You get really good at one thing, people will trust you. So to summarize, just on this point, before we crack into the practical steps here. Passion is attainable, but it's something you have to work very hard for. It's something you will not have at the beginning, and you have to be very strategic and patient in how you go about building it. So, to get into the steps. I'm beginning this with what I'm calling pitching preliminaries. Three things that you need to begin with. The first is that you must develop a body of work. Today's job market is so fiercely competitive that you need to be an immediately proven prospect. Whether in the form of writing a blog, having a YouTube channel, if you're a designer getting a really solid portfolio, you must have a body of work that distinguishes you. Now, there are certain stigmas attached to this in the way of people not wanting to put their name out there. They're fearful that friends and family will see these things. And to that, I would say that getting over this and getting over what people care about is really a lifelong endeavor, and that this is a great way to start. In doing so, you will refine your thinking. I was checking out a book called Rework by the Guys at 37 Signals in which they have a title of a chapter, Hire the Better Writer. If they're on the fence about a key hiring or a key hiring decision, they pick the better writer because it shows a clarity in thinking. So, in doing something like blogging and really thinking about an area, you will begin to understand it better. The second is research. You must research the person that you are looking to contact to death. Now, when I began working with Matthew, I was in quick succession given the reigns of the beast that is the Get the Guy recruiting inbox. And so, over the years, I've read hundreds, if not thousands of emails from people writing in looking to work with the company. I've seen every conceivable mistake that anyone could ever make, and I've seen the few gems of people who really do it well. What always amazes me is the number of people who will hear one radio show or hear one interview or one podcast and decide that this is enough to contact the person. You need to be able to distinguish yourself. You need to be able to put yourself out there. You need to really be able to get inside the head of this person. I would encourage you to read every single article this person has ever written. Listen to every single interview. Watch every video. Understand this entire person's body of work. Now, once you have, and this is where we get a little dark, this is where we're really getting inside this person's head, I have a list of ten questions, and I have this as a handout to pass around to everyone at the end, but this is a list of ten questions which I've stolen from a very world-renowned copywriter, a guy called Craig Clemens, and these are questions that he will use to get inside the mind of a customer for a potential client. So when he's writing a sales video or a sales letter, he will use these questions to get inside a person's head. The way to approach this exercise is to go about it by free writing, to open up a Word document and to spend ten or fifteen minutes per question writing in a stream of consciousness, likewise not caring about spelling, not caring about grammar, just spilling out your answers on the page. Now, the questions. Why did he or she start whatever it is they're doing? What are the main benefits that their followers, clients, or customers receive from what they do? What are their followers, clients, or customers' biggest problems? What are their biggest frustrations of the person or the people you're contacting in having to provide a solution to this? How can you help and where is your proof? What specifically can you help with and what can you not help with? What tasty tips or information can you give away right away? Why wouldn't they want you to work for them and what objections might they give? What is the dream and what they're working towards? What is really getting them up out of bed in the morning? And lastly, what is the nightmare? If you answer these questions, if you really take the time to do this, you'll have a profound level of understanding for this person. And once you do, we'll move on to, we can call this step zero, pitching preliminaries. So research and get inside the head. Step one is to meet this person in person. You'll notice from my story that I'd gone along to four, five, perhaps even six events of Matthew's before I even got on the phone with him. He knew how I was, I was something of a familiar face, and so I'd encourage all of you to find some sort of organized event that you can go along to meet your prospective person in person. Now when you do, it's great to go and be able to make an impression with this person. This isn't an easy thing to do when you're going along to some kind of organized event, but I'll tell you a quick story of how I was able to do this recently with someone that I wanted to learn from. A friend a few months ago, or this was coming up to the end of last year, turned me on to a guy called Owen Cook from Real Social Dynamics, someone who you'll mostly know as Tyler. We have Alex here from Real Social Dynamics speaking today, and Owen is the founder of that company. Now, Owen has a really incredible YouTube channel. He has videos on success, on motivation, on working really hard, and I really wanted to meet this person. I was in Toronto towards the end of last year, and he was doing an event in New York. It'll be an event for four or 500 people, but I decided I'm going to make it my mission to go along to this event.  I'm going to leave a lasting impression. So I went through all of his videos. I asked myself these questions, and I identified that the problem he had was a personal problem. He'd had a shoulder injury for two months. Now, I've read very widely around athletic performance and injury prevention and rehabilitation, and I decided that I would get him the book Becoming a Supple Leopard. This is by a guy called Kelly Starat, a really fantastic book. And I went along to the event. I had the book in a bag along with a little lacrosse ball, which is one of the necessary tools for applying Kelly's formula. And at the event, I realized there was going to be no appropriate time to do this. It's an event for 400 people. They're all here to see Owen, and there's no way I'm going to be able to do this. So when he'd set the group up, the audience up with a two or three-minute audience. We've got a lacrosse ball here in the audience. Very cool. When he'd set the audience up with a two or three-minute exercise, I walked up to the side of the stage, and again at this point, I'm nervous. I'm shaking. I'm almost trembling for doing this. But I tap him on the side of the arm, and I say, hey, Owen, I just wanted to introduce myself. My name's Edward. I'm a huge fan of your work. I really appreciate everything you do. And I just wanted to give you something as a token of my appreciation. Now, he pulled the book out of a bag, and when he did, his whole face lit up. He called across his girlfriend, who's on the other side of the stage, and said, pull out your phone and show Edward the text message that I sent you earlier today. She pulled out her phone, and lo and behold, was the text message that read, check out this guy, Kelly Starrett. He's amazing. We have to buy his book. I was in awe, but I knew why it happened. See, I've been following him on Instagram for a little while. I'd seen that he'd been hanging out across the gyms. I knew that he was going to be recommended this book by someone, and so I got the book just a few days ahead of him. If you ever see a prospective mentor reading a book, get your hands on it, read the book a few days quicker than they do, and you will see the other books that this book recommends, and you can buy it for that person. It's getting inside their heads on this crazy, crazy level. The second part of this, kind of one B, if you will, is to charm their assistants. Going back to my story with Matthew, you'll see that it was really only from befriending a member of his team at the time that I was able to present this opportunity for myself. There was someone I was recently looking to interview, and I've been...


Family Theatre presents Arlene Dahl and Wendell Corey. Future network in cooperation with Family Theatre brings you Wendell Corey with Ted DeCorsia and Bill Johnstone in Railroad and Churchyard. To introduce the drama, your hostess Arlene Dahl. Thank you, Jean. There are many things that go into the making of a great writer. His ability at characterization, the dramatic impact of his narrative style and above all, his ability to create a story of lasting universal meaning. All of these attributes and more went into the writings of Bjornstern Bjornsson. As a chief novelist, the leading poet and one of the greatest dramatists of Norway, it is little wonder that Bjornsson received the Nobel Prize for Literature. It is also little wonder that we are pleased tonight to bring you his railroad and churchyard. And our narrator for this evening, Mr. Wendell Corey. It was a wonderful thing, the friendship between Knut Akra and Lars Holmstern. Everyone in the village said so. Almost like father and son, they said. Even though small, twinkle-eyed Knut was but little older than big, serious Lars. And it all came about because Knut Akra, like his father and grandfather before him, had devoted all his life to the welfare of the village. Yes, the village would not have been half the place that it was if it were not for Knut. Why, anyone would tell you. Knut Akra? Why, we never would have had the farms we do if it hadn't been for Knut. He started an agricultural school for us to learn in. Our children can bless Knut Akra for their education. Did he who founded the library and started our school? Children? More than children got their schooling from him. How about the many nights he spent teaching older folk who were backward in their learning? Look at Lars Holmstern over there. Everything he knows, he'll learn from Knut. Yes, it was a wonderful thing, the friendship between Knut Akra and Lars Holmstern. Everyone in the village said so. And why you wished me to go with you to the village this day, Knut? Could I not merely wish the pleasure of your company, Lars? On some other day perhaps, but today the Board of Supervisors is meeting. Oh, is it really, Lars? Even if you were not chairman, you would be aware of that, you old faker. I do believe that Board of Supervisors means more to you than anything else in this world. So I repeat my question. Why do you wish me to journey to the village with you on a meeting day? Well, Lars, you are going to become a member of the Board of Supervisors. I? I am going to... Yes, Lars, you! But the Board is the most important organization in the village. Its members must be men of good judgment, sound reason. The welfare of everyone living here depends upon their decisions. Of course, Lars. That is why the man of soundest reason and good judgment has been elected as chairman, namely me. But seriously, Lars, do you think I would even have suggested your name if I did not have the greatest faith in your ability? I know you would not. You are pride in the Board. So it is settled. You shall attend your first meeting this afternoon. Yes, it was a wonderful thing, this friendship between Newdakr and Lars Hochstag. Everyone in the village said so. One day the Board of Supervisors convened to consider a certain important proposal. Gentlemen, I am sorry to interrupt your serious discussion over the relative merits of Sven's and Johansson's hops in the making of homemade beer. But we have here a petition from our good neighbor, the bailiff, which proposes that the village grain magazine be sold and the proceeds used to establish a small savings bank. However, I think he overlooks the fact that the grain magazine has served us well for many years, ever since the time long ago that it was given to the village as a gift by my grandfather. Oh, gentlemen, I fear that the bailiff, while a worthy and estimable gentleman, is not very felicitous in his proposal to this Board. Well, there is the proposition. Now we must vote on it. Lars Hochstag, do you vote to deny this petition? No. No, I wish to agree with the bailiff. He agrees? Well, what do you do? Very well, Lars. Do you wish to make a statement in support of your position? Yes, I do. I cannot see that it matters if the proposal came from the bailiff or not, nor whether the magazine building was a gift or not. The grain magazine has outlived its purpose. It now costs the village money to maintain it, whereas a properly run savings bank would return a handsome profit. I cast my vote in favor of the bailiff's proposal. Very well, Lars. In favor, one vote. In favor, two votes. In favor, two votes. In favor, three votes. In favor, three votes. Lars, what happened to you today? Nothing happened to me, Noot. Nothing? To vote against me as you did. I was not voting against you. I was voting for the village. Then you believe that I did not have the best interests of our people at heart? Since you ask it, Noot, I believe you were more influenced by family pride than by what was best for our people. You? You can say that?  