decisions, like my apologies. Yeah, that's okay. I'm totally, you know, happy to delegate, you know, decision makers, they're good at making decisions. Like if I feel like the outcomes are, you know, in alignment with myself, and then I don't mind delegating that. And so I think that people are willing to. And so it's not like we have to always know everything about everything and always feel like we have to be like making all the decisions for ourselves. And so I just believe in being able to give people access to as much data as they can, because information is power. Right. Right now, there's only a select few organizations of individuals that have access to a bunch of data that we don't have access to. And I so I think opening up that like Pandora's Box, so to speak, is is a decent approach to helping us. So a quick thought back earlier, when you were talking, I was like, Yeah, you would think that the pandemic that like a virus that's killing off a whole lot of people would have been a common enemy and would have united us and yet, you know, look what happened. And one of the major missteps was not following the advice you just gave. And there might be a scenario. Part of the problem is that we're in such a hot politicized environment for lots of different reasons. And there's a bunch of strategies being applied there. But I think that being honest and transparent and offering up, here's the best we know, and let's make decisions together about it would actually have diffused a whole bunch of data skeptics and other sorts of people who were like, This is authoritarianism creeping into us. This is Nazism. It's like, wow, people went pretty far over the top. But, but there's a legit, you know, there's a woman who's been in the OGM conversations for a while, who at one point stopped and said, like, before the pandemic, I didn't trust the government very much at all. And I certainly didn't trust big pharma. And all of a sudden, we enter this moment when both of them are saying, must do this. It's like, why am I going to follow this advice? Right.  And, and then I don't know, this is just like a, it's a hornet's nest of issues that that we're walking around here. It is it's a challenging thing, because just having access to the data itself doesn't mean that there's data integrity, there's right, it's even more difficult these days with like, deep fakes and all this other kind of idea is how to even disseminize the information. So I should asterisk and say, access to data, but also knowing that there's a solid foundation of data integrity to go along with that, as well as the representation of data. That's kind of like what the book was talking about. And of course, you were in the first time in your psychology stats class, like, here's three graphs, all representing the same data, and you're now have three different views of what's happening here. And so it's all three of those elements in conjunction with one another, I think that it's like, really going to really kind of touch on it. And my undergrad was econometrics. So I was nominally in the economics department. But I remember in econ 101, when we dispensed with externalities in 15 minutes, I was like, that sounded really interesting. How did that go away so fast? So then I kind of abandoned economic theory, because ISO quants and whatever like macro and micro didn't make a lot of actual sense to me practically. And so I found this professor who was doing econometrics and loved that. And that was kind of what I did. But I then I ended up calling econometrics how to lie with numbers.  Right? So it made me it made me a skeptical reader of charts and stats and all that kind of stuff. But then have you read the book, The End of Average? I haven't I actually I need to put that one on my list is someone that once told me so he's not the best writer, but the book is really, really good. And you're like, Whoa, okay, then he starts out with the US Air Force where when jet fighters show up, all of a sudden they have a lot more crashes. And they're like, what's going on here? And and like our pilots just not fast enough sharp enough or whatever it turns like not really. Then somebody has the bright idea of measuring their pilots. And so they measure 3000 pilots, hand length, arm length, waist torso, eyes, whatever, they just do measurements. And it turns out that less than 15 or 20%. Maybe it's the numbers even smaller like 5%. Some incredibly small percentage of the pilots were average. Everybody was like really long arms, short torso, whatever. And all of this leads to the invention of the highly modifiable bucket seat that the pilot seat that can be adjusted so that you can see over the instruments so that you can reach the joystick and the pedals and all that kind of stuff.  