Hey, folks. So the web benefits from a healthy relationship between browser vendors and web developers. And framework authors and their users are often at the forefront of trying to find a healthy balance between DX and UX. So today we thought we'd bring along a few folks from frameworks, libraries, and their users to have a chat about what a better future could look like. So joining us on the stage, we first of all have Andrew Clark from React. Andrew. Next up, we've got Jason Miller from React. We have Steve Orbel from the Polymer team. Rob Wormald from Angular. Tracy Lee from this.javascript and RxJS. Chatti Tala from Glimmer and Ember. Sean Larkin representing VueJS and Webpack. Malta Ubel, the tech lead of AMP. And finally, Alex Russell from the Chrome team, lover of frameworks. All right, let's sit down. So thank you to everyone that managed to get their questions in today. We have a very special prize for the best question, courtesy of Alex. The very best question today gets a very average Moto G4 phone. That's going to stay over here for now. Awesome. So let's get into it. The very first question that came in was, which features, if any, would make your life as a framework author or user easier if they were added to the JavaScript language or web platform more broadly? Jason, do you want to start us off? Sure. So there's been some stuff going around recently about a proposal called Dom Change List. And I think one of the end games of this spec is basically a way to serialize a set of mutations to the DOM. One of the end results of this would be we can start to run more application code in a web worker. Web workers have existed for a really long time and are strangely underused in our community. So it's a primitive that, whether it's polyfill, they're implemented in browsers. Once we've got some of these things in place, we can start to offload a lot of work off of the main thread and reduce jank on mobile. So that's a huge thing that I'm hopeful for. What do you think it is about web workers that have stopped them from getting as much traction as they could? They're scary. Also, by default, when you construct a worker, you have to give it a URL. And it's pretty easy to get a blob URL for an inline string, but it's not the default behavior. So there's a tasklet API that might be proposed to solve that. That would be another huge feature. A framework shipping could instantiate a worker with some code in it, and that wouldn't be a weird thing. That would be expected. OK, so web workers, Rob on the Angular side did you have any opinions about that? I know that Angular is historically been trying to invest in web workers. Yeah, I would second the DOM changeless API. It would be amazing for us. I think we could put it in tomorrow, and it would be ready to go. So that'd be a big one. And I think observables would be the other big one that we'd like to see. Angular developers, using a ton of that, they seem to really enjoy it. It would be nice to not have to ship that code and not pay for those bytes. And I think it opens up a lot of interesting things on APIs like intersection observer, mutation observer. I look at those and go, those are perfect for the sort of thing we're talking about. So those would be the big two for me. Is there something specific other than having to solve this problem in user lands that shipping observables in a browser would bring? I could probably talk for an hour about that. I think for me that, to me, it's kind of the same thing that we went through from callbacks to promises. When you get a type and you get a thing, you can pass around and treat like a real thing, I feel like we need the same thing for events, right? And that's more or less what an observable is for me, is that get a handle on the thing, be able to pass around, treat like an object. And it really changes how you think about doing complex event things, drag and drop, all these really highfalutin animation stuff we all want to do, this interaction stuff, I think becomes much easier when you have a primitive for handling really what's delivering you. Chad, I was curious. What, from the glimmer and ember side, do you feel is missing? So again, the changeless stuff. We actually have a strawman implementation of this in the glimmer VM. A lot of the work that we're doing on the glimmer side is instead of compiling a template, like how a vast majority of these frameworks authors projects do, what we are trying to do is compile templates directly into a byte code format. And so the changeless proposal is more kind of aligned with that, because the whole idea is that you would build up all of the operations that you need to manipulate the DOM. That's a typed array, you can transfer that across different workers and everything like that and then apply it on the main thread. So yeah, I think the changeless or something like the changeless would be, I think, great. OK, so we've got changeless. I think we have consensus. Can we just ship that now? I think we have consensus. You can do changeless plus worker DOM. There you go. Change list and worker DOM. Alex, do you have any opinions on changeless? No. You're taking bug reports here. Like we're too serious to scribble down that you want them. Tracy, we saw observables were mentioned. I know that in the RXJS community, observables are a big thing there as well. Do you have any takes on, are observables something browser vendors for seriously taking a look at baking in? Yeah, I totally think so. I mean, I know there is the TCF 39 observable spec happening, and hopefully that moves somewhere. And just earlier, Rob was talking about, hopefully, how are you guys going to champion that? I think we made it. We're looking at it. So hopefully that lands soon. Observables in the browser. But I think if we're able to sort of start getting those types of things to happen that are sort of more native, then what's going to happen is, I think, hopefully, the ability for people to use RXJS and the learning curve is a little bit less daunting. Awesome. Malta, so I was curious from the AMP side. Are there other capabilities you feel are missing? So what I would like to say, because I already mentioned workers, for what browser vendors could do is hear us. We all talk about workers. The developer experience in DevTools isn't great yet. So if you could invest in the future and say, maybe in a year people actually use workers, but then have the DevTools already be good, that would be amazing. I also have something, AMP doesn't really need it, but I think everyone kind of wants this, which is just really good weekmaps. So they launched a feature called weekmap. That's not actually what you usually would consider this. So just having a cache that you can put stuff in, and maybe it's still there, but not considered by a garbage collection. If you build something like Relay or even Redux, I think everyone kind of wants this, and it's not been coming. And that's really sad. OK, I saw Alex grinning at this. So Steve, I was curious, do you feel that there are any capabilities missing from the platform that would benefit folks that are writing applications using web components or Polymer? Yeah, I mean, I think I definitely second the JavaScript APIs that are mentioned. And I mean, I'm thinking a little bit more about the DOM here and just say, there's tons of cool stuff that we run into when rendering that I think would be nice to add to the platform, specifically stuff like a lot of the stuff that the native elements can do, that we can't do in custom element land, there's cool stuff that the dialog element can do, that we can't do, render stuff on top of other things, input element, of course, can do, infinities stuff would be awesome to deconstruct that and really add that to our toolkit so that we can use that as developers. And anything from the React side? Yeah, things that the browser can do that frameworks can do, APIs that expose that, I think, are always exciting to us. Our current favorite browser API is Request.oclback. That is, we use that everywhere. That's kind of core to how we're thinking about, basically what our goal is with React right now is, did everyone enjoy that image async feature that you all talked about? What if you could make any component async and just make any of your components stop locking the main thread? So scheduling primitives, like Request.oclback, there's a really cool proposal, I think the what, WG, I always get the different things confused, but there's a really cool proposal called asyncapend, which I think is a very interesting problem space. This basically lets you build up this tree of DOM, whether you're using React or whatever, if you could manually create this, and asynchronously append it into the DOM, you get a promise that says once all of the layout and everything that's been done by the browser. And then once the promise resolves, you can decide when you wanna actually commit that change or actually flush the changes. It's really cool reading that document because it's kind of just a description of what we're trying to do with React as well. But that's the type of thing that React can't do or a framework can't do, unless we reimplement layout, which maybe we will, but realistically for now, we can't do that, so those are the kinds of APIs that we get really excited about. So we saw some convergence on DOM change list. Is asyncapend something that any other frameworks, we think lots of knotting and fingers and Alex is also happy about this, great. Okay, we've got some convergence on this, that's great. Let's move on to another question. So folks are wondering what criteria should you use if you're trying to select a JavaScript, library, or framework to build a new application today? And given that he's just written a blog post about performance budgets, I was curious on Alex's take on this, and then everybody else's. No, read his post. You might get a different answer depending on who you ask today. I work on Chrome, I used to work on frameworks and working on a browser means you represent the user. And so I wind up representing the user's interest in a lot of these conversations. And the way I see people constructing applications today is incredibly well suited to the computers and networks that we were building and using about five years ago, six years ago, right? Networked computers that were had reasonable and good stable latency, fast pipes, copious CPU, relatively small screens compared to the amount that you've had to paint. So that's not the world we live in today. Mobile is much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much, much harder than any of that ever was. The latency on the networks is terrible. The pipes are smaller and variable. And so we've been working with lots of partners for a lot of years and I think the way I would think about this is frameworks take some amount of your headroom. How much headroom do you have is the next obvious question. And I think you have, if you're going to be building a framework-based site, you've got about 130 kilobytes on the wire, jeez it. So when you're selecting a framework, I think one of your primary questions should be how much of that 130K that you need to stuff all of your styles, all of your critical JavaScript, all of your data, all of your markup, templates, application logic, everything has to go in that 130 kilobytes. How much of that is your framework taking? Is a question you should ask. So one thing I was curious, Andrew, about this. You're staring at us now. Yeah, just looking at you. Right next to me. One thing I was curious about from the React site, so we obviously see a lot of applications being started today that are