It's a simple fact of life that for most endeavors you wish to pursue, there are going to be people who are dealt a better genetic hand and that will give them an advantage. But exactly how much does your genes affect your potential as a cyclist? Can anyone become a pro given that they train enough and in the right way? Or are you simply destined for mediocrity if you picked the wrong parents? This is obviously a difficult question to answer because there's so many factors that affect human performance and genetics is just one of them. But we do have research in this area that may help us get to the bottom of this question. Perhaps a good place to start would be looking at research that tests how different people respond to the exact same training stimulus. This study in responses of maximal aerobic power to endurance training had subjects all undergo the same 20 weeks cycling endurance training program. And what they found was that the difference between those who responded the most and the least to the training stimulus was massive. Individual differences in response to training ranged from just 5% all the way up to 88%. This review finds an even wider spread stating that responses to standardized training programs have ranged from almost no gain up to 100% increase in large groups of sedentary individuals. This meta analysis on VO2max trainability comes to the same conclusion showing a bell curve distribution of trainability. What this means is that an unlucky few of us will see little to no improvement after training while a small lucky percentage of us will see a massive improvement. However, the vast majority of us lie somewhere in the middle. These high responders that make up a small portion of the population are your pro riders. For the same amount of training, they see huge fitness gains and scientists have been able to pinpoint the genes that may be responsible for this difference. This meta analysis evaluated the role of the peroxisome proliferate activated receptor alpha gene intron seven GC polymorphism in athletes high ability in endurance sports. Wow, that's a mouthful.  Time to relieve my boredom with some TikTok videos. Taking 760 endurance athletes from five studies, they looked at how the G and C allele in the PP-ARA gene related to endurance performance. They found evidence that the G allele is associated with increased fatty acid oxidation in skeletal muscles and in increased proportion of type one or slow-twitch fibers, which permits a sustained muscular contraction over a long period of time. Furthermore, the GGE genotype was shown to be correlated with high values of oxygen pulse. That got a bit complicated, but basically athletes with a high ability in endurance sports had a higher frequency of the GGE genotype and G allele. And the PP-ARA gene is just one of many genes influencing performance. This review on the genetics of athletic performance discusses performance enhancing polymorphisms or PEPs, which are genetic variants that when inherited can lead to improved athletic performance. It is now believed that over 200 PEPs exist. These genetic variations can affect a variety of functions, including blood flow to the muscles, muscle structure, oxygen transport, lactate turnover, and energy production. So not only have we observed differences in response to the same training between individuals, but we've pinpointed the genes that may be responsible. Let's dive a little deeper though into these genetic differences that lead to better performance in cycling specifically. VO2max or the maximum amount of oxygen a person can utilize during intense exercise has a big impact on endurance performance. Unfortunately, it's also the case that how high someone can get their VO2max has a lot to do with their genetics. We've even identified the genes associated with a larger VO2max improvement. And unfortunately, very little improvement is made to VO2max in individuals who are already trained. The good news is that VO2max is not the end all be all when it comes to performance. In fact, a pro may not necessarily have a higher VO2max than a fast amateur, but they are able to use more of it. This study on physiological and biomechanical factors associated with elite cycling endurance took elite national class cyclists and good state class cyclists and ran them through a series of tests. Interestingly enough, the two groups did not differ significantly in VO2max. However, the elite cyclists were able to complete a 40 kilometer time trial 10% faster and generate 11% more power. So if these two groups had a similar VO2max, then how were the elite riders able to go so much faster? The difference was in how much of their VO2max they were able to utilize. The elite riders were able to ride around 90% of their VO2max for the test while the others could only hold around 86% of their VO2max. Essentially, the elite riders lactate threshold lies at a higher percentage of their VO2max. And this isn't the only study that showed a significant difference in performance between subjects with the same VO2max. This study on determinants of endurance in well-trained cyclists found that endurance can vary greatly among individuals with the same VO2max. One of the key contributors to this difference may be a higher proportion of type one or slow-twitch muscle fibers in high performers. When looking at differences in elite cyclists' economy slash efficiency, this study actually found an inverse correlation between a rider's VO2max and their cycling economy and gross mechanical efficiency, suggesting that a higher efficiency and economy seemed to compensate for a low VO2max in professional cyclists. So while VO2max can be an indicator of somebody's potential in endurance sports, it is by no means the only factor. A rider with a lower VO2max can make up for it with improved efficiency and economy. It may be argued that being able to utilize a higher percentage of your VO2max at lactate threshold is actually more important. The good news is that this is trainable. And if you wanna know more about how to train your lactate threshold, I've left some of my videos on the topic down in the description. There are also differences in the way our bodies are structured that can have an impact on performance and determine the type of cyclist we may be. Just take a look at the difference in body type between sprinters and climbers. This is not by accident. In this study on determinants of peak power output in elite cyclists, they looked at 35 elite cyclists, 18 of which were endurance cyclists and 17 of which were sprinters. Not too surprisingly, sprint performance was highly correlated with quad and hamstring volume or basically the bigger the legs, the more powerful the sprint. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that one out. Just take a look at the legs of the world's best sprinters or track cyclists for that matter and you come to that conclusion pretty quickly. Hmm, yeah, you're right. Pretty big. Wait, we're talking about their legs, right? Perhaps the less obvious advantage that sprinters have is the angle of their muscle fibers. The penation angle is the angle between the longitudinal axis of the entire muscle and its fibers and can affect the force a muscle can produce. What they found was that while quad volume explained 76% of the variability in sprint performance, the penation angle explained an additional 11% and was the second most important variable. If you're not naturally a sprinter, there are things you can do in training to improve your sprint, but it's unlikely that you'll ever be able to compete with the best and vice versa for that matter. And most of that comes down to physiological differences that are outside of your control. Up to this point in the video, we've been talking about physiological differences between people that make someone a great cyclist, but we shouldn't ignore the mental side of the sport. Cycling is a sport that requires a high pain tolerance and a lot of mental toughness, both to push through training sessions to make bigger gains and to push harder in races to get better results. This is obviously something that we can all work on, but is it true that elite level riders seem to naturally have a higher pain tolerance and mental toughness? This study on resistance to mental fatigue in professional road cyclists had both professional and recreational cyclists perform a cognitive test known as a strupe test, which is designed to assess inhibitory control followed by a 20 minute time trial. The pros performed better on the strupe test, but on top of that, their power was not lower than baseline in the 20 minute test afterwards. This was not the case for the recreational cyclists who averaged 10 watts less after the mentally taxing test. The study concluded that inhibitory control and resistance to mental fatigue may contribute to successful road cycling performance. These psychobiological characteristics may be either genetic and or developed through training and lifestyle. And it's likely a little bit of both. Sure, resistance to mental fatigue is something that you can develop over time, but then again, there are riders that just seem to naturally have an ability to suffer even at a young age and in cycling, that's an extremely valuable trait to have. Further research into the mental toughness of cyclists comes to the same conclusion. High level cyclists appear to be less susceptible to mental fatigue and reviews on the topic agree that it's a skill that can be both inherited and learned. Now, while I have touched on the major physiological and psychological factors that contributes to performance, there are of course many other factors that play a role. Your natural set point or body weight could affect your climbing ability, your height could affect how aerodynamic you can get, whether you're more of a carb burner or a fat burner and so on are all traits that people are born with that can affect results. Given all these factors, it's a bit difficult to pinpoint exactly how much genetics plays a role in your cycling performance, but we do have some rough estimates. This review set out to assess how much genetics plays a role in the making of a Tour de France champion. They state that twin and family studies have shown that approximately 50% of the variants in a number of performance related phenotypes, including those important to cycling can be explained by genetic variation. This number right here may give us a rough estimate of how important genetics is, but there's still a lot in this field that we don't know. Over 200 genes have been identified containing common genetic variants involved in the genetic predisposition to physical performance. However, typically these explain only a small portion of the variants, perhaps one to 2% and collectively they rarely explain anything approaching 50%. Thus there's a gap in our understanding. In the conclusion though, they sum up the all important question that I'm sure all of us were wondering, can anyone become a Tour de France champion? For this to happen, an individual must possess the right genetic and epigenetic variation to display natural talent at cycling, the right genetic and epigenetic variation to be able to respond to appropriate training. And last but not least, actually do the training with the right team, supporting them in the right way. This is not an either or situation. Champions of the Tour de France are both born and made. Genetic and epigenetic variations provide the potential in some individuals, but they must then unlock that potential with appropriate training and lifestyle. So basically, no, it's not possible for just anyone to become a winner of the Tour de France. It's shocking, I know. So to summarize this video, it was basically a long-winded lead up to telling me that I don't have what it takes and I'll never win the Tour de France. Thanks, I'm thoroughly depressed now. The percentage of people who have the genetic potential to even make it as a pro is extremely small, but setting that aside, whatever cycling endeavor you're pursuing, genetics will play a large role, but it's only half the battle. The fastest riders are not only naturally talented, but also possess heaps of drive and determination and train their asses off because of it, but also train in the right way without beating themselves into the ground. And if you wanna see just how far your genetics can take you in this sport, you have to do the same. Thanks for watching. If you enjoyed this video, be sure to give it a like, subscribe for more science-based cycling videos just like this one, and share this video with your cycling friends. I'll see you in the next one.


