Hi, I'm here today to talk to you about enabling descent, which might seem like a very strange thing to want to encourage. Unfortunately, we can't be together in person, but 2020 is coming to an end in a few months. And here's to wishing everybody a healthy 2021. Before we start, I wanted to give a shout out to Pixabay. All of the images in my presentation are from Pixabay. Pixabay has a great open license called the Pixabay license, which makes them safe to use without asking for permission or giving credit to the artist, even for commercial purposes. So I wanted to emphasize and remind everyone that we should encourage being free and open while still being respectful of licenses and rights. So if you're going to be using images and presentations, it's always good to first make sure you've got the appropriate license on those. My name is Sim Zaks. That's Sim, like the card in your cell phone. I'm based in Israel, where I've been living for the past 18 years. I've been working at Red Hat for the past six years as a DevOps CI architect, working in the Quality Engineering Department. And I have about a little more than 20 years of experience in the industry. I currently write a blog called Every Person Strategy, which is a strategy for regular people. It's not only for high ups and executives. Everybody can use their strategy. And this talk is based on one of those ideas in how to be strategic. My current role is leading initiatives across the QE department for multiple products. And we're trying to standardize on things and get people walking in the same direction. So let's get started. Why would we want to encourage dissent? So about a year and a half ago, I was asked to lead an initiative to, among all of the Red Hat QE teams to standardize the CI workflow. And now CI workflow in QE, basically using all of the CI tooling in order to automate the testing process. Until then, we had each team worked on their own. They had to figure out how they were doing things. And there was little to no communication between the different teams. So we had a number of different teams who were doing very, very similar things in very, very different ways. So among our objectives was to develop the QE CI workflow. And we had a continuous productization effort going on in Red Hat where we wanted to go from upstream through productization QE and out to the customers in a standard flow. So we wanted to connect QE to that. So we needed to actually be working in a similar manner in order to do it. And most importantly, we wanted our teams to be able to work together and form a vibrant community around the work that they were all doing. We had about 50 teams participating. One representative per team. It's a global group. We have people of China, India, Europe, Israel, America. And so we invited a subset of them over to Israel. We can meet face to face, discuss what we wanted to do and build a framework for our collaboration. Our first decision was to use the open decision-making framework for all decisions that we were going to make. We understand that each team is unique. They have their own processes, their own requirements and their own challenges. We required full partners. We wanted every single team to be partnered with us and to grant them ownership of the process and enable buy-in. So we started off the process by declaring it was open. We care about what you have to say. We need your requirements. We want you to be able to influence the direction that we're going in. And we very quickly found out that just because we declared something open, doesn't make it so. Now, before we discuss how to encourage dissent, what is open decision-making and why do we do it? So a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away, decisions were hierarchical. There was a single leader who would decide what is the direction and how do we want to do things and tell everybody this is our method and then everybody down the road had to do it. There are rumors that floating around that this methodology is still around, but hopefully in this time of enlightenment, more and more teams are moving towards open decision-making. The assumption was that the more senior a leader, the wider view he had, the better he was able to see the big picture. People with less experience know their small little task and don't really see the big picture and therefore they should remain quiet. However, at some point in time, people realize the business leaders are looking at the environment and the decision-making ecosystem pretty much and decided that, found out that the emperor had no clothing. It's impossible for one person, no matter what his experience, to fully grasp the entire picture, especially in a global environment with multiple cultures and a lot of different regulations and challenges. There's a lot of difference between theory and practice. We also have the grump workers, us regular engineers, who are faced with specific challenges that senior leaders are blissfully unaware of. At the same time, diversity started becoming an important aspect in business. At first, leaders thought that they were doing minorities a favor by bringing them in and making the business more open to them, but they very, very quickly realized that every person who has a different background or who comes from a different culture or who has different life experiences actually is bringing in a new perspective to the process so they can understand stuff that other people on the team are not understanding. And so when you put together this diverse group of people, then you're getting a completely different perspective because everybody is going to be able to share. Now, to harness this great new advantage that you're bringing in with all of these teams, because you've got the diverse teams, you've got the people doing the actual work, you have the business leaders who have a greater vision of the big picture and have the actual experience. We need to include all of those people in the decision process. So as I said, we declared our process to be open. Now, there's a lot of challenges involved in a standardization project. They often fail because people don't keep all of these different ideas and what needs to happen in mind. We explained what our goals were and why we wanted to do them. We told everyone their opinions were important and we needed them to influence. We needed to hear from them in order to make the best decisions. And we had a few loud passionate engineers who made sure their voices were heard, but the majority of participants remained quiet. And so we went through a process of understanding why people weren't talking and what we had to do in order to get them to talk. We had numerous personal conversations with the people who are participating, asking them about what they thought of the different things we were doing. We had discussions in internal company forums and asked people for their experience in order to understand from a wider group of people what was going on here. And it turns out there are numerous reasons why people are not giving the feedback, why people are not disagreeing and telling the leaders what the problem is in order to make the better decisions. So let's talk about a few of them and then we'll discuss how to mitigate this. So first of all, we have culture. This is a global project, as I mentioned, people from all over the world. Some of them are from authoritative cultures where people are highly discouraged from disagreeing, from expressing individualism. If you say I have a different idea than the group, you're frowned upon, you're looked down upon and that is not considered a positive thing to do. We also have patriarchal cultures. We've got standard introverts, right? Who never liked talking in groups. Shy people, uncomfortable in a public setting, are not going to necessarily shout out what the problem is here. People like to avoid confrontation. In open debate, there's often bullies who shout down other people's input. So in this global project dealing with all of these different elements, we have to understand where they come from, what their culture is and how to get them to open up in order to gain the benefit that we need. Second of all, nobody likes being wrong, especially if their suggestion is going to cause a debate. Oftentimes ideas are brought up, discussed and then there's a determination this won't work for everybody, right? The person who suggested it maybe had a narrow view, maybe had a different idea, but when you look at 50 teams across the department, you say, well, that's a great idea for your specific team, but if we want everybody to be able to do this, that isn't gonna work. And then people might feel embarrassed about that. Debates can use harsh language, as I said. People might be insulted by what somebody else is gonna say. So people would rather keep quiet than risk putting up an idea that's going to be shot down. As an example of this, right? Of people wanting to remain quiet rather than to look bad, right? I've been in an interview process recently, interviewing people. And one of the questions that I always ask is can you give me an example of a time that you screwed up? And there's a lot of things I wanna gain from this question, you know, how they work, how they deal with things that had a problem, who they communicate with, transparency, right? There's a lot of great answers that come in and most of the people just like, look at me blankly and like, no, I'm not really, I don't know, maybe a small thing, maybe I did this, it took me two minutes to fix it. And then I say, you know what? Let me give you an example.  