Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States, accompanied by Mr. Bob Dean. Ladies and gentlemen, I know you share my sense of appreciation that the President has chosen the occasion of this Congress of American industry to make an address of major importance to business and to all the American people. We indeed are greatly honored. The United States is fortunate to have at the helm of this nation a singular leader, a man of vision and determination, and I believe the most beloved president of this century. He has guided us with strength through a period of enormous change, through the storms and the turbulence of social and economic uncertainty, to the calm waters of national stability and greater international harmony. He has set this nation on a course that present generations have come to respect and that future generations will long remember. He is indeed the man of the hour and the man of the century. Ladies and gentlemen, the President of the United States. Thank you. Thank you very much. Thank you, Bob, and thank you all very much. It's a great pleasure to be with you once again. This is my first event with Maury Massing, the new director of public liaison in the White House. Liaison's in the White House. That kind of sounds like a political pot boiler, doesn't it? Maury, it's good to have you on board. Today, I want to address you on one of the most important challenges that faces our nation. Keeping our trading system free and fair and open, vibrant and expanding source of prosperity through the end of this century and beyond. I've noticed that dinner speakers or luncheon speakers often start off by saying, before I begin, I'd like to say a few words, which I always thought was a pretty handy trick. Today, I'd like to try it that myself. So before I begin talking about trade, I'd like to say a few words about your vote tomorrow on the Senate Finance Committee's tax reform bill. You can probably guess my feelings on the subject. We have before us an historic opportunity to dramatically lower tax rates and to draw America's investment capital out from under the shelters and back into the productive economy where it belongs. With this bill, we can liberate the entrepreneurial genius of the American people and put the American spirit of enterprise into overdrive for our race into the 21st century.  Now that last isn't mentioned very often by all those who oppose tax reform, but it's important to everyone who has to deal annually with the Internal Revenue Code. Let me give you an example. Here is the last sentence of section 509A of the code. For purposes of paragraph three, an organization described in paragraph two shall be deemed to include an organization described in section 501C45 or six, which would be described in paragraph two if it were an organization described in section 501C3. Now you know there's 57 feet of internal revenue code lined up on the shelf with things like that in it. Well as for fairness, by dropping millions of working poor off the tax rolls, giving families with children a long overdue break, lowering the top rate down to its lowest level in half a century, we'll make it easier for every American to climb that ladder of opportunity and to keep the fruits of his or her achievement. You know more than a century ago, a Scottish economist, John Ramsey McCulloch, spoke of the principle of the progressive tax to paraphrase him, when we start taxing individuals on any other basis than proportional to their earnings or property, we are at sea without rudder or compass and there is no end to the mischief that can be done. Well I think we can all say amen to that. This bill represents a new consensus in America, a pro-growth, pro-opportunity consensus.  We no longer believe that one man's gain is another man's loss. We have a new vision of America, one in which we are all pulling together rather than pulling apart, one where we're marching forward together as one proud and united, a growing economy with ever expanding horizons, an economy of boundless energy and infinite possibilities. This is a vision that does not and cannot stop at our borders. Unfortunately, when it comes to the issue of trade, that old zero sum thinking still persists. The same faction that brought us high taxes that locked out opportunity now wants to throw up barriers to lock out trade. You know, it's said that if all the economists in the world were late end to end, they still wouldn't reach a conclusion. I can make cracks like that now because my degree was in economics. But the one thing that practically every economist agrees on, whether they're left, right, or center, is that international trade is vital to a growing, high employment economy, and trade barriers do nothing but destroy jobs and stunt economic growth. But you don't have to be an economist to know that. No one who has lived through or learned the lessons of this century doubts how dangerous it is to play a game of chicken with our trading partners because it won't be long until we're both driving over that cliff. Having celebrated my 39th birthday 36 times now, I've been around to witness a sizable chunk of this century. I well remember the anti-trade frenzy in the late 20s that produced the smooth, holy tariffs, greasing the skids for our descent into the Great Depression, and the most destructive war this world has ever seen. As one episode of history I'm determined, we will never repeat. I also remember that after the war, the peoples of the free world pulled themselves from the ashes and swore it would never happen again. From their vision and determination came a great act of statesmanship with the unimpressive title of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, or GATT for short. The global trading system was opened up and the free world entered an era of cooperation and prosperity unparalleled in human history. In that post-war prosperity, the United States became the world's greatest trading nation in history. I don't have to tell you about the benefits of trade. That greater choice and lower prices for consumers, businesses, and manufacturers means greater productivity and improving living standards for all. Over half a trillion dollars in goods were traded across our borders last year. Exports account for one out of every four farm makers, planted and one out of every six manufacturing jobs. But even more important, trade is a spur to innovation. Despite the fate hearts constantly putting down this country's ability to compete, we remain today the world's largest exporter and the most competitive nation on earth. The American economy is blazing a trail toward the future. Since 1980, we've seen commitments to venture capital increase fourfold, record numbers of new businesses incorporated, and a 42% increase in companies listed over the counter in the stock market. Our entrepreneurs and scientists are in the vanguard of technological innovation. From custom-made computer chips to genetically engineered vaccines to the latest developments in robotics, the label reads made in America. And we heard some good news from the Labor Department this morning. The index of leading economic indicators rose one and a half percent in April, the largest increase since October 1983. While the previous two months were revised to show greater gains than earlier reported, and productivity figures for the first quarter were revised upward too, all signaling good times ahead. Now that doesn't mean that in some sectors of our economy, the pain isn't very real. In some cases, the disruptions of a changing world economy have caused personal hardship for America's workers. And in those cases, it's our commitment to help those workers move into healthy and growing industries, and we'll meet that commitment. But no one benefits by anti-trade legislation that pits one worker's job against another, that divides American business and industry and sets them off against each other fighting for a piece of a shrinking pie. America doesn't need to hide behind trade barriers. Given a level playing field, Americans can out-produce and out-compete anyone anywhere on earth. That's why it's the policy of this administration to open markets abroad, not close them at home. Now this doesn't absolve other nations from playing by the rules. Free trade means by definition, fair trade. And where other nations aren't playing by the rules, this administration is more activist, more aggressive than any other in blowing the whistle on unfair trade practices against American producers. In the past year alone, we have gone after Korean abuse of intellectual property rights, and we've increased access of American agricultural products to European and Taiwanese markets. While we prefer to negotiate, we have taken and will take strong action when necessary against markets closed to American goods and services. And to prevent other countries from selling below cost and unfairly moving in on American markets, we have initiated 528 anti-dumping and countervailing duty cases. Constant negotiations with Japan are opening markets previously shut to American exporters. Over