They are tremendous advantages indeed, Noot. And I know that all you have done has come from the goodness of your heart. And yet you dream of even greater future advantages. But that is not enough.  No, Noot. There is a practical side to dreams also. They must be paid for. And the taxes of this village have grown so heavy they are becoming unbearable. Because of your selfish desire to satisfy your own dreams, you are driving us into bankruptcy.  Yes, Noot. Yes, I believe I could. Very well then. Take the honour. I shall resign. I am able to live without it. After all, there are harder things to lose. It was a terrible thing, the enmity between Newdakr and Lars Hogstead. Everyone in the village said so. No longer were they seen together, each went his own separate ways, or the other had never existed. Yes, it was a terrible thing. Everyone in the village said so. During the course of the next several years, Lars' path led him straight and fast of the road to success. But as for Newdakr, well, his friends did their best to aid in healing his hurt. Noot, we've missed you on the board of supervisors. There is something lacking without an Akra on the board, your grandfather, your father. Then you. I do not have to explain all this, Noot. Simply, we all wish you back with us again. All of you, my friend? Well, perhaps. No, thank you, just the same. I am really too busy with my agricultural college to devote any time to the board. And so each man went his separate way, Lars bringing prosperity to the pocketbooks of the villages, Noot bringing prosperity to their minds and souls. And it was still a terrible thing that this coldness existed between them. Then one day there was a wedding, a wedding of the two young people who had been Noot's first pupils in his school, afterwards at the home of the bride's parents, there was much dancing and merry-making. And in one corner of the room, stern and door, stood Lars Hodgstein. And in the opposite corner, quiet, the twinkle gone from his eye, stood Noot Akra. Please, your attention here. I have a matter of grave importance to present to you. Very grave importance. You know what has happened? Well, we have run out of toasts. Run out of toasts? Oh, Sven. Yeah, but it is true. And look, we have toasted the bride and groom, their fathers and mothers, their aunts and cousins and grandparents. Well, there just isn't anyone left to toast. Think of the tragedy. All that good wine left to drink, and no one to drink too. It is a tragedy indeed, Sven, but I think I can come to your rescue. Oh, you knew that? You really have a solution? You have an excuse for me to drink more wine? Excuse? You're not the Sven I've always known if you need some excuse to drink. But I do, in all seriousness, have another toast to propose. We have one toast to honor. Today is indeed a joyous one, not only for the two who have been wedded, but for all of us. Our village is prospered. Our savings earn us pleasing dividends. We drive on new wide roads. And all these things have come about because of one man. And so, ladies and gentlemen, I propose a toast to the chairman of the Board of Supervisors, Lars Hochstedt. Yes, yes.  A wonderful toast, Newt. Hold on, hold on there. I wish to be heard also. Lars Hochstedt. Does he mean trouble? He can't make trouble now. Let me through, please. Let me through. Our good neighbor, Newt Akram, has seen fit to propose a toast to me for some benefits that have accrued to the village. I am sorry to say I cannot accept his toast. No, I cannot accept such a toast. Because there is one here who deserves it much more than I. The man who gave me my education. The man to whom I am indebted for all that I know. Therefore, I should like to propose a toast to the man whom I, as well as every other member, should like to welcome back to the Board of Supervisors. May I propose a toast then to Newt Akram, member of the Board. Yes, Lars. Yes, I should be proud to accept such a toast. Now it was a strange and unnatural thing, the arm truce between Newt Akram and Lars Hochstedt. Everyone in the village said so. It is unnatural, they said, for these two former friends to have made those toasts at the wedding to sit side by side at Board meetings and yet never utter a single word to each other. Yes, it was a strange and unnatural thing. Then one day Lars called a special meeting of the Board of Supervisors. Gentlemen, this special meeting has been called at the request of several members who seem to feel that the state of emergency exists in our village. While your chairman does not totally agree with this attitude, never the less... It does not matter if you agree or not, Lars. You cannot deny that Versteiner's lost his home and farm through foreclosure. Nor did Johann said realize not one penny from his harvest. The money went to satisfy creditors.  You forget that the money to run a village must be obtained from somewhere, either through taxes or from investments made through our savings bank. Investments, indeed. There's precious little investments about money lost in real estate projects where never a house was built. Or in the purchase of securities that the day are not even listed on the exchange. Your bank is still solvent, gentlemen. Your savings are still secure. Savings? What savings? We know that the entire village followed the example set by your bank. We, too, own land without improvements. Securities that cannot find a buyer at any price. We shall lose everything. Yes. What if I tell you there is no need for you to lose anything? That there is a solution for all your problems? A solution, Lars? What kind of solution? Yes, Lars. What is it? What kind of miracle do you propose to bring us? It is no miracle I propose to bring, gentlemen. It is a railroad. Lars explained his meaning. The railroad company was going to build a line through their county. Two alternate routes had been proposed, one directly through the valley in which the village lay, the other through a parallel valley a few miles distant. Lars' solution was to allow the railroad to come directly through the village, passing through the real estate development, and by selling this land to the railroad, they would recover their original investment and make a handsome profit. Very well, gentlemen. Here is the proposition. It is suggested that we allow the railroad to come directly through our village. Now, we must vote on this proposition. Nutatra, how do you wish to vote? I cast my vote directly against the railroad, Lars. Against the railroad? Very well. One vote against. Do you wish to make any statement in support of your position? Yes. Yes, I do. I shall not speak of the noise the railroad will bring. No, the dirt and soot our children will have to breathe instead of clean, fresh mountain air. I will merely ask you to look at this map of our county. A glance will show you that all the benefits of a railroad can be ours, and it passes through the adjoining valley by stations for our use at these two points. Now, I should like to call your attention to the fact that in order for the proposed railroad to run through the real estate development, it must pass directly through this area. And this area, gentlemen, happens to be the old church graveyard. The graveyard? Are you certain, Newt? Look for yourselves, gentlemen. Newt is right. How can we disturb that graveyard? It would be a sacrilege of sorts. My father and grandfather are buried there. And so are mine, Sven, and those of most of us here. But those men are dead, and of the past. We live now in the present. This is no time for sentiment. Save our pocketbooks through the railroad or we lose all. I shall count the vote. Newt, Acre? Against. One vote. Against. One vote. Sven? I say four. One vote. Four. One vote. Four. Two vote. Four. Two votes. Four. Three votes. And so the proposition carried, and within a short time the work on the railroad began. At first the villagers were jubilant, but as the work progressed, as the shiny rails marched down the valley toward the village, passing close to many of their homes and bore straight as an arrow, through the heart of the old church graveyard, the villagers' excitement died. And replacing it came a sober uneasiness, an increasing feeling of uneasiness and guilt. Now, one night Lars was in bed unable to sleep, listening to the work engines passing back and forth on the rails had just been laid in front of his house. He could hear them belching smoke and flame from their iron stacks, could see their large lights cutting through the night like some great, deeming, evil eyes. They look as if they might have been sent by the devil himself, don't they, Lars? Who said that? Who was that talking just now? Listen to that noise, Lars, sitting in your ears and the smoke can soot, Lars.  Who are you? Where are you hiding? Answer me, where? Tomorrow, Lars, the rails reached the churchyard. The work of disturbing the graves will begin. I wonder how your father and grandfather will feel about that, Lars? Perhaps they're standing together somewhere this very night, looking down upon you and wondering... Stop that, I say! It's hot. Hot in here. I must be feverish. Hearing voices. Feverish. It's so hot. So the house was on fire. Yes, hot on fire. Lars, wake up now! Wake up! The sparks from the engine have set the house on fire.  It was the very next day that Lars swathed in the bandages called an emergency meeting of the Board of Supervisors. Gentlemen, I have called this meeting for two purposes. First, to report that because of last night's difficulties, I now realize that it is too dangerous to construct a railroad through the village. I have therefore asked the road to re-route it through the adjacent valley. Secondly, because I have failed to provide the solution for your difficulties, difficulties that arose through my own errors of judgment and which were seen long ago by the man who rescued me, I hereby tender you my resignation as chairman of the Board. Well, Lars, you have spoken bravely and well and while it might be a good deal like locking the barn after the horse has gone, we have no choice but to accept your offer. Hold on there, Sven, hold on. That horse you're talking about is a pretty valuable one. Let us not forget that he served us loyally and well before his trade. New roads, a saving spank and one that is still fundamentally sound. That's quite a record for any horse, even if at times he more resembled a stubborn old mule. As for the loss of the railroad, well, it has preserved the churchyard and the final resting place of our fathers and grandfathers. And at least we know that we can sit in our homes like human beings instead of trying to impersonate a roast pig, as did our good neighbor Lars last night. True, we are now faced with financial problems. But I've yet to see one that couldn't be licked by good, honest, hard work. The answers will now be found on your farms where you belong, not dabbling in real estate and securities. And if you fear that such work will result in strong backs and weak minds, well, I know a pretty good agricultural school you can go to and exercise those little gray cells. No. No, as far as I am concerned, I see no reason to accept Lars Hochstadt's resignation. I reject. And I? I reject you too. Yes, and so do I. I reject you too. Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you. I should be happy to remain as chairman, but only on one condition, that a sensible man like no doctor shares the position with me as co-chairman. Well, Lord, what do you say? What can I say, Lars? If the village is willing to trust a couple of stubborn old mules to harness, perhaps we can still show them how to pull a plow. There was no question about it, of course. By unanimous acclamation, Newt Akra and Lars Hochstadt were made co-chairmen for the board of supervisors. And after the meeting, the village was treated to a sight it had not seen for a long time. Newt helped Lars into the Akra carriage, and the two men drove away together. And as they did so, Sven, looking after them, expressed the sentiment of awe. Yeah, it is a wonderful thing that friendship between Newt Akra and Lars Hochstadt. Wonderful for them, and for us. Yes, it's a wonderful thing, their friendship. Everyone in the village says so. This is Arlene Dahl again. I think if anyone were to ask us what we wanted most in life, we would probably all answer happiness. Many of us ignore the fact that God is the embodiment of happiness. A path open to him for everyone is prayer. Prayer that acknowledges that we are not alone in facing the problems of this life, that even in the midst of sorrow we can find comfort and happiness in our dependence upon him. That is why we urge you to pray. Pray is a family to bring all within your home true happiness. And that is why we remind you each week that the family that prays together stays together.  From Hollywood Family Theatre has brought you Wendell Corrie as the narrator and Arlene Dahl as hostess in Railroad and Churchyard with Bill Johnstone and Ted DeCorsio. Others in our cast were Tim Graham, Jim Nussar, Ralph Moody and Virginia Eiler. This adaptation of the Norwegian classic was written by Sydney Marshall with music composed and conducted by Harry Zimmerman and was directed for Family Theatre by Jaime Del Valle. These Family Theatre broadcasts are made possible by the thousands of you who felt the need for this type of program, by the mutual network which has responded to this need and by the hundreds of stars of stage, screen and radio who have so unselfishly given of their time and talent to appear on our Family Theatre stage.  This is Gene Baker expressing the wish of Family Theatre that the blessing of God be upon you and your home. And inviting you to join us next week at this time when Family Theatre will present Roddy McDowell and Terry Kelvin in Mark Twain's The Prince and the Popper. Join us, won't you? Family Theatre is released in the Philippines by the Philippine Broadcasting Corporation. It is sent to our troops overseas for the Armed Forces Radio Service and is heard in Canada through the facilities of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation. This is the world's largest network, the Mutual Broadcasting System.


So this is nice both because some of the previous speakers have clarified a lot of things I won't have to talk about and also some of the stuff that I'll show you, I think we'll directly address a couple of the questions. So I think it flows nicely. So the kind of idea here, the general theme is reproducibility and your imaging meta-analysis. And so to me, there's actually really two reproducibility challenges. You can course cart the space up different ways but one kind of take on it is this. One challenge is what you could call standardizing and representing experimental procedures. And I think that's what the first two talks mostly were about. And so the idea here is if we don't know what other researchers did, then of course you can't reproduce the results. So you have to be able to extract in some machine readable way, ideally what someone else did before you can go out and try to do the same thing and evaluate the results. But the other side of this is sort of synthesizing the results of many studies. And so it turns out that reproducible methods don't entail reproducible results. And so even if we know what other researchers did, we still can't reproduce the results much of the time. So even if you did exactly what someone told you they did, of course with different subjects and other very minor differences, but essentially the same experiment, much of the time you still won't get the same result. And this is something we I think don't always appreciate. So the question is why? And well, one answer, a big one, is because of sampling error. So there's just natural variability in the observations you actually get in any given run of data. And so some of you may have seen this paper, which elicited mixed reactions from the community. I think it's a beautiful paper. I think it should be a required reading for everyone in neuroscience. Making the argument that really in many domains of neuroscience, certainly including fMRI and their imaging, studies are underpowered very often, in fact, maybe the majority of the time. And this is not a new argument. Many people have made it throughout the social and life sciences. I've made it myself. Here's a figure from a couple of years ago. This is in response. Some of you may have recalled the voodoo correlations controversy. And the argument I made was that there really is a problem with fMRI studies in terms of results, looking better than they should and effect size being inflated. But it mostly has to do with the fact that we're underpowered. And so just to give you a sense, here's a typical correlation analysis. You might correct it, 0.01, modally in fMRI study, because it's a big brain and we do lots of comparisons. If your effect size is moderately actually really large, let's say your effect size is 0.5, which is an astronomical effect to come from a psychology background, for instance. It doesn't really happen very often. Then you'll notice that if you have 100 subjects through this line over here, you're OK. Your power is nearly one. Almost every time you'll detect the effect. But more commonly, the modal threshold or modal sample size is around 20. And so you're down here, this blue line, where you have maybe 10% power. If you allow for smaller effects, still quite large by the standards of psychology, and probably neuroscience as well, then you might be talking 2%, 3% power in a typical study. So this seems very strange. How could we have this enormous literature, thousands of studies, really interesting results, and yet when people actually sit down and simulate these things, it looks like power is extremely low. There's some kind of, there's some paradox there. But it actually turns out to be pretty easy to reconcile. So here's a simulation showing you what's probably happening in many of these cases. And this is true, again, not just in neuroimaging, but in many other domains, certainly in genetics, with GWAS studies, for instance, but in many other domains too. So let's say you have, this is your two-dimensional brain here, and every voxel has some effect size in relation to some behavioral measure. Nothing is truly ever 0 at the limit. So much of this is interesting, potentially. But the effects are not astronomically big. I've kind of circled in white the regions that are sort of stronger, just for the sake of illustration. And then this is the truth in the population. Now you come along and you're gonna run a sample, right?  This is what you're gonna end up with in the typical case, right? FDR corrected 20 subjects, and you have this one blob, and you say, oh great, look, here's the, you know, whatever, the visual spatial manipulation region of the brain, right? And it's not that this is a false positive, I mean, there's something going on there, but notice you've knocked out everything else most of which was highly interesting. If you've had more subjects, as you move this way, or you're thresholding more liberally, you start to end up with something that looks like the truth, right? And what's really insidious about this is it's gonna look to you like you have this really interesting resolve, right? You have this one brain activation that tells the story, and you miss all the stuff. So in practice, very low power doesn't always hurt you, right? In terms of getting a publication, it can actually help you, it makes it for an easier story, but in terms of reproducibility, what happens the next time someone runs the same thing, right, exactly the same methods, well, they're not gonna end up with this one cluster there, they might get this one, or this one, or this one. So you have a literature that looks like people are using more or less the same methods, assuming we resolve some of these other issues, obviously, and you still don't have any consensus from individual studies. So that's a problem. Just to illustrate, here's, and you've heard all of that meta-analysis, so here's that meta-analysis from Torweger's group a few years ago. This is, I think, about 150 studies of emotion, and each point is an activation from a study. And the point being, when you meta-analyze all of this, you get this nice representation, and so this is the ground truth, probably for emotion, broadly speaking, but any individual study is not going to give you all of that.  And so the idea is that even if we could perfectly reproduce the methods, you still have some uncertainty. And by aggregating a lot of data, we can actually start to get to a consensus. There is still another problem, though. Let's say you could do this, and I'll talk a little bit, you could do this, you've already seen some of these, you could do this on a large scale. But even if you could do this for everything you could possibly care about, you could automatically synthesize this data, there is another problem that comes up, which is one of interpretation, right? So if you look at the literature, and most of these are ALD meta-analysis, you know, all sorts of different domains published in the last couple of years, fast switching, subsequent memory, smoking cure reactivity, rectal distention, empathy, right? So I'm not gonna go through it in detail, but take my word for it, these are not all very different maps. There are regions that show up time and again, right? And that presents a problem, right? So you think that this is like the empathy network, but many of your regions are showing up in meta-analysis of go, no, go, and stop signal and other things. And so almost by definition, if a brain region or network is showing up all over the place, it cannot be doing something very specific, right? And just to kind of reflect that, here's what you get, this is from David Van Essen's Sum's DB a few years ago. It's just a density plot of where coordinates reported in studies fall. And it's not uniformly distributed, right? The assumption that activation could occur anywhere in the brain would be the likelihood is simply not true. Some regions are much more likely to activate, for example, the anterior insula. And so by definition, these regions must be doing something that's not specific to a given paradigm if they show up in