I said in my last position, right? I was in charge of IT for a small company, about 100 people. And we developed an internal application for all the company to use. And one day, somebody turns on the application, completely 100% internally developed. Somebody turns on the application and it says there's a virus.  It's probably a false positive. I know this application does not have a virus. I clicked on the button, I let the virus in and it went through the entire company very, very quickly. It took me 27 straight hours of work with two other system administrators to get back all of the computers into a normal state and to completely get rid of that virus. As soon as I give people that example, they're like, oh yeah, you know, I did something once it took me two hours to fix, right? They can't be as bad as what I did and therefore they're willing to open up. So, you know, giving different ideas, telling people it's okay to mess up, also gives them the ability to now say, I don't look so badly because you screwed up as well. So this is also very similar in meetings. Third, it often takes time for a new idea to sink in. Some people grasp ideas very quickly. They understand all the ramifications. They know what's going on. They see the big picture, they hear an idea. They, you know, all of a sudden their brain goes in a thousand different directions of exactly what's going to happen with this. However, most people need time to process and understand exactly what the suggestion is and what ramifications it has. They want time to research. They want time to look and see what happened with similar ideas. What happened when we tried other things that were different than what we're doing today? Somebody might have something in the back of his mind, right? Something is bothering me, but I don't know what. I can't put my finger on it. So what he wants to do is discuss it with the rest of the team, right? He wants to talk about with the other people before agreeing on something because whatever he agrees on is going to impact everyone. So he wants to make sure that everybody's on the same page. People are not prepared to stand up and explain when they first hear the idea, but after discussions with their colleagues, they can stand up and they can explain exactly what the problem is here. They might want to research or even just sleep on it so that they have some time for it to sink in. As an example of this, when I was a junior programmer, I was given a task once to scrape data from a popular web service. We wanted to use the data and offer it to the company's customers as statistics for something. And after working on it for a full week, this is a number of years ago before everybody understood how the web works. We found out that it was against their term of use. Not only that, they were actively preventing people from scraping data and there was even a lawsuit that was recently publicized against the company that was scraping this company's data. So we had to stop doing that. Now in the end, the company contacted via the web service directly and we ended up getting data from an API from them, which was much, much simpler. And this just goes to show us that research and thought first, right? Without just jumping in and saying, this sounds like a great idea, let's go and do it, that will save time, money, and effort. Fourth, people don't like to look like troublemakers. People are concerned for their careers, right? People don't want anybody to see them as a problem, as somebody who doesn't go with the flow, who always is throwing up obstacles. This may be based on past experience where either they've had obstacles in their careers because of things that they've said. It may just be based on survival instinct where you say, you know what, he's the alpha, I'm going to make sure to stay in line and not dissent too much. If people don't feel psychologically safe, they're not going to speak up, especially true if there have been repercussions in the past. Now, if you've led a process and you've either had repercussions or you've had a closed process, it's very hard to change your reputation. You have to work especially hard if you want to suddenly start using a more open model and work with people. And finally, people will only speak if it really makes a difference. There's a lot of processes that people declare to be open that have lip service. But after they go through the whole process and people give their feedback, the leader ends up making the same decision that he originally proposed. In other words, he asked everybody to come in, help and discuss and all of that. And then he's like, okay, now we're going to do what I wanted to, but we were open, dissenting, giving negative feedback, giving, you know, engaging. Takes a lot of effort and emotional engagement. People must be convinced that this is not for naught, that they're actually going to be able to influence and make the process better. During conversations that I had with people as part of this process, I was told that they had never been part of a truly open process. They didn't really believe that it would make a difference if they helped or not because I already knew what I was doing and I had already decided on the directions. It took a lot of convincing and showing proof of major impact by the participants where I said, this is what we started out with and look at where we went to, right? This is 180 degrees from what we originally had discussed. Now, an important thing to remember is who cares, first of all, if they remain silent. All of these people who are not speaking up, what happens if you make the decisions without them? What happens if you allow them to remain silent? So some teams do the nod and ignore, right? Yes, yes, yes, that's a great idea. And then they go and do what they think is best, they keep their original processes. They justify this by saying that the standardized process did not take their requirements into account. The fact that they didn't participate and didn't include their requirements is not relevant to them or to their managers. Other people mumble and grumble the walkway, this guy doesn't know what he's doing, we're going in the wrong direction, nothing is working. They might go to senior leaders to raise objections. They're gonna ask the leaders to come out and say, this isn't a good process, this is the wrong direction, the people are the wrong people, this happens all the time. So by understanding why they aren't speaking, you can mitigate this and you can bring them in and bring them on board in order to make sure that their requirements are included and that they own the process. And that will prevent all of this negativity that we're talking about. So now we understand some of the problems and what is behind them. And we also understand the ramifications of ignoring those problems. So the main question that we have to deal with is what can we do about it? So we came up with this methodology to adopt dissent. We have to get rid of the great silence and get people to tell you that you don't know what you're talking about and that you're missing things and that there are much better ways of doing this. So the five different methods of adopt are ask for ideas before presenting a proposal. Decisions shouldn't be finalized in a meeting. Open personal conversations. People can be called on during a meeting and thank people for dissenting opinions. So let's go into each one of these and see what that means. So when we wanna ask for ideas before presenting a proposal, when you walk into a room with a proposal and ask people what they think, the impression is that this is already a done deal. You might be able to slightly influence. You might be able to change a word here or there move the direction, but the main work is done, right? So what can you do instead of that? Instead, you can walk in and present goals. Say, this is what we want to accomplish and ask people for ideas. This does two things. First of all, it removes dissent from the picture, right? Instead of asking people what they think about this proposal, right? Ask them how to solve a problem. This is positive feedback, not negative feedback. It also empowers participants. It tells them that it's obvious that you care about their feedback and opinions because you didn't go ahead and write the proposal first before asking them. You're asking them before you wrote the proposal. So when you ask for feedback on your work, they can pretty much give you a plus one or a minus one, but when you ask for ideas you're saying, I need your help. So how does this work from a practical perspective? You start with a blank whiteboard and ask a question, right? Currently, we have no standard for triggering our jobs, but we need to participate in continuous productization. So we need an automated process for this all to work, right? How are you doing it? What is your team doing right now? Let's figure it out and we find out that we've got like a ton of different methods. So we have one team using the message bus for disconnected triggering so that one system can send a message to another system and then the other system can listen for messages and get it and it's a decoupled system for auto triggering when the build is available. Wow, this is such a great idea. Does this work for everyone? No, why doesn't it work for everybody? Why won't that work for your team? Well, my team gets multiple builds per day. If I trigger every time I get a message, I will be constantly running and there's no reason for it. If I just trigger once a day, that's good. So I would like to put my trigger on a schedule. Okay, so now we understand already that different teams have different requirements because their realistic workflows are different. Instead of just having a single