targeted to mobile using React and they're making a bunch of ecosystem choices about using Redux, et cetera. Do you think that folks understand the costs of the ecosystem pieces they're using when it comes to trying to target mobile? And is this an area that need- Do I think people understand this problem? Probably depends who you talk to. One downside, I guess, of the React ecosystem historically relative to the way maybe Ember or Vue, I think Vue does a good job with this, is that we have resisted the frameworks, like I like to put frameworks and libraries in the title, we've resisted the frameworks label for a long time because React was designed to fit into the architecture of Facebook from four years ago, five years ago. So in the beginning, we never built React apps as single-page applications. We were building little tiny views all over a larger server-rendered app. So the first people that built server-rendered applications were way out ahead of us, so we never provide our own router, we never provide our own solution for data fetching. So I think to the extent that people don't care about this enough, maybe in the React big system, I think that's kind of a consequence of that. In the future, I think with things like Create React app and really cool projects like Next.js and Gatsby that are starting to give a more framework-y, holistic approach to how you're supposed to do service workers or server-side rendering, which I think is really exciting, untapped area still, or data fetching or whatever, I think that's gonna be a really exciting and important area in the next year or so. So one thing that you touched on was things like Next.js being a good place to maybe, so you see that as being a good place for us to try defining perhaps well-lit paths for people that are trying to deliver applications on mobile. What was the word you said, well-lit? Well-lit paths. Okay, I don't know what that is. An opinionated path for folks that aren't- Well-lit, is that what you said? Well-lit, yes. Like a cow path, okay, yes. Where are you walking? I respond to animal metaphors. Yeah, I think that we have resisted taking super-strong opinions on things, especially because the infrastructure we use at Facebook is not, we don't really use Webpack even though we think Webpack is really great. So we've resisted giving too many opinions, but what I can see is it's shifting more in that direction. There are a lot of things like server-side rendering, streaming server-side rendering, data fetching of data management, code delivery, like Sam was talking about earlier. There's a lot of these things that are really the same problem space or overlapping problem space that we don't have a great way of pushing our solution or our vision of what that should be because we don't control a framework-y framework. So that's why Next and stuff really excites me in the React space because they are offering a little bit more of this and I think we will maybe start to dip our toe even further than create React up in the future. That's awesome. Jason, so React is in a similar spot with respect to technically being a library. What is your take on this? Yeah, so I'd say if you're making a technology decision about how you are going to structure your applications, if you're picking something important like your view renderer, but what you want to know is, when I'm finished this and I ship my version one, how large is it going to be? If you're picking a library, you probably need to look at what the rest of the options you have are in that library space. So if you're going with React, you need to say, okay, how large is a common router? Do I have a decent selection there for the various CLI tools or server-side rendering tools like Next? What is the end result of those kind of ecosystem approaches? Because at the end of the day, if you end up going with Next, the size of React may not even have that much of an effect on your bundle. It's more the size of Next that you want to be concerned with. And so even if you're not doing server-side rendering or Next or Gatsby or whatever, look at the common CLI tool, look at the boilerplate you're going to use and see if there's a metric you can derive from that. Not just the library. Yeah, cool. Let's switch up topics. Let's talk about interop. So framework interop, web component interop has been an interesting hot topic in the community for a while. Tracy, I was curious, what's your take on this with respect to like, is it important for frameworks to interop together? Like if you've got teams that are working in React and Vue and React, et cetera, is that important as a thing for end developers? I think you look at a lot of large companies who just do JavaScript. So a lot of companies try to say, okay, I'm just gonna go the Ember route. I'm just gonna go the React route. I'm just gonna go this route. But then you have a lot of people who just have sort of disparate teams who try to say, okay, I have this Angular app. What's the, you know, what's this, what's the library I'm gonna build with all these components? And do I stick React in Angular or what do I do there? So I guess it would be nice. I mean, I think it'd be nicer for some developers. And I think that there are a lot of solutions, especially in the corporate world, that people have sort of stuck together. It'd be nice if those were sort of more forward or maybe you guys can come up with solutions to do that or maybe Webpack can solve all the problems right now. Well, since Tracy put you on the spot, Sean, what is your take on framework interop? You know, I think one is the biggest, so okay, I'll speak from experience what we do at Microsoft. So we have over 98 products that ship in production that use Webpack, but no single one is the same. And one of the biggest initiatives that has taken a significant amount of time is trying to unify some sort of component library or system. I think some of the biggest debt that companies struggle with and even one like Microsoft is that we have to be able to move fast, add features, but then as platforms change or features are added or new frameworks crop up, we want to be able to take advantage of these technologies but in a way that can still be agnostic and provide interop between teams. So like, I have my own opinions and I think view is really gonna blaze the trail in terms of how we might see kind of a generic statically analyzed kind of Rosetta Stone for lots of different frameworks to consume components and Jason and I have worked on it a couple of times. So he's already has a loader powered by Webpack that's already taking a view component and importing it into a Preact project and it works. So I mean, there is a huge amount of opportunity space for lots of people to explore. So Jason, I was actually curious. You from the Preact side of view point of you've kind of been interested in web components support. I think that Preact's been doing a decent job of looking at interop. You've also been again working with Sean on ideas around how can we take inspiration from things like the HTML imports approach that libraries that Polymer have really been using and bring into their frameworks. Could you talk a little bit about your opinions on what the future direction of that might look like? Sure. So for me, a part of the part of the win here is we essentially have a compiler model, right? The web is obviously a target we write code for but it's also a target we compile code for, not just with WebAssembly and these types of things but even just compiling to JavaScript. But if we take a look at the way that we're using these compilers and we try to model our input after existing specifications, like if you have a compiler that takes in something that is essentially a serialized web component, an HTML file with JavaScript, CSS, and a template in it, that's an understandable independent layer. You don't need to know how whatever the framework that renders it after compilation works, you could just sort of know how web components works and if the framework adequately implements slots, then if you know how web component slot works, then you know how this file works. I think that Sean had mentioned Rosetta Stone. I think that's a good analogy for this. If we could start to converge at least a little bit on what a component looks like across all of these different technologies, what is the substrate that they're all built on? So we could start to kind of cross-compile between them. You could write a user interface components library with beautiful CSS and encapsulation and some behaviors and then compile it to whatever framework you're currently using and it won't matter. 10 years from now you could compile it to something else. So Steve, I'm curious about your take on this. There's the cross-compilation idea and then there's just having everything work magically at runtime. What is your take on the shape of this problem?  So a little bit that makes me slightly sad that everybody is not just gravitating towards it. On the other hand, I think the technology is evolving. It's taken a long time and I think it's getting there and hopefully we will evolve it still and make it a satisfying answer to this issue. I think one of the places that Polymer has seen a lot of adoption actually is in big corporations where they just have this polyglot of different stuff and they just need a technology that works without wherever the DOM is going to work and this is really where web components shine. And I think this is something where, as now, this is kind of the year of the web components specs being implemented widely. I hope there will be more interest among the other frameworks here. And I think there's, I want to give a shout out to Taylor did in his talk earlier too to the custom elements everywhere that Rob Dodson has done, which is I think that we took a little bit for granted the fact that, hey, we're the platform, everybody's just gonna work with us. And I think it's like to a lot of different approaches, this is sort of a scary concept that now an element in the platform can be anything, it can be whatever. And I think this is partly incredibly powerful because it's sort of this democratic process of the cream of the crop can rise. And, but at the same time, it's also like, but I think it could do anything, it's kind of scary, do I really want to use that? And this is where I think the approach between custom elements everywhere is really interesting because it kind of is this idea that the framework authors and the community of developers making these custom elements really have to meet in the middle and establish best practices such that it makes sense to use these things all together and we can all benefit. So hopefully that happens. Rob, so Angular has been investing in trying to improve their interop with custom elements and components in general for the last while. What's your take on this? So I kind of feel like the Rosetta zone that Sean was talking about, I think that's what a custom element is. I think that that is, and I don't think this group of people would agree on many things, right? Completely against the group, but I do think that we've all more or less landed on this idea that there are events and there are props or property, whatever you wanna call them, right? We all have kind of an API that if you squint, it's more or less the same. So to maybe make your year a little bit better, today a little bit better, I can say that our team has decided that we've always consumed web components. That was a day one decision in Angular. I talked to enough big companies, I'm sure companies that Palmer in, that have these very disparate ecosystems have a dozen