Here's Cliver, top of the box, still Cliver, got Kerkers to his left, finds Kerkers, cuts back, gets brought down, penalty to the Cherries! Tim Robinson did not hesitate to point to the spot there. Post-star atmosphere for Dominic Solanke, who looks cool, calm and collected. Here we go then, penalty to Bournemouth, Dominic Solanke runs up, shoots and scores! 20th goal of the season for Dominic Solanke, out comes the bow and arrow, he hits the bullseye again, Aston Villanille, Bournemouth won. This game really opening up at the end of the first half, Morgan Rogers into the Bournemouth box, onto his left foot, onto his right foot, into the roof! Here come Villanille on the break again, Watkins will win with Zabani, lays it off to Diabi, side-foot, it passed Netto and again, like they did at the end of the first half, Aston Villanille hit Bournemouth on the break. 77 gone, Villanille in possession inside the centre-circle, Wally Watkins has been hard work for Zabani all day, it's been a good battle between the two. Here's Watkins in behind the Bournemouth defence, round Netto, under Netto and into the back of the net! And Aston Villanille take control of the game, Nusset Diabi smashed it over the line, it may well have already been over the line. Either way, it's Aston Villanille 3, Bournemouth won.


Welcome back. Today we have a very special episode for you. We're going to get to meet the team behind Sportsman. We'll be talking about the driving factors and the thought process behind the brand. So stick around as we go behind the glass. We kind of started our company with a 23 center console in 2012 when we introduced that model. Companies that we competed with still had dated older tooling and designs. And we came out with what we felt was a fresh, more current, modern looking design. And then we just continued to build upon that as we go. Now our latest design language, we've done a lot of things just to improve upon that. Integrated detubing for our consoles, integrated windshields on all of our boats. Aquarium live wells, the list goes on and on. I've been in this industry for 37, 38 years. And I don't think there's ever been a time when the buyers' expectations were higher than they are now. Which we thrive upon that. We think it makes us better. Customers want quality, you know, best in class. They want all those things and we strive extremely hard to provide that for the customer. The vision for building the team here at Sportsman that goes back to the vision for the company is world class. You know, that's, again, I don't want to be cliche and it'll catch phrase world class. But you know, you've got to surround yourself with good people. The quality of your boats is only as good as the quality of the people you have. So people are everything in our business. That is the most important aspect we have. The team mentality, the culture, you know, the continuous improvement, we're all driving to one goal. And that's to build the best quality boat we can. I'd want to know whatever boat I was buying, whether it be a Sportsman, one of ours or not. Who is the team behind it? Who are the folks behind that product? And you know, what's their track record and all they're going to take care of me, you know, when I have a problem, if I have a problem. And that's, you know, really, I think I really pride myself on our team and how we're able to do that through our, of course, through supporting our dealers, is that we've got a world class customer service team. And you know, these boats are built by human beings. They're not machine made like the automotive industry and some other industries. We don't stamp them out with a press. We make them every day. You know, there's lots of labor involved, lots of love involved, but a lot of labor in these boats. And you know, you have, you have things from time to time. And what we're very proud about is, you know, when we have an issue, we take care of it and take care of our customers and stand behind our product. From an early start, Sportsman always had a driven vision. Well, obviously for our customers, we want to start out with a dealer network that is a world class dealer network, not only world class in terms of, you know, sales and creating the brand expansion that we look for, but also providing the total experience from before and after the sale.  In today's market, buyer trust is something that is very important for the success of the relationship between our brand and ultimately our customers. And this is something that we strive to earn every single day. When a customer sees the transparency that we offer through our website, through our pricing, through our dealer network, it just instills trust in them that they want to spend their hard earned dollars with us because they know they're getting a product that's going to last, that's going to, you know, have quality, but also they're doing business with somebody that's going to stand there for them when they have an issue down the road.  They're building that trust the entire way. And so I just think it helps give them the confidence and the trust they need to spend their hard earned dollars. As a customer, we felt like it was very important for our customers to be able to get to price very quickly, very easily without a lot of gimmicks. So we started internet pricing several years ago to provide that overall transparency. Our brand is positioned to be an incredible value proposition. In other words, for what you're going to get from sportsmen, from what we install in the boat standard to our dealer network to the customer, what you're going to get is an incredible value for dollar for dollar. This year we celebrate our 10th year and our organization has evolved just as much as our product. The evolution of the company has been fun to watch, but specifically two to three years ago was when we really throttled down on bringing, you know, upping our game from an engineering standpoint, specifically product development. First and foremost, I definitely think we are an engineered based company. That's one of the true enjoyments I have of working for a company like this. We're constantly trying to innovate. It's what drives the design and us be able to come to market quicker, usually the most, and more products quicker as well. And it goes back to the innovation we talked about earlier. Without it being an engineering-based company, you wouldn't have the focus that our ownership and management allow us to do to get to that, to get to the market quicker to make it to fruition and make it happen. So process improvement for sports and boats is, you know, it's a continuous thing.  You know, find the root cause of each problem, come up with a solution and then acting upon that. So every issue out in the, whether it's out on the floor or in the design process, we're always trying to troubleshoot and find how we make it better and bring a solution to the table. So as new products come out, customers give us feedback on what they want to see in the boat. And we as a group decide, yes, that should be in the boat. It's designed in. So it should appease the masses. And it's a turnkey ready boat and everything fits. When we asked what the key to success was over the last 10 years, the answer was consistent across the group. It's the team. You know, it really is. It's the people. And, you know, when I was in this business for a lot of years, I got out of it for a little while. That's the thing I miss the most was the people. First and foremost, our team here, our employees, I just love working with these people. We had just a great group of professionals and also the dealers and the customers, you know, enjoy interacting with our dealers and our customers by our boats. So that's probably number one. Second to that would be just the product development side of the business. You know, I love that. I love working with our engineering team and trying to bring a little value to that proposition on product development. And so I spent a lot of my time there. And so, yeah, that's probably the couple of things that I enjoy the most. As we come to a close on this season, I want to thank everyone involved in making this series possible and to you for your support, comments and feedback. From Somerville, South Carolina, my name is Victor and thank you for watching.