many, many different paradigms. Okay, and so formally this has been described as the problem of reverse inference. The fact that a task T consistently activates a region does not mean that region is specifically involved. It could be that there's some function that is recruited in many, many different paradigms. And so you're gonna look at this as, let's say a pain researcher and say, aha, that's pain because it shows up all the time. But someone in working memory would look at it and say, oh, that's a working memory region, right? And you wouldn't know unless you actually were able to compare the activation across many, many different domains. Which is something you cannot do in an individual study. No matter how many resources you have, you cannot get every subject in your study to do a hundred different tasks and compare them and see, well, what is really the common denominator? So it's a big problem. So how do we address this? And there's various things you might do. The kind of approach that I've taken is to kind of try to do large scale automated synthesis of the literature. So hopefully I've convinced you that the results are gonna diverge no matter how well you represent the methods. So it's not to say we shouldn't standardize things. Of course we should, but that's necessary. It's not sufficient. Accurate interpretation of our results is a very difficult proposition and it requires the ability to aggregate and synthesize data across many, many different studies. So it's hard to do. There is a way to make it easier, which is to kind of give up the pretense that we're gonna do a really, really stellar job of it. We just say, well, let's just see how well we do with really simple approaches and go from there. And so that's kind of been the approach of a framework that I call Neurosynth, which is a platform for large scale automated meta-analysis of fMRI data. And it's complementary to other approaches. So as you'll see, all the stuff that BrainMap does well, this does really poorly, and some of the stuff BrainMap doesn't do well, like scaling, as you heard, it's very effortful, is not a problem at all using an automated approach. So they're nicely complementary. And really we're just trading off right now, at least quality for quantity. So we're gonna give up the illusion that we're gonna get it just right and see how far we can get. So we're trying to extract and process as much of the published fMRI literature as we can. And this is all based, at least the preliminary framework, is based on two very simple assumptions, which probably to many people in this room will seem kind of mind-bogglingly dumb, because they're actually very simple. First assumption is if it looks like a duck, it's a duck. Which is to say, well, how do we extract brain activity from a paper in an automated way? We just look for something that looks like XYZ coordinates, right? We find tables and we say, look, you have these three columns, they're labeled XYZ, they have numbers, it's brain activity. We don't worry about labeling what that means, right? So this is heresy potentially to some people, right? How do you know if it's an activation or deactivation? What experiment it came from? We don't, right? It all goes into the database just tied to a particular article. And just banking on the fact that at least if nothing else, this is reasonably well standardized already. So most people report their activation coordinates in XYZ space. So that's one assumption. And the other is to treat articles as just a bag of words. So this is a very common approach in lots of domains. We're just taking the full text of an article and extracting the high frequency words and saying, look, if a study uses the word emotion a lot, it's probably an emotion study, right? At a first approximation. Then we can do other more clever things like we can do topic modeling, various other things we've done. But really the kind of the bedrock assumption here is just that you can tell what a study is like based on the words it's used. Which of course is gonna be wrong much of the time. And it doesn't give you the level of detail that you just heard about, right? You don't actually know necessarily what the paradigm is. You know it's something to do with faces but you don't know exactly what was involved. But that's the assumption. And this actually turns out to work quite well. So what you get out of this is a database of several thousand studies where now you can say for example, well, give me all the studies of pain and you pull them out and then, because you have a parser, you can pull out all the activations associated with those studies. And now, just like you would do with Ailee or any other package, you can meta-analyze those and generate a nice image of that. So you can query for any set of terms or any combination of terms you want. The database now contains automated meta-analysis images for hundreds of concepts. Essentially anything, any word that occurs frequently whether it seems sensible to you or not, you can run a meta-analysis in seconds. Activation data from over 6,000 neuroimaging studies. So it's two to three times the size of brain map and it's probably half to a third of the quality. So there's that trade-off again. And we have lots of other things. So there's almost 200,000 functional connectivity and meta-analytic co-activation maps. We'll talk about it in a second. And the database is completely open. So this is all available on the web. Everything you see, all the tools there, you can just grab and do whatever you want with, right? So it's, they're at least on their MIT license and you don't need to email us for permission or anything. Just do whatever you want with it. There's a web portal, nurses.org, which is sort of continually growing but it's still experiencing some growing pains. And I'll show you just some of the things that you can access through it. Well, actually before that, let me just tell you that software is on GitHub, right? As I mentioned. And there's really sort of several packages. One, it's for automated extraction of the data from published articles, which is very boring stuff. But if anybody wants to help write parsers for new journals, much appreciated. There's a viewer, which is brand new. It's a JavaScript library for 2D visualization. It's not very sophisticated, but it's pretty modular. So you can drop it into your own page and display images pretty easily. And then there's the core tools, which are in Python and which are what generates all of these metanalsis images and various other things. And again, all of this is freely available. We have RESTful API now. So let's say you want data on study 280. You can also query it by DOI. Well, you can pull out all the information we have and they'll tell you what are the images you can pull those and so on. So you can, you can build applications and interface nicely with NIRSEN. And the focus is on simple, large-scale analysis in ease of use. So the niche here is to do things that are, again, pretty crude but are useful. So everything runs quickly, you get a result and it's not the final word by any stretch, but it's potentially a useful product along the way. So just to kind of give you an example, here's the metanalsis of person. What does this mean? I don't know. What is the metanalsis of person? Well, strictly speaking, it's just studies and literature that use the term person with high frequency, probably reflecting person perception mostly. But then you could do kind of some of the things that Angie was talking about, right, where you can go back and look at those studies and try to kind of separate out what are the different components. You can get all the studies that are involved in this metanalsis. And this is on the web. It's visualized for you and you can download it. And the nice thing here, just coming back to this problem of reverse inference I talked about, because we have this enormous data set, what you're actually seeing here is not just activation, it's consistent for studies of, let's say person perception. It's a comparison of all the studies that use the term person to all the ones that don't. So it is giving you some measure of specificity, right? Each voxel is here that's active, is relatively more active and it's more important for person processing than it is for other things. So that helps overcome this problem of reverse inference to some degree. A region that shows up for lots of different functions is not gonna show up in this image unless it's more strongly associated with that particular function. We also have functional connectivity and meta-analytic activation maps, which is something that the brain map and other people pioneered. So the idea is you just like with functional connectivity analysis, you have a seed and you see what other regions activate over time. Well, you can do the same thing meta-analytically. You're just asking, in a study that reports activation here, what else is reported? This is actually functional connectivity. And so we just partnered with Randy Buckner's brain super struct project. So now you have those functional connectivity maps for over 1,000 subjects for every voxel and you can download all of those as well. And so the idea is to keep adding kind of these kinds of resources to the platform. And so just to kind of illustrate one of the things we can do with this. So this is a paper by Luke Cheng last year where we postulated the insular. So we took an anatomical mask of the human insular, did some postulation, which I won't talk about. And then we looked at meta-analytical activation patterns as well as time series based postulation. So we get networks that are broadly consistent. And the idea is you have these three, at least there may be more, three insular networks that are spatially segregated. And now because we can do this kind of reverse inference on a large scale, we can ask, well, what do these networks do? And just in the interest of time, I guess I won't focus on this too much. Well, I'll just say this is a report inference. So if you just look at each domain individually, you would probably always say that the anterior insular network, which is this blue one, is most active. It does the most stuff. But again, that's because there's this base rate issue, right? So these are regions that are active in general and lots of different things. When you actually do reverse inference, meaning you're asking, well, what is each insular network more specifically involved in? You get this really nice tripartite division where you have a sort of cognitive insular network, an affective one and a sensory one, slash pain. So it's a nice tool. Again, this is accrued, right?  