methodology for doing this, you can have multiple methodologies. Now, instead of having 50 for 50 teams, maybe you'll have end up with two or three or even four and say that if this is your workflow, this is the proper way of doing it. And if that's the workflow, then that's the proper way of doing it. And therefore you include both of their team's requirements and you say, we can work with both of you. Now, the third team was doing something completely different, but one of those two methodologies works for them. So we're going to ask them to see if that will fit into what they're doing. Decisions shouldn't be finalized in a meeting, right? So we've all been to meetings and ideas proposed, discussed, modified, and then there's a decision to do it. But after some time, we realized that there's missing a very important aspect, very similar to the example I gave about the web scraping. Maybe it's not the best idea, but it sounded good at the moment. So what should we do? We should use the meeting to present an idea and answer initial questions and then get initial feedback, right? If possible, send out the idea beforehand so that people can be ready. Sometimes you want to have it as a surprise and a great idea and have the whole show, but very often it makes a lot more sense to send that out in advance. People can review and come in already at least a little bit prepared, still not fully prepared. So when you do have this discussion, right? The first meeting should be a discussion and not a, this is what we want to do, let's vote yes or no. The best discussions is an idea is valid, right? Everybody who brings up an idea, that idea is a valid idea. If it's not a perfect idea because no ideas are actually perfect, there are challenges. We don't want to throw out the ideas. Sometimes we can take this idea and that idea and blend them together and one idea will fill out and answer the challenges and other ideas. So we want to list out the challenges of the ideas and enable people to work on figuring out how that will work for them, right? You always want to send them down and other modifications in order to make things production ready. So after this full discussion happens and you have a number of different ideas that you want to work on, send out a summary to all of the people and ask them for comments. This gives them the time to research and discuss. You need to have a deadline on that so that it's reviewed in a timely fashion. And after everybody sends in their feedback, you review it, now there's time for a new meeting to present the proposal, right? Now you've taken their ideas and you've meshed them all together and you've written out a proposal of how we can actually do this. By this time, most people have the time to review and discuss it and research and they understand the full ramifications. After that meeting, when you have the final feedback on the proposal, send out another survey. And then when you get in those results, then you make the final decisions. Remember, decisions are not a democracy. You want to bring in all of the opinions and understand and allow them to influence and take advice from them, but then the leader has to make the final decision as to how to actually do this. Now, the length of this whole process that we talked about, it's a long, painful process. It depends on the type of decision you need to make. The more important decision, the longer time you wanna work offline in order to get that working. You wanna open personal conversations. If you notice someone not speaking during the meeting or looks like something's bothering him, talk to him personally afterwards. Introverts and people from non-individualistic cultures are generally very happy to speak in a one-on-one. You may need to gently coax out important information and explain how important it is to you that you need their honest feedback. However, this might be a little bit longer, but it's very worthwhile as very often you're going to find out things that we're missing, but they didn't wanna speak up in public. So don't get upset because you just had a meeting and just talked about all of these things and this guy was sitting there and did not give you any feedback. Try to understand their perspective. Public discussion may be the best and most efficient method for you to talk to multiple people and together all of the ideas might even be the most efficient way for everybody as a group so that people hear each other and understand why their ideas have challenges and how to mitigate them together. However, a one-on-one conversation will definitely elicit more information from individuals. Another benefit of a one-on-one conversation is persons feel that they're very important, right? If the leader goes to them and says, I need your help, what do you think about this? As an example, I called a female co-worker in China after a meeting that she was silented and I said to her, listen, I know that this proposal causes problems with your workflow. How did I know? Because with that team, we always had problems with all proposals in their workflow. I said, I need to understand why. I need to understand what your workflow is and how it works and why this will not work with it. In that personal conversation, we learned about very specific challenges that that team was dealing with and because of that, we made changes to the proposal. Afterwards, few months later, she told me that no one had ever insisted on hearing her feedback and she felt like it really made a difference to her. People can be called on during the meeting. You have to know your audience. You don't wanna embarrass people but try to call on people specifically, right? This will help bring out feedback that you're interested in. Sometimes people don't know that they can speak or they don't wanna interrupt or it's not the right time or they're not really sure. In a small meeting, you can go one by one in the people who haven't spoken, right? So you throw out an idea, you ask for feedback. You have this whole discussion. When that discussion is over, you're like, okay, on our meeting here, we have 10 people, four of them have already spoken. What do you think? What do you think, right? In a larger meeting, you randomly pick on a few people, two or three people, try not to pick on the same people every time but just look for the people who haven't spoken and say, how about you, how about you? This has been a stimulating discussion but we haven't heard from a number of people yet. Oliver, how does this fit into your workflow? Alexandra, do you see any obstacles here? So this will give you a couple of things. First of all, it lets them know that their input is valuable and requested and what that might do is it might encourage them to speak up in the future. If they think that they're needed, they may volunteer the information the next time. It also encourages participants to pay attention during the meeting. There's thousands of distractions out there, either with your telephone or things you're thinking about or an email that just popped up. If people think that you're gonna call on them and ask them what they think about something, they're actually going to pay attention during the meeting and help out. And finally, thank people for dissenting opinions. A simple statement such as, that's such an interesting perspective. I hadn't thought of it. Thank you for sharing. How can we overcome that challenge? These sort of messages tells everyone that they have a real ability to influence. Anything you can say that will convince participants that this is not lip service is going to help you bring out their information so that you can use it and harness all of the power that they're bringing in. Even, or maybe even especially, if dissenting ideas are not accepted, right? Not every idea has to be accepted. Every idea has to be valued, but it doesn't have to be accepted. There are tons and tons of ideas out there that are the wrong ideas that do not work for everybody and did not take a lot of things into account. However, when you give an idea that is not accepted, thank them. That was a great idea. You know, we obviously have challenges. Keep on thinking. Let's continue to collaborate on this. Show your appreciation, right? By doing this, instead of deriding the people who come up with ideas that are not accepted, that will go a long way in showing that it is a safe psychological environment and people will feel comfortable saying, I don't think that's a good idea. You're missing a lot. You're not taking everything into account. All you have to do is say to them, thank you for telling me that I missed something. So by following these methodologies, you're gonna do a number of different things. You're going to empower your group and enable them to fully explore the entire picture and understand what they're doing in order to achieve your and their objectives, right? Don't forget, these are all of your objectives. When they are part of the decision, they own the decisions. That's their decision. And now when they go back to another group, they're going to defend those decisions and they're going to explain why that's the best way of doing it. Even if it's going to cause them a lot more work. When an idea is not accepted, you don't want to say no. You want to explain why that idea wasn't accepted, right? And give the entire ideas, right? It could be that there's another initiative going on and because of that, that you need to collaborate and work together, then we have to use a certain tool. We have to use a certain methodology even if it is more difficult for most of the teams in our group, it's better for the entire organization. When people understand that, they're