put it somewhere safe. But as the attackers also know, there's no place that is really safe. And our three speakers, Thomas, Dimitri and Josh, are now going to demonstrate in the next hour the art of completely breaking something apart. So please give a big round of applause for Thomas, Dimitri and Josh and have a lot of fun. So just to start, I'm curious how many people here actually own cryptocurrency? Raise your hand. Oh, and how many of you store it on a hardware wallet? So we're very sorry to everyone who has their hand up. So it's not just me, it's me, Josh and Thomas. So we're all hardware people. We do low-level hardware stuff and varying degrees. And we got into cryptocurrency, and so I can recommend to everyone sitting in this room if you're a security person, there's not a lot of people doing security in cryptocurrency as much as they're painful to hear. So, yeah, I mean, a lot of this is based on reverse engineering. We love cryptocurrency. I mean, for us, crypto also stands for cryptography, not cryptocurrency. But no offense to anyone with this talk. It's just something that it's a category that we looked at and show the results kind of speak for themselves. And again, this wouldn't be possible alone. So we have a lot of people to thank. I'm not going to go through all of them individually. Just be known that we're thankful to everyone on this slide. So, yeah, so we started this about six months ago. So we wanted to take a look at cryptocurrency because we own some cryptocurrency ourselves, and we saw that everyone's using cryptocurrency wallets. It's more and more the thing that you do. So we started a group chat as you do nowadays. And we have 15,000 messages now and 1,100 images. And I had my son in the meantime as well. So it's a really long time that we've been looking at this, et cetera. So what do we want to achieve though? Because people don't give the kinds of attacks so you can actually perform against cryptocurrency wallets on a credit. So first attack is supply chain attacks where you are able to manipulate the devices before they get to the end customer. Firmware vulnerabilities where you find a vulnerability in the firmware and somehow either infect or do something else. Firmware. There's the possibility where you attack side channels. And then there's the possibility to attack the chip. But first of all, what is a wallet? What is a wallet in this area? How do you do that? This is asymmetric cryptography. You have a private and public key. The public key gives you the address. That's right. And then you have the private key where you need to send coins. The private key has to be kept secret. The public key, you give it to everyone.  And that's why people thought about Bitcoin. They developed a standard called Bip32 or Bip44. And with that you can store more in one storage. That's what you do. You take a set of coins. That's the secret seat here. You add data. And with this initial value, you can save a number of keys. You can download this thing, but that's difficult. And that's why you transfer it into the standard Bip39. And here you can see how such a translation could work.  If you save it in different places, then you have to break it into two different places. What is a hardware burst now? We are afraid that some malware will run on the PC. And that's why you often use a hardware token. And on the right side you can see that. What you use here is that the computer sends the transaction to the device. This thing gives it to the user again. It takes the confirmation and then subscribes it. And then it's sent back to the computer. And the computer can then send it to the internet. That's how hardware wallets work. The first thing we looked at was the delivery chain. So the three things that we will leave with you. Stickers, stickers are for laptops, that's not for security. We will talk about stickers today, stickers. They are for the beautification of laptops. Supply chains are easy to carry out, but are scaling bad. And the last thing is that the sellers of the third model don't necessarily have to be your third model. Security stickers, I've seen them on many products. They seem to be very popular. I have a colleague who also likes these stickers. His stickers are the same that you can find on security. They have holograms and have serial numbers. They look nice and leave you with a good feeling back. The first device we looked at was the Tresor 1. It has two security levels on the packaging. There is once the hologram sticker. And then the box itself is closed with a sticker. That means you have to open the box. But with a hot air you can remove it all. On the left you can see the original and on the right you can see how I opened it and put everything back in. If you look closely, you can see a few traces that were opened. But it is very difficult to recognize. For the sellers it is a real problem. They have published a blog post saying that there is a problem that many people fake their devices. They found that there are fake devices. You have to look at the stickers to see that it is original. I bought it a year and a half ago. It is the same sticker as they claim that it is fake. On their wiki it is also very confusing because there are three different stickers. The stickers are very confusing and cause problems for the users. And even I was a little worried if I bought an original Tresor or not. That's why I bought a new one and opened the box with very refined technology. I opened the box with the foil and I was able to remove the sticker. I was able to remove it without any resistance. So stickers don't give you security. The box can be opened but there is also a sticker on the USB-C port. But you can easily remove it with the foil. A small tip, don't make it too hot. Otherwise the device will melt the case. So maybe the temperature will be lower. It is very confusing. Because this device is a very strange document. It says that there are no stickers in this box. There are a lot of Amazon reviews with a star that say that the sticker is missing. Attention, a hint for Geldbörsenhacker. I was very excited about it. Someone complained that the fingerprints are on the device and there was even a hair in the box. It doesn't work on stickers, so that's all I wanted to say. But as soon as you open it you have to open the case. There are now three devices, a Nano and a treasure. They all open very easily. I'm still not sure if it's really the original or fake. It's very easy to open. It's ultrashall welded, but the Nano opened very easily, even without tools. And then you open it as soon as it's opened. You take the microcontroller and remove it. And you just put a new one on it that you bought. As soon as you did that you can put a compromised bootloader on it. I didn't do that. I just put a debugger on it and I had a complete access to the chip. A few things broke, but it just happened. You just have to open it, build it apart, flash it and assemble it. Then there's this hardware implantation. There was briefly the story of Blumerg about this hardware implantation. I wanted to try that too. During the Blumberg story with which there were a few problems, I would like to talk about the Blumburgler. This is an implantation that is probably a supply chain attack, but can also cause a bad insider. So it has to be small. It has to fit into such a wallet. And of course it has to bridge security functions. I have a thousand pieces with me. That means I want to distribute a few here for our maker. So what did I do? I made a radio button. There is a button for the device. And all sellers just accept that the host is compromised. And as soon as you have a compromised host, you have to send it to the device. But then the host has to look at it. Is that okay? And then they have to say yes or no. So with this implantation I can press a yes button via radio waves. You don't need a host for that. I can just press a button. The radio waves come via an antenna. They go through a transistor and it pulls a button down. The bill of materials is very expensive. That's about $3. And it's so sad that it's so expensive. And why is it so big? It's an American 10 cents piece. Why is it so big? I optimized it by hand. You just have to put the antenna on it. There is a button. And I have a thousand pieces with me. This is a comparison. It looks like it's on the devices. But it also fits on breadboards. You could also try it at home. The last challenge is how to develop the antenna. And here is the first prototype. I experimented with a few antenna designs at home. But it really has to fit into the device. It's actually very simple. Because there is a lot of space to put in other switches. Then I built in an implant. I tried it out. And there is a test. Is your device really authentic? I didn't look closely. Maybe they'll see. It was just Linux. It just doesn't work under Linux. So I made a window. No problem. The device is authentic. So I could continue. It's a very rough receiver. But the engraver can simply use more power. This is my antenna in the cell. With a 50 watt transmitter. I had a range of 11 meters. And that was just the problem. Just the size of my cell. I'm very confident that you can solve bigger distances. Here is a demonstration of how it looks. Because the problem is... Where do you know that the device is? And there is a sentence that is shown. What you see is that the transaction screen is coming. And I'm going to turn off the device without touching it. That's the transaction. You have to click on it. And there is the radio with 430 MHz. And it goes on without pressing a button. And there it is. So if you have a beautiful implant, then the attacker can bridge this security module out of the distance. So a short summary. The stickers are for laptops, but not for security. The supply chain attacks are easy to do, but difficult to scale. If the seller says that the device is authentic, that can have different meanings. And now to the next part. Josh said something funny six months ago. If you put strange constants in your code tools, then they will appear on DevCon Slides.  