a very unusual situation. But it is. This has never existed. So you get economic growth at a stable price level only if the price deflationary tendencies resulting naturally from a growing economy are overcompensated, neutralized by a simultaneous monetary interventions that increase the money supply. And that is why, for example, in the British case in the 19th century, the price deflation was not as strong as in the case of the US because there was stronger monetary interventionism. So the price deflation was much more moderate. You might even say that as from the mid 1800s, price level remained flat for the rest of the century. It was a very slight price deflationary tendency. And only then with World War I did the price level in Britain increase as in the US. OK. Now, that's the theory on the media level. Now the question is, of course, why is this so? I mean, so let me emphasize this point, right? Empirically, that is what we observe. We observe vigorously growing economies, such as in the US all throughout the 19th century, but also in Europe at the end of the 19th century. Strong economic growth in Germany, the highest growth rate, with Chinese growth rates in the 1880s and 1890s, OK, in a price deflationary context. So that's a fact, right? You don't discuss facts. It's just what it is. The question is, of course, how is it possible? How is it, I mean, so clearly this fact alone is a refutation of the Keynesian saga, right? If the Keynesians were right, this could not be possible. This could never happen. But it did, right? We might say like Galileo, right? Look through the glass, right? It's there. Don't deny. It's there. Now, why is it so? So that's then the theoretical question. How is it possible that the mechanism described by the Keynesians does not kick in? Here we might first start off with two introductory considerations. A price deflationary spiral does exist as well. But it does exist only under very special circumstances. It does not exist in general. It is not the case that any decrease of the price level, even if it lasts for a month or a year, entails a price deflationary spiral. Why is this so? There are two immediate considerations that come here into play. First of all, it is not possible for human beings to reduce their spending indefinitely. It's not possible for us to do this. People who are living in civilization operating within the context of a division of labor, because few of us plant our own tomatoes, make our own clothes, milk our own milk, and so on. We are dependent on the cooperation of other people who provide us with those goods. We are operating under the constraint of the stomach. In order to live the happy day tomorrow, next week, next month, when prices will be lower than today, well, we first of all need to get there. To get there, we need to eat. And be protected in our sleep, and so on and so on. So we need to spend. So it's impossible from the outset that the price deflationary mechanism would reduce the level of spending to ground zero. It's absolutely impossible, because we are operating under the constraint of the stomach. Now, the second reason comes into play, and it has something to do with what Professor Hermann discussed this afternoon under the heading of time preference. Even if we know that goods will be less expensive next year, it does not mean that we therefore renounce to buying those things now. There are very few ladies who, knowing that, well, next year, necklaces will be less expensive than this year, or this nice summer dress will be less expensive next year, will wait for a year until they get it. Very few families make no vacation, because they expect, well, in two years and three years, the beach will be less expensive than it is today. So it's because we have a time preference that this also slows down this price inflationary spiral. There's always a minimum level, a rock bottom, of spending that, therefore, exists. It cannot be changed simply by the expectation of further diminishing prices. So then let us hit the main question. How is it possible for firms to operate in a price-deflationary environment? How can firms be successful if their revenue diminishes? Thank you, sir. They can reduce the cost. And here we have a big difference between Keynesian economics and all other economics. It's not just Austrian economics, it's all other economics. In the Keynesian saga, costs are given. Costs are somehow written in stone. Costs fall from the skies. They're just there. OK? But of course, that's not true. Costs are nothing but the prices of factors of production. If you have a firm and your revenue diminishes, the only way for you to stay in business is to reduce costs. That is, you will go to your employees and you will go to your suppliers and tell them, look, at these prices, I cannot operate. Either you diminish your requirements. You sell for less. Or, well, we shake hands for the last time. We had a good time together. And that will be it, OK? Now, it's clear that this doesn't work as far as an individual firm is concerned. If only one firm is concerned by this, let's say because the demand for its products has diminished, while the demand for all other products has remained the same. Because in that case, the employees will not say, no, I'm not going to work for half for you. Because I can go just next door and work for about the same as I have now, a little less. And the suppliers will tell them the same. If there is an alternative to which I can go, well, I would not reduce the price at which I sell. So then indeed, well, you take the hand, you shake it and say, bye-bye. And that's what happens if a company can no longer sell its product at the price that it needs, OK? But in the case of price deflation, we're talking about a different animal. In the case of price deflation, by definition, all companies are concerned by precisely that problem. All revenues diminish. Therefore, there is no alternative labor market. And there is no alternative market for the suppliers of all the intermediate goods, the raw materials that are sold to the companies that are being concerned. It's not just one entrepreneur who tells all companies and who tells the labor unions, well, guys, my revenue is down. You need to reduce your prices as well. It's all of them. And if all of them do it, well, guess what? Prices will diminish. That's exactly what happens. And that's also exactly what we observe empirically in such cases. Now, that doesn't mean that such an adjustment takes place immediately, costlessly, painlessly, et cetera. So there is no perfection in that sense in the market. It's not just we are not just led by some angelic spirits and so on. We find immediately the solution. It's a painful solution, painful process, especially if it's sudden and brutal. But in principle, that's exactly what happens. Aggregate