OK, so my name is Ludwig Cortes. I'm from Inria, a research institute in France in computer science and math. I'm also the co-maintainer of GNU Geeks, so this piece of software that I'm going to talk about. It's actually pronounced Geeks, which I think is quite unusual to many. But yeah, that's the way it is. Last year, I already had the pleasure to talk in the HPC Dev Room. Together with Piotr Prince, we gave a general overview about Geeks, and Piotr talked about relocatable binaries precisely for HPC. This year, I want to talk about a bit of a more prospective thing that we'd like to work on, that we are already working on, but we'd like to make more progress in that direction. And this is about integrating deployment tools within scientific workflows. Just a quick show of hands before I start. How many of you are already familiar with Geeks? That's like half of the room, I would say. OK, so I'll do a quick introduction to Geeks so you get a feel of what it's like, what it does, and what makes it different from other tools. For those of you, at least, who did not attend Kenneth's talk this morning, which I think did a great job at trying all these different tools. So in a nutshell, Geeks is essentially a package manager. I suppose most of you have already used Conderspack or APT or VM, that kind of stuff. So it gives you essentially that kind of interface, like app, like condo install, that stuff. So you have a command which allows you to install packages, GCE, OpenMPI, GWL, for instance. Then you have this command, which is a little bit particular, because it has module-like functionality. So if you're used to module load, well, this is kind of similar. So Geeks package-dash-searchpaths give you the list of environment variables that you need to define to actually use the software you installed, essentially. So you can just add that to your shell and you have all the environments ready to use. I think that's pretty convenient. I mean, it's always treat me up before that I forgot to set this or that environment variable. So I really like this. Then you have another way to install packages, which is that instead of having the usual app style common line interface like this, you can say, well, I want to declare precisely what software I have available in my profile. So I just tried a simple file that contains a list of packages I want to have. And I pass that file to Geeks package-dash-manifest. It just creates the profile with all these pieces of software. That can be quite convenient if you're moving between different machines. Like you have a set of packages on your laptop and you'd like to have the exact same set on your supercomputer. Well, you can just pad that file on and just do Geeks package-dash-manifest. And we have transactional upgrades and wallbacks. So you can try out new packages, new versions. And if it doesn't work and you have a paper due for tomorrow, well, you can still roll back and that's fine. You have the exact same tools as you had just before upgrading. But this is essentially the main interface to Geeks, I would say. The cool thing about it is that it's reproducible. So what do I mean exactly by reproducible? Well, let's say you have somebody on their laptop using Geeks to install some set of packages. Well, then you can have somebody else on a completely different GNULI-NUX machine. So it's GNULI-NUX only. And as long as that person is using the same commit of Geeks, they're going to be able to install the exact same programs, the exact same packages. And by exact same, I mean at the bit level. So the Geeks project is actually involved also with the reproducible build effort along with Debian, Arch Linux, FreeBSD, lots of distributions. And so we pay a lot of attention to making sure that we have bit reproducible builds. I think that's a key difference to some of the other tools out there. So yes, that's reproducible and portable. So again, you can, you know, you have your cluster, your supercomputer, which has a completely different distribution than your laptop. But that's fine. Geeks is self-contained, so it will always create, you know, its own set of packages. And, you know, it's independent of what the whole distribution provides. I should mention also that Geeks does, like Nix and like Spark is doing now, does mixed source binary deployment. So if you have binaries available, which we usually do, well, then you just end up downloading those binaries. And if you don't, then you just build from source. And it's completely transparent. So we have this reproducible thing that you can replicate from one machine to another. That's bit reproducibility. But I think in science in general, we want to be able to do more than just replicate bit by bit the software environment. Sometimes you want to experiment and that's one thing that Spark does really well. If you saw Todd's talk just before, I mean, there are lots of options you can add to Spark to specify, like how you want to build your package, what dependencies you want to use, and that's definitely useful in an HPC context where people want to try out things. So with Geeks, we offer some flexibility at the command line. Like you can say, so there is, for instance, a package for HWLock, the hardware topology library in Geeks proper, and it's a fixed package, right? It's a given version, it chooses given configuration flags and so on. But as a command line, you can say, actually that's a real use case because some of my colleagues work on