And now I'm going to turn it off. And now there is an attack here. In this Ledger Nano. And this constant is actually found in the program code again. And that means something like an essence machine. So here you can see the Ledger Nano. It has two buttons. It has a USB connection and an OLED. If we take a look at each other, then you can see a few pieces of plastic, a display and the USB connection. There is an integrated architecture. There is the STM32. That's a general microcontroller. There is the STM31. That's the security element. And that's a chip with very high security. And then there is the program part for the STM32. And then there is the program part for the STM32. And then there is the program part for the STM32. The STM32. And it is now turned on. That's what other people suspected. We checked it out. And of course, Ledger knows that. So now let's take a look at the security model. Basically, you can see the two components here. All peripherals are attached to the STM32. But it doesn't have enough pins for it. It only has one pin connection. So the STM31 only has one pin. And everything that is done makes the STM32. It is like a proxy. The hardware driver for the buttons and so on. To feed the STM31. If I now use the computer to run a transaction, then I'll put it on the computer, send it through the USB to the STM32. He sends it to the STM31. He says, show me. So he asks the STM32 to show this question. And he gets the answer from the STM32. And then he writes it. And then this transaction goes back through the STM32 to the USB port. And then to the computer.  Or you can show something else on the screen when you actually write it down. And later, we know that the manufacturer knows that. And they have a few ideas what they want to do. Sometimes hardware access has problems, but we wanted to find a software box. So we looked at how the firmware upgrade works in this system. So the bootloader was, at the beginning, open as-off. And they had no over-testing of the firmware. You could use it from anywhere, and then we could run it. And then Salim published a blog post. And then they changed it. And now they've looked around and looked if you can find some bugs in the bootloader, if you can attack them. So if you try to upgrade it, then there are four commands that are accepted. So you can say where it should go. Then there is a loud command with which you can load it. The flash command actually writes that. And the boot command with which it is checked, the integrity is checked and then restarted. So the boot command writes the image. It is checked cryptographically. And if it is successful, then they write a constant to this address 0x 0800 3000. And this constant is Food Babe. That means you don't have to check the flash every time you try it, but you just do it once. If the boot is booted, then wait five milliseconds, then wait on the button. If the loader goes to the bootloader, otherwise he gets the constant, checks it over, and if there is a constant on the address, then you try it again. So we have chosen the target address, we have written the value, then we have sent it to the write command, we have turned it off again, but it didn't work. So they have now said, if you try to write there, then this area is simply not served. That's where the bootloader lives. If you try to write to this special address, then they have a special method to make sure that nothing happens. But the SCM32 has an interesting memory card. And you can see here that this memory area takes place at two places. The bootloader has therefore excluded certain memory areas, but it didn't make a wide listing, so it was only allowed to write at certain places. So that means we write it now to another address. We say, please write all the way to the beginning, then the next command, please write this data, then we write, and at once we can write custom firmware. So what do we do when we have a device, where the display is not large enough to run on it? So we have now turned it on, we have brought the bootloader mode. And now we can run it here. How do you protect yourself against it? The manufacturer, Ledger, knows that this is possible. This is an simplified view, and we didn't take everything apart. If the chip starts, then it sends all its firmware to the SCM31, so they measure both the time as well as the check-sum, and they measure the time so that no compression algorithm can run. So we boot a compromised and compromised firmware, we copy the chip into RAM, then we jump into RAM, we take the compromised firmware and send it to the original firmware. And then the boot is right. It took a while. You can't do these complicated things, because you don't have enough speakers. So we looked for a duplicated, double device, and we made a space together. And our decompressor needs a 10-assembly instruction. So we ran the script, with which we saved 300 and 258 bytes. So we only have an hour left. We could tell a lot of details about this packer. So we showed what you can do, if the firmware tries to be verified. We also published a video on YouTube, where you can see how to get around it. We didn't release it fully, because we didn't want to support it, but we published the Snake firmware. So if you bought Bitcoin for 20,000, and now you're a player, then you can play Snake. So we wrote an analyzer, which analyzed the communication between these two chips. And if you want to break into the ST31, then you can try it out. Ledger also has a second device, which is the Ledger Blue, probably included as Bluetooth. But they never switched it on. It's actually a standard Ledger with a color display. We call this part fantastic signals, and how you can find them, when you open it. The first thing we found in there, is the security element. This module, this track is very long, and has a very fast signal. So what is a long ladder with a fast, changing signal, that's an antenna. I got a software defined radio, so you can start your favorite signals. I got a telescope antenna, and I took the Ledger Blue. So on the blue is the radio spectrum, at 160 MHz. And when you put the pin in, you can see a light signal. So on the radio you can see that. But unfortunately the signal is very weak. But the antenna is included. They call it an USB cable, but if you connect the USB cable, then it's a very nice signal. I just got two meters away, but it probably went on. I just made it in my living room. Now we have to find out, what kind of signal this is. We look at the drawn amplitudes. There are tips, 11 tips, a pause, and then a few more. This is probably a protocol, which sends 11 bytes of data, then a pause, and then send it again. We have now checked all the connection points. And now we have found, we can write with what is sent to the display. The blue is the number 0, and orange is the number 7. And that confirms what we have found. To write the code, it's pretty boring. And we just wanted to add a few new bash words in our talk. So let's say, we hack the blockchain, the Internet of Things, with artificial intelligence in the cloud. Our thought was, that we simply record a few training signals, filter it, then train an artificial intelligence with it.  I don't want to tap any numbers for 10 hours. So we have an Arduino, and we took the Huawei pen, and we let it run for 2 hours.  And probably that's the X and Y coordinates, where you make the button black. And you can see that. We have now made a training set, a test set, we have pre-worked it, we put it into TensorFlow, a model for artificial intelligence. And then we put the test set in, we checked it, and this is our accuracy. The gray is the signal. It says here, how secure am I that the number 7 is. Very good. We have one result, that's bad. And in total we get about 90% accuracy. And to put it here in the cloud, we hosted it on Google. And that's here under the name Ledger AI. You can play around with it. And that brings us to the next part. So now we're going to talk about the silicone silicon. We're going to talk about the Treasure One. We want to talk quickly about the architecture, and which previous work took place about it. The Treasure One is a simple embedded system, and it has an OLED display, buttons, and a USB connector, which are all external. Intern has the brain, if you like, an F205 microcontroller, which controls the other functions, and the buttons. Last year we gave a talk at the DevCon about the breaking Bitcoin hardware wallets. Here we are mainly because of the glitching attacks. The conclusion of last year was that it was inconclusive if we could exploit an injection with a fault. But the board is in principle a clone, and we designed this board, and the schematics are all online. This is the chip whisperer setup that we use. We designed this board specifically to act with it. This is what it looks like when you use the chip whisperer GUI. Here we do application level code, and then I met Dimitri and Thomas. Luckily, we had Josh to do the talk last year. He was a bit upset with the company's vulnerabilities. We can start with the microcontroller, in this case the STM32, and it controls everything. This means compromising the whole system. There are some papers that cover these vulnerabilities, and