Good morning everyone, Basel Chapman here for the 11 o'clock Tiger Financial News Network Market Update. That was up 56 points, 34,875. Trying to have a bit of a balance here. The general market is trying to have a bit of a relief balance. I would not like to see this market turn around and at the end of the day see the Dow down 20 or 30 points, S&P down about 10 or 15 points. That would be very poor action. In fact, that would set up a Monday that could be quite ugly. But in the meantime, holding quite nicely, the S&P did have a rally pullback, went negative, went up to the 44.73 level, now it's 20 points lower, is that 10, yeah, 44.62, 10 points lower underneath the 40-period moving average. We're going to be seeing next week whether or not that 9-period moving average turns pink in the daily chart because that's going to start to affect other things as well. The QQQ and the X100 trading vehicle had a very nice rally. It was leading, in fact, in the rally. Now it's down from that high, up 53 cents and 372.63, IWM, the Russell 2000 was weak all the time, still very weak down 8 cents and 184.26. Now that's going to be interesting. What happens with gold? Does gold give it back like it's done so often lately? Well, it has given back the high of the day, which is at 1954. It's now at 1947, not a big deal, but that 9-period moving average has turned pink and that just says, gold is now going to have a little bit more of a tough time. I didn't look at silver before in my show, the Tiger Dignitions Hour, the silver's very weak. It is up 0.04, 23.28, but it plunged under the 200-period moving average. Crude oil is trading up now 74 cents at 87.60. This is still hanging in there and the TLT bonds had a nice move earlier on. It's up 63 cents at 94.64, but while those yields, they up a range, going to watch that very closely. What did I want to do? One other thing was, I wanted to look at, oh yeah, Nvidia, the leader of the leaders is now down 8 at 453, and that's just telling us that those semiconductors, the oil of the 21st century chips, this is a little time out, maybe we started to see a bit of a glut there. I'll talk about that when I come back for the next hour. I'm going to be doing Steve's Hour, Steve Rose's Hour away, I'll be doing that hour, and requests, any requests, please just send them over my way, BaselChappen at TFNN.com. I'd love to get them, I'm checking out my emails right now, we'll do whatever we can with the requests. I'll be right back.


Okay So at this point we're moving on to the portion of the open session called the council initiated discussion and I think All but the new members have seen this before this is where we sort of turn the control of the microphones over to you We're happy to hear suggestions for future reports or If there are trends out there that you want to draw to our attention or questions that you want to ask the staff So one of the things that came up today, and then it came up again in your report Eric was this issue of how to maintain Critical databases that are available for everybody. So I'm wondering Will you be commenting on that again at the future council meetings? There's just could you tell us a little bit more about what is there a formal process or is it just a Kind of a over the couple of cups of coffee discussion or what is so it's probably sign in between and anybody And on staff who have anything to contribute. Please walk up to a microphone, but there I Really feel Extensive amount of stress about this in part because It's not just me. It's not just any sheer eye, but there's a limit to what I can do to change this So there are several moving parts. My understanding by the way is Well immediately I can tell you that John Lurch as an IGMS director and myself and Phil Bourne as the new associate director for data science are all very Interested and we're interacting regularly to try to discuss how to sort of navigate this because we want to bring this to the attention of All the NIH leadership Francis Collins is aware of it But we actually think we need to put this out to a larger discussion of the Institute and Center directors Grantees of which are greatly affected by some of the things even two institutes might do for example I also know there is an inventory being developed of similar resources Supported by other institutes because we're just going to get if we know what we have at our Institute They know what's a GMS There certainly is interest there to get find out what else there is my understanding And that's why I'm looking if anybody can confirm it My understanding is that there is bd2k the big data to knowledge bd2k program is Planning a workshop and there's someone coming to a microphone maybe the understanding is that there will be a workshop in the near future, I don't know when but that's coming and Finally the last thing I'd say is that Phil and John and I are regularly interacting and are trying to get this teed up to present Probably in the next month or two To the Institute and Center directors to really raise this put up the flag and say this is really a problem At the corporate level and we need help and sort of thinking through it So so you just gave me an assignment Which I think whether you meant to or not is that I should make sure to come back and update you I mean I can't this is not on a strict timetable that I know this that but I I think