Let's get ready for the first main session of this workshop. I am so excited of introducing our keynote speaker. So our keynote speaker today is Jess Wade. She's a physicist at Bay Zed Imperial College London. And more specifically, she works on material science. She does a lot of very cool stuff. And actually Jess is also very active on promoting gender equality in STEM, science, technology, engineering, and mathematics, and especially through Wikipedia. Jess has written as of today almost 1,000 biographies of women scientists. And thanks to her engagement, Jess has won a number of awards of all sorts of institutions from scientific institutions to the honorable mention for the best Wikipedia of the year in 2018, Natus Moore, most influential people in science. And she was awarded a British... I'm sorry, stop now. Sorry, come on, come on.  So, yes. Yes, you can, you can.  And her, so, oops, sorry. This is, okay. Sorry, so basically today she's gonna tell us a bit about her research, her work in promoting gender equality and also how we can all help to promote gender equality across in science. And so, Jess, over to you. Sorry for the long list of awards, but it's just really amazing. It's too embarrassing. It's like my mom. Okay, I'm gonna start. I cannot... Okay, you've got to stop sharing now, as soon as she's telling me off. All right, so also everyone, apologies, because I made this quite quickly because everything's changing so rapidly. So let's go play from start. Does that have it on full screen forever? Yeah, okay, so I'm gonna tell you a little bit about the research that I do. What I think Wikipedia is really important now, particularly now, and then the work that I've been doing on Wikipedia and how I think that we can work together. If anything's unclear, you can find me on Twitter or send me an email. I will try and speak slowly, but accidentally, I sometimes speak quite fast when I get excited. So if I'm doing that, you can just start shaking or shouting or ping me or send something to tell me to slow down. So this is where I work. Well, not at the moment, obviously, but it's right in the middle of London. And I work in the physics department, which is kind of in the top left of this corner. And this is Imperial College London. And it's a pretty sensational place to work, which you can see from this image around us. We have kind of Hyde Park. We have the Science Museum. We have the Natural History Museum. We have the Victoria and Albert Museum. And then over in the physics department, as Miriam kindly mentioned in the introduction, I'm looking at new materials for electronic devices. And particularly these materials are carbon-based materials. They're called organic semiconductors. We can dissolve them in solvents and make these beautiful semiconducting inks and then print them and create really, really beautiful crystal structures. And what we can do, something's coming up in more. Cool, yeah, let's see. Oh yeah, sorry. I'm gonna stop that from distracting me. What's amazing about these materials is that they have the electronic properties of things like silicon. So they're semiconductors, but the processing properties of carbon. So they're really, really easy to work with. We can dissolve them, we can print them. We can print them onto huge sheets and we can create kind of flexible devices. What we're particularly interested about in my research group is a type of a branch of semiconductors, a particular area of them, which are chiral. And chiralities are really fascinating topic in loads and loads of different aspects of science. Chiral objects exist as non-superimposable mirror images of one another. So you have a left-handed and a right-handed version, just like your hands, just like shells, just like some subatomic particles, but particularly I'm interested in molecular structures that can be left and right-handed. And what we're finding out is how we can work with those in electronic devices. So how we can use those to manipulate the properties of light, what a chiral molecule will do when it interacts with light or what kind of light it would emit, how they behave in magnetic fields is also appearing to be super interesting. And then what we're looking at increasingly now is how they can be used to manipulate electron spin. So not only the spin of a photon, but also the spin of an electron. And there's a whole range of different things that are really, really exciting when you start to think about chirality in research. And if anyone wants to talk about that offline after this workshop, I'm really happy to do so. So now why I think Wikipedia is really important in the pandemic and why I think it's so important that we're all here and here working together. I think as a physicist, I've been feeling completely useless since probably mid-February, mid-March. My whole family are medical doctors. They're all doing really, really important things. My brother's a junior doctor actually at a really busy hospital in London. On Sunday, my dad turned 70 and we went over to have a socially distanced birthday. My brother to be able to say happy birthday to him, which I think is so cute. But I've just been feeling like there's not a huge amount that we can do. But actually, I think Wikipedia is probably more important than ever before during this pandemic.  And I thought I'd just start on that because I think it's really, really crucial. I don't know if you all saw it, but if you didn't, you should check this out. It was a beautiful article that was in Wired actually in kind of early February about how Wikipedia is the last best place on the internet. And I really liked this quotation saying it was built on love. And I think even more than that, the kind of data science, the research that you guys are doing, the analysis that we get from Wikipedia is something that's so fueled by kind of very personal questions and interests and interactions. It's something that's really, really incredible for you as a researcher and also for the general public to see. I urge you to all go and read this article. I think it's really, really beautiful. But I think Wikipedia is important in a whole bunch of different ways. One is on how we interact with the general public through this ongoing pandemic. One is particularly on education. We spoke about it a little bit in my breakout room before, but lots of us work in universities and the whole notion of teaching and learning has changed, but not only in universities has it changed. Also for, if any of you have parents or friends with small children, everyone's having to homeschool now. And that's very, very different than learning in person and the resources are very, very different. I think that the pandemic too gives a whole bunch of opportunities for academics who are thinking about contributing to Wikipedia. Probably lots of the students who are here are thinking lots of online classes have changed. For me, as a physicist, we can't get into our research labs now so we can't do all of that aspect of our science. So how can we keep contributing? And I put this bullet point on kind of hastily when I was thinking about it, but I think for people coming back and looking at content that was generated during this time, you know, when people come to research the pandemic later on, when historians come to look back, Wikipedia is gonna be a really important place for them to go through for information. So it's such a cool time to be starting off and thinking about this, thinking about working on Wikipedia and the project. There's actually been quite a few articles about how important Wikipedia is already. And again, I'd encourage you to go and read these, particularly on kind of tackling misinformation and the way that Wikipedia has been incredible at pulling in medical researchers and epidemiologists and health researchers. And I'm happy to send you all of these slides or all of these links to the articles later on so you don't have to look them up. But I was thinking about particular ways. So one I think thinking about the spread of misinformation is really, really important. And particularly because Wikipedia is non-partisan. And what we're seeing now in the UK and the US all over the world is the kind of huge polarization and politicization of pandemic-related news content and stories. And I think something about Wikipedia that is particularly incredible is that everyone comes to it. No matter where you are, no matter what political party you support or subscribe to, everyone goes to Wikipedia for that information. So I think that is incredibly important, keeping it neutral, but also recognizing that when you write or edit or capture data from Wikipedia, you're capturing it based on everyone. And that's really, really different to any other platform that I can think about. It's not an echo chamber basically. Something that I think is really interesting about this pandemic and I've been reading a lot about it as I write more for Wikipedia about researchers who work on coronavirus related science is that this is the first real pandemic when people have pre-printed more than ever before when people have put their academic papers up before they've gone out for peer review. And as a result of that, journalists are publishing news articles based on pre-printed science and that's a really, really interesting difference for the public in how they interpret newspaper articles about science because usually it's gone through a rigorous peer review process before it gets out into the hands of the public. But also it's completely changing how science is done because people are working together so much faster than ever before. And I think Wikipedia has a role in kind of synthesizing that and explaining that. Also you can create and edit the pages about coronavirus related topics or researchers. There was an article in, I think this is obviously the New York Times from the way that the headline is written a couple of weeks ago that looked at all of the kind of top researchers working on coronavirus research and unsurprisingly, well actually surprisingly given that a number of women that I found out about all of the experts they quoted were men. So if you have any capacity to be able to write about women researchers who are working on coronavirus related topics right now it's a really, really great time because everyone is looking for these pages. Another thing I think is really crucial is thinking about how we get offline content to school students. This was an article from New York, one from LA and one looking at UK school students. And this is all in the last couple of weeks. So this is all since we've moved all of homeschooling to all of schooling even to online. And it was particularly looking at the demographics of students that aren't engaging with the contents that the content that their schools are putting out. And I think something that we can start to do as Wikipedia as researchers and editors is to start thinking about how we can get more school related content online and accessible offline. I can click through these quite fast but I'll send them all to you. But I think something that you as researchers could come up with is ways that schools can keep using Wikipedia as projects, as research projects as some way that we can think about shifting to online delivery of education. And I've been speaking to a whole bunch of teachers around the UK about how we can probably work more together as people who are passionate about Wikipedia, passionate about open knowledge, and also school students who have a little bit more time on their hands and potentially some capacity to access the internet. Oh, and it can be related to data, you know, a huge number, I like when I do this and my hand kind of vanishes into the London skyline, a huge number of school teachers, particularly trying to integrate more between kind of history and research and also data and computer science. And I think that wiki data and all of the opportunities we have now with a huge amount of data being generated is really phenomenal actually. Particularly as one fifth of the world, if not more than that, this was early April when