there is the possibility to downgrade security. This is to check the value in the interface, and then correct it. They protected this type of attack. There is another publication that is not yet published. It will be released in January. It describes how you attack the STM32F1 and STM32F3, and here is the product matrix. Three pieces are already broken, and the Tracer Model T has the F4, F4. Let's see how it works. STM certainly saves an option, and it is saved on a Cortex M3 or M4 microcontroller, but it is still saved in Flash. It is the same save that is also used otherwise. If you get a new one, then the chip is in a state where it allows full attack. The ultimate security is ADP2, where you have no attack at all. If you have something different than A or CC, then you have the ADP1 mode, and you can access Flash. You can't access Flash, but you can also switch on single-step mode. But you can read RAM. The question is, how do we get from ADP2 to ADP1, and we want to access the device in the state of ADP1 where it can attack. That is the right way to approach it. We are in the third phase. We did this for three months. We tried out different things, and at some point we found something. But here we explain it in the simple way that it works for the first time. You can see that it is relatively slow, but it is only at the beginning, only at the first time so slow. You can see that the current is switched on and the IOP is on. And here you can see the delay. We switched off one pin, and now we have the time frame. How long does it take? That is not so interesting, because it is not really a trigger. Intern has a boot ROM, and that is not a Flash browser. That is really a ROM image chip. That is fixed in there, that cannot be changed, and that is executed for the first time. We want to attack that, because the rest is user space, and we did that last year. So first 1.4 milliseconds, nothing happened at all. So you can forget these first 1.4 milliseconds, and now you can connect a shunt resistance and see how much current you need. The blue signal is the current consumption. So the first thing that happens is that boot ROM is executed. And then here you have the relation and the option byte, where they are read, at least within the boot ROM. And then at the third time point is where the application is executed. Now we have these 1.8 milliseconds, which is pretty long, and have reduced it to 200 microseconds. And not only that, we also know that we are interested in... that we are interested in in the higher power consumption. And that is somewhere... that is 170 microseconds. That is the time when we have to click and that is also a fixed parameter to have to reproduce it at home. What do we need? The biggest, the biggest thing that came out in the last months is the Chinese current supply. You have a controllable current source that you can control. That is what we use. The second thing we have here to control the timing is an FPGA. I use FPGA for everything. With an FPGA it was the easiest thing to do because you constantly have the timing. Then we have a multiplexer and this multiplexer changes between two voltages, between earth, to completely separate voltages to control the microcontrollers. And finally there is a debugger, the J-Link, which is very easy to recommend, to do JTAC. JTAC is just a JTAC debugger and what happens is you let it run for a while and it looks like this. It is not really very suitable. But you can see that the voltage, the yellow signal, you can see that at different time points that break the voltage. And we have a Python script that shows if we have a JTAC approach. Now you tell us, Thomas, how do we get the seed into the ram? We let it run for about three months in Germany, Russia and Germany. It took us three months and at first we didn't believe it because we really tried everything. The only reason was that we got it running because we made a mistake, because we changed 17 microseconds with 170 microseconds. And that's why we found that the ram is very slow when booting on this JTAC. And as soon as we had it from ADP 2 to ADP 1, we could read the ram out but we couldn't read the flash where the seed is actually stuck. But how do we find that now? Our idea was to look at the upgrade procedure. The bootloader works so that you don't need a pin to update the firmware. So that you don't need a pin to update the firmware. That makes sense because if you have a bug, you have to get rid of it. On the other hand, if you have a valid firmware flash, then it holds the seed. And if you don't have an original flash, then it will delete the seed. And they do that really well. For firmware verification, they do it really well. We didn't find anything every day. So how does this upgrade work? How is the seed saved? When you look at the code, you can see that there is a call to beta-gub-metadata. And that's as if the data is saved. And that's actually just a memcopy of flash in the ram. So that was our step-by-step. We go to bootloader. We start the firmware upgrade and we hold it until the ram is deleted. Because after the upgrade its save is deleted. But we found out that it stays in the ram. When the firmware updates, then it asks you to check the checksum. And at this point the seed is still in the ram. And we can read it about our ADP2. It's easy as long as you have it. As soon as you have clicked it, you just open the CD and dump the image. Then you get an s-ram and you have a complete ram content. What do we do, Thomas? What kind of high-tech hacking tool do we use to get the seed out? Before we were successful, we had hours of maintenance. How do we get the seed? And then we had this very sophisticated tool and it only works on POSIX and POSIX-like systems and it's called strings. And it turned out that when you have a firmware dump, if you have a ram dump like us and you use strings on the dump, then you get some nice words. And when you remember the intro, that's what you see. It probably asks you what the 1-2-3-4 is. That's the pin for your device. That was a good day. Josh or one of Josh's employees took the whole chaos on our desk and packed it into this little device. It's basically a socket where you put a chip and then we can get the seed out. But all that including the word design, the FPGA code, the Veriloc source code. If you want, you could do that with your open source FPGA boards. That's just what we had. And we could work with it. You could just take it and do it yourself. We think that we could do it with the Arduino, because the glitch is just 16 micro-seconds 6 micro-seconds in the time. That's easy to do. Just repeatable with cheaper things than this now. But that's just a kind of automation without any cables and without looting. All that we did on GitHub. And one more thing before we stop. That's pretty much a lot of the treasure security. If you use a passphrase on your device, then it doesn't work. So if you have a passphrase on your treasure, then a good passphrase on your machine isn't infiltrated yet. Then it works. But a lot of people don't use it. It hurts us. We really didn't want to do anything bad. But that's all we're going to do online. Then you can follow us on Twitter on wallet.fail It's actually a domain. You can go to GitHub on Twitter. You can follow us on Twitter. On Twitter and we're going to publish it all. But on GitHub we didn't expect 100% success in what we wanted to do. And we did it. And it's the first time that we did it. We also have other debt burses. But we only have an hour. We also have a few things. We also have a thousand of these PCBs with us. We even have components for about 100 devices. We can do it. Thank you very much. Thank you for this amazing talk. I feel really inspired to break things apart in a very creative way. We have some time left for questions. If you have questions, please line up at the microphones. But first we're going to start with a question from the Internet. Thank you. I have about two questions. How hard did you laugh that the Android-based wallet unhaggable is. The second question, have you ever tried to hack bigger devices? So let's start with BitFly. So we're talking about some more secure money, and we didn't want to use a Kinesis phone. We laughed a lot, we ordered a few, but... Yeah, that was already reported extensively. CyberGibbons on Twitter gave a talk about a hardware diorama, and he did research together with a few other people. If you're interested, take a look at that. The second question is about AM controllers. All of the controllers were AM. All of them we looked at were ARM architecture. If you're interested, take a look at the Nintendo's glitching. It's also very interesting and there's a lot of inspiration in this regard. Microphone 4, please. Hello. Thank you for fixing the issues. If anyone is interested in hacking hardware wallets, we're very interested in working with the community. We have a full disclosure program. You have problems with the delivery chain. Let me say, Treasury is open source hardware and you can build your own from open source components. If you're paranoid, you shouldn't prepare for these attacks. Is there a solution to build your own wallet or to inspect it? First of all, thank you very much. What we should have done when we looked at the code. The reason why we wanted to glitch for three months was that we couldn't hack the company differently. That was really good work. Of course, the company is really interested in what you can look at. We're doing all the advice work here. What I can recommend is people who are interested in preventing something like this. Then it's an outstanding project to look at. You should really