The first option I have for you are the hydration packs or hydration bladders. I'm looking at a three liters of spray hydration pack here. I personally find them to be very practical and very useful. This one here fits three liters of water and this is a good amount of water if you are going on a long day hike or an extended backpacking trip for one night, two nights or even more.  You don't have to reach to grab the water bottle, it's very easily accessible and it's going to help you ensure that you are staying hydrated and you are drinking a good amount of water while hiking or backpacking. Next, I'm going to move to the smart water bottles. These are very known in the hiking and backpacking community and the reason is, let me show you, if you are using a Sawyer filter, it can hook directly to the water bottle and just like this, you can fill your water from a water source and then you can squeeze it and drink directly from this water bottle. I personally take a smart water if I am going on a long backpacking trip and I know that there are reliable water resources throughout the way so if there is a source, I would fill the water bottle directly from the water source and then I would use the filter to drink directly from this water bottle. This one right here is 33.8 ounces and there is a smaller version of 20 ounces really depends on what you are looking for but these are a great option if you are just trying to drink water on the go. The next option I want to talk about are the Hydroflask water bottles. These two right here are similar. They are 32 ounces. They are insulated. There are a lot of advantages about these two water bottles. There are also some inconvenience and I'm going to talk about both. So these are great if you are going on short hikes or taking a walk around the block. I think that it's great that it has a handle and you can just carry it this way. The other thing that I like about this specific water bottle is the wide mouth. It allows you to drink water easily and to add ice if you want to. These two bottles are insulated. It keeps hot drinks hot and it keeps cold drinks cold. So this water bottle is great if you are going on short hikes or if you are hiking in high temperature weather and you want to have a cold nice drink by the end of the hike or when you get to the top if you are climbing. This is a great option. We took it on so many short hikes and it works pretty well. Again you can use this one for cold beverages, water, alcohol or hot drinks like coffee. But the downside for this water bottle here for me is that it's really heavy. I took it with me when we hiked the Inca Trail to Machu Picchu and I think it was an overkill. It was really heavy. I mean I was thinking the other day that this can be used as a weapon to be honest. It's really really strong and sturdy. So maybe if you get attacked you can attack back with this water bottle. I don't know why I'm thinking about this scenario but I am. And that's the 32 ounces Hydroflask White Mouth. And now we are going to go to another version of Hydroflask and that is the 24 ounces standard mouth. I love this Hydroflask. This is the one that I log around the house with me if I want to make sure that I'm drinking enough water. It's also insulated. 24 ounces keeps hot drinks hot and keeps cold drinks cold. The only difference between this one and the previous one is that first of all the size or the capacity and then the mouth. So this is more of a standard mouth. It's good for drinking water but if you are outside in snow and you want to shove some ice in here it's not going to be the best option for you. But it's still a good option for short hikes I would say. And moving on to another option here and that is the camelback with a jet valve. To be honest I don't take this one with me on my hiking or backpacking trips but I think it's a great option if you find the Hydroflasks to be a little bit heavy. This one is great mainly for biking if you are looking for a quick grab and go just squirt some water and you are good to go. It is BPA free. It's not insulated but it can be a good option if you are going on shorter hikes in an area with a more pleasant weather. And that takes us to the last option in the list here and that is the Naljean water bottles. The Naljean water bottles were mainly made to be used in laboratories but then they started getting popular in the hiking and backpacking community. So the Naljean water bottle is great. It's 32 ounces that's almost one liter and it can work for both hot beverages and cold beverages. There are a lot of great things about this water bottle. Again the wide mouth allows you to drink water easily. I love love the fact that the lid is attached to the water bottle. This way you don't drop it on the trail or you don't lose it at all. And the other thing that I like about this water bottle is the fact that I can use it as a photo prop. So these two here are my favorite water bottles. This is mine says a life outside is a life well lived. And then this one says enjoy the switch back. So whenever we are hiking and we want to take some nice expressive photos I would use it as a photo prop as well. And I know that a lot of people would use them when they are backpacking. They fill them with the hot water and they would just fit it in the sleeping bag to keep them warm. To be honest it's not something that I would do unless I am freezing, freezing cold. But that's just another thing that you can use this water bottle for. I also use it when I am traveling to refill water in airports and so on. And I think it's a great water bottle. It is also BPA free and I think most of the Naljean water bottles are made of low density polyethylene. At least this one that I'm looking at right here. These are the options I had in mind for you guys today. The intent of this video is to give you a general idea but by the end of the day it depends on what you are looking for. Thank you guys for watching and if you found this video to be useful give it a thumbs up and consider subscribing to our channel. And if you haven't followed us on Instagram make sure you do. We share tips and tricks about hiking, backpacking and adventure traveling as well as some behind the scenes from our own adventures. Thank you again for watching your trekking paths, Habiba and Alice and we'll see you soon on a new adventure.


All right, so now we're going to talk a little bit about quantum mechanics in this lecture. So quantum mechanics we've seen so far has been with the model systems summarized here, either particle in a box or rigid rotor or harmonic oscillator. And quantum mechanics has been very useful so far. We've been able to take the results of quantum mechanical calculations, take those energy levels and use them to do statistical mechanics, make predictions about what systems are found in what states, extend that a little further to talk about thermodynamics. And we've gotten a lot of knowledge out of being able to talk about the thermodynamic properties of lots of different systems. But I'll point out now that the only cases where you've actually solved quantum mechanical problems, solved Schrodinger's equation, has been for fairly approximate systems. It's not actually true that molecules behave like particles in a box or perfect rigid rotors or perfect harmonic oscillators. These are only approximations, they're only model systems. It turns out there is one system, the next system that we'll study, that we can study not just the model system but the way this system actually behaves in the real world. So the next quantum mechanical problem we're going to study is the hydrogen atom. So just like for particle in a box, rigid rotor and harmonic oscillator, what we need to do first is to figure out what the potential energy is that the system obeys. So the hydrogen atom, of course, consists of one proton in the nucleus, which has a charge of plus one electron, same charge as an electron, and also in a hydrogen atom we have an electron, which has a charge of minus one in units of electrons. So of course, quantum mechanically, the way we think about that is the nucleus, which is a point at the center of the atom, is surrounded by the electron in some sense. So if we solve for the wave function, that's going to end up telling us the probability of finding the electron at various different locations around the nucleus of the atom. But at any given position, we can consider the electron to be located at a position space, and the wave function ends up telling us something about the probability of finding that electron and generates this probability cloud. So what we need to understand is how to calculate the potential energy of the electron, which is at some point in three-dimensional space around the center of the atom, so at some point in r, theta, phi coordinates. But of course, it doesn't matter if we think of this atom at the moment as just located at some point in space around the nucleus. The interaction between these two, between this plus charge and this minus charge, is Coulombic. So it doesn't matter whether that electron is north of the nucleus or south or east or west or in what direction it is. So the angular coordinates don't matter, don't affect the potential energy. So we can end up writing this potential energy expression using only the distance between the proton and the electron. And what Coulomb tells us is that interaction, potential energy of interaction between two point charges is charge of one of them times the charge of the other one divided by r. So in this case, the charge is negative one times positive one. So negative one electron times positive one electron charge units, so it's minus e squared over r. And to get the units right, that expression actually looks like minus e squared over 4 pi epsilon naught times r, where epsilon naught is the permittivity of vacuum. So you can think of that 4 pi epsilon naught as essentially just a unit conversion that allows you to calculate a charge squared divided by a distance and end up with units of potential energy. This is the expression for the potential energy of an electron at some distance away from a proton. Turns out, so we'll write down Schrodinger's equation next, but it turns out we can get a little more mileage by thinking not just of a hydrogen atom, this expression would be almost exactly the same for, let's say, a helium plus ion, right? Helium plus ion has two protons in the nucleus and because it's a positively charged ion, it only has one electron in the electron crowd surrounding the nucleus. So the only difference between this diagram I've written for a hydrogen atom and a comparable diagram for a helium plus ion would be that the nuclear charge would be plus two instead of plus one for the helium plus. And likewise, if I make ions of lithium or beryllium and so on, as long as I make the ions strongly charged enough to only have one electron surrounding the nucleus, the only thing that's different is the nuclear charge is plus z, the atomic number of the ion that we're talking about, the electron charge is still minus one. So in this case, the product of the two charges is going to be minus z times e times e. So I can use the same expression, just include the atomic number of the element that we're talking about and we can use this expression not only for a hydrogen atom, but also for some particular ions that we call hydrogen-like ions and they're hydrogen-like in the sense that they only have one electron. So it's a lot like a hydrogen atom with only one electron in the electron cloud with a differently charged nucleus. All right. So this is our expression for the potential energy. We can use that in the Schrodinger equation to find the equation that we're going to have to solve for the wave function of the electrons in the hydrogen atom. So Schrodinger's equation, of course, is h psi times e psi. That begins to get more meaningful if we write down what the Hamiltonian operator is and that's this question of constants minus h squared over 8 pi squared mass times del squared plus the potential energy times the wave function. So we're going to end up solving for the wave function, which is going to have dependence on r, theta, and phi, the three-dimensional spherical polar coordinates. Because we're working in spherical polar coordinates because it's easy to talk about distance and angle away from the center of some coordinate system, that means we also need to write down del squared in spherical polar coordinates. So if I take this term, the minus h squared over 8 pi squared mass, del squared in polar coordinates is a little bit complicated as we recall from the days when we were thinking about the rigid rotor. But what that looks like is 1 over r squared d dr r squared d dr of the wave function. So that's the r derivatives. We also need to include 1 over r squared sine theta d d theta sine theta derivative of the wave function with respect to theta. And there's a term that looks like 1 over r squared sine squared theta and then second derivative of the wave function with respect to phi. So that thing I've just written in brackets, that's the expression for del squared in spherical polar coordinates. We still need to include potential energy times the wave function. So that's going to look like not a plus. So plus the potential energy, but the potential energy is negative. So I'll write minus z e squared over 4 pi epsilon not r multiplied by the wave function. So this whole long expression on these two lines is the left-hand side of Schrodinger's equation on the right side of Schrodinger's equation. That's all equal to the energy times psi. And if I clean that up a little bit, the mass here, think for a second about what the mass is that I'll use in this expression. Ask yourself, is that going to be the mass of a proton, mass of an electron? And the answer is that it's the mass of the electron because that's the particle that we're solving for the wave function of. If we want the wave function of the electron, we'll use the mass of the electron here. And again, just to point out a few features of this equation, the r theta and phi, when we're done, we'll end up solving for a wave function as a function of r theta and phi. Those are the coordinates of the electron relative to the nucleus. So at some distance and some angle, theta and phi relative to the nucleus. And in these derivatives, d dr, d d theta, d d phi, those are derivatives with respect to those coordinates of the electron. And this r, again, is the same r, distance of the electron away from the proton. So what we have here is the Schrodinger equation, the version of the Schrodinger equation for the hydrogen atom or for a hydrogen like ion that we'll need to solve if we want to understand the wave function of a hydrogen atom.