I got this statisticer now on lockdown. And again, thinking about access to online content. And as I mentioned before, it really emphasised that I think it needs to be representative. I think we need to make sure that we're documenting all of the different scientists from the Northern Hemisphere, from the Global South, from more economically developed and less economically developed countries. The final one I think is for researchers. I don't know if you've all read this blog on Medium. It was by one of the Wikimedia Foundation research team. It's actually really, really beautiful. If you haven't, I'd go and look at it, but it's particularly looking at how Wikipedia has changed in the past couple of months, particularly with knowledge related to the coronavirus and how it's increased. And I think we all have this capacity now to better support our colleagues and our student friends with how we can make use of all of this data, how we can share all this data, how we can pull it all from the internet. You know, Wikipedia is phenomenal, not only because we have this opportunity to speak to so many people, but we can learn so much about what they're interested in and what they're clicking through when they go online. And I think it presents opportunities for people who are interested in finding out how they can engage because they might have a little bit more time. So now I'm gonna particularly think about, I'm gonna kind of try and switch now and talk a little bit about the project that I've been doing before coming back to thinking about things we could do together as research collaboration ideas. So I've been working, as Miriam mentioned in the introduction, on new ways that we can try and think about improving gender balance in science, particularly in physics. So I work in a physics department, I studied physics at university as an undergraduate, I did my PhD in physics, and we've always had a really big under-representation of women, under-representation of women and of people of color. And as with so many countries all over the world, this has been recognized as an issue for 10, 20, 30 years. And we see it at high school, we don't have the right representation of women, we see it when we get to undergraduate level and we see it at postgraduate and then at professor level. And we've tried, all over the world, we've tried various education initiatives to try and improve the representation of women in science. And actually for the US, you can get data on it, they spend about $3 billion a year on education initiatives, about a third of that is towards gender diversity. So they're spending a huge, huge amount of money on initiatives to try and improve the representation or the recognition of women in science. And the most fascinating and frustrating thing is nothing seems to have changed that much. So if you pull up data on kind of statistics of who studied what and when they studied what, the number of women studying physics, the number of women graduating in physics hasn't changed for, you know, since the 1980s, 1990s. And so I've been starting to think for kind of probably the past couple of, you know, three, four, five years since I started doing my PhD about ways that we can actually meaningfully better represent and celebrate women scientists and also create an opportunity for people to learn about these incredible women, these amazing people of color in a context of something that's important to them. And I think that's why Wikipedia has been so phenomenal in that. So it's amazing as a platform because you have people who come on it to read about a particular topic. You have people who come on it because they're interested in, you know, a particular river that's near their house or a particular football team that they support. And then they start clicking through all of the different links and find themselves on this phenomenal woman, man, cousin of color, whatever it is that reminds them very much of them. You know, it's someone who reminds them of their story. It's someone who connects with them. It's a page that they kind of chance upon. You arrive at it sneakily. You don't get put this information right in your face. You're on Wikipedia because you're fascinated and you're interested in something and then you learn about something else. Actually, just like that game we played in the introduction where you shared your favorite fact from Wikipedia, I think that's a really incredible way that you see all of these people are there and that they're just like you. So in 2017, I read this amazing book by a science writer called Angela Saini and it's called Inferior, the True Power of Women in the Science that Shows It. And Angela is, she works in London. She was an engineer and then became a science writer. And in writing this book, she looked at all of these historical science studies that had been set up to try and show that men and women were different. So all of these studies that show, you know, women have different hobbies to men, women are more interested in caring responsibilities and all of these different things and showed how biased all of these science studies were. So how the impact of the scientists who are leading the studies, how they impacted the data they collected in the way that it was interpreted. And she looked kind of throughout history all over the world at these phenomenal women who were kind of standing up and saying, this isn't right, this isn't fair. You know, in the early 1900s, there was a lot of voices in the UK, particularly who were trying to get women not to be able to go to university, to be able to vote, to be able to own property. And there were all of these women standing up. And I think Angela puts together this really, really incredible introduction to how biased science has been and how that's impacted women's status in society. Actually, her book that followed Inferior was called Superior. And it looked at particularly this same concept that related to academic racism. And again, I'm happy to talk to you about those great books later on. But kind of briefly after I read, shortly after I read Inferior, I met a phenomenal woman called Alice White and this is a picture of Alice. And she is a Wikimedian in residence at the Wellcome Collection. And she is a historian of science actually by training. So she has a degree in studying the history of psychiatry. But she particularly taught me about Wikipedia as this incredible platform, as I mentioned before, as a way of communicating with a huge number of people, as a way of teaching people about different topics that are important and you know a lot about, that you're an expert in. And she also taught me just how important it was in schools. And I hadn't really ever thought about it before, but now I've been working on this for the past couple of years. I've been thinking about it all of the time. So Wikipedia is used all of the times in classrooms, you know, whether it's online or offline, people are using Wikipedia when they're learning, you know, it's used in universities, it's used in pub quizzes, it's used all of the time. Something I hadn't realised before everyone started wanting me to talk about Wikipedia with them was how often Wikipedia is used by journalists.  So actually having representation on Wikipedia impacts what's on the mainstream media, impacts what's on the news, it impacts what gets on, you know, the front page of the Guardian. And I think I hadn't sort of, I hadn't made that connection so like since I started doing this project. Let me see if I can come back. It also impacts science. This is another fascinating research article from a couple of years ago. And again, I encourage you to read it. But it was a professor at MIT who set a Wikipedia assignment to members of his class. And then it was to write particular Wikipedia pages for topics in chemistry. So kind of niche areas of chemistry that didn't have Wikipedia pages. And then tracked how often those topics appeared in scientific literature. So how often they were being written about in peer-reviewed science journals and found that you could assign one in 300 words in these peer-reviewed papers to them appearing in Wikipedia. So it completely changed the way that science was evolving, them having a Wikipedia page. And as I mentioned in the introduction, and Miriam mentioned, I work in this kind of emerging area of new materials. And actually so often in that, I want to know about a particular technique or a particular type of material or kind of a brief history on why people have used a particular experiment. And Wikipedia is certainly the first place you'd go to before you go to a peer-reviewed area of research. So I think actually as science becomes more interdisciplinary, as everyone wants to become an epidemiologist, as all of these things are changing so much, having Wikipedia pages on particular topics is so, so crucial. So not only important in academic learning in the kind of formal school sense, but also in how it's changing our research, you know, as we all become more interdisciplinary, Wikipedia is becoming even more important in those academic circles. And I hadn't really appreciated too how much it informs everything that we don't see. So these kind of ways I think are things that are obvious to us.  But what we don't know is when we ask Syria a question or when we ask Amazon Alexa a question or when we ask our Google Homer question, is that all of the information that these home assistants are getting is also from Wikipedia. So if we have a huge amount of bias content on Wikipedia, if we don't have enough pages about women, about people of color, about people from the global south on Wikipedia, then whenever you ask a question to your Siri, that's going to be biased too. And I think this is something that's much, much more subtle and something that really means we have this kind of responsibility as Wikipedians to make sure that everything on there is neutral and up-to-date and correct. And sometimes you can see it. So if you do a Google image search for famous physicist, this is what comes up. You get a nice wall of old famous physicists, probably many who worked with or at EPFL. But I think that something that we have to remember is that this is because of the content that we've put onto Wikipedia, right? This isn't because Google is biased or the Google image search engine is biased. This is because there aren't enough Wikipedia pages about women physicists who get enough clicks, who get enough people going to that page directed to that traffic, and also because they have an image on the page. So I think what we need to do is work with Wikicommons. We have to work with libraries and archivists to be able to get this content, but also make sure it's on there and linked to appropriately so people can start to see it. So this is old data now and something I think that we could start doing a lot more as a Wikipedia research community is collecting more information on the people who edit. But there's kind of talk that between about 10 and 20% of Wikipedia editors are women. So we know we have a really, really big lap in the representation of women editors. This may have changed now. This is quite old data. And I think something that we could all do is better collect that data and understand it.  