HWLock and sometimes they want to try out release candidates and this is something for them, I guess. You can always say, I want to build HWLock but I want to use a different source table so you can provide a file or a URL. It's going to use the same HWLock package recipe that's available in Geeks proper except that it's going to use this source file. That can be quite convenient. And you can also say, well, I like that MUMS solver package in Geeks, except that, you know, I like to use different dependencies. Like I'd like to use the parallel version of Scotch, the graph petitioner. Well, you can just say, okay, I want to, you know, take that MUMS package, but I want to rewrite the dependency graph such that any reference to the Scotch package is replaced by a reference to the PT Scotch parallel Scotch package. And that's going to do that on the fly. And so probably you will end up building from source because the build servers don't have this particular set of binaries. But I mean, you get the flexibility that many people need in HVC. And again, and this example is, I guess, we owe it to Kenneth, the discussion about binary performance, you know, for some pieces of software you need to choose at compilation time, whether you want to build a generic version of the software or whether you want to build an AVX, for instance, optimized version. And this is how you could address this kind of situation where, you know, Geeks itself provides a generic version that works on any X8664 machine, for instance, but if you want the AVX version, you can always say, okay, rewrite the dependency graph so that I use the AVX variant of FFTW. So Geeks started in 2012. It has almost 7,000 packages currently. It builds on a number of architecture. We got ART64 recently. And we have a continuous integration build form that provides binaries at this URL. The last release was in December last year. I think we could be doing a better job at making frequent releases. We're working on it. But we had like two releases last year, I think. And the new thing compared to last year is this Geeks HPC effort. Essentially, we realize that some of us in the Geeks community, so Geeks is not initially designed for HPC at all. Well, I mean, not specifically, but it has good properties for HPC, like the fact that you can, you know, install packages as a user without being root and you have a lot of flexibility and every user can decide what packages they installed. This kind of property is quite useful in a cluster, typically. So we realize that actually several of us in the Geeks community were already doing HPC stuff and using Geeks in that context. So we created that Geeks HPC effort initially started by Henry, the Max Tilburg Center for Biomolecular Medicine in Berlin and the Utrecht Bioinformatics Center. Also joined by people from Cray. So we're trying to see what else can be done to make Geeks a good choice for package deployment in HPC. So we've already made a number of improvements in that area and we hope to do more. And so this is an invitation for you to join us. If you're curious about Geeks and you'd like to see if it would fit your use cases or if you, I don't know, if you'd like to chat in general, well, we welcome you to join us to have a look at that website here. And yeah, hopefully we can talk and do stuff together. Right, so I don't know if you had the opportunity to go to the Unix History keynote yesterday. I think it was pretty cool, pretty interesting. And Unix has this well-known motto of having one tool for a job, one tool that does one job and does it right. I think we all like it in general as a concept. It's a pretty good idea because it means that you have to create tools that can be composed together, right? And the general idea is sound. I mean, it makes a lot of sense to me. Yet in Unix, composition of programs is a bit limited. Like essentially you can share text through pipes or through files, stuff like that. So you can compose things like cat and WC, you know, stuff like that, that works well. But if you're trying to compose other pieces of software, sometimes it doesn't work so well because you wanna share higher level concepts, not just streams of text. And I think this is what led us to what I call the Archipelago of tools that do one thing. So we can see that in HPC and clusters, I think, we have tools like, let's say we have APT here, which is a tool that is used to deploy software on the main distro. And then somewhere we have, I don't know, EasyBuildConda, which is a tool that users or CIS admins actually use to deploy more software. And then somewhere around there we have the batch scheduler which simply ignores the whole issue of software deployment. And then again we have CWL or Galaxy, for instance, which are tools to run pipeline workflows and again they mostly ignore the issue of software deployment. I think that's a problem. I think we could do a better job if all these tools, these different tools could be made aware of software deployment, right? This is what we're trying to achieve with Geeks, actually. We're trying to put reproducible deployment at the center of the stage and to provide tools that can be used to build applications around the notion of package and software deployment. So let me give a couple of examples. So as I said before, Geeks initially started as a generic package management tool, right? So you can install software. But since Geeks knows all this dependency graph of packages, we can