My name is Bill Pelage, I'm a nurse anesthetist at the Pittsburgh VA, and as a staff anesthetist there, our patient population are veterans. Nationally, veterans are subject to about 20% PTSD. Of that same percent, about 20% of those patients are also subject to emergence to laryngeum and that would be a bad wake up or a violent, potentially violent wake up post-operative following an anesthetic. And also nationally, in the civilian population, it's about 5%. So the likelihood of emergence to laryngeum is much higher, it's five times higher in a veteran population. The easy definition is an abrupt awakening from an anesthetic, it could be any anesthetic or for any procedure.  In that stage, when your ears and your senses are emerging from that anesthetic, it is a period of confusion. It's a period where if there's involuntary movement, action, crying, really any behavior that would be involuntary, that short bridge, stage two anesthesia, waking up is also the most dangerous period. That's the period where under the wrong circumstances, you are easily triggered by a sound or it could be a voice. What we found in what's proven is that a female voice upon emergence is better safer than a male voice. And the theory, at least on the military side, is that a female voice would potentially remove you from a combat experience because it's a female voice that would be potentially more calming, more soothing, and also not remotely attached to your combat experience. If that's the source of your PTSD. So our concentration as an anesthesia provider is emergence to laryngeum. Emergency to laryngeum is usually, there's usually a triggering event and so triggering event could be a loud noise, a smell, a sound, it's usually an abrupt noise. And you're reading in reading of PTSD. It's it's those people combat veterans in particular that would avoid July 4 celebrations if they used to hunt they don't hunt anymore. It's that loud abrupt noise, which acts as a trigger event under anesthesia or emerging from anesthesia. The drugs that we use they they suppress, they suppress you in a manner that you can't distinguish. It's a combat experience. You can't you're unable to distinguish what that noise source is. And so it may trigger a flashback or an episode of violence. Project on Eagle was actually started in 2012 so it's it's 10 or 11 years old. Initially it was to pack you nurses at the Pittsburgh VA that they clearly identified that the patients waking up that were most likely to be violent or confused. Also had a history PTSD. So it was brilliant for these two to to say how you know how do we screen and identify. So early on in that 2012, they would pre screen each patients. Each patient on the schedule for a history of PTSD traumatic brain injuries is related sexual assault violence, things like that, or a history of emergency delay. And so those patients were screened like today for tomorrow's schedule. It's just brilliant for them to say, we're going to give these people a quiet room in the pre up area, and we're going to give them a yellow or cap so that everyone on in the perioperative area knows that this patient, if nothing else is is more likely to wake up poorly bad or with violence. I just started there six years ago. I'm a veteran myself. And I noticed for myself that my, my, my event was being in the recovery room, and seeing an old gentleman screaming get down get down. He was clearly not in Pittsburgh he was, he was in Vietnam. And, and it's screaming and swearing that I was going to be shot. And so when I approached him, I thought, you know, I'll, I'll do a little hands on I'll call him I'll talk him out. And that was that was definitely the wrong answer it's just ineffective. So once I got within arms reach he threw me to the floor. And, and when I got up, I knew right then that, you know, we have to do better. You know, it wasn't enough that we know who and identify or pre screen, who was going to have these episodes of violence. It was my mission that day, getting off the floor that, you know, there's got to be a way to prevent this. And that's where project only ago kind of became reborn. And it was a matter of me speaking to the right to individual at Pittsburgh VA and behavioral health. And then it took us about 14 months to formulate. What's now known as Project Golden Eagle, taking it a further step to not only pre screen and put patients in a quiet area, but do a better preoperative assessment. Or, you know, what are their triggers what what is their history of PTSD. And what we found and what we know is that PTSD of any form, whether it's a childhood event sexual assault. It doesn't have to be combat and it just has to be a an event in a person's life. At the VA, of course, we see more combat and more those type, you know, military related stressors. Because that's the environment we're in. But so what we do is we assess better. And then we plan better. And, and what we found myself in a man the backstab my anesthesia partner is that there's really just two drugs that make that situation worse. The PTSD brain is now physically and chemically different by MRI by scans. Someone with PTSD their brain now functions differently. When when triggered or or with an episode of anesthesia related emergency area. And so, so just a matter of good reading and research. You know, there's, there's two agents that make that situation worse. So we are anesthesia management is to eliminate these two agents and go with the drugs that are proven are expected to perform better. And since 2018, our, our injury rate has been zero. We implemented somewhere we implemented the anesthesia portion and the hands on training for all the perioperative staff in 2018. Since then our injuries are zero. And we really attribute that to a solid prevention strategy of doing a better assessment planning better planning the medications better, and then following through with it with a safer and smarter plan. When we look at the statistics and and how these how they impact patient behavior upon emergence from an anesthetic on a civilian side, it's about 5%. I practice, I have 20 plus 25 years practice in a civilian facility, and now these past six years at the VA. And what I think the success of our program translating to another civilian agency or hospital. It's just a simple matter of asking a couple more questions on preoperative anesthesia assessment. If in any hospital, a patient is asked if there's a history of violence in the home or domestic violence. It's a simple yes no question but that doesn't translate to an anesthesia plan. So what we do once the patient is pre screened for PTSD, and we, we know that patient is subject to or maybe subject to emergency to wear. And so what we've done is the, the patients, the 15 or 20% of patients that we see that are not, or they're either not pre screened for PTSD or sexual assault. So that puts us kind of in the same category as the civilian population, whereas these are patients who either don't have a history or a known history of emergency alarm but may have a history of PTSD. And so taken project going to go out of the Pittsburgh VA and and trying to adopt it outside. It's, it's honestly just, it's just an assessment. You know, is there any history of PTSD of any cause or sleep disturbances. I think the younger generation younger meaning, not Vietnam veterans, more Iraq, Afghanistan, you know the last 20 or 25 years. I think that stigma of PTSD is gone, whereas it existed or it seems to exist stronger with the older veterans. And so, so a question of PTSD or sleep disturbances seems to carry a conversation for a patient to, to either admit or think that, you know, the last time I had surgery. You know, I was held down and, and that bothered me. And we have an incident. Amanda took care of a patient. She was a college age. And she, she was putting off her surgery because she she awoke in a period of emergency. At a civilian hospital.  