Of course there are problems. So this is, there are many problems. So the data quality is very poor. And if you actually go and look at the data, you'll find studies where like stuff is clearly not a real activation, right? It just thought you mislabeled something. It doesn't happen often, but there are problems. As I mentioned, we don't know what's an activation, what a deactivation is. We don't know what population something came from. So in some ways it's kind of surprising it works at all. But it does seem to work. The data are not automatically centralized. So I use centralization here lightly. So it could be represented in many different places. But the problem is that when you publish a study, we don't get the data, right? Was that five minutes or am I out of time? Five, okay. You don't, we don't get the data. And so it would be great if there was kind of a push approach, right? As soon as you publish, we get the data automatically. Arguably it's the wrong kind of data, by which I mean coordinates are great and they are a good approximation of whole-brain images. But if we can get whole-brain maps where we have an effect size at every voxel, that would be better, obviously. And most of the functionality is not readily accessible. So there's a web portal, you can download the software, but it'd be great if we could do as much of this online, right? So the nice thing about meta-analysis, in some ways, it doesn't require local resources really. So most of the stuff you could do potentially on some remote server. So what we're pushing to now is an online infrastructure for meta-analysis. And so right now almost everything's conducted locally. The data may be served remotely, but you're gonna run the thing on your own computer. And we wanna move everything online. And this would, I think, bring a lot of benefits. So one is crowdsource validation and annotation, right? So ideally anyone can help curate and validate the database. Now this sounds easier than it actually is, because as Angie will tell you, motivating people to actually do this is very, very difficult. So there has to be some incentives built into place and figuring out how to do that is a difficult proposition. But if the editing is done online, then everything is inherently centralized, right? So rather than you downloading some, like a set of studies and then editing it yourself and then maybe you're maybe not pushing it back, if you're doing everything in a browser, it's already on the server, right? So you don't have to say, you don't have to do any more work. You've already done the work to centralize this without even realizing it. And you can have alternative representations of the same space. So you could come along and say, well look, I think this study is this. And this kind of came up in a question, right? And so now there's a record in the system and how to model that as I think a question and et cetera and other folks are quite interested in. But we want to have some kind of way of tracking these different ways of representing the space and allowing for disagreement. Here's just one example to show you there are efforts. This is Roberto Toro who's not here, unfortunately, has brainspell.org, which is the entire neuroscience database and lets people tag it with the CogPo terms, with cognitive Atlas terms, Russ Baldrack's platform and go table by table and just tell us what you think it is. And I don't know how many people are using it. It may or may not take off, but the idea is something like this, structured the right way, I think, hopefully should take off. Could help with ontology development. So, neuroscience is deliberately ontology agnostic. We will soon have an online feature set which you can use to tag any study and ultimately any contrast with different ontologies. And then you can ask questions like, well, which ontologies carve brain activity more sensitively? You can use the brain to tell you which one you prefer or how different ontologies are related. Maybe the term used in this ontology actually doesn't map on to that ontology. There's a different way of brilliant them and you could do things like that. Image-based meta-analysis, as I mentioned, we're still relying on discrete coordinates and we would like to use images. And so this is thanks to Chris Gorgalevsky. There is now a prototype. It's very rough, but it is functional at neurovault.org. So you can go and upload your maps and using our viewer, they'll be instantly rendered and available to anyone else to download and you can give us as much metadata as you have the energy for, essentially. And hopefully this will scale up and so eventually we will be able to do things with the images. So you can just come along and say, I want that image, that image. I'll tag them this way or I'll pick out the ones that have this ontology category assigned to it and run them in analysis online in real time. Skip all this. There's a screenshot and this is all also on GitHub. So if you find bugs or you wanna contribute, please do. And the last thing I'll talk about and this kind of gets out of question that was asked after Andy's talk, is you can now start to talk about things like real time decoding, right?  It's not what you expected. Well now you can upload your maps and decode them in real time by comparing them to Neuricent meta-analyses. And so this is already available. It's hidden because we're still testing it. If you really wanna try it out, it's at www.neuricent.org slash decode. And you'll get back something like this. So keeping in mind all the data quality issues, it's still quite useful. You upload your image and it tells you, this is just a correlation coefficient across all voxels, but it says, this looks like something related to sentence comprehension or language, for example, right? And if you don't get anything sensible, that probably tells you something about the quality of your image. Either that or you have this amazing result that nobody's ever seen before, right? Either way, it's useful. And so the kind of the overall just to come back to the general theme of reproducibility and here is, once meta-analysis is online, and we can't do this for other things equally. You can't run a study online, obviously, an fMRI study, but meta-analysis potentially we can do in a fairly centralized way. And documentation and valuation become much easier, right? All procedures can be inspected. So I can come along and say, oh, here's your meta-analysis. Here's the paper trail. Which studies did you use? What happens if I remove these or include a couple of new ones? Does anything change? Results can be visualized immediately. You could put them in a paper. You can stick a link in an email if you want. You can annotate them potentially. So we're not there yet, but ideally you will get to a point where you can just on the image say, look, here's what I think or see this and so on. So I think this fits nicely with the general theme. I think we probably don't have to convince many people at this meeting that openness is good and we have all this data and we wanna make it accessible and useful to people. And I think if we can do that, at least in the domain of meta-analysis, the world will be a very, very slightly happier place. So thanks to all these people, some of whom are in this room, and I'm here for funding and I'll take any questions. I tell, how do you suggest versioning? So if you use neuroscience, how do you reference that and then the amount of data that's there? Yeah, I mean, that's a big problem. So what I've done right now, which is really not a good solution, is when you download an image, it's time stamped and stamped also with the number, with the number of studies in the database at that moment. That's not because I think that's a good solution, it's just because the alternative of having formal version control is a lot of work and there's other priorities, but it is something that has to happen. So ideally, there would be metadata attached to that that says, look, here was the state of the database at this date and that's still accessible online and you can go in and look it up. But I think that is a big problem. And there have been cases where people have emailed me and said, look, I did this six months ago and it's different now. And typically different means that it's better now, right? The data set is bigger, but it's hard to tell someone the result they were happy with kind of vanished. So there has to be somebody to track that. Yeah. Okay, so this is fully automated and I'm curious about, is there any aid or documentation coming up next to the results coming out from the meta analysis because for instance, one retrieval may result in GLM maps of contrast, one other may result in means mostly. And there are recently pattern recognition algorithms that produce GLM SPMs. So everything is mixed together. So you need a summary of from where at least these maps are obtained. Absolutely. And that's why I really hope that Satcha and Gully and other people who are developing tools that will allow you to codify that information succeed because the problem from my perspective is each of those, every time you wanna, so I would love to be able to quantify sample size population and of course the imaging methods in an automated way, but each of those domains is a difficult problem in and of itself. And so from my perspective, if anyone has a way of quantifying that, right, so if there are any NLP experts who know how to get sample size out of neuroimaging articles, then we can put that straight in and we can tag that and you will have that metadata. But I guess my view coming at this was, we don't have that now and it'll take a very long time to get there. And so this is just a very crude approach and you have to keep the limitations in mind. It is blending everything together. As soon as I have a way of pulling out that information, I would love to put it up there. And so you'll know exactly what each study is and be able to filter on that. I should say actually that there are some, there's some work in that direction. So Josh Karp has done this really nice work tagging a lot of the same studies with methods that people have used, at the cell versus SPM, field strength of the scanner, different movement correction approaches. And so that's not online, but it will be shortly. And so the idea then is at least to provide some filtering, right, so you can say, well, I don't want studies that are, you know, not geolumbates, for example. But right now it's sort of everything is kind of bundled together, unfortunately.


Hi, my name is Tara. I had a great experience at Mountain View and Dodge, buying the new truck. Thanks!


Come here, sit down, let's talk. In this video, I'm gonna show you guys how to build a monster dividend portfolio. Now, if you don't already have a brokerage, I'm gonna leave a link to Moomoo down in the description. You sign up, deposit $100, you can get up to 15 free stocks and have a 5.1 APY% cash sweep. So all the cash that's just sitting inside of your portfolio, you can earn interest on that along with getting paid dividends. So this is by far the best promotion that Moomoo has in a while. So you might wanna click that link down in the description. Also, I'm gonna leave a link to Weeble down in the description. You sign up to deposit $1 if you want to and you can receive up to 12 free stocks. With those 12 free stocks, you can keep them inside the platform and decide to use it or you can sell those free stocks and withdraw all of your money. Guys, it's literally free money. Now I have to say that at the beginning of this video. So we can get straight into the subject matter of building this monster dividend portfolio. If you wanna learn how to do that, go ahead and hit that thumbs up button. It helps out this channel more than you could possibly imagine, right? So y'all guys, if you pick up your Moomoo and your Weeble's with the link down in the description, I'm gonna also leave a link to my mastering dividends ebook down in the pinned comment section. If you check out that ebook and read it from beginning to end, you will learn everything you need to know about dividend investing just from that free ebook down below. You click that, you get the PDF, you'll learn everything you need to know about dividend investing much more than I could tell you in this video alone. So if you guys wanna learn everything you need to know about dividend investing, click that link down in the pinned comment section to get my free ebook, my PDF over mastering dividend. And it's also free and you can go ahead and subscribe to the channel so you don't miss out on any future videos. Now, in this video, I've been investing into dividends for a while. My shirt right here say dividends are dope. I'm making money right now. Listen, I've been doing dividend investing for quite some time now and there are a lot of dividend investors out there that just gonna start it and then they gotta go through the low points and the high points and they have this crazy, they're considering a monster dividend portfolio to be, oh, my portfolio is gonna bring in a dividend yield of 10%. My portfolio is gonna bring in a dividend yield of 11%. My monster portfolio is monster because it's bringing in such a high dividend yield. That's not a monster dividend portfolio. The portfolio I'm gonna show you how guys how to build today is monster because it's gonna stand the test of time and also it's gonna bring you in hundreds of thousands of dollars in dividends every single year by the time you're ready to retire guys. So if you wanna build a correct monster dividend portfolio, make sure you watch this from beginning all the way to end.  