the past year, we've worked to open Japan to American exports of telecommunications equipment, medical equipment, pharmaceuticals, electronics and forest products. And we're going after transportation equipment. We've been intensively negotiating with the Japanese on semiconductors. And I'm pleased to announce that we have the framework of an agreement which would open Japanese markets to U.S. computer chips and prevent Japanese companies from dumping their chips on American markets. While the precise details still have to be hammered out by Ambassador Eider, this framework should allow for significant new market access. Just last week, we began negotiations with Canada, our largest trading partner on a new comprehensive free trade agreement which would lower barriers to U.S. exports. From insurance in Korea to computers in Brazil to tobacco and products in Japan, this administration is making sure that American exporters get a fair shake abroad. Now, all these initiatives are important, but if our critics are seriously interested in creating a level playing field for American industry, they have to look with us at the underlying reasons for the imbalance in world trade. The first we have corrected, the dollar is now at a more competitive level with foreign currencies. And that means increasing American exports. The second important reason for the imbalance in trade is the basic imbalance in the world economy. Because we cut tax rates and regulations, control spending and squashed inflation, our economy's been growing and prospering. But the world is not growing along with us. Burdened by tariffs, quotas, oversized governments and marginal tax rates as high as 80%, economies in Europe, Africa and Latin America have stagnated, even declined. With incomes falling and unemployment high, they can no longer afford to buy our products. And that's one major reason why between 1980 and 1984, imports into Western Europe dropped by 18%, Africa by 17% and Latin America by 34%. Now, despite this devastating decline in world trade, America has stayed competitive. The members of NAM deserve a lot of credit for the fact that in 1984, exports of US manufactured goods increased by over 8%. And they went up again in 1985. Our share of world exports of manufactured goods has increased too, from 17% in 1978 to 20% in 1985. America's manufacturing production has risen steadily and is just as big a part of our overall economy as it was 30 years ago. All those who talked about the so-called de-industrialization of the United States should take a look at the real figures and then maybe they'd realize that America's best days aren't over, they're just beginning. When it comes to America's future, believe me, you ain't seen nothing yet. The world doesn't need more tariffs and taxes and the unemployment they produce. It needs more pro-growth policies that lower tax rates and interest rates create jobs and expand world trade. And once again, America is taking the lead. We are strengthening the world monetary system, the foundation of international trade, and as I mentioned before, the dollar is now at a more competitive level with foreign currencies. We're combating economic decline in the debt-ridden developing countries by promoting high growth, low tax, free market reforms. We're encouraging Japan to reform the bias against consumption that is built into its system. And next September, we expect to launch a new round of GATT negotiations with our trading partners aimed at opening up markets for everyone. The docket will be full, including current rules that aren't working properly, for example, those in agriculture and the settlement of disputes, as well as the trade issues of tomorrow, like services, intellectual property protection, investment, and high technology. All of these are real solutions to the real problem of getting the world economy back on the growth track. And that's the track to a future of open vistas and unfolding opportunities, a future where we all grow together, where every nation's prosperity augments our own. Unfortunately, the House of Representatives last week turned its back on the future and started marching right back to smooth hauling. It's so-called omnibus trade bill is really an ominous anti-trade bill that could send our economy into the steepest nosedive since the Great Depression. This reactionary legislation would force American consumers to pay billions in higher prices, throw millions of Americans out of work, and strangle our economy as foreign markets slam shut in retaliation. This anti-trade bill isn't protectionism, it's destructionism. We've created nearly 10 million new jobs since the recovery began 40 odd months ago. More jobs in the last decade than Europe and Japan combined. But this bill would start wiping them out. The Commerce Department has estimated that the jobs of five and a half million Americans, workers, are dependent on exports. That's five and a half million jobs, American jobs that would be threatened if this bill were passed into law. And who would be some of the first victims? You don't have to look very farther right here at home. The aerospace machinist at Boeing's plant near Seattle builds some of the world's finest passenger planes. The recording engineer at CBS Records. The wheat farmer in Nebraska. And the longshoreman in New Orleans loading grain on ship's destined for foreign ports to name just a few. No job is safe in a trade war. In this modern society, all our fortunes are connected by a million links in a chain of interdependence. If these people lose their jobs, what of the automobile dealer who hoped to sell them a new car? Or the trucker who hauled the cars? Or the auto worker who made them? Or the steel worker who fashioned the raw material? Or the miner who provided coal to the steel factory? And what are the retailers, service people, doctors and teachers whose livelihoods ultimately depend on their jobs? This bill is so potentially destructive that even many of those who voted for it did so in the expectation it would be vetoed and so never become law. But if it comes to that, I assure them they'll get their wish. The democratic leadership may think this is clever politics in an election year, but the American people see this for what it is. Kamikaze legislation that would take their jobs down in flames. Those who believe this is the way to go are in reality economic defeatists. They have lost confidence in the capacity of their own country and their own countrymen to compete in the modern era. They look out at the industrial democracies of Europe and West Asia and the emerging democracies of Latin America. And instead of saying America will lead the world into a better and brighter future, they cry, stop the world. I want to get off. I don't share that pessimism, that defeatism. I never did, neither did as young America. There's got to be a pony in here someplace. And neither, by the way, do our trading partners who marvel at what Europeans call the American miracle, three and a half years of expansion and job creation and advances in science and technology that have left the whole world gaping at the near limitless capacities of the American people. I saw that firsthand at the Economic Summit in Tokyo. The leaders of the world's major industrialized democracies all wanted to know how they could inject some of that American spirit of enterprise into their economies. Well, let me restate then the trade policy of this administration. We will root out and take action against unfair trading practices targeted at American products or American workers. We will be alert and aggressive in opening up foreign markets closed to American exporters. We will bring the world with us into a new era of free and fair trade. Free trade with free traders is our byword. But we will not seek false security behind restrictive quotas and import duties. Nations that hide behind tariff walls soon fall behind. America's destiny is not to be second or third or fourth in the march to the future. It's to be in the vanguard, leading the free nations into a brighter and better era. To those countries whose economies are still enmeshed in status policies, the American economy is a shining example that freedom not only works, it works wonders. If we further reform our tax structure, closing loopholes and bringing our top rate down to 27%, we'll be opening the floodgates of progress and creating a momentum toward economic freedom that will sweep up the world in its currents. We will see a global economy of opportunity emerge, one where markets are not only open, but constantly expanding. America has done it before in more trying times. And with your help, we can do it again. We can keep the miracle alive not only for America, but for the world. Well, thank you, God bless you all. Thank you, Mr. President, for that thoughtful and stirring address. As our board of directors meets tomorrow, you may be certain that we will have listened very carefully to your words about the tax bill. I certainly am confident of the outcome. Thank you again, sir, for being with us. Thank you.