She was, she was locked in a state where she was reliving her sexual assault. And, and without the training to identify, assess and plan for a patient like that. So our staff did what they thought was best they held her down, which only escalated her confusion and her state of violence. So this program going outside of our facility is really it's on that cost, but we're on first base. So we got up with the Pennsylvania safety authority. In 2021. And that organization assigned us a writer Matt Taylor research analyst. And so we looked at first the Pennsylvania civilians statistics of emergency solarium, going back through. I think we started at 2000 incident reports. And then had to identify from that, which of these were anesthesia related across the civilian Pennsylvania population, got that down actually to 97 ever clear cut anesthesia related. That information that study was published in December of 21. And then what we did was from that program or that study. We looked at just project going to to kind of plan for under under the Pennsylvania safety authorities direction was to make our program, almost a how to manual. So what we published in December of 22. It's a, a, a, it's a how to manual it's like the manual that came with your TV that nobody rates. It's start to finish how to identify how to assess how to plan. And, and so there's the anesthesia side that's 50% of it and then the other 50% is how to train your staff. And that's, that's as important as the anesthesia and it really is 50%. So the planning side for the non anesthesia. We look at those assessment questions and the planning to train the staff to better react individually and as a team to safely restrain a patient. And, you know, at the same time protect themselves from injury. In the emergency scenario episode. We define it and we wrote that there's, there's a there's a clear line between violence and non violence or dangerous versus non dangerous. So non dangerous and non violence. What we define would be the patient is not a harm to themselves or harm to the staff. That could include insoluble crying, crying to the point of being hysterical crying.   But they're still in that zone of stage two, where that doesn't always work. And so what we do is we have a medication called precedent. So precedent is, I like to call it a soft set it up.  It's a calming drug, but it takes five or 10 minutes to work. So in the, in the, in the episode of non violence. This is a drug that works great. It works great because it, it doesn't set up so fast, but it's dates the patient to the point where they're still able to, to answer you, or they will be shortly. It's, it's, I think the analogy is, you know, everybody wants to smooth landing in the airplane. But for, for someone like this of emerging from anesthesia, we want that runway to be a little bit longer. So we would use a drug like Presidix as a preventative strategy towards the end of the procedure, you know, or surgery to lengthen that runway and land this plane a little more smoother. So in the opposite spectrum, I, where there's an episode of violence of self harm or patient harm. I mean it's thrashing it's kicking it. It's pulling out IVs it's pulling up breathing tubes. It really is a, it looks violent, and it is violent. And it's potentially dangerous to the patient or to the staff if they're not trained to, to approach a patient correctly. So verbal de-escalation. I'm going to honestly say that that's out of the ballpark. It doesn't work. So in a period of violence, where that preventive strategy is now useless, essentially. So we would use a stronger drug like Propofol, which, which onsets very fast. So we like to teach that Presidix prevents a fight and pro-Propofol stops a fight. Despite our, despite our best assessments for PTSD and related behaviors. This is the potential for emergency learning. Absolutely. So what we've done is we've expanded our assessment question. In 2012 project, only looked for screened or asked about a history of PTSD in trauma or combat experience. And, and that really doesn't begin to open the umbrella of related risk factors. And so our questions are from, from one or two questions in 2012, since 2018, that's broadened out to about 10 questions. Some patients, they like to fill out the, it's a simple questionnaire. Some patients like to fill it out and check the boxes. So what we look at is domestic violence, history of sexual assault, depression, anxiety, alcohol, drug abuse, things, things that may point you in a direction that a patient is self-treating something that they're not identifying as PTSD. Traumatic brain injury is on that same assessment scale. Really, it's, it's any, any event can be perceived as, as a path or a trigger for someone someone that is susceptible. Trying to think of the word startle reflex someone startles easy. It may not be PTSD related, but an abrupt noise upon emergence, for whatever reason, could trigger these same behaviors, because as the medicine wears off and as a patient awakens, it is truly, truly a bridge of involuntary action. We just published in December 21 with the Pennsylvania Safety Authority. The editorial direction that we received as a team, and also with Matt, you know, their research analyst and writer was because we're not research and we are QI, and they are purely research and best practices, we fell somewhere in between.  Our injury rate was zero. We were seeing, we were seeing bad wake ups, potentially violent behavior, once or twice a week, you know, with real staff injuries in years 2000, or prior to 2017. And, and so it was their editorial direction that they wanted something replicable. They wanted, they wanted our program. They wanted it as a word document. So, so what we published was the nuts and bolts of Project Golden Eagle, the entire medication strategy why these two drugs are bad and why these three drugs are great. And with their hand, it is best practices research based. And with our hand meeting in the middle is we came up with a generic form of Project Golden Eagle. It's the entire preoperative assessment. It's the entire medication strategy. It's the entire lesson plan for the hands on training to teach a staff member how to safely approach or restrain a patient, whether they're violent or nonviolent, you know, to protect themselves as well as protect the patient from, from more harm. And then what basically what that marriage produced was a, a 50 page document that anyone can download it's free. And you could put your name at the top of it you put any name you want on it, and, and it's all plug and play. I didn't see it at the time, but I just think that was brilliant on Matt's behalf and the editorial staff of Pennsylvania Safety Authority to make a how to manual to replicate Project Golden Eagle. The barrier to implementation is really provider preference and experience and culture. I've been an estus for 25 years. And, and these, these two drugs that that it's for said and a gas agent. I remember early in my training and in the first 15 years of my practice when, when I saw emergence to my room. I gave more of those drugs. And it just escalate I just made it worse. You know, and, and it's, it's this cultural. What's a stronger word than habit.   And so what we're hoping to do as QI is to penetrate that culture to try something different. You know, to, to, to read a little to try a little. And to, I guess, put your neck out a little bit to not use these two drugs, but use these two drugs. And I don't have a financial interest in any of this. But it's just a proven strategy to improve outcomes. And our biggest barrier is, is experience and culture. An assessment question cost you nothing. It's a simple question. You know, any history of PTSD for any cause. Or sleep disturbances. And if it's a yes or a maybe, then you can ask about a history of domestic violence or sexual assault or depression anxiety, these related risk factors. That would make you believe that this patient would benefit from project on you. And so, so on the front. It's, it's minutes worth of an added assessment. And some people won't make or take that added minute. I think it needs to change that culture and just to add something to your habit of assessing a patient. The other side of that is implementation of a medication strategy. And, and that requires a little more. A little more effort on our part to change the attitude of a practitioner. That's been giving a drug or two or has a, has a very good reason to treat patients with a benzodiazepine to calm them preoperatively or on the onset of potentially dangerous behavior to use that same drug. And the, the medazoline to in the hopes to calm that behavior when in fact the research bears out that it's that same drug that traps that patient and in that event in that episode in that nightmare in that flashback.  So there's a greater potential for self harm or staff harm. And so it's, it's a matter of, of culture and, and doing a little bit of research, a little bit of reading and saying, you know, maybe even try something new, rather than something old that I've been doing for 1015 20 years.