Just play this video back and then let me get some more views, but yeah. So let's just go ahead and dive straight into it.  First of all, dividends is a form of payment that these companies pay back their investors, me and you, right? For saying, hey, thank you for investing inside of our company. Here's a little check. Now with these companies, it's by far the most passive form of income there is. I literally do nothing. I wake up and they put the money inside my account just like that, like once a week, sometimes twice a day, three times a day, money hidden in my accounts. The most passive form of income there is, if you're doing it right. Now, the other thing about dividend investing is that they have to dividend you. Now, if every company pay out the same amount of money, with the higher the yield, the higher they pay you in dividends. So if they have a 13, 14% dividend yield, you're gonna make a lot of money in dividends from this company. And if they have a lower dividend yield, like half a percent, they're not gonna make a lot of money from dividends, but the company might grow more in the future, right? So new dividend investors, they're gonna see that high dividend yield.  They're gonna end up losing money in long run chasing high dividend yield.  One of the coolest ones on YouTube right now is SEHD.  So you're diverse across many different platforms, many different sectors, many different companies. You just invest inside that one ETF and you guys can make some dividend income that way every single quarter. Now I say quarter because there are different kind of dividend companies out there that are monthly paying dividend stocks and then they're quarterly paying dividend stocks. Monthly paying dividend stocks pay out their dividends every single month. I mean, every single month you're gonna be receiving a check from that one company. Now the quarterly paying dividend stocks usually the blue chip style companies they pay out their dividends every single quarter four times a year or once every three months. Now we're gonna be looking at both. Now, so they have monthly paying dividend stocks, quarterly paying dividend stocks and that itself. many of them, many different ones in between. Now, looking at some of the quarterly paying dividends stocks, take notes guys, there are many out there. There are some that are dividend kings and dividend aristocrats. Now dividend aristocrats, companies that are inside the S&P 500, the top 500 companies in America and they've increased their dividends every single year for the last 25 years, right? Amazing, they increased their dividends every single year for the last 25 years. And then there are dividend kings. Dividend kings are the same companies that's inside the S&P 500, but they increased their dividends every single year for the last 50 years. That mean every, no matter through recession, depression, pandemic, anything like that, they was able to increase their dividends, no matter how bad the economy was, they was able to increase their dividends. That's why a lot of people go and invest, they're building that monster dividend portfolio by just investing inside dividend kings. Is it safer? Yes, it's safer. But are you gonna make as much money? Probably not make as much money because they usually sometimes don't always have the best dividend yield. Now the reason people do invest inside dividend kings and dividend aristocrats is because other companies out there are at risk of getting their dividends cut. Remove completely our cut in half or cut by some percent or just don't raise their dividend yield at all. And that's why people that go and chase these high-paying dividend companies that have a 12% dividend yield.  You just lost half your income just because this company could not keep up with their dividends and they had to cut it. Now the reason that investing to high-year dividends is kind of scary is because, just imagine, a company is paying back the investors so much money, they're unable to take their earnings and reinvest it back inside of their company in order to grow the company, right? That company won't grow at all. The stock is gonna stay at the same price for the next 10, 15, 20 years because they can't grow their company because they're paying all of their money back to investors in dividends. Versus a company that has a lower dividend yield, they're only paying back the investors, hey, a little bit of a dividend yield, a little bit of change and they're taking most of that money to reinvest it back into the company and grow that company by 10-fold. Now you're making money from growth in that company and you're making money from this company increasing that dividend yield by small percents every single year. So the smartest way to build a monster dividend portfolio is to look at the 10-year growth rate of the companies that you are very interested into putting inside if you're a dividend portfolio. So we're gonna be looking at growth rate in this video and then we're gonna do a couple of examples, but let me explain some more dividends to you guys. There is a thing called real estate reach. Real estate reach, real estate investment trust companies, they invest inside the real estate sector, right? And by law, they have to pay back 90% of their taxable income in the form of dividends back to their investors. They usually have a high dividend yield and that's why a lot of people are attracted to them and they also pay out their dividends every single month. Most people run straight to them and say I have a monster dividend portfolio. It's only one or two in there that I really trust and that is the first one on this list, ticker symbol O, on real estate income. As known as the monthly paying dividend stock, there are dividend aristocrats there inside the S&P 500 and they increase their dividends every single year for the last 25 years. Another one that I like on this list that you guys are not gonna consider a dividend stock is Apple, right? They have such a low dividend yield probably like half a percent and people are gonna say no, that is not a dividend company. They have such a small percent, but Apple has increased their dividend growth by around six to seven. It was at 10% not too long ago for the last 10 years, I think last year, but they increased their 10 year growth rate by around like 8%. I'll look it up later on in this video. That is amazing to me because it's not too high, it's not too low. And they have an amazing growth rate in their dividends for the last couple of years and the growth in Apple is completely insane. So on one hand, you got the real estate reap that pays such a high dividend, but not gonna have a lot of growth. On the other hand, you have Apple that pays a low dividend. They pay dividend, but they pay a low dividend, but they're gonna have high growth in the future and a half a percent of a trillion dollar company is better than 10% of a billion dollar company because the percentage on a multi-trillion dollar company is gonna be completely amazing, especially when they continue to grow over time. So we're gonna pull up some stocks in this video, we're gonna look at their growth rate, then we're gonna show you an example on how you can make hundreds of thousands of dollars in dividend income from dividend investing. But before we pull that up, another big thing about dividend investing is that if you guys don't do this, you're screwed.  You want to reinvest your dividends back into the company. Why would you not want to reinvest your dividends back into a company that you already trust, right? I'm gonna show you guys in this video that if you invest $10,000 or one-time investments of $10,000 inside a company and reinvest your dividends versus not reinvesting your dividends, a one-time investment of $50,000 and a one-time investment of $100,000, reinvesting your dividends and not reinvesting your dividends on how much money that you could be making in the future from hundreds of thousands of dollars to not so much money that you could live off of in the future. So let's go ahead and pull up a couple of stocks and I could show you guys how you could find these dividend growth rates, dividend yields, things like that in order for you to start to build your own dividend, your monster dividend portfolio. All right, here we are on seeking Alpha ticker symbol M.O. Altria Group, right there, $43.32. Let's just scroll down.  So whether they make them guys, they make them dividend kings. They've been increasing their dividends every single year for the last 54 years. They have an annual payout of $3.92 per share and a high amazing dividend yield of 8.99%. Now that is kind of high, but they've also still been able to increase their dividends every single year for the last 54 years. So are they at risk again, their dividends cut? They could be at risk again, their dividends cuts, but let's take a look at another one, Apple, right quick, at APL. And then I'm gonna show you guys the dividend growth rate. So Apple is at $170 every corner of this video. They've been increasing their dividends every single year for the last 10 years. And they have a dividend year of, like I said, half percent, 0.5%. Now, are they at risk again, their dividends cut? Probably no time soon, right? So let's look at the dividend growth right here. And we wanna look at the, there you go, growth rate over the last 10 years. And Apple is at 8.22%. Anything above like seven, six and a half is pretty good, but the 8.22 is amazing. Once you get to around the 10, that is something that you wanna do more research on to really add to your portfolio because the growth, if they continue up to 10 year growth every single decade for the next three decades of 10% growth rate, those dividends is gonna add up to where you could completely retire and do absolutely nothing and receive those dividend payments and live off of that. So we did look at Apple, let's pull back up MO. Out your group, there it goes, the 10 year growth rate for MO, 7.5%, not bad. I mentored to assemble O, it's probably not gonna be a high because they're real estate reed. 10 year growth, 3.81%, it's not the best. IBM is a pretty good one that I like. IBM have a growth rate over the last 10 years of 6.3%, a little lower than what I expected, but it's not bad. Microsoft MSFT, there you go, Microsoft right there has a 10.86% dividend growth rate over the last 10 years. Amazing, that's the double digits that we was looking for. We looked at Apple, let's look at Broadcom, which is what AVGO, AVGO. Now Broadcom, once we talk that in, they have over the last 10 years, they have a 35.28% dividend growth rate. So guys, when you're building out your dividend portfolio, your monthly dividend portfolio, don't always just, let's take a look at their dividend score card, there it goes, they've been increasing their dividends for the last 13 years and they have a dividend year of 1.58%.  