Hello, and welcome to the panel on interoperability, interoperability, here, there, and everywhere, in several pieces of regulation and several technical applications. So I am Vittorio Bertola, I'm the head of policy for Open Exchange, which is a German open source software and service company, mostly in the email and DNS space. And before introducing all the other panelists, I will be giving you an explanation basically of why interoperability has become so important. Because if you were here in Brussels, I mean, you will have noticed that all of a sudden in the last year or two, interoperability has become sort of a buzzword, a magic word, which is coming up in several different pieces of regulation as the potential solution for everything. And I mean, for someone like me, I mean, I have a great suit, because now I am a policy person, but 25 years ago I was the kind of young person writing code up to the 3 AM in the room. And so as a developer, for me, interoperability was something that was completely natural. So the first thing that we should say is that interoperability is not a new concept. Actually, it is an attempt to get back to the origins of the internet. So the intent was originally meant to be interoperable, and its architecture was designed in interoperable forms. And all the services, let's say the early services that were conceived in the 80s and 90s, like email, DNS, or the web, were built since the beginning as interoperable services, in which you could just get the implementation of the protocols into open protocols from any supplier. And you could have clients and servers by many different providers and software makers. You could write your own. And you can get an email address from anyone, any provider, or run your own, and still be able to communicate with everybody else. It's the new services that have been coming up in the last 20 years that are not interoperable. But they are the exception, not the norm. So what we should do as a technical community is try to push back the original principle. And I think this is really a fundamental moment in which we have to do. Because what happened in the last 20 years is that we allowed, through possibly the lack of sufficient regulation, we allowed the internet to be closed down. And the services to be closed down. And we allowed the internet to turn into a set of world gardens owned by very few, very big companies. And we are at a point in time. And this is at risk of getting worse. Because as we have seen, now we are entering the AI age. And now there are, again, very few companies, mostly the same, that are building these machines that are learning from. Some actually say it's stealing from. There's an interesting debate on compensation of learning services for AI's. But they are learning from the knowledge, the code, the art of the entire humanity. And then they are becoming actually better at doing this. And possibly creating new forms which surpass the ones that were created by the humans and are even better and are making them redundant in a way. And they are closing them down. I mean, at least depending on the rules that we will have, there is the risk that the knowledge, the code, the art of will be progressively closed down. So this is why we have to restate that interoperability openness are fundamental principles. Not just nice to have for competition and in general for the technology. But they are fundamental to preserve the openness and democracy in our society. So with this very low stake that I wanted to set, well, I will let the panelists introduce themselves so they can, as soon as they speak. We structured this panel into sub-panels on specific implementation cases of interoperability. And we are going to start from messaging, especially instant messaging. You know that the digital market sec, which was approved last year, introduces mandatory interoperability close for actually any number independent interpersonal communication service, which means instant messaging mostly, but also email. So we have Andine, and I will let her introduce herself. That will introduce the topic, explain what we are talking about, and then I will let the other panelists also comment. So please go ahead. Thank you, Victoria. Hello, everyone. My name is Amandine Loupap. I'm CEO of Elements and co-founder of Element and Matrix, which is an open source project, which has been mentioned a few times on this stage already today. The idea of Matrix is to provide an interoperable secure communication layer. So basically break all these silos, world gardens, of chat, voice of RIP video that exists today so that, as a user, I can choose where I want to host my data, and I can choose which application I use to communicate without having to just trust blindly one provider. So as Victoria said, the Digital Markets Act, which has been coming out, was voted at the end of last year, is very interesting in terms of actually trying to break these big silos and making sure that the European markets are more open to help both the users and the companies. So the Digital Markets Act is actually covering several angles and their items about self-preferencing, bundling, all sorts of things. The one where we have been interested in mostly with our Matrix hat on has been the interoperability around messaging. The idea is to designate these big companies, which go beyond the threshold of revenue or market capitalization and play a role of gatekeeper as on the European market, which means that anyone wanting to communicate would have to go through these. So they haven't been designated yet, but it's very possible that people like WhatsApp, for example, are designated as a gatekeeper or meta, or iMessage, for example, and these sort of people. So the idea here is to the regulation is forcing these gatekeepers to open up their communication APIs to other third-party players who may want to interoperate with them, and they have to do so whilst preserving the end to an encryption if they are end to an encrypted, because there are a whole bunch of people out there who are not end to an encrypted. So that makes it a bit easier. It's from a user perspective, it's basically going back to what I was talking about earlier. You know, as Victor, you say, for email, you choose where you register your email account. Do I want it on Gmail? Do I have to use my work one? Can I use Proton? I can choose where it is, but for chat, I have no choice. And once I created my email address, I can access my email from the email client I want. It may be Outlook, it may be the email up on my iPhone, it may be straight from my web browser. I still access my emails, it's the same content. Why, for chat, do I have to change the user interface to change the content? It's so weird that it doesn't exist. So the DMA is actually trying to fix that so that smaller companies can also create a new market to open up the opportunities for smaller companies. Someone was talking earlier on stage about how the markets in Europe is full of contenders. And I'm sorry I cannot remember who it was, but it's true. Basically, the big gatekeepers are usually American companies. And in Europe, we're trying to actually provide innovative, different propositions that may be competitive with them. But we cannot, because they have the big networks and we cannot break into it. So from a business perspective, what the DMA is bringing is small companies in Europe may be able to interpret with existing networks and access the users of the existing networks to provide a different value add. Think about a small company wanting to provide a specialized messaging app for elderlies, for example. Then today they cannot, because it means that the rest of the family would have to install the same app. Why they could have interoperability between the app from my grandmother and WhatsApp, and this sort of things. It's basically lowering the barrier to entry for the smaller contenders in Europe. So the gatekeepers have obviously been pushing hard against this, saying firstly that it was technically impossible.  This is impossible. Technically, I cannot see how it can work. So the thing is, we had been with Matrix doing it for almost nine years now. And we were able to say, guys, this exists. There is an 80 million user network out there which is doing interoperable and 20 encrypted communication. So now basically there is a lot of work to be done to prove this and help people implement this in the right way. There is another pushback around data privacy. We're saying that if people are using WhatsApp, then they are sure that the data is staying in WhatsApp. Yes, the thing is they have no choice but give them the data with WhatsApp. At least with the interoperability, the key thing is being clear that the data is actually going out of WhatsApp. If I want to talk to my grandmother using this specialized application, it may be more important for me to be able to have this interoperability. And if the data is going somewhere else and I'm aware of it, it's a conscious choice. It's all about choice. And that's why it's so important to be able to implement this properly. And it's a great step forward. Yeah, OK. Thank you. And Jurgita, do you have anything to add? I'd like to see the perspective of an email company.  