actually create other applications around it to make use of that information. So let's say for example, as a developer, one thing we often wanna do is be able to say, okay, I fetch a source of the software I wanna work on, let's say Pet-C, and then I actually want to hack on that piece of software, right? So I need to set up the environment for that software. Well, we have a Geeks environment command where you can just say, I wanna hack on Pet-C and Geeks already knows about Pet-C, right? It knows about its dependencies. So just a Geeks environment Pet-C and it spawns a new shell where you have everything available to develop Pet-C. I think that's pretty convenient as a developer. It's one case where we're just using information that's already available and just making new tools using it. Container provisioning is another case where we have a disconnect between the main tools that are used to provision containers and package managers, for instance. I think that's waste tool. Because if you're using Docker, so the general approach would be for Docker to use a base image, let's say a Debian image. And from there you have a Docker file that runs a bunch of apps and condor commands, for instance. And it does a job, but it's not reproducible. Why is there this disconnect? Why can Docker be made aware of the package graph? I think we can do a better job. And so with this Geeks pack command, what we have is a generic tool that again uses information already available in Geeks, which is the dependency graph, and is able to create bundles. So the bundle itself can be a generic table that you can extract on a different machine, or it can be a Docker image. And you can create that Docker image, and here what we end up with is a Docker image that contains HW look and all of the dependencies. And from there I can just take that image, pass it to someone who, well, maybe hasn't seen the light yet and is not choosing Geeks, and they can still use that software in using the tools they're familiar with. So I must say I'm a bit of a programming language geek, so I'm trying to do a very real exercise which is to talk about functional programming and scheme. In an HPC track, I hope that will work, we see. I couldn't help but tell you a little bit about the underpinnings in terms of programming language feature that we have that make this possible. So let's see. So Geeks itself is written in scheme, which is a functional programming language of the list family. In scheme we have expressions, so this is an expression, scheme expression, as you can guess it's basically like the, it simply invokes the LSTOPO program, right? So it uses the system star function, which is like the system function in C roughly, and this is an expression, okay? If we had a quote right here, then what we get is an abstract syntax tree, so it's an unevaluated expression, so to speak, or a stage expression. So I can take this, I can write it to a file, or I can send it over to a different machine. But of course if I send it over to a different machine and I want to evaluate it there, well as you can guess, maybe it's not gonna work because this being LSTOPO thing actually means something, right? It refers to software. And the expression here doesn't capture the fact that I'm referring to the LSTOPO command or vegetable you like. So we need something more. And in Geeks we actually extend the programming language with an additional stage notation, which is this hash till thing, where here I'm saying, okay, I'm building an expression, but it refers to a specific HWLock package, right? So in other words, we have an expression that is aware of the deployment needs for itself, right? It carries information about what software needs to be deployed for the expression to actually work. And again, this HWLock here, it's actually a reference to a variable, and that variable describes a complete graph, right? This is HWLock. This is what's going to be deployed when I evaluate that expression, let's say on a remote computer. And so we've put deployment within the language in a way. And when we have that, well we can start building applications around it. So one of them is the Geeks workflow language currently being developed by Rolf Jensen of the Utrecht Bioinformatics Center. I don't know where Rolf is. It's basically using that feature to make deployment a core part of the workflow language. I don't know if there are bioinformaticians in the room. Yeah, okay, so I'm not a bioinformatician, right? So I'm trying to explain the whole situation, but basically in bioinformatics, people run big pipelines, right? They have lots of different tools in lots of different languages, and they compose them to build, you know, analysis of DNA sequences and stuff like that. And they basically have a graph of tasks that need to be performed using all these pieces of software. So basically as an input, you have data, and then you have this big graph that uses tons of pieces of software. And then as the output, you have, well, the end result, well, the computational results. But for each of these boxes, you actually need to deploy software. And in bioinform people, well, the de facto standard is CWL, Common Workflow Language, which is a tool that allows you to describe workflows so far so good. But again, it doesn't take care of software deployment by itself. So you are not really able to express the fact that you need not just to run software, but you also need to have that software deployed