Hello. Well, thanks for coming. This talk will be about consensus. As you can just see, reaching the consensus can be quite hard and even if you reach the consensus, you still don't win because some malicious guys like me can break the agreement right after you reach it. So reaching the consensus can be quite hard. Do you agree? So yes or no? Well, it's, as you can see, it's very hard to reach any consensus because most of you don't answer at all. So, okay. This will be mostly about distributed ledger systems and consensus in these systems and we'll try to show you that the consensus algorithms are really critical part of any such system and try to give you a brief overview of a couple of consensus algorithms and as you probably can guess, as time is quite limited and the problem is a little bit hard, it will be a really very brief overview of these algorithms. But we will try our best to explain you some differences between these algorithms and give you at least some basic understanding which algorithms is better to use with one kind of distributed ledger system and which is better to use with some other distributed ledger system type. But let's start from very trivial things. Right. So at the first step, I would like to introduce you to the issue why we need the consensus. This is quite like simple example of transferring money from one person to another person. There is the Alice who is giving a note of $10 to Bob. If Bob received that, 10 pounds, $10, then he hand over the coffee to the Alice. If we move to a central system where we have some central authority like a bank, then the system has some centralized ledger, some one source of truth where the system can verify that the transfer is valid. So if Alice sends $10 to Bob and it's written to the ledger and Bob can hand over the coffee to her. If Alice wants to send $10 to Carol, then the system is quite easily can verify now that Alice does not have enough money on the account. When we move to the era or to the world of the distributed system that this problem start to be quite more difficult as there is multiple verifiers or multiple accountants in the system. And if Alice is capable to inform two sides of the system about sending the money to different persons, each of the accountant has its own ledger while it's sending this information or gossipping this information to all other parties. And at the time, this part of the system can have different knowledge of the account balance than this part of the system. So that could happen that Alice, in fact, spends just $10 for two coffees. And this is why we need to somehow manage the consensus. And as now Weta tell you that what is exactly, what is the detail? Okay. What is consensus, I guess, it's pretty clear. It's basically what you expect. It's some agreement, for example, on some value or that you agree to commit to do something. And so basically that's it.  So I guess you use some kind of agreement on a daily basis, at least if you work with some database which use transactions. And if you use distributed transactions, you use even distributed consensus. So, but let me explain why it's hard to achieve the consensus. It's because besides of possible concurrent request, it's because of the network. As you know, the network is not reliable. So packets can be delayed or even get lost. So or they can be some glitches on the network, split of the network, and many, many other possible things. So basically you never know if the note of the network didn't send a reply or is completely off, or if it sends a reply, it's a reply is. And proper consensus algorithms has to have at least two properties, safety and liveness. Safety means that there are no two, no 40 nodes in a network which agree on different values. So basically that really all nodes agree on the same value. And liveness means that each node gets all the transactions and all the values which was agreed on. So basically that algorithm doesn't get stuck somewhere and it's then they're all removed some part of the network and don't communicate with it and so on. So I hope it's somehow clear. And I have already gave you an example about the database transactions. But we are speaking about distributed ledgers. So let's move to some examples from distributed ledger systems. I hope all of you knows Bitcoin, right? So how do Bitcoin reach consensus? Do you know? So what is the mechanism, how Bitcoin network reach consensus on something? Come. Pardon? Yeah, do you know how it's called? Proof of work. Yeah. So this is actually not the right answer. Almost, right, but not completely precise. This is street from one professor at Cornell University who says that it's terribly wrong. I wouldn't agree completely with that. It's not terribly wrong, but it's not precise. He explained in a couple of follow up tweets why this is not a completely precise answer to say that proof of work or proof of stake is consensus algorithm. But as we are not on a Twitter, we fortunately can go more slowly and explain a little bit more. So let's start from where most easy things and don't worry after a couple of minutes we return back to the Bitcoin and proof of work and we'll explain why it's not completely precise to say that proof of work is mechanism of high Bitcoin reaches the consensus. So we'll start with the kind of standard consensus that is used in distributed systems where we have, that's kind of the distributed databases which is used normally like ETCD for Kubernetes or similar. Those systems are prepared for two kinds of the failures which is crash or connection error when the messages could be delayed, the notes could crash and still the system is able to reach the consensus and proceed with the operations. But there is not prepared for malicious users which are coming and saying like incorrect Bronx which is not, it's not following the protocol itself. The examples of such protocols are the kind of the Paxos or are the most known ones and we can like differentiate them to base groups which is leader based where the systems Alex the leader which is the one note which receives all the communication from the outer words could be handling some, by some, by information of that client can receive to redirect its request or could be just some load balancing and the second one is the leader less where any note in the consensus network can reach the request from the client and proceed with the saving this information and needs to inform about received information to add notes in the network, inform the consensus. Here just for like to overview what such algorithms about I, there is the like two slides about the rough that really just the brief overview. There is like four nodes, there is always defined some leader which receives all the, all the, all the connections from the, all the request from the client. Then there are some nodes which receives the information from the, from the leader and the leader is, has to inform the participant, the other nodes by heartbeat, heartbeat tickets where the participant does have some timeout and when that timeout elapsed and they do not receive the heartbeat packet then they start to the election of the new leader. The system has to have some leader. Here is just the, the shown the leader election phase where two participants tries to be in leader and informs about this. Then as the next step of the rough is this phase where the leader informs about the information coming from the client and saving this information to, to the log. The each node has its own log and but those logs has to be in, in sync, synchronous. It has to be in sync and the, the state at the all, on all nodes has to be the same. So the, the, the, the leader sends this information to, to the participants, to other nodes and they agreed on that, agreed that they receive the information and then that information is committed to the log and the system can go forward. This is the, this is, these algorithms are used in private blockchains which is like blockchains which are normally inside some of the, in the, in the, in the elite of some single operation, single organization where all nodes trust each other and they are, there, there is no malicious like user, the, the, the, the hyper, hyper ledger in, in sort of uses, for example, or after one of the possible consensus algorithm. From this, there is connected two terms which are mentioned here. It's permissioned and permissioned less. This permissioned, permissioned blockchains or hyper ledger, networks are, are, are networks where nodes are, needs to be permitted to join while, while the permission less are mostly public networks where nodes can join to that consensus protocol and they will and nobody control them. Right. Okay. So let's make things a little bit harder. So besides a possible failure on the network, there can be some malicious or misbehaving nodes. This is called Byzantine failure. I already showed you, if you remember at the very beginning when we are trying to reach the agreement who will start the talk, we agreed that under will start and right after out of sudden, I started myself. So I behave like Byzantine fail. It was kind of Byzantine failure because I break the rules and started to behave completely arbitrary and started the talk. So in general Byzantine failure is any, is any, any arbitrary behavior. So you don't have to expect from the node anything. It can behave completely arbitrary. In most of the cases, it's