different frameworks. I think it's very sad as a web developer that everybody has to rewrite the date picker in every framework that exists, right? If I do one thing as somebody who works on the web now, we can just write one date picker that's awesome and then use it everywhere. I'll just quit, right? So from our perspective, Angular is a framework, as you said, we do try to solve a lot of these problems. And so for us, I think our bread and butter is these big applications that everybody likes to build, but for me it would be great if Angular components could be spit out as web components, right? It's a thing that you look at and it's a no brainer. And so six weeks ago, we started really looking into this. I've been complaining about it for 18 months. I said to Alex Russell when I joined Google that we're gonna make this happen and finally it's happening. So you'll be able to write an Angular component and spit it out as a custom element. And I think that the most important thing about that, the kind of crux to all of this custom element stuff, is that nobody has to know anything about how the component was implemented to make it work because everybody in this room already knows how the DOM works, right? And if that becomes the common API we'll talk to, it doesn't really matter what happens inside of the component, right? We can all have this Rosetta Stone, and we can all talk and we can write one date picker and everybody can be happy, right? So on that note, it sounds like there's some interesting convergence on the Rosetta Stone idea. I'm curious from the React perspective, what's React's take on web components? Yes, we have a slightly different take. Web components are really cool. I think they definitely solve the encapsulation problem and they solve the consumption problem where you should be able to consume a component. You shouldn't have to learn 15 different ways to consume a component. And surely you can wrap any React app in a web component. It's not that hard. The question is whether or not we should replace like React components as a primitive for building your application with just writing a bunch of web components. And on that note, we're not as convinced because we use, I could be wrong, but I think another selling point for web components is that perhaps it obviates the need for a virtual DOM or for us to have to manage our own like parallel and memory representations of your view. And on that part, web components don't solve that for us. So, because we use our internal instances not just for encapsulation, but we use it for memoization. We use it for computing changes. We use it for scheduling. That's the big one. I don't know if you all have heard of this recent effort we had to rewrite React, but we're moving in a direction with React 16 and going forward where we're gonna have async by default rendering. And what this means is we need to be able to do, well, we're gonna do all of our rendering work inside of request.oclback basically. And in order to do that, you need like this double pass kind of rendering system where you have two phases. One you have async render phase where you do most of your expensive work. It's all in request.oclback or maybe in the future it's on a web worker or whatever. And then you have a synchronization phase where once you can compute all of your mutations into a DOM changeless maybe, you can synchronously flush all of them all at once. And that's the type of architecture which we're really excited about. There's a lot of cool features that you can build on top of this, but it's not really possible without implementing your own data structures. So we're like thumbs up on web components, but we don't think it replaces the need to have our own data structures. Alex, do you have any takes on this?  Demetri Klaskov, Alex Comeroskin, I started the project at Google that sort of started the web components effort. We're sorry. Apologize, catch me later, buy you a beer. I don't think web components actually have any bearing on whether or not you should have a virtual DOM. Virtual DOM becomes an implementation detail about how your component decides to handle getters, setters, attribute setting and all the stuff. Web components as an implementation give you a surface area that everybody knows, as Rob said, so you can just reuse the date picker from wherever. And then how you wanna handle that question about how a state gets handled inside of your component is now up to you. It doesn't do any global coordination. So I think this is one of these places where web components disaggregate a bunch of things that frameworks used to do. Frameworks have traditionally taken a bunch of different responsibilities between ensuring compatibility across the DOM, giving you a component model in the first place, making sure that those component updates are coordinated in various places, doing data distribution and event handling. And web components sort of disentangle a couple of those and leave you with a few of those problems. They don't solve everything. So a few of those still have to happen. And it's interesting to see how the various frameworks have sort of reorienting themselves now that web components are kind of a thing. So yeah, I think I've seen lots of people, Skate.js is doing this great work where they're using virtual DOM inside of custom elements, which is super cool. They may be using Preact internally, which is not removing a virtual DOM, but it does leave that global coordination question open. Cool, and sorry, I was just gonna say just a sentence on the interrupt thing, just to go back a little bit. I'm gonna sound like a broken record, but the thing that we've found that's interesting about interrupt is this coordination problem. At Facebook, we use React everywhere, but the other framework that we use is server-side rendering. And if you think about it, we have this system called BigPipe. The thing about both of these are asynchronous systems and it becomes a really interesting problem, how to coordinate two asynchronous renderers so that things are popping in on the screen at different times. Okay, and circling back to Malta, AMP is one of the largest consumers of custom elements. I'm kind of curious on your take about interrupt. So I just had this conversation with the product manager saying, hey, we did a date picker in AMP, and I'm like, oh my God, not again. But what we ended up doing was taking the Airbnb React date picker, using it with Preact, so it's not actually like 60 kilobytes and putting it in the custom element, and because it works fine, like AMP does Airbnb date picker. And that is like, I'm worried or worried about the people who put all these massive frameworks in these little encapsulated things. I think we need to understand that just because something is great on the interrupt level and we don't have to make a new date picker, doesn't mean we don't need an implication framework. Now, on the other hand, like AMP right now doesn't actually allow you to write code in any other framework, so interrupt is a bit awkward, but I think what our goal is in the long term that you could just use React to render this stuff that you want to change in AMP document at runtime, like I think the current state is not what we want this to be. That's just the thing we could implement in fall 2015. Nice. Switching gears up a bit, we are running a little bit over, but we're just going to take one or two final questions. What impact is WebAssembly going to have, if any, on JavaScript frameworks and libraries? Chad, do you have any takes on this? So I think WebAssembly is kind of interesting. There are certain things, I really like to talk today, basically. It's not a replacement for JavaScript, but there's in places where you need the performance, I think it will play a larger part. Maybe not everyday developers writing it, but framework authors may opt into writing a little bit of C code to maybe eke out a little bit of more performance. This is like some things that we're experimenting with, with glimmers in very high critical performance scenarios, we want to try to eke out as much as possible. Eke out enough performance as possible. Awesome. Jason, did you have any other takes on WebAssembly? Just something that came, I'm like a total WebAssembly new, but something that came up over lunch, you laugh, that's true. I know the API, it's about it. Also, I wouldn't trust myself to write native code. One interesting area that I touched on was for something like a polyfill for a really performance critical feature, having the ability to write at least parts of the polyfill in WebAssembly could be really compelling. We were talking about DOM change list if there's diff computations or something that needs to happen in there or the creation of that array buffer. If that's better done in C and WebAssembly's available, why wouldn't you do it? It seems like it could be powerful there. So our final question is not strictly going to do with APIs, but we had a question around, what can we as a group do to improve diversity in open source? Which I think is a really important topic and something that I personally love to see us make some traction on. Tracy, I was interested in your take on this. I think there's a lot of really great programs out, like I'm a Google developer group organizer and there's a women tech makers initiative that happens. And it's a really great way to sort of bring women developers together and give them a safe space to learn. I think if you talk to women across, women and just everybody in general, but I focus on women because I'm a female. If you talk to women in general, everybody has varying ideas of acceptance and inclusion and what it should be and what it shouldn't be. So I think not really forcing your opinions on women, but just giving them a way for them to contribute the way they want to. I think it's just also encouragement in general. I think in our industry, we have this diversity problem and a lot of companies are looking for these senior developers where when you actually look at our industry, you see a lot of junior female developers coming in. And what we need to do is sort of somehow figure out a way that we're able to encourage these junior developers so that we can build senior developers. And I think that's the biggest problem right now. That's the biggest disconnect we have. I agree with that, Sean. You also, this is a problem that you have some thoughts on. Yeah, I mean, like if it wasn't for open source, I wouldn't be here.   Like we should be able to not only elevate the opportunities for every single person to be able to receive the same blessings that many of us have just by being involved and passionate about something. And so one of the things that we're, you know, that we've seen is that we have specific outreaches for Webpack, not only that span gender or race, but even just countries. Like we have an initiative called Webpack Africa that we're starting and a gentleman named Prosper, if you haven't met him, raise your hand maybe. He's back there somewhere. He's helping lead that organization and their goal was we need to prepare people for the web for the next billion people. And so it's like, that means that we could have the opportunity to elevate somebody to a whole new life opportunity for the next million contributions or developers. And so like we want to find as many ways possible to essentially elevate or provide more opportunity so that these success stories don't have to be unique. They don't have to be rare. On that note, we're out of time. Please join me in giving a hand to all of our panelists who are very kind enough to take time out to come here today.


