Hello and welcome to the Grand Line Review, your source for everything One Piece. And today we are here with some of your predictions for chapter 1000 of the series, which is now confirmed to be the very first chapter that will be released in 2021, which thankfully is very, very soon. But I've made a video going over the legacy of landmark chapters and the patterns we can draw for them as well as my positive thoughts for potential events. So now it's time to see what the Grand Fleet is predicting for this monumental occasion starting with, lore looking for the Road Ponyglyph will stumble upon Kaido's subscription to the Grand Line Review and upon touching it receives regular One Piece content straight into his YouTube feed. And I think that this is one we can all get on board with. I mean, if even Kaido has pressed the subscribe button then you have very little excuse, dear viewer. So please do say hi in the comments below if you're a new member of the Grand Fleet and I welcome you.  They have a range of gear for men, women and children and are currently having a buy one, get one, 50% option available. Sounds pretty solid as does their tagline which is normal brands, BU, that's more than enough. Very uplifting, I like it. So do check them out, link in the description. But now let's get started with some predictions for chapter 1000, beginning with, cut to the reverie with an emu dragon reveal. So this is one of the very standard thoughts I saw in these comments. The idea that we'll have a break and get to explore the outside world for a bit which I think only works if Act 3 ends in chapter 999 or I guess at the beginning or halfway through 1000 itself but the latter one seems a bit weird. One thing I really do want to stress though is that the reverie is over, it's done. The event is finished and there will be no cutting back to it unless there's a flashback. I mean, we could head to Marie-Joy or wherever the revolutionary army are but there will be no more reverie. It's also a tricky thing because as much as what I probably crave most is one of those world catch up chapters, Odis precedent with landmark event seems to incorporate something great into the current location. So if massive things do happen and Act 3 still isn't over, then it's almost certainly going to be on Warner. Which speaking of revealing Zora's parents and maybe the backstory of Guido. So not so sold on the Zora one but the beginning of a hint of a Kaido flashback would certainly be greatly appreciated for me. It would also be kind of cool just for getting the 1000 number for a second but it might be fun to end Act 3 of Warner with a flashback and give it a bookend kind of vibe. You know, starts with a flashback, finishes with a flashback but I'm still not so sure about that. My prediction is that it ends with the line end of prologue. That would be simultaneously the greatest yet the most depressing thing I've ever seen. On the one hand it would be quite comforting to know that one piece is going to endure throughout the rest of my lifetime. Then again on the other it would be pretty sad knowing that I'd never get to see how it ends. Which just as a side note, how lucky are all of we? Having been born into this small sliver of the human timeline that just so happens to contain the telling of the greatest manga ever written. And this is going to make me sound like an old man as most things do but future generations just won't be able to appreciate one piece like we do. They'll probably just blast through it and go, yeah, that was cool. But yeah, we are very lucky. Unlike perhaps Kinamon who is just gonna die as Luffy arrives to the roof. Now this one I personally quite like because it matches up with what's happening on Warner. The end of Act 3 of a Kabuki play is generally crowned by tragedy, the darkest moment of the story and of all of the people Oda could kill Kinamon has been making me incredibly nervous for quite some time now. And that's because I've grown to really like him. Oda has done a brilliant job of evolving the perverted fart samurai into a really sympathetic and respectable guy which is why killing him would probably have the most impact of anyone right now. The death of Nefertari Vivi. All right, keeping things up on the death train this would certainly be unexpected to say the least. I mean, just imagine that. We get to chapter 1,000 and it's all like, hooray, we made it this far and to celebrate, we're going to kill Vivi. Brutal, very brutal. Even worse than Kinamon as well because Vivi would have been killed and the straw hats wouldn't have any idea that it happened. It would be a double tragedy because eventually they'd find out and we'd have to do the heartbreak thing all over again. I have extreme doubts to say the least though because in the very, very rare chance that something like this does happen I think that Oda would leave us on a cliffhanger rather than confirming what did or did not happen to Vivi or indeed anyone else currently not on Wano. The chapter will be super boring, the most unexpected thing. Yes, this is indeed a possibility. It seems unthinkable, but another of the trends I discovered going through the landmark chapters is that a lot of them are just business as usual one piece. In many cases, Oda just continued telling his story rather than trying to work some sort of special celebration or huge event into it. And while it is really hard to see that happening with something like 1000 because it's just so big, at the same time, there's certainly not a 0% chance that it's just a normal chapter. The long awaited return of Wanzi, the noodle chef and sure, why not? I think it's just as reasonable as most other character revelations suggested for chapter 1000. There's so many dreams of Skopper Caban, Vacapunk Joyboy, perhaps even Eam, but so few people ever mentioned poor, poor Wanzi. I mean, the last time we saw him was entirely non-canon, although it was in film gold where he proposed to his girlfriend, now fiance, I assume, perhaps even wife. So good on him, makes it unlikely that he'd want to get involved in Skirmish with two of the four emperors, although just imagine a Sanji Wanzi team up. He is Sanji's ultimate combat partner, a chef fighting alongside food. It's absolutely beautiful. I predict that Luffy will awaken his devil fruit in chapter 1000 and calling it Gear 5th, intriguing. I mean, it seems like a bit much to maybe both awaken and create a new gear all at once, but I do get where you're coming from. In fact, I have a video about the ever speculative topic of Gear 5th coming up, so I will save a lot of what I have to say for that, but what I will say right now is that I don't feel like Wano is the arc for awakening devil fruits. It seems very Haki centric and it would be quite fitting if kind of were taken down at least part due to the advanced arm and Haki because that brings Odin's legacy into things as well. Due to that, you know, being his trademark thing. As for Gear 5th though, I mean, at the time of this recording, we're three chapters away from hitting 1000. We have 998, 999, and then bam, 1000. And it just doesn't seem like enough time for Luffy to do his standard thing.  So if Gear 5th or even a new Gear 4th form were to happen, I think we're looking at act four and even then it might not happen. Nami's dress falls off by mistake and Kaido dies of nosebleed along with his other Nakama. And really, I would love to see this happen if only for the fan base reaction. People would lose their minds calling Kaido a joke of Ionko, although in this case, to be fair, they'd probably be right. I really don't think that Kaido is 100% immune from appreciating the odd bit of nudity though. He's a fairly serious combat-driven guy but he certainly has desires outside of that as well. But you know who I can imagine this sort of thing happening to? Queen. He is the exact right character for a naked lady gag to land. I obviously wouldn't kill him but just imagine if it did. If Nami was the Straw Hat responsible for ultimately defeating Queen, the power scalers would implode. So it's a shame it's not going to happen. My personal prediction is that the Straw Hat Grand Fleet gonna make an appearance. This is interesting because I really don't see too much of that thought happening these days which I do find fascinating because when we started one of the Grand Fleet rescue was a leading theory. The idea that there was no way that Luffy and the Samurai can handle Kaido and this was before Big Mom and her crew presented themselves as well. But it was that idea that Luffy would need an incredible mass of help from either the Grand Fleet or the remnants of the Whitebeard Pirates. Neither of which has really come to fruition. I mean we do have Marco and Iso but that seems to be what we've got to work with and somehow we need to use what we have here to take down two Emperors of the Sea with simply what remains of the Ninja Pirate Minks-Samurai Alliance. We should be good though. The raid is still going to end in success. Which speaking of, the Onigashima raid will end in failure. Mr. Morge will do three mortal pack for backwards flips. What? The community will blow up. So I can confirm if the first part of the sentence were true then the second and third parts would almost certainly come to fruition. I definitely fall in the opposing faction though. The raid will end in success, is my belief anyway. I think that Mr. Morge is very good at analyzing one piece fact patterns like on a level that I am truly envious of but sometimes the way he applies those patterns to the future is, well it's interesting. Like for example, he was bang on about the pattern of the citizens of whatever island needing to see Luffy defeat the big bad guy. That is incredibly important because that's how the legend of Luffy spreads and how he makes grand alliances in the world. But we don't necessarily need to jump to a conclusion like the raid will fail for that to have happened. I mean, I've always thought it would be something as simple like a big TV screen gets set up in the flower capital, Arla Marineford, but hey, Kaido has come up with something far more creative than I could ever dream of. And he's going to some pretty great lengths to make sure that each and every person sees his defeat. 1000, Oda flips 1000 to 001 and starts one piece from scratch. All right, so having gone through all of that, this is the one scenario where yes, I can see the raid failing. Basically, here's what happens. Everyone dies and Luffy is forced to go back in time right to the end of chapter one and relive his journey knowing that he has to prepare harder for Kaido. And then after another roughly 23 years of publishing, we'll get back to the same point which will technically be chapter 2000. Meanwhile, we have another bold prediction here with, it will contain at least one one piece character, which I do think is a pretty safe conclusion to come though, because here's the thing. Even if chapter 1000 contained exclusively new characters, those new characters would still automatically become one piece characters. Twice as long of a normal chapter length. I've seen this floating around a bit as well and it would be nice and celebratory, but weekly shown in jump really doesn't do that sort of thing. Outside of debut chapters that is because those things need 40 to 50 pages to stand out and tell a more complete story, but any hopes of a longer chapter in any other circumstance, they're pretty not great. Dragon pops up in front of Luffy and reveals the revolutionary army is there too. All right, I think I've spoken a fair bit about the whole revolutionary army on Wano thing. So this time I'll pose another question. Why would anyone want the revolutionary army to show up? Because let's say it happens. Let's say the dragon, the commanders, even Calvin, maybe even Sabo just rock up to Wano because of vague reasons related to weapons. And then everyone bands together to defeat Kaido, but doesn't that kind of undercut everything we've been building towards in this arc? Such a key factor of Wano has been about the Kozuki legacy coming together 20 years later. Almost everything plays into that. The vassals for obvious reasons, but also Luffy because of his link with Roger and Joy Boy. The Ming tribe have a direct loyalty to the Kozuki family. Marco and Iso are only there because of their direct connection to Odin and everyone else meaning like Law, Kid, Killer, Drake, et cetera, they're effectively there because of a connection to Kaido. Meanwhile, not one person in the revolutionary army plays into the building up of this sort of legacy.  Their target is the world government. So that's where their story is better played out when they have some actual dramatic weight to throw around. So instead, how about chapter 1000 will just be Kaido helping big mom have another baby, all 22 pages. And yeah, I did notice that you've added an extra four pages onto the standard chapter length with this disturbing prediction here. But you know what, at least it's celebrating life unlike everyone else calling for the deaths of Kinemon and Vivi and the like. So sure, why not? Chapter 1000, I can picture it now. Luffy reaches the roof and catches big mom in Kaido banging, perfect. But what do you guys think? Please do leave your thoughts in the comments below or even join my Discord server. And if you're keen for some more videos like this then please do go and check out some of my other content or even subscribe to the channel for more glorious one piece business uploaded straight into your YouTube feeds. But for now, this has been the Grand Line Review and I'll see you next time.