Only 18.3% of Wikipedia biographies are about women. I think what's fascinating is this is very similar to the representation of women on banknotes or the representation of women in statues in the UK. But I think this is really terrible, right? Particularly because we know now how much is informing so many different aspects because we know how it's informing all of our home assistants because we know how it's changing all of the stuff that we hear about in high school and in journalism. If we only have a representation on Wikipedia that's less than a fifth of those biographies are about women, then I think that we should feel pretty badly. So as Miriam said, since I read Inferior, actually since the beginning of 2018, I've been writing these Wikipedia pages every day for women, for people of color, for LGBTQ plus scientists and researchers. I'm nearly a thousand, which is the most exciting thing. Although I was kind of hoping I could celebrate it in a really big way and now I'll just be celebrating it in my house. So it's probably by editing Wikipedia. I'll tell you about a few of them because I think they're really fascinating and then come up with some ways that I think we can be clever and work together and I'll go quickly because I know you have a tight schedule. So this is a phenomenal woman called Gladys West. And I learned about Gladys West in probably 2018 kind of a black history month in America. And she was an American mathematician who started working for the government. So she started working for the US government, particularly on the early programming for GPS. So she was doing all of the kind of early mathematical calculations to get the satellites up for GPS so that we can all use satellite navigation. And when I made this page about Gladys West, there was so little about her. It was kind of one of those beautiful Wikipedia kind of collaborative growth. Everything happened. Everything happened on this page. She had very little information. All I could find was this tiny document that was all redacted, all of this kind of secret government information as you can imagine. And then after I made this page, she was nominated for the BBC Top 100 Women. And again, coming back to the way that data is important because you can track all of the page views. You can see as soon as she gets nominated for BBC 100 Women, the kind of page views go crazy. Everyone starts clicking on Gladys West page to see it. And then she was inducted into the US Air Force Hall of Fame, which means that now we have all of these incredible free images of Gladys West because the US government make all of their images freely available for Wiki Commons, which is just kind of staggering. The other amazing thing is that she's nearly 90 and she's just finished her PhD by distance learning, which is just so cool. So even when you start writing this page about someone and you think, okay, that's it. She's nearly 90. We're gonna keep adding a little bit more as we learn about her. She does so much more, which makes the page grow even more. I just think it's incredible. Another amazing story was this researcher that I'm sure you'll remember, but Katie Bowman who's a computer scientist and physicist who was at, she's now at Caltech and she was at MIT when she did the programming, but she was one of the software developers who put together the code that first created this first direct image of a black hole. And this was one of those amazing stories of Wiki editors worldwide collaborating because there's very little information about Katie Bowman again. I made this page when I got home from work. So it was, I got home at about six. I made the page by the end when I'd finished having dinner. By the time that I finished editing, it had been translated into about 15 languages. Now I think it's in nearly 30 languages, but that night alone, it was viewed over 300,000 times, which is staggering, right? Just everyone was clicking on and learning about this, which I just think is amazing. And she was also in the BBC Top 100 Women. One more, which is just an amazing story. And then I promise, oh no, I have to show you a few more, but I'll be quick. This is Elizabeth Sudmayer. She's just, it's just staggering actually. So Elizabeth Sudmayer studied English in kind of the early 1930s. And she then went off to work for the Central Intelligence Group that became the CIA. So she was one of the early pioneers who set up the CIA in the US. So kind of the security and spying organization. And not only did she do that, but she was really involved with campaigning for women to be better recognized and to be better paid. And this was the time when women weren't doing these kind of jobs, right? So she was there. She was not only doing that job, she was also changing the whole way they supported women. And this one's kind of incredible. She led a whole panel called the Petticoat Panel, which was looking at the gender pay gap in the CIA. Imagine that now. So the amazing thing about this story was, I watched a little video about her on the CIA, which is why I put this webpage up. I'm on a Zoom call with a million people on it, but I'm not supposed to be talking. Okay, got it. And then I got this email from a guy called Michael who said, by the way, I'm Elizabeth Sudmayer's second cousin and I read this page and it says that it's been created by you. So this was about a day after I'd made this page, which was quite staggering. And then after that, we had a whole long conversation. It turns out he makes movies and he wanted to make a movie about Elizabeth Sudmayer and the Wikipedia page made it really great to be able to make this movie about her, which I just think is so cool. So it starts off as something where you just write a page or you put some data up or you put some image on Wiki Commons and then it becomes something that's so, so much more. So Wikipedia is incredible for that. I've also been focusing a lot more recently, as you can imagine, on all of the incredible women who are involved with the coronavirus research efforts, including Kizmekia, who's one of the top researchers that the NIH who's leading vaccine development. This page is also amazing. She was featured on all of their American news channels and also the BBC. And then this got about 45,000 views in about two hours the other day, whenever I was starting to click on. And the amazing thing about these two pages too, Kizmekia is in the US, Sarah Gilbert's in the UK, was both times my dad's come and told me about them and he's like, they already have a Wikipedia page and I've made their Wikipedia page, which is just so fantastic. Alison McGeer is working on looking at aerosols, particularly in how coronavirus might be transferred and translated in aerosols. And then Paula Reed is the incredible American journalist who's really held health government to account on how they respond to coronavirus. So all of these amazing stories are coming out. And I think the incredible thing is to keep those conversations growing and keep growing. I'm gonna go quickly now because I don't wanna take up more of your time. Let me just see what's happened to my... Oh, oh no, too much. So since the beginning of my editing, I've really enjoyed teaching other editors how to take part in Wikipedia projects, how to stay involved. We've had editathons for a whole bunch of different activities. So writing profiles about women scientists, about black and minority ethnic scientists. We've done Wikipedia editathons two years in a row now for LGBTQ plus science day, which happens annually and internationally. And it's just been incredible. I went to Brazil, we did a big Wikipedia editathon in translating pages into Portuguese. And that was just kind of staggering, all of these young people who really, really rely on Wikipedia, you know, much more than their textbooks because they're difficult to get and not up to date. People really use it in places that you could never imagine. And all of these different editathons with learned societies. So really, if you're a student listening and you're thinking about ways that you can get involved with Wikipedia, one way would be through your library, one way would be through your student society or your chapter of a particular learned society, but also work with people. All of these different conferences and professional bodies want something to do like Wikipedia. And it's a really, really great way for you to support them as well as them to support you. I'm not gonna keep talking. I have too many examples. The most amazing thing is the editing Wikipedia costs absolutely no money. So you can engage all of these people all over the world. You can do all of these amazing things with data. You can have a really, really incredibly inspiring time learning and you've not spent anything.  So now finally, I wanted to put one thing just a couple of slides on how I think we can all work together more. There's been some really beautiful examples recently, particularly about how capturing small, not obvious amounts of data has resulted in the public learning so much more. One, that was a very skeptical and vague point that I just made, but I wanna give two examples of it. One was in February last year. This was two US researchers. I don't know if anyone saw it, but again, I'll send you the papers that they looked at. It was two US researchers who set their undergraduates a project of looking in 10,000 academic articles at all of the acknowledgement sections in those articles. And they realized that the same group of four women were being recognized all of the time cited in all of these different acknowledgement section. And they actually had some huge impact on some part of the way that you do kind of computational genetics. So some program that they created was used in a huge amount even to this day is still used. And the papers that they wrote about creating this software have been cited tens of thousands of times, but the women were kind of held within the acknowledgement sections. They weren't properly recognized. And this researcher set, this is an assignment to our students and they started to see the same women's names being coming up again and again and again. And again, I think this is something that from a research perspective you could completely run with. You know, it won't just be in computational genetics that this will be happening. It'll be in lots of different areas. And anyway, it turns out that at least one of these women went on to have an amazing second career, not in genetics, but in educational research. But you kind of see how actually not only writing these pages for Wikipedia, but also doing research to identify who should be written about for Wikipedia is also something that's really, really great to do. Actually, there's a project on at the moment run by the Science History Institute and there's a great article about it on Massive Sciences website. But looking to try and identify these women, these five women researchers who are in this picture of one of the early academics who was involved with diabetes research in the US. And this is again, something where I think data and research and access to archives and libraries would be really, really incredible. So I'm gonna end with a whole page of bullet point suggestions and then take any questions. I think there's a huge amount of information that would be really great to get on editors. So what kind of people are editing where they are, but particularly for new editors. So this is something that I've been thinking about. I mean, I know Wikimedia thinks about it a lot, but we have all of these great editor funds. We have all of these incredibly inspiring opportunities to work with each other. And then sometimes editors don't stay. You know, all of the editor funds I'd run, I'd say 90% of the people who can't show up are women and yet they don't keep editing. So how can we keep them engaging and what interaction are they having on Wikipedia that makes them not wanna stay? And that's something that I think is a community that we should try and find some answers for. Particularly about the content that comes up on Wikipedia. So we can talk about this at length later on, but I think thinking about which pages are more likely to be nominated for deletion. So why pages get deleted? How people talk about pages that should be deleted? What's the differences between pages about women, about people of color? How can we try and understand from that data who's particularly being included or excluded from Wikipedia? Again, looking at who is missing. So what kind of topics are coming up and not available on Wikipedia? And again, to work, you know, librarians are incredibly crucial for this effort. So are these phenomenal Wikimedians in residence, local Wikipedia chapters. All of this I think is really, really important. So I think one area on understanding editors and another area on trying to improve our content. And the final one, I can't even remember what I cut now, but it will make sense. Oh