first. And that's something that GWL, I think, solves in a pretty nice way. So just to give an example, this is a GWL process definition where essentially we use a bunch of modules that define package objects and workflows, things like that. And then we can define a process where we have specific dependencies. And again, when we say Python here, we're referring to the Python package that's defined in this very module. So we're precisely referring to one Python instance, same for the SamTools thing. And then we essentially provide, in this case, a Python snippet that does stuff, does computations. From there, we can just run GWL Workflow and it's gonna submit the whole set of tasks using, in this case, the SunGridEngine batch scheduler. It's gonna submit that on your supercomputer and make sure that everything is deployed and accessible in the compute nodes. I think that's pretty nice to have this body. Okay, I'm gonna wrap up. Now, if we take a step back, in terms of reproducible science, it's becoming more and more of a hot topic. So this is, for instance, nature, insisting that people should be providing code and not just data. This is, I guess, another nature magazine. Well, and we get the point. The ACM also in computer science is insisting that, well, it's not okay to just have a paper that says that you have code that does great stuff, right? You need to have the code and people need to have a way to reproduce it. And there are initiatives like the Rescience Journal. There are many others, but this is the one I happen to know best, which essentially seek to reproduce experiments that are described in papers. I think to do that, you first need to be, you first need to have the code of the software involved and you need to be able to build that software, which brings me to my conclusion. If we look at the whole reproducible science spectrum, at one end we have initiatives like the Rescience Journal, which is scientists trying to reproduce experiments and to fiddle with experiments. At the other end, we have initiatives like Software Heritage, which protect software source code from disappearing. If we have both, that's already kind of nice for reproducible science. Of course, it takes more than this to make science reproducible, but these are very useful tool. And you see what I'm getting at, we miss something here for deployment. And what if geeks, for example, could be used to make reproducible deployment available so that we could big dose, ideal reproducible science workflows. And this is it, if you have any questions. All right, so let me repeat the question. So essentially, why did we create a new workflow language? This is actually not my work, but I think the main motivation to create the Geeks workflow language is to incorporate deployment within the workflow language. So from my understanding, CWL, for instance, so there are two main ways to use it. Either you just do deployment by yourself and that's it, CWL doesn't care at all. Or you can use Docker images and CWL in a CWL spec, I think you can specify your Docker image. But it's still up to you to actually create that image and deploy it on the nodes and so on and so forth. So, I mean, I can understand your argument, which is that CWL already exists and there are lots of tools and yeah, that is great. I think we have an opportunity here with CWL to actually make things simpler, right? To have deployment be part of the whole workflow management process. I think that's pretty useful, even though in some cases, yeah, probably people have already had their CWL workflows and they're not gonna switch overnight, right? Yes. So the question is, how is data managed in CWL? So, yeah, we had a discussion about this, so I'm not an expert in terms of design of CWL, but basically the issue was, how should we treat data? How should we put in that store, that GNU store directory that Geeks uses? Because it's content address, at least for data. So that was one option, but the problem is that data is typically very large for bioinformaticians and so they just didn't want to have that bottleneck, which would be the central store. So, data is treated out of ban from a Geeks perspective, so I don't know exactly, maybe we should discuss afterwards, but I think GWL arranges to have data stored outside of the store and just make sure it's available in the compute node. It's about, I knew I could do this, so you talked about the integration between the system that you... Yes. And just really quick, what did you do? Did you integrate a framework like the integration, the integration, building, when you have other options for the computer or something that you just... You're focusing on your system and why do integrators of yours... So the question, if I understand correctly... Because I have a framework that's just doing the GNU integration system. Yeah. But there will be a growth and you integrate it in your... In partnership, you integrate it and you do integration, you can do it. Right. So the question is, why do we have a specific continuous integration tooling? Or did I get that right? Yeah. Well, continuous integration is very important to us because we need to be able to distribute binaries of those packages. So we need to have servers somewhere building packages in advance so that when users actually try to install them, binaries are already available. So that's why we're doing continuous integration and also obviously for QA. Yeah, I think that's the answer. Thank you.