Yes, hello everyone. Today, we will talk about the journey we had when we tried to integrate GitOps in delivery pipelines or in workflow or process-based toolings. So my name is Thomas Schutzer, I'm a principal engineer for Dynatris and maintainer of the captain project. And I'm here with Brad McCoy. Yeah. So at first, as we will talk a bit about captain today, just wanted to describe what captain is. So captain is a tool which should help you keeping your deployment stable and keeping your application stable. And it does this by putting data or service level objectives in the middle of your process and helps you integrating different tools and controls everything in your process. Okay, so what would be the goals we would want to cover when we are using captain? At first, we want to do some kind of release validation. So for instance, I want to deploy something and afterwards try to find out if everything works as I expected. Therefore I can use my observability solution just like Prometheus or Dynatris or whatever. Then the second reason why you or why I want to use captain would be that you might have a standard for your observability tooling. So for instance, you define your quality criteria once and can use it with whatever observability solution you like to use. And third thing is you can use it for vendor neutral tool integrations. So you define your workflow once and by using cloud events, you only need a consumer for everything and which helps you executing everything. Last but not least, we can take auto remediation actions. So based on our observability solution, we can define some kind of events on which we listen and if something fails, we can take actions based on that. Okay, so enough about captain. So we said that we want to talk about our GitOps journey and the first thing we deal with when we had to deal with GitOps in captain was that captain was a very imperative tool. So there was no Git based configuration and you had to do everything via commands. Therefore, we thought that it would be a good idea to create some kind of declarative language for captain deployment and build some operators around this. So there were some, I don't want to get into deep into this graph, but it should show how hard it was to implement captain out to implement GitOps in a imperative application. One thing, so we found out some things. So at first I thought this would be GitOps. After some time I spent on GitOps and deal with some things, I can say, no, this isn't GitOps. This only covered the configuration of captain but not the configuration of our deployments. Furthermore, we had to deal with our own artifacts. So we had an own captain repository where we expected our artifacts. Therefore we also had to deal with them. The third thing we had for deployment, we had no real desired state. So we had some kind of deployment configuration. We copied something, we modified the configuration, but in fact this was not real. And last but not least and this was the hardest part was we didn't use Argo or Flux. We implemented our own GitOps controller and this was hard for everyone who wanted to use it. So I think there is a slight missing. So yes, Brad will tell you how the real GitOps implementation looked like. So here we can see we first started implementing Argo CD and captain. So we used rollouts and flagger as well but one thing we wanted to make is a solution where you could either bring Argo or Flux. So in this scenario, the problem that we were seeing is that when you were just using GitOps and you were promoting through environments, it was hard to do real testing and specifically, so we used Prometheus for metrics and when we've done deployment, we want to verify that everything's okay and then use that as a quality gate which I'll show you soon to progress to the next environment. So you can see here that the GitOps controller will see the change and then that will send a cloud event into captain. So you can use the Argo notifications controller or you can also use Flux using a provider and alert and then we've got a small integration that will turn that into a cloud event and then start the captain sequence. So you can see here that we're gonna run tests, evaluate and then we create a PR to progress to the next environment as well and the PR can either be auto approved or you can ask for approval as well if you wanna go to production for example. So this is sort of what we started with before we tried to integrate captain. So everything's in the main branch. We would, the first, I mean, you could change this, it doesn't have to be these environments, but it's very simply just copying the settings which has all the application configuration, pretty much the environment variables and then the version of the container as well. So when it's promoting through environments, it's simply just copying from the folder. So you can see here we have a folder for each environment and it will simply copy over the settings in the version. So for the demo today, we're gonna just show a quick demo of there's a app that we like to use called Podtato Head. So with this app, this is done by the app delivery app. Yeah, and you can change its arms and legs and we like it for demos. So yeah, the thing that we wanted to add to this was testing like load testing. We can see here that when using captain, we can have a quality gate between environments. So you can define your SLOs and SLIs to the accepted criteria to progress to the next environment. So for the load testing, we're running K6 load test and then we're querying the metrics from Prometheus and then if that passes, then we can do the get promotion to essentially copy the file from the settings file from the load and then copy it into the integration testing and then Argo or Flux would pick that up. It would not see the change and then the journey would start again. So it would get the change and then it would trigger captain with a cloud event and then that workflow would run as well again. So this is what captain looks like. So you can see here that this is where you define your services. So in this demo, we're using around three services. So we're using the Prometheus service. You can flip that up for Dynatrace, Datadog. There's quite a few other integrations as well. So the thing I like about it is it's good with interoperability. So you can captain's not really opinionated. So it's just a declare and saying, okay, I want you to go do an evaluation, for example, and then that service will subscribe to that event. So captain will send out the event saying, okay, we're on the stage. We're gonna trigger this event and then these services that are subscribed to it will then go action that and you can have the event triggered, started and finished and failed as well. So this is what it's gonna look like. So I'm just gonna pretend that we did a get change. So I've just done one before this really. So we now come here and we wanna say, I'm gonna start the load testing stage. So if someone's done a feature and they put it back into the main, we're then gonna kick off the workflow. So this will trigger the sequence and then that will now roll through the environments. So you can see this automation step. It's gonna go right from the feature into production. So it will go through the load testing, integration testing, QA staging and then the last step will have manual proof. So it'll make a PR and then we just click approve merge and then that will roll up to prod as well. So this is during the load test now. So it'll actually be using K6 to throw a lot of it because one thing that we found is when we wanna query Prometheus, normally it's for four or 500 errors to see if our application's working. We found that when there's no traffic, it's hard to get a proper outcome if it's actually working. So therefore we added more API testing. We've just integrated trace test as well and that can do open telemetry traces and get evaluations from that as well. So you can see here that this load stage worked. So K6 load testing was good. We've seen that the traffic went through. Then it's seen an event to use the evaluation which Prometheus was subscribed to it and then it did the evaluation and then it said, yes, we're happy with these results. These met requirements and then it will do the get promotion as well. So for this get promotion, it's just auto-approve and then it will go to the next environment. So you can see that then we went to integration, we did some trace testing, we evaluated that, we promoted again. So in what it's doing at the moment through each environment, it will just keep doing PR and then just automatically merging itself as well. So the get-ups tool, every time it notices the change for the environment, it will scoop it up and deploy it and then run the test again. So we're in the last step staging now as well and then now it's finishing and then