So these companies can increase it over time, you wanna look at the past statistics to kind of project towards their future statistics and you don't wanna invest into companies like QYLD that have a very high dividend year of 11.5% with a zero year growth rate with a negative 0.76 growth rate and a lot of people are investing inside QYLD every single day. I used to do it, I made a video about that and how I got in and got out alive and actually made money from it. But with QYLD, they have a negative growth rate, zero years growth, but they have a high dividend year and people are building these monthly dividend portfolios with high dividend stocks in there that pay out their dividends every single month. But in the long run, they're gonna be in trouble for it. So let's take a quick look, let's say we had $10,000, right? There we go, from 2000 to 2024, a one-time investment of $10,000. We're gonna reinvest our dividends into ticker symbol O, which is the monthly paying dividend, real estate REIT, Apple and MO, right? So this is us investing a one-time payment back in 2000, $10,000 into these three different companies. Gonna hit analyze portfolio and there it goes right there with just one-time investment, $200,000, $2.2 million. Of course, we all know Apple was gonna go crazy and $300,000, so let's see how much we'll be bringing in dividends. There we go, in 2023, with a reality income, you'll have $11,000 every single year. Apple, you'll have $12,000 every single year. In the Altria Group, you'll have $27,000 every single year. Yes, it's not enough to live off of yet, but let's just say how much do you need to invest? Let's say we invested $50,000 on one-time payment of $50,000 in hit analyze portfolio. Remember, we are reinvesting our dividends. Let's scroll down. We have $1 million in each, $11 million in Apple, $1.6 million in Altria Group, and we'll scroll down to 2023. Now, we're bringing in $56,000 in reality income. We could definitely live off of that comfortably, especially if we move to Mexico, where you can live like a king out there, right? So we have $56,000 in reality income. We'll be bringing in $60,000 in Apple. Remember, Apple only pays a half a percent dividend year, right? Oh, Apple's not just dividend stock. Apple's not a dividend stock. Well, they outperform reality income, a monthly paying dividend stock, the monthly paying dividend stock. They outperform them, right? With $60,000, and with Altria Group, you'll be bringing in $137,000. That's crazy. Now, let's say if we don't reinvest our dividends. Well, first, let's say what happens if we invest $100,000? All right, so we invest $100,000 in the last portfolio. Apple's going to be dumb. I already know it's going to be dumb. $22 million, $2 million and $3 million with tickets of an M.O. And if we go out to 2023, reality income, you'll have $113,000 in dividend income, doing nothing at all. Apple, you'll have $121,000. And Altria Group, you'll have $274,000 with a one-time investment. With a one-time investment of $100,000. Now, I know you guys are saying that's a lot of money. Let me show you guys this very simple trick. But what happens if we don't reinvest our dividends? Let me show you. All right, so if we don't reinvest our dividends, man, see that? Only $500,000, $189,000 and $18 million. And then our dividend income would be completely trashed. $30,000, $100,000 from Apple and $16,000 from Altria Group. So we always want to reinvest our dividends and that's what $100,000 is for. Let's just say we are going to reinvest our dividends and we only started off with $50,000. But now, right, we're cutting that $100,000. We started off with $50,000, but we're going to invest $20 every single day or $100 a week or that's $400 every single month. Then we're going to hit analyze portfolio. And there you go. You have 1.6 million, $26 million and $2 million.  And that's just from $50,000 and reinvesting $400 a month. But let's just say if we started off with $10,000, will we be comfortable? $10,000 usually it's not going to get it done just a one-time investment. But we are reinvesting with Apple. You'll have 17 million, almost a million with tickets to my O and Altria, you'll have 1.1 million. And with dividends, you'll have, yeah, yeah, yeah.  You will be able to retire very comfortably with 44K, 97K and 92K. And look at that, Apple outperformed both of those high dividend paying stocks with $97,000 in dividends. From a company that's not a dividend paying stock because they have such an amazing dividend growth rate. And there we go, dreamers. That is a little trick that you guys can use to build a monster dividend portfolio. Don't go crazy looking for the high dividend yields. Oh, I need high dividend yields. Those are going to get cut. And then they have a negative growth rate. Most, I could have showed you a whole bunch of examples of companies that had their dividend cut or a negative dividend growth rate or just because they have a high dividend yield. A lot of people are running that monster dividend portfolio. No, these that have a good growth rate that don't have a high dividend yield to where they can actually grow their company is going to stand the test of time. What I always say is that we are investing to our companies that we absolutely love that just so happen to pay dividends. We're not going to invest inside a company just because they pay dividends. That's not the number one reason. We invest inside a company that we love that just so happen to pay dividends so it can stand the test of time and we can make money in the long run and also retire from dividends by doing absolutely nothing. Go ahead and hit that thumbs up button. If you made it to this video, let's try to get it to a thousand likes. If we get a thousand likes, that would be completely insane. Hit the subscribe button that helps out this channel more than you can even imagine. Also, let me know down in the comment section are you already building out your dividend portfolio? What's the most you ever made in one month from your dividends? I'd like to check that out down in the description as well because I'm going to do an update video on my monthly income from dividend. So make sure you subscribe to the channel so you don't miss out on that one. Guys, don't forget to pick up your free stocks down in the description. To Moo Moo into Wee Boo, pick up free stocks. That's an easy way to get started. If you guys want to learn more about dividend investing, I'm going to leave a link to my free ebook down in the comment section. But other than that, guys, thank you for watching. I'm Zeke, bringing you to Dream Green Show. I'm out, peace.


Lomography is a company that specializes in let's say Creative-looking film emulsions. They are the company behind popular film stocks like Lomo purple teal Metropolis and other film stocks that some may consider to be Experimental however, Lomography also offers a color negative line of film that we're gonna be looking at today Lomo color 800 is a C41 color negative film that is the highest ISO that Lomography currently offers I should preface all this by saying in order to review this film objectively I bought this Lomo 800 with my own money transferred from a Swiss bank account under a fake name I did all that work so that I could review this film 100% free of outsider influence or bias You're welcome. Now if you have no life and you spend as much time online as I do You may know that Lomography isn't the actual producer of this film Supposedly if you believe internet conjecture Lomography has confirmed that Lomo 800 is cut from a Kodak master role But a master role of what stock? Well, it's never been pinned down for sure But it seems more than likely that it's a Kodak gold Max 800 that Kodak actually still produces though mostly in use for disposable cameras Additionally, some people online speculate that it could be an old formula for Kodak VR 1000 as well But just like how we'll never know if Bigfoot is a real-life giant ape or just me wandering shirtless through the forest The mystery will continue to live on So anyway, my brother Matt had heard of this campsite in a distant far-off land that had these awesome hot springs So he hopped in Matt's Prius and hit the road to verify how cool this campsite could be, you know for science. I Brought none other than my sh**ty attitude some Lomo 800 and my Pentax 6x7 Both as a tool for fighting off coyotes and shooting 6x7 negatives on medium format Our first stop would be a spot in the desert that is one of my favorite places to camp at After easily setting up the tent in the wind no problem at all definitely not a hassle We decided to do what every well-adjusted adult does drink on an empty stomach Hey, I mean it saves you money, but only to cost you later And boy, did we pay the toll we woke up felt like sh** it packed up our sh** and hit the road As we cruise towards our destiny I recalled hoping that my long exposure that I took the night before would turn out and Luckily it did using a tripod and a cable shutter release I set the aperture to the lowest possible setting and then open the shutter for over three hours Which is about two and a half hours longer than it took for us to realize that well-adjusted Functional adults don't chug whiskey straight from the bottle Most of the shots I took in the desert were exposed at box speed with the exception of one or two shots That were exposed one stop over at 400 ISO just to see how the film handles an abundance of light And I'm happy to report it does quite well I'd say this emulsion whatever it truly is definitely provides the film look Whatever that means most shots definitely had a healthy amount of warmth in the shadows and yellow in the highlights Anyway back to the main plotline Getting to this campsite would be no easy task The road was 10 miles of rocky and narrow backcountry that took us along the edge of a cliff at some points and The final boss would be a river crossing But hey if it were paved not only would there be a ton of people and inevitably a crossover KFC Taco Bell But the reward wouldn't have been as satisfying Needless to say after a somewhat risky river crossing we made it and set up camp The whole area definitely had some sort of geothermal activity going on to make these pools heated Which could only really mean one thing that there was a volcano somewhere nearby and if you know anything about me It's that a volcano will definitely kill me one day The Lomo 800 definitely had a chance to shine here as there was an abundance of green Which I think that the emulsion renders quite beautifully hell I'm halfway convinced that Lomo 800 would make a great stock to shoot wedding photography with but what do I know? I'll never get to be a bride All of these photos were scanned on a flatbed scanner and converted with negative lab pro in case you were wondering So the natural hot springs turned out to be everything we dreamed and more Location 10 out of 10 water temperature 10 out of 10 water flavor 6 out of 10 All right, so brief non-film related story time So we had set up camp and this guy came over and started hanging out with us He was there just for the day because you can access the campsite by ATV Anyway, this gangsta claim that he has done every drug in the book And while I was certainly impressed that he was still alive red flags were definitely starting to go off in my head Apparently he had found a bottle of peach crown royal in his brother's cabinet and chugged it that morning He also told us he wants to be a comedian. So who knows if any of this is true I guess I'm just trying to paint a picture of this character As it soon became time to go he took one more swig of whiskey hopped on his ATV And I shit you not he sent it up this 65 degree dirt incline going as fast as he could never to be seen again By us at least and that's where the story ends or so I thought before he left amongst his various life stories He told us that he knew exactly where forest fens hidden treasure was and that him and his brother were gonna go find it the following week The treasure the forest, uh, what's his name? Yeah, what's his name forest? Yeah If you don't know forest fan is an art collector that hit a treasure box of gold somewhere