recommend Treasury for this. At the end of the day, it doesn't mean that the chip is safe against these attacks. That's why we looked at the chip level on a silicon scale. On a wallet like the Treasury. On the supply chain side, it's really difficult because the government has the problem. Like with Legend Nano, you can make cryptographic stickers. It didn't work. You can look at it with Röntgen, but that's really an open problem in hardware security. I have a... Please, make it short, because we're actually just taking questions. One sentence, please. There are some MCOs that have JTEC connectors for hardware security. They could be used to magnetize attacks. I agree, but they're not Cortex-M microprocessors with 100% security. It has so much to do with the microcontroller that's used in these devices. They're built after this specification of ARM. What ARM thinks is a good set on features. Everything Cortex-M has weak spots, which are more or less like the silicon weak spots that we found. It's just a matter of time that you have. Luckily, you have three months to make this glitch. But if you have so much time, then you can probably find it in other Cortex-M products. And one more question from the microphone, please. So, actually, from your work, did you analyze some of these devices? Did you find any way that the firmware was obfuscated? So, on the firmware, you can't really close the firmware, but we didn't have to look at it, because the SD31 didn't have any obfuscation that we saw. Of course, we also started the Quellcode on Ida Pro. The next person on microphone 4. Hello. Have you ever looked into the entropy generation of the master seats with both of these devices? And what do you think about it? We had already covered how the reservoir works. There is only one chip, and that is the SD32. We know that there is a well-known problem, when the additional generator didn't really initialize, but that's fixed. But that wasn't a problem for our attack. If you take care of how strong the coincidence is, then you can use a BIP32 to generate money outside of this hardware and use it outside of it. If you have a question, come to the microphone. One more question from the Internet. Thank you. Have you seen the Dinosauria Hip Hop Zero Wallet? No, we haven't. If you're interested in it, please do it. The Dinosauria Hip Hop Zero Wallet was a treasure clone. We looked at that last year to make the Bitcoin Wallet. We used a lot of the instructions to make the Breaking Bitcoin Wallet. But if you take a look at what wallets are actually being used, the ledger is very popular. The treasure is very popular. But since the treasure is open source, there are a lot of clones and forks. But not all use the last security patches, which are used for the treasure code base. That's something you can do. Which projects are really up to date and secure? The question is now the last one for today. Please come closer to the microphone. If you see that this is the first congress for many of us and many of us don't have much experience in hardware hacking. Yes, a lot even. Buy an Arduino. Learn what you're doing wrong. Learn how hardware works. Watch a lot of online videos.  I gave lectures. Watch lectures. Watch Live Overflow. That's a great YouTube channel about this topic. And don't hesitate if you have questions. Then get in touch with us. Here at InfoEdWalletFail or on Twitter, wherever you are. We are always happy. It can take a while, but we like to do it. There is a lot of free material, how electronics works. It's not only about security, but I also started with an Arduino 2. Thank you very much for the questions. Thank you for the interview. Thank you for listening. That was the translation of OS 10.000.


First I would like to thank you all for coming along to my session. My name's Mike King and I've got a bit of a cough. I'm depending on where you work and who you are, and what you do, I can be called a project manager, product manager, a delivery manager or something along those lines. Effectively what I try and do is make sure The end user gets a lovable product. I've been working in the web industries for, well, since about 1995, managing projects and teams since about the year 2000. So I've been doing it for a little while. Wanted to initially establish what an estimate is. There's a little definition for you. It's a rough calculation or judgment regarding the value, number, quantity, or extent of something. Now, what that something is that you're calculating or judging, it depends based on exactly what you're doing. But all in all, it feels a bit brittle. It feels like it's a guess. It feels like something that's not really based on too much science. And in my eyes, that's not great. Can I just do a quick stand-up poll, if everyone's happy standing up, that is, to see who uses estimates and how they're used. Could you all stand up or at least put your hands up? OK, that's good. If you're not happy standing or not able to, just put your hands up. Yeah, OK, good. So now, if everyone can leave their hands up, put your hand down if, sorry, that wasn't an instruction.  So somewhere between 0 and 50% of the stuff that you complete in your teams or your daily work. Not many hands went down there, OK. OK, so if you have 10 things that you're doing in a day, do you have to estimate all of those things to figure out what you're going to do? Do you estimate none of them? Do you estimate some of them? So I'm asking if you estimate up to five of them out of those 10, then you put your hand down. If you estimate, so less than, between 0 and 50, yeah.  OK, so what I want to try and figure out is everybody uses estimates, but we need to find out why they don't always work. And in my eyes, they definitely don't work. So they're broken. I'm not the only person who thinks that. Another quote, or a quote for you, estimating tasks will slow you down, don't do it. And that's from someone who people might recognise called Jeff Sutherland. He's the co-creator of Scrum. And if he thinks that estimates are kind of broken and they're not really good for you, then I'm going to listen as well. So the next part of this session will take into account as all good clickbait articles should, a top three or a top five, but I couldn't fit five into the time we've got. So we go with the top three. We go with the top three issues for estimation. They're harmful and personal. And I apologise immediately because I said I was going to have a top three and the first one's got two points. But we'll keep going. Estimates are harmful because they build a bridge back into the non-agile development world. So we know that in an agile situation, we need to make sure that we're working to a fixed budget and a fixed time frame and we flex our scope. Estimating what we can get done in a certain amount of time takes us back to the world prior to agile or prior to projects that we're using in agile, where we're estimating everything. We're saying what will be done in that time and for that budget. That's why they're harmful and they're personal because in my experience, a lot of the time, people are given estimates as a fate to complete as to how long it will take them to do a piece of work. They didn't necessarily estimate how long it would take. And even if they did, they didn't estimate with the right information. I'm sure everyone's been in this situation where they've got, let's say, it's our mythical 10 cards, our 10 features that have gone into a sprint or being planned for a sprint. And you've estimated each of them and you've given them each a single figure to say this is how long it will take and then you add all those figures together and you say this is how long this whole sprint will take or how many things we can get done in this sprint. That's great for estimation. It's really good. But if you look at a single figure estimate per card, you find that it gives you a binary situation. So if you have a feature and you say that there is one point in time up to where it's successful to be completed, if it's a one-day feature and you say, yeah, okay, it's going to take us one day to do this, if you complete it in anything more than one day, it's a failure. If you complete it prior to that, it's successful. It's a binary outcome. It feels very much like flipping a coin. So you have a 50-50 chance whether or not your estimate is going to be achievable. And this issue is compounded when you add all of those together. So your 50-50 chance for flipping a coin completing your estimated item on time is compounded by the number of times that you add those chances together.  