yeah, this one I think is great. It'd be super nice to know how people land on a particular Wikipedia page. So what do they click through before they get to Wikipedia that lets us end up at a page about Gladys West, at a page about Kuzmetia Corbett? How often are they just Googling their name? How often do they start on a page about virology or whatever and then end up there? And also how much time are people spending reading them? I mean, it's so nice when you're training new editors and you can say, this page has been viewed 45,000 times, but also it'd be super nice if you could say, and everyone stays on that page for 20 minutes an hour because it's so fascinating. So I think that would all be really nice data to have. And when I spoke to Miriam yesterday, I was acutely aware I didn't wanna not connect with you and say that there's ways that we can work with each other. So I came up with a whole bunch of different suggestions. So in light of that and having spoken for too long, thank you so much for having me and for clicking in and joining this conversation. And if you have anything, you can send me an email or find me on Twitter. And yeah, and obviously like everyone else around a lot now. So just find me and ask any questions. So thank you. I'll stop sharing now. Thank you so much, Jess. Yeah, I'm clapping. I'm clapping for Jess. So Isaac, if you're around, Isaac, another researcher at the Wikimedia Foundation is handling the Q and A queue. So Isaac, if you're around, I'll let you go through that. Yep. Thanks Miriam. And thanks, Jess. Thanks to Jess, yes. So yeah, just a quick reminder, I'm taking questions from the chat. So if you have more, just add them. The first question comes from Andrew Eels and says there's specific research focus is studying misinformation as it relates to politics and public discourse. And the way we speak about it, misinformation seems to have a connotation of intent to mislead. Would you personally consider journalists publishing unvetted research as misinformation? Or do you think it's more an attempt to disseminate information as rapidly as possible, perhaps overlooking the long range consequences? Without being as probably informed as someone who's spent years studying this area, I definitely think in this situation, it's the latter case. So I don't think it's people deliberately trying to spread misinformation, but I think everyone is talking about this, everyone is thinking about things at the moment related to it. And people wanna have that big scoop as quickly as possible and people wanna get that out so that people will click and link to their newspaper article or whatever. So I think we probably need to take more care over the way that we report scientific research, but that also comes with us as researchers doing a bit more public engagement to talk about the way that scientific research is done and also published. Because if I went, you know, even though I come from a family of medical doctors, if I went to them and spoke about preprints, they'd have no idea what that was. So I think that we need to not only do the part of working with journalists, but also do that part of talking about what we do as scientists. And yeah, to the chat, I will definitely send the slides. I'll send them as soon as I put them on Google Drive. Thank you. The next one, I think this is again coming from kind of the start of your presentation. Hussam-Adin Turkey asks, so there's alt metrics like Wikipedia page views and Google search engine queries are playing a main function in predicting disease outbreaks. This has been known for a while since Zika and Ebola epidemics. Is there any work to use Wikipedia analytics statistics to predict epidemiological evolution of epidemics like COVID-19? I definitely don't think I'm the best person in this discussion to answer that, but I'm sure that there are some really, really big projects that are looking at it in the pages that I've been writing so far for researchers who are working on coronavirus. I'm amazed by how many of them are more the kind of mathematical computational predicting side of epidemiology and public health. And actually some of the most cool projects at the moment looking at how we can better contact trace in hospitals, out of hospitals, how we can understand how these viruses spread. And I think that all of those data science related and related to information that it's capturing from our mobile phones, from the ways that we engage online. So I'm sure that there is a huge amount of research, but I'm definitely not the best person to answer that. Sorry. No worries. Oh, Mayor, you are up next if you'd like to ask your question. I'm just going to intervene. We have, we're a little bit late, that's fine, but maybe let's try to keep another five to seven minutes for a question, because after the workshop. Sure, I mean, everyone I can take questions later on too. You can just send me an email. I realize I spoke for too long and I feel guilty. No, no, no, and it's absolutely fine. We were late earlier than when you started to talk. So that's fine. Just for everyone that's for the interest of time, let's just limit the Q&A to another five to seven minutes. So I'll try to keep my question short, even though that's maybe hard. My question touches to how Wikipedia encodes bias. So how Wikipedia's policies maintain bias in their attempt to kind of keep high editorial standards. I mean, things like notability, because notability on a lot of times will revert to kind of academic standards, or will we create academic standards, especially in professional fields? And I think there is on Wikipedia an overlap between scienceism and the gender bias. So I just want to hear your opinion on encoded bias and encoded bias within Wikipedia's own form of encyclopediasm, for example. Yeah, I mean, I completely agree, and I actually didn't talk about it, but obviously the notability criteria on Wikipedia generally reflect the notability criteria within academia. So the way that we celebrate and think about who's an important professor basically fulfills the Wikipedia notability criteria. So it's who's published a huge amount of news, got a massive grant, all of these different things are significant for whether you get a Wikipedia page. I think the difference is how it gets covered. And women, I often find when I'm writing about them, they'll have the big research grant, they'll have won the big prize, they might be president of a particular society, but actually they don't get coverage outside of their own institution or the professional body. So I think in that sense, the Wikipedia notability criteria are fine, but the way that we talk about these people is completely different. So you saw it in the case of Donna Strickland, the first woman in a long time to win the Nobel Prize for Physics, and she had had a Wikipedia page written about her. It was decided that she didn't fulfill the notability criteria, and the reason for that is because no published, no newspaper site, no journalist had reported any of the research that she had done in a really big way, or written that she was president of the Optical Society of America, so a kind of very big optic society. So I think actually, whilst I think that Wikipedia does make this by, it exaggerates the bias, right? Because if you're not spoken about in the media, you're not on Wikipedia, but if you're not on Wikipedia, you're not spoken about in the media, I think that university press offices and journalists need to do a better job at finding these experts to profile them, to write about their achievements so that then Wikipedia editors can put them on Wikipedia and keep backing that all up, because the hard time I have is finding enough independent sources that confirm all of the claims that these scientists are saying that they can do. So I think that we actually need, Wikipedia has a set of criteria that has to be maintained, and I think that that's important, but actually we need the wider world to start recognizing these people's achievements so that we can document them on Wikipedia.  So for now, I think that we should focus more on trying to make sure that women and people of color and all of these different marginalized groups are better represented in the news so that we can better cite them on Wikipedia. Sorry, Miriam, that was a very long answer. All right, we've got three more questions. I think we can get through them. First up is Benjamin. So I was just wondering, obviously we want to vase this proportion, but until that occurs, how can we communicate with the media in order to change the way that they behave? So I think that often, and when I've spoken to an analyst about this, they will go to a university or a particular research group for a comment, and some of them are super engaged with the same efforts that we're talking about here. So some of them often try and find a women expert to be able to get her insight so that they can quote a woman. But sometimes the people don't want to be quoted. They say that they're not the real expert. They should go and ask the man who lives next door. You know, there's a big confidence issue, not only in the journalist, but also in the women researcher to make sure that she wants to be commented. So I think we all need to do more as a research community to make sure that people have the confidence to be able to respond to these particular areas and to make sure, and this is very, very niche comment, but you find the right area researcher for a particular comment to give you a really important key. If you're asking a question about something, you want to find exactly the right researcher to be able to answer that. And I think often researchers will answer questions broadly about a field without being a technical expert in it, and we need to get away from that. We need to go towards people, journalists, finding out where these people are and going to ask them to answer a particular question that I realized I didn't. I think that we, as activists, as people in an online space, whether it's on social media, whether it's helping journalists through emails and suggestions like that, do have an opportunity to make recommendations. We have an opportunity to nominate people for awards, to nominate people for fellowships, something that I've been doing a lot since writing these Wikipedia pages is writing a whole bunch more nominations for prizes for people who I realize are incredible and haven't had the recognition that they deserve. And I think if we keep doing that, then they'll get up to having some kind of visibility that means eventually journalists will go to them. But yeah, it takes a lot of nudging and a lot of, you know, if you know anyone who edits a scientific journal or a newspaper, then to just keep bugging them about profiling these people, that's kind of what I've spent two years doing now. So I think I have a whole database of people who are quite open to suggestions, but just keep writing about them and keep talking about them and then eventually other people start listening. Next, Christina asked from the chat, how do you choose the scientist to write about next? Do you know or use automatic methods that help in making the choice? So I, no, nothing as automatic as it should be. I have at the moment me and my friend, Mariam Zaringalam, who's a AAA science policy fellow in DC. We have a whole Google sheet of all the women we know who are working on coronavirus related topics that we keep adding to every day when we wake up and look at Twitter. We just add all the cool women researchers we've seen. So that feels incredibly old fashioned. Sometimes I just end up spending all of my evening on university websites or who's just been made a fellow of the NAS or the AAAS or a TED fellow because they're usually quite good and diverse, but really it could be a lot more automated. The problem that I've had comes back to the question before about notability improving sources that sometimes even from all of these automated generated things or people who've made suggestions and email me, they are absolutely staggering phenomenal women but it's really hard to prove they're as notable as you know they are. So I've been trying a lot more to make sure that I can do that before I write the page which is disappointing, but yeah, it could be more automated. But yeah, I think maybe this is too many or we've got one more question. We've got one more and hopefully maybe it's a quick one. Lotoic asks, you mentioned how Wikipedia content informs journalism, research, artificial intelligence and probably much more. Do you have insights to what extent that effect is mostly English Wikipedia and what the added effect is also having whether it's available in other languages too? Yeah, I think probably, I mean it's probably mainly true in English speaking Wikipedia because A, it's so big and B, journalists trust it and rely on it a lot. I don't know the differences and certain there'll be other communities and probably people in this workshop who know more about that than I do. But I think having the, you know, you saw it and you see it in lots of the different profiles, the amazing groups that with you women in red and all of these other groups that come together to mass edit pages about women in different topics, translating or writing about pages in different languages is obviously a really important way to get that knowledge into a whole different area of the world. And I do think probably journalists rely on it increasingly more, but probably not as much as in the UK or the US or English speaking Wikipedia, but I don't feel like I'm educated enough to give a proper answer on that. So sorry. Okay, bye everyone. My time is up. You can find me on Twitter or on email. Goodbye. Thank you so much, Jess. Thank you very much for being with us. Thank you very much, Isaac for taking the question. Thank you to you all who asked the question. I think