Educational technology involves teaching with technology and teaching with tools. And when we talk of teaching with tools, we are simply talking about non-digital and some traditional tools that we have. And of course, the recent or the modern ICT tools. In this session, we'll discuss about the non-digital and traditional as well as the ICT tools. We'll discuss about how we utilize them in teaching for learning and some of the issues and challenges that we encounter in using them. Research shows that 90% of learning is visual and attention span of our students lasts only for about 15 to 20 minutes. Students often use mobile devices and they study about 40 minutes more each week than those who don't. More than 70% of mobile students use applications or apps that allow them to study with flashcards and some quizzes online. While 60% of our students are willing to pay for an app that supports learning. In higher education, digital technology can offer an experimental space that provides a pedagogical experience, an environment where students can learn at their own pace. Content presented in multiple modalities, graphs, arts, interactive learning, reinforcement and video tutorials to create the illusion of non-mediation. Content presented in small chunks offers an agile app-to-date information. Recent technologies has changed the paradigm of education from consumption, creation to collaboration. Consumption, we consume all the knowledge and information that we gather from these new technologies and we should be able to create something new from this information and we should be able to collaborate to others or share to others what we have created. It's no longer the multiple choice world. There is a need now for big thinking. There is now an explosion of knowledge, new globalized technology driven order. There is more complex wide of problem that we face now involving technology. In teaching, we must be concerned with what technology migrant schools prefer for their instructional materials. We must be concerned what the end users or our students actually need and we teachers must be able to match this need and this migration concern of the schools with what we are teaching, what we can use and what we can actually produce and what we can offer to our students. Teaching involving educational technology is actually anchored on three important things. One is learning teaching strategy. The second one is the mode of interaction that is involved in the teaching learning and the third one is the tool, the task and the content. However, we have to consider also that in anything that we prepare for our students there are three basic concerns that we have to consider like whatever activities we give to our students is our focus on activity, is our focus on communication or our focus is on content. If our focus is on activity then we should provide our students with activities such as case study, conference session, constructivism, expedition based, experiential learning, laboratory or project activities. If our focus is to develop communication skills to our students then we should provide activities such as cooperative learning, guided discussion, social learning or Web 2.0. If our focus is on content then we should do it by chapter, by lecture, by lesson, by module, by subject, by topic, by unit or it could be science focus. Take note that for each of these activities that we would like to provide to our students it has something to do also with the different subject contents that we would like to consider. If the course that we are teaching is mathematics then it's more of activity focus. If it is science based then it is more of activity focus as well. If our focus is to develop critical thinking skills involving content then these activities must be offered or given to students whose courses are heavy on content such as Ralimpan Lipunan or Kasai Science or what we call as history and others. These activities are heavily dependent on the tools that we use and our tools could either be non-digital or digital. Let's take for example boards. We are familiar with the green or black boards that goes well with chalks. We also have what we call the white boards or a more pricey one but portable is we have the wall-to-wall magnetized white boards. We have manila paper or brown paper as we call them when you need an extra board for concepts that you intend to use again. But your paper in locals we call it cartolina when you don't have white boards or want to keep an affinity map for example like the 4 x 48 x 200 feet roll white art paper. Non-digital tools could include painters masking tape to adhere the butcher paper without tripping the room's paint. It could be the flip charts. It could be multiple color packs of post-it notes or categorized affinity maps. It could be index cards. It could be sharpies. It could be notebooks, writing pads, music notebook. It could be math notebooks. It could be an overhead projector an opaque projector, a carousel for your slides, camera using roll films, a megaphone, a videotape such as your VHS or others. We can go on and on but there are more tools now like the digital tools that are better than the non-digital tools. Like for example the white boards. The white boards now has been replaced by the electronic white board an electronic white board where we can use this for typing or writing, drawing and which content can be saved, retrieved or printed. We have the Manila paper or brown paper when we need an extra board as we say in the butcher and all of these activities can be now done using the white board. We have computers now. The pisses, the laptops, the netbooks, the tablets, the smartphones no need for painters masking tape the flip charts nor the charts that we use. We can do them all using the computers. We can do highlighting. We can do tagging as well. We can do note-taking, typing. We can do the things that we are doing using the traditional technologies that we have. The use of traditional approach or the non-digital technologies that goes with it and the digital alternative is the next discussion. If the skill that we want to develop is about note-taking the activity or the traditional approach that we will use is about handwritten notes. The digital alternative to this is brainstorming using text entry tools and word processing softwares using other organizing digital technology such as the blooms and graphical organizers the mind mapping tools. We have also the draw anywhere, the mind map or we can make use of the eye thoughts the simple mind x, the white board hd it could be the eye brainstorm or we can make use of word processing tools such as the open office the star office writer the MS word the adobe buzzword and such as collaborative note-taking tools such as wall-wisher the iPad eye works pages the notes we can also have the stylus text entry the tablet pieces or we can have graphic tablets blogging tools for blogging we have the micro blogging tool we have the posterios or we can even have the ebook creation tool if we want our students to create some activities related to journal writing if the activity is about coming up with diagrams mind maps, graphical organizers and flowcharts our traditional tool is to make use of butcher paper or diagrams and flowcharts the alternative to this is using flowchart mind mapping software such as the glyphy the draw anywhere the white board the eye brainstorm the eye thoughts the mind master the iPad eye thoughts the simple mind x or it could be the white board if the activity is about formal writing the tool is as simple as the paper the alternative to this is using word processing software or a desktop publishing software or an online publishing such as we have the my ebook we have the collaborative writing tools such as the google documents the zaho documents we have the wiki for drafting processes the tool or traditional tool that we use is the drafting table the alternative to this is we make use of word processing software such as the star office you have the MS word you have the notepad you have the prime yard pad we have the collaborative writing such as the google documents the collaborative note taking if the activity is about formal communication example is writing letters then the electronic or digital alternative to this is to make use of the electronic mail and word process documents tools that we can use includes electronic mail online solutions such as Microsoft exchange discussion boards blackboard or web city star office MS word documents and other note takers such as zaho open office adobe buzzword the impress the powerpoint we have the keynote we have the slide share the voice thread the prezi for collaborative writing we can make use of google documents we can make use of wiki or zaho documents the ithar pad or the protagonist if the activity is about informal communications the alternative to this is making use of electronic mail instant messaging or threaded discussion so we have the gmail we have the hotmail we have the first class mobile me we have instant messaging we can make use of model outlook skype eye chat we have the name we have wordpress we have blogger we have edu blogs we have wall wischer and of course we have the twitter if the activity is about research research from the traditional using the encyclopedia the alternative to this is using the online encyclopedia we have online encyclopedia such as the britannica online the wikipedia and the wikipedia schools offline we can make use of the citizen doom we have the living library that we can make use of we have dictionaries the online dictionaries like the oxford dictionary the cambridge dictionary we also have the ipad online dictionary if the activity is about research from those papers journals and magazines the digital alternative to this is to come up or make use of the online newspapers we can make use of web browsers internet explorer safari opera firefax we can have aggregators we can make use of the google scholar as well if we want to do bookmarking tools then we can make use of ipad router app we have the bbc app we have the tvnz app we have the news pro app and others if the activity is about general research then we can make use of some research engines and directories so we can make use of internet explorer the opera the firefax and other online encyclopedias if the activity is about presenting material the traditional way is we simply ask the students to create posters the digital alternative to this is to come up with presentation using presentation software graphic tools web publishing we can make use of presentation software such as impress powerpoint google documents we have the open office we have the voice thread the slide share we have the prezi we have the eye works the keynote the presenter the projector we have the remote story kit or we can make use of the soho documents or we can make use of the microsoft publisher we can make use of the adobe page maker the coral draw the star office the ink space and so many other free resources that we can make use if the activity is about watching videos the alternative to this is coming up or using the digitized resources we can make use of the quick time as the students to use youtube the teacher tube or the ted.com or we can make use of the vlc player if the activity is about journals the traditional way is to process journals come up with diaries and others the digital alternative to this is to come up with blogs micro blogs videos and podcasts for blogs we can make use of classroom blog master first class wordpress the name the blogger edu blogs blog lines we have the posterious we have the wordpress for micro blogging we can make use of twitter we can make use of tweak deck for ipad we can make use of google video teacher tv youtube teacher tube we can make use of audacity voice thread quick voice outlook google calendars for making or coming up with journal or we can make use of your ipad if the activity is about homework and we want our students to come up with traditional homeworks like distributing homework and assignments we can make use of traditional tool such as the pen and the paper but the alternative to this is the electronic mail posting to conferences forums wikis and others digital tools that we can make use include electronic mail such as gmail we have for wiki we can make use of moodle we can make use of blackboard we can make use of moodle for thread discussion we have the first class moodle we have blackboard for blogs we have classroom blog master we have wordpress for micro blogging and sms we can make use of twitter texting and sms online storage drop box idisk mobile me or even the mobile phones if the activity is about collecting homework collecting homework is simply asking the students to pass the paper or the activities of the students the digital alternative to this is coming up or having a drop box the tools that we can make use would include