In this video, we provide the solution to question number 19 from the practice final exam for math 1060 In which case given this diagram, which I should mention the circle in consideration is in fact the unit circle notice We have two examples of radii of this circle being length one So this is in fact the unit circle and so using this unit circle Diagram we need to prove that tangent of theta where theta is this angle in consideration here is equal to the length Ae so we're trying to show that this distance right here is the same thing as tangent of theta What are we allowed to use to prove that well first of all we know? This is the unit circle so this is a radius. This is a radius Those are length one and since we have a point on the unit circle We know that the x-coordinate here is cosine of theta and the y-coordinate is sine of theta as Illustrated on these two sides of a right triangle and so the basis of this argument can be around similar triangles So consider the triangle AOC right here. You're always going to use this triangle and what are we going to compare it to? Well, we need to use it right triangle that has Ae in it where you have Ae right here In which case that seems to suggest that we should use this triangle right here. All right That was kind of sloppy there. We're using this triangle right here And so we then claim and this is how the proof is going to start here. So note That the triangle AOC is similar to the triangle. Well, how does it compare right and we have to make sure the vertices connect with each other correctly, right? So notice they theta the angle coincides with both of these and there's also a right angle of a right here The right angle is there in there as well So when you do this correspondence angle a in the original triangle right here This is the complement of angle theta for which that would have to be angle E right here So we see that the vertex a coincides with E. What about oh oh coincides with theta Which then would be oh again, right? So you get oh like so and then the right angle which for the original triangles at C Coincided with a like I said earlier in which case we get the following the triangle AOC is similar to the triangle E. Oh a I put those in order to make the following statements a lot easier thus We get by proportions that a e over Right, so notice a is the side. We're trying to consider right here. What does a e coincide with a e on this one So with respect to I'm actually gonna draw these triangles to the side for a moment. Here's angle theta, right? So this is OCA with respect to angle theta. This is the opposite side This is the adjacent side and this is the hypotenuse Like so and then if we do this triangle right here again, I'm just gonna draw it the way it is on the screen They don't like so oh E and a so with respect to theta. This is the opposite side This is the adjacent side and this is the hypotenuse that also can help you figure out Which vertices coincide with each other so a e with respect to theta is the opposite side So that will coincide with a c which is the opposite side with respect to the other theta triangle All right, so we want to compare a e with a c but what else do we do well? What can go with a e? We have to pick another side of the triangle which oh e we don't really know anything about it It's longer than one I guess but oh a right here. It's a radius of the unit circle So that's the one I want to know so oh a right there now oh a Notice here is the adjacent side of the triangles. We have to compare that to the adjacent side over here For that triangle which would be OC like so so now using the diagram. What can we do here a e? We don't know oh a is a radius of the unit circle. So that is one. What about a c a C is equal to here sine of theta and Then OC is equal to cosine of theta Like though like so and so simplifying that we end up with a e is equal to sine theta over cosine theta Which is tangent theta and so therefore we've now proven the statement that a e is equal to tangent of theta


Hello, I just went outside for less than a minute to take my trash cans to the curb and These glasses that automatically get dark Got real dark real fast, which is what you want and that was five minutes ago so I mean not horrible, but They will slowly not be dark As the show goes on this show is this a show Let me see which let's do the thing where I share the screen Yep, that's the one Hello screen. Hello Zoe on this episode of DTNS Social network that doesn't let you type to Creases against ad blockers a closer look Disappointment I have to read that Software engineer Benjamin Sandowski published a post Monday about the humane AI pin and it shall we say less than stellar reception from early reviewers Talked about this a bit on GDI, but let's take a closer look at the variables humane raised 230 million spent six years to ship an AI pin Which you wear on your body and has a protective ring kind of all for 700 ducks on desk Details about the venture capital part of how humane got to this point, which is an excellent read But let's