usually considered that the node is malicious and trying to somehow cheat or break the rules and things like that. And probably most of the example is what Ondra already explained to you is double spend problem when one node send to some, one reply to one part of the network and completely opposite reply to other part of the network and try to persuade both sides of the network that this answer and the other part of the network about opposite answer. So how to solve it? It was solved quite long time ago with Byzantine Paxos algorithm and also probably the best known is practical Byzantine Fortorn algorithm by Barbaralisco and it's sketched here. The PBFT algorithm, there is a leader or proposal which propose a value, send it to all nodes, all nodes send replies to all other nodes if they agree and if they get, or if they are prepared to commit this value and if they get a sufficient amount of positive responses, they move to other part, other phase and try to commit the value and again if it receives sufficient amount of positive replies, the value is committed. So it has three phase, prepare, prepare and ensures the ordering of the transactions during one round and prepare and commit phase and ensures proper ordering of the transaction between the views. Views are the states where one node for example can join the network or crash and so on when there are some failures and the topology of network changes. So these three phase together ensures proper order of transactions even if there are failures on the network or misbehaving nodes and if you still want to somehow imagine from probably what you hopefully know, you can imagine as three phase commit, it's quite similar. What is the disadvantage is this, as you can see, a really huge communication over the network. So this PBFT algorithm can be used and it's actually used for example in some hyperledger project, but it's used for either private distributed ledger systems or federated. I will get to federated, maybe I can right now, federated distributed ledger systems. The federated distributed ledger system is that it, here is the centralized example where is just for example one node which decides but federated means that there are a couple of groups which for example vote leader or some node and this node speaks or represents the whole group. In most common cases, these federated distributed ledgers are still to some extent centralized because these nodes are more forms kind of centers and quite often there are also permission because typical case is that anyone can join this but this communication in yellow is somehow protected and in some dedicated for example network. You can imagine like that couple of banks want to create a distributed ledger system so each bank would provide one node for example here and they will trying to reach agreement between the banks so you don't have complete control over the network so you want to be prepared for some arbitrary Byzantine failures but you still can to some extent trust the other nodes inside this network. So I mentioned here also two more algorithms, it's called PTFT. Tendermint is some kind of improvement of PTFT. It replaces the communication here over the network by GOSEP protocol so it reduces the communication a little bit and also improves the PTFT algorithms by introducing some different methods to make it more easy to finish the agreement. I don't think there is some big idea which I can share here behind it so maybe if you want details you can read the paper but it's quite similar to PTFT, just improve it so that Tendermint can be used in early years and it's not limited to some small network and the STALAR protocol I mentioned here because it's exactly what is shown here, it does some federated voting that a couple of nodes elect node who represent them and this node again can elect other node which represents some even bigger group and so on. So this is like parliament democracy, you can imagine it and again this scales quite well and can be used in early huge networks. So that's it and let's move, let's add something a little bit even more difficult. So before moving again to the Bitcoin, there is an example of other threat that the distributed systems need to somehow handle which is named as Sible attack and based on the fact that as you could understand from the previous size all the presented algorithms up to this time have the each node in the system has one vote, one vote and all of them have the same permission for voting. If there will be some malicious user who would be able to spin up multiple nodes it can overhand the network with its own voting rules and in these times of AWS when you can have hundreds of nodes just by one click it's quite possible. So the system needs to somehow handle this threat. This example is for example Alice who just overhand the network and consensus and get just by the majority of the voting. So this is the threat and some basics about the distributed systems and when we come to the Bitcoin again then I would like to show you how Bitcoin handles all of those. Just to be at the same page I will try to briefly go through what's about the Bitcoin consensus or how that particular part works and this is really not the precise thing just for me being able to show you the idea. So the proof of work is some mechanism which works on blockchain which is the data structure where the each block is linked to the previous one by referring it's hash. Hash is the signature of the block. It's calculated from the header and because of this signature it's hard to calculate or hard to change then you can say that the blockchain is immutable because it's defined and how it is with those linking blocks with each other. The block to the block chain is added by process name mining where miner starts with SH 256 hash functions, calculate over the data of the header and he tries to find out such hash that would be following some rules of the network which is for example having five zeros at the start of the hash and then if such hash is found then the such block is valid for being added as the next stop of the blockchain. How the miner can achieve that is to changing the field, let's say normally it's field nouns which is just arbitrarily randomly changing it and trying to with this change calculating the hash from the header and find such hash that would be starting the five zeros. As we are in the distributed world then there are multiple miners and could easily happen that two of them find out the same hash that would be valid for the next block to be added to the blockchain and at the time we say that there is the fork at the blockchain because there is two possibilities where the blockchain can continue. So now we are coming to what Bitcoin uses to manage this which is Nakamoto consensus which is combination of this proof of work which manages the way of adding the blocks to the blockchain with the static rule which is very sad that only the longest chain is valid. So if I get back here in this case there is just like waiting which of this branch will be prolonged at first and that one will be submitted as defined as the valid continuation for the blockchain. So as we define Bitcoin is Byzantine fault tolerance in a way that is pretty hard for malicious user to change anything because needs to have quite a big hash power computing power to change the blocks or to change the blockchain as well as resistance of symbol attack because it's needed not just to have multiple nodes but it needs to have hash power for changes of the blockchain and at that state it needs to have quite like a lot of money to buy some computers to be able with such power to change the blockchain. It said that this consensus as well probabilistic because you never know when if there is some hidden chain which was not known to your part of the network and there is just big probability while adding one next block to another that there won't be any such hidden network because again there would need to be quite a lot of powerful computer machinery behind building such hidden network so there is just increasing probability that blockchain which is now known to the network is really the right one. The Bitcoin uses one more thing or point for the consensus it's defining the time how long the network should how long the network should need for generating next block it's defined it should be 10 minutes and depending on the number of participants in the network this the difficulty of riddle let's say this the rule of the network of five leading zeros at the hash is changing for six or could be reduced. The reason why there is this 10 minutes is that Bitcoin needs to be is different to be synchronized because for not having 10 minutes I need to be faster. There needs to be 10 minutes is enough time for all information about the found block to be produced over the whole network and if there will be last minute there will be a lot of folks and the consensus would not reach to the state time. Now I move to proof of stake which is kind of the improvement for proof of work where when you run the proof of work you need some machinery to reach the consensus of proof of takes tries to put it this need to inside of the network like that you are not buying the computers but you are providing the stake which is a currency inside of the network and you have votes for being able to participate in consensus you need to deposit the currency in the system and