electronic mail online solutions again such as gmail and others we have microsoft exchange we can have thread discussions as well and the ever note if the activity is about paper based tests then the digital alternative to this is having electronic tests electronic tests are now very common and the tools that we can make use would include electronic testing tools such as blackboard Moodle first class education the lambs the survey monkey the dot x the scorm objects it could be hot potatoes and others if the activity is about voting and surveys the traditional is that we use the paper base or show of hands digital tools would include online survey and polling tools such as first class education Moodle the monkey dot x scorm objects part of google documents that is the google forms we can also make use of some survey tools associated with blogs wikis, imtools and some micro blogging and sms such as twitter, texting and sms if the activity is about discussion the digital alternative to this is using asynchronous and synchronous tools the instant messaging chat rooms forums, threaded discussions and wikis the tools that we could use would include electronic mail we can have online solutions hotmail, gmail we can have hosted solutions such as microsoft exchange for wiki we can make use of first class Moodle, main, blackboard we can have wiki spaces we can have wet paint wikis for threaded discussion we can have Moodle we can have blogs as well we can have social networking tools we can have micro blogging and sms audio and video conferencing and collaborative writing tools if the activity is about graphical organizer the digital alternative to this is brainstorming mind mapping software we can make use of mind mapping such as babolas, gliffy, cmap tools we have whiteboard inspiration, kidspiration we have free mind we have mind manager, microsoft we have ideas we have compedium we can also make use of ibrainstorm but for collaborative writing we can make use of google documents soho documents or protagonize if the activity is about time management such as using personal project group or organization that involves time management activities for the students the digital alternative to this is using the calendaring tools project and task management software such as the outlook the first class the project management tools such as the gantt project the open project or we can make use of the task management tools such as the task coach or the ms outlook if the activity involves mathematics, maths and data processing that usually involves paper base and calculator the traditional way is simply make use of paper, calculator and pen the digital approach or alternative is making use of spreadsheets and calculators tools under this would include spreadsheet, star office, calc the star office, the math office the ms excel for the numbers we can make use of the acrobat.com we can make use of the note taker by soho we can make use of numbers by using your ipad we can make use of calculators the standard and the scientific calculators or we can have online resources using web map or the math board if the activity involves about board games the digital alternative to this is make use of the rpg and electronic games such as the game maker the pop fly rpg maker the sims online if the activity is about timelines or visually representing events the digital alternative to this is to have an online timeline tools we have the president we have the xtimeline.com we have the timeline.com timelost.com timeglider.com and dipity.com if the activity is about bibliography and developing bibliography the digital alternative to this is to make use of the online bibliography tools such as the online citation tools like the ezebib the landmarks project sign of citation machine you have the sataro you have the bib me you have the delicious as well educational technology is very important so as digital and non-digital tools so these are the tools that we use for communication if we want to develop collaborative skills to our students tools for inquiry if we want to develop the critical thinking skills to our students tools for construction if we want to develop the creative skills with to our students so we always go back to the question how do digital natives learn and how do we teachers teach there are different tools different media different languages and students learn differently outside and inside the classroom digital and non-digital technologies have changed the language the function the structure the vocabulary the context the standards and outcomes of education there are so many tools so many different ways so many strategies so many principles but all of this depends on the readiness of your students to use technology the readiness of you teachers to use technology inside the classroom and outside the classroom the readiness of your infrastructure in your schools and the place where your students will access technology first the last part is the support of your administration it's about time that you revisit your own tool box teachers and try to find out what you have in there it's about time that you fill up your tool box


But what all of these things, all these technologies do, is they enable us to better monetize value. And you see a clash between a sort of organic means of advertising that developed on these platforms and what the normal consumer safety or awareness rules look like. Welcome to Building Tomorrow. Today we're talking about commodifying daily life. And with me today we have Aaron Powell and Will Duffield. Welcome guys. So we've got an interesting couple of topics.  Underneath of that we have smart TVs spying on you. We have special new browsers that give you control of ad revenue. And we have the way in which being a Twitch streamer can be a very stressful and unpleasant way of making a living, but a way of making a living. So let's tackle those one at a time. So first there was an article in The New York Times by Sapna Maheshwari how smart TVs and millions of U.S. homes track more than what's on TV tonight. In short, it's an article about how when you set up your smart TV, and it really doesn't matter who you buy it from, it could be Samsung, Vizio, Philips, you name it, there'll be a screen often where it says, would you like to opt into a service that will help you better match your interests with potential shows? Like we'll show you smart recommendations. 90 plus percent of people opt into this program not realizing that what they're actually opting into is a record-keeping surveillance of everything that they watch. The point of the article is not only that you're allowing a third-party marketer to watch you as you watch television. It's also that now this is bleeding over into the Internet of Things that when you set up, say, your smartphone as a controller for your television or you use Amazon Fire Stick or Apple TV or any of these devices that are now connected to your smart TV, they're actually sharing data with the TV that is then being shared with these third-party marketers who pay TV manufacturers for the privilege, the TV companies getting a cut of this money, but you yourself aren't seeing this revenue. So what do you think, guys? First of all, where are the problems in this trend? And what's the potential, though, for consumers pushing past problems? I think the issue here is a lack of transparency. Even the screen that was shown to users as they were trying to set up their TV and watch something that explained this process did so fairly opaquely and didn't seem to highlight what would be, for most users, the most concerning aspect of this program. This firm, SAMBA, not only tracks what you watch on TV, but what you do on other devices connected to the same Internet connection as your television. The article quotes Jeffrey Chester, Executive Director of the Center for Digital Democracy, saying that the TV's device map, which matches content to mobile gadgets according to a document on its website, can help the company track users in, quote, their office, in line at the food truck, and on the road as they travel. And while that was spelled out pretty explicitly in this internal document at SAMBA, users weren't getting such a forthright explanation of what was happening to them. And when someone feels as though the wool is being pulled over their eyes, they'll usually react poorly to it. Okay, so I get that. But I guess I'm skeptical that even if you told people, it would make much of a difference as far as them feeling like the wool was pulled over their eyes. So as we record this today, and it's, what, Friday, July 6th, one of the many things in the news that doesn't have anything to do with Trump is that people have suddenly figured out that when you give third parties permission to read your email in Gmail, third parties are reading your email in Gmail. And that people are panicking. This is kind of the next phase of the Cambridge Analytica Facebook thing. But this is an instance where when you go, like, so I use a third-party email client that connects to my Gmail account. And when I install it and when I log into Gmail with it so I can add the account, a dialogue pops up from Google. And it's very clear. It's crisp white with nice icons, not a lot of text. And it says, this app would like permission to, and the first one is, manage and read your email. And then it has a couple more, like, delete email, see your contacts. There's no hidden language behind, you know, lots of leak leads. There's probably 40 words total on this dialogue. And I have to say, yes, I want to grant it these permissions. So everyone who has granted these app permissions has seen this incredibly clear dialogue that says, do you want to let this third-party app read your email? And yet everyone is panicking now because third-party apps can read their email. So I don't see, I guess, what difference it would make. I don't see the problem here being that it's opaque, that, you know, the thing you're opting into, because people seem bafflingly unable to understand what they're opting into, even when it's only a handful of words. I don't know if it's so much the length as that the, like, it's not, like, what's being done by, say, Samba TV as described in the article is not, it's not about the length of what your, I mean, in fact, they show a picture of the opt-in screen in the article. You don't even see the terms and conditions. There's like an option you can check where you can voluntarily pop them open and read, like, 40, you know, some crazy number of pages of text. What they basically do is they say, is that they obfuscate what they're going to use, what information they're gathering from you and what they're using it for. So rather than saying, we're going to use your information to target ads at you, they say, we want to enhance your experience with the television. The exact line is something like, get recommendations based on the content you love and give you more control over your television experience.  It doesn't mean, I mean, I don't read that and say, this means they're going to target advertisements at me and they're going to watch me so they can... And track your phone. It doesn't seem to jump to, off of the television platform onto other things. Now, yes, people might react as they do with regard to Gmail and the third parties you've consented to provide access to there, but in this case, it wasn't so clear-cut a provision of authority and I think that will always rankle people whether if you were to provide a more explicit explanation of what you were doing, they'd be happier. I don't know, but this kind of obfuscation can't help. Well, and though your point though, I mean, I think there's a point where I would agree with you, Aaron, that terms and conditions are just something we're all kind of trained, like Pavlovian dogs just click on. We see it and we click. We're trained, we see it, we click, and we don't give it a second thought. We just kind of assume that they're operating in our best interest because why wouldn't they? And then we find out that actually something in there gives them the ability to do something we don't like, then there's lots of public shock and surprise. So, I mean, the argument would be, is this really any more hidden or obfuscated than what we're all doing constantly whenever we use a new app or whatever we use a new program? Even when it comes to using a new app, often the design of the service and what it's going to provide to others isn't very upfront. I was very surprised to find the other night that as I signed up to Nextdoor, this neighborhood social media app, it's been great, enjoy using it, but only by looking at someone else's profile who hadn't explicitly opted out of providing their exact address. Did I learn that I and the others, most of the others using it around me, had auto-opted in or weren't presented with an explicit opt-in provide their specific street address, which maybe isn't something all of those users intend or desire to provide to anyone else on the platform? One wonder I have about the more explicit terms, the more, you know, so we can lay out everything that this thing's going to do with knowing what your devices are doing and what information it's gathering, is does that have the effect of potentially scaring people away from a service that they wouldn't mind in retrospect? So that they, you know, if at some later point you're like, oh well the way that your TV has been giving you personalized recommendations is because it's aware that when you're using Apple TV you're watching these shows and that you have, you know, asked it to look up the following sorts of things and it's gathering that data and people might be like, oh well, in the context of how I've used it and seen how that plays out, that's pretty cool. But if you front-load it and say, here's all the things that we're going to do in this, you know, explicit way that it might scare them off, it kind of primes them to think like, oh god, this is stuff I really have to pay attention to and so they're not going to necessarily get the benefits. And this isn't something like I'm not, this isn't necessarily my position and I'm not making this as an argument, I'm just tossing this up as like would we be potentially giving up long-term benefits because that the norms would naturally adjust? Like people are, I've seen it in use, they're like, oh that's fine. But if you make the warning explicit up front, we won't have, we'll lessen the opportunity for the norms adjustment from which the benefits eventually flow. It'd be like, imagine if someone at the FDA, they just, and they went back to college and they were assigned Upton Sinclair's the jungle, they read all about like how, about meat cutting and the production of meat products and how filthy they are and so they said, you know what, consumers need to know.  