I'm really excited by this opportunity, presented by the Digital Markets Act. And I'm really excited to see one day also as a user a possibility to be able to message from my one messaging app that I prefer to other messaging apps. I think it would be really great. Because as I mentioned, it's quite burdensome for a user to have five, six, seven different messaging apps to be able to reach your friends and family. And sometimes you want to quit one messaging app because, for example, the privacy standards are not the standards that you would like to have. But you won't because all your family is there, all your friends are there. And I really see no reason why it should not be possible to be able to access those people in other messaging platforms. They did this for telecoms many decades ago. Everybody was saying the same. It's not possible. We should all be staying with different telecom providers. And I don't know. Ideally, I have different phones for different telecom providers and things like this. The same happened in the energy sector. Now, a consumer can choose different energy providers. So can you imagine? It's possible in the energy sector to choose your electricity provider, your gas provider. And how come we were not able to connect the messaging apps and things like this? So I think this is really exciting times. And it will greatly benefit users. And yeah, we also heard a lot of different arguments regarding end-to-end encryption. Obviously, we're an email service, so we are interoperable. And things can be possible in the end-to-end encrypted environment. And this cannot be an argument not to provide consumers with the right to choose the use services that they want to. Thank you. Gabriele, introduce yourself. Sure. Hi, I'm Gabriele Colombro. First of all, thank you for having me here. I'm the general manager of Linux Foundation Europe. We recently launched in September last year. But I'm here with my second hat. I'm the executive director of FINOS, the Fintech Open Source Foundation, talking about an industry that's been pretty locked in for the last decades or pretty much ever. And so I actually approach regulation from a very pragmatic standpoint. We've wanted a few vertical foundations and definitely wanted a few in regulated industries. Yes, banks do open source. Seems pretty strange to hear. But when I think about DMA, I have to think about what happened with PSD2. And of course, as a very corporate, in some ways, of course, we have a lot of individual contributors. But the large contributors and members of our foundation are banks. And so for me, I always have to lead with why you want to do open source, why there is business value in what you're doing. And that is for each of the constituents, where is the banks, asset managers, regulators themselves, and of course individuals, individual users. And when PSD2 was introduced in 2018, of course, the initial reaction of regulated industries is always one of irritation of, oh, this is impossible. Or this is going to massively add costs to our bottom lines. And true, they are regulated industries. They have to have the burden of regulation. But if I look back, and I kind of want to get the numbers right, that was a regulation that has indeed had sort of three major, I think, positive effects. One, it opened up really the fintech sector. There would not have been the sort of massive explosion of fintech that we've seen in the last few years, especially in Europe, which brings me to the second point. Actually, from 2018 to 2019, when the regulation was introduced, European fintech has grown faster than American fintech, almost like 24% versus 18%. Again, bringing forward the role of Europe in sort of the global stage. And then number three, a couple of years later, banks themselves started realizing that there is an actual market to be had here in providing access to APIs. And again, for those who are not familiar with PSD2, it's really about providing access to customer and account, sorry, payments and account information to sort of the rest of the ecosystem. And it really created an open ecosystem. Now, when I think about the DMA kind of going to the question, one problem with PSD2 is that it really applied only to banks, primarily, to financial institutions. DMA has the potential to fix that, because as you were saying, it applies to gatekeepers. Of course, having been gatekeepers of the financial system forever, but it does apply to big tech. It does apply to effectively companies that under PSD2 had the potential to benefit even more than the small and medium businesses that were created in the fintech wave, because ultimately they could get access to the data, but they were under no obligation to give the data back. And so that's what I'm really looking forward to the DMA. I'm really looking forward, especially to the vertical interoperability and the data portability requirements that it comes with. If I may. It's completely bringing up the level of service and value that one can bring to the user, because if you're a gatekeeper and you have a complete monopoly on something, then, of course, you don't need to innovate. Who cares? What's here? Anyone can come, and that's also linking to the open-door discussion earlier, anyone can come and innovate. At least you're not starting from scratch. Otherwise, if you created a new messaging app, you would have to first reinvent the wheel, and no messaging is not easy. That's why we have so many silos. You start thinking it's easy, but it's really hard, especially if you want to add into an encryption to it. Then you have to differentiate, but you have so little users that it's tough to actually bring up. So for the gatekeepers, it is an opportunity to actually show the value they are actually bringing beyond just being a network. And I will add that the interoperability is also good for sustainability, which is a hot topic now, because in the end, just imagine how many resources bandwidth battery you are consuming by having 10 messaging apps running at the same time on your device. This could all be saved, and maybe you could do a little also for the planet. So I think that there's a lot to be gained. And the DMA, the instant messaging part of the DMA was maybe the most visible one, but there are other clauses which are related to, for example, opening up operating systems on mobiles and preventing self-preferencing and defaults and allowing users to actually have a choice. And there's an internal probability clause for payment systems and for identity. So maybe we should now switch to that, because identity is actually one key theme, especially logging. We have this big EI dusting, which is good for public services in Europe, and it's growing. Now there's a revision going on. But it's traditionally a very complex thing, and they're making it even more complex. So in some countries, they don't even have the mobile authentication we have in Italy, like speed. They use EID cards with chips and smart card readers, which are very secure, but nobody wants to use them because it's just too complex. And so people use Google and Facebook and Apple logins all over the web. And this means that, again, the gatekeeper control all the credentials, the identification of people, and potentially get to know, I mean, every place I go on the web and every place, every service I log into. So we should be opening up this as well. And this is technically possible, again. So I want to get back to Yurgita and discuss this. If you have any considerations or ideas on how we can open up identity and identification systems through interoperability. Yeah, definitely. Thank you, Victoria. So I'll quickly present myself. My name is Yurgita Mesovicita. I'm the head of public policy and government affairs at Proton. Proton is a privacy communications company. We provide now an entire product suite of different private tools. And our goal is to enable people to have an ecosystem of privacy-focused tools that would allow them to protect their data and basically open up possibilities to a more private and fair internet in the future. So identity and identity systems is a very important question. And DMA will, I think, introduce quite a big improvement in this area, opening up this particular systems of the gatekeepers. Perhaps the best way to start is to provide an example of how gatekeepers use identity systems to essentially keep the whole ecosystems closed off for a competition. And a good example of that is the Android case. So currently, if one buys an Android device, the only way to actually access a device and to set it up is to get a Google account. To get a Google account, you actually need a Gmail address. Well, technically, it is possible to get a Google account without a Gmail address. It is so complicated that no average user is able to do that. So in fact, I tried it myself and spent a good hour on that. And I didn't manage. I really didn't find a way. So it's really open to only very savvy people, these type of things.  