Hello and welcome to this presentation. My name is Bedardine and in this video we will learn how to set up a different OctoSpy flash memory and that GFX template. In this first part we'll see how to set up the OctoSpy peripheral in STM32 Cubamax. If we look at page 20 of the STM32-H7B discovery board user manual we see that it has a 512 megabit OctoSpy north flash memory and this video will see what changes need to be done to use a different memory from a different vendor and a different flash size in the TETGFX application. For example we'll use the IS-25 north flash memory from ISSI. The IS-25 family comes in two sub-families the IS-25LX family operating at 3 volts and up to 133 MHz. The IS-25WX family operating at 1.8 volts and up to 200 MHz. The two families come in 128 megabit and 256 megabit flash size. We'll use the IS-25LX-256 because its operating voltage is compatible with the STM32-H7B discovery board. Besides this memory comes in BGA package and it's pin-to-pin compatible with the one from Macon X. I will start by launching TETGFX designer version 4.17 and TETGFX designer is a GUI builder that lets you easily build your graphics application. On the left hand side select examples and select the board setup. In this video I'll use STM32-H7B3 discovery kit and then click select. For the example example I will go with animated image example given name to my application STM32-H7B underscore octos pi IS-25LX 256 and then click create. I have my example ready. I'll generate the code then browse to the files click on files here on the left hand side go up by one level here and then double click on STM32-H7B3 IUC5. I have my STM32-QBMX project open I'll go to pin out and configuration tab and then to connectivity and here we see we have two instances of octos pi peripherals so the octos pi peripheral is used to interface to octospi or serial flash memory. So if you look at the schematic of the STM32-H7B discovery board we see that the octospi instance 1 so here octospi 1 is used to interface to the octospi flash memory. I go back to QBMX and select octospi 1. Here in the mode we have all the modes supported by the octospi peripheral single-spy dual-spy quad-spy quad-spy multiplexed and here we'll use octospi mode because we have eight data lines if we go to schematic we see that we have eight data lines from IU0 to IU7 and that's why we'll use octospi mode and the clock we have either the possibility to connect the clock signal to port 1 clock or port 2 clock if we go to the schematic we see that the clock pin is PB2 and then we go to the device datasheet table 9 we see that PB2 pin is or can be mapped to octospi port 1 or P1 clock so we'll select port 1 port 1 clock same way for the chip select if we go back to the schematic we see the chip select in this pg6 we go to pg6 and here we see that pg6 can be mapped to octospi port 1 chip select and go back to QBMX and select port 1 chip select and here we see in the GPU settings tab under configuration we see the default pins enabled for the octospi and we see here for the chip select PB6 is used by default and PF10 is used by default for the clock so here we need to match the schematic so the schematic uses pg6 for the chip select and so we need to type in pg6 and change the default configuration to from pb6 to pg6 so pb6 is again is correct configuration is just it doesn't match the schematic so we use pg6 for the chip select and for the clock same way for the clock we see it for the clock PF10 is used by default go back to schematic I see that the clock is used in the schematic pb2 so here I'll change it to pb2 pb2 octospi port 1 clock I go back to the mode and enable the data store we see here in the schematic that data store or DQS signal is used and the pin used for that is PC5 so we enable the data store for port 1 and the default configuration is PC5 and it matches the schematic next we'll do the data lines port 1 same way and here we need to make sure it matches the schematic so we have the data lines expand this so for the iu0 we see in the schematic for the iu0 is pd11 while QBMX uses PC9 so we'll change it to pd11 to octospi iu0 same way for iu1 iu1 the schematic uses pf9 while QBMX uses PC10 by default we'll change it here with the search for pf9 and here toggles change it to octospi iu1 for iu2 iu2 by default QBMX uses PE2 I'll change it to pf7 pf7 and octospi iu2 one more data line is the iu3 pf6 so by default iu3 is mapped to pf6 which matches the schematic then we'll enable the data from 7 to 4 the MSB of the data same way we need to make sure that the configuration matches the schematic here we check iu4 iu4 by default it's pd4 while the schematic uses PC1 we'll change it to PC1 octospi part 1 iu4 next iu5 by default uses pd5 this is the QBMX default configuration while the schematic uses ph3 we'll change it to ph3 octospi part 1 iu5 iu6 pg9 by default and this matches the schematic iu7 pg40 and this doesn't match the schematic the schematic uses pd7 so we go here and search field and we type in pd7 and we change it to octospi part 1 iu7 okay now one more thing we need to go to system core GPIO and then the octospi tab here and we need to enable the internal pull up for the data stop signal so which is PC5 so here in the GPIO pull up pull down configuration we need to enable the internal pull up for the chip select we already have an external pull up so no need to enable the internal pull up for the chip select signal next I go back to octospi one and then to parameter settings here we'll set up the octospi peripheral so we'll leave the 5 4 threshold to 1 I'll keep the dual quad mode disabled because we have one single octospi memory the memory type we have either micronex AP memory or micronex RAM so here the memory type specifies the order of the data in double transfer rate 8 data bit mode in micronex mode the data is organized as D0 and then D1 while in micronex it is D1 and D0 if we go to the device data sheet we see that the data comes out as D0 then D1 so the IS memory is compatible with micro mode we can see in the micronex data sheet that the data comes out as D1 then D0 then D3 and D2 so I go back to IS 25 data sheet and then I see it's D0 D1 so compatible with micronex type next we specify the device size which is the size of the external flash memory in bytes and it is calculated as 2 power of n where n is the device size parameter here in cuba max the IS 25 lx 256 is 32 megabytes flash memory 32 megabytes is 32 megabytes is two zero zero zero zero hexadecimal value and we see that bit bit 25 is set so 2 power of 25 is 32 megabytes so here in cuba max I set the device size to 25 next the chip select high time is the minimum number of clock cycles where the chip select must remain high between commands the IS 25 lx 256 specifies 30 nanoseconds here if we go to page 88 we see here that TSH SL2 is 30 nanoseconds so we need to divide 30 nanoseconds by the clock period of the octaspire I go back to cuba max and then I start my calculator so I divide 30 nanoseconds by the clock period of the octaspire the clock period of the octaspire is so we have the frequency here to the octaspire 133 megahertz and we need to divide it by the clock rescaler which is 3 so the clock period is 3 divided by 133 megahertz so we divide 30 nanoseconds by 3 and then we multiply by 133 megahertz so here we have 1.33 we round up to to the next value which is 2 so here we set the chip select high time to 2 we'll keep the free running clock disabled the clock mode the clock mode indicates the level taken by the clock between commands when the chip select is high in page 47 page 47 of the IS 25 lx 256 datasheet we see that the memory supports mode 0 or low level and mode 3 which is high level so our flash memory supports both low and high we'll select low we'll keep the app size not supported the clock prescalar 23 meaning the clock on the bus is 133 as we saw earlier the octaspire is 133 megahertz divided by the prescalar 3 here so which gives us octaspire clock of 44.3 megahertz we'll keep the sample shifting to none and we'll enable delay hold quarter cycle which means we will add a quarter cycle delay on the outputs in DTR communication to match the whole timing this is recommended when using double transfer rate or DTR mode I will keep the other parameters to their default value now I will generate the code my code is successfully generated I'll click on open project I have my STM32Q by D launcher here I need to give a new workspace and click on launch thank you for joining me in this video and we hope that you enjoyed learning how to set up the octaspire peripheral in STM32 cuba max and the second part of this video we'll see how to initialize the octaspire flash memory