based on the size of the currency you have voted based on that. This is the way how to manage this again the civil attack because for reaching the consensus you need to stake your currency and you are again you are not fine with just adding some arbitrary notes you need to provide some real currency for being able to vote. Still there is it's not the consensus because there is still a rule that the longest chain of the blockchain wins. Just briefly there is two ways or two different states like chain base where there is the proof of stake which so the randomly choose the node where we will put the next block to the blockchain based on the weighted size of the deposit and PBF style when the voters just promotes the next block and the next round goes through the PBF style algorithm. It's not exactly consensus algorithm but it's further beyond the blockchain. Yes thanks. So as Ondra said the blockchain is basically synchronous and it's more or less something like linked list and obvious disadvantage is that it's slow and the throughput is quite low. As you may notice we try to use not a blockchain which people in many cases use interchangeably with distributed ledger system but we try to use the name distributed ledger system and it's because of that the blockchain is just one possible data structure used for the distributed ledger. Another one which seems to be pretty good and useful is and quite popular in let's say last year or maybe two is direct acyclic graph. As you can see here it's basically graph where the edges are oriented and there are no cycles in that graph. There are obviously things like not common consensus can't work on the top of such structure because nodes won't be able to choose which is the longest chain because the forking and adding transactions happens so quickly that it would be absurd because they will compute any useful hash so we need other consensus algorithms against quite some of them like hashgraph, Avalanche, Tangle and probably a couple of more. I will briefly speak about two of them hashgraph and Avalanche and I will just mention the main idea behind given algorithm. So the hashgraph is based on two main ideas. It's gossip about gossip and to watch voting. Gossip about gossip is following things. The protocol used gossip protocol to spread information really fast but besides the vote or transactions it includes here not only it but also all it's known state from previous conversations. So for example this node knows that this node vote for this value and when he sent message to this node he includes it into this message. So the node, so this is what the authors call gossip about gossip and virtual voting is that if you remember PBFT algorithm there was a lot of huge communication because each node has to communicate with each other to know how they vote so this is not needed in this case because the information for example how this node voted is included here so this node knows the vote of this one without talking directly to each other. So besides the information is spread really fast over the network it can be really effectively reduced. In reality of course the algorithm is a little bit more complicated but this is let's say the main idea and if you are interested in all the details you can read the paper here. Ovalunch is kind of similar it's again based of gossip protocol and it used the property of this network which is called Metastability it basically says or it's means that the probability that the network would split exactly into halves when one half of the network will vote for yes and the other part of the network will vote for no is extremely low so in a couple of rounds the whole network very quickly converge to yes or no answer and it's done in this way that the node each node send gossip message to couple of randomly selected nodes and ask them how they vote and when they reply they vote according to the majority so in this case the node gets two answers voting for blue and three answers voting for red so this one will vote for red and every node does this and it can be proven that the whole network very quickly converge to some result so again in reality it's a little bit more complicated but this is main idea standing behind this protocol or actually it's a whole family of protocols as you can read in the paper but for probability we will just speak about this one so that's it and now comes practical exercise for you to try how to reach the consensus in reality so we will adjust it we adjusted algorithms suitable for this in literature it's usually called Halopka-Iranic almost consensus algorithm with usually positive social side effects the name is a little bit long but don't worry the algorithm itself is really trivial and it's as follows you should go to this web page scroll down to feedback form and click on this icon remember this icon when we finished or during the rest of the conference you should grab five randomly selected people in the corridors introduce yourself to the man or lady start chatting with them explain them what you remember from this talk what the algorithm is sorry what the consensus is explain them this algorithm and ask them to do all these four points and then continue chatting and this is the positive social side effect that you will learn new people and probably have some good conversation with them and if most of the conference attendees are not Byzantine the actual result should be that we will win the best talk competition so remember this is a homework for you so hopefully it's clear and hopefully we will win to finish with just more seriously and to have some quick summary what we were talking about that is like what was this talk that there is consensus we can differentiate to Byzantine falter and consensus algorithm and non Byzantine falter and algorithms non Byzantine ones is using private networks where the nodes trust each other and it's the that could be rough or paxos then we have Byzantine falter and algorithms which are using permissioned networks which is where node needs to have privilege to join for example Tenderman which is based on practical Byzantine falter and algorithms but with enhancements under this we would federate it federated ones where there is the democratic elections of some nodes which has rights to vote for in the consensus in public networks we have structure where the consensus runs at it's either blockchain where we can say there put the proof of work or proof of stake with some rule how to say which blockchain is valid and the new upcoming direct acyclic graph data structures and at the top of them there are again the family of consensus algorithms and we presented here hashgraph and avalanche just quickly say that for those some of them here like needs again some proof of stake mechanism to manage the civil attack that's they are normally not not resistant for it just as they are that was the fourth summary and last one I understand something at all don't worry we don't understand it either but there are a couple of things I like you should take off from this talk so first one is that the consensus algorithm is really a crucial part of any distributed leisure systems and the choice of such algorithm can impact almost every aspect of the network like performance and security and it's quite rich field there is not only proof of work and proof of stake which are not consensus algorithms but it's quite a rich field there are quite a lot of algorithms and also there are many or several types of possible distributed leisure systems and not every algorithm is suitable for every type of distributed leisure so you have to have at least basic understanding now what are the differences and what is more suitable for what kind of distributed leisure system and one of obvious recommendation if you want to do some programming on some distributed leisure system please take time read the documentation of this network and get familiar with consensus of such network and be sure at least to some extent understand how it's reached so questions, no one so one or could you repeat what was the question what are the concepts so the question is how the network is formed and basically it depends on the type of the distributed leisure as we showed it can be a permission so basically you just have everything under control and it depends on the cable you connect to which machine and federated network you have for example some node where you can connect and this node are the rest of the network is trusted and there are public network which are peer to peer and anyone can join so it depends on the type of distributed leisure does it answer your question it seems to me that these sites for you that don't have to be if you use gossip protocol you at least have to get some information for about other nodes and then you ask more nodes so you can somehow cheat that the first node send you some wrong list of participant and let's say send you his subnet which he controls but I think as the gossip protocol spreads you can easily escape from that anything else so if not here are a couple of links to the papers which we mentioned here so if you want to know any details just follow the links or google or the appropriate paper thank you for coming in the morning and thanks for your attention