But then like accidents go down. Because they realize that we don't have an average pilot. And so and so the author of this book plays this out in place after place after place, like, like, when you look at average stats, they're really misleading half the time. Yeah, and I think that's a really good example of what are we really trying to accomplish at the end of the day. So objective is for accidents to go down. So that's a very tangible objective metric to say, well, did we get the results that we're trying to achieve? And, you know, that path to get there can be difficult, because controlling all the variables in a world of infinite amount of variables is very difficult. And so trying to fine tune that as much as possible is the way to go. And it's, it's just, it's just a tough thing. And so I think like, I just like want to, I basically want to think in terms of like, the connectedness to things, like I said, in holistic systems, it's hard to describe what is the whole, you know, so it's really have this membrane here, maybe this like community is highly productive. And like, everyone's living happy and healthy. And like, they've got a strong thriving economy. But if it's at the detriment of the surrounding area, that's, that's not a whole system, you know, and so this is, I think now where we're collaborating on larger scales internationally, and we have digital tools, and more and more people are getting opened up to the internet. There's something else that's happening. That is, I mean, it's just like, we there hasn't been a whole lot of like, theorization to what does that mean? And what does that look like now? And like, what does that really mean? Because it's the boundaries and everything it's just kind of beginning to slowly wash away.  It's a little bit like the books on behavioral econ that are telling us that, you know, we're full of all sorts of bias. And we don't respond to the right things very often, we don't stop and slow down and think through the situation. So I was just like, what if we live in a dateocracy, where evidence based decisions were kind of king, except the conversation around what constitutes evidence, how reliable is the data? What is a good experiment? What are we going to do about it? What is the right policy measured? Each of those questions is like thorny and difficult. But wouldn't it be cool to be living in that world where when somebody said, hey, hey, you all, we think that this is happening. But really, if you look at the stats, it's not it's kind of this thing over here that's happening, right? I think that I think that'd be really pretty interesting. Yeah, I think that people should be free to explore science, the way that science is meant to be studied. I don't think that that's necessarily happening. Yeah, when it's say that as a scientist myself, going through university that I was really encouraged to challenge the status quo by any stretch of the imagination. Yeah, yeah. Well, the whole process of getting like getting a doctorate degree is the process of finding your facet of the fractal leading edge of your discipline, and being an expert in that thing. And every so often one in 1000 of those people bends the discipline in some new direction, right? Change changes the whole discipline. But mostly, everybody's finding their voice and their way and their their slice of expertise within the general ongoing view of the discipline. And it's hard to find advisors who will back you if you're bucking the discipline. Right? You won't make your way through so easily. Yes, it's interesting. So how do we solve that as a general purpose thing? Well, I mean, I know for sure what we were saying kind of before we started recording is the divisive nature of these narratives, right? And so it's like, how I was saying with the consensus is that the systems aren't working very well. Most people agree to that. And so the fact that we can get most people to agree on something that's, I think that's powerful, right? But the problem is, we are pointing fingers, and we're not coming from a place of unity, we're coming from a place of separation. And so that's why I kind of say the word conscious again, some of these newer terms, like awareness and wake up, it's just like it gets convoluted. But but the point of it is that an aware intelligence of being has a broader scope of view of what's happening. So it's like, it's just the scale at which you observe, right? Because, you know, in science, we try to we tend to draw this imaginary box, and we're going to say like, we're going to study everything in here, and just make the assumption that it's not connected to anything outside of this imaginary line that we've constructed. Right? So I think that's where the fundamental flaw is happening. Exactly.  I'm not sure what Keteris paribus means all other things being equal. So when you set up an experiment, you often say, we're going to look at this, all other things being equal, then we're going to and it's like that assumption was a really bad assumption because those other things are also moving and also affecting your experiment. So that's partly what I guess this article is saying knowledge, confusion and manipulation, a talk by Felix Stalter. Yeah, it looks good. So interesting. I forget that I even put this in one that I put this in 2019. I'll connect this to today's call. And I know going back to what you were speaking in relation to ergonomics, you know, ergonomics in the pilots and fitting in the size and stuff. I think that is also true for how we interact with our devices, excuse me, our online spaces spaces aren't ergonomically customizable. So I kind of envision this modularized components where you can have a user interface or the same application be different for different personalities and different learning styles and things like that. But we have we have seen that with ourselves so much yet, it's just like here's the UI, right? It doesn't work for you.  