that will create a PR to be able to merge into production. So you can, and we're cataloging that microserver starter as well because if we have like 30 QA environments, we wanna know which versions, et cetera, and the environments. So we're finished and then you can see the PR links here and then that said promote to stage production and it will make the PR for you. We wanna do things like reporting as well so we can report back on all of the testing and things we did and then a developer or DevOps engineer could come in and just say, okay, this looks good to me, let's put it into prod. So you can see the files changed. In this case, it was very simple. So I wanted to change the pod taro heads hat. So at the moment he has this hat and that's made it so all the way to a PR and then I can merge that PR and then now that's sitting in main branch in the production file for the settings and then in this case, we're using Argo that will then scoop up that change deploy it and then we'll see that his hat will change soon once that sings. So it's probably, it might take a minute or two to come up. I can maybe just refresh it here. Yeah, so that's singing now and then you can see that my change to update his hat has progressed through each environment and we've tested that everything's okay and it's made its way into prod. So some challenges we have at the moment as well is how do we deal with roll? Sorry, have a question? Yes, yes, I'll show you now. That's a good question. So these are, yeah, each, so this is using customized, you can do some of the things with HALM as well. So for, this is all on main branch so we're not doing, some people do on branches but it's not really scalable. Some folks say it's a bad practice to have on branch. So this will all sit in main and then it will just simply copy the one to two and then an example, if we go back here to look at the old PRs, we can see that closed, you actually see that did the order approved so it actually just merged itself. So it's keeping Git as a source of truth and trying to stay true to the GitOps principles. Yeah, so that's sort of how we've done it at the moment and then Thomas now will talk about our findings from this, things like rollbacks are very difficult and he'll talk a little bit about what kept the MOOCs in the future as well. So what's how we're going on with time? So, yeah, some of the major challenges that we had with this is that obviously rollbacks are very hard, if something's broken and there can be so many different scenarios so if you keep rolling back and that fails, wins enough to keep going around in the circle. We found it to be quite ping-pong right where you, captain's telling Argo. I think you saw at the picture of the whole Argo process that we did a lot of ping-pong. So we took a look in the repository if something changed, if something changed, we notified captain then captain did its part, notified Argo and so on. So this was kind of a ping-pong game so it worked pretty well but it didn't feel really, really right. Yeah, yeah. Especially when you have things like rollouts and flagger as well that somewhat do that capability but we just wanted to go the extra step to have, you know, bring our own tools for whatever we wanna use. In context, yeah, sorry to have a question. Yeah, feel free to just answer as we go. I have a question regarding scalability with get-ups, like how many deployments do you, can Argo or this tool support, can it, like per hour, can do 1,000 deployments, 10,000 deployments, is that something you've tested? I guess we haven't tried it at that scale, have we? This has been pretty small, pretty small scale but I think we would run into some challenges as well because if you have a really big development team and you just wanna keep being features in and in, it's gonna kick off these workflows as well so if you, one thing with the Git promotion services that gets quite complex as well because when you start having editing PRs, when you have more than one PR, it can get quite complex. But in general, if the question is it with just get-ups itself or with get-ups and kept in the way we're doing it? Yeah, with get-ups, I heard, I think I was at the Flux project many other day and they were talking about someone, I think they showed a Terraform controller using like 1,000 deployments at once so it very much can scale so you can just give it more memory, the get-ups tool and it generally goes pretty well. Yeah, I've heard of quite a few deployments. I can take the other two points. Two other things we also found out, we need some kind of context information to know in which sequence service is at the moment. So what you saw in the picture, I showed you before, or in the, on the Captain UI, was that there are tasks which are connected between each other and this is propagated via context information and if you think about get-ups, this might be pretty hard to get this through a pull request or through a git repo. So especially for the whole ping-pong game we did here, for the change detection, kick-off and so on, we had to find a way how to propagate our context information through the get-ups tool and this was pretty nice for Argo because they had some kind of information we could pass. In other get-ups tools we had, this was not this easy and this was also a problem we faced in our G-SOP project afterwards. Yeah, because if it's opinionated payload then it's hard to get the things that we need. So with the Argo notification controller we can send, for the application sets we can put some labels and then it will pass the labels and get that as well and then for flux we did a small integration that will take the payload into our web service and then it will transform it into a cloud event and send it to the captain. So we have 10 minutes left. Thomas, would you like to talk about the... Yes, so as you might have noticed we faced a lot of challenges with this workload-based approach and our workflow-based approach and pipelines and the last few months we put our heads together and thought about how such things could be looked like in a cloud-native and get-ups away away. So without delivering, without pipelines, delivering without workflows and simply rely on get-ups and on all the things we all love. And one of the results was that we create the captain life-cycle controller which is a small Kubernetes which is a typical Kubernetes operator which helps you achieving exactly the things which captain did before or still does. And everything starts with your manifest. One thing we took care about was that you don't have to change much in your manifest so you can use the captain life-cycle controller with your default deployments, with your stateful sets and so on. So you don't have to change your Kubernetes primitives. The only things which are relevant for us are that you have to add some annotations but I think that's obvious in this case. You can use Argo for that, you can use Flux for that, you can use your pipeline tool and so on. Use everything which applies something on the Kubernetes API can be used. And what our life-cycle controller does is it puts observability around all of the things you are doing. So for instance, you see when your deployment started, how long it took and how long it ended and when it ended. And one thing we took care of because this was also a problem we had with the last approach is we are trying to do or we are not trying it so we are doing this application aware. So for instance, you can run some kind of pre-deployment tasks and pre-deployment evaluations before the first service of an application gets deployed. So for instance, you can check if there is enough CPU left to deploy your application and only after these tasks and checks are executed then the workloads themselves get deployed. The second thing we are doing around this is we are using standardized task execution. So you simply have to annotate your deployment and say which task you want to use. Behind this, there is a kind of definition. This can be enhanced as you like or whoever wants to write an integration is able to. And you can exchange this however you want. At the moment, this project is around two or three months old. We are only supporting functions but this can be contained or serialized in the future but this can also be external control planes such as directive or such as captain now where you can send your cloud events to. And a typical workflow of this looks like this. So at first we apply our manifest to our Kubernetes control plane. Let's say we are using Flux. Afterwards, if there is an app detected so if the manifest is annotated with an app annotation we are waiting for an app custom resource and are dealing with our pre and post deployment tasks and evaluations. After this has been finished we can do anything on the workload level. So we can check something before the pod gets