A digital signature. Remembering that the purpose of a signature is it acts as a confirmation that someone agrees to that message. I sign a document, I confirm that I've seen it, I created it, I agree to the contents of that message. We want the same thing for files or messages. I send a message, I want to sign that message. How can we do that? We want to be able to prove to anyone that a message originated or is approved at a particular user. We can't use symmetric key cryptography. The problem with symmetric key cryptography is that there's one key and two people in the world have that key. Let's say user A and B share a secret. A has the key. Anything encrypted using that key could have come from A or B. With symmetric key cryptography, we don't have confirmation that a message encrypted with that key comes from one particular user. It could have come from two particular users. Even though symmetric key cryptography, if someone receives a message, let's say A, they can verify that it came from the other user, B. That's okay. But we can't have a third party C to prove that the message came from B because that message may have also come from A because both A and B have the key to encrypt. So that's where public key cryptography comes in because there's only one person in the world that has a private key and we can confirm a message came from them using that approach. The concept is quite simple and we've seen it when we introduced public key cryptography. A user signs a message by encrypting with their own private key. I have a message. I use my private key to encrypt and the nature of public key cryptography is it can only be decrypted with my public key. So if it successfully decrypts with my public key, it means it was encrypted with my private key. So confirmation of this signature or verification of the signature is done by... The signature is attached to the message. We send the message and the signature. In fact, we could just send the signature as is. We'll see at a disadvantage of that in the next approach. And then we verify the receiver and the receiver uses the public key to verify. Any questions? You've generated your RSA keys for the last homework and you're going to use them, so don't lose your private keys. If you don't have your private key, you can't do the next homework because you're going to sign a document or sign a message. And the way that you will sign, you'll use your private key. You will send the message encrypted with your private key to the destination and they will verify by using your public key. If it successfully decrypts with your public key, we get the message and we know that that's the correct message. It came from A because the only person who can encrypt such that it successfully decrypts with the public key of A is user A. Only user A has the private key of A. So that's the concept. In practice, we don't encrypt the entire message, we encrypt a hash of the message so we can do a confirmation just for the... on across the hash. So this is the practical digital signature. And in fact, from now on, when I refer to a digital signature, use the hash of the message. We have a message M. To sign the message, to generate the signature S, we encrypt using my private key, the hash of that message. Hash the message, encrypt with my private key, I get signature S. S is quite small because the hash value is small. When we encrypt it, we get a small signature. Even if the message is 10 gigabytes long, the signature is a fixed size. So what we do is we send the signature and the message. And this is good for performance in there. There's not much communication overhead. If my 10-gigabyte message concatenated with a 256-bit signature, those 256-bits don't create much communication overhead. There's not much extra to send. We send the message and the signature S. The user verifies by decrypting the signature with the signer's public key. You know it came from Steve. You use Steve's public key to decrypt. And you get a hash value. And you compare that hash value with the hash of the received message. If they match, everything's okay. If they don't match, we have a problem. Let's see some quick examples of how the digital signature is applied. And we assume that users have keys, key pairs, in fact. We have user A and user B. And they know, let's assume to get started, they know each other's key pair or they know each other's public key. So A has its own key pair. They know P-U-A, P-R-A. I know my own key pair, but I also know P-U-B. And similar for B, it knows P-U-B, P-R-B, the private key of B, and the public key of A. Everyone knows their own key pair plus other user's public key. So the normal case. The normal case is we send a message from A to B. Let's say there's no malicious user in this case. And the message we can denote as message M1 concatenated with the encrypted hash value. So that's the message plus its signature, where the signature is obtained by hashing the message and encrypting with my, or the sender's private key. This process is called signing. The encryption of the hash is the signing. We sign the message and B verifies. When they receive the way that they verify, they decrypt the signature. It came from A, we decrypt with a public key of A, and I'll say S, which part is S? This component, so I don't have to write it all again, is S, the signature. The encrypted hash value is the signature. They decrypt the signature component. What do they get? Well, they get the original input, the hash of M1. And then they compare. Does this hash value equal the hash of the receive message? What was the receive message? Nothing's been modified here, so the receive message is M1. Yes, they're the same. Does the hash of M1 equal the hash of M1? Of course. So this is the message has been verified, and we know that the message came from A because it successfully verifies using the public key of A. That's the normal mode of using a signature. Questions on how to use the signature? We sign with our private key, but we encrypt the hash of the message, not the entire message. So let's see what happens when an attacker, a malicious user, tries to do something. Same initial state. They know each other's keys, public keys, and they know their own private key. And now we do the same. We sign a message and send it on to B, where we send M1 concatenated. Let's denote it now to be more precise. S1, where S1 was calculated as encrypting using the private key of A, the hash of M1. So this is what A sends, the signed message. Malicious user intercepts. Let's see if they modify the message. What happens when we change the message? M1, let's say changes to M2. We don't change the signature in the first attack. So leave it as S1. And then the verification steps at B to verify. We decrypt the signature using the public key of A. We know it came from A. We decrypt the signature. When we decrypt, then we get H of M1. Why? Because S1 was the H of M1 encrypted with a private key of A. Therefore, if we decrypt S1 using the public key of A, we'll get the original input, H of M1. And then we compare. Does H of M1, the decryptive value, match the hash of the received message? And under our assumed properties of our hash function, the hash of two different messages, the hash values will be different. So no, it won't match. Our collision-free property. The attacker can't find two different messages which produce the same hash value. We say that the verification fails. And you'll see this is similar to what we've done already with the authentication schemes. If we modify the message but not the signature, we get an error. Because the hash received, H of M1, doesn't match the hash of the received message, H of M2. What else could the attacker try to do? Well, we modify the message and the signature. But how do we create a new S2? Well, we can calculate the hash of M2, but it needs to be encrypted with the private key of A. The malicious user doesn't know the private key of A. Therefore, they cannot produce the correct signature. The correct signature is the hash of M2 encrypted with the private key of A, but we don't know the private key of A. So that would be detected. What else could the malicious user do? A masquerade attack, pretend to be A, sending a message to B. But if I want to pretend to be A, I need to know the private key of A. Because what B is going to do when they get a message thinking it's from A is use the public key of A. So again, if we try to pretend to be A, we don't have the private key and the attack will be detected. So very similar to what we saw with the attacks when we used symmetric key encryption, but now we're using private key encryption of the hash. That is, it's very similar to this case, where we encrypted the hash value with a shared secret key. Now we're encrypting the hash value with a private key. The difference is not the security, it's about proving who sent the message. If we use shared secret key and we have a signed message, either A or B generated that signed message. But if we use public key encryption, if we have a signed message, it came from one particular user in the world. And that's what a signature should be. We can confirm who the source is. And digital signatures are a very common application of public key cryptography today. Which algorithms are used for digital signatures? We can use RSA. So for the encryption decryption algorithm, RSA is a common one. But there are others. There's a special algorithm developed for digital signatures, DSA, the digital signature algorithm, which is used in the digital signature standard, DSS. But there are variations. And we may come across them in practical examples of especially web security. It's not just RSA, you may see DSA, a variation of DSA with something called elliptic curve cryptography. EC, DSA, El Gamal is another one. And there are a couple of other approaches. So there are different algorithms used to encrypt for digital signatures. And we can use different hash algorithms. MD5, SHA, SHA2, SHA3, and so on. We should use a secure hash algorithm. MD5 no longer considered secure. So SHA2 or above. And those hash algorithms, we need them to have particular properties. And we've talked about the general properties of collision-free and one-way property. Let's come back to those properties to finish the lecture today and look at them. And we'll define them a little bit further.