I'm not sure if anyone is mathematically brained enough to figure the odds of that one out, but it's just over 1,000 to one. Does that feel like something that you want to stand by when you're completing a project? You say, yep, we've got a 1,000 to one odds that we will complete this on time? No. In fact, if you said to the person you were giving these numbers to, you give them to you right now, that there's a 50-50 chance that you might not meet the estimate, would they be happy? And estimates, most importantly for me in this one and it's probably the simplest to illustrate, estimates are incomplete. They don't include such things as context switching. Studies indicate that every time we change context from one subject matter to another, let's say for example changing from one feature or working on one card to working on a different one, we lose approximately 25 minutes of quality working time. If you're somebody working in support, and I can see a few out in the audience, you may be context switching three or four times a day. Think of the amount of time that you're losing there and estimates don't include these switches. So if you fill up your sprint, if you fill up your iteration completely with cards or with features, you won't take into account the fact that you're losing time every time you context switch. They don't include waiting time. Okay, I'm gonna work on this card but the person who's working on it prior to me has run over, so I'm waiting. That's lost time, it's dead time, it's not included in the estimates. Debugging time. Do your estimates include some time for debugging, a lot of time for debugging? Do you pad your estimate? If you're padding your estimate, it's no longer an estimate. This didn't understand the problem problems. When you estimated the issue, you were told it one way or you read it one way. When you came to fix the issue or create the new product, you read it a different way. So you didn't understand the problem the first time you looked at it. Holidays. Now holidays are kind of okay in a way because you can see when somebody's got leave booked but there are often times when people need to take emergency leave. That can't be included in estimates and the time that's available in your team. I don't know many teams who don't suffer from this problem who have urgent work that pops up. So they're working away, they have a sprint, all of a sudden a site's down, an app's down, something's gone wrong. They have to go and work on it. That time is lost, it's not included in your estimates. Broken computers, this happens very often. It could be a server, it could be someone's laptop, it could be your development environment, it could be anything, it could be a third party API. If it's broken, it's not included in the estimate. You get the idea, I think, really, technical debt. Something that we can't really judge for because we don't know every line of code and exactly what we're going to want to do with it. Cuing, it's an interesting one that the more items you have waiting to complete, the longer it takes to complete the item you're doing. There's a whole nother session about queuing theory, but the fewer things that you're being asked to do mean that you take less time because of the mental queuing and the mental capacity that you have to store the information about what you have to do. Building a release. I know some people, when they're looking at iterations and looking at sprints, do you have a particular card for building a release? Maybe that's one release per sprint. What if you want to do five or six? What if you were to do 10 a day in continuous integration? You should have cheap releases being built, but is that factored into your estimates? What if one goes wrong? Refacturing along the same lines as technical debt. Solutionaring is one of my favourites. So it's possible that you didn't understand the problem, so now you're going to have to sit down with the team and solution something. You've got to now dig up an idea from nowhere to solve this problem still within a finite amount of time. Sickness is the obvious sister of holidays, but it is completely unpredictable. And there are more, but this is my list. So I say don't estimate, forecast. Let's not give single figures. Let's start talking about ranges of possibilities. If you come to the boff tomorrow, if anyone's interested, we can see that graph working and create your own version of that. So what is a forecast? We'll do the same treatment to this that we did to the word estimate or an estimate the first time round. Already we're seeing the words calculation and prediction based on analysis. It feels more scientific to me, at least. It feels like something that you might rely on. So let's work through our list, our clickbait article, top three, and compare estimates to forecasting. Estimates we saw were harmful and personal. Well, forecasting is agile. Forecasting, as we mentioned or as I mentioned earlier, excludes the fact that you're estimating exactly what needs to be done and when it's going to be done and how long it's going to take. What we're using is evidence based on the past experiences or recent experiences of the team to suggest what might happen. So you can start giving a range to say, yeah, we're sure we can get this amount of work done, but if we change scope or if we change the level of value that we're delivering, we might be able to get more done. And it's evidence based rather than being personal because we're using recent evidence from the team. Estimates for binary and compound, whereas forecasting is based on a probability. It's not a promise. We don't give people a single figure and say, here we go, that's our success or failure point. That's our winning line. We might tell them that there's an 85% chance of an outcome, a bit like a weather forecast. So you could say there's a 23% chance of rain. You don't expect every time for there to be rain, you expect there to be a 23% chance of rain. So in our case, we're saying an 85% chance of successfully completing the cards we have in our sprint. The other good thing about a forecast in this instance is that it's updated every day. So it's updated based on the evidence that we've had over the few days of the sprint as well as the previous days, whereas an estimate wouldn't be updated because it would be too expensive to do so. And I won't go through the list again, but whereas an estimate excluded all of the items on that list previously, forecasting can't help but include them, or at least includes the recent patterns of them. You're still going to fall foul of a stomach bug that brings down your whole team. You're never going to get away from that, and that's not predictable at all, but at least you'll be able to get closer to reality. Whenever I start talking to people about this, one of the things that they say is, well, this sounds perfect. It sounds really, really great, but it won't work for us because we have different size cards. We have big tasks coming through our queue. We have small tasks coming through our queue. So how can you predict these things when we can't even predict the size of the work? And my response normally is that we have to go back to one of the core tenets of Agile, and pretty much one of the first things I ever learnt about Agile, about sizing cards and effectively levelling the flow of the incoming work. It's a lean tenet hijunker, as you can see there. If we make sure that all of the, or as many of the cards as possible are of a similar size, it becomes much more easy to predict and to see the flow happening. So if we level the flow of the work coming in, it'll be more predictable going through the system as well as forecastable. Whenever I go to a session, I love to have a take home, something that I can at least get started with if not used straight away. And I wanted to give everybody here something like that. Who uses Fibonacci numbers in their estimates? Lots of hands, great, good stuff. Fibonacci numbers have built-in uncertainty. So the larger the Fibonacci number, oh, here we go, look, we can see the numbers here, there are a few numbers, the larger the number, the more uncertain you are because the larger the gap between the numbers that you're able to use. So for example, the gaps between those numbers increase. So what you can start doing instead of telling people that, okay, the estimate will take eight days or eight units. I don't know if people use story points or hours or days or whatever, it really doesn't matter. If you estimate eight, you could say to them, but if we'd make some changes, we could do it in five. So you give them a range of possibilities. You can say it could be five between five and eight units, days, hours, weeks, whatever. So that's a simple way to get started with forecasting. If you want a more in-depth way of getting started with forecasting, we've got a boff tomorrow. I've got the details on that in a minute. So tomorrow, 10.45 in gallery 13-14, there are a bunch of open source tools that allow you to start forecasting really, really easily and very quickly. So any previous evidence and you'll be able to get going straight away. Feedback is really important to all the speakers so if you would be so kind as to head to that bitly link, it will take you straight to the session page on Drupal Events and if you could leave feedback, that would be wonderful. And also please attend the Friday Sprints. They're very important to keeping us where we are. There's a bit of a reading list here. These are the things, the books that I've gleaned a lot of this information from. The lean side of things, obviously this is lean, give you a lot more information around that efficiency paradox, how centering and focusing on the flow of work going through your business or your chain is really important and not to focus on people being 100% utilised all the time. Okay, so I should have another slide with questions, but that's it. So if you have any questions, please feel free to step up to the microphone and please make sure you use the microphone for the recording. I must have given you all the information you need. So if you have any more questions or if you want to talk about it in more detail because it's a bit of a different way to look at things then the boff will be the place to do it, but we have one question. Yeah, just a little funny story. I think Dave, before you said that, I went with a taxi and I asked him how long would it take and he said 40 minutes unless there's a traffic jam. I guess that would be a forecast and not an estimate. Yes, so he's given you a forecast range, absolutely. Yeah, that was good. I was happy about that because if he would have missed like the 40 minutes, it would have been more