Welcome back folks to Dow. Dow Industries right now trading down $360. We hit the Nasdaq off $68. S&Ps are off $36. Let's get over to our mam. It's to Tim Ord as we do each and every Thursday at 20 past the hour and you can reach Tim every trading day folks at Ord-Oracle.com. That's Ord-Oracle.com. Tim Ord, what's going on brother? Well, I sent you a chart probably about an hour ago. Did you get that one? I have it. Do you want to start with that one? No, actually I wanted to, I just want to make sure you got it, but we'll start chart number one which is a monthly chart. Okay. And I drew a Fibonacci relationship from the March 2020 low and if you can see it there I have a 50% retracement. Yes. Which was pretty close didn't quite hit it in October of last year. Okay. That was a low for that decline and the market kind of worked up has been working up since that time. I have a great big line drawn to us down to the volume and I have a finest drink there. Right. Yes, we see that. Yeah, if you notice that big volume on that it was a monthly chart so that was a month of March. Yeah. And I drew a neckline and if you can see it, if you connect the highs going back to the morning of that neckline it broke above that neckline with a sinus strength. So in a Weisskopf term that's a breakout of a neckline confirming a breakout. Okay. So that neckline is around 405 on the monthly chart. Okay. So I got the breakout. So the market went up a little bit in April. Now we're in May and we're kind of right back at the 405 area. Yes. So on a monthly chart I have a confirmation on a monthly chart that we broke above the neckline and the neckline is support. Now if you go to the chart I sent you about an hour ago. Yeah. I got a kind of shaded area, a pink area at that 405 area. And if you look at late March on the volume chart I got a red circle around a volume. Yes, we see that. A spike in volume. Yes. Right. And we compare that to the previous high which is another circle around a volume area in early March. I see that. Yeah.  You know that's Weisskopf. Sure. So now that area should become support. And this is what I really want to stress. You never get a bottom without panic. If you don't have panic you don't have a bottom. And there's a lot of different ways you can define panic. You can do it by the VIX. You know if you get spikes in VIXs you know you can do an RSI on it or a rate of change. You can also do it with the TICS and you can also do with the TRIN. There's probably some other indicators you can do it with but those are the three that I use. And I once you get to a support area and it's going to be support you got to have panic. If you don't have panic that support area is not going to hold. And I want to point out here. We jumped above 405 and last week when we were talking last Thursday it says we're pulling down to that 405 area. Now I'm saying it's going to hold support and reason why you got panic in the TRIN. A TRIN reading on the close of 1.20 is considered panic. Well you had panic on Wednesday. You had a TRIN of 1.35 and on Thursday the day of the low you had TRIN reading of 1.68. And Wednesday of last week you had a 517 down to grating 2. So you had TICS showing panic and you had two days of TRIN panic. Now so the market rally is up. It's a high on Monday. Now we're back into the pink area again. Yes. So now we had on Tuesday we had a TRIN close of 1.40 which is panic. Not much on the TICS there plus 174. Yesterday we had a 116 on the TRIN which is near panic. But we had a 469 down to grating. Over the years I came to conclusion if you get a TRIN reading of 1.2 and you get a down to grating within one day of a panic TRIN reading. Now there's day before or day after. I call it a bullish combination and that suggests the bottom will form within the same day as I was reading to us two days later. Well the combination came yesterday. We had a 469 down to grating. Day before we had a 101.4 on the TRIN which is a bullish combination. Okay. Suggesting the low will form either yesterday was obvious that's not the case. Mark went lower today. It would be today or tomorrow. So anyhow we got panic back in the 405 area and once the TRIN reaches panic area and the TICS reached panic area in a previous support area normally you go back to that area you'll get panics again. It's just sport. This is exactly what we're having here. So Tim let me ask you with that if we get our head wrapped around the volume here now what's going to happen we're coming into that area for sure but the volume is going to expand. Yeah that's a good point because you got a gap there. Yes. We talked on the radio last Thursday. The market gapped up on Friday and left an open gap and I'm saying that crap.  But if you follow the volume since the scenario from last Friday the market as see yeah Thursday is when the market bottom that's when we were talking and Friday when the market gapped up so Monday Tuesday was a high right. If you notice that's correct. Yes. Yeah. Yeah. Volume dropped out Tuesday because the market hit a new high and volume dropped off. So there's no energy to the upside. So now we're going back down. If you test the gap on 10% lighter volume so last the level would be your last Friday's gap would be the volume you test against it. So I'm not. You should test the previous gap areas like testing a previous high on 10% lighter volume that's usually implies resistance. If you test the gap area on 10% lighter volume that's a support area days not over yet. Yeah. No. No. I'm with you there. I get it. I was just questioning the aspect. I get it because what's happening right now. Let me just we have divergence in a big way between the S&P and the and the cues because what's happening if we look at the three cues right we're coming into a 65 million and we're going to be lucky we're going to do like only 50 million in the cues right but the S&P that so if we look at the spy and this is always tricky folks when we have divergence okay they're coming in and we've already done 71 and it only has to do 85 so that you know the spies going to end up doing 100 million you know so listen just hold that thought all right so we're going to we're going to take a quick break and we're going to come right back we'll go through the other charts and we'll go from there man as you said the market's not the day's not over yet right right not yet so that's the bottom line stay right there folks Tim or myself we're going to be coming back you can reach Tim at odd-oracle.com that's O-R-D-O-R-C-L-E.com Dow Industries right now down 310 306 S&P's off 30 Nasdaq off 50 we're going to be right back welcome back folks to Dow Dow's down at 296 Nasdaq's off 47 S&P's are off 29 we're talking with our man Mr. Tim Ord and we are talking markets so Tim we have the chart up here of you know the the two circles with the with the the volumes on it right do you want to continue with this one or do you want me to go to another chart? No I will continue just a little bit longer you know that that gap did form last Thursday and that gap on the SPY's volume wise was 93 million shares just a smidge less than that but anyhow it was 93 million shares so if we're testing that gap today on 10% lighter volume that'd add to the the bullish situation because we've got panic and the ticks and trend add around this 405 area and if you get volume to match it to be 10% lighter which also leans bullish then there's the probabilities really increase that this 405 area will hold and if you also look at the monthly chart which we went over because we did have a sign of strength through that neckline at 405 and that 405 should hold the support and since you're showing panic in this this area yeah I'm calling this a probably a bottom now if we didn't have on this pullback we had over the last three days if we did not have the trend above 1.2 or tick readings above minus 200 then I'm saying yeah we're going to blow through this 405 and go down lower but since we already got panic panic only forms that at lows then uh I'm I guess confident that this 405 area is going to hold that saying today's going to be the bottom no I'm with you if we can so for 10% lighter volume I'm saying probably today is the bottom yes let me ask you this I'm trying to figure out whether we're on the I'm on the wrong date or not because so there's I can see we we had a sign of strength I can't see that far on my chart because it's way too in front of me it went from 404 to 409 and that I'm talking to spy now that had 112 million shares so we're definitely going to be way below that but that's not the swing point but that was a sign of strength going all the way back it looks like at the end of March so that's where the gap side is that what we're talking right there well there's a gap that formed Wednesday's closed to Thursday's open of last week okay that gap I have it I have it labeled there on a and we're testing that you see that pink area yes I do that shaded pink area okay I have a gap a line there's gap on it pointed to that area which is I got it I get it okay I don't yeah yes okay we're we're testing that gap right now oh I see you know what's happening folks here I'll show you this on this screen watch this I see it Tim I got it now what's happening is that when I look at this line shot that I have so if you're looking at this line shot folks you're gonna see it looks like there's not a gap but there is because this at the bottom which that's entry yeah because the bottom that we had hit 40376 that day and that's when it gapped up because see this on the right hand side folks I'll get the cursor off it that's where we actually closed and then the next day we opened I see what you're saying Tim okay it didn't even 403 that's so intriguing so picture this that that love that yeah it went right to the gap man and closed it okay cool I got it yeah we did it today yeah and that gap which was be Thursday's volume or yeah be Thursday's volume because that's the gap up from Wednesday's closed so you take Thursday's volume which is 93 million shares so you need to be around 10% liar than 93 million shares today to say that gap have a gap has support okay so the day is not over yet we got you know 25 minutes to go yeah we're not gonna do that so to walk the listeners through this again so what you're doing even though the swing point is down there at that 40378 you're saying