scheduled and can evaluate if this matches our requirements and after everything is finished we simply release the pod. The same for post deployment. So after we detect that the pod has been deployed we can run some checks, some tasks and also evaluate whatever we want and after we found out that all of the workloads in our application are deployed we can also do post deployment tasks and evaluations based on that. So if you want to find out more about the captain lifecycle controller I'll be at the captain booster next three days and I'm really happy to talk with all of you about all of this. I think it's a pretty cool tool. Some things we found out so to wrap up the session today we think that the GitOps and captain fit perfectly together in terms of use cases. The initial approach was not this GitOps friendly but I think the approach of the lifecycle controller will make everything better. Then what we found out was that adopting GitOps in captain or typical workflow tools might get really hard because at some point in time you're simply pushing something to a Git repository and have to act on it and you always have to find out when should the tool continue and how can I promote to the next stage. Yes, with this handover tool. So there's a few more talks for captain today you can come for free as well to the community day so you can see the schedule here that's in level three. Okay, it might have. There you go. Yeah. Okay, there it is. Yeah, I guess we'll take questions now because we've only got a few minutes, yeah. So does this tool also support like blue, green deployments? No way. We decided not to compete with things as with Flux or Agorollout because we thought that they can do it this better than we but we can extend them. So everything we're doing in terms of pre-deployment tasks and evaluations and tasks in general can be used from the captain lifecycle controller but if you want to do progressive delivery and want to do blue, green deployments can release and so on I think it's the better choice to use the tools which are already there. Because you can still use an Agorollout CRD that would do that for you as well so you can do blue, green, canary with that. Yes, so you can also use our tasks and evaluations for Agorollout of LEGO so that's also no problem but you get the benefit from that you are more or less tool agnostic so you can switch between the GitOps tool you like very easy and we hope to bring some standardization into the tooling landscape. Any other question? With this new lifecycle operator controller approach does it feedback the health information to the GitOps tool like Argo CD when it says the health and status of your app does that include what captain knows about or is evaluating? I'm sorry I didn't hear too good. The new lifecycle operator approach so if you're using it with a CD tool like Argo CD and normally Argo CD gives you back the health and the status of your application and how it's doing, all the components are doing the things that captain is supposed to be evaluating and testing does that reflect back into the health status that you see in Argo CD? At the moment you see how your deployment behaves so you see that all of your parts came up and that everything is ready. One thing I found out in the last week was that it would be nice to get back some status information from the application itself and this will be a thing we will be working on. Thank you. Thank you. We'll be at the captain booth so if you want to come chat to us as well we'll be happy to talk.


Six years ago, my mother got a phone call from the hospital because I was in the cardiac critical care unit. They called her up and said, you might want to come down to Las Vegas because we don't think your son is going to live through the night. She dropped everything that she was doing. She came down to Las Vegas and when she got there, she found out that her 26 year old son who had been battling addiction for years had congestive heart failure. They gave me a 10% chance of living. My mom ended up trying to help me get clean by moving me out to California with her, but I wasn't ready to get clean. I brought drugs with me. I brought him into her house, even though she is a woman in long term recovery. She ended up finding those drugs and she gave me an ultimatum. She said, you're either getting clean or you're going to be homeless in Las Vegas, Nevada in the middle of the summer. Now, I remember that day so clearly and I remember seeing the look in my own mother's eyes that she was ready to let me die if I wasn't willing to get help. I can't even imagine what she was going through. I'm a parent myself, but she was ready to let me go because there was nothing else that she could do for me. And the reason I share that story is because right now I'm reading all the stuff on Twitter and social media. People blaming Ariana Grande for the death, the drug overdose of Mac Miller and it's absolutely disgusting. Up everybody, this is Chris from the Rewired Soul where we talk about the problem, but focus on the solution. And today, today during National Recovery Month, the problem is, is the ignorance about addiction. One of the main reasons I started this channel was to increase awareness and decrease the stigma. Not only about addiction, but about mental health as a whole. So if you're new here, make sure you subscribe and ring that notification bell because I make a ton of videos. But one of the things I'm trying to do is to educate people. Like when I see something like this, when I see this, when I see people blaming Ariana Grande for the death of Mac Miller, I am just like, man, I need to keep going. I need to keep making videos because people don't understand how this thing works. People don't understand how insane the disease of addiction is. People don't understand how toxic relationships can be and when you got to go. Like it's absolutely mind blowing. So for those of you who don't know the history of it, Ariana Grande and Mac Miller were dating for about two years. And Ariana Grande ended up leaving him and now she is engaged to a comedian by the name of Pete Davidson. So now the social media is blowing up blaming Ariana Grande for Mac Miller's death. Now something I will touch on real quick and if you want me to make more videos on this later. It's very interesting to me because Pete Davidson is actually in recovery. He got clean. He got sober. So when I see Ariana Grande went from one addict to another, just the only difference is one was in active addiction. One is now clean. It makes me wonder like, is she prone to dating these type of men? And this is something that's a very big issue if this is something that you do too. So if you want me to make more videos on that, let me know down in the comments, alright? But anyways, my girlfriend and her best friend and I were in a group text and my girlfriend's friend Shelby tells me that people are blaming Ariana Grande for the death of Mac Miller.  I'm like, wait, what? And then like, when she said that, I'm like, well, it makes sense. It makes sense because people don't understand this disease. So anyways, I'm going to read just a few things that are being said on the internet. Okay, so Ariana Grande ended up disabling her Instagram account because of comments like this, alright? You low-key evil. This is your fault. It's your fault. This is your fault.  I hope you're happy with Pete.  Like, what? What? Like, this is insane. I'm going to put up in the info card up here a video I did a while back. It was a collab with my friend, Panko Bunny. Go check her channel out.  