Good morning, everyone. My name is Aadha Shankar, third year Pure Outskirts resident, JJ Medical College. The title of my paper is Role of the Multiplanner Reconstruction, Imaging on the Three-Dimensional Computer Tomography, Imaging and Diagnosing Cranial and the Facial Factors. Name and the objective of this study, the verus injuries caused by the ferocity and the facial regions being the most commonly affected region in all of this region will leave to life-threatening situation, which includes the refuse blood loss of tissue swelling, glycerations, and the pain. Skull factor, also known as the canal factor, can occur in road traffic accident, as well as sports and any other injuries factor, so the skull can occur in any region on the skull. All brain injuries, including the traumatic brain injuries, subdural hematoma, epidural, dextraternal hematoma, or the traumatic, intercellular hematoma, or the conditions. The role of brain radiography in assessing the facial traumas has declined over the years in sexes as a sensitive to the canal wall factor, but are in such a to the skull-based factor as it does not provide sufficient information regarding the anatomic retails. The role of MRI in trauma is to assess the soft tissue injuries since it has good soft tissue contrast and also helps in eating, assessing the patients with the knowledge of their patients, but is not as useful as compared to the city in the evolution of the Bonnie pathologies. The role of multi-planar reconstruction of the 3D reconstruction of the multi-director computer tomography in the musculoskeletal system is of tremendous advantage in the traumatic injuries and the results of the brain data are filled to answer the doubts of the surgeons regarding the satisfactory alignment of the complex fracture. Small structures that are not well seen with the conventional CT imaging can be clearly depicted using the multi-planar reconstruction and the 3D overlapping reconstruction of the small intervals. Performed images can provide complementary information about the various conditions, including the congenital malformation, vascular damage, and the trauma involving the cranial and the facial bones. Coming to the materials and the method of the study, 100 patients with a clinical history and the examination findings of the cranial and the facial factors from the JJ Medical College were referred to the CT. The department of the radiology were included in the study. 100 patients fulfilling the criteria were included in the study. The average age taken was from 20 to 24 years. The patient was scanned within a GE CT machine with appropriate brain and facial protocols with the bone and sub-tissue reconstruction. During the study, proper instruction were given to the patients and protective measures, such as the late aprons were used to cover the patients but to minimize the radiation dose to the patient. Throughout the procedure vitals or monitor factors that were assessed include ear length, simple and displays communicated and the simple displays factor. The images obtained were subjected to the radiology analysis and the interpretation. The parameters for KVP were 100 to 120 and the MS was on 300 to 350 slice thickness was 5 mm and the field of vision was 18 to 22 and the scan length was 250 to 300 mm. Coming to the inclusion criteria, traumatic cranial and facial factors were included pregnant and lactatic women and non-traumatic patients were excluded for the study. Coming to the discussion, plane radiograph is the initial imaging modality in the trauma patients, one since it has cannot provide adequate information regarding the internal and the skull-based anatomy, its significance in assessing the cranial and the facial factor. Trauma has declined moreover in the patient with the multiple traumas, especially the involving the cranial and the facial factor. There may be life-threatening consequences while positioning the patient since its role is limited. This factor, not in the right paratal bone impinging on the underlying brain, parankema segmental factors noted in the ignitable of the right frontal bone or frontal sinus resulting in the large effect. The evaluation of the factors, multiply the reconstruction of the 3D sequences were widely used for the successful identification of the factors set. This is especially true for the factors of the cranial and the facial region. This is because the structures are located and then in the transverse plane, but trauma images can provide false-positive images since adjacent agents easily overlap. Hence, this produces a false image thereby making the diagnosis difficult. However, in a wider context, transverse imaging useful as a method of visualization of the anatomical element is perfectly equal to the examined brain. A good example would be the evaluation of the anterior and the lateral walls of the magnolias and the orbital bones. The high sensitivity in the agmas in the factors of the axilla frontal and the nasal bone was relieved with the multiply the reconstruction. It was noted that in the imaging of the thin and delicate bone structures, such as the crudiform plate of the etymid bone, orbital flow. And in some cases, also the anterior wall of the magnolias and the 3D reconstruction were less useful than the multiply the reconstruction. The use of 3D reconstruction in those areas often produces a false positive image as a suggestion of the inexistent source that are difficult or impossible to differentiate from the factors in 3D reconstruction cannot be used as the only imaging method in the visualization of the factor. When comparing the results of the imaging with the use of the direct acquisition of the raw data with the 3D reconstruction is also what noticing this is separated to artifact the disappearance of the false image. Elements that do not exist in real day may follow from the steady protocol. Only for example, if the thickness is 2-3 during the multiply the reconstruction, a stage to artifact appears. Off-run data conducted a study in which it was proved that the acquisition of the multi-detector computer tomography is like thickness of 2.5 mm and slice thickness less than 1.5 mm is enough to avoid the stage to artifact in the multiply the reconstruction. Furthermore, in the visualization of the 3D sluggered 5-size segment multiply the reconstruction turned out to be more successful in the assessment of the post-traumatic collisions involved in the orbit and the magnoliasis. 3D image reconstruction also turned out to be of the limited utility, not only in the abominable discursive group of symptoms but also in the imaging of the itmoid bones. However, it was successful in utilizing the free bone chips within the condyle process branches and the body of the mandible. And here all of these frontals and the zygomatic bones and the nasal bones also provided useful in the imaging of the cryophore fractures. The technique of the 3D reconstruction also turned out to be useful also in the evaluation of the fracture with the high number and the extent of the dislocation of the bone chips some of all the uplay techniques of the presentation and the reconstruction of the CT images of 3D. Option allows for a very precise reconstruction of the post-traumatic amortical deletion in contrast to the transverse and the multiplying of the imaging. This is a minimally displaced fracture in the right parietal and the temporal bones well-depleted in the coronal reformated CT image on the CT, such that a reformated CT image shows the fracture line. This is the axial CT image in the repressed fracture. This is the multiplier CT image is well demonstrating the repressed fracture in the right parietal and the temporal bones and flexion of the fracture. Coming to the results of the presentation, I believe that compared to the four types of fracture, simple and displaced was found to be the most frequently occurring one, where in the multiply and the reconstruction was found to be more deductive for the fracture compared to the multiply and the reconstruction of the 3D, multiply and the reconstruction axial and the 3D, multiply and reconstruction and axial. Statically, analysis was carried out using the formula and software detest. This is the above bar graph showing that in my study, simple and displaced fracture were the most common one sustained. This graph shows that in my study, multiply and reconstruction imaging was the most accurate means of detecting the canal and the facial factors compared to the other mode of study. Coming to the conclusion, this study has highlighted the usefulness of the multiply and reconstruction technique as imaging tool in the enabling the actual localization of the P for fragment and assessing the degree of the displacement and thus helping to reduce the recurrent exposures. These are my references. Thank you.


Hi there, this is Ashley with Oxford Toyota. I wanted to send you over a quick video greeting that way you can see who you'll be working with I know to say you were interested in trading in your 2011 VINCIA for a new 2016 Highlander I want to hit and send you over links to our current inventory for you to look over at your convenience When you get a moment, please give me a call. My number is 5 0 2 2 1 4 7 1 6 6 or email me back. Thanks. Bye


Hi, my name is Fumiro. I'm a frame artist based in New York. Today, I want to show you a little tip on how to refine a dirty green screen edge, especially a jagged edge. This tip may get a very good result, but please bear in mind. It's not always a case. Sometimes needs more detailed treatment to get the best result. If you could get a very high quality green screen plate, probably you don't have to concern too much about the edge treatment. However, sometimes you have to comb not the best condition plate or high chroma difference costume, especially red costume like this green plate. As you can see, there's a little bit of an artifact on the edge of the subject and the and the hair hurts jaggy too. How can you fix that? Someone may be using edge detect for refining edge, but I'm gonna show you adding just two frame default nodes and softened edge. Let's take a look at this green screen comp node. I'm using additive gear as everybody using these days and here is normal gear. It's keying out just a little bit harsh way. This key is to fit up inside of body part. The additive gear is for the edge and adjust the color of the spilled front and comp them together. Let's take a look at comp results. As you can see in the hair part key out very nicely, but still you can see artifacts on the edge of the face here and the costume edge too. So to make this edge looks better, I use two pixel spread on the green plate at the beginning and one is connected to the normal key. The idea is very simple. The first pixel spread expanding the subject edge and bring that edge back until to the same shape in the second node. That makes softened edge artifact. Okay, let's try that. Add a pixel spread and make sure the split mode is set to expansion and expand just little until getting to the point to clean the artifact. Okay? Bring it up one more pixel spread then this time change the mode contraction and bring the edge expansion back to the point where the plate is. As you can see these two nodes softened only the edge of the artifact sets and here's a comparison. It's softened the artifact nicely and here too. The less abstract is pretty much the same as usual comp. Sometimes these artifacts appear on the edge between high chroma difference plate. This tip may usable on another type of comp to solve or refine your result. If you want to adjust the value simply just adjust these two pixel spread nodes value. I hope you guys enjoyed it. Thanks for watching.