But we're fine eating it, sometimes you don't want to know how the sausage gets made, you just want to eat the sausage.  But they don't know how that thing's produced. You pull back the curtain a little bit, it freaks them out some, but that might be a function of their kind of lack of understanding or technological literacy rather than a true gauge, right? So there's something to be said for that argument. I can see it, though, I think a lot of the concerns, sorry, were you going to say something? Yeah, just to take your sausage analogy and run with it, particularly as liberals or libertarians, we should be aware and concerned by Audubon Vismarck's formulation of that likening the lawmaking process to the sausage-making process there. As folks who aren't particularly pleased with either the process or the outcome, I think we'd be happier if people knew a bit more about how laws were made and refrained from endorsing them or accepting their application on that ground. I mean, I suppose the question is how we arrive. We should value transparency in process. The question is how we arrive at that, right? There's a potential for a panic to overwhelm the kind of rational faculties here, in which case something that actually does provide benefits and could be improved with more competition or with more transparency gets kind of cut off, the development gets stultified because of a kind of broad social panic over what's being done. The other aspect of the article that I think would arouse concern, it did a little bit for me at least, reading it was the device mapping, the idea that, okay, I've opted into my television reporting back information about what I watch. I'm cool with that. But when it starts reporting what I'm doing at a food cart or what I'm, you know, things I'm doing with other devices, wait a second, did I opt into that? And it also is a peek possibly into the future of the kind of surveillance that's possible in an internet of things enabled environment. So someday, you know, this is the buzzword Internet of Things, at some point everyone expects that your major appliances, starting with your major appliances and your phone and electronics, but at some point even your light bulbs, your circuits, your just really anything that's electrically connected in your house will be communicating with each other and then also communicating with third parties.  So like you bought that kale but then you didn't actually eat it. And they can tell how quickly you ate that, that you drank that six pack of, whatever, of Bud Light, I don't know who bought a six pack of Bud Light, for example, but they did and they drank it really quickly. What's wrong with that? So they know what... You always bought it in like 24 packs or larger. Well, yeah, well I can't. Buy the case, man, buy the case. So they would be able to know or then when you use your, you know, you ask Alexa what the weather forecast is and then after doing so, they get that forecast, then say, okay, where's the nearest dog park or something? They know from that like when the weather is like this, you do these kinds of activities. But there's a potential for kind of like an expansion in vacuuming up consumer information as a matter of course. And that's gonna be, I think, scary to a lot of current consumers in a digital age. I mean, are we right to be scared about that? And what aspects of that do you find scary or potentially overblown as something to be worried about? I guess I find it more needless than scary. I can't ever imagine wanting to purchase a smart fridge. Like none of that functionality is remotely appealing to me. I'm, I guess, bracing myself more for the sort of culture war concerns that we will see surrounding how these systems are designed.  As for the harvesting of user data, I mean, yes, it's going to happen. Now, how that will be abused or misused, I'm not sure. And again, really still just struggling to figure out why anyone would find it valuable. Oh, I can think of lots of ways that having your fridge track what you're putting into it, when you're taking it out, how much of it you're consuming would be valuable.   My fridge can tell me these are the things you're out of would be incredibly useful. Because not everyone is all that diligent about saying I used the last of the milk, we need to get more. Or knowing, you know, all of us do buy, as Paul said, things aspirationally. But if I know that the last six dozen times I bought that kale, it never got eaten. And have something that can remind me of that, then maybe I'll be like, okay, I'm going to admit defeat. Don't you have rotting kale in your fridge? You'd be amazed at the human ability to ignore the fact that you let it rot the last six times.  Okay, I can see some of the family stuff. I'm always skeptical. Here's a new technology and I can't imagine what use we would ever have for it.  So, I mean, there should be, I can imagine uses for consumers. You can imagine the usefulness for advertisers too, right? Where they can now, they can say, okay, not only do we know this is someone who purchases kale, but they don't actually eat the kale. So, maybe at certain times they're probably getting, but they'll buy dove chocolate. So, we'll target them for a period. You know, there's all kinds of potential micro-targeting that can be done. But at the same time, I think the first objection that comes to mind as an objection to being overly worried or paranoid about that prospect, we already do this with the internet, right? Everything you do on the internet is being, unless you use Tor and you use a VPN and you use special browsers and the like, everything you do on the internet is being tracked and watched for the sake of advertising. That is the Fundamental Commercial Bedrock on which the internet's built. And there are issues with that information being misused. I mean, think Cambridge Analytica and Facebook and whatnot, but at the end of the day, the benefits outweigh the costs. And there's no reason to suspect the same thing wouldn't be true with smart fridges. And so, while the smart TV device mapping, we could quibble with the particular thing that they're doing. Like, maybe they need to be, well, not maybe. They should be more transparent. They should let people know what they're actually opting into. They should, this whole taking information from other manufacturers' devices that aren't part of the agreement, that's all really sketchy. But the basic concept, the concept that all of your devices will communicate and that that produces value, both for you and for advertisers, bring it on. I mean... Okay, it seems to go beyond advertising as well. I mean, think of the insurance market benefits. You'll certainly see more efficient insurance markets.  And that seems like a lot of work to deal with. This constant communication fits in, I mean, one of the benefits of free markets and prices as information. The core argument for the value of having the market set prices is that they act as a means of moving information between actors in the market in an incredibly efficient way that can't be done in a centralized fashion. And so the more information you have, the better all these efficiencies. So you give the example of the insurance, but there's all kinds of efficiencies. There's all kinds of new products that can grow out of this. There's all kinds of wealth-creating mechanisms that can spring forth the more information you have. The problem is that if you get overloaded with information, then you can't really act on it. So one of the things that prices do is in this really elegant way they can take extraordinary amounts of information and get just the right information to just the right person at just the right time in a way that they can act on it in a fruitful manner. So there's the concern that we just gather too much, but as the technology gets better and better at managing the information too and passing it around, I think we can see tremendous benefits. I agree with that completely, and my concern is much more selfish. There are certain inefficiencies in the market that exist now as a result of incomplete information that benefit me personally, and I'd like to maintain them. I don't want that information out there because there's a cost to me for that. Now right now I might be a free rider in a sense, but I'd like to maintain that status as long as possible. Right.  Things you're embarrassed about, things that... So those kind of things are easier to expose in the world in which everything's talking, communicated. Aaron is rightly frustrated that he may be subsidizing my insurance at the moment or other inefficiencies that exist. Yeah. Oh, we all know what an accident-prone lifestyle you live will, so... Now it's out there. Everyone knows it now. One of the other potential benefits that I thought of is that, okay, so there's a revenue stream, and that revenue stream is getting bigger because now you can target ever more specifically. That's worth money to advertisers. Right now that money flows through these third-party marketing organizations like Samba. The question is, as that pool increases, can consumers take some of that money for themselves, cut out the middleman, redirect that flow to their own pocket? So like right now a lot of that's indirect. I mean, indirectly, Samba pays some indeterminate sum of money to a television manufacturer. That television manufacturer and margins are very, very slim on TV sets. Because of that, they can drop the prices on their TV by some fraction. Our TVs are cheaper because of organizations like Samba. That's indirect though, and the question is, if you can cut out the middleman, you're cutting out some slice of the profit they're taking, more of that money can go directly to the consumer. So you can imagine a world in which you get the opt-in that says, you can opt-out and have all your privacy and desperately try to find the Netflix program you want to find next is through all the direct that's in the back catalog on Netflix. Or if you opt-in to our program, we will pay for Hulu for you for free, or HBO Now, or we'll provide free subsidized benefits because of the value you're letting us take from you. So there's a way in which this excess revenue being generated doesn't have to stay in the pockets of organizations like Samba or other marketers. Yeah, I think there's a lot of really interesting tech in this regard. The next thing that we had in our list is the Brave browser, but Brave is just one example of many sorts of things like this. This idea that right now the advertising model, and it exists this way because of technological limitations and responses to technological limitations, right now the advertising model is advertisers want to reach consumers. And so advertisers give money to publishers, whether that was print magazines or classified ads in newspapers or online ads now, or television ads, they give money to the content publishers and the content publishers have an audience and so then they put the ads in front of the audience. But