willing to take a step back and say, okay, that makes a lot of sense. If you just say no, because that's the way that I've decided we're doing it, people are like, yeah, that, whatever. Don't be afraid to add exceptions and multiple processes, right? You don't have to have a single way of doing things. In fact, if you have a single way of doing things, it's most likely will not be appropriate for every team. In one case, we started out with 50 different methodologies. Every single team that was working with us had implemented something to do the exact same thing in their own way. We knocked that down to five accepted methodologies. They were based entirely on team requirements, right? Does this work for you? Does this work for you? Why not? What can we do? How do we get this all to work? And when people are convinced that you're trying to get them all in the same, to actually work with them instead of forcing them to change, don't ever try to put every shaped peg in the same square hole. Doesn't work. Best of all, by being inclusive, you generate passion. And people who are passionate are the best workers. Teams will love what they're doing. They're gonna put in all of their efforts. They're going to put in extra hours. They're going to work on this in order to make sure that it's good. And best of all, you're coming up with the best solution. So, in summation, and I can't express this enough, use the adopt-descent methodologies. Ask for ideas before presenting a proposal. Decisions shouldn't be finalized in a meeting. Open personal conversations. People can be called on during a meeting and thank people for dissenting opinions. Thank you very much. That's what I have to say about enabling dissent. If you have any questions, I will be here to answer them.


QuickBooks Online 2024. Bank feed to bank feed transaction. Get ready and some coffee because we're doing some quick thinking with QuickBooks Online 2024. First a word from our sponsor.  Like our Accounting Rocks product line, if you're not crunching cords using Excel you're doing it wrong. A must-have product because the fact as everyone knows of accounting being one of the highest forms of artistic expression means accountants have a requirement the obligation a duty to share the tools necessary to properly channel the creative muse and the muse she rarely speaks more clearly than through the beautiful symmetry of spreadsheets. So get the shirt because the creative muse she could use a new pair of shoes. If you would like a commercial free experience consider subscribing to our website at accountinginstruction.com or accountinginstruction.thinkific.com. Here we are in our QuickBooks Online Bank Feed Practice file we set up in a prior presentation. Let's open those major financial statement reports like we do every time the report's on the left hand side. Within the favorites we're going to be right clicking on that balance sheet to open a link in a new tab right clicking the profit and loss or income statement to open a link in a new tab and doing the same with the good old trustee trial balance. If you don't have the trial balance in your favorites you can search for it we're going to tab to the right close the hamburger change that range going from<PHONE_NUMBER>124 tab select the drop down so we can see it on a month by month basis and run it. We will tab to the right do the same thing close the hamburger change the range first three months of 2020 for 010124 tab 033124 tab and select the drop down for months again running to refresh tab into the right closing the hamburger and changing the range 010124 tab 033124 tab months on the breakout side by side running to refresh it. Back to the balance sheet we're now continuing on with our bank feeds for the credit card so instead of looking at the bank feeds for the checking account we've been concentrating on the bank feeds related to the credit card which are usually actually easier because all the transactions for the credit card are electronic transfers typically and because we don't have to deal with so many of the deposits they're only going one way until you pay off the credit card which is what we're going to do this time. Now the interesting thing when you pay off the credit card is we have a bank feed to bank feed transaction so if I scroll up note here that we have a checking account that's connected to the bank feeds what are the other kind of accounts that could be connected to the bank feeds you could have like another checking account you could have a savings account you could possibly even have a brokerage account if it's with your banking institution and you could have then the credit card accounts also connected to the bank feeds so what's going to happen here is we have a payment out of the checking account that is going to go and pay down the liability account so that means we're going to credit the checking account or decrease the checking account the other side's going to debit or decrease the liability account of the credit card so if you were to think about this just in terms of forms before we jump into the bank feeds and I select the plus button what would be the form that I would use to make that transaction well if you were actually writing a check we would usually first think of it from the perspective of the checking account most people believe I would so that would be like a check we would write a check form which is basically the same as an expense form so if it was an electronic transfer you would think it would be like a check or an electronic transfer would be the expense form a check equivalent form decrease in the checking account however that is not the form that will typically be used when you're going from one account connected to the bank feeds to another account connected to the bank feeds and it's easiest to see that if you think about two transactions that are checking account transactions first so in other words what if it was going from one checking account to another checking account or from one checking to a savings account what would what would happen if you used an expense form well in the in the checking account side of things it would look normal because it would be decreasing the checking account which is normal for an expense form to do but when you go into the other checking account it would show an expense form that has an increase it would be like a deposit or an increase going into the checking account but it would be with an expense form that would look funny it would be correct from a financial statement point of view the numbers being correct but if you tried to filter your transactions it would be difficult to filter by because usually when you want to filter you filter by transaction type and usually if I want increases I would say it would be equal to equals and then the deposits right if it was going to be an increase if I have expenses that are increasing the account then that's going to be you know kind of a problem so you could say okay well then then why don't I think of it from the standpoint of the account that it's going into let's say for example the checking account is going to increase because I'm going from the savings account to the checking account well then in that case you'd say well then maybe I can use a deposit form that's the form used when I increase an account and you could and it would look basically correct on the checking account because in the checking account increases are formatted with deposit forms but on the other side if it was if the other side was a bit was a checking account you would have a deposit form that would be decreasing you know the the account and that would look funny so that's why those two forms although they they record the correct transaction if you're going from one checking account to another you could use either the expense form or the deposit form but neither of them look correct in terms of the transaction type if you were to filter by transaction type even though they record the correct dollar amount and the right journal entry so your other option if it was bank to bank would be a transfer so we could record a transfer and that way the transfer form isn't indicating whether it should be an increase or a decrease therefore the transfer form would be typically used if you're going from one checking account to another because that will look normal whether it be an increase or a decrease that's the idea so notice you could use any three or any of those three forms for that one transaction going from one checking account to another so then what about a credit card account well you have a similar thing with the credit card account because if you paid the credit card with an expense form then it would look correct on the checking account because you're paying down the credit card that would be a natural thing to do but if I go into the credit card form down here note that the expense forms are the forms used to record the normal transactions when we make purchases for like supplies in our case with the credit card so if I also had an expense form used to pay down the credit card meaning it's going to you know reduce the balance here right these are increasing the liability if I paid it down reducing the liability with an expense form again I couldn't really search I couldn't sort by expense form here to see the payments now you might say well okay well why don't I use the same solution I could just use a transfer and you could right you could use a transfer form and that would look more kind of normal to some degree but QuickBooks has a special form just to pay down the credit card and that's going to be called the pay down credit card and I think maybe QuickBooks is thinking that the