Hi, I'm Phil Moody. I'm a principal soil scientist with the Queensland Government, and I'm working with the Department of Environment and Heritage Protection on a decision support tool called Safe Gauge for Nutrients. I'd like to show you how Safe Gauge for Nutrients can be used to give you an idea of where the nutrients might be moving on your farm. If they're moving off your farm, they're costing you money. With spending a little bit of time on the computer with Safe Gauge for Nutrients, you'd be able to get a good idea of what management practices you might undertake to reduce the loss of nutrients and save you money. Safe Gauge is a web-based decision support tool that helps you manage your fertiliser to make sure your crop is the best chance of taking up the nutrients it needs. This is a big deal for farm management, and of course for great barrier reef catchment waterways. Once you've worked out your crop's nutrient requirements, you can run Safe Gauge to see what potential risk there is of nitrogen and phosphorus and your hard-earned cash to pay for it, moving off your block the next time it rains. Before you run Safe Gauge for a particular block, there's a little bit of historical information that you need first together so you can use the tool. Starting with where your block is, use Google Maps to pinpoint the location and the boundaries of the block. Safe Gauge can then recognise the soil in the block and the local climate. Know what your surface cover is. Which soil group applies to the area? The results of your latest soil test? Any relevant cropping dates?  Safe Gauge uses drop-down menus to allow you to easily enter the information you need to run the decision support tool.  To get a better description of each of those, click the question mark and that gives you a full text description of each of those options. When you've entered all the information on a particular block that you need to to run Safe Gauge, this is the look that you get with dials at the top and also a risk index and the rainfall. But what if I had another block that I was interested in, one that had a different soil type, perhaps a heavy clay or a block that was a lot more sloping than the current block. It's very easy to adjust Safe Gauge to run with the new block and the new management details. Hi, my name is Jack Robertson. I'm an extension officer with the Department of Agriculture and Fisheries in South Johnson, just south of Innisfal. You've just seen Phil show you how Safe Gauge for nutrients works. If you need more information keep your eye out for a departmental workshop near you. Remember what happens here on the farm can affect the catchment right through to the reef. So put Safe Gauge to


So welcome back to the Japan update this year. We're on to our second panel, Science, Defence and Technology in Japan. So for those of you who don't know me, I'm Shiro Armstrong. I'm the Australia Japan Research Centre at the ANU and it's my pleasure to bring this update to you with my colleagues Lauren Richardson and Ipe Fujibara. Before I start, let me acknowledge and celebrate the first Australians on whose traditional lands we meet and pay our respects to the oldest past and present. And of course here in Canberra, we're on Manawar country. So in this session we're bringing together the digital economy, new defence issues and the every important energy transition that Japan has embarked on, started to transition and embarked upon. We bring those three, seem to be disparate topics together in the form of thinking about Japanese innovation and Japan as a technology leader. So for this session we've got three panellists. We'll bring them now and then hand over to hear presentations from each. So first we have Jun Makoyama, who's a fellow at the Asia-Pacific Initiative. Ms Makoyama holds a BA in law, political science from CAO and the Master of Public Administration from Harvard University's John F. Kennedy School. Prior to joining the API, she was 10 years in business development and investment in Mitsubishi Corporation. Our second speaker will be Yuki Tatsumi, a senior fellow and co-director of the East Asia Program and director of the Japan Program at the Stimson Center in Washington DC. Before joining the Stimson Center, Yuki was at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. Also at Washington and earlier was a special assistant for political affairs at the Embassy of Japan in Washington. Many of you will know Yuki is a leading commentator and analyst on US-Japan alliance, Japan security policy and Japanese domestic politics and US-Asia policy. And finally, last but not least, Associate Professor Llewellyn Hughes, a colleague of ours here at the Crawford School of Public Policy at the ANU. Llewellyn is a PhD from MIT and trained in political science but is a specialist on energy policy. So with that, let me hand over first to Jun Makoyama to talk to us about the digital economy. Over to you, Jun. Thank you, Sheryl. Hello, everyone. My name is Jun Makoyama and I'm a fellow at Asia Pacific Institute. There's been a lot of change in the past year in Japan on digital policy, so I'd like to spend a few minutes talking about Japan's recent digital policy. So in context of COVID-19, I was a working member of the Independent Investigation Commission on the Japanese government's response to COVID-19, which analyzed early last year's response, government's response to COVID-19. And during the interview with then-Health Minister Katsunobu Kato, he said the delay in digital transformation was the great challenge in responding to the pandemic. And what does that mean? You might have seen these articles about Japan's tax machines. So during the early stages of the pandemic, Japanese government could not effectively collect information on number of patients, number of deaths, vacant beds, etc., because information exchange was based on papers. Fax machines were used between local governments and hospitals and the central government. So COVID-19 response team, including data scientists and epidemiologists, had real difficulty collecting accurate real-time data. And that has led to governments developing many systems, but that initiative also often failed. For example, HRSA's Health Center Real-Time Information Sharing System was created to resolve that such issue of using paper-based information, but it was criticized its poor usability and the Conduct Tracing app, COCO, was criticized that it has not been compatible with the OS updates on Android. And these old systems failed basically and caused a vast criticism from the Japanese society. And I think that this was the worst one, government's cash distribution operation. So in response to COVID-19, governments tried to distribute cash grants to its citizens. And comparing to other countries like Germany or South Korea or the US, they spent a few days, or at least a month to do this operation. But in this photo, you can see a local authorities office packed with people, because this is Japanese government's online application required, my number card, which was needed to use to get these grants. But only 60% of citizens had this my number card and people stormed into these local offices to actually apply for the card. So the online system was built to avoid and prevent physical contact, but this didn't actually achieve the purpose of that. So such disastrous situation led to push for creating a new digital agency, which was launched last week. And what kind of challenges they faced, I have a slide here. In procurement, they had a one-year budget cycle, and they used waterfall methodology, and they had very stringent procurement policies, which relied really on big vendors like Kujutsu and NEC or entity data, and didn't really manage the system development properly. And also the human resources. So Japan has lifetime employment, and most of the public servants rotate in cycle of two years. So they lacked expertise and didn't accumulate knowledge to actually use that kind of expertise in the digital field. And also this usual silo between the ministries or the segmentation between local government and central government was also a huge obstacle. And also use of personal information. Japan has very strict my number law, which prohibited use of tax, for example, tax information to distribute cash, because there was a Supreme Court ruling that government should decentralize the use of the hold of personal information. So government is very cautious about use of personal information, and this has caused a lot of complex operation in simple things like distributing cash. So the agency was launched last week, and this was pushed very hard by the current Prime Minister Suga. And I think we are very hopeful that this agency is altering the status quo. The minister here I devoted his political career in this area, considering that there were previous ministers who didn't really use computers. This is a great, but the right person to actually read this initiative. He uses keywords like government as a startup and trying to really challenge the change in this Japanese society. They have three pillars, including updating of government services, but also digitization of the society as a whole, focusing on health care education and disaster management. I think the very challenge this agency has is that it has recruited talents from private sector. 100 people out of 600 employees are from private sector, which is very rare in Japan. And also, it's notable that they are at a very high level of management. Chief architect or CEO or CBO are all from private sector. And also, it is interesting that we have also director general level from private sector, which means that actual decision making could be done by the private sector for people. So, but the last week, Prime Minister Suga announced it's his stepping down from the administration. And still, I'm very hopeful that an optimistic that this organization will succeed in the future because he has authority and momentum and support from the private sector and citizens at the moment. And also, most of the potential successors, as I see the names, likely to support the agency. One candidate I'm concerned about is Sanae Takahichi-san, who actually mentioned using my number to tax the rich people, which might again cause the controversy of use of personal information in Japan. And that might be one factor that could stall this movement. But otherwise, I think I'm very looking forward to developments of this transformation. And one also caveat that I wanted to mention is that during this creation of new agency, two aspects were not prioritized. One is cyber security. That doesn't mean that this agency doesn't concern cyber security, but similar to the digital systems developments, cyber security management in Japan, Japanese government is very fragmented in many agencies and also ministries. And this was left as it is. And I think this has to be sorted out in the near future. And also, if you see the new agency's website, you'll only probably see one page or English website page. I think global interaction and how to connect with the global other countries agencies will be one of the issues that the new agency has to work on. Otherwise, I'm very looking forward to this transformation. And this is all from me. Thank you. Thanks so much, Jun. That's a big change for Japan. Maybe we'll get rid of fax machines finally and all the paperwork that we have to do with hard copy signatures and everything as we all know when we deal with our Japanese colleagues. Moving right on to Yuki Tatsumi and we'll come back for questions later. I'll just remind everybody to put their questions in the Q&A function in Zoom and we'll get to those in the discussion. Over to you, Yuki. Thanks, Shiro. And thank you for Australian National University for giving me this opportunity. And I very much enjoyed the Jun's presentation about digital agency