talk about what we know and where we are now in May 2023 humane co-founder and former Apple employee Imran Choudhury developed delivered the TED talk Users complain as far fewer features than demo promise too heavy runs too hot as bad battery life One extremely influential and walrus specter review remark as brown Lee who has 18 million YouTube followers titled his review the worst Product I've ever reviewed for now Hey, the gamer main got them heights. What's going on? Sandowski notes that when humane launched 2018 people we're starting to talk about how our phones aren't good for us The iPhone launched its screen time, which has proven a good enough solution for many to curb their screen addiction Okay All right. All right, let's see what Sandowski says X-Apples I Someone who strives to build products and paint movement the Apple can destroy a lot of stops. Oh, okay There's an exhibit alongside Juicero and clinkl. Oh, wow already Benjamin Sandowski Who is Benjamin Sandowski? Let's find out. He doesn't say Benjamin Sandowski I went live too fast. No YouTube notification. That just takes you there. Okay Co-founder developer of Halid Advisor to Silicon Valley. Oh All right. He's a developer Silicon Valley. I got it Be successful one of them worked on the original iPhone Humane was pitched as replacing the phone through the lens of wine now Married co-founders are red flag. You may might have worked out if it followed a traditional VC startup formula Instead they tried to follow the Apple way where 1.0 products need to be so insanely polished as to blow everyone away When they take an existing product and make it amazing Apple's existing ecosystem They like to Fitbit to prove the concept. They had little evidence people want to ditch their phones. Ah Sandowski's criticisms come down to Three main things the Apple has for its Apple way That humane did not Good afternoon Clinton. I don't have any space in my luggage for my trip home after TMS Vegas I always travel super light Zoe lack of established Product to compare to lack of evidence That people wanted the alternative Humane offered a lack of understanding of user Mindset form factor etc Raise money build something proof. It's taking off go to step one Sandowski says humane should have launched a less polished product earlier rather Fully developed but Disappointing product later Pa pa I don't know he's saying fail fast Nostalgia. Yeah. All right. I Get it. Okay Yes, it is fully developed Clinton in the sense that it has lots of features It's not fully developed in the sense that the features work. Well, those are those are two different spins Brian I just find it less stressful to carry a bunch of luggage around and have to keep track of it Travel light Travel easy. Oh That should be Sarah because it's about Apple vision show for consideration TCL made a soap opera Back tomorrow with Scott Johnson All right. Yeah, see Zoe. I hostile in the UK with only carry-on and you still brought snacks That's that's talent. I mean it works Clinton. Let's let's not over exaggerate the it just doesn't work well I think that's the That's the big thing You can go ten days and pack light. I Bet you pack light Brian H. You just Yeah You you don't see what I'm comparing myself to I guess as light as possible. Yeah The eclipse was wonderful Let's say pack efficient How's that? You don't need you know for a ten-day trip. Do you need ten shirts? Oh, we don't have mail Let's get a mailbag in there But do you need ten dress shirts ten off-duty shirts? You know what I mean? There's there's some efficiencies you could You can have All right Mailbag mailbag mailbag Booster podcast engagement. I'm spam Invitation to be spam. Let's use Gabby Hmm. I have three pieces of email with no subject and attachments. Do you think I should open them? Who paid your property tax? bags fly free I Got you Yeah, to me. It's not so much about the cost of the bags It's more of the like having to go to bag check and get them and Lumber around and all that stuff. It's just easier if you pack pack efficient. Oh Yeah, this would be the this would be the second half for me usually it for us It's half in November and then the second half in April I Paid ours all at once this past year because I knew things were looking tight. So thankfully I'm all done All right That looks like a show to me. We're gonna talk about Air chat have you all heard about air chat air chat you can only post with your voice and then it does speech to text This is Robert Scoble. So you're hearing up Robert, but you could also read him. I need to find more people to follow Sarah Lane Okay. Yeah, no messages yet. Who's Patrick Bay's you're following So we're going to talk about air chat on Daily Tech news show today Which means I have to try it out some more. So here I am Trying to come up with something to post does my laughter make it through But then it automatically post boom your post is up now. You can delete it Immediately if you're like, yeah, I don't like that the voice to text works really well So far I have not had it do anything