spending diminishes. So people renegotiate contracts. And they find their rock bottom. And they find a cost level that is low enough to make companies worthwhile. Now, this process, again, this renegotiation of contracts as a rule takes some time. As a rule, there's first a reduction in revenue, and then you start renegotiating costs. So this introduces a complication that is relevant for our next consideration. So we have seen in principle how the problem is being solved, how economic growth in a price deflationary context is mastered by entrepreneurs by firms. Price deflation does not create more formidable problems for entrepreneurs than any other price level environment. Entrepreneurs can operate in a price stable environment. They can operate in a price inflationary environment. And they can operate in a price deflationary environment. And the reason is that what counts for entrepreneurial success is never the level of prices at which they buy and sell. It's only at always the difference between buying prices and selling prices. If the spread is positive, companies work. If the spread is not positive, they have to close. Now, we need to complicate things a little bit by introducing the following distinction. We all analyze the same process. We have a price deflationary shock. Prices diminish for whatever reason now for the moment. And we need to compare two scenarios. In the first one, all companies are financed by equity capital. That is, there is no debt. All capital that is invested belongs to the entrepreneur, belongs to the shareholders. And in the second scenario, a more or less big part of the capital invested, the line part, comes from debt. Let's take all of it, except for 1%, comes from debt. So I have a company. I produce shoes. I sell all my shoes that I produce. I've sold so many pairs, let's say, 5.5 million pair of shoes. And I sell them for, let's say, $110 million. And my cost of production is $100 million. So payroll and all my supplies, I pay them $100 million. So I have a 10% rate of return on my investment annually.  I cannot sit on my shoes. I've come to the conclusion, well, this decrease in spending will be permanent. If I do not come to this conclusion, I might simply hold back my stock. I don't sell now. I wait until prices will rise again. But I come to the conclusion this reduction in spending is permanent. So I can only sell all my shoes for $60 million. I've bought for $100 million in factors of production. Now I'm selling for $60 million. That's a very bad deal, very bad for me. It's good for my customers. They're happy. It's also good for my employees. They're happy as well. Everybody's happy, but myself. The problem is, if I'm not happy as an entrepreneur, well, this thing will close down. So then the others won't be happy either. So we need to renegotiate. Now, if all the money belongs just to myself, the renegotiation, if successful, will mean the following. I have had a one-time loss. And after renegotiation, I'm profitable again. I renegotiate all my factor prices from $100 million to $50 million. So before I was operating to $55 million or whatever. So before I was buying at $100 million and sold for $110 million. Now I'm buying at $55 million. I'm selling for $60 million. I'm profitable again. So I had a one-time loss in the period of time after the deflation or price deflation or reshock and until the renegotiation. And that's it. This is really what happens in such a situation. Now, if you're very smart, and not many of those people around, I don't hold this up as a model. And sometimes people are simply lucky. But it can happen that for some reason you anticipated this event. You saw it coming. You saw it coming that there would be a price deflation. In that case, well, you start renegotiation earlier. The problem is, if the price deflation is not yet there, nobody will listen to you. So in that case, you only have one solution while you close down shop. It's not easy to do this either, because you might lose market share in the meantime. So sometimes you simply have to bite the dust, take the one-time loss, and then go on producing. But that's how it happens in a market economy. Now, things are very different if there is a high level of debt. If all companies are highly indebted, then we have the following problem. I might very well be able to renegotiate my contracts. So I reduce my cost level. But I still have to serve that debt. I signed a contract that says I'll pay you back 100 million. But my revenue is only 60. I will never be able to pay back 100. You see my point? So in that case, if a price deflation hits a highly leveraged economy, a highly indebted economy, then more than often this entails massive bankruptcy, because the entrepreneurs are not able to renegotiate very often because their suppliers are not willing to do it. And their creditors are not willing to do it. Very often the creditors sit on the side and say, ha, ha, ha, he goes bust. I will take over the firm. So he will go bankrupt. Now, what's the overall economic significance of this? It's certainly very painful for the entrepreneurs who are concerned. But if you think this through, from the point of view of the economy as a whole, it's really not as dramatic as that, because everything on which depends the real wealth, the real revenue of the people, all the factories and all the machines, all the equipment, all the infrastructure that is needed to churn out shoes and lamps and windows and so on, all of this is still there. The only difference is now it has different owners. It's no longer the guy who went bankrupt. Now it's other people who own it. So a price deflationary shock in a leveraged economy tends to entail massive bankruptcy. And but it does not, in the long run, affect the productive ability of the economy as a whole. That's the first point. That's the second point. The third point is that this massive bankruptcy then typically translates into a price deflationary spiral because of the following mechanism that has been first analyzed by the American businessman and author Charles Holt Carroll in the 1850s. You'll find probably a couple of copies of his book. He never published a book, but his articles have been collected into a book and published by the Van Aschand Company in the early 1960s. So the title of the book is The Organization of Currency into Debt. Or is currency the organization of debt into currency. So he was the first economist who described the price deflationary mechanism. Well, because he witnessed it himself. So what happens is the following. Companies go bankrupt. Means those companies cannot pay back their creditors. Among the creditors are banks. Banks themselves are very highly leveraged. So if the bank no longer sees back its money, it might itself go bust. If the bank goes bust, what happens then? What happens