what we can do technologically now and increasingly is we can kind of cut out the need potentially for money to go to publishers or all of the money to go to publishers. So you can have a system where the advertiser is basically paying the consumer to see the ads. Publishers still can take their cut too because they are creating the content that is drawing the person. We can imagine some sort of dystopian future where you can opt in to spend four hours in front of the TV just watching advertisements and take home some money from that, but that's probably not what most of us want to do. It seems like an architecting question more than anything else because at the moment the portals through which we view and consume this sort of content you're using, say Google Chrome to watch or read the New York Times, it doesn't allow you. It doesn't give you the capacity to retain control over your data. But this web browser looks like it changes things. Aaron, you might be explaining Brave. I know there's other options, but why don't you explain Brave for our listeners? So Brave is a project to build a browser but the real thing that it's building, the browser is kind of a way to get to the core of it. The core of it is a new way to address, call it the attention economy online, which is what advertising all is, is an attention economy. People are paying for the attention of viewers and listeners and so on and readers. And so what Brave does is it bakes into, in this case, the browser. So Brave is a browser you can download it now, you can install it on your desktop, you can install it on your phone or your tablet. It works just like every other browser. It's got some extra neat privacy features built in so it's got slick ad and tracking blocking. The newest desktop version is now supporting. Every time you pop open like a private viewing window, typically your browser, if you open a private viewing window, all that really means is that the browser doesn't retain the cookies that you generated during that session. But there's all sorts of other ways to track you. Brave now bakes Tor into the private viewing windows. You're automatically using this much more secure and private network. But the core of it is this basic attention token, which is a cryptocurrency. It sits on the Ethereum blockchain. It's a token. But this token is supposed to be the core of the new attention economy for browsing. And so initially this plays two roles. The first is I can have a wallet of basic attention tokens and I can spend real money to buy more tokens to put into my wallet. And then what I can do is effectively share a portion of that wallet each month with the publishers that I visit. So the Washington Post right now is signed up with them. So if I have $10 I'm giving out each month, I've chosen to give out to publishers in my wallet, and I spend 10% of my browsing time that month on the Washington Post, then the Washington Post will automatically get $1 worth of my tokens transferred to their account. And so the more places I browse, the more it's spread out and so on. But that's the... I have to kind of... I have to not just opt into that in terms of like I want to give permission to give this money, but I have to opt into the sense that I have to put my own money in. So it's more of a tipping system than an advertising system. The other part of it though is that the brave browser in a local way, so within my system, not shared on third-party servers and all that, is building... can build a profile of me, of the kind of data that any other... that like Facebook would gather about you or whatever else because the browser knows obviously what I'm browsing, what I'm clicking on. So you can build this profile of me, and then in a secure way it can brave... the company can sell advertisements. So advertisers come to brave. They sell advertisements that appear in the browser or can appear on publishers' websites. And those advertisements are targeted to me based on data that's stored locally in my browser. So brave doesn't know what's on your system. Is my understanding, yes. And then the advertisers are basically buying the ads using these tokens. And then when I see one of these ads, a portion of the money, so I think 70%, something like that, goes to the publisher that the ad appeared on. And brave pockets its 30% fee for this service. But you could also very easily turn that into... a portion goes to the publisher who showed me this ad that was targeted to me in a privacy-respecting way. And then a portion also goes to me. It goes into my wallet because I'm the one who saw the ad. And this seems like... We know that obviously our data is valuable. We are generating... Facebook is in business because we, the users, are generating a tremendous amount of value. And this is simply a way that the users can get paid for generating the value. It's always been that way in the sense that... the way that you use a social media network is by creating content on it in the form of posts, in the form of comments, in the form of likes, you're creating content. Content creators have been paid in the past, obviously, but there's like a floor. You need to be a certain level of famous or a certain level of having a big audience in order to get paid, otherwise your content creation is free. Tech like this allows you to kind of get rid of that floor so that everyone down to, no matter how obscure you are, you're not going to make a lot, but you're going to generate... you can generate income based on how valuable whatever content you happen to create is to the publishers and ultimately the advertisers. Do you think it might have specifically thinking about social media and current complaints about antisociality on it? Have a pacifying effect on some of that if people were seeking a monetary reward rather than a sort of social impact or recognition reward. If you were simply paid for having read someone's post rather than expecting payment in the form of the followers you might get if you left a particularly amusing or snarky comment underneath. I can see that being a tricky problem because you as a user slash content creator you're playing both roles when you're using these networks the advertisers ultimately... the advertisers are only going to pay an amount that they think they're going to get a greater return. That's their goal is to get people to buy their products and so they're not going to pay out more than they're earning from the sales of their products. They will increasingly want to pay for effective advertising with effective targeting and so on. And so the thing is you get paid by the value you create but the value you create is not... it's not quite clear how to measure that. And so I could see it on the one hand leading to a pacifying effect that if the economy is set up to encourage good behavior and good behavior is rewarded then you'll get more good behavior. But if its value creation can be a unpredictable thing so it might be that the people who draw the most attention that that's who advertisers want to target, right? Influencers, you want to get your stuff so the metrics behind the scenes are saying like advertisers want to target their ads to people who have larger audiences or get more retweets because those people then create kind of downstream value for the advertisers in which case you might get the opposite effect that it might ratchet up because not only right now that attention, those lots and lots of retweets that you get for your snarky comments the value to you is gratification, is, you know, feel goodness but if suddenly on top of that there's a monetary gain then you might see even more of it. But then you have the effect of just that then devalue the network as a whole because it drives away other users. So I can see this being very, very screwy and seeing lots of extremes. I expect that, you know, as the technology gets better and as people get used to the system it evens out but it strikes me as unpredictable. I have a heightening effect rather than something new or different current trends in this space would be exaggerated. So it's a space that already has some exaggerations and actually that's our last topic here from an article by Adrian Chen, Ice Poseidon's lucrative stressful life as a live streamer. So we're talking about content creators who need large audiences but that in theory those audiences don't have to be as large in this brave new world. But we currently have streamers and this Ice Poseidon is a guy who's a Twitch streamer who is an in real life streamer so he's not streaming games. Most Twitch streamers are gamers. I've just got to read the opening passage here because it's wonderfully written and a strange creature stalks Los Angeles hunting for content. He is pale and tall as skinny as a folded up tripod. His right hand holds a camera on a stick which he waves like an explorer illuminating a cave painting. His left hand clutches a smartphone close to his face. Entering a restaurant he wraps his left wrist around the door handle so that he can pull the door open while still looking at the phone. Chaos follows him. So this fellow Ice Poseidon streams most of his waking life whether he's inside playing video games or wandering the greater Los Angeles area seeking out human interactions which will delight and titillate his followers and draw greater attention to his project getting him greater advertising revenue. This has obviously had quite a profound impact on how he lives his life as well. And the article illustrates some very interesting dynamics and incentives created by this mode of both content creation and essentially his work. So, well, there's this, as I was reading Ice Poseidon, the bell, Ice Poseidon, it was the first I'd heard of him. I mean, I watched a little Twitch myself. I'm familiar with the community a little bit. So there's a toxicity. I mean, throughout the article, both he and his followers engage in, shall we say, antisocial behavior. So like his followers were constantly, he gets, people are swatting him and calling the SWAT team and saying that he's holding someone hostage. Someone swat them every day for a month. I mean, these are his own followers. And part of the appeal for them, I think, is not just to view his life but to viscerally take part in it. Yeah. And they made him break up with his girlfriend. They made, you know, like, there's a lot of, and so you read it and you say, well, if the future is more of this, well, we're in trouble because we're unpleasant. But I do wonder to some extent if what we have is kind of a false picture of what this looks like going forward, that for a variety of contingent reasons, this lifestyle, this technology is in the hands of, or has been first wielded by kind of an unpleasant community. Like the reason why he's toxic is because he's a toxic guy attracting toxic people. All this technology could be used by more, I mean, this doesn't have to be the case. I also wouldn't be so hard on him and his community. The people who follow him seem to derive a lot of value from it and often seem like pretty lonely people who find a friend in a community in this. So one thing that I think distinguishes this from the prior two things we talked about, so that smart TVs and the Internet thing is gathering data on you. And then putting the users into the ecosystem for advertising, making them participants or earners as well, is that toxicity aside, all that aside, what this guy's doing doesn't scale. So all of us could be earning money in advertising dollars from our use of social media. And all of us could be opting in and getting better and better recommendations about television shows to watch. And in fact, all those things potentially get even better than more of us who opt in. But... Not all of us can be expedited. Not all of us can be live streamers. Even if we wanted to, most of us wouldn't want to, but most of us are not interesting in the way that I guess this guy is somehow interesting to his audience. You know, it's more like all of us tell jokes all the time. But that doesn't mean that we all could become stand-up comics and that someone like this needs... You need a critical mass of followers in order to earn even enough to make doing this worthwhile in the first place. Because as the article mentions, he's using a lot of very expensive equipment. There's all sorts of upkeep costs and so on. So I think that this is, A, something that was always going to remain relatively obscure because it's just not financially sustainable at scale. And B, I think that as it attracts, as this sort of stuff grows, or at least the potential money in this sort of stuff grows, and catches the attention of what I'll call the professionals who tend to be... I mean, amateurs make good content, but professionals are often better at... There's a reason that we go and watch blockbuster movies made for a lot of money by professionals as opposed to public access television. And so I suspect that this kind of live streaming will end up looking more like slickly produced stuff over time as the professionals get more and more involved in it. Don't we already have that, though? I mean, on MTV with reality TV, Jersey Shore, part of the appeal of this would seem to be its amateurness. The fact that it does feel real in a way that one expects that most of these slickly produced stuff is also fudged or faked in some sense. The drama less true. It's professionalized amateurism. So like you mentioned, when we were talking about the idea of the show, you mentioned Jenny Cam, an early streamer who streamed her life in the 97, 98... 