Hey everybody, it's Brian. I wanted to leave a quick note in this specific playlist because I'm getting a ton, I mean a metric ton of feedback about Flutter. You guys seem to love Flutter. It might also be because there's really not much Flutter content out there and some of the content out there is... how should we put this? Questionable at best. Don't get me wrong, there's some really good tutorials out there but some of it's not so good. I'm hoping that mine is okay. I've been getting some pretty positive feedback but everybody seems to have a hungering desire for more such as like fire base and authentication and things of that nature. The other part of the puzzle, if you will, is I put this video out what's Brian been up to in 2018 spring edition and I wanted to address a lot of the feedback that I had been getting. Specific to Flutter is that folks want an actual structured course so they have some sort of certificate so they can take that go to a job interview and say I've completed these courses I am now an expert or an intermediate or a beginner in Flutter and Dart so that's also been on my radar. It's what I've really been focused on. You can see I've got a beginners and intermediate advanced and I just did the Flutter for beginners. It's not the same content so for example let's just crack open Dart advanced here. Let's go to course content and you can see we start off with async compression encryption socket programming database programming and when I say things like encryption we're not talking about just you know flipping a few bits we're talking about block cipher stream ciphers military strength encryption you know using AES things of that nature so it goes a lot more in depth than the YouTube tutorials ever probably will. Now the next question is am I going to stop doing YouTube tutorials absolutely not I love doing YouTube tutorials it's just I wanted to fulfill that kind of need if you will that somebody's looking for a certificate and at the same time I think the content of the YouTube videos is going to feed into the Dart or into the Dart geese into the Udemy videos um but it's not going to be the same content so if you're still watching and you haven't like rolled your eyes and closed the browser and rage quit because you think I'm just after your money you can go to the Voidrums Facebook group if you have no idea how to get to there go to my website voidrums.com click on contact go to be sure to join the Voidrums Facebook group and join up and you'll see that I have been posting free coupons for these courses I did post those out in the official Flutter and Dart channels but I think in the future I'm just going to post them solely in the Voidrums group because I've found that people have been copying and pasting those out in other news groups which I really kind of wanted to be a benefit for the people who have been watching the channel other than that just drop me some comments below I do want to continue down and do like Firebase and authentication and all that but I'm not sure what content is going to be on YouTube and what content is going to be on Udemy I got to really put some thought into that so leave me some notes below and let me know what you think


The sun has sustained the Earth and fascinated humans since the beginning of time. And as our understanding of physics and our space technology have advanced, so too have scientists tried to tackle more questions about the sun and its effects on the Earth. One baffling matter has to do with the temperature just outside the sun's surface. It's a long-standing mystery in plasma astrophysics how you create a very hot corona, millions of degree corona, from a cool star. Many of us know that the sun's corona, its atmosphere, is extremely hot. But maybe what's not so commonly known is that the actual surface of the sun is surprisingly much cooler than the corona. To really understand the plasma physics behind this, we have to go there directly and make measurements. And that's the mission of Solar Probe. Launched in 2018, NASA's Parker Solar Probe spacecraft has now traveled closer to the sun than any other mission in history, actually penetrating the sun's atmosphere to investigate its highly charged magnetic field. Here at Berkeley, we have the lead responsibility for one of the instrument suites, and we have a major role in one of the other instrument suites as well. We designed, we built, and we operate a bulk of the instrumentation on the spacecraft. Those instruments are measuring the properties of the solar wind. That rush of electrified particles, the magnetic field continually pushes out towards the earth. Understanding the solar wind could inform the key question of the hot corona and also help us prepare for major disruptions the wind can cause to our spacecraft, satellite communications, and the safety of our astronauts. Named after Eugene Parker, who developed the solar wind theory, the probe has already sent back many interesting measurements. The first three encounters of solar probe that we've had so far have been spectacular. We can see the magnetic structure of the corona, which is an important thing. It tells us where the solar wind is emerging from. We see impulsive activity, large, what we call jets or switchbacks, which we think are related to the origin of the solar wind. The probe also captured information about solar dust, tiny remnants of disintegrated comets or asteroids. We're able to measure dust impacts on the spacecraft and we're surprised at the kind of ferocity of the dust environment in the inner heliosphere. Built with the most sophisticated heat-protecting shields of any other spacecraft, the probe stays cool with a novel water circulation system that captures and expels the heat into space. It's also the fastest spacecraft in history. At 430,000 miles per hour, it could take you from New York to Tokyo in less than a minute. But it's clear that the best thing about the mission is all the new knowledge it's generating. We've been working essentially around the clock for a decade on this thing. And so to see this data, it's just a pleasure. I mean, the data is so spectacular. It's a big case of delayed gratification, but it's really terrific stuff. I think we're on the cusp of being able to answer the question of what heats the solar wind.


Dear high school me, my name is your name.  Yes, I'm happy to inform you that there is a great big world out there beyond the hormones, cliques, pimples, popularity contests, and that all too familiar cutthroat search for coolness. Well, it may seem overwhelming right now. I really don't want you to take this time for granted, as the decisions that you make today, big or small, shape the person that you're going to become in the future. You see, the jungle that you are currently engulfed in has a wide range of personality species crawling about, each one taking a different and unique approach to high school. On one hand, there are those who will trample and chomp on anyone and everyone just to get to the top of the food chain. And on the other hand, there are those who try to fit in and blend with their surroundings. Be careful, that personality type is contagious. Then there are those who stand out as distinct and unique leaders, who wear their colors on their sleeves, so to speak. This rare species is known as the peacock. High school me, I want you to embrace your inner peacock. Bet you didn't see that one coming. Now, although your reaction right now might be to completely tune me out and seriously consider getting some therapy so that you don't become like your post-high school self, I urge you to just give me a moment and let me explain. What I mean to say is that what I want for you more than anything is to be brave, be bold, be willing to be different, and most of all, be you. As the saying goes, what is popular is not always what is right. And what is right is not always what is popular. In a place where everyone is trying to rush forward to those nights that they won't remember, spend your time making memories that you'll never forget.   And get involved in every single club, activity, program that you feel passionate about, and run for student council, even if you don't think you're going to be elected. That one actually turns out kind of cool. And then at the school dance, when you get the choice to do the macarena or sit it out and be cool, always do the macarena. Make your mark. You may be young, but you're powerful. In fact, you have the power to change someone's life right now, and you probably don't even know it. Invite baths sitting alone at lunch to come sit with you. Offer to show that new student around at school. Send a candy gram to John, because as you know, he hasn't received one the past couple of years. The possibilities to make someone else's high school journey even a little bit better are endless. A kind word, a helping hand. That's all it takes. And yes, you may need to go against the grain. And yes, sometimes you may feel like the only bird in the jungle with a thousand colors on your feathers. But standing up for what is good and what is right brings about its own comfort, the comfort that you have the courage to stand up for what you believe in. And when you stand up for something or someone, even when it's not popular, you unknowingly give permission to those around you to do the same. It's a wonderful ripple effect that echoes and makes an impact in more ways than you at this moment can even imagine. So start the ripple. One good deed at a time. And I promise it will make a world of difference. Sincerely, me.