This is a lesson I like to teach with a small group of three or four students, ages four and five. So this is when we are going to be learning about story structure, specifically a three-part story. So we'll start with something simple like my story cards and we sequence them together. So in this one I have a seed. In this picture I have a little sprout and in this picture it's a plant. And so we're going to put these in the right sequence. We'll fit them together and then I will tell a little story to the kids. In the beginning there was just a seed. In the middle the seed is a sprout. At the end the sprout turned into a flower. So what they're learning and I'm modeling for them is beginning, middle and end. So we'll practice that and I'll have them tell me the story back to me. And then when we're done with that I'll give them their own. And we'll mix it up and I'll say to them we'll get them all out and we'll put them in the right order. So here is one snowball. The squirrel now has two snowballs. And then at the end we have a snowman. So we'll put it in order. The kids will then try to tell me a story. I will try not to help too much. They'll say in the beginning squirrel had one snowball. In the middle squirrel had two snowballs. At the end he made a snowman. And I'll be so happy for them because they tried so hard to tell me. And what's important is to be happy for anything they're trying to tell you that has a three part structure of beginning, middle and end. If they try to just tell you about the end redirect them back to the beginning and say whoops you forgot to tell me what happened in the beginning. And then you try it again but this time you can help them a little bit more about beginning, middle and end.


Hi friends I am Poojwa and today we will work out the following question. Prove that the dot product of vector A plus vector B and vector A plus vector B is equal to mod of vector A square plus mod of vector B square if and only if vector A comma vector B are perpendicular given vector A is not equal to zero vector and vector B is not equal to zero vector. Let us now begin with the solution. Now here we have to prove that if vector A plus vector B dot vector A plus vector B is equal to mod of vector A square plus mod of vector B square then vector A and vector B are perpendicular that is vector A dot vector B is equal to zero and if vector A and vector B are perpendicular that is if vector A dot vector B is equal to zero then vector A plus vector B dot vector A plus vector B is equal to mod of vector A square plus mod of vector B square. Now first we will consider that vector A plus vector B dot vector A plus vector B is equal to mod of vector A square plus mod of vector B square and we will prove that vector A dot vector B is equal to zero. This implies now opening the bracket on left hand side we get vector A dot vector A plus vector A dot vector B plus vector B dot vector A plus vector B dot vector B is equal to mod of vector A square plus mod of vector B square. This implies now vector A dot vector A is equal to mod of vector A square plus vector A dot vector B plus now since vector B dot vector A is equal to vector A dot vector B so we get here vector A dot vector B plus vector B dot vector B is equal to mod of vector B square and this is equal to mod of vector A square plus mod of vector B square. Now cancelling out mod of vector A square and mod of vector B square from both the sides we get this implies vector A dot vector B plus vector A dot vector B is equal to zero and this implies 2 into vector A dot vector B is equal to zero which further implies vector A dot vector B is equal to zero. So by taking vector A plus vector B dot vector A plus vector B is equal to mod of vector A square plus mod of vector B square we have proved that vector A dot vector B is equal to zero. Now we consider vector A dot vector B is equal to zero and we have to prove that vector A plus vector B dot vector A plus vector B is equal to mod of vector A square plus mod of vector B square. So here first we will consider the left hand side and we will prove it is equal to right hand side. So we have left hand side is equal to vector A plus vector B dot vector A plus vector B. Now this is equal to vector A dot vector A plus vector A dot vector B plus vector B dot vector A plus vector B dot vector B and this is equal to now vector A dot vector A is mod of vector A square plus vector a dot vector b now since vector b dot vector a is equal to vector a dot vector b so here we will write plus vector a dot vector b plus mod of vector b square now since vector a dot vector b is equal to 0 therefore we get this is equal to mod of vector a square plus mod of vector b square and this is equal to the right hand side so by taking vector a dot vector b is equal to 0 we have proved that vector a plus vector b dot vector a plus vector b is equal to mod of vector a square plus mod of vector b square hence we write our answer as the dot product of vector a plus vector b with itself is equal to mod of vector a square plus mod of vector b square if and only if vector a comma vector b are perpendicular hope you have understood the solution bye and take care


The Equitable Life Assurance Society presents, this is your FBI. This is your FBI, the official broadcast from the files of the Federal Bureau of Investigators. Transcribed and presented as a public service by the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States and the Equitable Society's representative in your community. A lot of folks in our audience tonight are specially attentive. Because they received one of the thousands of postcards sent out yesterday by representatives of the Equitable Life Assurance Society. These postcards were invitations to hear tonight's middle commercial on this Equitable Society radio program. The commercial will tell about the Equitable's independent 60s plan.  I'll be back in approximately 14 minutes to give you full information on this special plan offered by the Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States. Tonight's FBI file, the sentimental double cross. Unfortunately, it is necessary for the Federal Bureau of Investigation to call to your attention the current crime wave more often than it would like to. It would much prefer that there was no crime wave to discuss. But the facts do not warrant any such conclusion. There is almost unprecedented activity among criminals. And your FBI talks about it on this official broadcast because it concerns you so directly. Every crime, no matter where it is committed, has its effects on you. It raises your tax bills. It raises the price you pay on various commodities. It makes you the next possible target for the criminals. Yes, it touches every one of you in a hundred different ways. And yet, try to recall something. In your presence, when has anyone been heard other than law enforcement officers discussing the prevention of crime rather than distorted details? The answer probably is never.  Discuss it from every angle until you arrive at some plan whereby you can effectively aid in the war against crime. For, like international wars, this is a battle which will not be won unless you, the law abiding decent citizens, join together and cooperate with your local police. The time to do that is now. Tonight's file opens in a small dimly lit room of a building located on the outskirts of a Midwestern city. It is midnight and two men are listening to the last note of a distant clock. It's overclocked. I know. Well, let's wake him up. You ready? Wake up, Tommy. He's really knocking it off. Well, this ought to do it. It's okay, Tommy. It's okay. It's just us. Yeah, now why are we walking? It's after midnight. Happy birthday, Tommy. Huh? Have a thousand of them, kid. Oh, thanks. Uh, me and Charlie got something for you. Huh? It's not very much, but... Yeah. A ballpoint pen. Oh, gee. I don't know what to say. Okay. Well, we're so thoughtful of you. I'm not ordinarily at a loss for words, but... Well, I just can't tell you how thankful I am. Yeah, sure. That ain't the only present, Tommy. Any more? Uh-huh. We've got a plan all set to bust out of this jail tomorrow morning, and we're taking you with us. The next day, at a nearby FBI field office, Special Agent Jim Taylor meets Agent Bill Wayne as he is signing in. Hello, Bill. Hi, Jim. You're back from court already? Yeah, recess. Oh, I've got to go back this afternoon. You, uh, meet through testifying then? Probably. Good. When you're finished, the SAC wants you to work on it, and he just put me on. Oh, what's the story? A jail break out at South Randolph. Again? Yeah, three men got away. Two of them had been arrested by our agents for violation of the National Motor Vehicle Theft Act. How did they get out? They overpowered the jailing. That's the third time that same thing's happened, Arthur. I know. Well, they stole the jailer's keys, and were gone by the time anybody missed them. When did all this happen? Within the past hour. Any idea what they're using for transportation? Well, I'm not sure, Bill, but there's a stolen car reported shortly after the break. Well, who are the two we're looking for? My name's Charlie Lake. He had previously served 10 years for assault with a deadly weapon. Well, who's his partner? Frank Robin. He served five years for armed robbery. The third man was named Tommy Brunswick. He wasn't a hardened criminal like the others. He was in for judging his company's books. Did they ever work together? Well, not from their arrest records. They were cellmates, but I believe that was the only link. Anything been done so far? We've got a roadblock set up on the two highways leading out of South Randolph. I hope it was set up early enough. Well, I'm going out there now and find out, Bill. As soon as I get anything, I'll call in. Been pretty fast.  