She's a cooking channel. Go check her out. She's an awesome woman. But I made a video collab with her and the video I did was about being held emotionally hostage. Like, this is something that we really need to identify and look at. Like, what? What? Like, the people spewing this stuff out are really not looking at the alternative. Okay? Like, addiction is such a serious, serious disease. And it's something that breaks my heart about addiction. Like, I am so fortunate to be six years clean and sober today. So many people don't get that opportunity. And I try so hard to help people get clean. I try so hard to help families understand how to set boundaries and things like that. But the truth of the matter is, is addiction. Addiction is our sole responsibility when you are the recovering addict. Like, I remember, like, I made a video about how my family did interventions on me. And I blamed my mom. I blamed my mom for my disease, for my addiction. She was an alcoholic for 20 years. I blamed her. But I was a 26-year-old man. It was time for me to let go of that stuff and take responsibility for my own actions. I had to. Like, although that may have played a big part into my substance abuse, it was no longer an excuse to keep living the way I was living. Because, like, what people aren't realizing is, if Ariana Grande stayed with Mac Miller, he could have died of an overdose anyways. Like, people are not putting those dots together. And that's why we need to talk about addiction, especially during National Recovery Month. Like, please do me a favor and share this video. Like, people just do not understand. They do not understand how serious this thing is, how tricky it is, how complicated it is. There's so many right and wrongs about this whole thing. And I understand when somebody passes away, we're looking for somebody to blame. But man, this is rough. But anyways, like, I'm getting caught up in my rant. Let me read you some of the stuff going on on Twitter. All right? Unpopular opinion. If you have a partner of two-plus years who you know has a mental health issues, just to start dating and get engaged with someone else months later, you played a part in their relapse and overdose. Like, no, no, no, no, no. I'm going to make videos about this, about how you cannot make anybody feel a certain way. Like, this is very important, especially for people who are codependent. Like, you cannot make somebody feel a certain way. So saying they played a part in it, that is bananas. That's like saying traffic played a part in his overdose. You know what I mean? Like, what about the dealer? Right? What about the people supplying him? What about his friends, right? Everybody plays a role in this thing. The government, you know, the biggest epidemic that we have that nobody's talking about is the prescription drug epidemic. Thousands upon thousands upon thousands of people are dying from medications they are getting from their doctors. What about that, right? There are so many parts to the epidemic going on in our country today that, like, you would need a million arms to point all of the fingers. All right? Let's keep reading some of these mean tweets. Ariana Grande killed Mac Miller. Tweets Jake 25, who called Demi Lovato a skanky junkie.   Like, this one was, you know, it was kind of mean, but kind of funny and kind of sassy. Like, it really shows, like, I'm glad somebody points it out, like, even though I don't get involved in that kind of stuff. Like, I'm glad that other people point out other people's hypocrisy, especially when it comes to mental illness. Like, this is why, like, man, like, y'all don't even understand yet. Like, I have so much stuff planned.   Like, for example, the person she's pointing out right here, they clearly got anger issues. They're on Twitter just being mad at everything, right? Like, if you don't think that's affecting your mental health, you've got another thing coming. That's why I need to sit down and make some anger management videos. Like, when you're running around, like, you're spewing ignorance, you really have no sense of identity yourself because you can't stick to one side or the other or have your own beliefs. You're just angry about everything. And that's, like, cool. And that's what she's pointing out. Like, this same person who's blaming somebody for an overdose death is the same person who stigmatized Demi Lovato when she overdosed. Like, that's bananas. And here's another one. Remember when Ariana Grande broke up with Mac Miller and was engaged two weeks later? Again, you can't make somebody feel another way like. So when I'm talking about this emotional hostage thing and things like that, so this is something that anybody who dates somebody with, not anybody, but a lot of people who date somebody with borderline personality disorder, they have to deal with that. Because people with BPD are, they can get very threatening, right? They have a lack of emotional regulation. They can threaten you.  Right? They say things like that. And that's called being an emotional hostage. And you are put in this very tricky situation. You are put in a no-win situation. Like, let me play this tape out for you. Okay? For those of you who are not aware about how serious mental illness is, how hard it is to date somebody who has a mental illness or an addiction, let me play this scenario out for you. Okay? A girl and a guy are dating, right? The guy says, if you leave me, right?  Okay? But don't you tell anybody that I said that. Okay? So now the woman is in a tricky position. All right? Now she's stuck in that relationship. Okay? And if she doesn't do something about it, this guy is going to think that she doesn't love him. She doesn't care. Right? That's what he's going to think. That's what he's going to blame her for. But if she goes out and she calls the police, okay, or if she gets him a therapist or whatever it is, now he's going to say, I told you not to tell anybody. You see what I mean? Like, a lot of people in these, that get into these relationships are stuck in a very tricky position where it seems like there is no winning solution. I'm going to link my book down below and I'm probably going to get some hate. Like, oh, you're promoting your book when talking about this stuff? Yeah. I made a book called Caught in the Crossfire. It's like $3. Okay? Download the Kindle app if you don't have a Kindle and read that book. Caught in the Crossfire is a book for anybody affected by a loved one's addiction. Part of it is about how to help somebody with an addiction and part of it is about setting boundaries and walking away. You know what I mean? And we got to talk about this with all sorts of forms of mental illness. Like, I have an entire playlist for any of you who can relate to some of this stuff. I have an entire playlist called The Broken Picker. I am of the belief. I am purely of the belief. This is an opinion. Might be an unpopular opinion like that last tweet said.  It is unfair. It is selfish to date somebody and bring them into that. All right? Like, I say this as somebody who stayed single for over a year and a half, because I knew, I knew to bring somebody into my mess was one of the most selfish things that I can do. But on the flip side, too, if you are somebody who is attracted to broken people, people who struggle with mental illness, people who struggle with addiction, you got to stay single for a while, too. You need to go get help. You need to figure out why you are attracted to these people. What is going on with you? Because you might be making their situation worse. Like, I'm going to throw this out there and this is not to throw any blame at anybody. But to date somebody who is an active addict or alcoholic, that can be very, very bad, okay? Like, for example, in addiction, when people get clean, they say, do not date for a year. All right? It's because people are very fragile. One of the biggest triggers people have is their emotions, right? And one of the most emotional situations you can get into is in a relationship, okay? You have extreme goods and extreme bads, right? Extreme feelings of love, extreme feelings of pain. So to date somebody while they're in early recovery or even in active addiction is very dangerous. And I'm not saying these people are broken forever, but like I said, like, that's why I make so many videos on how to help you and how to look at different aspects of your mental health and try to improve a little bit by little bit. Because now I'm in a position, right? I'm in a position where when I went through my first breakup in recovery after I was over a year and a half sober, I was actually over two years sober, when I went through that breakup, I had such a strong foundation that I didn't get drunk or high over it. You see what I mean? And again, please share this video because I'm just trying to educate people and decrease just not only the stigma but the ignorance about this thing. Like, it is madness and more people need to understand how this disease works, how mental illness works, but they also need to get help and need to get hope.  So I make these videos to try to offer people hope and let you know what I do to improve my mental health and what things you could do to improve yours as well. Because you don't have to keep living the way that you are living if you don't want to. All right? But anyways, anyways, I've gone on way too long this video is way longer than I expected. So leave comments down below. Let me know your thoughts. If you want to have a conversation, let's do it kindly and let's talk about it, okay? Leave comments down below. All right? But if you liked this video, please give it a thumbs up.  I talk about addiction recovery too. So make sure you subscribe, ring that notification bell. And a huge thank you to everybody supporting the channel over on Patreon. If you want to help support the channel over on Patreon so I can make more videos and do this thing and spread awareness and give people hope, make sure you click or tap on the Patreon icon and you can do it for a dollar, all right? But anyways, that's all I got for you today. Thanks so much for watching and I'll see you next time.