And then here you go. Then you want to start downloading your apps. But the only way pretty much to download your apps is to access the Play Store. If you want to access the Play Store, you have to have a Gmail account. Otherwise, you will not be able to access it. Of course, some people would say, well, you can have some other Play Store or the App Store on the Android. Yes, I also tried that. But then you can't get most of the apps that you need. So essentially, when you buy your Android phone, you really are forced in a situation where Google bundles together its operating system, its email, and its App Store. And so everything is bundled in such a complicated way that an average consumer really has no choice than just to use the Gmail account, the Google account, and to basically be tracked across the device, not just across the device, but also on the web. I can give you quite an interesting example that for a user to be able to use Proton Mail on the Android, the user has to become, first, a Gmail user. And then going through all those additional steps, be able to download Proton Mail from the Play Store, which is quite crazy when you think about it. And it should not be like this. Another thing that is worth mentioning is that once you get the Google account, they have all those things like sign in with Google and things like this. And then it's often tied with the browsers. And so essentially what happens is that you, as a user, you're being tracked not just on your device, but across all over internet. So people who don't want that or who want to use more privacy alternatives, currently they don't have this opportunity. The good thing with the DMA is that there is a provision that will allow service users actually to have a choice, which means that gatekeepers will not be allowed to force on end users or business users their identification systems. And I think that will bring tremendous benefits to consumers, first of all, for consumers that really want to have a choice. Of course, consumers who want to continue using the available gatekeepers identification systems, they can continue to do so. It's a free world. But the ones who want to have a choice and who want to have more privacy-preserving alternatives will be able to have a choice not to use, for example, the Gmail to access their Play Store or access, in general, the Android device if we come back to the Android example. So I think this will really open up the whole world and the whole world of opportunities also for different industries, including European industries that are quite strong in privacy-preserving tools. That means a lot of companies will be able to finally get access to the whole massive closed off markets like Android Market, the iPhone, the iOS operating system market. So there's really a lot of opportunities for already existing companies, but also for future companies to even emerge. And I think that's going to be quite a big deal finally opening up those systems. Of course, I'm sure there will be efforts to somehow circumvent that and make the possibility of this interoperability of identification systems look good on paper. But I think the most important thing is that when regulators will be assessing whether this works or not, is to really look through the eyes of an average consumer, whether it works or not. That means can the consumer really have an easy choice to use an alternative? Can consumer enter the phone and, for example, start using the apps, the Play Store, the App Store, and whatever all those things in the same short and efficient amount of time and things like that? And I think this will be really a start of exciting time together with other GME obligations to really open up, first of all, the mobile devices market, which has been really closed off to competition. Yeah. Yes, I agree. It's going to be an exciting time. I hope you're looking into opportunities. So maybe Amandine, do you have anything to add? Do you want to say, or Gabriele? Well, I think I could not agree more. I think one item that I've learned, one lesson that I've learned in my fintech experience as a vertical foundation is that I think, as an Italian living in the United States, I have major grievances with the American banking system and how disconnected it is. It's been other mentions here today, other shortcomings when public services are left to the market to figure out some. I'm actually a big fan of, again, turning monopolies and gatekeepers into more open ecosystems. But I do think that it's really important to, and that's what I think, hopefully this can be a call to action for the folks here in government, I think starting from consumer rights, it's always the right sort of starting point. But I do think it's super important, and again, that's what I've learned by being able to then make banks sort of build into open source, like into this idea of open source that was really scary a few years ago. I think it's important to make sure that people realize that open sources can be a positive sum game and this type of regulations can be positive for consumers. And the gatekeepers themselves, besides, of course, there's more medium businesses that actually can sort of make a business whereby it wasn't possible before. I think it's important to pass the message that this regulation is not against the gatekeepers. It's really in favor of consumers and actually going to be benefits if we're able to sort of pass the natural friction that regulation introduces, because that makes sense. No, I agree. I think we're gonna hopefully get them to agree on this, but we'll see. Amandine? I think the only thing we haven't mentioned yet is the fact that interoperability can be achieved by different ways. It can be just like gatekeepers saying, here is how I work and figure it out and then you'll be able to talk to me or you can actually get some people to define an open standard where everyone gets a line with so that if you just interpret with the standard then you can talk to everyone else out there. And it's really bringing the openness, bringing the collaboration towards working together towards something which is useful for everyone basically. So it's a really interesting approach. I'd like us to highlight that it's the same way Germany is doing a lot of good things in open source, but even if there is still a lot to do, we can still acknowledge that Europe is doing a lot of good things in terms of data security and privacy. And personally very proud that we're a precursor here and yes, there's a lot of more things to do and yes, there's a lot of things that could be improved in terms of implementation and it's not just because the DMA is here and ready to be enforced and ready to be deployed. Still a lot of work so that it doesn't become a mess to implement and a mess for the users, but yet when we look across the Atlantic, for example, we're still quite far from there. So and they're looking at us and they're trying to get there as well. So I think it's very promising. Yeah, no, I agree. You know, if we look to the west, we see the internet heavily controlled by a few companies. If you look to the east, we see the internet heavily controlled by governments. And what Europe is trying to do is to find the right middle way in which you have rules and we have all the stakeholders co-writing together in a value framework, which is really important for Europe. So we still have about 10 minutes. So I've got quickly back to the banking sector asking Gabriele if you still have, I mean, things to add to what you already said and tell us a little about that. And then if we have some time, as I hope we might also take questions if there's anything you want to raise or we might also look at other aspects. Gabriele. I just wanted to sort of double down on this idea of working together. And I think open standards are important, but I work on both open standards and open source and I come primarily from the open source side of the house. And I would say the banking sector is one that is more familiar with open standards. I've been working for, well, with standards. Can debate how open they are. But, you know, I think open source and honestly, we're still at the beginning of this journey, but open source has had the potential to invite regulators to participate in the open collaborative process. Again, it's still a little bit at arm's length. You know, whenever a regulator is in the room, bankers tend to get a little stiff or shut up, which is sort of not really compatible with the open collaborative process, but that is opening up. And so when I've, you know, I'm hearing a lot of talk about, you know, government auspose, European Commission auspose. I think it's really good that that starts focusing around consumption, but I think to me the next frontier is when we will have governments and regulators actively participating in the, you know, open collaborative processing, potentially the implementation of a regulation. You know, not so long future, hopefully before my kids grow old or my grandkids, you know, they could even just come up with open source reference implementation or machine readable regression together with the regulated entities. I realize that this seems, you know, far fetched or far away, but you know, I think going back to sort of finding value and a value proposition for each one of these constituents, you know, open source is a positive in some game. I think there is value for each. And again, it's something that's been mentioned