I would naturally be updating Counsel about this, but I will write it down as something that I will definitively try to bring back to you as as things percolate along on Tina Maybe Carol can you loan a mic? Yeah, so I just wanted to add that we're really working at two different levels. So one is Within energy are I we're working with the large database resources. We're arranging a meeting of the large database resources to really analyze How this database resources work? The efficiency of what type of activities they are are they relevant to energy are I research or not or maybe they're Applicable across different institutes. So we're right now. We're collecting information And and that will help us decide what to do next and also have this discussions have more informed discussions about next steps the other thing we're doing is also to work at the NIH level with the bd2k office and Basically There are there is a working group. It's called the sustainability working group that has a number of Initiatives that we're evaluating One is the workshop and actually the workshop has been put on hold because we have been collecting There are already reports that can help us to make some decisions about things to test out for the future So and there is an RFI that is going to be out pretty soon and really it is to inquiry with the community about potential alternative funding models for the database resources We're talking about supplement projects to really encourage the large databases to To do some projects to improve interoperability of the resources So there is there are different type of activities many of which are exploratory at this point And so eventually long term We're probably what is going to be done is what what we're doing within NHGRI and what is going on a bd2k We'll converge and we'll inform all future discussions. That's a helpful way to frame it I like that and the way I was trying to frame it, but now I can probably say it even better Is that I think we do need to I think it's operating at two different levels I mean we are Internally looking grant by grant having discussions with the grantees sort of saying this is you know What's our conclusion? This is not sustainable. We need a different model and then at a whole different level I mean and it is very much the premise in some ways of The creation of the associate director for data science position Phil Bourne's recruitment also the premise behind big data to knowledge initiative Sort of the same thing at a corporate level. This is not sustainable We have to change the way we do business in biomedical research with respect to how we take care of data How we fund data resources how we fund all and so that's it a whole different sort of philosophical level Hopefully these things will converge, but we are doing it in both ways and Several of us are involved in both conversations But there's so many there's some immediate issues, but there's also some very clear cultural issues that we need to deal with Yeah, Bob one other issue really is This trying to strike a balance between it the data these things as as deliverables that we all need and Emphasizing innovation to improve and make them better and that I Can see how those are they're completely bound up together But in some ways one is much more the mission of the NIH than the other Yeah right and and the other thing you just mentioned I mean the other thing about this of course Which is why it gets to be such a hard problem and I can tell you that working with John and Phil We are engaging in conversations outside of NIH is that it's really not just I mean you're gonna tackle this problem It's really not just NIH alone, and it's not even in the United States It's not just NIH alone and then of course everything we're dealing with the way we're all connected This is a worldwide issue and it's not quite fair that NIH would be carrying as much water as we are in terms of Funding all these things when clearly there's an international stage, and they all contribute all this data and these resources to everybody So how we do that? I mean in some ways this almost becomes a challenge of the international funders Yeah, Hardy, so I have now said this to Philip born and Kathy Hudson, and I don't know who else so I'm just gonna say to you as Well, which is that in our report our Institute of Medicine report We say that all of NIH should do exactly what an ACRI has done in mandating data sharing to all its grantees And that NIH currently has the power to do that so There's a section of the report that points to the regulation under which NIH has the power and So I just wanted to say my piece once again about that And I completely agree with that But of course you do realize that could make this situation worse because then if all the data is shared and then The data resources for example and then all of a sudden we need more servers and we need more curators and more annotators And so that's where we want to be which is why this is a not sustainable problem because on the one hand We're asking for more data sharing and the genomic data sharing policy that is going into effect is Absolutely what we should be doing and yet it's going to exacerbate the problem of sustainability Yeah, no that's fair enough And one of the things that the I am report did not do deal well with is the cost problem And I think that's absolutely