transfer form looks like it's going from one account to another whereas the the the payment of the credit card is is is paying down an account it's not actually going into another like asset account so they felt they needed a whole another a whole another form for the pay down of the credit card but it's basically the same concept as the transfer so so now that's good because it gives us more ability to sort by transaction type although it's also a little bit confusing because now when I look at the decreases to the checking account I have to take into consideration that a decrease could be a check form could be an expense form could be a transfer or it could be a pay down credit card or it could be a pay bill form right all these other forms that are basically expense forms usually decreasing the checking account they're basically check type forms the more of those we have the more we have to basically consider how we're going to use the filters when we're searching for like increases or decreases to the checking account so there's pros and cons to having different options here I also just want to point out that you also have this credit this credit card credit over here now that would typically be used possibly if you contact your your credit card company and they said that like you you're going to waive a fee or something like that so they charged you for a late fee or something and then you want it and then you're going to waive the late fee well then you might use something like a credit card credit it's not typically used as the form to pay down the credit card although I think in their example problem that QuickBooks test drive they use that I don't think that's what it's designed for really so this is the one so this is the one therefore that we typically use to pay down the credit card let's just take this opportunity however to go to the first tab into the transactions and look at the different options so this one you can see that if I look at it from the checking account side we paid off the credit card so this might be with an electronic transfer or something that you set up to pay down the credit card on a monthly basis or something like that it decreased $100 it said it paired it to another account and if I select the drop down you can see that it defaulted not to the category which would typically default to an expense type form not to match because we haven't recorded a transaction on either side you might think it was matched it is matched to some degree but it's not matched to a transaction that has yet been recorded it's matched to a bank fee transaction which has not yet been recorded neither side of the transaction is part of the financial statements yet what when we use the match that means that one of the transactions has already it's already been recorded to the books and then the transfer is the one that we would use if it was going from bank feed to bank feed usually but from one checking account to another and then the credit card that's why it's going over here to the record as a credit card payment so if I if I save this it's going to record as a credit card so let's confirm it now normally you could see it on either side I could go to the credit card over here I could see the same thing on this side so here it's not a category which would be it's not a match record it's going to the credit card so usually I would first go to my checking account because that's what I normally think of when I pay the credit card off and I would confirm it on this side once I confirm it over here it has then been recorded when I go to the American Express credit card side then it should then be paired or then you can then you would think it would be matched right because then it would be matched so I'm going to confirm this one that records it now if I go back to the credit card then it actually recorded both sides because it was paired so I don't have to go in here and click it off on the credit card it recorded both of them because they were paired if I go to the balance sheet and go back and then I run it then I could say that in the checking account when did I pay it it was February I think in the February we had the credit card payment so now it's in there as a credit card payment so that's nice because now I can determine that it's a credit card payment but it's also a little bit more confusing if I want to sort my transaction by decreases by using my filters because now I have to add the transaction type and then I have to say it's going to be it's going to be equal to and then I have to find all the potential decreases which are now check forms check forms we know that we could have expense forms and then now we know that we could have bill payment forms bill payment of credit card and bill payment of a check and then we could have the and then we could have the credit card payment form and then I could select I'll see I have to select all of those to make to make sure that I that I pick up all the the proper transactions hold on I said I said not equal to I want to say it equals those transactions all right so so so so you can you can imagine a system where like in the old in the desktop version they lean more heavily to to using one form like you can imagine that they just use a check form for all of these right so they just label it as a check and in that case then they would all every time you want to look at a decrease whether it be an electronic transfer or paying off a bill or the credit card you would see one form or possibly a transfer form so there's pros and cons is what I'm trying to say of having these additional transaction types which are basically all different forms of checks which are the form typically used to decrease the checking account but there that is it looks it looks normal on that side and then if I exit out of here and I go into the credit card we could see it in February now then now it's in here as a credit card payment so this is really where the benefit is because again it shouldn't be an expense that would then be looking similar to the to the to the purchases I would not be able to sort by the by the payments of the credit card if it was an expense form so that's the point that's the whole point of that of that form we'll talk more about transfers I think we'll do a PayPal one as well I'll go back and and when we do that we'll talk about two checking accounts and I'll go into some more examples on on the differences between using possibly an expense form versus a deposit form versus a transfer but the bottom line is what you really want to make sure you do is that is is that don't use the transfer form or the the pay down the credit card or the credit card credit here for any transaction unless you're doing a payment of the credit card for the credit card form or unless there's a bank feed to bank feed usually it's a bank feed to bank feed transaction when when you're using the transfer form every other time increases are are basically going to be if they come through the bank feeds generally going to be deposits and the decreases are going to be basically the expense type forms and when you're in and that's and when you're in the the credit card all the payments the things that you're purchasing the supplies when we purchase them will be the expense form here and then we pay it pay down the credit card with the pay down credit card and then if I go to the first tab also just note when you see those transactions that are going to be on both sides as we saw it would be paired but you can add them on either side of the transaction so you might just want to double check like we did here just go into the credit card and then go into the checking so that you can see them as being paired on both sides of the transaction and then you can add them from either side of the transaction again I typically think of adding things from the credit card from the checking account side because if I was actually physically writing the check I would be thinking of myself from the from the checking account side of things that would then be matched you know to the credit card side of things I think that's the natural flow that your that your brain will probably fit into but again you can do it from either side all right this is where we stand in terms of the of the balance sheet at this point in time and so that is that we still have this outstanding balance we'll talk about our reconciliations because you could do a credit card reconciliation as well as a bank reconciliation credit card reconciliation should be quite easy but we'll talk about that later and then this is where we are with the p&l the profit and loss I don't think there was any change to this one because all we did was pay off the credit card not recording any new transactions here's the trusted trial balance so if your numbers match these numbers and you're following along that's great this is just basically the balance sheet on top of the income statement without all of the sub categories if your numbers are off try changing the date range it's often a date range issue