because that is actually the new agency that I was very curious about how it's going to evolve. So it sounds like this is from a very much of a work in progress. So I'm very much looking forward to continue to watch the evolution of this agency. And my task here tonight this evening in DC time, but then for your afternoon is to talk a little bit about the challenges for Japanese defense policy, both existing and the upcoming. So here is, I would like to do three things in my limited time for the opening remarks and I'm very much looking forward to receiving Q&A and the continue the conversation afterwards. So first I would like to identify a couple of things that are considered that Japan considers as a major challenge for its defense policy. I'm mainly taking hints from the latest defense white paper that was published in early August. I think I would highlight a couple of things that when it comes to how Japan's defense establishment is thinking about how to cope with the emergence of the new technology such as artificial intelligence, big data and so forth. Secondly, I would actually like to talk a little bit about the spend a little bit more time about the impact that could have a current political uncertainty following a Prime Minister Suga's announcement of his stepping down as of this past weekend on to Japan's policy. And I would like to finish up my remarks by identifying a couple of the Malmokas to watch as I'm moving forward for the next three to six months. So moving right on, let me talk a little bit about the how Japan identifies its defense policy challenges. And then again, my hand, I take these hands from the latest defense white paper that was that that was published in the August one. And I would like to mention that now full English translation is available on the Japanese Ministry of Defense's website, which is actually kind of unheard of because they used to have at least several month delay in coming up with the English translation. So this is a major step forward and I actually would like to congratulate Jay monster efforts to pushing out their information on the public domain. One thing that I would like to note is from the 2021 defense white paper is that China features big as Tokyo's top security concern. If you even if you only read the introduction that was written by incumbent Defense Minister Nobuo Kishi. He started out by he starts out his introduction to the defense white paper by referring to Beijing's quote, unilateral attempts to change the status quo in East and the South China seas unquote, particularly emphasizing the problematic aspect of a Chinese Coast Guard law enacted in February 2021. And obviously for Japan, North Korea's nuclear program and ballistic missile program is a major security concern so that does follow closely as a security challenge as the security challenges top item that the Japan continues to keep a close tab on. And this year's defense white paper also reiterates Japan's commitment to the promoting free and open in the Pacific concept. And one thing I would like to note is that the important is that it places on the security cooperation between bilateral US, not just bilateral US Japan alliance but beyond the display bilateral alliances, namely India, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Germany, UK and France. And that is actually a major shift. I think Japan has talked about the active reaching out to other security partners in the in beyond the US Japan alliance but I don't think I don't think any past white paper has discussed the security cooperation outside of the in outside of the inter Pacific partners such as European partners to the to this to this degree. In that context, I would also like to know that that there, this white paper attracted a quite bit of attention, because it did articulate Japan's interest in the stability of the cross time relations and the importance that it has on the security. And this is actually the very first time that the Japan's defense white paper discussed this in in such a clear and unambiguous term. So this is one thing to note. And obviously, the United States and the alliance with the United States is the most important for Japan's defense defense policy. So it does emphasize the continued focus on the robust US Japan alliance and defense cooperation in that context. And just an addendum on August 31 Japan's Ministry of Defense has released the new budget request for the upcoming fiscal year 2022 through 2023 budget request. And this is actually a quite a big sea change because it does have a 7% increase from last year's requested amount. And that I think is the biggest increase that I've seen in this request amount. At least in the last 10 years and I really haven't personally could recall the such a big increase in the percentage compared to the previous year. Now, I would like to note, given the current situation in the in the Japan's first Japanese government's response in the COVID-19 and the spread of the death variants and so many things that the Japan has been actually quite falling behind in terms of rolling out of vaccinations and so forth. This could this 7% increase may not hold, depending on the negotiation that Ministry of Defense will have with the Ministry of Finance but I just would like to note that the Ministry of Defense did request this much a bigger increase compared to previous year, and that is very actually not worthy. And under this new new budget request space, cyber and electric magnetics gets the lot of attention on this budget. But speaking to the theme of this panel, which is the emerging technology and digitalization of the economy and how Japan might or might not be able to cope with the emerging technologies. Quite frankly, Japan's Ministry of Defense really still hasn't quite figured out how how to do or what to do with the AI and the other emerging technologies, but they at least began in this budget request put put in the kind of a placeholder to begin them studies of how to incorporate those things into the defense capability. However, all these things could be actually a significant impact could be influenced either positively or negatively, depending on how current political uncertainty will shake out. As all of us know, Prime Minister Suga announced that he would not seek re-election as ruling the Liberal Democratic Party's president. What that means is he would step down on September 30 as his term as the LDP president expires. And now LDP has to pick a new president and then I think we have seen a flurry of speculation and speculative reports on who's going to be running, who would support FUN, and who might be the top candidate to challenge whom and all that sort of things. But what even complicates the picture is the Japanese House of Representatives lower house election needs to happen after because it sometime in a fall because it's term expires on August 22. So original plan before Suga's announcement of not seeking re-election and stepping down is that LDP would hold its own presidential election within September. And depending on the results, there may or may not be a change in a Prime Minister, very a caretaker government, quite possible. And LDP will go into the upcoming lower house election with the new phase or same phase depending on how the presidential election would have shaken out and lower house election would have happened in October. But now there is a great deal of certainty on when actually this lower house election will take place. Some media reports speculate that it may actually please into November beyond the expiration of the current terms of the diet, which will be the first, which will be the first time occurrence since the Japan's current parliamentary democracy system started. So that will be a quite unusual event if that comes to play. Focusing back on the upcoming LDP presidential election. Everybody kind of thought that former Foreign Minister Kishira was going to be the top contender for the possession. But since the announcement of a Prime Minister stepping down, there were all kinds of maneuvering going on. And the most recent formula is that maybe there will be a coalition between a couple of groups to push a popular Foreign Minister and current admin reform minister Taro Kono into the opposition. So we'll see that happens. But so all that political maneuver could quite impact how this defense budget holds and what the Japan's foreign policy and security policy priority is going to be. So quickly wrapping up a couple of my marker, my markers to watch. So obviously who will succeed Suga as a Prime Minister is the biggest, the biggest topic of interest. But then following that, what his or her cabinet will look like, especially who would fill the possession of Foreign Minister Defense Minister and the, because we're talking about digital economy and technology here. Ministry of, Ministry of Economic Economy Trade and Industry will will be. And obviously the results of upcoming full lower house election slated to happen either sometime between late October around Halloween times through the early November. So depending on that, the personality that holds those offices and the results of the election could really impact not really necessarily impact the defense budget and the general trend that the Japan set itself, but nuances and and the prioritization of among those items could change. So I will wrap it up as that. Thank you. Thanks so much, Yuki. Yeah, look, it all comes down to the Prime Minister still and the uncertainty there and that's exactly where Jun left off. So I look forward to coming back to a lot of those issues too, especially on the kind of placeholder on artificial intelligence and these new issues but let's hope the next presentation the next issue doesn't depend so much on who becomes Prime Minister but we'll hear from the Prime Minister or well on that. So now on energy transition and sort of innovation policy there. I'll hand over to Llewellyn. Thanks. Hi everybody. Let me also recognize the Wurundjeri people whose land I am on down here in Melbourne and recognize their elders past and emerging. So I've been asked to talk a little bit about what's going on with Japan's energy and climate policy. Of course there's going to be a lot of interest and questions about what the decision by the current Prime Minister Suga Yoshihide to not run as the president and therefore no longer be the leader of Japan. What that means across different policy areas and particularly in the energy and climate space. And it's particularly germane in this area of policy because the current Prime Minister has actually had an enormous impact on Japan's energy and climate policy. You know for those of you who have followed Japanese policy making politics in Japan you know there used to be a kind of you know one would typically assume that a change in the Prime Minister wouldn't have a significant effect on policy. Because most policies being developed within ministries and agencies in a fairly technocratic bottom up kind of process. But in the short but very sweet period of the Suga administration I think we clearly have seen a different model for developing energy and climate policy coming out of the government of Japan. And that has led to some very significant announcements which have been made. So I'll just want to review this very quickly and then you know like all good academics I believe that good things come in threes. And so I'm going to give you an argument and my argument is going to be that Suga as Prime Minister has successfully managed to embed a number of the changes in fact three big changes in energy and climate policy which mean that the changing of the Prime Minister is not likely to see a significant change in direction in terms of Japan's climate and energy policy. In fact if Kono Taro becomes Prime Minister I see upside in terms of more rapid energy transition. Firstly just