critical that said that's a good problem to have to have all these people from Other institutes actually sharing data Carol so I just you said Eric what I was Going to bring up which is Phil's doing a great job at reaching out outside of NIH to really get the Conversation to be much more global because it is not just an NIH problem And the solution could come from another place Or one a part of the solution could come from other agencies And so I think he's he's doing the right approach to address the sustainability question I will say it's been interesting In the last six months in all the strategic discussions around precision medicine I'm going to try to avoid saying that every problem we have we love onto the back of the precision medicine initiative because a lot of people are Already doing that I'm not doing that here what I am doing is as illustrating a point And that is it has been very interesting in the discussions leading up to the announcement that the private sector in particular the the Data experts, you know, you know the Googles and the Silicon Valley types Have have come running actually quite interested in the precision medicine initiative because of the data Excitement around it at the same time that means we've gotten into conversations with them And I say we I mean Phil born myself others and these are some these are some folks from you know big-name companies that have tackled some major big data issues and seldom and all of a sudden they're getting Pretty excited about biomedical big data more broadly obviously specifically precision medicine But so I think the hope fingers crossed is that that this will be an exciting enough problem that we it won't be the usual NIH funded suspects And that we would bring all new expertise to this and you know again I don't know what this looks like But it is just exciting to have some people that previously were really interested in you know more corporate oriented IT challenges now putting their their brains into this and you know Maybe the precision medicine initiative will get them into the problem or focus and then we'll get them involved in the more general set of sustainability issues Eric So on the topic of precision medicine The president's interest and enthusiasm is greatly appreciated and my guess is because of that and the fact that he's He's six years into the term or whatever things are going to move very quickly in the next six months and And I would hope an NHGRI will also have a major role in that And I would hope that you would come back to counsel periodically at a minimum at our next update But even in in the interim having specialized phone calls before things are committed to major things are committed to Without the addition of new monies With committed to without the addition of money. Yeah, yeah, yeah, there's a lot of questions about Well, how this will all play out and at what time frame and all that but as I said earlier I have every intent. I just can't imagine I won't be talking every single council meeting About the initiative, but you are right. Maybe some of it will happen so quickly We'll need to engage you between council meetings and and yeah, you know, that's quite possible other topics other requests for so Bob actually raised one issue and I wrote that down are there other Topics for future council meetings things you want updates about I mean obviously precision medicines data sustainability Other things that you haven't heard haven't heard about for a while And you really want an update about because we always take your advice It helps formulate the agenda for the open session in particular and one thing I guess we should mention is there are two workshops that will be in March and there'll be reports of those workshops coming to you in May Okay. All right. Well, you know how to find us and how to reach us Yeah, you know let me draw your attention to Two quarterly reports one from the National Society of Genetic Counselors and the other the American Society of Human Genetics and Then we're going to deal with the statement of understanding and Monica or Cheryl I don't know if either of you want to move your way to the front of the room in case there are questions Say again You don't have to come up if you don't want to The statement of understanding is something that we present to the council every February we do it at February because that's when the new members come on board and At the end of this discussion. I will ask you to accept the Statement or give us any modifications. You think are appropriate so there will be a vote on it This document is basically a description of how the council and NHGRI will interact It describes the council Responsibilities and it talks about the actions that the council can take it also describes the limits of our Administrative authorities, which is code speak for the things that we can do without bringing matters to the council's attention Or without seeking a vote from you It's a four-page document. It's a pretty simple read. I do a recommended for you to look at it I'm going to very quickly touch on the highlights I'm not going to ask you to vote on we're not going to stop and I'll read this together and I'm not going to read it out loud But give you a sense of what's in the report and if you have any questions we'll attempt to answer them So all applications have to undergo a Second