I did want to, I've been asked to let you know that I will share the slides so you can have those. But also, most of the genetics and genomics images and diagrams and so forth are on the NHGRI website. And who's going to talk about where those are? He's going to talk about that Wednesday morning where you can get those. So they're really great diagrams and they're very useful for teaching, I think. So those will be available to you. It's a very basic question I'm asking from the student perspective. You know, when you show us the replication animation, we have tons of animation on YouTube. Yeah. And we know that when you see something on an electron microscope, you need to kill the specimen to dry it and to process it and to get the image and everything. Right. How did the scientists come up with the process going on? How did you see the process? That's okay. You are showing us the animation. Yeah. How did you know that this is a DNA polymerase and this is helicase cutting it or like joining all those enzymes? Yeah. That's a great question. And I would say that it was basically the experimental process of taking, you know, a cell extract and saying, you know, here's what we can do with this extract and then starting to take mutations that don't do that. Okay. So variations that inactivate the helicase which then prevents the DNA from unwinding. And then you can look if you can, there are ways to differentiate twisted DNA from untwisted DNA. Okay. And to be able to tell whether it's twisting or untwisting or let's say it just slowed it down. Okay. That process. And then you can identify that there's a protein which when mutated will slow down that unwinding process but the replication will go on. Okay. Or, and then in terms of the sort of leading and lagging strand bits. So you can tell that there are these short pieces that are generated. So there's a long piece that generated off the leading strand and then the lagging strand is called lagging because the length of the DNA that you've replicated so far is shorter than the other one by roughly one of those segments. And then you can actually detect those little segments as well. So you say, well, we have, you know, a long segment, a slightly shorter segment. And then we have these little tiny segments that are exactly the difference between those two. And then they sort of start putting the pieces together and make a hypothesis about what's going on. You figure out a way to test that hypothesis and you generate that model. Okay. So in, in, in, in, in essence it is a model that's been generated through experimental testing, experimental hypothesis and testing. And then the animation that was done is a synthesis of that model into an animation, right? It may not be perfectly correct, but it's pretty correct. Yeah. Okay. So this is a gene. It's, it's a funny gene. It's Gene Wilder who's a comedian. He's been around for a long time. He's done some very funny stuff. So there are many different kinds of genes. That's not the one we're going to talk about. I want to go back and talk a little bit about basics of information containing molecules just so we make sure we're on the same page before we move through this, what does a gene do? How does it do it? Segment. So there's the DNA. We've talked about that a lot. It's double-stranded, et cetera, et cetera. There's the RNA ribonucleic acid. And the DNA is this kind of summary. I mean, this is a repeat of what we've talked about already. And RNA and protein. So RNA is nucleotide units. It's usually single-stranded. It can be double-stranded. You can make RNA complementary the same as you can DNA. It has four possible bases, A, C, G, and U. U is the complementary base in RNA for T in DNA.  It has lots of different uses in the cell. The one that we're most familiar with is the one that plays a role in the central dogma in messenger RNA, all right? And its template, its RNA is the template for complementary DNA or cDNA, all right? So you'll see that in talking about cDNA. And cDNA is basically the DNA that's replicated from the RNA message after it's been spliced. After the exons have been spliced down. We'll talk about that, too. Okay. So this little thing here is just to show that thymine goes to uracil from when you're talking about the difference between DNA and RNA. The other difference is that the ribose portion of the backbone is missing an oxygen, deoxy, in DNA, whereas in RNA it's not. Okay? Slight difference. Protein is a strand of amino acids. There are 20 possible amino acids in the sequences encoded by the triplet codons in DNA and messenger RNA, okay? So we're going in the DNA, the instruction set from four letter code to 20 different things in proteins. And how do we do that? I'll get to that in the next slide. Genes are things. I mean, before we had a concept of DNA, RNA, the genetic code, we had a concept of gene, but it was an abstract concept. And it was a thing. It was a thing which, when inherited, corresponded to a trait, a phenotype. Okay? So that's just kind of this really vague, abstract kind of thing that scientists started to think about when you couldn't see what was really going on. Now we know that a gene is encodes a functional transcriptional, I mean a functional unit from a single transcription unit. Okay? We're going to talk about transcription in a minute. So the concept of gene has really varied over time and is still somewhat controversial. So here's a series. This is a series you can get off genome.gov.  Okay? What's a gene these days? I think a gene is like R, right? It's up to your interpretation. I know it when I see it. I think we have a much more nuanced view. The genome is dynamic. The idea that most of it is junk DNA I think has now been tempered. We know gene regulation is far more important and far more complex. But we remain with the view that in and of itself DNA is an incredibly inert molecule. It is the blueprint for cellular machines. Okay. So that moves on to the next guide. But I think Carl has just said it well. We have a basic agreement of what a gene is, but there are lots of variations on that. And as we learn more, somebody asked me in the breaks, talk about the things we don't know. So we don't know a lot of stuff. And this is one of the things we don't know. We don't know all the things sort of this concept of gene can apply to. So we can continue to talk about that as we go on. But from a simple standpoint, a gene encodes a functional unit, a protein, an RNA that does something, and it's from a single transcription meaning that it's one strand of RNA that's transcribed. Okay. What do genes do? They code for things. A blueprint or a deep-tailed plan for how to run and build an organism. It's kind of like an orchestra. They regulate each other. Okay. So one gene may produce a product which regulates other genes. Okay. It turns them on and off, makes differentiation happen, makes species, makes organ-specific genes be expressed, et cetera. They genes make through transcription RNA, through translation, eventually through RNA. They make protein. And genes can also make proteins that are modified and have other complex stuff happen to them even after translation. All right. Basic gene structure. So this is an important point, which I'm not really showing well on the slides, but there's a difference between prokaryotic genes and eukaryotic genes. Prokaryotes are things like bacteria.  What's the main difference in the genes that we think about when we think about those two groups of organisms? Yeah. So that's one thing. So the structure of the compacted DNA is different. Okay. And in terms of the gene structure itself, the prokaryotes, the bacteria and so forth are not broken up into these segments called exons and introns. Okay? It's one continuous stream of protein-coding DNA in a gene. In us, however, the chromosome, if you spread it out, you get to the DNA level. And then there are segments of the DNA which are marketed as genes, partly because they do something that we just talked about. But they have these sort of recognizable hunks called exons. And the exons are actually the coding parts of the gene. And it's like taking a prokaryotic gene and it's slicing into pieces and sticking junk DNA in between. Okay? Why do we do that? Lots of reasons, but that's the way it is. So exons are the coding parts, introns. The intervening sequences inside, in between are the pieces that separate the exons. And how do we put these back together? I'll show you in a second. So exons are segments of genes that contain code for proteins. Just a couple of minor exceptions to that. Introns are spacers that get cut out after transcription. And gene coding regions are about 1% of the genome. Okay? So there's 99%. We don't know a whole lot about it. All right. Transcription. How do we take that gene DNA-encoded stuff and turn it into RNA? The word transcribe. You think about ascribe as somebody copying a copy from one thing to another thing. They're copying it. It's the same thing. They're just copying it. Transcription. And in this case, in genomics, we're talking about transcribing from DNA to RNA. It's the same information. It's a three-letter code. It's the same code, same basis, et cetera. And it's done by a molecule like DNA polymerase, but it's RNA polymerase. Instead of getting deoxynucleotides, it uses nucleotides and it makes RNA instead. Okay? There's also the concept of a synth strand, the strand that contains the protein information in the direction that it will be sequ- will be synthesized, and the anti-synth strand, just because you have to have two strands. Okay? Can I make a comment? Yeah. Because I think it helps with the intron exon thing, something that I've struggled with the last couple of years, trying to figure stuff out. So I work on a project that does whole exome sequencing versus whole genome sequencing. So when I first signed on to the project, they said, well, what is the difference between those two things? And what they said to me was, think of like a necklace with beads on it. If you cut the necklace and you keep the bead and maybe a little bit around each bead, there's in between those sections are your introns. Yeah. And you might miss some, like there's stuff in the junk DNA that you might miss, but the whole exon sequencing is really getting at the heart of those beads and