earlier, but the fact that regulators need to talk to the right people as well, to actually come up with the implementation. And so far we've seen some good signs in terms of regulator coming and talking to us, for example, but I think it's key. You cannot have people providing, suggesting an implementation of a regulation like this without talking to the people who actually have been doing that before other one actually implementing the smaller companies who are trying to build against the gatekeepers. The gatekeepers who are, they still have to listen to them and what their problem are, but also make sure you talk to the users as well or representative of the users who can actually come back with, well, by the way, don't forget, they're not technical and this sort of thing. So it's a complicated process because you need to be in touch with everyone in the ecosystem, but it's worth it. And Yurgita, do you want to say anything? I just want to say that I think it's really exciting times coming forward. We're really still to see the benefits of the whole legislation, but I think the potential is really huge. I mean, internet was meant to be interoperable and I think we're really taking a lot of steps to make those major platforms, major technologies that have become so big and so irreplaceable and so massive of massive importance to all the users and consumers. Now we really have to make sure that things that are of so much importance, they really work well together. And I think it's also a big expectation from users as well to just have things working easier, things working together so that you don't have to download 10 different apps or that you don't have to have 20 different accounts to create the things and accounts that you don't need but otherwise you're not able to use your device or some other applications. World should be really much more simple and I think the more there is opportunity for interoperability, the more there is opportunity for different innovators, more companies, more businesses to grow, but also for solutions to satisfy users and it's really those solutions provided by gatekeepers, they will stay there and users who want to use them, they will keep on using them, but it's all about choice and people should have the choice to be able to have control of their devices, of their IT tools the way they want. And as long as this does not compromise certain security systems and things like this, we should be really moving towards the world where things really work, where they become more and more connected, not disconnected and just one major ecosystem, another major ecosystem and then you have to choose because otherwise you cannot have the benefits of several of them. I really think the future of internet is where there's more entobility, more connection and yeah, more happy users and more innovative companies. Yeah, I agree, I think we are all in agreement so this is why I am also asking anyone from the floor has any other questions or ideas. I mean we still have about four minutes so if I don't know Paula will try to be quick so that we, sorry, I'll give you mine. So very quickly so that maybe at the end we still have like 30 seconds for people here to give a final remark. Hi, well my question is about a baby elephant in a room so office interoperability or productivity is still capturing ministries. I was at a ministry last week and people said we can't move. We would like to leave the Windows platform but we're locked inside Microsoft Office documents and we still can't escape after decades of trying to get out. So I was wondering is there anything where the panel sees any movement in that well, painful old dossier? Yeah, thank you. I think we had a second question maybe we can take it, I mean, I think we'll, no? Okay, no then we, okay anyone wants to take this question? Well we have seen some like typically governments, yeah they've started to move but it definitely requires strong champions and advocates internally or a huge drive or like a huge realization like Daniel Malin earlier was saying from Sweden. It's like we just had this huge realization that we cannot legally use these American platforms to host our governmental data. And that's the kind of things that needs to be clear basically. And once people understand that then making the step towards data sovereignty typically is a no-brainer. But yes, it's probably an effort in some places and needs some champions and a good reason. Legal regulations are usually a good reason. Yeah, if I may add I think that everything is connected. So once you start breaking up the world gardens into I mean maybe starting from messaging then maybe you get also into documents because nowadays all of this is integrated and so you need to be able to make everything work together. Which is why I mean it's very important to get all the smaller unfortunately open source companies that do a lie and provide services together like in Germany where we are doing. And so I'm positive but of course it will take time and it will take political win. So I mean before giving like that promised 30 seconds to my panelists that I still want to mention that there is one very important interoperability regulation that we didn't get to which is that attacked. And especially the possibility to finally switch cloud providers and port your services and move your services from one infrastructure or platform provider to another. And this is still another very important battle that is happening these weeks. And so I mean it's complex. Maybe it would deserve an entire panel but this is another thing that we have to keep an eye upon and possibly fight for. So let's start. Who wants to start with the final? Yeah, sure. I think data act is also a very important step towards better internet era. From our perspective obviously we are very happy about the provisions on interoperability for cloud switching. Hopefully as a result of this provision users will be able to more easy change their cloud providers. I think that's quite an important thing because just how this market works you will not have again five different drive providers. Maybe some people do, that's okay but normally if you want it to be convenient you want to use one place. And then it's the same with email. If you have all your emails in one email provider you basically want to make sure that you manage to import all your data so the new maybe email service that you want to use. So the same with cloud. So hopefully as a result of this data act there is this real and most important easy possibility for users to switch. Not a theoretical possibility not a possibility where theoretically let's say competing companies could somehow engineer some solutions because we know from our experience that trying to engineer some solutions that are theoretically possible could make you take out from core products entire teams of resources and then have to add lots of money into something that is meant not to work actually. So I really hope that this interoperability for cloud switching will be a real opportunity for actual switching. It just feels like actually implementing what the internet, the web is meant to be. It's such a no brainer. It's crazy again that it's not, doesn't exist yet. I'm just gonna close by saying that I'm super excited of the role that Europe can play on the global scale you mentioned, regulations that have been then sort of looked up as the de facto standard. I think PSD2 was one. I think GDPR was another one. I live in California and we're probably the only sort of closer thing to GDPR. I think Europe, between all these regulations another one is ADAS2. I think we're launching the Open Wallet Foundation in Europe in recognition of this leadership. I think this is a way that Europe can really bring local excellence to the global scale and really sort of bring a little bit more of an even level playing field with the other regions of the world. Thank you. Yeah, I agree. So I think that if there is something that Europe is a leader on, it's really regulation and horizontal cooperation among very diverse environments, countries with different languages and markets and we should not underestimate how important this is for Europe and for the entire world which needs that kind of cooperation very badly. So thank you all for listening. I think we'll wait for Paula to come up and thank you for listening to us.