level of review all applications that come in to NHGRI each round There are some exceptions to those types and this would include certain types of fellowships Contracts and interagency agreements the council doesn't see those If we don't list an application on the closed session agenda, it means it's being included in the on-block Vote which is taken at the end of the closed session There are certain kinds of applications that were required to bring to your your attention That doesn't necessarily mean we're going to discuss them at depth, but we're talking about large program project grants T32 institutional training grants Cooperative agreements, so you'll see things listed on the closed session agenda that we don't talk about that's why they're there Also Anything that comes from a foreign institution were required to bring to your attention and Special counsel review and we'll have a couple of examples of those tomorrow There are four actions that the council can take on when it comes time to reviewing applications You can concur with the IRG the initial review You can defer the application for re-review because it has come to the council's attention as a rebuttal or a Claim on the part of an applicant that there was a flaw in their initial review You can recommend the application for high program priority or low program priority Which is another way of saying voting out of score order or you can defer the Application because you need additional information you're requesting additional information Before you're going to make a determination about it NHGRI does have certain administrative responsibilities or Capabilities We do something each round called expedited council concurrence There are three council members. I think it's Bob and Jim and Tony Who serve as the ECC reps so about four or five weeks before the council meeting? They'll get a list of applications. These are largely not exclusively SB IR STTR type applications And they give us approval to take early action on them. It just allows us to speed up the award mechanism The award process rather You get a report in every council meeting It's in the ECB of the applications that have been approved For this round of ECC and you can see the ones that were awards were made from the previous council round So the information is there. We're not trying to hide it from you. We're just trying to expedite them staff authorities The staff has the authority to make administrative supplements on any existing grant up to $150,000 or 25% of the total cost of the application Now we've set a cap on that of one million dollars because 25% of a multi-million dollar grant would be a huge sum of money Again, you'll get a report each council rounds of the administrative awards that have been made by by staff and then there's actually a clause in there that says in the event of the catastrophe Active nature or pandemic flu that the council can meet by electronic means so teleconference in a secure website, etc so that in a nutshell is a summary of What's in the Statement of understanding are there any questions? No debate. Nothing you saw that's inflammatory there good There haven't been any substantive changes to the statement of understanding from what the veteran saw last year So can I have a motion to accept the statement in a second? all in favor Any opposed? Any abstentions? Thank you All right So our last action Before we close the open session and go into closed section session is for me to read the statement of conflict of interest And this applies to the applications that you're going to review in the closed session You must leave the meeting room when applications submitted by your own organization are being individually discussed in the case of state higher education or other systems with multiple campuses geographically separated own Organization is intended to mean the entire system Except where determination has been made that the components are separate organization for the purpose of conflict of interest You should avoid situations that could give rise to charges of conflict of interest whether real or apparent For example, you should not participate in the deliberations and actions on any application from or Involving your spouse your child a recent student a recent teacher a Professional collaborator with whom you have worked closely a close personal friend Or a scientist with whom you have had long-standing scientific or personal differences The NHGRI staff will determine the appropriate action based on recency Frequency and strength of such associations or interest either positive or negative and will instruct you accordingly In council actions in which your vote on a block of applications without discussing any Individual application the so-called on-block action your vote will not apply to any application from an institution Fulfilling the criteria noted above Now in your folders are at the table. There should have been a conflict of interest form Please sign it and we'll collect them at the end of the day today. Okay, so you want to Gable us is done Okay, we are we are finished