96 was when it launched. 96 was when it launched. Okay, so very early. I mean, it was like a screenshot every 14 seconds. Yeah, she was a student in college, I think at time 19 or something like that, and she just set up cameras and streamed her entire life. And I remember... I mean, I would have been, what, 17 at the time? I remember hearing about it. I remember trying to log into it, probably because there were rumors, and I guess they turned out to be true, but rumors that she was sometimes naked on it. But it didn't... I remember it being... I mean, it was a... The tech was not quite there to make something like this work well. Truly titillating, yes. But yeah, I think... I mean, to my knowledge, that was the first of these life streamers. Yeah. And that evolves then. I mean, you can even see it. I went and watched the, like, the greatest highlight reel of Jenny Cam. And you can see the process, her becoming... It becomes less of an amateurism and something a lot closer to your current vloggers, your... But that over time, that process has become more routinized. It's become more professional. And now you actually have, like, there are outfits. I mean, I'm thinking here of, like, the Logang, the Jake and Logan Paul. They, like, select people, and then, okay, we're going to turn you... Like, it's becoming essentially, like, record labels, but for YouTube. And so the process of discovery and of turn... And the professionalism, the amount of capital that goes into actually producing the show, et cetera, it's all becoming a lot less like Jenny Cam and a lot more like Hollywood or like the music industry. Yeah. You see people even mocking the formalization of share, like, and subscribe. That becoming an almost industry-wide sign-off, as it were. And the same thing we could expect to happen to Twitch and the like. However, on the advertising side of things, people seem to like the informal. It gives them a sense of participating in something, being not just a consumer, but a member of a community. New York Select All has an interesting piece on Instagram empty photos. So the consumers of often cosmetic or makeup products will post images tagging the brand they purchased the product from of the empty bottle. Now, sometimes these are major influencers.  For the makeup brands, it's very valuable native advertising because that photo of the empty bottle, while I guess someone could have gone out and poured a bottle out, to most viewers demonstrates that someone has used up all of this product. They've liked it enough to use all of it. And in exchange for posting these things, the firms will often send the Instagram user a replacement. So you've demonstrated to the world the value of this product to you here in a sort of ex-ante compensation, not contracted in any sense. We will give you some more of it. People seem very comfortable with that. Warm feelings all around. Other than with the FTC. Well, when there is a contractual relationship and it is undisclosed, the FTC takes a very dim view of these things. And you see a clash between a sort of organic means of advertising that developed on these platforms and what the normal consumer safety or awareness rules look like. Well, even here, although it's less of a problem just because the expense involved is less, there's still a scale problem. Now, the scale problem is as big as it would be for ICE Poseidon who's making a living off of this. But those things still cost money and right now, them giving away free product to Instagram influencers and fashionistas, it works because there's only so many of them, right?  But once everyone's part of that world, the value of that goes down dramatically. Again, it doesn't scale up as much as, you know, we're not going to be in a world where everyone who wants free product in digital life is going to get free products. Just right now, we have a large number of consumers who aren't plugged into this community. But as millennials and Gen Xers and Gen Zers, as we age, they're going to have a scale issue. The other thing I thought of as I was reading the ICE Poseidon article was that we've democratized celebrity life, right? So his behavior is not all that different from, say, like the Kardashians. So the Kardashians made their way, they became famous for being famous using an older medium, right? They relied on essentially all the glossy magazines that you get, the grocery checkout counter, us weekly and et cetera. And then they relied on reality television, which evolved out of the kind of, you know, Jenny Cam, the kind of thing we were talking about before, to make themselves famous, influential and wealthy. ICE Poseidon is the evolution of that. So now someone who doesn't even have the Kardashians relative level of minor, I mean, they're like, I mean, prior to this, they're like C-List or famous because their father was an Olympic champion, right? And it is the tech shift, the advancement in technology that drives this. Anyone can behave outlandishly. However, previously you needed to be able to both behave outlandishly and appear in us weekly or wherever else. YouTube has changed that because everyone from Jake Paul to ICE Poseidon can tap into or example those behaviors and receive celebrity in exchange for it. And I think the optimistic take on everything that we've discussed today is that the perfect, I mean, the perfect utopian economic system, right? If we could imagine, you know, an economy and a world, it would be where everyone can make a living doing what they love doing. You know, so that everyone feels really fulfilled in everything that they're doing. And unfortunately for the vast majority of us, that's not an option. You know, we can't, we have interests, we have hobbies, but those aren't the things that we can make a living doing. So we're still not anywhere near that utopian world, but what all of these things, all these technologies do is they enable us to better monetize value and get money to people who are creating value for other people. And the tech, the tech is like breaking down barriers to that, making us better able to identify it. And so what it's done is you can now, you know, if you simply are the kind of person who the things that you do are other people enjoy, they create so, and it doesn't even have to be creating a product anymore. It can just be like I'm someone who talks into a live cam for a while or I have a strange life that people think is fun to watch. You know, suddenly you're enabled to keep doing that but get compensated for the value you created in a way that you never could before. And even if that doesn't spread to everyone, like these, what we're watching is more and more capability to somehow earn a living while specializing in directions that better align with like your particular and sometimes weird and idiosyncratic bliss. Well, it's not like the behavior being described here is new. I mean, but what used to be restricted to a handful of say aristocratic second sons who they could be the, they didn't have to go into, you know, the family business or they could rely on new innovations, stuff like a stock market and a bond system which allowed family wealth to be heritable and passed on without going through land. Well, that thing that was restricted to a very small number of elite wealthy folks has been expanded bit by bit with each new technological form so that now we're, it's a process of maximizing the number of people who get to do the things they enjoy for a living. And maybe not everyone, but more people.  Something that number would have been a handful prior to this new technology and this new form. So there's value in that. People become happier when they get to do more of the things they enjoy doing and get to do them for a living at the same time. So that's a win. I think we count that as a win as libertarians, a world that is both more prosperous because we extract more of that income for ourselves, a world which we get to do more of the things that we enjoy doing. Hey, that sounds like a pretty good role to me. Well, thank you for listening to Building Tomorrow and until next week, be well.


Hi and welcome to the session I am Deepika here. Let's discuss the question. Find the approximate change in the surface area of a cube of size X meters caused by decreasing the size by 1%. So let's start the solution. Let S be the surface area of a cube of size X meter. We know the surface area of a cube is 6 into sides there. Therefore, S is equal to 6 X square. This implies dS by dx is equal to 12 X. Now, percentage degrees inside is equal to 1%. This implies delta X is equal to 1% of X. That is 0.01 X. Let delta S be the approximate change in the surface area. Therefore, delta S is equal to dS by dx into delta X. Now, dS by dx is 12 X. So this is equal to 12 X into 0.01 X. So this is equal to 0.12 X square meter square. Hence, the approximate change in the surface area is 0.12 X square meter square. And this is an answer for the above question. I hope the question is clear to you. Bye and take care.


are you looking also look man i know this ain't the way it's supposed to go so we'll have to figure it out at some point all right this guy's ready to go in by the way that's the best thing i can pick up okay all right


I've been the time of my life. These group of guys are amazing and you know this team deserves this and I can't wait to see what we're going to do. Not like you haven't been locked in but today you hit a bomb to right center field. When you're hitting it there what does that tell you about where your swing is at? I'm locked in. I'm in my zone. I'm doing my thing staying within myself and that's you know that's what's effective for me and I'm staying within you know I'm doing my thing. When this season started did you ever envision being with the New York Yankees celebrating in this clubhouse right now? No not at all and you know what guy works in mysterious ways and it's an unbelievable feeling. Who doesn't want to party in the biggest city in the country with the greatest group of guys. It's been awesome. When you look at the last couple of weeks and all that success you have had offensively what do you think has allowed you to really dial in the way you have up here? I don't know. I don't know but whatever it is it's working.  Do you enjoy every minute of those Luke chants? I will and I do and it's unbelievable around the second base my heart's pumping and there's nothing nothing cooler in the world than that so keep it going they got to keep it going.


Alright, the day moves on. Just got done working in Leadville, Colorado today, which, little fun fact, if Leadville was almost going to be the state capital of Colorado, and it would have been at 10,000 feet above sea level because that's how high the town is, and it was a boom town for mining. Anyway, done with work for the week. It's Friday, and now finding the boys up here at this campground at Turquoise Lake, but I can never find, can never find matchless campground. I don't know what the deal is. I found their campsite, but they are not there, which means they are off on an adventure, I'm assuming, down by the lake. You can't see them, but I can. I believe, well, maybe not. I saw little kids walking through the forest over there. I thought that was them, but maybe it's not them. I can't find them down here by the lake. I see them. I see them. It's quite the hike they did. I found you. Hi. Welcome to the woods. Hi, Joseph. Are you guys hiking? Marshmallows. Oh my goodness. You have the tent. What are you doing, Joseph? That was a good one. That one needs a little weight in it, maybe a rock. From nature hike numero dos. Time for a little rest in the tent. All right. Here we go. Or not a rest, just we go in the tent and play.  You having fun? Not all at once. There you go. Little bite. Marshall likes this is the buffalo. All North American animals. This is the alligator. And so the question of the day. What is the most impressive or wildest animal you've ever seen? Not in a zoo, but in the wild. What's the coolest thing? A sea otter. What about you, Joseph? What's the coolest animal you've seen? A sea otter. No, I see a polar bear. You see a polar bear. What did you see? That's the question of the day. Seek beauty, a card, love to find your car keys, somewhere...