The paper presents an efficient and effective method for semantic classification of 3D point clouds that can handle unstructured and inhomogeneous data and is computationally efficient, making it possible to process millions of points in minutes. The key issue is careful handling of neighborhood relations, which leads to a fast and expressive feature set. The method outperforms the state of the art in terms of per point classification accuracy while being much faster to compute. This article was authored by T. Heckel, J. D. Wegner, and K. Schindler.


Welcome to passive transport, simple diffusion. Passive transport is the movement of molecules across cell membranes without using any energy. When cells use simple diffusion, molecules naturally move from an area of high concentration to one of low concentration through a permeable membrane. The difference between the two sides is called the concentration gradient. As passive transport doesn't require any energy, the speed at which each side reaches equilibrium is entirely dependent on the porosity of the membrane. The more porous the membrane, the faster the molecules diffuse. Simple diffusion moves molecules from high to low concentration until both sides are uniform or have reached an equilibrium. Oxygen is the one molecule that moves into cells using simple diffusion. When the oxygen concentration outside of the cell is high, the molecules are able to quickly cross the phospholipid bilayer and enter the cell. The cell doesn't have to expend any energy to get the oxygen in, which is good because all cells need oxygen to survive. Let's look at this in action. Note the difference in the high concentration of molecules inside A versus side B. The molecules and water are permeable to the membrane inside of this beaker. The molecules move randomly using kinetic energy. They may collide into the walls in each other or they may move through an opening in the permeable membrane. Because there are more molecules moving on side A, there are also more collisions, so more particles move from A to B than from B to A. The amount of materials moving from side to side is called net diffusion. Net diffusion moves down the concentration gradient from areas of high concentration to areas of low concentration. The particles continue to move back and forth between side A and B until they come to equilibrium. That is, they move until the number of particles on each side is equal. You've reviewed passive transport simple diffusion.


Right, so in this song you have basically one or two verses right and of course a chorus. So let's start with the verse one, the whole song is on A flat major right. So you're going to deal with the following chords, A flat major, the triad, then D flat major, the triad, D flat major, then you're going to do E flat major. So A flat is your one, D flat is your four and E flat is your five. In addition to that you're going to have the minors, D flat minor, C minor and F minor. So I would advise you to write down all your available chords major, minor and also the diminished if you ever use and then it will help you play the song a lot easily. Okay, so Naveen and me will just do our verse and then I'll break down the chords. The chords for verse one are super easy. It's just A flat major and D flat minor. That's the one major of a scale and the two minor of the scale. And a rhythm which you could follow is this for pretty much the whole song where it gets groovy. One, two, three, one, two, three, one, two, three, one, two, three, one. You could count it like that right, one, two, three, one, two, three, one, two, one, two, three, one, two, three, one, two, okay little faster. You can also add some notes. But I advise you to just get used to this first, okay, whenever you're ready, we'll do the verse. That's B flat minor, A flat again, chorus, right, so that's A flat, A flat, it's basically these two chords for the verse in that rhythm. Now let's do our chorus. Let's go through the chords that's A flat major, flat major. So then the same thing pretty much repeats again here but then instead of A flat at the beginning, you do C minor at the beginning. Let's try the whole thing a little slower so you guys can follow the chords and I'll call it along as he sings. We'll try the chorus part, one, two, one, D flat or C sharp major, B flat minor, A flat major, C minor, D flat major, B flat minor, A flat major, so that's your chorus A flat, D flat, D flat, A flat, then C minor, D flat, D flat, A major, okay, so in the next verse of the song which is verse two and then they do a verse three, the lyrics and the melody for sure remain pretty much the same. However, the chords are very interesting. So I have written down two chord progressions here in the note sheet for verse two as well as verse three. I would advise you to go through both of them, however you could use either because the vocal melody is pretty much the same throughout, right? So I'm going to demonstrate it first with the verse two chords then we'll do it with verse three. But just note that when you come to the line two of each verse these chords don't groove with them, just hold the chords, just play them long, A flat, B flat, so that creates a sense of excitement to take us to our chorus which I have showed you earlier, okay. Let's now try verse two. A flat, C minor, D flat, E flat, A flat, C minor, D flat, E flat, that goes to the chorus. So let me break that down, A flat major, C minor, D flat major and E flat major and then second line, A flat major, C minor, D flat major and then in one bar you need to fit in E flat and A flat together, okay. We'll do that very slowly with Navin, three, start. C minor, E flat, E flat, C minor, D flat, E flat, E flat, B flat minor, A flat, okay and then there's the verse three which I'm not going to again play, I've written down the chords for it, pretty much the same tune but a different chord interpretation, right. So in addition to what I just said, there's also a nice piano part at the beginning of the song which I've adapted, you can check this out as well, that happens at the beginning of the song, however I guess you could add it at other places as well. So here's how that part goes. And the chords which could go with this are A flat, F, D flat and E flat, a simple progression, F minor, D flat and so on, actually not and so on otherwise you won't get to hear the singer which is the cool part. Anyway, so the piano interlude again, sorry, also a nice finger exercise I guess, yeah. So hope you guys have some fun playing this song and I can't wait to see you jam this with your band or at least a singer in you, right, okay, all the best. Don't forget to like, subscribe, hit that bell icon for notifications, leave us a comment for any other video you'd like us to do next and don't forget to share the video with all your musician friends. Cheers.