So in the previous lecture, we had discussed how to estimate the burnout velocity of a rocket vehicle as well as the burnout height using a phenomenological approach where we balance the forces and we consider the thrust as a force being supplied as a reaction force. And then in the previous lecture, we started a different approach of the launch vehicle dynamic estimation where we consider the exhaust as the factor producing the thrust. So, we will continue from the same discussion. So, let me first draw the rocket that we were discussing last time. So, this is the rocket that we were discussing. This rocket is flying with the velocity u and this is the positive x direction, this is positive y direction. The forces acting on this rocket one is the drag force acting in the negative x direction against the flight path opposite to the flight path. Then the weight of the vehicle acting on this c g is given by m g. The lift is acting normal to the flight path given by l and we had considered that at time t mass of the vehicle was equal to m. The velocity of the vehicle was equal to u. Then what we have said is that the rocket is flying at a particular condition. We look back at this rocket after time t plus delta t that is after a small time interval delta t. What are the changes that has happened in this rocket? That is what we want to see. So, we say that during this small time interval there is exhaust which comes out of this rocket. Let us assume that the mass of that exhaust which is coming out during this small time delta t was equal to d m and the velocity of this exhaust is equal to u e. So, then the mass at time t plus delta t at time t plus delta t, the instantaneous mass is equal to the initial mass minus the mass that has gone out and the velocity of the vehicle has increased by a small amount delta u. Therefore, the new velocity is u plus delta u and we have considered the exhaust velocity to be equal to u e and let us say exhaust mass, exhausted mass rather let me write it exhausted mass is equal to d m. So, this is the problem we have been discussing in the previous class and we have shown that the change in the momentum of this vehicle total momentum of this vehicle along the x direction during this small interval of time d t is equal to m d u minus d m u e. This is what we had derived in the previous class where m is the mass of the vehicle at time t d u is the increment in the vehicle velocity during this small time d t d m is the mass exhausted from the vehicle during this small time interval and u e is the exhaust velocity. So, this is the expression that we had derived in the last class. Now, let us continue with the discussion coming back to this diagram and now let us just revisit the different forces that we had talked about. Previously we had identified four forces where thrust was a reaction force appearing separately and then we considered only the vehicle not the exhaust. Therefore, the rate of change of momentum was just m d v d t. Now, we are considering the exhaust also therefore, we do not consider thrust as a separate force. So, then the forces acting on the vehicle are only this three lift drag and accelerate the weight. So, the weight of the vehicle is due to the gravity. So, this is equal to force because of gravity. We have or is the same expression will continue where m is the instantaneous mass g e is the acceleration due to gravity at the c level r e is the radius of earth and h is the height of the vehicle at particular instant t. Now, this two together is the local acceleration due to gravity. So, we can write this as m times g. So, that is the gravitational force or the weight. Then the drag again we have seen this before the drag is equal to half rho infinity u infinity square s c d or s we can also write as a f where c d is the drag coefficient a f is the frontal area or weighted area u v is the free stream velocity of the incoming air rho infinity is the density of air at that altitude or density of the medium may not be here. What we can see from here is that if we are outside the atmosphere then rho infinity is 0. Therefore, the drag is 0 as we go up high up in the altitude density reduces. Therefore, the drag reduces. So, initially at the launch pad we have substantial drag, but as we go up the drag continuously keeps on reducing. So, this is the expression for drag the lift is given by half rho infinity u infinity square s c d.  This lift and drag are essentially the aerodynamic parameter depends on the aerodynamic design as well as the operating altitude and operating speed. So, these are nothing to do with the rocket designer per se this is something the aerodynamic should provide to the rocket designer. So, these are the two values that we will be considering. However, one more thing that will come into picture in this case which did not appear in the previous analysis which is the forces exerted by the exhaust pressure the pressure forces. Because there will be a pressure differential may be a pressure differential here. So, we have discussed that there are various type of expansion possible. We can have an under expanded nozzle, we can have a ideally expanded nozzle, we can have an over expanded nozzle. We have also discussed in the previous lectures that the thrust produces maximum for ideal expansion because at that condition P e is equal to P a that is the exit pressure is equal to the atmospheric pressure. So, therefore, there is no contribution from the pressure forces and we have also shown that for either the over expansion or for the under expansion the thrust is going to be less than the ideal expansion. We have already discussed those things we have also discussed that typically what we would like to have is over expansion not under expansion because of the fact that when the vehicle is launched from the ground the pressure is low. As it goes up in the altitude the pressure continuously decreases and as the pressure is decreasing if we start with different type of expansion there is a monotonic decrease in the expansion. So, but if we start with a point where let us say P e is less than P a this is under sorry when we start with under expansion P e is less than P a is under expansion. We start with this condition P e is less than P a as it goes up P a falls the atmospheric pressure falls and then at one point of time it will become equal to P a beyond that P e will be greater than P a. So, we have a thrust variation something like this whereas, if we start with this condition and then this P a is falling. So, we have a continuous drop in thrust. So, therefore, this is a preferred condition P e less than P a then at certain instance we will reach this condition where P e equal to P a. So, this is a digression from what we have been discussing. Now, let us this is over expansion expansion is more yeah this is over expansion condition. So, that is why we usually consider over expansion, but ideal case will be this where we get the maximum thrust. So, now since we are considering the exhaust separately there should be a contribution from this pressure force if the expansion is not ideal. So, that also now needs to be accounted for in the momentum equation. So, the fourth force in this case is equal to the pressure forces and that is equal to P e minus P a times a e this will be applicable if it is not ideally expanded. If it is ideally expanded P e will be equal to P a. Now, let us look at what are this forces doing the drag force is along the along x direction or is along the direction of flight we consider x as the direction of flight. The gravitation force. So, first let us look at the forces acting along the x direction. One is the drag force second is the a component of F g a component of gravitational force will also be acting along the x direction and that component will be equal to let me say F g x which is equal to M g cos theta according to this diagram where this angle is theta. Then the net and this pressure force is also acting in the x direction which is equal to P e minus P a times a e. Now, the net force then along x direction is equal to this pressure force P e minus P a times a which will be acting in this direction upward in the positive x direction minus the drag force. So, this is minus d and this term the gravitational component is also acting in the minus x direction. So, that will also be minus. So, this is M g cos theta. So, therefore, this is the net total force external force acting on the rocket vehicle. Now, from Newton's second law of motion this is equal to the rate of change of momentum. So, now, let us use Newton's second law of motion. So, then first of all total sigma F along x direction is equal to the total change in momentum in the x direction is equal to this. So, this can be written as M d u minus d M u e. So, this is the application of Newton's second law of motion on this rocket vehicle.  What we can first what we will do is we will divide both sides by d t. So, sorry just one more thing this is the net force acting which is equal to rate of change of momentum. This is the change in momentum the rate of change is momentum will be d t divided by d t. So, therefore, let me rewrite it again d M d u minus d M by u e d t. This is the rate of change of momentum is equal to the sum of external forces. This is the governing equation that we have. Now, let us look at this equation little more closely. So, first of all let us look at this term d M change in mass d M is nothing but equal to M dot d t where M dot is rate of change of mass. So, this is M dot d t where d t is the time interval. Now, this is equal to the initial mass was M. So, this is d M d t times d t and the mass of the vehicle is decreasing. So, there will be a minus sign here. So, d M is minus d M d t d t. So, this is the expression for d M where 1 second like to reiterate that the change is occurring because of the propellant flow. So, this is nothing but propellant flow d M is the propellant flow that brings about this change in mass. So, then what we can do is if I look at this expression we will have M d u.  