with the money supply? It decreases. It decreases because banks produce money substitutes. They produce money. So if the bankruptcy wave affects the banks, the money supply diminishes and this reinforces the bankruptcy wave. So in a second wave, then you get even more bankruptcies and even more bankruptcies of banks. So the money supply shrinks even further. And this is really what creates this price deflationary spiral. It does not and cannot happen in an economy which is financed by equity capital and which is just exposed to a price deflationary shock. There is no spiral in such a case. It's a one-time shock and that's it. The spiral kicks in only if you have a highly leveraged economy and in which part of the money supply is produced by fractional reserve banks. These are the two conditions that need to be given. So the question is then, what do we think of price deflation from an aggregate point of view, social point of view, from an aggregate from an overall point of view? Is price deflation good or bad? Now there are some economists who argue that price deflation is contrary to what the Keynes, for the Keynesians, price deflation is always bad, as we have already seen. There are some economists, free market economists, who argue that price deflation is OK if it results from economic growth. But it's bad if it results from monetary factors. So it's OK if prices diminish because there is a growing economy where you're churning out ever more goods and services. Fine, but if the price deflation results from increased hoarding, that's bad. Or if the price deflation results from a collapse of the fractional reserve banking system, that's bad. Now, I would even take an exception to this point of view, there is a social function of those monetary factors. Price deflation resulting from increased money hoarding is, in my eyes, completely legitimate because it results from a multitude of individual decisions. Individual market participants would decide to appreciate money more relative to all other goods and therefore reduce the level of spending in the economy. The consequence will be that entrepreneurs have to adjust the structure of the economy to these new wishes. And as typically what happens in such case is that the economy becomes more robust. It becomes less, becomes more resilient to shocks because entrepreneurs are forced to engage in activities that are more profitable than the before. It becomes more resilient. And if the economy enters into a price deflationary spiral because fractional reserve banks collapse, well, this is certainly a very painful price to pay. But let's also see the consequence that finally results from it. The consequence is that these banks vanish. Now, after all, this is a pretty good thing. OK? Now, you might say, OK, this is cynical. It's cynical. If we only adopt the individual point of view in the economy, this is what Keynesians do, typically. They reason from a microeconomic point of view. They don't look at the greater whole. From the point of view of the greater whole, it's beneficial that harmful parasitic institutions, such as fractional reserve banks, vanish. And the market process, the deflationary spiral, is actually a very ruthless and efficient mechanism to bring this about, contrary to political reforms. So if you ever hope that political reforms would change something to the current European monetary constitution or something like this, where monetary arrangements go wrong, well, you place your hope on something that is quite illusory. So the market process is brutal, fast, and efficient. And it brings about a situation that, in the short run, is very painful, monetary or very high unemployment. But in the medium and long run, is very beneficial from the point of view of the economy as a whole. Now, I don't say this is the austral libertarian position on the question. That's not my point. My point is we need to see the options that are on the menu. Either we can say, well, we let the market forces work, then this will be the consequence. Or we do not. We promote monetary interventionism. We ask the central banks to intervene in such a situation to prop up the production of money, to open the floodgates of more feared money, to bail out the fractional reserve banks in order to prevent their collapse. Then we get a different outcome. Now, you probably know that precisely the second option has been the preferred policy of the past 150 years. And we see today very clearly the long run consequences of such a policy. We see the long run consequences of anti-deflation policies of the fight against deflation. And these consequences all result from the fact that the banks, of course, adjust to the presence of a lender of last resort. They adjust to the presence of central banks and of monetary interventionism. So if they know that prices can never really dramatically diminish, and even if prices diminish somewhat, they will still be bailed out by the central banks and by the government. Well, what do they do? Well, they engage in more of the same. They engage in more of the same practices that have entailed the price deflationary risk in the first place. Namely, excessively high levels of debt and reckless investment in risky undertakings that permit higher profits. So as a consequence, we have today as a fruit of 150 years or more of anti-deflation policies and anti-deflation thinking, we have a financial system that is some sort of zombie than the economy. There's no better word for this. Because zombie in the sense, you have companies that have no economic substance, have a lot of bad credits, and that are operating on a higher level of debt. That is, they're very fragile, which are utterly dependent on central powers, central banks and governments, and which entail a tendency for resources to be allocated to users that are not beneficial from an overall point of view, but just benefit a small coterie of powerful people that currently benefit from the system. And this cancer is spreading and has been spreading for many years into the so-called real sector where you also observe that non-financial companies increasingly start behaving like financial companies. So they operate with a very high level of debt. They have increasing share of financial investments rather than investments in payroll and products and so on. So the same problem that started in the financial sector is now spreading throughout the rest of the economy. So I must say by the day, I love price deflation and even price deflationary spirals ever more because I look at what the alternative consequence would be. Thank you very much for your time.


Do you want me to do something? Are you ready now? Yeah. Okay. I think you want us to circuit. Line. One. Nothing. Three. That's that one. This is three from there. Okay. And that's not connected.  I jammed the phone system.