that the next day we had thought the small sign of strength so we're going to use the 93 million number which totally makes sense I see and then now word so they're the lower that was 40674 so if we actually closed above 40674 it'd even be better today right yeah yeah cool okay because you're testing the gap there's another thing too today's Thursday was Tuesday if you look at Tuesday's volume yes I think we had we had a hundred and some million shares yes we did yeah I don't exactly what number I have 103 but once we had yes and we broke through that that low of Tuesday today we didn't touch the low yesterday that's correct a little bit short right but we broke it through today that volume is 10% lighter than yes the previous low that means a false breakout to the downside okay so you're testing the gap and it looks like could be 10% lighter volume yeah I think it probably will be and you broke below Tuesday's low on the 10% lighter volume that implies false breakout so and we also got you know again panicking the ticks and trend yeah on this decline over the last three days we didn't have panicking the ticks and trend this then probably we'll be hitting a lower but in this vicinity was probably where this bottom is it's the combination I got it cool man okay yeah and there's another thing too I do a lot of formations too I'm thinking you know we see the little high we had first of April yes the only thing we went down there made another high in mid April yes we went back down again then we made a higher high what Tuesday this week right and I'm thinking that three drives to a top pattern which has downside target to where the pattern began right which is basically where we are okay yeah it is right cool okay yeah and three drives to the top patterns usually not a long-term topic but it's a timeout and an uptrend I used to call it right so right nice but yeah that's my feeling I know we got about two minutes to go here yep you want to flip to the gold chart real quick yes absolutely okay I have it up all right this is how do you know when the market's going to trend well I can tell you so the second window down from the top or the top windows gdx okay next window down is the gdx advanced decline percent yep with a 50-day moving average yes if it's when it stays above zero the market's in an uptrend and all those blue shaded areas yes are when that 50-day average is above zero there's a lot of little quarks in there that didn't stay above zero by isn't me I just put the ones that stayed above zero yes and so those are ones so anyhow we've been above zero since last august and we went down a little bit uh I don't know look like about February or or something and we turn right back up and we're back above zero again and we're actually gaining ground right now today's reading was that been higher over the last two days so my opinion another impulse wave even though we did correct here over the last couple of weeks the indicator in general stayed above zero so we're still in an impulse wave and we're going on to well we're in May so we're going on to what eight months nine months of rally here and so far as long as these indicators stay above zero the market isn't in an impulse way to the upside so this rally what I'm saying is there's no sign of a top here even though we consult a year over the last couple of weeks the up-down volume advanced client indicators remain above zero just in this impulse way that's really go to the upside and of course the consolidation is helpful because that's building cause to Tim right yep that's building cause listen folks I'm at mr. Tim was going to be doing a workshop for us he's gonna basically come in give us a lot of great education so you stay tuned for that Tim you have a great weekend safe weekend of course we look forward to speaking the next Thursday all right sounds good thank you stay right there folks to come right back


Hi and welcome to the session. Let us understand the following question today. Prove the following tan inverse 2 by 11 plus tan inverse 7 by 24 is equal to tan inverse of half. Now before writing the solution, let us write the identity we will be using in the question. Which says tan inverse x plus tan inverse y is equal to tan inverse of x plus y divided by 1 minus xy, where xy is less than 1. Now this is the key idea to our question. Now let us proceed with the solution. Here given to us that x is equal to 2 by 11 and y is equal to 7 by 24. Now consider NHS. We get tan inverse of 2 by 11 plus tan inverse of 7 by 24 is equal to tan inverse of 2 by 11 plus 7 by 24. Whole divided by 1 minus 2 by 11 multiplied by 7 by 24 which is equal to tan inverse 48 plus 77 by 264 whole divided by 264 minus 14 by 264 which is equal to tan inverse of 125 by 250. This gets cancelled back to so we get tan inverse of half which is equal to RHS. Therefore LHS is equal to RHS hence proved. I hope you understood the question and enjoy the session. Bye and have a nice day.


From DailyDoseOfWeirdNews.com, I'm Darren Marlar, and this is your Daily Dose of Weird News! If you're already an official weirdo, please share this video on Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, and other social media to help get the word out. If you'd like to become an official weirdo, simply click that subscribe button, and while you're at it, click that like button to let the world know that you're weird. Ever get into an argument while playing a card game or a board game? A 31-year-old Minnesota man has been charged with stabbing another guy and hitting him with a mallet after an argument broke out during a game of Magic the Gathering. First, he lost his mind, that's plus one, then he lost his friend, negative two, and finally he lost his freedom, negative six. A poll says 33% of Americans are happy. Now how you feel about that statistic probably lets you know which category you fall in. A new app called the Kissinger is a rubber gadget that attaches to the user's phone to simulate long-distance kissing.  So now you can tell somebody to kiss my grits from across the country and still mean it literally. The cowboy's David Irving says he injured his nipple when he lost a nipple ring at camp. But then it's kind of hard to feel sorry for a guy who has a nipple ring. The young British couple has gone public with details of their very strange relationship. Adam Gillette, 27, and partner Beatrice Gibbs, 22, say that their one-sided open relationship makes them happy and they're not concerned with what others think. So basically she can sleep with other men but he has to remain faithful on the condition that she doesn't leave him. Beatrice explained, I love Adam but I wasn't ready to settle down and commit to just one man. He, on the other hand, was terrified that she would leave him so would rather allow her to have the occasional fling than have to worry about losing her. Beatrice says she sometimes feels a little guilty about seeing other people but after a chat and a cuddle with Adam things quickly get back to normal. She keeps things purely physical with the other guys and Adam says the arrangement takes away the worry of her cheating on him. Um, no, she is cheating on you. Sleeping with other people while committed to you is the definition of cheating. Saying it's not cheating doesn't make it not cheating.  In Nice France over the weekend, an airport worker reportedly punched a man holding a baby after the man complained about a 13-hour delay on an EasyJet flight. Oh, EasyJet. Man, I would have bet money this story took place on United Airlines. Elementary school students in Marion County, Florida will have more free time after school this year as the school district implements a controversial homework ban. The goal is to eventually make Florida's main export fast food workers. Starbucks is starting to sell their own brand of ice cream at 100 of their locations in the U.S.  Grandparents and their faraway grandkids are sure keeping the conversation going thanks to modern technology. About 80% of grandparents reach out and touch their grandkids at least once a month via texting, Facebook, Skype, Twitter, instant messaging, or good old-fashioned phones, says an AARP survey. While gabbing up a storm, the topics discussed usually include morals and values, 78% of the time, staying safe at 73%, college and careers at 72%, and religion and spirituality 66% of the time. And it's not that grannies or grandpas are bypassing their own kids, 84% of them say they contact their children at least once a month. But come on, let's face it, that's probably to talk about the grandkids. Stephen Colbert is going to produce a cartoon series for Showtime about the Trump White House. Apparently, he cannot fit all of his Trump bashing into his one-hour-every-weeknight show and needs to find another outlet. President Trump doesn't mind that his new communications director is taking public shots at his chief of staff. White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders says Trump actually enjoys there being a competitive Game of Thrones dynamic among his staffers. In fact, starting after Labor Day, Trump's going to hold bare-knuckle cabinet-member fights in the Rose Garden. A report says the obesity epidemic is affecting 711 million people worldwide. 7-11, hey, there's that number again. Who's in the mood for a cherry slurpee and a nacho cheese-covered hotdog? Arizona has a new concept regarding executions, an idea one lethal injection expert calls unprecedented, wholly novel and frankly absurd. Are you ready for this? The Arizona Department of Corrections has had a lot of problems acquiring the standard execution drugs, Pinto barbital and thiopental, so they are suggesting that lawyers provide the drugs to be used to kill their own clients. Yes, not only is this obviously unethical, but the plan is simply legally impossible. For the makers of Pinto barbital, they won't allow the drug to be used in executions and thiopental isn't sold in the U.S. and can't be imported.  There are other options that are a lot easier to execute somebody, like shooting squad, hanging, guillotine, binge-watching the view. A couple in Florida have announced their Trump divorce. She was a devout Trump supporter, he was a staunch Democrat, and after less than two years it just wasn't working.  A new study says that 42% of millennials have not started saving for their retirement. I only have one question, what is this mysterious word, retirement? Ohio firefighters rescued a 45-year-old woman in Sheffield Lake who called 911 after a boa constrictor wrapped around her neck and began biting her face. The giant reptile was one of two snakes she had rescued the day before, though police have not said how or where.  The woman was taken to a hospital for apparent non-life-threatening injuries. The woman had 11 snakes, including nine ball pythons and the boa constrictors. 11 snakes! The only way the story makes sense is if the woman's name is Medusa.  But hey, then again, maybe your secret birthday wish is to spread the flu around. Coke Zero is getting a new name, Coke Zero Sugar. That's right, it's new and improved because we've added the word sugar to the name. Vladimir Putin has expelled 755 U.S. diplomats as punishment for the new U.S. sanctions against Russia. ***Oh, so I have to leave Russia and can never come back? Oh, boo-hoo! How will I go on? Oh, woe is me! This episode of Daily Dose of Weird News is brought to you by the audiobook anthology Last Exit by Jason R. Davis. It is the dark and lonely road.  Then, a set of headlights emerges from the darkness, and your night has become a nightmare. Welcome to Last Exit, an anthology of 17 horrific tales where life on the road can sometimes take a dark and unexpected turn. Check out our free sample and support Marlar House by downloading the audiobook for yourself at DailyDoseOfWeirdNews.com. Be sure to like this video and subscribe to the channel if you want to see more. Be sure to click that notification bell, too, so you'll know when I post new videos. Find even more weird news that I didn't have time for at DailyDoseOfWeirdNews.com. I'm Darren Marlar and I'll see you next time, weirdos.