in the Rocky Mountains about 10 years ago Anyway cut to present day and it was announced on June 7th 2020 by forest fan himself that the treasure has been found June 7th was about two weeks after we did this trip Which means it was about two weeks after peach crown royal ATV guy told us he was gonna go get it Now obviously I don't know for sure but I'm starting to wonder if this was the guy that found it because Frankly the timing is impeccable as of right now forest fan hasn't released the name of who found it And I'm not sure that it'll ever get released But at the very least I hope that if it was drunk ATV guy that his newfound fortune launches his new career in comedy Anyway, the next morning I woke up at sunrise to empty my clip of 800 and reflect upon my long exposure that I did the night before Eh, it turned out okay Later that same morning. I had the hot spring all to myself. It was so quiet and peaceful I can't remember the last time I was alone like that. Oh wait. Yes. I can it was my senior prom As I sat there in the hot spring I thought about none other than life liberty and Lomo 800 is Lomo 800 a cheaper alternative to Portrait 800 Well, I don't think it's really as solid as Portrait 800 But that might just be because I'm a huge whore for Kodak's Portrait line. However, it is also not cheaper for medium format on B&H Portrait 800 goes for around 10 59 per roll in a five pack versus Lomo 800 11 60 per roll in their three pack to be Fair though if you buy both films and 35 millimeter the Lomo 800 is like 60 cents cheaper per roll on top of that Lomography currently only offers the emulsion in three packs for both 120 and 35 and as I mentioned before it is quite often out of stock Another thing to consider too is if you're scanning in silver fast There are currently no profiles for any Lomography films if that's something that's important to you since the rumor is that This is a Kodak stock You can probably just use the Kodak gold slash max preset or hell use any preset you want I won't tell anyone unless I guess a peanut for some reason then you're f***ed So in the end even if Lomo 800 is constructed upon a consumer grade Kodak film I still think it performs very well in most situations unlike how I perform under pressure like the pressure to think of a joke to conclude this video


What is going on guys, welcome back to the channel and I appreciate you being here. Now with the latest 2.0 patch for Destiny 2, which you should have installed by now, if we check out DestinySets.com and take a look at the collections and go to the weapons we will see. Well actually the items, we will see plenty if not all of the new exotics come into the game and there are some beast returning people. But before we get into that guys, I am giving away an exclusive gambit emblem to being with the chance of winning it. Simply drop a like on the video and leave a comment down below. I will pick the winner in a couple of weeks and contact them via direct message here on YouTube. Also guys if you do enjoy the video leave a like really just help me out and stay tuned until the end of the video to find out about my monthly controller giveaway. But let's get into it people and as we can see some beast returning right here we got the, well we will check them all out really, we got Cerberus plus 1, this is another rifle we know about, Game Informer covered this. We have the Wish Ender as well, we've seen that numerous times, we have the Malfeasense I believe that's pronounced, the wannabe thorn I'm calling this, we have the Ace of Speeds, we have the Chaperone people, the Chaperone is returning, my mother had a shotgun we called the Chaperone, kept us alive out there before we got to the city, Amanda Holiday. We then have, what else have we got here? We have the Queen, Breaker's is returning, people in the linear fusion rifle, now there's no details actually on it, we can't see at the minute but I'm guessing it will be an energy weapon. We have the Black Talon Sword, we have the Two-tailed Fox, they're a rocket launcher that shoots a solar and a rood rocket at the same time.  What else have we got here? We've got this thing here which is the Lord of Wolves returns, behold the Lord of Wolves. Then we have this, the Wave Splitter, a Marlin's Noose Breaker who uses focused sonic waves to super heat electrons into a devastating energy beam. So a trace rifle, damn, we then have the Trinity Ghoul which we know of, we have the, well we know what we got, I'm an Xbox player so that's new to me, that's new to me. What else have we got here? We've got a few Temps like this all for tomorrow, I'm not sure what this is. The Toilet and Trouble, I mean there's a few things, there's even a few Temp like Green Weapons, Minebender's Ambition, well it says, it's a Legendary but it's got a Green, I don't know, I don't know what that's all about, but we've got a few new things here. Some great looking, what the Twilight, oh nice, the Dreaded Venture, nice, so many, so many new things, what is this here? The Ether Doctor, wow, we've got a few Legendary Bowls here. No turning back, the Arsenic Bite 4B, I'm trying to think of things that I haven't looked at all, what's this here? The Waking Vigil, we know what I haven't seen, I mean we've got the Lord of Wolves coming back, we've got the Queen Berka's Bowl, so where's the Dregs promise? Where's the Dregs promise? You're leaving it out Bungie, you're leaving it out, I know it was a waste of a weapon in D1 but damn, at least buff it and bring it back, but there's so many things here people, so many weapons, and like I said, these Destiny sets.com collections will be linked in the video description if you do want to check it out, you can go through these and check them all out if you want to. Translation Theory, the Vestian Dynasty Returns, damn, the Vestian Dynasty Returns, wow, the Distant Relation, we have Death by Scorn, Rungside of Rite, nice, we've got so many things here, I thought that was not for the second people, I thought that was an old Ambiant, a Legendary Version, hard falling love, hard truths, now I'm just trying to make sure I don't miss anything here because you know, there's so many new things though, I don't know if these are all what will come available with that for a second, I'm guessing these are a lot of them, got plenty of blues as well, so have another double check before we go into the exotic armor pieces that are coming, because we don't want to miss nothing, yeah, I think we covered everything here, I mean obviously a few of the weapons here that I haven't had a look at yet, but yeah, that's all good, if you spot something that I haven't mentioned down below, then I'll come and check some people, let me know, let me know, let me know, let me know, let me know, let me know, let me know, let me know, but Hunter Armor, we have here the Shards of Galanor, sounds good, Galanor is beyond my skill to repair, I can work with this, but there's no icon, we can't see what it looks like, we've got the Ove Keeper, the Sixth Coyote, we know it's there, is it the Chess Beast, which gives you two Shade Steps or two Dodgers, the Gwaisen Vest, what else we've got, we've got a few epic looking armor pieces here, look at this helmet, Ancient Apocalypse Mask, wow, I mean it's crazy things here, some of these have actually got like images that got an image, where'd it go, where'd it go, no, no, no, no, just there, what else we've got here, there can't be oil, is that oil, Hunter's only got one, two, three, four new exotic, really game, there's got to be a few more than that, there's got to be a few more than that, there's loads of things here, there's loads, they're everywhere, we know about them everywhere, we know about them everywhere, we have for the Warlock, I mean the Titan Sword, the One-Eyed Mask, we have the Ursa for the Ursa, we have an Ursa, we know about that, the Heart of Imosa Light, the Peace Keepers do marches, what we've got here, we've got the Antius Wards, I think we saw them there, I think they're the ones that you slide and they basically deflect projectiles, like rockets, so if you slide and someone's shooting a rocket at you, it will shoot them back, which is a point in the exotic in my opinion, moving on to the Warlock and we have the Contraverse Hold, we have Chromatic Fire, the Chess Piece, which I cannot wait to own, people make every kinetic weapon have Dragonfly basically, we have the Phonix Protocool and we have the Geomag Stabiliser, so four new exotics for each sub-clastro it seems, but I'm guessing there's going to be more than that, there's a load of new things, what are these here, I don't even know what these are, these could be, wow that looks beastly but I'm not sure where it's from, or what are Valorant Reset, fully complete and reset your Valorant during season three, oh this is old, oh because I made them all in season three, my bad people, my bad people, and what else we've got, we've got the new Emotes, exotic Emotes, I don't think there's none there, and the new Gold Shards, wow, look at that thing, oh it's Procedure, is that new or old, I'm not even sure, because I haven't had that before, I haven't seen it before but it looks beautiful, it looks better, yeah, old F4, now some of these ships are new, they've got to be, unless they're old ships, there could be old ships actually, because you know, the 10th ones are like these, the new ones, so yeah, these are old ships I'm guessing, because you know, you know I like all these people, I'm so excited, unbelievable, Vanishing Point, nice, don't think I've seen that before, some of these actually I haven't seen before, what's some I have, I don't know whether these are new or old, they could be new, they could be old, I'm not even certain about that, to be honest guys, but yes, so these are new Shaders from Gambit we see here, I'm not sure where these are from, they could be from Kurosaburra, could be from Vanguard, Ngrams, they could be from Raids, we don't know yet, we don't know, Tangled Rust, that's obviously from Tangled Shure, so yep, Gambit, like I said, more Gambit Shaders, Vanguard Veteran, so there's quite a few things here people, quite a few things, I'll probably miss something, because there's so many to look at, it's unbelievable, what's this here, six years, I've never had that, never had a six shooter, never had a six shooter, but people think that, see it's hard to have a look at Catalyst, I don't know if it's gonna be anything new here, probably not, nah, it's not gonna be, I don't think you'll get the Catalyst in-game until, you know, until actual, the new weapons come to the game, so yeah, but guys, so many, so many things, so many new exotics as well, I can't believe it, I just cannot believe it, but yes the Lord of Wolves returns, the Queen Burkha's returns, No Dregs from me still for some crazy reason, but the Chaperone returns, well you, you were there, beastly, Chaperone, and we have this right here, the Wave Splitter, unbelievable people, unbelievable people, we've come to the end of the video, if I find out any more information on these new exotics, all these new items, these new gear pieces, I will let you know in a video to come, so stay tuned for that, if you are new around here, be sure to subscribe for daily Destiny videos, if you enjoyed what you've seen and you are a fan of the channel, do be sure to show your support by leaving a like, I do appreciate that, also guys, every month I give away a fully customizable controller for either Xbox or PlayStation, sent it anywhere in the world, to be with a chance of winning, simply drop a like on the video, leave a comment down below, make sure you subscribe to the channel and follow the gleam and then get the top of the video description, it's fasting, but energy guys, but I don't know, I am out, thanks as always for stopping by and hopefully I will see you on that next one.