to note that the Japan's energy and climate policy has really been under shifting grounds over the last little less than a year. As you can see here Prime Minister Suga used actually his first major speech to the Japanese Parliament to announce a 2050 economy wide greenhouse gas net zero announcement and in the case of Japan unlike for example Australia that basically means the use of energy and energy conversion about nine out of every 10 units of greenhouse gas emissions come from the energy sector as opposed to let's say agriculture. So you know we're really talking about energy transition when we talk about a net zero goal for Japan. In addition in December 2020 we've seen the green growth strategy I'll talk about that in a minute. We've also seen some discussions about carbon pricing and border carbon adjustments and I'm happy to talk about that in Q&A as well if you want an update on where that stands. And then most importantly for me in April 2021 we've seen that mid-century net zero target shifted forward in time in a way that influences investment decisions today and that's happened because of the announcement of a 46% greenhouse gas emissions reduction target by 2030 relative to 2013. That's very very ambitious. If you look at the previous goal for example which was enshrined in Japan's nationally determined contribution to the United Nations framework on convention on climate change. It committed Japan to a 26% reduction in emissions by 2030 relative to 2013 something that Japan was on track to achieve. So this is a substantial increase in near term ambition focused particularly on the energy sector. So some really really big changes. I don't have time to go into this now but one of the big things that's happened in decision making is essentially Japan has adopted what's called the back casting method. And what that really means is establishing an ambitious target and then innovating to achieve it rather than looking at what's possible now and then thinking about how you might incrementally improve upon that. And you've seen that play out in for example renewable energy renewable electricity targets and how those have changed over the last over the last few months. So I said you know we've only got a little time I said there were three reasons why I think that the Suga administration has successfully embedded or is in the process of successfully embedding this new ambition in climate and energy policy within Japan's policy making landscape in a way that will mean it will outlive his administration. The first of those is because of Japan's nationally determined contribution. Now this is something for those of you who don't follow international climate policy making essentially a commitment which governments around the world have committed to make to as part of the framework convention which you know where they state what the ambition of the government will be and the idea is to ratchet those up over time. In fact in 2020 Japan reiterated its previous target but that is now in the process of changing. And as you can see in front of you the new nationally determined contribution which is an international commitment and therefore really does kind of lock the Japanese government in after Prime Minister Suga incorporates this much more ambitious target in the languages in front of you here that is to roughly half Japan's emissions relative to 2013 by 2030. Now this NDC is currently under a domestic public comments process. It finishes on the 4th of October. And so once that's been completed and we have kind of social license around this number. I expect Japan to submit this and to have this incorporate that as new international commitment. That's a big change. The second reason that I think that this new ambition around climate energy policy will outlive the Suga administration is because of something called the basic energy plan. Japan is a law called the basic energy law. It was put in place in 2001 and it requires the cabinet to review Japan's midterm energy policy settings every three years. The last one was done in 2018, which means that we are reviewing it again this year. And just in July actually the full draft of that document was released. And as you can see here it shows a significant increase in renewables deployment as a target relative to the previous target. That is about a 14% increase in generated electricity relative to the 2030 target. And that is met by a reduction of 7% in electricity generated by coal and a reduction of 7% of electricity generated by gas. I think that as we move towards this it's safe to say that Japanese demand for Australian thermal coal and Japanese demand for Australian natural gas in the electricity sector have peaked. And so we are going to see that gradually decline over time. But the key point is that again the draft basic energy plan is currently under a public comments process. That process will also be completed by the 4th of October. It takes about a month for those to be collated. So I expect the basic energy plan to be approved by cabinet and therefore locked in moving beyond the SUGA administration. The third reason I think that Japan's new ambition, which we have Prime Minister SUGA to thank for is because of its green innovation plan. Japan's developed a very comprehensive set of sectoral plans across different segments of the economy. Those are shown for you here. To kind of celebrate the Australian government putting its own offshore wind power legislation to parliament last week, which will see us build an offshore wind sector as well. It's worth noting that one of the key areas in which Japan is really pushing is in offshore wind. It has for example a deployment goal of up to 45 gigawatts of offshore wind by 2040 with about a gigawatt or about four projects a year every year moving forward. And we're about to find the results of those. This kind of planning is at a very detailed stage. If you look at offshore, for example, we've got industry targets around domestic content. We've got supply chain development and so on and so forth. And this kind of sectoral industry policy planning around energy transition is in place across each of those 14 sectors which I described to you a moment ago. So both in terms of the NDC also the public comments process around Japan's basic energy plan which will be improved by cabinet and because the sectoral plans around energy transition are already in place. That provides strong evidence to me that whatever we see from the next administration, there's going to be significant continuity in this new ambition that we've seen from the Japanese government. Let me just finish by saying just one comment about the implications of this. For Australia, this is a really significant change. Japan has been a partner for Australia in the development of Australia's resources particularly around gas but also around coal. But it's clear that Japanese energy markets are increasingly policy driven. That is, it's not the underlying economics necessarily fuels which is driving their use but rather this ambition around energy transition and these very detailed plans which are being put in place. And that means that for Australia intelligence about those changes, what are the policy instruments? When are they being put in place by what does that mean for Australian demand? And what are the new opportunities that we're seeing for example in green ammonia but I think in many other areas as well and how might we take advantage of those? One of the arguments I've been making is that we need some better platforms around track 1.5 and track 2 discussions to enable us to better chart what will be a shared energy future in energy transition between Australia and Japan. Let me stop there. Look forward to the discussion. Great. Thanks so much Lou Allen and thank you for keeping to time for all three speakers. I might get Jun and Ruki to reveal themselves and turn their cameras on. And we've got some questions in the Q&A and a few questions that have been answered already by our speakers. So let me just start with the political uncertainty and the now jockeying for Prime Minister because all three of you raised that and that is a topic that we're all watching very closely. Lou Allen you mentioned with a possible Prime Minister Kono that this energy transition, the commitments might be accelerated. Maybe I'll just ask you to run through a couple of the other candidates Lou Allen and then I'll get to Yuki and Jun too of the prospects for energy transition with the other candidates say Kishida and Ko. And then obviously Yuki to yourself you said you know change in nuance and emphasis a bit but if you could flesh that out a bit including there's a question in here about a female candidate that's also running. And then Jun, just a quick commentary on the potential impact of the leading candidates. Sure. So my understanding is although you've got to kind of read the paper every morning and I haven't had a chance to do that that the currently the the the only formally committed member of the LDP to run in the presidential election is Mr. Kishida and that we, you know we're seeing lots of jockeying but it's not yet clear, for example, how a subtle or others within the LDP are going to line up and what that might mean for eventually other candidates revealing their hands. The reason that I say Mr. Kono provides a lot of upside if you want to see energy transition is because of his role firstly as the Minister of Defense and previous cabinet and then as the Minister for Administrative Reform. In both those portfolios he has demonstrated himself to be very bullish on the potential role of renewable electricity within Japan's energy system. When he was Minister of Defense he played a key role in ensuring that developers of onshore wind in particular were able to coordinate well with the Ministry of Defense around radar issues, because you know when you have significant numbers of turbines within the range of radars which Japan has particularly on the Japan sea side that that those turbines can interfere with the performance of those radars. When he was Ministry of Defense he played a key role really in helping ensure that that coordination has been has been well also for the offshore wind sector. As Minister for Administrative Reform he set up a Renewables Task Force which essentially he's been using to make recommendations to different ministries, AMLIT, the Ministry of Land Transport, METI and others about how more quickly you might see what regulatory reforms are needed in order to more quickly deploy renewables. Mr Kishida has said some things but if you look at his policy platform it's much less front and centre. He has noted that energy system reliability requires continuous use of coal. He has done some things within the LDP when he was the Chairman of the Policy Affairs Research Council just in terms of organising how policy gets made within the LDP. But there's much less known about the other potential candidates on that score. Thank you so much. Yuki. Yes, thank you for that great question. So and a conventional wisdom is that the former Minister Kishida is leading a candidate to succeed Prime Minister Suga. But like Llewellyn said, Llewellyn alluded to there are so much movement behind the same going on right now. And I am very closely watching whether Taro Kono will formally announce his candidacy before the end of this week because another top contender or at least in the field of a public opinion Mr Kishida is actually ranks the third as the person who the public would like to see as the next Prime Minister. So number one is Taro Kono and the second, number two is former Defense Minister Shigeru Ishiba. So there has been a whirlwind of speculation that perhaps Mr Ishiba might choose not to run and then rather bring all of his supporters to support Mr Kono's candidacy and to accelerate the generational change and then