what's maybe right around the beads, but we could miss this other stuff. You miss a lot of stuff. So you miss many? That kind of helped me. I just thought it might be a good teaching point for other people to think about because that's, I still think people get confused about the difference between a whole genome and whole exome. Yeah. Right. So when we talk about sequencing the whole genome, we're talking about sequencing every last base that the technology will allow us to, at this point in time, which is not every last base. Okay. When we talk about sequencing for medical purposes, most of what we know right now for medical purposes has to do with what the coding regions of the genes, those parts of the genes that encode proteins, because the proteins do stuff. Okay. And we understand that a lot better than the parts of the genome that don't. Okay. But that's only 1% of the genome. Right. So when we're sequencing the whole genome, we sequence everything, we get the genes, we get the coding regions, we get the non-coding regions, we get the intermediate regions, we get the junk DNA, we get lots of stuff. Okay. Lots more data, 100 times more data to analyze when we're trying to really focus in where the information is going to be most useful. We do a step at the beginning of the whole genome sequencing, where we select just for these segments, these exons. Okay. And that's called a whole exome. Right. So we're selecting for that. We're selecting out of all that DNA just the segments that are important for encoding proteins. And that's all that we sequence. Okay. It's a lot less sequencing and we know more about it. So that's our current approach to doing things. I hope that's helpful. Okay. So transcription. When we, after the RNA is transcribed, it's got this genetic code in it. And it's genetic code is universal, which is also really cool. Okay. Bacteria have the same genetic code as we do. Right. Viruses have the same genetic code as we do or they wouldn't be able to infect us. Okay. The code is three bases long, one amino acid out of three bases, or a signal to say, stop transcribing. It is degenerate. Some bases don't, some base changes don't result in amino acid changes. They're synonymous. Okay. There's synonyms. So for example, serine here, amino acid, can be encoded by a triplet of U, C, U, or UCC, or UCA, or UCG. And in fact, down here, it's also encoded by A, G, U, or A, G, C. Okay. Any of those triplets encodes for the amino acid protein, amino acid serine, and once it's in the protein, who cares what the codon was that generated it? You can't tell the difference. Okay. Translation is a reading frame dependent. So if you insert or delete any number of bases other than three, you have shifted the reading frame instead of something being in the first position, second position, then you'll get a different amino acid, or maybe even a stock out of it. Okay. That's called a frame shift. Here's a nice diagram of translation. We'll start with the DNA, and we transcribe the RNA. The RNA is pushed through a pore out of the nucleus into the cytoplasm. It goes to endoplasm. We're ticking them where these big machines called ribosomes that are very fast and very efficient, and the ribosome takes up the RNA, and it recruits these transfer RNAs, which basically have three single codon, complementary codon here, and also attach the specific amino acid that's for that complementary codon, and it brings them down and then attaches that new amino acid to the growing chain of amino acids in the polypeptide. So here's codon 1, the start codon, which is always AUG, methionine, and then the sequence of the protein with all these amino acids encoded by it. You can see if you delete the C, you're going to get a different set of triplets going further. That's the frame shift, okay? And then one UAA for stop. So whenever the ribosome reaches that particular codon, it says, oh, I don't have an amino acid to add there. That's my signal to stop making this chain longer and longer. Okay. Proteins, what do they do? I'm sorry. How are they organized? So it's a chain, and the chain has a secondary protein structure, which is it tends to sort of get itself into things called pleated sheets or alpha helix, okay? So there are segments that will go in one direction, so it will go in the other direction, segments that are still amorphous, okay? So it's kind of loose out there. Then once those are formed, then it starts to fold itself onto itself and into a structure which has a good energy and bonding between the different segments. And that's the tertiary protein structure. And I'm not a protein structure guy, so give me a little break here. So then the final level, which I think is really very important, is that quaternary protein structure where proteins fit together. Two proteins, more than two proteins fit together, okay? So this tertiary protein structure is actually also really important, because if you have an amino acid in here, that's really important for forming the right bend or the right cross-link there. And it's changed. It's variant. You may not get the same shape, and the protein may not get its whatever function it is that it's supposed to do. Okay, so what do proteins do? They hold. They digest. They cut. Those are enzymes. They build. They convert one chemical into another chemical. They take up space, okay? They send messages. They can send signals. They can glue or attach two cells together. They can glue or attach molecules together. They can specify. They can identify. Think of antibodies, okay? Those are things. Antibodies are the things in the immune system that say, this is me. This is part of me. It's not, you know, that thing that just got injected into the bloodstream isn't me.  Logic. There are ways that proteins can encode logic. They can respond and regulate. Think of hormones. Some hormones are proteins, polypeptides. And they can contract and expand. Think of muscles, all right? This is sort of getting back to the idea of the protein function and the variation and its interaction with environment. And you can have the variation reduce in less function or loss of function. These are terms you'll hear or read if you read the medical literature. More function, gain of function. New functions, also gain of function or neomorphism. Or no change. Let's call it benign, okay? Why is all of this important? It's all integral to life. It affects aspects of health and illness. And I guess I put this here in part for those of you who have students who are interested not in science but in other things, okay? That they may be interested in health and illness because of something going on in their family. They may be interested in chemistry or the effect of things in the environment. They may be interested in IT, information science. There's a lot of information science in genomics. Behavior, genes affect behavior. Reproduction, also known as sex in high school. History, there's a very rich history in genomics. Sociology, how do we deal with all this information that is important for a lot of reasons. But one of the things is it tells us who we are. It tells us about identity. Geography, so when populations grow and their resources are limited, they migrate, right? So we have an idea about geography and populations. Economics, increasingly important. Environment, crime, right? Everybody watches CSI. And also because it's still very mysterious. There are lots of things about genomics that I think are very mysterious, okay? And I'm gonna have to speed up a little bit. So inheritance, I'm gonna go through inheritance here. These are inheritance of phenotypic traits here. And it's kind of about looking at yourself. Gregor Mendel, I just have one slide, I promise. I'm Gregor Mendel. He's this guy who really is a great story, really great story about how he inferred genes from playing with peace over time when he had time. Like everybody has that much time. Okay, so what I think is really cool is that he really did use some version of the scientific process, right? And that's really what this slide is about, scientific process. So he's a good example of that. I did talk earlier about balance and unbalance in balance in the genome. So balance means in humans, you have two copies of every gene, when you hear from mom, when you hear from dad, with the exception of a few on the X chromosome, which when you're a guy, you only have one copy of. And so balance is really important. If you take a recipe for a cake, think of the genome as a recipe for a cake, and you change the recipe, you modify the recipe. My sister does this all the time. And you give her a good recipe and whatever happens. So she says, well, I'm going to add half as much sugar because I don't want to be as filling, right? It's still cake, right? It's not the same cake, right? Some things, if you don't add as much of it, it will come out completely wrong. It won't be a cake anymore, right? So the same thing applies in genetic phenotypes and genetic diseases. It's like a recipe. If you change the recipe, sometimes it matters, and sometimes it doesn't, right? Sometimes it's just as good, a little different, but it's still a good cake. All right. I'm going to skip this slide because it's really complicated, but it basically goes through all the details that are dominant and recessive that I think most of you are probably familiar with, but it takes too much time to go through at the moment. Examples given of Domino's Huntington's disease, Huntington's Korea, so a disease where you have uncontrolled movements and eventually some dementia, okay? And sickle cell anemia, which is a recessive disorder in which it has highest incidence in African populations or