Oh. Ah, this is certainly pleasant. That being out of prison, I mean. It'll be more pleasant when we get to some safe place. They've got that map there, Franky. Yeah. What's the story? This road goes another five miles. And it feeds into a lot of roads. A junction like. Where are we heading for, Charlie? Any place where there's dough and shelter. You mean you have no particular destination, Charlie? No. Then could I make a suggestion? Yeah, why? Why aren't we hurries? Too many towns. But you said you wanted to. Head west. I have some money planted. Hmm? I say I have some money hidden away, but. Of course, it's too dangerous. Important money? About ten thousand dollars. Ten thousand? It's from when I was borrowing money from the company I was working for. You fellas were nice enough to take me along with you. I'd be very happy to give you, say, oh. One thousand dollars apiece to show my gratitude. Frank, look at that map. You've changed your mind? Kid, it's a pleasure having you aboard. Where's the dough planted? It's in a place. Hey, what? Look down the bottom of the hill. It's a road block. What do we do?  You'll see us. Well, maybe not. What about the woods? Just sit a minute, will you? They'd be pretty good cover. According to the map, there's a highway that runs on the other side of them. Charlie, look there. A cop. Yeah, I think he spotted us. Yeah, he has. Come on. Hitch to the woods. Special Agent Taylor speaking. Hello, Jim, this is Bill. You call me? Yeah, Bill.  Any action there? What? The road block was partially effective. What do you mean partially? Well, the trio had to abandon their car and scatter when they got to the place where the block was set up. They made a break for it on foot through the woods. What happened? Frank Auburn was recaptured, but Tommy Brunswick and Charlie Lake got away. That's not so good. Have you talked to Auburn yet? Yeah, I've just finished questioning him. You got anything? Well, he told me that Tommy Brunswick was wounded by one of the local police, but Auburn didn't know how serious the wound was. Anything else? Yes, he said Brunswick mentioned some money that he had hidden. He was going to give some of it to them. Did Brunswick say what he had it hidden? According to Auburn? No. Yeah, I guess I do, Bill. He's scared. Oh, oh yeah. Well, you contact the local police and get Tommy Brunswick the rest record. Okay. If we can get a lead from that and find out where the money is hidden, we should be able to pick up both of them. You all right, Bad Tommy? Uh-huh. Hold on. Yeah, those things really burned. Yeah. You've ever been shot, Charlie? Uh-huh. By a cop? By a dame. It was a gun I gave her for a birthday. Well, we ought to be there in a couple of minutes. Who is this doctor you're taking her to? Well, kid, he ain't exactly a doctor. Who you said he was? What he used to be. Oh. He blew his license about five years ago. What does he do now? He drinks whiskey. No. I mean, for a living. Well, the best he can. Well, that's the place up ahead. He isn't very far from the main road. Police might come by here looking for us. Oh, Doc will take care of the cops. Boyd, I'll come on, help you out, Tommy. All right. Here, here. I'll grab my shoulder, Tommy. There, there we are, kid. You such a burden. Oh, you're kidding. Just hold on, kid. Thanks. Hello, Doc. Well, it's good to see you, boy. Say, by golly, I was just thinking about you. Hey, Doc, give me a hand, will you? Huh? Who's this? Palamini. He's looking after us. Well, come in, come in, come in. Okay. Charles, I was under the impression that you were incarcerated. Why don't we bust out? Blendons, blendons. That's how my pal here got hood. Can you fix them up? That's an elementary question. Just put them on the cop, Charles. I shall prepare for immediate surgery. A sample of the juice of tender mercy. Well, is it all right for me to drink? Sure, sure. It's about you. You know, son, there are moments on this mortal coil when a man in my profession fears to believe his own inscrutable knowledge. What do you mean? Son, the wound you received at the hands of that minion of the law was quite severe. I know, much more severe than I at first, to my... Well, last night you said... I know, I know, I said you were getting better. But it appears from the tests I took this morning that well, Tommy, your convalescence isn't what I hoped it would be. You're not going to recover some. You mean I'm going to die? That's right, son. I can't. That is something over which mere mortals have ceased to exercise any control. There's only one thing I can do for you now. What's that? Notify your next skin. Oh. Do you... Do you have anybody to whom you're particularly close? My sister. I shall notify her. Where are you going? I must replenish my supply of ambrose, you tell me. Through some error I brought with me an empty bottle. Did you tell him, Doc? Yes. Yes, Charlie, I... I told him. Has he got any relatives? That's sister. Sister. Use her as a wedge to find out where he stashed the minion. Oh, Doc. You stay away from us. Why?  We will return in just a minute to tonight's case from the official files of your FBI. Just before tonight's exciting file, I mentioned an important announcement the Equitable Society asked me to give at this time. I urge you all to listen closely. This is a special message about the Equitable Society's famous Independent 60s plan. Independent 60s means exactly what it says. When retirement time rolls around, you're free and independent. No charity, no money worries. This Independent 60s plan enables you to be self-supporting and self-respecting. When you reach retirement age, you can live just as you like. Maybe move to a section where the climate is mild and pleasant all year long. For me, that's California, Mr. Keating. San Diego, California. My wife and I have our own little place right outside of town. And, first of all, it's only a four-iron shot from a golf course. How did I know where you spend your spare time? Would you believe it, Mr. Keating? I've been playing golf for years. Never broke a hundred in my life, but now I'm shooting in a low 90s. Well, I'm sure everybody sees the advantages of the Equitable Independent 60s plan. Just what is it that keeps more people from joining? I guess they're like I was for a long time. I used to think you had to be rich to belong. How did you find out the truth? From my Equitable Society representative. He showed me with actual figures just where I stood. And it sure surprised me. Finding out how much social security and the life insurance I already owned helped towards independent 60s. That's very true. In many thousands of cases, it takes only a slight increase in your present insurance to enable you to look forward with complete confidence to independent 60s. A few extra dollars a week did it for me. So why not see your Equitable representative without delay? Phone him soon, or send a postcard care of this station to the Equitable Society. That's E-Q-U-I-T-A-B-L-E. The Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States. Now back to the FBI file. The sentimental double cross. The situation discussed by the two special agents in tonight's case from the files of your FBI. The situation which sees a small town prison fail to hold its prisoners time and again is not a caricature of the true facts. That state of affairs does exist today in many parts of the country. It often happens that a criminal is arrested after much time and effort. He is tried and caught at further expense of the taxpayers and he is convicted. He is then sentenced to one of these cracker barrel jails and within a short time he escapes. Now the entire costly process has to be gone through again. Gone through, of course, at your expense. But the situation is not hopeless. There is a solution and it is available to every community. Build better jails. No one of you citizens listening tonight can do that by yourself. But you do have a vote and you can speak your mind through the ballot box when the question is brought before you next election time. Unfortunately, there were many such referendums to build new and more secure prisons defeated the last time the people went to the polls. Defeated because of a theory of false economy. You do not save money by letting prisoners escape and having to recapture them. You save money by making sure that any criminal sentenced to a term in prison