the contrary versus on the other hand. This lesson will help you learn the differences between on the contrary and on the other hand, so that you can use them correctly in speech and writing. Ready to begin? Students often get these phrases wrong. Perhaps they're just trying to use different words to be creative, but instead they create a situation that doesn't make sense. Here's an example of a common mistake. I might go to London on my next vacation. On the contrary, I would like to go to Rome. This is incorrect. What's wrong with this? On the contrary is not used to indicate contrast. It is used for emphasis. With on the contrary, we put two statements side by side to emphasize the second one. What seems like a contrast actually is not. Let's see how this is done. Look at the following example. First statement. It's not hot. Second statement. It's cold. Are these opposite statements? No, they aren't. They actually indicate the same thing. Not hot equals cold. Let's put it together. It's not hot. On the contrary, it's cold. This is correct usage. See how we are creating something that seems like a contrast, but in fact it's just emphasizing the same thing. It's not hot. On the contrary, it's cold. Here's another example. It doesn't have to be exactly the same thing. It can be something similar. I'm not stressed out. On the contrary, I'm calm or I'm excited to do this. This means something similar to not being stressed out. When using on the contrary, we usually start with a negative statement. That way we can emphasize the one that follows it. For example, I'm not tired at all. On the contrary, I'm full of energy. She's not going home after work. On the contrary, she's heading to the pub. Note, on the contrary is similar to actually or in fact, not on the other hand. We'll talk about that later. On the contrary is sometimes used in answers to questions. Are you still ill? Not at all. On the contrary, I'm feeling better than ever. Notice the seeming contrast between ill and feeling better. No, I'm not ill anymore. I'm feeling better now. Basically means the same thing. On the contrary makes a connection between two seemingly contradicting points of view in order to emphasize the second one. What about on the other hand? On the other hand is part of a discussion or decision-making process. We often use it to contrast different ideas or opinions. For example, I might go to Rome on my next vacation. On the other hand, I might go to London. This means I haven't decided yet. I'm still evaluating the pros and cons of each possibility. Let's look at this in more detail. Contrasting two possibilities or options. Should I go to Rome or London? Well, in London I can visit Buckingham Palace and the Tower Bridge. On the other hand, in Rome, I can visit the Coliseum and the Vatican. Oh, it's such a tough decision. Can, on the other hand, be used for more than two possibilities? Yes, it can. But don't overdo it. We only have two hands after all. Sometimes we can use, on the other hand, to go back to the previous idea. For example, we might start with option one and then use, on the other hand, to move on to option two. Then we can use, on the other hand, to come back to option one and we can go back and forth between option one and option two. Or we can use, on the other hand, to move on to option three and maybe option four. Sometimes we can use statements to limit the discussion to only two points. For example, on the one hand, I'd love to see the opera. On the other hand, tickets are really expensive. Should I spend the money or not? Time for practice. On the other hand or on the contrary. Indicate whether the transition phrase should be, on the other hand, or on the contrary. No, it can't be both. O-T-O-H means, on the other hand. O-T-C means, on the contrary. Complete these statements with the correct phrase. Feel free to pause the video if you'd like more time. Time for practice. On the other hand or on the contrary. Number one, I think I should go now. On the other hand, maybe I can stay for another drink. Two, I'm not leaving. On the contrary, I'm going to be here for another two more hours. Three, does Sheila like baseball? No. On the contrary, she hates it. Four, we could get ice cream. On the other hand, cake sounds tempting too. Five, candlelight in the window is a great movie. On the other hand, I haven't seen left in the lurch yet. Maybe we should try that one. One final note. This might help you remember the contrast between on the contrary and on the other hand. These phrases are not the same. On the contrary, they are different. They are not the same. In fact, they are different. The phrases may be different. On the other hand, they are easy to learn. Even though they are different, they are easy to learn. Hope that was helpful. If you liked or learned something new from this video, please give us a thumbs up. And don't forget to subscribe to our channel. Thanks for watching. If you have a question for our next video, please send it to us at the link below.


Japan is fighting against the United States of America. The United States of America is fighting against Japan. That is the war. In this case, it's not Hamas. That is the governing body of Palestinians.  Palestinians really hate them. They want to destroy them. No, this is an organization supported by a majority of Palestinians. This is an organization that is embedded within the Palestinian people. And the goal here is not the destruction of the Palestinian people. The goal is their defeat. The two are not the same. Genocide is not the same as defeat. America did not commit genocide against Germany. Every war does not end in genocide.