African derived populations, including African-Americans and cystic fibrosis, which has highest incidence in Caucasian populations. Two examples of the founder effect we talked about earlier. So meiosis is not mitosis. It's a different kind of thing. Meiosis is about taking a regular diploid cell, the same one we started with when we started with mitosis, but turning it into four cells that only have half the genetic material, one full copy of a genome instead of two full copies of a genome. And meiosis starts with DNA replication, same as mitosis. And then it goes through phases, which I won't really have time to go through, that break it into multiple parts. So then the outcome of this is four haploid daughter cells, each with 23 chromosomes. Those are the germ cells, those are the sperms or eggs, okay? Questions about meiosis? And I purposefully separated mitosis and meiosis but I think of them as kind of different, even though they have some of the same things. And when you put them on the same pages in the book, they look very similar. Recessive is a concept that is often described as having two bad genes, all right? And I want to flip that on its head and say recessive means that you don't have any good ones, all right? So for a lot of genes, having one copy that works just fine is perfectly fine. There's no difference that you can detect from having two copies versus one copy. You just have a backup, right? And when one of the backups is gone, you're still fine, okay? When both copies are gone, you have a problem because whatever instructions that was important for, it's missing. So my very generic example is, I only need one hammer to hammer nails, okay? I can hammer nails, but I have two hammers, okay? Who doesn't? If I take away one hammer, I can still hammer nails. Same thing with the needle and thread, I can still sew. I do sew. But if you take away both, you've got nothing. You close it and fall apart. Your house falls apart. You can't do it, all right? That's my concept of recessive. All right, how do you tell recessive inheritance there's no normal copy? In a recessive inheritance pedigree, an unaffected person has at least one normal copy. That's just the converse of what I was saying. So long as you have one normal copy, you're okay. A carrier is a person who has one normal copy who's unaffected and transmits 50% of the time. They transmit the normal copy half the time and the messed up copy the other half of the time. When I say transmit, I mean pass it on on your germline to your offspring. And both parents of an affected person are always a carrier. Okay, that's the rule. Ex-linked recessive inheritance is pretty much the same, except that there's no normal copy. But it affects predominantly males because males only have one X chromosome to start with. They only have one copy to start with. If they're missing that copy, it's the same as having no hammers. Okay? And I'm running out of time, so I'm going to go through this pretty quickly. Carriers are females and males with an extra X chromosome. That's Gleinfilter syndrome for anybody who cares. And the carriers are females because they have an extra copy, right? They have two X chromosomes. Males can't be carriers unless they have an extra X chromosome, which is an unusual but not infrequent occurrence. All right. White-linked inheritance. Why don't we hear about much about this? Because the white doesn't have much on it. It has a few sex-determining genes that say, yes, make some testes, make this a male, and a few other things, but it doesn't have a lot more. Okay, so you can pretty much ignore that. Mitochondrial inheritance. We touched on it at the very beginning. Both sexes are affected. It has a variable expression because there are lots of mitochondria passed on. Some of them may have a problem in them and others don't. It's vertical transmission, meaning in a pedigree. Like in a pedigree like this, it's passed down through the generations. But it's only passed down through the maternal lineage because everybody's mitochondria, my mitochondria, came from my mother's egg. My father's sperm has mitochondria, but only in the tail to make the tail spin around. It's an energy source to make the tail spin around, but those don't get ordinarily dropped into the egg that becomes the zygote that becomes the human. And the disorders affected by mitochondrial inheritance are those that are in energy-intensive organs, brain, muscle, liver, et cetera, because it's an energy factory. New mutations, I'll skip over that. Beth, what do you think I should keep talking about? Okay. Okay. I wanted to talk about chance and risk because these are concepts that come up in genetics a lot, and in particular in medical genetics, which is my expertise. And I wanted to differentiate between two sort of concepts of chance and risk. One is it happened by chance. It was unplanned, it wasn't orchestrated, and it was apparently completely random. So not terribly predictable in terms of what would happen. And my metaphor for that is a dartboard. You throw it at the dartboard, and it may be predicted roughly how close it is, but you're not going to predict exactly which side it's going to go on, okay? Whereas then there's a chance that's like likelihood. You can figure out what the likelihood is empirically, but it's a predictable process with random step, okay? And the thing to slide is dice.  So that's a little bit more like knowing how something is inherited in a family and being able to predict how likely that's going to happen with the next child, okay? If you don't know how it's inherited in the family, you can't give them information. So chance and genetics, a new genetic change, like a mutation, is kind of one of those unpredictable things. You can have a rough idea of what the frequency is, but you can't predict where it's going to happen or what basis is going to change. Whereas inheritance of a genetic trait or disorder is something that is predictable if you understand the phenomenology. Yeah. So your patient can maybe know that most of the time they're bad or sometimes they cannot detect that at all, but can they be good? Yeah. So that's why I try to stay away from the idea of the word of mutation, but I've probably failed you in that. So the variation happens and then depending on whether, so it can change the protein even, but if that's a positive change for the organism in its environment, if it allows that organism to withstand warmer temperatures in the ocean, for example, that may be a good thing, okay? And then if that advantage allows the organism to reproduce more efficiently than the one that didn't have the change or one that had a bad change, then over time that single mutation or single variation will expand in the population and become predominant, okay? All right. Lots of applications. I think you're going to hear about some of these in the next few days, so I'll skip over that. And I just mentioned, because I think you're going to hear about cancer as well, that these concepts of cell division are crying DNA replication. Normal growth, this is a growth chart that we use from the pediatric office for kids growing, make sure they're growing at the right rate. Overgrowth in disorders where certain parts of the body may overgrow as in Proteus Syndrome. And cancer is also a disorder of overgrowth. So you take the same concept of growth, which is good in certain circumstances. You dysregulate it, and you have disease. There's a whole segment on precision medicine, which I don't have time to talk about. Somebody else may talk about it, I don't know. Okay. All right, let's zoom through here. The basic concept is that you have people that are defined as having a medical condition in the yellow, and you try treatment, and if the majority of people respond to that treatment, then you say, okay, that's a treatment for that condition, even though there's a segment of people who don't respond to that condition. That's the way we do medicine now, okay? We try something, if it doesn't work, then we try something else, okay? There's a lot of trial and error, and that costs money, and people get sicker in the meantime, all right? What we can understand using genome science is that people actually are not all the same, and they may have variations which may affect their responsiveness to a particular drug or to a particular therapeutic approach, or in fact, they may have different conditions that on the outside look exactly the same. So diabetes is not one disease. It's many, many diseases, okay? If we understand what causes it, we can target therapies to those individuals. So if we understand what's going on behind the disease and what's going on behind susceptibility to treatments, we can target therapy and treat a lot more people effectively. And I think all of this is going over the plan, resources, and thank you. I do want to say that I'm here because I had teachers in middle school and in high school who cared about science and who cared about me understanding it and teaching. So if that wasn't the case, then I wouldn't be here. So it's really important that you guys are here and you have the commitment to take your summer away from the beach and come in here in a dark room and listen to me talk. So it really does have an impact and I want to emphasize that very much. And for the nurses in the room, you are teachers too, and you are an important part of the team and increasingly a segment of what you do, lots of what you do, is teaching the patient about their condition, helping them understand what they're doing so they can know how to help themselves through the process of medical care. So it's really, really important. And I'll end there.