also address the kind of existing and brewing frustration within the LDP of the, I guess, a diplomatic speaking not so inclusive decision making processes that unfolded under former Prime Minister Abe and now under a Prime Minister Suga. So all I'm saying is the, I don't think any one of us here today has a crystal ball on how it all shakes out. But regardless of who gets who gets elected. It could be very short lived Prime Ministership because the lower house election follows very, very shortly after the LDP presidency. So if LDP doesn't do well in that election, whoever sits on the top will be a hold accountable. So we'll just have to see and then I'm just afraid. I just pray that Japan will not devolve back into the 2007 after Mr Abe stepped down where we see different Prime Ministership every year because now is exactly not the time that Japan can afford to have that kind of unstable leadership. Thanks, Yuki, and we'll come back to this issue in the next panel, of course, as well. And to you, Jun, specifically on the prospects of different candidates for, you know, affecting this really whole of society digital transformation Japan needs to undertake. Right. Just a little bit of comments on digital policies. I think Hamiya Kishida-san has been in the same faction as Hirai Minister, Digital Minister. So I think if it becomes Kishida-san, then the current movement will not change. And also Kono-san, Taro Kono and Minister Hirai, it works closely together. So I think these two candidates, I see their support in the current digital transformation. Ishiba-san, I'm not sure. And also, because Sanae Takahichi-san has been former Minister of Interior and also Communications, I think she might have different views as to digitalization. So I think we have to watch closely if she gets selected. And then in final comments, I totally agree with Yuki-san's view that Japan needs to, the next Prime Minister may be short-lived and Japan cannot afford to have that era back again. So yeah, that is my comment. Thanks, Jun. While we're with you, maybe I'll follow up based on your presentation and setting up a digital ministry and coordinating across government. It all looks really promising and we know Japan when it starts to implement things can be very effective and quick. But Japan is rather behind, as you showed, with fax machines on some issues, in some areas, way ahead of the rest of the world when it comes to technology and innovation. But it seems a lot of areas very slow to change. The prevalence of fax machines is a case in point. You answered one of the questions here in the Q&A on what the barriers are. But maybe that's worth just reflecting on for the rest of us. And for me, working from home isn't all that fantastic all the time. But the occasional flexibility to do so, I would have thought, is now that it exists in Japan, do you think there are prospects for workplaces to be more flexible? And that'll help with labour force participation, people commuting less. Or are we going to go right back to when things open up, right back to long hours in the office, staying late at night? I think the pandemic had a huge impact on how people work in Japan. And I'm hoping that the transition will not go back after everything goes back to normal. But I think, for instance, like Mr. Kono Taro, he is pushing to strongly with this reform. So I think, depending on the leaders, Japan's trajectory will change. But definitely, I think the labour force is a huge key to determining what the next steps will be for Japan. Look, we might, there's a question here to Llewellyn that you said you'll answer live. I might just add to everyone, thanks for asking the questions here. And it's great that our panellists are able to answer some of these via text. It's a try to limit the Zoom fatigue for everyone and having short panels, but there's an opportunity to engage with the panellists while we do so. The question is from Anonymous, how much of the energy transition is actually possible? And I won't respond to the rest to ask the rest of the question, but you get the idea, Llewellyn. Yeah, and thanks for the question. So this is a question not of the direction of change, but rather the pace of change. That is that it's clear that Japan is going to decarbonise its energy system. The real question is how quickly that can happen. And I think there's lots of debate there, right? So I haven't done the numbers in a careful way, but if you look at the model results of how Japan gets to net zero, for example, by mid-century, it's an extremely challenging target. That's an extremely challenging target also for really every economy, whether you're developed or developing.  Yes. I think the best way to think about that problem is sectorally. And what I mean by that is when we talk about energy transition, we're actually talking about a large number of energy transitions, each of which are occurring under different time scales. If you think about how long a steel foundry lasts, for example, compared to a coal-fired power plant or whatever it might be, when the investment decision is made about what to do with that when it reaches the end of its operating life, that's when the key moment occurs. But I do see a lot of positive movement in Japan more so than previously. One of the key issues, for example, that the government faces around the issue of grid, the transmission grid, because renewable energy resources are not in the same place as often where the large fixed-point fossil fuel intensive power generation facilities are current in Japan. And, you know, the country's just developed a national grid plan for the first time, following the Europeans. And we're now seeing a feasibility stone, which will be done with the first draft completed by the end of this year for a high-voltage DC cable running from Hokkaido down to Tokyo Electric, which will enable a lot more offshore wind capacity to flow from the location where that wind is down to the major population centres. So I think that, you know, there are challenges. I think there are challenges about time rather than about direction. And while, and I see room for optimism. Thanks a lot. Yeah. And that, as you said in your presentation, the pace of that change is going to affect the Australia-Japan relationship significantly and how Japan relates to the rest of the world. Yuki, to you, you mentioned in your presentation, you know, the Ministry of Defence in its latest white paper is talking about artificial intelligence and big data, but it just needs more money. And so it's going to, you know, go to battle with Ministry of Finance as usual to try to get that. Is this, you know, we expect Japan and Japan's self-defense forces to be at the technological frontier, really. But from what you're saying, it sounds like, you know, this is an area where Japan's probably a little bit behind, but Ministry of Defence paying lip service to try to get some more funding. Is that a fair assessment? And then I guess another question is, you know, surely space and other areas are really new frontiers for Japan and thinking about defence and how is Japan working with countries like Australia in that space? Thank you. And I think the, rather than, I think I'm paying, just paying a lip service is a little bit too harsh on the Ministry of Defence. Rather, I would characterize it as they're just about to begin to grapple with the magnitude of the change that those technologies might bring in to the way that they conceptualize what the defence operations and different self-defense force operation might look like. And then on top of it, how Japan will capitalize on its existing technology within the country. But, you know, let alone cooperating with the US and the other security partners such as Australia. So we will see how much of a budget for a study that Ministry of Defence might able to snatch based on this budget request. But they are, I mean, based on the conversation that I've had with my friends over there, they are quite serious about these new technologies and how do they are keenly aware that they need to address these challenges. But I think the source of the challenge come from twofold. And first and foremost, most of those advanced technology lives in private sector and not in the national defence circles. And the traditionally speaking, and I think I would love to hear what June might have to say about the current trend, but the scientific R&D world has been known historically very, very adverse to support national security related research and materialization of those technologies into actual defence systems. So if that trend continues, then Ministry of Defence really have a limited in country resources to pull it from. So I don't know what the implication might look like, but I'll just throw it out and then I would love to get June's opinions on that. Thanks, Yuki. And that's exactly what I want to ask June as well because there's a question here from Jennifer Jacket on strategic rivalry over advanced technology between the United States and China and where Japan really fits into this with sensitive technology protection. And I'll talk a little bit about this outside of the technology realm, but more generally in the next panel. But on this issue, Japan is the third largest R&D spender in the world. A lot of that's in the private sector. June, you showed that the new digital agencies bringing people in from the private sector and that's where all the dynamism and innovation is. How does Japan see this being squeezed between the United States and China in this space? And are you worried about that for development of technology in Japan, as well as the push for digitalization more broadly? Yes, I think paradigm is shifting very quickly in Japanese government and also in the private sector because previously private sector was just private sector. Just thinking about their global economy and pursuing their interests that the recent China-U.S. conflict or the context. Japanese government is currently building its capabilities to tackle national security from an economic perspective. So I think private sector is certainly concerned, but at the moment I think they haven't found the right path to actually balance the political aim and also the development of this technology and building their markets and profits. So I think this is one of the most focused area for the Japanese government in the next few years. And also just mentioning about Yuki-san's points about Japanese universities and research centers reluctant to contribute to the defense industry. I think this context hasn't been changed. Even I think Prime Minister Suga is not appointing people in the new academic circle has also started this conflict. So I think this trend hasn't changed. So Japanese government has the difficult issues to manage going forward. Thanks Jun and we've run out of time for this panel, but we will continue some of this discussion in the next panel, which is half an hour away, including trying to get this balance right that Jun talked about between economic interests and national security. But I think that was a fascinating panel for me talking about Japan at the forefront or not of technology in some areas. The challenges that lie ahead, the energy transition still taking advantage of the COVID pandemic and what that's meant for being able to work from home, whether that's just a temporary blip or whether we can really take advantage of that in Japan. And then again on the defense issues and thank you to our panelists very much for bringing some light to these topics and for answering all these questions in the Q&A. So we're going to keep this room open. We're not going to lose you as we did last time between sessions. The Q&A is still there. You can have a look at some of the answers. But let me take this opportunity on behalf of everyone to thank our three panelists. Thank you very much everybody.