Hey, welcome back everybody. Jeff Frick here with theCUBE. We're at the Accenture Technology Visit in 2018. Actually the preview event, about 200 people, the actual report comes out in a couple of days. A lot of interesting conversations about what are the big trends in 2018 that Accenture surveyed Paul Doherty and team and we're really excited that this was a panel discussion to get into a little bit of the not technology but really the trusted ethics conversations. We're joined by Dr. Shannon Baller. She's a professor at Santa Clara University. Dr. Baller, great to see you. Great to be here, thank you. So you were just on the panel and of course there was a car guy on the panel so everybody loves to talk about cars and autonomous vehicles. He didn't give enough time. So we got a little bit more time, which is great. But one of the things that you brought up that I think was pretty interesting is really kind of a higher level view of what role technology plays in our life before. And you said before it was ancillary, it was a toy, it was a gimmick, it was a cool new car status symbol or whatever. But now technology is really defining who we are, what we do, how we interact, not only with the technology of other people, it's really taken such a much more fundamental role with a bunch more new challenges. Yeah, and fundamentally that means that these new technologies are helping to determine how our lives go. Not just whether we have the latest gadget or status symbol, previously as I said, we tended to take on technologies as ornaments to our life, as luxuries to enrich our life. Increasingly they are the medium through which we live our lives, right? They're the ways that we find the people we want to marry. They're the ways that we access resources, capital, healthcare, knowledge. They're the ways that we participate as citizens in a democracy. They are entering our bodies, they're entering our homes. And the level of trust that's required to really welcome technology in this way without ambivalence or fear it's a kind of trust that many technology companies weren't prepared to earn. Right, right. Because it goes much deeper than simply having to behave in a lawful manner or satisfy your shareholders, right? It means actually having to think about whether your technologies are helping people live better lives.  And it's just really interesting when you talked about a refrigerator, I just love that example because most people would never let their next-door neighbor look into their refrigerator. Or their medicine cabinet, right? Or their medicine cabinet, right? And now you want to open that up to automatic replenishment. And what's interesting is I don't think a lot of companies came into the business with the idea that they were going to have this intimate relationship with their customers to a degree and a personal responsibility with that data. They just want to sell them some good stuff and move on to the next customer. So a very different mindset. Are they adjusting? How did legacy folks deal with this? Well, the good news is that there are a lot more conversations happening about technology and ethics within industry circles. And you even see large organizations coming together to try to lead in an effort to develop more ethical approaches to technology design and development. So for example, the big five leaders in AI have come together to form the partnership for AI and social good. And this is a really groundbreaking movement that could potentially lead other industry participants to say, hey, we have to kind of get on board with this. And we have to start thinking about what ethical leadership looks like for us as opposed to just a sort of PR kind of thing. Yeah, we throw the word ethics on a few websites or slides and then we're good. It has to go much deeper than that. And that's going to be a challenge. But it has to be at a level where rank and file workers and project managers have procedures that they know how to go through that involve ethical analysis, prediction and preparing ethical responses to failures or conflicts that might arise. Right, there's so many layers to this that we could go on for a long time but the autonomous band has kicked up. But you know, one of the things is, when you're collecting the data for a specific purpose and you put all the efficacy in as to why and how and what you're going to treat, what you don't know is how that data might be used by someone else next week, next year, 10 years from now. And you can't really know because there's maybe things that you aren't aware of. It's a very difficult challenge. And I think we just have to start thinking in terms of different kinds of metaphors. So data up until now has been seen as something that had value and very little risk associated with it. Now our attitudes are starting to shift and we're starting to understand that data carries not just value, not just the ability to be monetized but immense power and that power can be both constructive or destructive. Data is like jet fuel, right? It can do great things but you've got to store it carefully. You have to make sure that the people handling it are properly trained, that they know what can go wrong, that they've got safety regimes in place. No one who handles jet fuel treats it the way