will serve that term. Any other policy is penny wise and dollar foolish and favors not you but your enemy, the common enemy, the criminal. Tonight's file continues in a room at the South Randolph local police headquarters. Sorry, it took me so long to drive down here, Jim. Oh, that's all right. Well, apparently, Brunswick and Lakewood. Oh? Yeah, you remember my telling you they ran through the woods when they abandoned that first stolen car? Well, there's another highway on the other side of those woods. They stole a second car over there. How do you know? Well, we found the jacket from Brunswick prison uniform right where the car was parked. Have we got a description of the second stolen car? Yeah, we've already sent an alarm on it. Have all the doctors in this vicinity been notified about Brunswick's wounds? Yeah, I don't suppose there's anything else that can be done, Jim. What do you think of? Oh, we might just as well start studying that arrest record of Brunswick. Oh, yeah, it's right here in this envelope. Oh, pardon me a minute. Yeah, sure, Jim. Special agent Taylor speaking. This is Sergeant Crawford. Yes, Sergeant? We just got some word on that alarm. On the car? No. Where does he live? Where does that road lead to, Sergeant? Sergeant, I think we'd all better get out there right away. They might have as much ammunition in that house as we can. Brunswick and Lake, listen to me. We've got the house surrounded by police and federal officers. You can't escape.  Nothing yet, Jim. Yeah. Let's give them a little time to make up their minds. Well, I went through their second car, they stole. It's fine, isn't it? Blood on the front seat. Hey, any guns? Nope. I'll give them one more call. Okay. Brunswick and Lake, listen to me. We've got the house surrounded by police and federal officers. You can't escape.  We'll have to move in, Bill. Signal the Sergeant. Right. Okay, come on. Watch it. I'm going to kick the door in. Cover me. Right, Jim. Nobody in this room, Bill. I must take the door to the other room. I guess so. Keep me covered. Right. That's Tommy Brunswick. He's the only one here. Is he dead? No, just passed out. Bill, look around the other room and see if you can find any lead on where Lake and that ex-doctor went. Will you quit nipping at that point? You'll forget what you're supposed to do. My chore hardly demands the qualities of a genius. Well, let's go over it again, will you? Oh, very well. I go into the Palace Hotel and give this note to the crew. Yeah. The one named Joe. Exactly. He gives me Tommy's suitcase. I bring it back to the car, take the keys out of the suitcase, and we drive through the post office. Right. I go in, open Tommy's post office box with the keys, get the package, and come back to the car. Is that it? Yeah. Yeah. And you still got the note Tommy wrote, ain't you? Yes, my ungrammatical friend. I have. Say. What do I get out of this whole thing? A year supply of whiskey. Very enticing. You know, at first I felt badly about double-crossing Tommy this way. But upon mature deliberation, I think a year's supply of whiskey ought to stab my conscience. Until it disappears again. Brunswick, we know that Charlie Lake was here with you. Where did he go? I don't know. Where did he and the ex-doctor leave? We've already got the description of the car they're in and we've sent out an alarm on it. Now you might as well tell me what you know. Sorry, I'm not talking. Who told you about that? Frank Arvin. The other two are on their way now to get it, aren't they? I don't want to talk. Getting anywhere with them, Jim? No, not very far. I found this in the other room. A pad of prescription blanks. There's indebted writing on the top sheet. Let's read it and see what it says. Yeah, go ahead, I'll hold the flashlight. Put it up a little bit. Dear Joe, please give the man who brings this note of black suitcase I left with you when I checked out he is my friend, and he's signature. Put it down for that, that's it. Signature is a little tougher to make out. Um, it starts with a T. T. Tommy, it's a first name, Tommy Brunswick. I never wrote anything on that pad. Brunswick, who did you write this to? I never wrote it. We can find out if this is your handwriting. Hold it, Bill, I just remembered something. Let's go. I beg your pardon, sir. Are you the clerk? Sorry, we're all filled up now. I have not come here to seek lodgings. Then what do you want? I seek a word with a clerk named Joe. I'm Joe. Splendid! What can I do for you? I am a messenger. I bring you this note. Okay, wait a minute. I've got to be in the office. I shall be standing here like the sphinx awaiting your return. Mm-hmm. I think maybe the sphinx needs a drink. Here you are, Mac. Well, thank you very much, sir. I've got a card. My father getting back into the car lake. I'll take that suitcase. And may I ask who you are, sir? Yes, I'm a special agent of the FBI. You can leave this car right here. I'll supply the transportation as far as headquarters. And Frank Auburn were found guilty of violating the National Motor Vehicle Fed Act and the Federal Escape Act were sentenced to 10 years each. Tommy Brunswick was turned over to local authorities. The bogus doctor was given a two-year sentence for harboring federal fugitives and treatment was designed to rehabilitate him. When Tommy Brunswick refused to answer any questions, Special Agent Taylor remembered that in his arrest record there was a notation which read Place of Arrest, Lobby Palace Hotel. The two special agents sped to the hotel and there they set up a surveillance covering both the front and side entrances with what results you have already seen. The final clue which led to the capture of Charlie Lake and the ex-doctor thus came from the trained memory of an FBI special agent. But this case would not have been closed as quickly had it not been for the close cooperation given the two special agents via the local police force. The same is true of a tremendous number of other cases which your FBI closes every week. The Federal Bureau of Investigation is proud of the fact that it makes its facilities available to every local law enforcement agency in the country. But it is even prouder of the fact that in every section of the country the local police extend the court shall welcome to every special agent. We believe that to be true because in the past such cooperation has inevitably led to victory over the criminal to his arrest and conviction. In just a moment we will tell you about next week's exciting case from the files of your FBI. Now two final questions on the Equitable Society's Independent Sixties Plan. Are these plans flexible, Mr. Keating? Can the amount be increased if my income goes up in the next five years? It certainly can. Your Equitable Representative will tell you that many successful men have done exactly that. When I reach the age of 60 about how much income will I receive a month? Well that's something you and your Equitable Representative will have to work out together. It depends on your present income and your future needs. I'll see you in the next video. Thank you. However all names used are fictitious. And any similarity they'll have to the names of persons living or dead is accidental. Tonight's program was transcribed and the music was composed and conducted by Frederick Steiner. The author was Jerry D. Lewis. Your narrator was William Woodson and special agent Taylor was played by Stacey Harris. Others in the cast were J.C. Flippen, Mark Lawrence, Wally Mayer, Charles Maxwell, Sydney Miller and Steve Pendleton. This is your FBI is a Jerry Divine Production. This is Larry Keating speaking for the Equitable Life Insurance Society of the United States and the Equitable Society is representative in your community and inviting you to tune in again next week at this same time when the Equitable Life Insurance Society will bring you another thrilling story from the files of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Out of the storm on this is your FBI. Stop. Look and listen if you drive a car. Now than when it's too late. Observe the traffic rules and regulations in your locale. This is ABC the American Broadcasting Company.


This picture is of an industrial chicken house in the town of Waldron, Arkansas, where I reported a lot of the meat racket. These chickens you see here are actually baby chicks. They'll grow larger over a period of about six weeks to the point where the chickens entirely cover the floor of a chicken house like this. A typical industrial farm might have five, six, or even seven chicken houses like this to supply the giant Tyson food slaughterhouse in the middle of town. For all the industrial sophistication of a house like this, the power structure around it is almost feudal. The farmers have virtually no control over their operations, but sign a contract with Tyson foods which delivers the birds, delivers the feed, and ask the growers to raise the birds under exacting specifications. The farmers have so little power that they can't negotiate good contracts with the company and are often afraid to speak out about abuses on their farm.