What is going on everybody. It's Stas here. Welcome back to another video. So in this video, we're going to be doing an overall market update like we do in every single video. We're going to be talking about an article that I read on Yahoo Finance explaining what could have caused the green day that we saw today in the stock market. And we're going to talk about a red trade that I made today, where I went wrong, what mistake I made, and you know, what I learned from this. So before we do talk about this trading update, this market update, for all your new viewers out there, my name is Stas, and I make videos dealing with swing trading, day trading, long-term investing, and my personal philosophies and strategies when it comes down to investing in trading in the stock market. So for those of you guys that want to learn more about that, feel free to drop a like, leave a comment, subscribe, and follow me on Instagram as well as on Twitter. And join our Discord group chat as well as our Facebook group. All of those are linked down below in the description box. And if you guys want to be in contact with me and about 335 other investors and traders on a day-to-day basis, feel free to join that Discord group chat. It's very helpful in there, guys. We're talking about trading, investing, stocks, strategies, news, and just networking with each other to become the best traders and investors possible. So if you guys want to be a part of it, again, all of those are linked down below in the description box. And let's get started with today's video. So I'm sure you guys know by now the markets today had a very strong day. The Dow Jones was up about 500 points at the peak. I believe the S&P was up about 45 to 50 points at its highest point. And the Nasdaq was actually up about 150 points at the peak. So they were all up almost 2% on the day at around noon 1 p.m. Eastern Standard Time. And from there, guys, we broke the pattern and then we broke down and pretty much downtrended for the rest of the day. So let's just take a look at what's going on on these technicals so we can get a better understanding of where the overall market is moving. So judging off the S&P, guys, we've been talking about this in every single video, right? This one's trading in more of a horizontal pattern with the support being right around here at about 26.30 with the resistance being at about 2800 to about 2800 and $15. So I was talking about in yesterday's video that we've been consolidating at the support for a couple of trading days and that we could potentially see a green day today. And that's exactly what ended up happening. And let's take a little bit closer look at what's going on. So what I'm keeping an eye on very closely for the S&P and the Dow Jones, we'll see the technicals on the Dow Jones right after this is this 50 simple moving average, guys. And this is a resistance point that is very important because it's been a resistance point in the past. So let's just take a look closer at what's going on under this 50 simple moving average. So take a look at what happened a couple of weeks ago, right? Let's just take a look here. We had a very strong couple of green days after the low at about 26.30. We pulled back and we're having a very similar reaction as to what's going on right now in the S&P. We pulled back, right? We had a couple of green days in a row and then we got rejected by that 50 simple moving average pushing us down to another low. That's a very similar situation that we're in right now, right? We sold off just like we did here. We popped up, got rejected just like we did back here and now we're starting to push up a little bit, right? Just like we did here, a couple of days in the green, a couple of days in the green and then we got rejected back here a couple of weeks ago, which could potentially happen again in my personal opinion, which is why I'm watching this rejection zone and just judging off the latter half of the trading day today, guys, we noticed that there is a strong red candlestick forming under that 50 SMA, which actually is falling deeper than this green candlestick that formed earlier on in the day. This is something in my personal opinion to be keeping a very close eye on in terms of the technicals for the S&P because again, we always do these market updates to dictate what we're going to be trading and if the markets are going to be pushing red tomorrow, that's going to change our philosophy rather than if the markets are going to be pushing green, we'll be having a different philosophy in that point. So it's always great to have an understanding of what is going on in the overall markets and the indexes before trading. So even off this 180 chart, guys, we can see, you know, we can see this is a strong rejection zone based off of the past and just looking at the 20 day one hour chart, we can see it's going to be rejected right under that 50 SMA as well. And we'll see in the Dow Jones, it's a very similar situation. So looking at the Dow Jones, guys, it's a very similar scenario in terms of the technicals, judging off the 20 day one hour chart, we're getting rejected by the 50 simple moving average. And, you know, again, very similar situation with the S&P 500 here. But what I want to note for you guys is that, you know, the past three trading days, we can see here, it's still technically on that higher high, higher low pattern. So, you know, for me to play these market ETFs that go up in price, when the markets sell off, I would love to see, you know, the Dow at least break back down below to this level, preferably, you know, right around this level right here, which was that previous support. So that would be a break of this higher high, higher low trend. And again, very similar thing on the S&P guys, we can see that here, right? You know, I would love to see a break of that trend. And if we just look at the five day five minute guys, we can see technically, you know, it hasn't really broken that trend quite yet, it pushed up for that higher high here. And now it's still technically at a higher low. So for us to see a break below this level would be a very good sign that the S&P, the Dow is going down in price, you know, continuing the correction that it's been in since the beginning of October. So keep an eye on these levels guys, keep an eye on the 50 S&A on both, you know, the Dow and the, what's it called, the S&P, because those are very similar in terms of the technicals here, right? And the NASDAQ, a little bit different in terms of technicals, but we'll get into that in a second here. But you know, in terms of the 180 on the Dow Jones guys, again, it's making lower highs, it's making lower lows. And the fact that we're getting slowly rejected by here, you know, this 50 S&A, that could eventually push it down to another lower low. But again, we have to be very patient here and keep an eye on these smaller timeframes to see if it does break this trend and, you know, break the support at the 180 S&A here on this five day five minute chart. So just take a look, just to take a look now at the NASDAQ guys. This one in terms of technicals guys, it's a little bit different than the Dow Jones and the S&P, right? But we are getting rejected here by the 180 Simple Moving Average, which has been a rejection zone. It's been a resistance in the past here, here, we broke above it here, but then we got, you know, crushed back down below it to that support. We bounced up now when we're getting rejected again, which would be a lower high from the previous. So if we do get rejected here guys and start the head back south down to that support level, this could be the continuation of the lower low pattern in terms of, you know, the NASDAQ. But the positive thing right now in the markets is that the trade war tension is slowly starting to lighten up based off of this article that I read on Yahoo Finance. And this could have been, you know, one of the reasons why we had a pretty strong green day today. And the reason why a bunch of the large caps did very well today. Did you guys see Facebook? Facebook's actually breaking out of that 180 SMA resistance on the 180 chart, which has been a strong resistance over the past couple of months, right? It's slowly breaking out of that. And we'll talk about that in a couple of minutes. But before we do guys, you know, this news is breaking some of these resistance points in the large cap stocks. It's slowly starting to, you know, change the momentum. But again, the tensions are still there just because they're lightening a little bit just because, you know, we're getting a sense of maybe an agreement between Trump and China. You know, it's still a very risky time in the markets in my personal opinion.  