that some companies treat data like today. But today, data can cause disasters on a scale similar to a chemical explosion. They can, people can die, lives can be ruined and people can lose their life savings over a breach or a misuse of data that causes someone to be unjustly accused of fraud or a crime. So we have to start thinking about data as something much more powerful than we have in the past and have the responsibility to handle it appropriately. Right, but we're still so far away, right? We're still sending money to the Nigerian Prince who needs help getting out of the airport at Newark Airport. I mean, even just the social, the social factors still haven't caught up and then you've got this kind of whole API economy where so many apps are connected to so many apps so even where is the data? And that's before you get into like a plane flying over international borders while you send an email. I mean, the complexity is crazy. And we're never gonna get a handle on all of it. So one of the things I like to tell people is it's important not to let the perfect become the enemy of the good, right? So the idea is, yes, the problem is massive. Yes, it's incredibly complex. Can we address every possible risk? Can we forestall every possible disaster? No. Can we do much better than we're doing now? Absolutely. So I think the important thing is not to focus on how massive the problem or the complexities are, but think about how can we move forward from here to get ourselves in a better and more responsible position? And there's lots of ways to do that. Lots of companies are already leading the way in that direction. So I think there's so much progress to be made that we don't have to worry too much about the progress that we might never get around to make. Right, right. But then there's this other interesting thing that's going on that we've seen with kind of the whole fake news, right? Which is algorithms are determining what we see. And if you look at the ad tech model, it's kind of where the market has taken over the way that that operates. There's no people involved. So then you have things happen like what happened with YouTube, where advertisers, stuff is getting put into places where they don't want it, but there's really no people, there's no monitoring. So how do you see that kind of evolving? Because on one hand, you want more social responsibility and keep a track of things. On the other hand, so much as moving to software automation and giving people more of what they want, not necessarily what they need. Well, and that means that we have to do a much better job of investing in human intelligence. We have to, for every new form of artificial intelligence, we need an even more powerful provision of human intelligence to guide it, to provide oversight. So what I like to say is AI is not ready for solo flight. And a lot of people would like that to be the case because of course, you can save money if you can put an automated adjudication system in there and take the people out. But we've seen over and over again that that leads again and again to disaster and to huge reputational losses to companies, often huge legal liabilities. So we have to be able to get companies to understand that they are really protecting themselves and their long-term health if they invest in human expertise and human intelligence to support AI, to support data, to support all of the technologies that are giving these companies greater competitive advantage and profitability. But does the delta in the machine scale versus human scale just become unbearable or can we use the machine scale to filter out the relatively small number of things that need a person to get involved? I mean, how do you see kind of some best practices? Yeah, so the answer depends on the industry, depends upon the application. So there's no one-size-fits-all solution. But what we can often do is recognize that typically human and AI function best together, right? So we can figure out the ways in which the AI can amplify the human expertise and wisdom and the human expertise can fill in some of the gaps that still exist in artificial intelligence. Some of the things that AI's just don't see, just don't recognize, just aren't able to value or predict. And so when we figure out the ways that human and artificial intelligence can complement each other in a particular setting, then we can get the most reliable results and often the fairest and safest results. They might not always be most efficient from the narrow standpoint of speed and profit, right? So we have to be able to step back and say, at the end of the day, quality matters, trust matters. And just as if we put together a Shadi project on the cheap and put it out there, it's gonna come back to bite us, if we put Shadi AI in place of important human decisions that affect human lives, it's going to come back to bite us. So we need to invest in the human expertise and the human wisdom, which has that ethical insight to round out what AI still lacks. So do you think the execution of that trust building becomes the next great competitive advantage? I mean, nobody talks about that, right? Data's the new oil and blah, blah, blah, blah, and software-defined data-driven automation, but that's not necessarily only to the golden