What's the difference? Finally versus at last. This short video will tell you the difference between the phrases finally and at last, along with how and when to use them. The lesson is designed for students and teachers of English as a second language. A common mistake students make especially in writing is to use the phrase at last when they really mean finally. These phrases are not the same. Here's what they mean. Finally means the last item in a sequence or series. Similar words are last or lastly. Finally follows words like first, second, or secondly, third, or thirdly, next, then, and so on. At last means I've been waiting for a long time for this and now it's here. Do not use this phrase to indicate the final item in a series. Sequencing. In writing, we often use words or phrases to indicate order or sequence. For example, we say or write first, next, then, finally, last, or first of all, second, or secondly, third, or thirdly, finally, lastly. Do not say or write at last for the last item. You might sometimes hear the idiomatic phrase last but not least, but never at last but not least. So where do we use at last? We use it when we have been anticipating something for a long time and it finally arrives. You're here at last. At last, you're here. Can we use finally in these situations? Yes, you can, but be careful. It usually comes between the subject and verb. You finally got here. I've been waiting all morning. Depending on intonation, finally can sometimes carry a negative meaning. You finally made it.  What took you so long? Finally can sometimes indicate exhaustion or exasperation at the stress of working or waiting. I finally finished the project.  It's been tough getting everything done. Whereas, at last, usually focuses on the positive result or payoff. For example, rest and relaxation at last. I have earned this wonderful reward. So, do you finally get it? Oh, now I see. Or do you get it at last? This feels great. Hope that was helpful. Please give us a thumbs up if you liked or learned from this video. And remember to subscribe to our channel. Thanks for watching. If you have ideas for our next video, please submit them at the link below.


Right, go on then. What are you going to do? Are you going to charge it? Oh, yeah! Hello! Episode on the Lagoons series, including all the new ones, and maybe some old kind of laughs. Oh, it just ends like that? Oh. Today? Oh, God. Stop scaring me. We're looking at a balleroyal of sorts of the new creatures with all of the old. And that is, of course, including stuff that was in mods and things like that. I haven't included all of the modded quarter-creatures because there is a lot of weird stuff that happens with them, where, like, they attack each other, but, you know, because they're modded creatures, they sort of just stay there. So what I want to do first is put all the regular creatures with each other, and then once that's done, let's just add all of the modded creatures and see what happens. Right, with that being said, let's release the monsters all first. All right, they're slowly being released. Yes. Dunkalosteus. Well, three duglosses, if I remember correctly. We've got four Archelons there. You know, we put some of the floaters. Let's say floaters. Who says we're wrong? We put some of the floating rocks, but they're not really floating anyway. They're on plinths. We've got the, I think that's a Styxosaur. Or we go over here. Whoa, Pleasiosaur's coming out. Ictiosaur's as well. Oh, look at these guys. Right, they'll not attack each other at the moment, but I just kind of wanted to see everything that this game has to offer in one enclosure. Yeah, look at all the ictiosaur's over there. Some of the thylosaurs are modelled as the ones from Jurassic Park, the game. Yeah, nothing I could really do about that, unfortunately. There is a regular thylosaur over there, though. Yes, look at its grimace face. I don't know what they did with this. This is a way better design. I would have preferred that one, but gotta be honest. No shade on the design team at Frontier for creating this marvel. But, I mean, it was already done a lot better before, but I guess maybe Universal needed to approve of a different one. Alright, that is everything released. And so far, that is what your game will look like if you do max a batch of everything, including the marine or reptile DLC. And now the question becomes, who will die first? Now, my guess is probably an ictiosaur or a plesiosaur. I don't know.  This is gonna be absolutely fantastic. Missing shark. Well, I mean, in the DLC, I mean... Sorry, mods have shark. You'll get some in a minute, but first I just want to... Oh! What? Dead? Whoa, what died? Oh, it was at the borosaurus? No! It was too dead! Oh, was it the cronosaur that killed it? I didn't even get a notification that something was hunting it. Interesting. Oh, God, something else has died up. Why is everything dying? I don't get a notification. A cronosaur died. What, too? Another? Another source, really? What happened to the notifications of things being hunted? That used to happen. So far, two dead Attenborough sources and one dead cronosaurus. I'm pretty sure it is. Right, but how does a shounisaurus or compare to a tylasaur? We know that it can fight a mosasaur, but can it fight a tylasaur? Oh, look at all the turtles! Oh, please leave us alone. They're all hiding behind the rock. Oh, God. You know what? I don't blame them. This place is terrifying. Oh, that's so cool, though. They're actually sticking together. A five-plus dead. What is happening? Oh, it's another source. Springer leaker game. I haven't got a shock, but I've got a person a zipline. I'm so confused. Why are the turtles just hanging behind you? That is so weird. Are they trying to get on? Maybe they are. And because it's so close to the wall, they can't actually do it. Ah, caught that. Didn't get a freaking notification on, but an Attenborough source being attacked by another source. Is that instant death? No, it's not. It basically is, though. Seven percent the classic fight. And a clear saw. Against a pleaser saw. Going for the head. And there it is. Deed. This is death corner over here. Okay. I know what you were hunting. Oh, you're hunting pleaser saw. Oh, Tyler saw going for the doka lost is there. Oh, he killed him. Oh, is it gonna get it? It's about it. There it is. You know what? The Archelons might be the ones to survive this. Oh, wait. What? The doka lost is being attacked by something?  What are you doing?  They are basically just prey to these guys. Although nice to see, you know, the drastic part of the game Tyler saw looking different. Yum, yum, yum, yum. Wish they would do more than just, you know, bite it and then throw it around. Don't eat it. Dismember it. Cut it off. Only the strong survive and only the ones that kill basically survive because they're the ones that get to eat and there's no food in here.  Although no. It's not very hungry though. It's also freaking messing with me, Cameron. So far, I think all of the giant predators are still knocking about. This ichthyosaur doesn't finally food. It's probably going to die. Oh no, we've lost. We're down to one. Okay, the other one died. How did the other one die? Oh, it's starved to death. Oh, okay. Nothing decided to come out of the water here. If I was them, that would be the first and last place I would go to. Archelon's tried their best, but no, it didn't get anywhere. Oh, that's just lovely. You and your forked tongue. I don't know what this ichthyosaur is doing. It's circling as if it's chasing something. It's probably panicking though. I wish they would also eat the dead bodies on the surface. Just take a bite out of them or something. They don't necessarily have to stop to, like, yum-yum-yum. They just, like, pull the body. But then again, I guess that's way complicated to do that. Oh, God! The ichthyosaur!  It killed the ichthyosaur! I don't know what the ichthyosaur's hunting down something. I don't know what it is. Oh, it's a liepluridon. Oh, it wasn't a cornice one. Oh, I'm so sorry, liepluridon. Yum! And a shake. Yep, I think that is actually the last of the liepluridons. I'm just going to starve to death. Hey, you never know. You might actually win to the ichthyosaur attack the tylons. Oh, my God, the ichthyosaur's dead! That's just some weird glitch happening then. No! Killed by tylosaur. They were kind of broken up by the rock. Like, they were fighting on either side, which looked so weird. Tylosaur going for the sticks there. Oh, yep, going for it. Pulling the neck. Beautiful! Yum! I would have said maybe the ichthyosaur or the arculon would be in with a chance, but arculon, even though it can't be hunted by anything, they are starving now. So, seeing as it's just the arculon, tylosaur, and ichthyosaur's, and we know that the tylosaur can hunt the ichthyosaur's and the arculons are basically starving, tylosaur has won it. There you go. You saw an arculon go to the surface. So, we'll call this a victory for the tylosaur. Let's jump back in and add all the beautiful modded creatures, shall we? Oh, those look cool. Oh, there are the basillosauruses! Oh, my God! This looks so good! There we got bullshox. Oh, what is that thing? That is amazing. I love how these guys have just stopped. Maybe they're trying to do some sort of social interaction. All right, what do we have here? We've got the ichthyosaur's, arculons, oh wait, no, they haven't stopped moving. Okay, basillosaur, no, not having any, but this, I think, is ichthyosaur, or ichthyosaur. I think it's ichthyosaur. Oh, the leviathan's also doing that weird glitch. Oh, interesting. Now, this isn't actually the ichthyosaur. If I remember correctly, this is a shastosaurus, which is a modded creature. There may only be one of those. Got those guys. Oh, yeah, you've got the Indo-Pacific sailfish. I think that one is. What else we got?  