When it comes to fertility treatments, it can be a pretty touchy subject for some people. But what happens when you find out that your fertility specialist has been lying to you?  Dr. Cecil Johnson specialized in reproductive genetics for more than 50 years, but he wasn't the man he claimed to be. At one point, the man claimed to have impregnated a male baboon as wild as that may sound, but Cecil also had a few other dark secrets. See, when couples would come to him for fertility guidance, he would help set them up with a donor. Better yet, he would even let the couple choose their hair color, skin color, and the IQ of their donor. Sounds like a pretty promising process, right? Well, yes, but things aren't always what they seem. See, while Dr. Jacobson claimed to be getting his samples from a reputable source, he wasn't. Investigators say that Dr. Jacobson was eventually convicted of more than 52 crimes related to his fertility business, earning him the nickname the Sperminator. But what could have gone so terribly wrong for Dr. Jacobson and his clients? Well... If you've watched the Netflix documentary Our Father, I want to be clear from the get-go this is not the same story. They are eerily similar at times, but that documentary follows the case of Dr. Donald Klein. Today's story is about Dr. Cecil Jacobson, an American fertility doctor with decades upon decades of experience in his field. Cecil was born in Salt Lake City, Utah and would eventually attend Brown University, where he got his degree and eventually got his medical license. Once he graduated from college, Cecil got straight to work at the George Washington University in Washington, D.C. It's believed that he became a researcher there, with his research specializing in alternative fertility methods. Before long, Dr. Jacobson has worked his way up the ranks at the college, as well as quickly becoming the chief of reproductive genetics. Dr. Cecil Jacobson was highly respected by his colleagues and his peers, and he eventually had decades of experience under his belt. To put it plainly, if you needed information about fertility treatments, Dr. Jacobson was the guy to go to. But this is when things begin to get a bit interesting to put it lightly. By the 1980s, Dr. Jacobson had decided to leave his role as the chief of reproductive genetics and instead opened up a genetic center in Fairfax County, Virginia. Dr. Jacobson decided to carry out an incredibly noble endeavor. Rather than spending his days simply researching genetics and fertility, he wanted to get out into the field and actually put his knowledge to work. Dr. Jacobson decided that now was the time to begin helping out couples who were having issues with successful pregnancies. These patients would include anyone from victims of multiple miscarriages to those who simply never got pregnant at all, often for reasons they never fully understood. Dr. Jacobson made sure that his patients felt welcomed, heard, and comfortable in his workplace, and many of his patients spoke incredibly highly of him at the time. One of Dr. Jacobson's specialties was his hormonal treatments for women. Dr. Jacobson claimed to have a special blend of hormones that would guarantee his female patients would become pregnant, and quickly too. His success rates were off the charts. Virtually every one of his patients were able to successfully get pregnant within a week of their treatment, but the joy of these women was very short-lived. See, after treatment was completed, many of the women under his care would report that they achieved a successful pregnancy test soon after their treatments had been administered. After a few short weeks, Dr. Jacobson would carry out an ultrasound and show the couple the first images of their unborn child. These ultrasounds would continue for several weeks or months, but by month three, many of his patients began to miscarry. In fairness, many of his patients did carry their child to term, but a very large portion of his patients would miscarry specifically in their third month. This began to make some of his patients a bit suspicious. The crazy thing is, the pregnancy of these women was undeniable. Their bodies very quickly began to change, showing all the obvious signs of being pregnant. But no sooner than these changes had begun to occur, they would abruptly stop, quickly followed by the loss of their baby. But despite the fact that so many of his patients miscarried, none of them reported any sort of consequences for lack of a better word. To put it bluntly, their baby never came out, even though it had clearly lost its life. Now, this isn't unheard of, but the fact that none of his patients, not one, ever actually witnessed their child for lack of a better phrase, well, it was unusual. Dr. Jacobson soothed his patients' worries by telling them that their bodies had simply reabsorbed the baby. But as a few of his patients would soon learn, they were never actually pregnant in the first place. A few dozen of Dr. Jacobson's patients started to grow a bit suspicious about his practice. They began to compare notes and share stories with one another about what they had experienced while in his care. Each of the women told the exact same story. They showed up because they had difficulties getting pregnant. Dr. Jacobson would then give them an injection, then they would immediately become pregnant often within just a few days. Three months later, tragedy would strike, rinse and repeat. When so many patients began reporting the exact same story, a handful of victims formed an alliance, gathered up their information, then contacted a local news station to report their suspicions. The news station gathered all of these allegations and invested the case, later reporting on the incident and helping the families to file a lawsuit against Dr. Jacobson for malpractice. Now, you're probably thinking, well, shoot, that escalated quickly and you'd be right. See, the reason they decided to pursue charges of malpractice is because many of the women began to realize that they were never pregnant in the first place, even though Dr. Jacobson assured them that they were. When Dr. Jacobson was investigated, it was quickly determined that the hormone that he'd been injecting the women with was simple HCG, a hormone that is naturally released during pregnancy. So it only makes sense that these women would suddenly be getting positive pregnancy test results, because 99% of pregnancy tests simply test for an elevated presence of HCG in the body. So after being injected with HCG, naturally these tests would detect it and report a positive result, even though the women were never truly pregnant. When the case was eventually taken to court, several of the families provided ultrasound images that have been given to them by Dr. Jacobson. The doctor claimed that these images showed clear depictions of their unborn child, but in reality, the expert claims that these images were nothing more than nearby bodily organs or, in several cases, poop. But believe me when I say, this is only the tip of the iceberg. This lawsuit was child's play compared to the allegations that were about to emerge against Dr. Jacobson. A popular pregnancy method these days is artificial insemination. There's a million reasons why a couple may want to pursue this route of reproduction, but the quick and simple breakdown of how this works is that the couple locates a suitable donor, then that donor provides his donation sample, then that sample is implanted into the mother. Nine months later, if all goes well, a healthy baby is born. Artificial insemination was just one of the many services that Dr. Jacobson offered his clients. Considering that the doctor had been in the business for decades, he claimed to have had close relationships with a nearby donor bank that could provide samples for virtually any requests the parents could conjure up. If they wanted the father to have blonde hair with green eyes, he would make that happen. Red hair with brown eyes, you got it. High IQ with a height of at least six feet tall, no problem. Dr. Jacobson would rather quickly come up with these samples for his patients, then they would come back to the office and a quick procedure would be performed in prednating the mother on the spot. But during this process, some of his patients would get rather uncomfortable. Several of the women that he worked with said that his demeanor was less than ordinary. To make matters worse, right before each of his procedures, he would take remarkably long trips to the restroom. This may seem like a very odd thing to notice, but several of his patients picked up on this, so it's certainly worth mentioning. The truth about what was really happening here wouldn't come out for several years. Everything hit the fan between 