road, right? There's issues. So is trust, do you think, the next great competitive differentiator? Absolutely, I think in the long run, it will be. If you look at, for example, the way that companies like Facebook and Equifax have really damaged in pretty profound ways, the public perception of them as trustworthy actors in not just the corporate space, but in the political space for Facebook, in the economic space for Equifax, and we have to be able to recognize that those associations of a major company with that level of failure are really lasting, right? Those things don't get forgotten in one news cycle. So I think we have to recognize that today people don't know who to trust, right? It used to be that you could trust the big names, the big Fortune 500 companies, the blue chips, right? And then it was the little fly-by-night companies that you didn't really know whether you could trust and maybe you'd be more cautious in dealing with them. Now the public has no way of understanding which companies will genuinely fulfill the trust in the relationship that the customer gives them. And so there's a huge opportunity from a competitive standpoint for companies to step up and actually earn that trust and say, in a way that can be backed up by action and results, your data's safe with us, right? Your property's safe with us, your bank account is safe with us, your personal privacy is safe with us, your votes are safe with us, your news is safe with us, right? And that's the next step. But everyone is so cynical that, unfortunately Walter Cronkite is dead, right? We don't trust politicians anymore, we don't trust news anymore, we don't trust now more and more the company. So it's a really kind of rough world in the trust space. So do you see any kind of silver lining? How do we execute in this kind of crazy world where you just don't know? Well, what I'd like to say is that you have to be cautiously optimistic about this because society simply doesn't keep going without some level of trust, right? Markets depend on trust. Democracy depends on trust. Neighborhoods depend on trust, right? So either trust comes back into our lives at some deep level or everything falls apart. Frankly, those are the only choices. So if nature abhors a vacuum and right now we have a vacuum of trust, then there is a huge opportunity for people to start stepping into that space and filling that void. So I'd like to focus on the positive potential here rather than the worst case scenario, right? The worst case scenario is we keep going as things have been going and trust in our most important institutions continues to crumble. Well that just ends in societal collapse one way or the other. If we don't want to do that and I presume that if there's anything we can all agree on, right? It's that that's not where we want to go. Right. Then now is the time for companies if need be to come together and say we have to step into this space and create new trusted institutions and practices that will help stabilize society and drive progress in ways that aren't just reflected in GDP but are reflected in human wellbeing, happiness, a sense of security, a sense of hope, a sense that technology actually does give us a future that we want to be happy about moving into. Right, right. So I'll give you the last word. Sure. We'll fit in on a positive note.  Well one thing that I mentioned already is the AI partnership that has come together with companies that really are leading the conversation along with a lot of other organizations like AI Now, which is an organization on the East Coast that's doing a lot of fantastic work. There are a lot of companies supporting research into ethical development, design, and implementation of new technologies. That's something we haven't seen before, right? This is something that's only happened in the last two or three years. It's an incredibly positive development. Now we just have to make sure that the recommendations that are developed by these groups are actually taken on board and implemented. And it'll be up to many of the industry leaders to set an example of how that can be done because they have the resources and the ability to lead in that way. I think one of the other things that we can look at is that people are starting to become less naive about technology. Perhaps the silver lining of the loss of trust is the ability of consumers to be a little wiser, a little more appropriately critical and skeptical, and to figure out ways that they can, in fact, protect their interests, that they can actually seek out and determine who earns their trust, where their data is safest. And so I'm optimistic that there will be a sort of meeting, if you will, of the public interest and the interests of technology developers who really need the public to be on board, right? You can't make a better world if society doesn't want to come along with you. So my hope is, and I'm cautiously optimistic about that, that these forces will come together and create a future for us that we actually want to move into. All right, good. I don't wanna leave on the side, no. Dr. Shannon Ballard, she's positive about the future. It's all about trust. Thanks for taking a few minutes. Thank you. I'm Jack Brick, she's Dr. Shannon. Thanks for watching, we'll catch you next time.