crazy I even spoken Korean and my horrible Korean was translated into properly spelled hungul. So Yeah, how big would you dream if you knew you couldn't say there's also video Nobody's doing video though. Anyway, um, if any of you all would like an invite. I've got a few Yeah, air chat just talk has a smiley yellow face in the app store. That's right Here, I'll uh, let me let me add add this extra camera. Ah, there's two of me, but there This camera works better for That's it Right there. Yeah, we're gonna talk about that wired story today Uh, but yeah, if you want an invite to try it out, uh message me in the dts discord And I'll tell them anybody want Air chat invite We're going to talk about it on today's dts I get that wired Ernie Cole, where do I do my invites? Oh, and I already know how to get in touch with you Zoe. So there's motion at my front door Oh, it requires a phone number well That's I didn't give it access to my, uh I didn't give it access to to my contacts because I don't like doing that Please only invite people you can vouch for Oh boy delete draft I bet I could do this Now suddenly everybody's text messaging me They had to take down invites over the weekend. So I think they're being somewhat careful with invites. Hence the We don't have a way for you to to do this, you know, I could do this It's me It's me It's me Tom Merritt I see the bacon emojis Zoe can confirm. That's me I wrote tell me your phone number and I'll text you though. I don't know if it's us only This is a good way of confirming a text message Air chat No, I just see your email That's how I was able to use it eye message So weirdly even though you're on your phone, Zoe, you have to give me your phone number This is fun. Let's see if that works Let me see if air chat will take that Has a phone number. Oh, yeah, that makes sense I'll do that. All right. See if that worked Unless you want to give me your phone number which I don't recommend to be honest. Zoe and I have a working relationship. So I invited Eileen to I thought I could like copy a link and put it in discord and then that was going to be my way of You know vetting it, but it doesn't let me do that. Anyway, kind of nifty Uh, I need to find some more people to follow I know gary venerchuk is on here Who's he following? All right, there we go Kevin rose The usual suspects Let's kick it old school gary This feels very old to me, but I'm told there's lots of um That there's lots of young people on it too. So Your mileage may vary. Oh, jeez. Okay Should have looked at scobles follow list. He's following everyone on the planet Now we're talking Recognize all these folks Who's that? There's a lot of silicon valley folks here, but you know, I'm looking at scobles follows. So that makes sense I know that person Thank you to patrick beija for inviting me into this so I could try it out Very cool. Look sam olden I know who that is He's the open ai guy The once and future open ai guy Do Oh, that's a lot of people Still scrolling Was I part of gary's 2007 south by twitter party? If I don't remember does that mean I probably was 2007 A lot of recognizable names here Joanna stern Okay, wow. I'm still going Towards the end though Some names I haven't heard in a long time Still going Can you believe it It says I should be out of people. Oh, I know that guy Okay, okay There was someone earlier when I was scrolling I'm like, oh, I should I should that I haven't seen that I was like Oh, I should look and find them Yeah, it does. I mean It'll be an echo chamber and this happened with blue sky. It'll be an echo chamber until More people joined but this is a good way for them to load test Oh look There's someone I know All right, who was it? Who was it that I was going to try to find? Do you remember? Nope I think maybe I was going to look at someone's follows that that tracks Yeah, this person's only following 28 people. That's a lot easier to parse There we go Hold on. I have a piece of spam just came in I think this is going to be a good show today and I hope you agree I should probably go get prepared for the production meeting that we do I know this was a lot of just watching me scroll through Robert Scoble's air chat contacts and I apologize for that The reason you don't open the floodgates is that your servers get overwhelmed because you haven't scaled in anticipation for them That's exactly what happened over the weekend on Friday He gave everybody unlimited invites Just to see what would happen and it brought the service down So he went back to limiting the invites so they can they can properly scale the service That's that's just engineering for you Yeah, it's kind of interesting, isn't it? All right We'll talk more about it on daily tech news show Sarah, I know has been poking around at it too. So I will see What else I can find on it and until then that'll be in just about an hour from now I will have lunch. You will do whatever it is. You're going to do and we'll all have a great time. It's great to see everybody Thanks for thanks for hanging out. I will talk to you in an hour. Bye