It had a negative sign when we take it to the right hand side this becomes positive and then after that we. So, this term here will be equal to d M d t is equal to M dot d t.  It has the negative sign when we take it to right hand side it becomes positive. So, this is equal to M dot u e minus track minus the gravitational term and all this times d t. So, this d t I am taking to the right hand side. So, this is the expression for M d u. We can further simplify it and write an expression for d u all alone. The change in velocity is equal to first of all let me look at this two term together. What is this? We know that M dot u equivalent equal to M dot u e plus P e minus P a times A e. Therefore, these two term together is M dot u a. So, we write it here as M dot u e M dot u equivalent minus d M d by M d t. Well, d is the drag M is the instantaneous mass minus g cos theta d t. That is the acceleration due to gravity. Now, let us look at M dot term. M dot is this will have divided by M, because we are taking this M to the right hand side. Now, M dot by M from this expression we write M dot by M equal to d M by M. If I divide both of this by M. So, M dot there will be a d t here first of all, because this d t is also coming in here. So, M dot d t by M is equal to minus d M by M. So, now, we take this and put it back into this equation. This simplifies to minus u equivalent d M by M minus d by M d t minus g cos theta d t. So, now, we have got an expression for d u. As you can see that this includes the equivalent velocity. It is not in terms of the thrust directly. It is in terms of the equivalent velocity and the mass change is already been incorporated in this equation. So, now, we work with this equation and now let us go back to the same similar cases that we had discussed for the other approach in the previous lecture and try to get the expression for velocity increment as well as the height that can be achieved. So, let me first rewrite this equation. d u is equal to now minus u equivalent d M by M minus capital D by M d t minus g cos theta d t. This is the general expression. I like to point out here one thing that this is the expression in the positive x direction, velocity increment in the positive x direction. We have lift is not appearing here because lift is in the y direction. So, we do not consider the lift at present. So, this is the generic equation which can be applicable to any rocket vehicle. Now, let us do the case studies. Case one, first let us consider that the drag is 0 and we also consider that the gravitational force is 0 or g is 0, acceleration due to gravity is 0. So, for this case then from this equation this term goes to 0, this term goes to 0. So, what we are left with a simple equation d u equal to minus u equivalent d M by M. As you can see this expression is much simpler than what we have done before. And now we can just integrate it from time t equal to 0 to some time t and we get the velocity change. So, when we integrate this between time t equal to 0 to some time t then we get this is equal to delta u minus u equivalent d M by M integration is just log. So, this will be log M by M naught where M naught is the initial mass of the vehicle at time t equal to 0. And M like in our discussion here is instantaneous mass of the vehicle at time t. So, the velocity change therefore, this is now the expression that we have obtained. So, starting from initial we can now get expression for any time, this negative sign is quite odd. So, what we will do is we will just flip over and we can write it as u equivalent L n M naught by M. So, as we can see this is a much more simplified expression that the difference between this expression and what we had obtained earlier is the fact that there we had considered the thrust acting at an angle little vector thrust. Here we are not considering that we are saying that the exhaust is coming in the x direction negative x direction that is why those complexities do not arrive here. So, but we have discussed that why do we need to have that small variation that because of the stability. So, now let us continue with this discussion and see that what we get after this. So, let us consider a practical total burnout at time t equal to 0 we had initial mass M naught. And then the rocket is launched till the complete burnout we want to find out how much velocity change is occurring. So, at time t equal to t b which is the burnout time the mass is equal to M f which have been writing as M b bus, but here since we are talking about a different approach. So, just to differentiate it I will write it as M f is the final mass. So, the velocity increment during this entire operation then is equal to u equivalent L n M naught by M f. Now, if you recall in one of the previous classes I have defined this mass ratio and that mass ratio is given as M r which we have defined. So, let me write it here M r is equal to M naught by M f which we have defined and sorry it is M f by M naught. And we had also defined the propellant mass fraction zeta which is equal to 1 minus M r this we had defined before. So, now coming back to this expression then we get delta u is equal to u equivalent L n M naught. L n 1 upon M r according to this definition we can also write it as equal to minus u equivalent L n M r we can write it like this. Now, notice one fact here that M r is always less than 1 because fuel mass is always less than the total vehicular mass. So, M r is always less than 1 therefore, this term is going to be negative. So, this becomes positive delta u is positive and since zeta equal to 1 minus M r. So, therefore, M r is equal to 1 minus zeta. So, this can also be written as minus u equivalent L n 1 minus zeta. So, now we have got the single stage rocket dynamics the velocity change in terms of the mass ratio or the propellant mass fraction. I would like to point out here that typically for any rocket these are the factors that are given to the designer. So, you have to work with these factors only that is why it is important to express everything in terms of these ratios and particularly becomes important when you go to multistage because therefore, different stages will have different numbers for these ratios and you have to work with all of them together. So, therefore, it is important to work with these ratios the mass ratio or propellant mass fraction or structural coefficient which will come later everything. So, this is the first case now we have discussed when the drag is 0 no gravity then this is the exit velocity expression which is expressed in terms of the mass ratio as well as the propellant mass fraction. Now, continuing from this then let us consider second case so, this is our basic governing equation. So, I will just retain it here and look at a second scenario in this case we will consider the gravity we will still neglect the drag and consider the gravity. So, case 2 case 2 is then f g is not equal to 0 d is still equal to 0 we still consider no drag, but now we are considering the acceleration due to gravity. In that case coming back to this equation then this term goes to 0 this term remains now this term as we can see is g cos theta d t when we integrate this equation this term gives me this and integrating this between time t equal to 0 to d t to t gives us g cos theta t that is it nothing else changes.  That is this term after integration is giving me this minus g cos theta t and if you are burning up to t b up to the burning time t b. So, this gives me g cos theta d t b one point like to mention here that during your flight g may vary cos theta may vary. So, if this two are varying then we have to account for that also, but when we are integrating this then we can take the average value since we are integrating. So, we can take the average value of g cos theta. So, average g cos theta times t b gives us then the expression of velocity increment with an incremental velocity with the with the effect of gravity also. So, del u is the change in velocity. So, here t b is our burning time which we have discussed before here t b is our burning time and cos theta particularly this cos theta is the integrate at average value of cos theta that is that the angle that the flight path mesh with the vertical is the average value of that. So, this is actually not over the entire thing but only the cos theta average cos theta. Now, this integrate this averaging is valid if we are talking about short thrust intervals. If we are talking about law interval of course then we cannot consider the average value then what we have to do it at every instant we have to consider the attitude and then integrate it. Now, gravitational acceleration h so far as long as we are close to the gravitational close to the earth surface it does not vary much. But once we start moving away from the earth then it starts to vary with h the attitude because we have shown that g equal to g equal to this we have already talked about this. So, as we go away from the earth surface h becomes important then g will start to drop. So, therefore this value of g as long as we are close to the earth surface it will be a constant. But beyond a certain height cannot consider this to be a constant then in this integration we consider the variation of g as well and then accordingly we integrate. So, therefore