than he would have had the excuse already or he built in the estimate. That's it. So if you look at something like Google Maps, if you try and get a route for a, or if you try and get a timing for a busy route, it might give you between one and four hours because the evidence is that people have taken that long. Yeah. Thank you. It's a really, really good talk. We also struggle with estimates. I really like the idea of the range. Sounds a really good concept. I was just wondering if you had any thoughts or examples on how that's worked with clients, whether they're receptive to that or you give them a range low, medium to high and let's say it comes back at the top end, how they react to that. I suppose it comes back to again that idea of talking to the client every day and updating the forecast all the time. So if you've got evidence from the day previously, you plug it into your forecast generator and you keep that information updated and you keep showing it to the client. So there's no surprises. You'll never get to the end of your sprint and go, well, hang on, we're at the high end because they'll have known that from the day or the second day of the sprint that they'll be able to see how progress is going. It's a bit like velocity in some ways, but it's forecast driven rather than just the immediate evidence. Okay. Both term estimate and the other one? Forecast, yeah. They still have this idea that you have a task and this task takes some time or some cost and this is in the end the cost of the project is the cost of the tasks and then add up. But sometimes there's a cost that is not specific to a task. The refactoring sometimes doesn't belong to a specific task. You could do it in one task or you could do it in another task. So it's like if you sell ice cream and someone could ask you, how much does it cost you to make this one ice cream?  Yeah, I think these items are the hidden costs. So you would have to make a percentage on top of each forecast? No, no, absolutely not because these hidden costs are included in your forecast. You're not looking and saying how long did it take me to do the specific card or the work on the card itself. You're saying this one item of work took an amount of time to complete and that includes the fact that you had to build a release and someone was off sick and we had to debug some other bits and pieces. So that's packaged into your forecast. Okay, there's really nothing to do with a task. If you have a short distance to go with a car but you also need to refuel the car which maybe takes a lot more time than just the short distance and it's not really related to this one trip but it's still part of the build or the cost. Yeah, so if we get away from the idea of cards and features then we're actually talking about delivering value. So don't worry about the card, worry about the value. How long did it take to deliver this value? Yeah? Are you sure? I'm not a native English speaker, so differentiating between estimates and forecasting, I don't really see it. All the estimates, all the points you're making there, I would put that into estimates but the thing I'm missing from what you're talking about here is who and what are we doing it for? Is it for before we do the project to sort of size the team we need? Is it for the customer ahead of time so they know roughly? Like have an estimate of how much money to spend on this project? Is it during sprints? And I don't think we can forecast the project ahead of time so we do need estimates. And if I say the project or a customer comes with a project, then I mean sickness and holidays and so on, I mean there are certain things that I can factor in. I think it becomes more conceptual so it takes it away from looking at the particular features of a project. Sorry. And it effectively says, instead of worrying about the detail, instead of worrying about every single item and estimating it, you say on a whole, how long does it take us to do projects? Projects of all sizes, but most businesses work on projects of a similar size because that's where their market is. If they're a small outfit, maybe they're working on smaller projects. Yeah, generally. Yeah, so this is the assumption that we're saying, smaller teams, smaller projects, or if not, it's a longer project. But you're estimating, sorry. We've forecast, yeah, I know you've caught me, sorry. We're forecasting based on very little knowledge, but you can forecast based on prior experiences. So without seeing what the project is, you can still guess how long it will take. You can say with certainty, with a 50%, 70%, 85% certainty, this project will be finished in three, six, nine months. I don't know what the scales are, but just with somebody coming to you, you can say a project will be done in nine months. That's your first forecast. But without calling it, thinking about estimates and forecasting, I think like a seasoned senior project manager would probably say, oh, we've done this a million times. It'll take you six months. I know exactly how this goes. And you land somewhere around like five months and two weeks and six months and two weeks. But for maybe an unexperienced project manager, it's super hard. I can only second what you're saying. Let's all go to the buff and learn about forecasting, especially the ones who are struggling with estimates. Thank you. OK, if there are no further questions, then thank you very much and hopefully see you at the buff tomorrow.


Okay, okay, all right. Okay. Okay. Thanks. Thanks. All right Hi guys, I'm Dr. Ahmed Ergin.  You may have also heard that the moon is made of cheese Don't believe everything you hear The truth is no vegetables completely off the table Some of them are better than others. The best way to use are low in glycemic index high in fiber and Not smarter than wrench dressing Let's talk about glycemic index. It basically measures how quickly your body absorbs glucose from a particular food Like your golf score or electric bill lower number is better Seriously, just turn the lights off and you leave the house. How hard is that? What I'm trying to say is that while you should stay away from Starchy vegetables such as potatoes or corn. There are plenty of vegetables with a low glycemic index Here's my countdown of the top 10 vegetables Number 10 brussels sprouts glycemic index of 32 Unfortunately brussels sprouts get a bad rep because too many people think that they're just gross fun sized cabbages I've got news for you. You're supposed to roast them Of course, they're gonna taste bad if they eat them wrong The only reason I don't have them higher on the list is because they can give you gas Which your family may not appreciate Number nine green beans glycemic index of 32 Green beans only have about four grams of net carbs per cup Which makes it a great snack alternative to potato chips and pretzels Historians say that People have been eating these for over 7 000 years. Wow, they must have been chewing really slowly Number eight spinach glycemic index of 15 No, it won't make your biceps well like footballs But it will make your bones stronger and support your immune system The best thing about spinach is how easy it is to use in your diet. You can blend it into smoothies Sauté it or use it in salads. Just be sure To check your teeth before you go on a date. Number seven bell pepper Glycemic index of 15 like green beans. This is a great snacking alternative Unlike green beans.  Seriously I feel like I'm carving a miniature pumpkin every time I'm cutting bell pepper And why are the yellow and red ones are more expensive than the green ones? Number six zucchini glycemic index of 15. This veggie is fun to eat and even more fun to say zucchini Zucchini, what was I saying? Oh, right try zucchini. It's great in a stir fry Number five eggplant glycemic index of 15. This is one of my favorite vegetables The spider's inexplicable name like what what egg in the world is purple and you better believe That if something catches out of an egg that size, I'm running as fast as I freaking can in the other direction Number four broccoli glycemic index of four Research indicates that gently steaming your broccoli maximizes the health benefits while you're at it Your button down can probably use a gentle steaming as well I mean, you can also eat the broccoli raw if you're a total badass who needs to punish your taste buds Number three cauliflower glycemic index of 10 Or as or as I like to call it albino broccoli Cauliflower is incredibly versatile. If you're not keen to put it on your vegetable platter You can mash it and use as a substitute for rice You can even make pizza with a gluten free cauliflower crust And if you do you will be able to hear the faint sound of thousand italian chefs weeping number two mushrooms Yes, mushroom is technically a fungus not a vegetable. This is my list so deal with it Mushrooms are great in stir fries and soups or you can just marinate them and toss them on the grill. Number one Asparagus glycemic index of 15 a study published in a British journal of nutrition Indicate that eating asparagus can help control type 2 diabetes turns out asparagus can actually increase the insulin production in the body That's why it earned the number one spot on my list Despite having a higher glycemic index in this more uncomfortable phallic shape Than the vegetables before vegetables are important part on Everybody's diet and it should be for every diabetic.  Thanks for watching everyone I hope you hit that subscribe button for more great content Even if I made you eat a vegetable that you don't like In the next video, we are going to talk about the Worst vegetables for diabetes. So stay tuned