Even though we got this little slight relief of tension, the tension is still there, right? You guys know what I'm saying here. You got to be very careful still in my personal opinion. But, you know, this was an article that was published today. Stocks jump on signs of trade talk progress, right? US equities tracked a global rally and closed higher on Wednesday as a slew of reports pointed to softening of trade tensions. The S&P, okay, we already know all this, 0.5% rise for the S&P, the Dow up 0.9, or that was the NASDAQ actually up 0.9%, and the Dow up 0.6. Stocks added to gains following a Wall Street Journal report that China is planning to open up access to foreign companies and move away from its original staunch made in China 2025 plan. Very good plan right there, guys. You know, very good that we're seeing this type of news from China. Earlier, President Trump said on Tuesday in an interview with Reuters that China was buying a tremendous amount of US soybeans, a commodity that has been at the center of trade disputes. Trump added that Washington and Beijing are already in trade talks by telephone, and that more meetings are between envoys of the two countries are likely. And this is another big note right here, guys. This comes as China is preparing to cut tariffs on US-made cars to 15% from 40%, according to a Bloomberg report, and another move indicating progress toward a resolution to the US-China trade war. Just like I've been talking about in every single video, guys, the stock market has a lot of tension and a lot of doubt. And what does the stock market not like? It does not like tension. It does not like doubt. It does not like uncertainty. So the fact that news like this came out, right, what I just read to you guys, this relieves some of that and more people are willing to buy. Again, it's a psychological game. It's emotional, guys. When people are tied in to short-term emotion, short-term news, this affects stock prices in the short term. A lot of people, most people out there don't have a long-term vision for the stock market. Most people are not disciplined, right? So the fact that they see this news, they just buy based off of this news rather than buying when the stock would be at a cheaper price or in other different times, right? So it's kind of an odd scenario here. Again, very psychological game in terms of the stock market, very emotional driven for most people out there. And the whole idea, in my personal opinion, guys, is to not act on emotion rather than acting on strategic moves and strategic buy points when stocks are undervalued if you're looking to be a long-term investor. So that's what we're looking at based off of this little Yahoo Finance article. This could have been what pushed up the markets today, again, due to a little bit of a relief in the tensions with China and Trump. So now that we talked about that, let's talk about what I did today in terms of my trading, guys. Again, if you're part of that group chat on Discord, if you actually know I didn't post it on my Instagram story, but if you were paying attention earlier in this video, I took a red day. And as you read in the title, I took a red day today in the overall stock market with my trade in TVIX. And I'm going to talk about that right now very quickly. And TVIX is one that I've been trading in and out of. And it's about time that I took a loss because not trying to sell cocky or anything, guys, because that is not what I promote on this channel. I am not a person to show off or be cocky whatsoever. That is not my style at all. But I have been having pretty good amount of green days in a row. So the fact that I had a red day today, it's pretty much kind of what's it called? Even though I am humble already, it's humbling to me to have a little red day now, to bite me in the butt a little bit, to teach me that every day is not going to be a green day. Although I already knew this, it's nice getting this, what's it called? It's nice getting this reminder when you've been having a couple green days in a row.  And I'm glad that it happened to me today because, again, not trying to sound cocky. I've been having a couple of green days in a row over these past couple trading days. But in TVIX, guys, I took my little 2% loss today on TVIX. And I'm going to show you guys exactly where this happens. So the S&P 500, again, opened up 30 points, 35 points to begin the day. And we saw it slowly starting to drop. And this is what I saw in yesterday's trading, which allowed me to profit about 7% on TVIX. And the fact that it was kind of repeating itself, we started to see the sell-off, the break below the EMA. This kind of gave me an incentive to trade or put a little bit of money, slowly start to scale into TVIX. And that's exactly what I ended up doing, guys. I got in at about $50. I believe it was about $50.60. And it was a little bit late. And my personal position was a little bit late because we do see $50.60. It might have been $50.50 because $50.60 is right at the peak. Yeah, I think it was like $50.50 right before this peak out. Literally, I got in at the worst time, right? I got in, $50.50. And took that 2% loss. And it ended up being a very bad trade because, again, we saw the S&P, guys, it was making higher highs, higher lows to start off the day. And this was just simply a dip in the S&P where I ended up taking a position, right? It was just a dip. And then we pushed up to another higher high. And this is when I pretty much cut my losses in this range when the S&P was popping up. Because, again, for those of you guys that don't know when the S&P is going up, TVIX is going down and vice versa, right? So I got in here, jumped the gun a little bit, right? We bounced on the S&P, giving me a 2% loss on TVIX. And, you know, stop loss orders are really lifesavers, guys, because if I didn't have a stop loss here, I would have lost more money than I did, right? From $50.50 down to about 2%. Let's see where that put me just to give you guys some perspective here. So that put me at the loss right below this $180.50 S&P crossover there. But if I didn't have that, I would have lost 5% even more on that trade, right? But we do see now we're swinging back up and I would have made money if I actually held the whole day. But again, that's not what I do, right? I'm not truly an extremely risky trader. I'm more conservative. So I usually like to cut my losses pretty quick, right? If I see a stock ETF turning down, down, turning from where I personally got in, I like to cut my losses. And then I like to re-enter potentially later on in the day. And today would have been a great day to re-enter. And I could lie to you guys and say that I did re-enter and it made my money back, but I'm not going to lie to you guys. I did not re-enter. I pretty much took that loss and stopped trading for the day. And that's just the truth, right? So that's my loss on TVIX. I got in a little bit too late here. We were a little bit overbought on the RSI, pretty much really overbought. So I jumped the gun. I got a little too excited and it bit me in the butt. So bad trading for me today, but again, that happens. And I'm glad it happened because I've been having a couple of green days in a row and I needed this little bite in the butt to remind me that you're not going to be getting money. You're not going to be getting positive percentage gains every single day. There's going to be some red days that occur and I'm happy that it happened. So to look at some other stocks and ETFs very quickly before I do end off today's video, let's take a look at Drip and Gush. A bunch of people in our group were actually able to trade Drip and Gush. And Gush and Drip were actually two that I called out in yesterday's video. For those of you guys that watched yesterday's video, I said that Gush had potential to push back up today closer to that. What was it? I believe it was a resistance on XOP. And if you guys don't know the correlation, Gush rather and Drip trade based upon XOP, meaning whenever XOP is going up in price, Gush is going up in price. And whenever XOP is going down, Drip is going up. So in yesterday's video, I talked about how we saw potential bottom in XOP. And that based off of this trend, we noticed that the resistance was at the 50 SMA. And I thought, and based off my technical judgment, I made a prediction that XOP could potentially go back up to that 50 SMA and get rejected. And that's kind of what it did pre-market hours today, guys. If we can see here, pre-market, it did have a huge gap up and it shot up even more heading into the middle of the market at about 12 1 PM Eastern Standard Time. And that's where we ended up getting rejected right under that 50 SMA on this 184-hour chart. A little bit under it, but still in the same vicinity as the 50 Simple Moving Average. So I didn't trade Gush and Drip, but again, a bunch of people in our group were able to trade them. And Gush shot up to $13.66 today. And it went down as the markets went down as they start to sell off. They don't technically relate to the markets, but typically when the markets are going up, Gush is doing well and going up in price. But when the markets are selling off, vice versa, Drip's going up and