that can be considered. Now, one point I would like to emphasize here we have mentioned that this term is always going to be positive because m r is less than 1. So, this term is always positive g is always positive it cannot be negative right acceleration due to gravity is always positive theta is bound between 0 and 1. So, that is also positive time is already increasing. So, this everything here is positive. So, therefore this term is also positive. So, this is positive minus a positive quantity. Therefore, the effect of gravity is to actually decrease the acceleration due to the increase in velocity. So, we have to ensure that this term should be large enough to compensate for this loss because of gravity. So, therefore in the design state that is why we are writing all in terms of this parameters that are very equivalent for the mass ratio should be chosen in such a way that we get a substantial velocity increment that is the m finally to get a high velocity which is not much affected by the variation in gravity. So, that needs to be. So, therefore the thrust must be high enough to compensate for the gravity effects here this is the thrust the term appearing here is from the thrust. So, this is the second case that we have talked about let us now look at the another scenario a third case. Now, in the third case what we will consider is that now we do not consider the drag is absent let us say it is the flight is inside the atmosphere. So, we consider the drag as well. So, in case 3 in case 3 what we will consider is that the drag is also present. So, we have the gravitational effect we have the drag as well. So, case 3 is considering the drag also. So, we have defined drag as half rho u square f c d this is how we have defined the drag. Now, let us see what is happening here density is changes with altitude because we consider the atmosphere to be the perfect gas consider perfect gas. Then we know that for perfect gas equation of state pressure equal to rho r t. Therefore, rho which is the density is equal to pressure by r t. Now, temperature as we go up in the atmosphere initially decreases remains constant then increases again then remains constant decreases like that at different levels of the atmosphere temperature varies. The pressure monotonically varies from the earth surface up to the edge of the atmosphere the pressure continuously decreases. The net effect is the density continuously decreases as we go up high in the altitude. So, that there is a change in the altitude the density also changes. Therefore, considering everything same the drag will be reducing as we go up and up in the altitude. Second point here is that u as we have just discussed del u is always positive. Therefore, as del u is positive u is also changing and increasing. So, u changes with altitude. Now, I like to point out here one thing I said that the del u is positive, but that is only during the powered flight. If we cut off the engine this term goes to 0. Then this term will take over and reduce del u and it will come to 0 velocity and that will come back again when we talk about the maximum height. So, during the powered flight del u is positive. Therefore, u also changes with altitude. So, once again what we are saying is the density is decreasing with altitude, but velocity is increasing. Considering the aerodynamic design is same c d is constant let us say area is constant. Then the drag will be increasing because the dependence is u square and the variation in velocity is much higher than the variation in density. So, therefore, the drag continuously changes with altitude. So, d changes with altitude. Now, here altitude represents essentially the passage of time because the variation in altitude is because we are increasing increases with time. So, therefore, in other words we can say that it changes with time. So, now if we come back to this expression then this drag here is a function of time. Now, we have to integrate this equation. So, d equal to d t. So, coming back to this equation this dependence is not a linear dependence unfortunately as you can see that everything is coupled. So, this is our governing equation now where minus d t by m d t minus g cos theta d t. This is what we have to integrate now. So, this is what is not very easy to integrate because we do not have a well defined closed form term for d as a function of t. We do not know how drag is changing with time. It is not very easy to figure out. So, typically what is done is a round about approach in solving this. So, the common practice is this. Let us assume that everything remains constant. Let us assume that everything remains constant during a small increment of time d t. So, we assume that this theta remains constant of d t. Gravitational acceleration remains constant in this small interval. The d remains constant. The mass remains constant. Everything is constant. The equivalent is also constant even in this time. Then now we can very easily integrate this. We can get a value of this entire right hand side at a small time. Then slowly we keep on changing it. So, numerical integration that is what we can do. So, what we can do is then we calculate this value of drag calculate d as a constant because during this small interval our density is constant, u is constant. So, we can calculate this value of d during this small interval of time. Once we have done that, now we put this value back into this equation. Now this is appearing as a constant. So, now after that we integrate this and get a velocity increment d u. So, next we calculate d u with constant d. We increment this d u with constant d. We calculate this value of d u.  Replace the density with that and recalculate it for the next time step. So, again we put that value here and integrate this. That is why that is how we keep on integrating in time or marching in time till we get the final value. And also one more point here is that when we are doing this, we also keep on changing this theta whatever change in theta is required that we keep on doing because that comes from the component balance. So, we keep on upgrading this term and do a time marching and estimate the final value. That is how we estimate the final velocity increment when we consider the drag and gravity as well. So, this gives us the most complex scenario which can also be done but has to be done numerically. I like to point out here one more thing that in all this analysis we have not talked about y direction. If we look at y direction then unless we provide a thrust vectoring there will be a non-zero lift. So, there will be a tendency of the vehicle to move in this direction. So, in order to get zero lift we have to give a vector a small vector to the thrust which we have discussed in the previous lectures. So, therefore in order to provide in order to have zero lift the thrust must be given at an angle to the u direction or the x direction as we have already discussed. This balance the normal component of gravitational force otherwise the gravitational force will not be balanced and it will start to wear off its intended path. So, now let us see if there is no lift and we do not just give vector then there is a unbalanced force acting like this and that will take it downward. So, it will come down. So, therefore in order to compensate for this gravitational pull we have to give a slight vectoring to the thrust. So, we put thrust at a particular angle here and now coming to the other way then we can actually achieve various type of flight stable flight by providing thrust vectoring. If we do not provide thrust vectoring there will be a tendency to go like this. If we provide thrust vectoring it will go like this let us say after a point we want to bring it down we we have a different thrust vectoring it comes like this. So, a cruise missile where we want to change the orientation or attitude of the flight path we can do that by thrust vectoring very easily. So, therefore thrust vectoring is an important method in the flight of rocket vehicles. So, with this we come to an end of our discussion of this method. Now, what we will do is in the next lecture we will go back to the single stage rockets and look at different performance parameters like the maximum height etcetera. So, here we have estimated the velocity change. Next we will look at the burnout time and burnout height etcetera for single stage rocket which we are discussing so far. Thank you.