Aloha, and welcome to Business in Hawaii with Reg Baker. We broadcast live every Thursday at two o'clock here in the downtown studios of Think Tech Hawaii and Pioneer Plaza, where I show the talks about positive stories of business and their owners in Hawaii. And occasionally we'll bring on people as guests to talk a little bit about organizations that help support business in Hawaii to increase the chances and probability of success. And today we have one of those guests, Renee Green, who is with the University of Phoenix and heads up their business programs for the University of Phoenix here in Hawaii. Renee, thank you for being on the show today. Oh, thank you, Reg, for inviting me. Now you've been with the University of Phoenix for a while, but you had an interesting beginning to your career. Can you share with us a little bit about your background and how you got to Hawaii? Sure. Well, you know, I grew up in a low socioeconomic background in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and I always knew I wanted to do something different. You know, I've seen that people, sometimes they go straight to college. Some people go in the military, and some people go to work. So for me, it was the military, so I kind of started my career path there. Well, you know, and that's a great way to get a start because I did the same thing. I grew up in an area that wasn't the wealthiest. Yes. And a way to get out of the neighborhood was to go into the Navy, in my case, and the Navy really provided some good structure and discipline that I needed, and it just kind of took off from there. And I think you went into the Army? Yes, I did. Yeah. But you were there for a while. I was in the Navy only four years. You were in the Army for a little longer. Yes, I was in the Army for 20 years. There were so many great things that I was exposed to that I decided to make it a career. Very good. And you got to do some traveling? Yes. I spent most of my time when I was in the military in Germany, and that was a great experience for me because it gave me the opportunity to be able to experience different cultures, to be able to get exposed to different environments and do different things. Right. And the Army was a great place to get some education, some training, too, right? Yes. Yes. You know, that was probably the thing that I liked most about the military is that training, because each level of leadership you transition into, there was always formal schooling that you would go to, and it was a lot of training that took place within the organization. Right. And so you got the training, you got the travel, and you made a decent living, too. Yes. I mean, it's a good combination. Yes. And then when you got done, there was this thing called the G.I. Bill? Yes. So, you know, I did some of my schooling in the military, so I was able to transition up to my master's degree. Wow.  Very good. Yes. And that was all on the mainland? Yes. That all took place. Well, now, my degrees, I did those in the military, so a lot of it was done in Germany, but then my doctorate degree was at the University of Phoenix online. Aha. Yes. So there's a connection there. Yes. You know, and what's interesting, I think, about some of the courses that you are able to take in the Army or any military branch can be done remotely. I mean, you can attend an American university, even though you are in Germany or Japan or wherever. You can be on a aircraft carrier and be attending college courses, right? Right. I've also told them, they understand the needs of their military soldiers, and they try to, you know, cater education so that we all can participate, no matter where we are at that particular point in time. It's a great benefit. Yes. So it did well for you. So you were able to go through that, get all that experience and background, and then transition to corporate America, get your doctorate degree. And then what motivated you to get into academia? Well, you know, I've always had people within my life to mentor me or inspire me. And I felt it was time in my life to give back to others after I received my doctorate degree. I wanted to be able to, you know, transition into academia life, where I could share my experience with others and inspire them. Because I believe that everybody has that flame within sight of them, that they can do whatever they want. They just can't give up. And they've got to keep fighting for it. You know, and that's a message that needs to be sent out over and over and over again.  And you've done very, very well for yourself. Well, thank you. And now you're here in Hololulu. So did you join University of Phoenix directly here? Did you work with them on Amainland first? Okay, so I had a little different path. So I started teaching in the University of Phoenix in Minnesota and Wisconsin.  So I kind of, you know, put my career on the side to help out. But once I got over here, I realized I was still young and I wanted to get back into, you know, to my career. So then I applied to be an instructor at the University of Phoenix and later was hired on. Wow. So you actually have almost like a second career going now that you've started here and now you've worked your way up to what I seem to think is a pretty senior role at the University of Phoenix and the business school environment. Can you describe, what do you do now with the University of Phoenix? Yes, I'm a campus college chair for the School of Business and what that is is an academic representative slash leader that oversees the School of Business and I oversee the College of Information Systems and Technology. Wow. That's a lot. Yes. Now what kind of programs do they have at the University of Phoenix in the College of Business? Okay, so we do offer undergraduate and graduate degree in business management and also we offer undergraduate and graduate degree in IT. Wow, okay. And you've got, I guess, instructors and who are these classes designed for? Well, these classes are, we have a unique target market for working adults because we understand that going to school is not all they do. They have other responsibilities in life and one of them is working in their careers and also taking care of their family.  Right, and can these classes be taken remotely? Yes, yes, students can either come to the local campus or they can go online. Right, so you've got, do you have a military component to these classes? Do you have a lot of military attending? Yes, we do.  And if they wanted to, they could come into the campus environment. You've got one downtown and you've got another one, don't you? Yes, it's in Kapolei, our learning centers, yes. And so can you go to either one or the interchangeable or do you have to sign up for one and just stay to that campus? Well, I'm really not the right person to answer that because that's more of our academic and enrollment department. They are the ones who determine, you know, where those particular cohorts start. There's a lot of, there's flexibility in how that can be all structured. And I guess the bottom line is that for the older student that's got some other obligations, this provides a, you know, a platform for them to be able to continue their education almost on their own timetable, you know, and be at attended classes when they have the time to do it. Right, because, you know, classes are one day a week for four hours. So that frees up a little time to, you know, engage into other activities and also be able to study so that they can complete their degree. Right. Now, the University of Phoenix has been in Hawaii for quite a while, hasn't it? Yes. Yes. And they've kind of integrated into the community and they do a lot of different community activities. And I know you've got something that's in the works that you've been working on. You want to share that with us a little bit? Yes, so we have our second annual Technology and Business Conference that's coming up really quick. It's next Saturday, October the 15th. And I'm really excited we had our first one last year around the same time. And it was a huge success in the community. You know, people were really excited about a place to come and just share knowledge. Right, yeah.  This is being held out on the west side of the island, isn't it? No, it's right here downtown. Oh, is it downtown? Yes, downtown in our Honolulu campus. And it's going to be segment minute this year because we wanted to be able to accommodate more people. So they're going to come to our campus and register. And then we're going to escort them across the street to HPU. And we'll have our morning session there. That way people have the opportunity to see the whole morning session, not select which area. And then around 1130, we'll transport them back over to our campus. And we'll have lunch and breakout sessions. Now we've got a part of the flyer is showing on screen right now. And at the bottom right hand section is the website that people can go to sign up. Right. Right. And so if they went to that website, they would find out more about the conference. Right. It will talk about the different sections that they will be able to experience on that day. It also shares about who our keynote speakers are and some of the other speakers that we have for the day. And I guess there's a general session or are there breakout sessions? Are there different tracks or is it all pretty much kind of in sequence? Well, we have a general session in which we'll have a keynote speaker and then we'll have a panel. So we're trying to break it up a little bit. You know, people speaking, panels, time for the attendees to ask questions. And then in the afternoon, it's going to be a little bit more concentrated. So you get to select which breakout session you want to go based on your needs. Right. And this is focused, and I noticed some of the topics in there are pretty focused in the IT area and the cybersecurity and that sort of thing, which is on top of everybody's mind these days. I mean, there's a lot of issues in that area. But you've got some other good topics in there too. Can you just touch base on what some of the different topics are that's going to be? Sure. So one of the things that we're going to talk about is supply chain management. Because all businesses, no matter what their end results are, they want to provide that great customer service experience to their client. And it doesn't matter if the product has to come from 3,000 miles away, it should be timely, effective and efficient. And some insight will be shared around what that looks like and how can we get to that point. Another topic is going to be big data. So, you know, a lot of people may not know what that is. And the speaker is going to share some information around system analysts and business analysts, how they can collect the data and what happens with it after they collect it. And I think the interesting part of that discussion is how can we use that, utilize that data for smart cities. See, and that's, you know, and the utilization of big data. Yes. And maybe we can touch base a little bit on that when we come back from break. But right now we need to take a 60-minute break. This is Business in Hawaii with Reg Baker. We're talking with the University of Phoenix right now and what they're doing for the business community in Hawaii, including a business conference that they've got coming up in about 10 days. So, stay tuned. We'll be right back. Hi, I'm Chris Letham with Think Tech Hawaii. And I'd like to ask you to come watch my show, The Economy in You, each Wednesday at 3 p.m. Looking to energize your Friday afternoon? Tune in to Stand the Energy Man at 12 noon. Aloha Friday, here on Think Tech Hawaii. Aloha, I'm Carl Campania. I hope you please visit us this summer. It's a wonderful summer. It's actually a cooler summer than we're used to. But I hope that you come back and visit us and watch our show, Education Movers, Shakers and Reformers here on Think Tech Hawaii. It's at noon every Wednesday. See you then. Aloha and welcome to The Savvy Chick Show on Think Tech Hawaii. I'm the weekly host at 11 a.m. Honolulu time. I'm very excited for the next six weeks. We have the Aspire series, which is all about the coolest careers I could find and interviewing and getting insights from these amazing people who want to share it with you and help you live your dreams. Look forward to seeing you on the show. Aloha. Welcome back. This is Reg Baker, business in Hawaii. We're here with the University of Phoenix. And I may have misspoke earlier. I said we'd be back in 60 minutes. And