1990 and 1992. This took place while Dr. Jacobson was being investigated for his role in falsely informing women of their pregnancy. And claiming their own feces was actually a living child. During the course of the investigation, detectives noticed that none of his medical records ever documented the name of any of the donors that he'd been connected with. Instead, each of the donors was simply referred to by a number. Dr. Jacobson said that he operated a completely anonymous business, and that he ensured all of his donors would remain anonymous until the end of time. To help facilitate this, he never wrote their names down on paper. He was the only one who had the knowledge of who the donor was, and he vowed to take this information to his grave. But this is when his house of cards began to fall. As investigators dug further into this so-called donor program, they could find no information regarding the existence of such a program. They could find no ties between Dr. Jacobson and any of the donor banks in the area, not one of them. So how was he getting in touch with all of these donors? To better understand this, investigators approached many of his former patients, and asked if they would be willing to take part in a DNA test to help prove whether or not Dr. Jacobson was telling the truth. Many of the families happily agreed to take part in the research, and they offered up a DNA sample from each of their children. This is the moment when catastrophe struck, and decimated families across the country. When detectives submitted their first seven samples for testing, every one of them came back with results that labeled Dr. Cecil Jacobson as the biological father. Detectives knew that there was much more going on than Dr. Jacobson was willing to reveal. They'd now proven that Dr. Jacobson had been lying to his patients, and they suspected he'd been doing this since day one. It wouldn't be unreasonable to assume that nearly every last one of his patients had been deceived. We don't know for sure just how many patients came to Dr. Jacobson for guidance, but we know that he's been linked to at least 75 children across America. What makes this even more disturbing is that in several of these cases, the mothers were expecting to be inseminated with their own husband's samples. So whatever became of the samples the husband provided? Well, we don't even know. Needless to say, Dr. Jacobson was taken to court by dozens of families, all of whom wanted to press charges against him. When he was asked to defend himself, this man gave it his all. He had an excuse for every question.  He denied any wrongdoing from beginning to end and vigorously fought to protect his name. When he was asked about the dozens of false pregnancies that he'd witnessed, Dr. Jacobson claimed that he truly believed each of the women had been pregnant after the administration of HCG. To him, he believed he'd come up with a secret formula to quickly force a pregnancy, a method that no one else was using. He admitted that he did know that the presence of HCG could cause a false pregnancy test, but he firmly stated that it was his honest belief that the urine concentrations would have been far too low for the test to show a false positive result. He was then asked about the ultrasound images, which he'd chalked up to nothing more than an honest error in every single case. As for the fake donor program, this is where things just get ridiculous. He claimed that he did in fact rely on anonymous donors, but he couldn't provide any documentation proving that he'd been affiliated with any legitimate donor programs in the area. He claimed that, on several occasions, donors failed to show up for their appointment. In his eyes, he was doing the families an honest favor by providing his own samples instead of just canceling the appointments. He claims that he didn't want his patients to miss a window of opportunity, so he inseminated them with his own donation. And let's be clear here, that's a pretty generous offer. But at least ask the families if they'd even be interested first. You don't just do something like this without speaking with the parents. As for the situation in which the woman's husband provided a sample that was never administered, this was labeled as nothing more than cross-contamination or a mistake in his lab. But here's the problem with this case as a whole. There were no laws in place that prevented Dr. Cecil Jacobson from doing any of this. Virtually everything he did was perfectly legal. At that time, there were no laws in the state of Virginia that would have held him accountable for the tragedies that he inflicted on so many couples. The fertility industry was almost completely unregulated at this time. So Dr. Jacobson never technically did anything wrong in the eyes of the law. And it seems that he knew this was true. He knew he couldn't ever be held accountable. But there's a bigger issue here that's been spoken of by a handful of journalists and what it means for future generations. I remember reading one article that claims that over 75% of Dr. Jacobson's children reside in Northern Virginia, and many of them are believed to be attending the same schools. So when these children become teenagers, what does this mean when they start seeking out potential partners? The genetic ramifications to future generations could be disastrous. Even the simple emotional ramifications could be harmful to these kids. What happens if they fall in love with each other without even realizing that they're half siblings? We've all read Romeo and Juliet. We know what teenagers are capable of when they feel they're being trapped in some sort of forbidden love story. Thankfully, investigators recognized just how terrible the situation was. And they vowed to make sure that Dr. Jacobson would pay for what he had done. While his actions against these families weren't technically illegal, they continued to investigate it and found that he had sent various medical documents to the Postal Service across state lines. This was highly illegal in Virginia. They also convicted him of wire fraud as they found out that some of his patients had paid him for services that he knowingly didn't provide. He was also convicted of perjury for the lies he told during the investigation. In the end, Dr. Jacobson was convicted on more than 52 counts. But unfortunately, the maximum punishment for this was a mere five years in prison and a $116,000 fine. He got out of prison sometime around 1997 or so and remained a free man up until his passing in 2021 at the age of 84. When Jacobson's wife was asked about her stance regarding her husband's crime, she proclaimed that any woman should consider themselves lucky to have Dr. Jacobson as the father of their child. She never believed her husband did anything wrong. Many of Cecil's victims have been strongly urged to move out of the state of Virginia to help minimize the impact of his actions. But nearly all of his victims have opted to remain in their home state. Let's just hope that these parents choose to educate their children about the dangers of dating someone without clearing them with the genetic expert first. If this case weren't bizarre enough, I should definitely mention that it is by no means the only case of its kind. Like I mentioned at the beginning of this video, Netflix has an entire documentary about Dr. Donald Klein, who's believed to have fathered at least 94 children in eerily similar ways. A Dutch doctor has said to have fathered 21 children in this way, and another American doctor fathered 24. In Canada, Dr. Norman Barwin has said to have fathered at least 226 children in a similar fashion, with another doctor from London allegedly fathering 600 children. It goes without saying, if you plan on receiving fertility treatments, check out your doctors very, very thoroughly first. Thankfully, cases like this are exceedingly rare, but most states in the United States still have no regulation regarding the fertility industry. So pretty much anything is fair game at this point, making this case all the more disturbing. Thank you guys for tuning in to another episode of True Crime Stories. If you want to see more true crime documentaries like this, be sure to hit the like button and subscribe. It's completely free. If you'd like to help support the channel, the best way you can do that is simply by leaving a comment below, any comment at all. It helps out the channel a lot more than you may realize. If you love the channel and want to see new episodes several days early, you can do that by clicking the join button below. And you can even pick up a True Crime Stories mug, like the one you see on the desk behind me, from tienaughts.com. But with that, my name is Tie Noughts, and I'll catch you guys in the next video.