You're mahusif! Oh, yeah, and what people thought may have been coming to the Marine DLC, the beautiful Zephactanus, a trapdoor fish that Classic Fossils found of it eating basically itself. What else do we have? There should be bull sharks, great white sharks. There's the megalodon! Yeeeees! Glorious!  We've got the Anomalacaris there, with these two of them, that aren't happy. I think they're kind of waiting for things to die. Uh, same with these things. They seem to get stuck with each other. These are the Lysicthies, which are not happy at all being this. This is truly Hell's Aquarium. I was gonna say, yeah, that is the Bull Shark. I don't know what that's from. It kind of looks like it could be from that. Oh, what was that Shark Game? It was like Jaws Unleashed, but modern day. It looks like it's the Bull Shark from that or something. I think it was the Lysicthies, which are based on maybe the Tilosaur animation, but I don't think they are. They're based on something else because there's two of the Max. I'm not too sure what two is Max. Maybe it's these guys. It might be this one. Uh, the Chronosaur. But yeah, they are not having a fun time, but what I'll do is I'll save it, reload it, see if that fixes it, and then we'll turn on combat. This is the best way to see it, is to go into camera mode.  Hopefully, you know, even if I don't catch it, you guys will see it. Cause now things are starting to panic, and they are going crazy. That thing's farting like no one's business. The great migration of the pleaser source is going on over here. There's a lot of things swimming away. I love this Dacosaur. Oh! Oh, Adibosaurus attacking, oh no, definitely dead. Killed by the, like, pluridon. And what beautiful things these things are. The things are things, yes. Although they are glitched. The same with the Leviton. It's like they moved a little bit. And they went, no. We'll see if they stay there.  Hopefully, there'll be an update to that sort of mod or something. We shall see Megalodon having a great time. You should have been here, Megalodon. We all were rooting for you. I didn't want to be here anyway. Look at that guy.  Yeah, there is a lot of, oh, there you go. See, this is the sort of thing that happens when you have normal creatures interacting with modded creatures. So that was killing the Bullshock there. But because they're modded creatures, they do the weird thing where they attack each other.  You were... Oh, something else? Something else is attacking. Oh, the Bullshock attacking something. For a while, mods always seemed to, like they worked out the animation. And then, I don't know what happened, but oh, oh, the Tilosaur being attacked by the Mosasaur there. Ooh, looks like the Mosasaur got the best exchange here. There's only one of these guys though, so there is three Tilosaur. It does seem to be just that move set, or that animation set, the double. It's a bugger, because a lot of the cool things have that animation. Oh, what? These things, they just float up and die. I don't even know what kills them. No, the Shastasaurus... died. Die very, very dead. Oh, oh, Kornosaurus swimming away there.  Oh! Another dead Attenborough source by the Light Pluridon there. This is just shock, Kornon. So many sharks and fishes over here, and they just scared to go out into the open. And you know what? I don't blame them. No! Killed by bubbles! So, if anything this has proven, is the Arcalon cannot be killed by anything it would appear. It doesn't matter what enclosure you put them in with, Mosasaur, Tylosaur, Ducalosteus... Nah. Not able to be killed by any of those guys. No. I think that's because a lot of the little things look the same. You've got like six great whites, six bull sharks. Oh, this thing's gonna be killed. Oh, wait! Was it attacked by the other great white? I think it was! I do hope we can fix the animation at some point. Because it was so cool seeing all these modern creatures interact. You've got the awkward tilted, you know, animations of them not interacting properly. And even the real things of the Tylosaur attacking other things. I mean, I'm saying that though. The model was different. It didn't really fit completely. You know what? You might not do anything. Oh, God. Oh! Oh! Did it just head for the Mosasaur? What? Oh, man! Oh, we've got to see that animation. We've got to do the redo of that. Shonoso just headbutts a Mosasaur. That's its kill animation. Bam! Damn! That was cool! Look at you, dude! I thought this, like, there wasn't any more surprises. Like, I've seen everything. Nope. We've got a secret Shonosaur animation. Gotta make a super aggressive Shonasaur. And then put it in with a really weak Mosasaur. Just to see how that plays out. Because it might be a case of there's too many things in here. Oh, no! Ignisaur's don't attack each other. No! No! Is there anything on the rocks? Wait, how many leaves? These are the three! There might be one floating around there. I just never saw. Leviathan can die as well. Oh, interesting. Interesting. I know the Dunkaloss just, you know, coasting by. That's good. That's good. Oh, I want to see the Shonosaur go for the Tylosaur now, man. It's surely going to have a similar animation, right? Oh! Oh, that was a close one. Circling around each other. No! It was a factor! Yeah, it's this animation.  Oh, my God! Look at them! How much death! How many things are still in here? How are there 38 in here? Tell you what. Imagine if you rocked up to Jurassic Park like this. Oh, my God. I've waited my whole life to see dinosaurs. Oh! Oh! Let this be a lesson. Don't keep wild animals in captivity. Where is the, where is the Megadon? There he is. Okay. Megadon's still... Oh, it has been in a fight. 21%. I wonder what, too. It must have been a thylosaur. Dude, a thyl... Oh, that's a Lysicthes! No! I died in starvation. Unless... Oh, I think it was killed by the Ducalosteus. Yes, it was. Oh, man. How did that get free all of a sudden? Oh, no. No! Oh! When one died and freed the other one. Ah! Oh, I think it got killed by the Shonosaurus. Oh, so that's how we get them randomly free. But because they kind of starve at the same time. Right? So one would have been fine. No! Bysyllosaur! You look so cool, though. That's right. Because apparently, the mammoth was called Leviathan. And then it was not called Leviathan. Because it was called Leviathan. Now nothing can be called Leviathan.  Two is the problem. One would be fine.  Maybe. Maybe. There's still a chance this thing can kill. No! No! There it goes. No! Megalodon!   Oh! Oh, God. Hello? Can I, can I please? What is going on with this camera? Oh! 18 dinosaurs remaining. It looks like Tilosaur may be the winner here. These two are definitely going for each other. They're trying to do it. They just can't seem to line it up correctly. But a hundred percent. They're just, they're just swimming in circles. Round each other. I mean, I didn't know you needed a bigger space to have a battle. Apparently you do. Oh, are they going to do it this time? They're going to do it this time? This time? Yeah!  You're perfect.  This could be a strategy by the Shonisaur. You know, he's on 85 percent. Tilosaur's on 73 percent. So all he needs to do is just outlast them and starvation. This poor Archon is going to co-op in the middle. It's also going to die any second. He's like, no! Please! Keep me out of this! My pluridons now seem to be just taking on everything. He's going for some sort of police. Oh, there it is. It's the police over there. Yep. He's going to get it. He's going to get it. He's going to get it. He's going to get it. There it is. Yum, yum, yum. Ooh. Don Colostius is hunting now. He's hunting the life pluridon. Ooh. They should be interesting. Here we go. Oh, lovely. Just a chunk out of the neck. Easy kill. Don Colostius? My win is because the Tilosaur's like, hung up. On the, uh, on the sh- Oh no! He died. Did it die of starvation? Or did it actually get killed? Starved to de- Whoa! It's starved to de- I thought it had more health than the other one. Wow. Okay, for some odd reason. We're not seeing another dead Tilosaur. Is that only one? Was it just this one? Oh, it's fine- Oh no! It's killed the Don Colostius! No! Oh, it just wouldn't fight.  And it is the last one. Seeing as the Bullshock is, uh, almost gonna starve to death. That's great. And the Tilosaur can pretty much easily hunt down a Kronosaur. Like, whatever it is. A Tilosaur has won a game, but it was close! Kronosaur or Shonisaur gave that Tilosaur run for its money. It's such a shame because that Shonisaur killed the Mosaur. But, before we go, I do want to test out that attack animation with a really good Shonisaur and the Mosasaur. Okay, here we go. The release of the one that's got its fit. So it's 30% extra Stam. It's got 30% extra Attack. You could probably get an extra Defense as well, but I think that's probably gonna be enough to take on a vanilla Mosasaur.  Yes! Lovely yellow. Okay, and let's release that Mosasaur. Do-do-do-do. Do-do-do-do-do. Oh. Oh. Oh! A side charge! Instantly killed the Mosasaur! Oh my God, wow! Bam! Straighten! That is interesting! I didn't even think it would be able to do that. Wow! Okay, you know what? We'll put in a Tilosaur as well.