Gush is going down. That's exactly what we've been seeing in the past couple of months, pretty much, since the October sell-off. And tomorrow, guys, it all depends on what the market does. Is the market going to be selling off, which means that we could potentially profit on Drip? Or is the market going to break those what's it called, the 50 SMA resistances? Are we going to start to push up and have a couple more green days, which would be very good for Drip, not Drip, rather, Gush, in my personal opinion. So just like everyday guys, again, I talk about this all the time. It kind of gets repetitive, but we do get a lot of new viewers every single day. I'm trading a bunch of the same ETFs and stocks on a day-to-day basis because this is what I've seen success with over the past couple of trading years that I've been in the markets that I've had experience with. What's the point of trying to trade new things all the time when what you're already trading is working? So that's what I've been doing and that's what I'm sticking to. That's what I've been trading. Gush, Drip are two of the main ones that I trade. We saw a huge sell-off today in natural gas. Actually, guys, take a look at this. It completely broke that wedge to the downside. And I was talking about this in yesterday's video, guys, because in yesterday's video, I believe we were at this point in terms of natural gas. And I was saying that, are we going to break below this? Are we going to break below the support on this wedge to break that pattern and start a downwards trending pattern? Or are we going to bounce here and pretty much pop up and break above the resistance, which would be a crazy bull sign, bullish indicator, right? And we pretty much did the first thing, which was break below the support and start a new downtrending pattern from where natural gas was yesterday. And obviously, guys, with natural gas being down 7% today, D gas was on fire, right? D gas was absolutely on fire. And we can see that here based off this chart. Up 16% today, up $9. So whoever was able to capitalize on that, congrats to you. Very, very solid move there in terms of D gas. And let's take a look at Facebook, guys, because I did talk about this a little bit earlier in the video. But Facebook is one is a stock right now that is breaking a very strong technical barrier here on the 180 chart.  We've had data leaks, Cambridge Analytica, all these different things. Zuckerberg has been interviewed by the government, he's been all over the news, right? All these different things that have been happening. That's crushed the stock, right? From 220 all the way down to 126, that's nearly 100 point drop, right? And we noticed through this whole time, it's been getting rejected by that 180 simple moving average here on the 180 day four hour chart. So the fact that we're breaking up here, you know, we're breaking out of that is a very good sign that this could be a reverse in trend. And we could potentially start to push back up in terms of Facebook stock. So I'm very, very excited about this, because you know, this is one of my long term investments. I've been buying it over the past couple of months, I slowly start to scale in at around 170, bought more at 160, bought more at about the recent price I bought out, I think was at about 135, I bought a couple more shares. So you know, I've been buying this one over the past couple months, and I'm really, really excited to see what it's going to do in the short term and the long term in terms of its price.  I'm going to see if Facebook can have another strong day tomorrow. You know, maybe I could potentially trade that in my swing account. You know, I don't know about it, because again, you know, the markets are at a technical spot right now where it could, they could potentially get rejected. So I want to be careful because you know, if the markets do get rejected and start to go down in price tomorrow, you know, Facebook's most likely going to get rejected here as well and have a red day. But again, you know, I'm keeping all my options open and waiting until pre-market hours to see what happens. So in yesterday's video, I said to leave a comment for staying all the way to the end and I was actually surprised how many people stayed to the end. That's actually mind blowing to me. So I really, really appreciate all you guys that stayed at the end of my videos. I really want to just thank you personally. I really, really appreciate it, guys. And I hope you do find some value in these videos. I hope they really do help you because that's my mission. That's my goal with this YouTube channel. I'm so happy that I've been able to help a bunch of people, literally hundreds of hundreds of hundreds of people over the past couple of months with trading and vesting. It just brings warmth to my heart. I just love helping people and just sharing my experience, sharing my journey and I really do appreciate all you guys. But I really do stay down to the end of these videos because they are pretty long. They're pretty long, 20 minutes some of the time, 25 minutes. And that's a pretty decent amount of time, guys. So I really do appreciate it kicking back, hanging out with me, talking about stocks, checking out the videos. I really, really do appreciate it. And I'll catch you guys in the next video. Again, stay connected with all the links down below in the description box. I'll see you guys tomorrow. Peace out.


What is up, everybody? Brandon Ndola here with three of my favorite bets for this week's FedEx St. Jude Championship over at Vandal Sportsbook. I like Scottie Schaeffler this week. Schaeffler has not won since the Masters, but let's not pretend like that matters since April. He was winning at such a high rate that that wasn't going to last, but he sets up really well for this week over the past three months, according to Data Golf. Schaeffler is second in true strokes gained, which adjusts for field strength. He's at a 2.70. Roy McElroy's at a 2.79. McElroy's the favorite this week, and nobody else in the field is above a 2.23. So there's still a big gap between Schaeffler and McElroy and everybody else this week. He has the distance to overpower this course. Accuracy can help out a lot. Shorter hitters can contend, but over half of the top 10 last year basically did it through driving distance rather than driving accuracy. So that sets up well for Schaeffler. He's an elite iron player. He's got two top 15 results here the past two years while losing strokes from putting. So it's a good sort of bounce back indication. He plays well, T-degree in here, but just didn't get the putting, the putter going. So I like Schaeffler quite a bit for it this week. Also like Matt Fitzpatrick to pick up a win. He is a great putter overall. We see that every time. He teased it up in a major, but especially on Bermuda. He's a 97th percentile Bermuda putter over the past 50 rounds, according to Fantasy National. He once gained 10 strokes from putting on these greens, which is a career high for him. One of the highest, just basically highest rates we've ever seen. What jumps out really though is that Fitzpatrick has gained a lot of lengths that can help him overpower things whenever he has the opportunity, but he sells just so accurate above average there despite the added distance. 77th percentile long-term irons in my database, which adjusts for field strength and recency. He's at a 2.23 true strokes gained over the past few months. So he's tied for third in the field behind Olme Schaeffler and Macklemore. He put that all together and Fitzpatrick is a great option to back this week in a loaded field. Finishing up, I like Billy Horschel this week. We can see shorter, more accurate hitters can tend in TPC Southwind if the rest of the game is there. Abraham answered one last year. Harris English, Daniel Berger, Ian Poulter, all top 10. Those are more accurate hitters than they are long. Horschel does kind of scare me a little bit. With long-term irons, they're not elite. 33rd percentile there relative to this field, but plays this course well. He's actually got the most career strokes gained in TPC Southwind among the field. He has a 93rd percentile Bermuda putter. He's also got 93rd percentile expected putting splits, which based on his distance, he's putting really well. It's not like he's making some lag putts, getting a little bit lucky there. He's a great putter overall. And he is 18th in the FedEx Cup standings. I know we're probably gonna maybe give a little bit more credence to golfers outside the top 70 when you get some points to get into the top 70 to play next week. But Horschel should be very motivated. All these guys should be motivated. Lot of money on the line and Billy Horschel loves the PGA tour. He would love probably nothing more at this point to get a second FedEx Cup championship under his belt. So that'll do it for my favorite bets for the FedEx St. Jude Championship. Best of luck this week. Let's hit a winner.