Doctor Chumo, if you're around, please join us. Thank you. There's only one mic, give it a go, so how much? Ziku api? Can you miss me? Kaki zumbu mob, my friend. Apaneza pigastori na mugu bi, me nami joka mugu bi. Kwa niya ma ni babayaki? Tv tuweo fiyasa maapa sayazi. Thank you very much. Welcome to Season Tv. This is Apaneza that consists of Victor Wanyama and his brother who is also here. Welcome very much from the Wanyama Academy and also Doctor Chumo. We'll start with you. Maybe you explain to us what you're doing with the green playing in the green spaces. What is that all about? Thank you so much. My name is Doctor Chumo. I'm the CEO of Mama Doing Good being the initiative of the first lady of the project of Kenya. Basically, we have many programs. One of the programs is Environmental Pivot Action. As a nation, we have an opportunity at the government to ensure that the current green spaces that we have in this country is actually covered in our first season programs because currently, as a country, we are doing badly when it comes to the forest cover. We are below 10 percent and we really need to be at least above 10 percent. As a country, we are focused now as a strategy to make sure that in the next 10 years, we should be able to cover the forest by 30 percent and by 15 billion. We have many areas to cover the trees whether it's the concentrated forest, you know, the private farms and also one of the key areas is actually the green spaces which are found within our towns and the city of Nairobi.  The next time, we hear from IBMs that this is the Hulida of two parties and you hear from the statement that it's a panda meat. You can check but this is a panda meat drug but it's very tasty. How many trees do you plant? We have a target of 15 million. We currently ... we are talking about 15 billion in the next 10 years We were supposed to do 5 billion in the first 5 years. If we do 15 billion in 10 years, it means 15 billion every year. How many years have you been working? Like especially on 13, it was a working holiday. It was not just a sitting holiday. It was not just relaxing. We said to all Kenyans to go outside there and plant trees. That was actually a working holiday. Okay, we'll go outside and plant trees. How are you? Are you going to go outside now? It's not working? It's not working. How are you? I'm fine, thank you. Are you going to go outside now? Yes, a little. A little, but you know the city. I know a little. How are you? How are you? Are you going to speak English? French? Only locals. That's what happened to Nadeke. I don't know what happened. Where is your... This is an example of... Mugubi, the first time I covered Mugubi was 2005. Kamukunji hasku. Kiwa na daddy, kiwa na... Morise, nani ule mwingine, oboia. All those guys. In him in particular, I used to tell him... We asked him to end up pro. Utaungia luga mingi uchangani kiwa. Ah, Mike Mikilamesiwezi. Intervixu aili pekiyaki. So hea nangia baka kifaransa. Thank you very much, Victor. One of the things that our toiyonrabuskiya... At this level that we play... Ki lamutu na sema. One of the things is... Mazu kifka ukoju. Siu dui dea dasi siu tufute. Can you explain to them how stable it was in Afanikazi? Ya. Of course... Mi na penda kusahidiya neza terapia... Tukwe wengi. Na pia... Kono eni penda mese gisahidiya. But it's not that easy. Mazu mga upeleka ui peleka ule. But it takes a lot. Uwe sema tu uwe unpeleke. Kus pali wali ono maskotsuwao. A lafupia... Wan na... Wan na profile zinionata futa. So it's very hard to just pick someone and say, ok, mwachatu unpeleke. It doesn't work like that. So... It's a process. Na zima tu uji tume. Na zima tu uji tume. Na zima tu uji tume. A lafupia uji tume pia time ita kama. So ni kuadupeshe. So do you have... Vija na wengi. Wan na give up a raka. Ile ati mojaribunu na wendi. So you give up. But you have to be strong. Mentally you have to be strong. And you have to have that mind of... Not to give up. Kila siku na give your best. It doesn't matter. So wiki kwa niyo discipline. Kila siku na kuja. Wan na payana your best. Kuna tu wa na ona. Na pia. Makoches kama mkuapa. Encourage those boys. Opatiri moral. Ara kama kwa kuapitumbago. Wenginewa na tu miya. Napda pomba yama nini. Jeribunu na gaib. Kama tu iblonza wengi na mtuim doko. Jeribunu na gaib. Na mursha hindi onjiya. Uzi give up. Keep going. You're doing well. We do. And then we'll end up with good players. Ta pata hoteza jwengi na haleoneza pata yo chance kuinda brod. So pia na sayi. Kuna ma akademi mobs na kamaap. Na... Vitus na za kufunguka very soon. Ta kona tu hoteza jwengi. Tuna akademi piya sisi inafunguliwa sumt. So vitus na funguka ma scout za kwaengi. Endelin na yo moral piya coaches ku patiwa vidyanai yo chance ya ku showcase their talent. Nde yo weze to kakwezi ma shida shida piya. Na izimi mambu mingi. Weze za wafanya wa lose. We lose focus. So endelin na yo moral ya kwa patiwa guidance. Na tuta kuna future poor. Bukubi tulengi ya umemenshun akademi na fungu asu. Ukitema ita hausa hi. Ulize jama. Adikuna akademi nga pizabal na Nairobi. Kilamdu na pambia kila kuna kuna akademi. Pambia siyutu kuna. Na pataga wajoku wanth media piyo kuna opportunities inginesi na kamaap. Every other dame do na kutumiya invite. Atini kuna akademi yango tunna train mahalifu lag. Tukuna akademi yango tunna train mahalifu lag. I think I'm one of the privileged journalists. The only place I did not cover Mugubi aki chairs and the swede. But Akiwa Southampton. I went for the training. Akiwa Celtic. The same. Akiwa Spaz. The same. And it was common one thing. Akademi ni norm. What lessons have you picked from? Iziti mu mecheze asote. Na unazileta hapa Kenya. Kwenisha watu. This is what an academy entails. Sizi ka lungu nga tunna vanya. Okay. Kuna pitu mob. Kuna pitu mob. Of course, ni me pick toka abroad. Vidukama vile wachezaji wayan. Vile wana kochiwa. Vile surface. Surface ea. Enya na pewa o trenie. Izoni viduz na fakutien. Ugo wami believe ina umiza players. So, wana ajeriku kwa po itzana izotaf. Onapatapia... Uni artificial taz. Yeah, official taz. Na ina umiza sana kariya zamchezeaji. Uutastu kia. Ujuwizi sejuna cheza uta ajuwa. But ina kula goti, na kula ankles. And then, in the long run, wana pata kariya kwenisha. Kama eba duni miha. And so, izu bitua ajeriku kwa po. Idu kienga lini surface wana tren. Kama eba first team. So, ni surface po. Izoni bitu pia na traiku leta apa. Like surface iku eni surface poa. The way pia, ni prisha ni, da i, wa uko bila gana treat. Wachiza di uko bila wana, wana pati o diet. Desi e maapa, matikatu ea pia wana dekuia player apa. And, bitu kama pia izoma facility, zen yon atu miha. Tudia rei, tutazi leta uku. Tudia rei atu miha uko. Pia program ya chuo.  Ono na atu, wana toka fom geto na kwa atu, wana jweza, kwa doniza change. Oso piya zoma geto. So, chuo, wana ifa ni atu, kwa academy, na ni program like, special program, ya waku. So, wana pata wana lan apo, wana ma computer, apta, apta gulan, wana ingiagrao, wana train, wana ruditena chuo, wana rest, wana ruditena chuo, daro, wana sumakiasi, wana ball. So, wana pata wame kavijana, kutuka age kama 12, mbaka, mbaka 16, alafu, every day ni repetition, na diwa. Wana train, left, passing, wana rudiezo, v2. Om ni mchizajia kifikaitin, wana ni mchizajia kwa, ata kwa fala. Ion dutkitu, ya ni, piya, I think apam tani, apa Kenya, imetu, na tuanguusha. So, tukifanya tu repetition, after 3 years, ya buna ni mchizajia kama, awa chizajia kama, kwa nasyultim, wana zafana, wana zafanya, bigger things, wana zainuwa, wana zainuwa taifa. So, hiu repetition, kilasiku, everything.  Countrywide then, ah, veri suntu taku apia, ah, tako ma lan kwa hii, afrikam futbol na piya kawal.


Yeah Right, how do we get judges to do all the work that you did? Call me right right to it because it's so clear You went above and beyond none of that was required right that you go and visit these institutions and build these Relationships with the doctor at the hospital and etc. And get to know the prison warden and understand their programming That's not required, but it it should be it sounds like so how how do we think about that? Should it be required? Here I think so because it was such of such benefit to me, but you know here is the thing you all I don't know a judge that doesn't want to do a good job hmm and So and you and let me just pause and say you've dealt with some judges who have been jerks who've been Sexist and racists to me. Yeah, we we can have a whole judges lawyers set of conversations about how Laurel has been treated within the the courtroom process by her colleagues and by other people in the courtroom and yet you still believe that it's possible to Align good performance with these kinds of required social context Lessons and understandings you think it would work because I I want judges to be out of their bubble You know to be on that bench, you know potentially depriving people of their liberty Taking taking a family member out of the home Sometimes taking an income out of the home You know, it's a it's a huge responsibility And so the more information we give judges the better because again I think either whether you're in the lock them up and throw the way the key camp or You're never send anyone to prison camp everybody wants to do a good job So do give them the information to do that and then I think for policy makers and People in academia Study federal courts, but especially when you're talking about crime most of that is in state courts Which I understand though makes it harder to study, you know But you know if you are to come into contact with a court It is way more likely to be a state court And it's most likely to either be criminal was particularly because traffic falls under criminal Or as a victim, maybe you didn't even commit a crime You might be a victim or the other court that you are unfortunately most likely to come in contact with is domestic Interesting that sounds like a policy prescription to me in terms of thinking about how to How judges are trained and what's required. Mm-hmm. It's really interesting really interesting. Yes