Hey guys, Thundie here and we are back with another charge test video. This time, we're taking a look at what we consider the fastest wireless charger on the market. I'm talking about the Huawei 27 watt charger, yes. While we mentioned at the launch event, 27 watt charger is the fastest out there and we're gonna see how it compares against at least what is currently the fastest as we know it, the Samsung 18 watt charger. Plus, we're gonna pair this with the 18 watt wired charger of the iPhone because wanted to see how at least something comparable in my mathematical sense will work. Now some of you ask, why not throw in the OnePlus or even the 45 watt charger from the Samsung? Well, those in my calculations will beat it at at least an hour or an hour. I figured this would be slightly longer than an hour. So, wanted to stick with these here. Now, the wireless charging pad, the 27 watt wireless charging pad, it's also about 39 bucks. I'll have a link for you guys down below if you wanna pick it up. It's nice, it's got this fiber look to it. It's got fans built in. USB, it only comes with a USB cable. You do have to use your Huawei 40 watt charger to actually use this. So, that is something to take note. But now without wasting any more time, let's go ahead and start the test. So, kicking things off, all devices are drained to zero. And of course we're gonna start with them empty as we power them on. Now, the Huawei does automatically start as well as the iPhone. So, I'm gonna go ahead and start the Galaxy as well. So, we're all in the same playing field here. So, we're gonna go through and the very first time we'll do a check is 10 minutes. We do 10 minutes. We're gonna do 20, 30, we'll do 50 and 60 and then we'll see where it stops. So, at 10 minutes, the Galaxy is at 5%. Huawei's at 15 and iPhone's at 16%. Which is pretty good for the iPhone. So, I do like that. There and there, Huawei, that's pretty nice. Now, as we move over to 20%, we see that the iPhone's at 30%. The Mate 30 Pro is at 31 and the Galaxy's at 12. So, the Galaxy is lagging behind right here and that 27 watt charger is powering through really well. It feels like a fast wired charger right now to me. I am liking what I see. So, we're gonna move up to our next spot, which would be of course the 13 minute mark and we'll see what we have there for time and in the 30 minute mark, we have the Galaxy is at 19%. The iPhone's at 45. The Mate 30 Pro is at 43%. So, the iPhone has taken a lead here. I mean, it's taking a lead after the 20, 20% mark but we can see the iPhone is moving forward. Now, will we get that slow trickle charge at the end of the iPhone? Will it affect it in this race? So, we're gonna go past a 40 minute mark and go to the 50 minute mark. But one thing I do want to point out here is that it's interesting to see a wireless charging pad this fast, comparable to a fast wired charging. I mean, it's just now that we're getting 30, 40 watt charging and this is a 27 watt charger here that can give us some really high speed. So, at 50%, iPhone's at 74% taking the lead. Mate 30 Pro is 68 and the Galaxy Note 10 Plus is at 32%. So, the Galaxy is way behind. We know it's not going to catch up at this point but we'll see when we get to that 60 minute mark. 60 minute mark, iPhone's at 81. While the Mate 30 Pro is at 80 and the Galaxy Note 10 Plus is at 39%. Now, from here on, you're gonna start seeing the iPhone slowed down and the Mate still go all the way through. That's what happens. iPhone really slows down when it gets to about that 80, 70 to 80% mark. And this is where the Mate 30 Pro actually catches up and you're gonna see some very interesting results in terms of time. So, we move past like an hour 20, hour 22, 23 minutes and we're at the hour 29 minutes. Mate 30 Pro is number one. So, it actually takes the number one spot an hour, you know, 29 minutes. And the iPhone finishes at an hour 52 coming in second. And last but not the least is our good friend, the Galaxy Note 10 Plus at two hours and 42 minutes. As you guys can see, the 27 watt wireless charger is impressive. Finishing at an hour 29 minutes. Look, that is totally awesome for a wireless charger. The Galaxy's 18 watt charger took about two hours and 42 minutes, which is par for the course. But the iPhone, of course, we know the iPhone's around an hour 52. Some people have gone an hour 45, but it's clear this is the fastest wireless charger. And also the Huawei Mate 30 Pro also charges the fastest wirelessly at an hour 29 and it beats the iPhone wired 18 watt charger. So, if you have any questions or any comments or you'd like to see more tests like this or you have to want to throw any opinions on this test, leave those down below. Otherwise, stay tuned for more content we have on the channel. And again, leave suggestions guys, but what do you think about the 27 watt charger and would you like to see fast wireless charging speeds like this in more, of course, high end devices? Leave your thoughts down below. Don't forget to like, share, subscribe and always enjoy your entertainment.