of course, we went right through the 60 minutes and we cut 59 minutes of it off. So we're doing good right now. But we've got Renee Green here. She's with the University of Phoenix. She's got a very interesting background, very successful. She's a good example of the non-traditional way of becoming successful. And that's great motivation. People got to understand that there is a lot of ways to be successful, both personally and in business. And there's no standard or cookie cutter way to do it. And Renee has shown that. But this business conference that we're going to be having a week from Saturday. Yes. You know, one of the topics in there, which is a favorite of mine, which may not be a favorite of viewers, but big data, you know. And coming from the background that I come from in the CPA industry and particularly in the banking industry, very automated, very computerized, has been for many, many years, high volume of transactions that are occurring, all the checks clearing and etc., etc. So I've been working in the big data arena for a while. And it's amazing to me how much information can really be obtained there. It's all there. It's all available. The question is, how do you access it and how do you use it? And that's what, you know, the speakers that's going to talk in that area is want to be able to, you know, frame that and break it down to be able to share that. Because I think, you know, when we think about big data, a lot of times, you know, it's especially that if you own a business and you have so many different components that you're trying to manage to make your business successful and figure out what is it you need to do and how do you need to use this information? They want to try to give a frame of reference for that. And, you know, what's so good about our audience is that we have people that are probably no exposure to big data, some that's kind of in the middle and some like you, Reg, that know a lot about big data. So how do we give everybody a nugget to walk away with? Right. And I think part of it is just making them aware of what's out there. And once they start thinking about it, they can probably come up with some ideas on how to tap into it and what would be useful and what wouldn't. I mean, one part of the big data or a component of big data that I never really thought much about was, for example, what's in our email systems, you know, the contacts that we have in there and some of the notes that may be there that we have for our contacts. I mean, I've got several thousand contacts, different addresses, different locations, different notes. I've got my calendar. I've got all of this information that's in my personal computer. And if you multiply that by the number of employees that are in a company, there's a whole bunch of little data components that when you start bringing it all together and combining it with what's in the accounting system or what's in the sales force or sales system, there's a tremendous amount of information that can be tapped into and utilized. And that's the goal for this conference, is to show our attendees how to use that. Maybe, Reg, next year, you can join us. Yeah, that'd be a lot of fun. I always enjoy that, you know, and I notice supply chain management is going to be on there. I notice blockchain technologies. Now, that's a term that I'm not familiar with. Right. Can you elaborate on that a little bit? Yeah, so, you know, not to steal any thunder away from any of our speakers, but I think, you know, it's something that when you think about blockchain technologies, you think about Bitcoin and financial analysis. And there, the person that we have speaking in this, they want to kind of take it in a different direction, so to unleash some disruptive innovation. So disruptive innovation. So groundbreaking, yes, groundbreaking innovation, so that it moves it beyond the financial analysis. And it offers, you know, ways that it can be used. There may be real estate, health care, utilities, and even in the government sector. So I'm excited to learn more about that, too. Yeah, that sounds like an interesting topic. Yes. And this is going to be on next Saturday. Yes. Maybe I'll make a trip out and just hear that. You know, but it sounds like you've got some, you've got cloud data security now.   It is. And it's, you know, the thing about it is it's a benefit to know about it, but then there's some risk involved. And I think, you know, the benefit is, you know, that you know that you can secure data in those places that you have it's a convenience for the user. But I think the risk involved more so is that, you know, how do you avoid scams, you know, how do you protect your data and when is enough information enough, you know, because we're always getting access to supply things. So, you know, how do you know your data is secure? And one of the things we try to do is just not bring one person. We try to bring people from the local, the state, and the federal level so they can share a comprehensive perspective of, you know, that particular topic and what people can expect. And they all come with their own individual experience. Right. You know, that they can share so people can get these different perspectives that you mentioned. Right. And, you know, it's important to remember, I believe, that, you know, what's in the cloud is one thing and they can have that encrypted and it could be rock solid secure. But if the access point to tap into that information is weak, then the whole thing is weak. It's the old proverb, you know, it's only as strong as its weakest link. And so, if you've got weak controls at the user end with passwords or access to the terminal to tap into the information, then all of this control over here, all this strength and protection is wasted. Right. And, you know, it's funny you mentioned that because last year, one of our speakers demonstrated how it was so easy just to hack into your data and just to be able to get whatever they needed. Right. You know, and that's scary because I've seen examples of just having these smartphones. Right. And being able to, once the smartphone and a lot of us, I think, automatically have the smartphones log in to a network that it's familiar with. Right. And there's not a lot of controls in the smartphone itself to protect access to that network. And that can be a big weak link. Yes. And we always think sometimes that these things happen outside of the organization but they can happen in the organization too. So it's just one of those awareness clause that, you know, we want to just share information with others. Right. So now this is the second or third year you've done this? This is the second year. We're really excited, yes. All right. And so obviously the first year must have been a success. And then this year you're going to do it again. How many people are you expecting to come? Well, this year we're expecting 300 attendees to come to this event. So this would be an opportunity not only to learn something and get exposed to some of these technology and controls and classes, but also maybe even an opportunity to network a little bit and meet other people. Oh, definitely.  You know, hi, how are you? And the question comes, what do you do? And that's how people can network also, you know, as they're walking back and forth during the conference or even in sessions during, you know, the time from one session to another. Great opportunity just to network, you know, perhaps get a business card from somebody to follow up later. Or you just never know who can help you with what? Well, you know, and having 300 people in Hawaii altogether at one place with a common interest, there's going to be a lot of opportunity there to meet and get to know others.  As a matter of fact, I've always found that to be one of the game changers when you've got a business and you're trying to grow it, you know, having people that you can go to almost like an advisor type of capacity, people who've got experience in certain areas that maybe you don't have. You know, and it can be an unofficial advisory group, if you will. But developing a network in an environment like this is definitely one of the values. Right. And, you know, we all are probably after the same goal. We're just probably going around it differently. And this is a great opportunity to bring all the knowledge that we all have together and to be able to share it. Because technology is rising on the Hawaiian Islands. And why not share it from an academic, from information systems and technology from a business and even our local entrepreneur perspective? Well, and it changed you so fast. Right. I mean, what you taught last year and what you're teaching this year, it's going to have changed a little bit over that 12-month period. So things, it happens. And it moves quick. It does. So it takes a little bit of effort to keep up to date with all of this. Now, what do you think would be the stereotype of company or person that would come to this conference? What is that perfect fit? Well, that might be a different question than who do I think and who we're looking for. It just seems like business owners would need it. People in the information systems and technology field would need it. Students in college, that's learning not just in the University of Phoenix, but in surrounding colleges. People in the military could use this information. So it's something for everybody who has an interest in business technology. And people in the military, and it just triggered something. I mean, with this networking capability and with people coming into the conference, if they've got some skills that might be useful, there might even be a possibility that they can find a company that might be looking for good people. Right. So there could be, don't want to make any promises, but there could be employment opportunities that they might be able to find if they were coming in and networking through the 300 people that would be there. Well, I met it. I can't make that decision, but, you know, anything is possible. You know, absolutely. Anything is possible. You know, so anybody who does show up, they bring a resume. Maybe they can pass it out and find something. That'd be great. Now, how do you find the instructors and the lecturers to be presenting? How does that work? Well, the people, so what we do, the people that's going to be presenting at the conference, we talk to our faculty practitioners. We talk to our students, and we have connections in the community that we talk to, organizations that, you know, suggest speakers for us. Good. And then our experts in those things. And I would imagine if they did well last year, you'll invite them to come back this year. Yes. You know, we have invited some people back, not to say that others, maybe next year they'll come back. It just depends on the topic and what we're trying to do. OK. And if somebody did want to speak at your conference, how would they reach out and show their interest in doing that? Well, this year is full, but in the future conferences, they can always email me at rene.green at phoenix.edu. OK. So why don't you say that one more time? Sure. It's rene.green and it's green without the E at phoenix.edu. Very good. And you'll be at the conference, right? Yes. And I look forward to meeting all of you. So if anybody was having any interest in getting more involved with it, they could always find you at the conference. Oh, sure. Of course. Very good. Well, you know, rene, we really enjoyed having you on the show today. We're about ready to wrap up. And I've enjoyed being here. Did you have any last words of thoughts or anything for the people out there that you can give them some valuable tip to take with them? Yes, you know, one of the things I know that people might think, well, you know, I don't work in business or technology. So I probably, you know, maybe this is not for me. But maybe it is because we all use some type of device at home, and we always want to ensure that we know the risk involved and the benefits involved.  There's always a nugget that you can take away with, you know, from this conference. And we hope to see you. Well, and that's true for anything that you go to. You need to, you get out of it what you put into it. So go out looking for some value and you'll find it. Right. Very good. Well, Renee, it was great to have you here. Thank you. Thank you so much. This is Business in Hawaii with Reg Baker. We broadcast live every Thursday from 2 to 3, 2 to 2.30. I hope to see you next time. Until then, aloha.