And so and it's very siloed, you know, you can't your behavior amongst one app like Yelp doesn't affect Uber doesn't affect this, you know, imagine if there was actually a universal single sign on that could bridge those silo gaps as well as a database that could be collectively shared, still maintain the privacy that we want to have in the security. Right, right. There was a time some a decade ago, maybe when skins were really popular. And you could skin your Napster app to look like whatever or your instant messaging app and all that and gave a lot of customization. But that that moment seems to have passed a bit. Although like Gmail has themes, I just don't know how many people notice or realize that Gmail has themes and you can change them. So my Gmail background changes with the weather all the time. So yeah, so my Gmail frame looks like what the weather is outside. I don't know why I like it so much. But we don't get a lot of customization. And there's a lot of conversation happening around OGM and around us in terms of those boundaries between different applications. It's a little bit what you just said about why don't I get to choose which of these is my favorite to use and how do I compose a work environment from my favorite elements, right, the composability or modularity of elements.  Right. So we tried many moons ago. We have Mattermost servers. You're on those. And we tried to get everybody to stop using the Zoom chat and to just chat over on Mattermost. In the calls chat for the calls and I mean, most of our standing calls had their own channel on Mattermost, which is lovely because then you can go back and you can scroll through every time you don't have this separate little text file that's context free. Except not everybody who'd show up for the call was on Mattermost. So getting hurting people over there was hard. And then we just we just the discipline was too hard to maintain. So we don't do it anymore. And my my assertion was, if Zoom permitted you to swap out this chat for some other chat you like, and it just bolted in, it'd be a no brainer. Because then when you set up the call, you configure it to whatever chat you're using and they basically bond when you show up and you're on your way. But but it doesn't do that they don't do that. And I'm trying to figure out how you encourage vendors to write for that. How do we how do we get a composable environment out of some of these piece parts? That's what drew me to the community that I'm involved with now, which is hollow chain and taking agent centric approach. So instead of the global consensus, like we the ledger has to be full synced on all the nodes and everyone has to agree to some universal, you know, truth. Yeah, an agent section approach and they that framework is also allows for modularity and ways that are unprecedented. And with newer web three tools that will be coming out, the way I envision a decentralized architecture now opens the door for bridging those what were previous silos. And so now instead of 25 apps that you have to have, you can have three or four or five mini operating systems that are all run off of the cloud, they're all a decentralized backend. And so really, it's like you're just downloading a mini operating system as opposed to like some siloed application. And I think that that has huge implications for the future of the internet and how we interact with software. Interesting. I'm friends with Arthur Brock from way, way long ago, but I'm really not caught up with holo for a long time. How like, where's the project now? I'm not sure they just came out with a roadmap. And so that's probably the best route to just take a look at their that the devil's they do. They do a good job of updating developers. And, you know, they came out with a newer roadmap after they did a code rewrite and everything. And so now it's like, there's a lot more additional features that they rolled out with. But I don't I don't follow that so much because I'm really just my focus is on developing applications, hollow chain applications, and other tools open source tools for recognition. Right now I'm working on a project called trust graph, which is on I can post that. Thanks, which is, you know, related to this idea that we've been talking about is like, you know, how how do we how do we handle this kind of stuff? So is this link the best link for their new roadmap? I'll check it out. Thanks. Yes, that's the one. Sweet. And have you heard of an app called Adam, the agent centric DAP meta ontology? Yes, that's also another project I'm looking to get involved with. Oh, no kidding. God damn. Okay. I'm working with Nicholas luck. And I'm waiting to continue that conversation. Harlan and who I'm working with on trust graph is going to be collaborating and very interested in collaborating with him. So it looks like they're, you know, I'm hoping there'll be some synergy there because that's a great project. It's really, it's a spanning layer. So it's a meta ontology. And the big like passion I had when I first jumped into hollow chain many years back was sector. And so sectors describing this decentralized operating system I'm talking about. And it's an it's an artificial neural network. And so, you know, Adam is in conjunction with that given that there's this meta ontology in terms of how these different ecosystems can communicate with themselves. So the idea is to really actually bring about a system for interoperability, like true interoperability. So here's sector in my brain here. And I met with Eric Harris Braun and Arthur back in the days of their meta currency project. And was listening to that. And and sector was a spin out from that and hollow chain is a spin out from that. Each time I think cleaving off pieces that seemed doable to go build, but meta currency ran really, really deep.  But they're building from those philosophical foundations. And here's how I found Adam is that I had put in this ontological project by this GitHub user. But I know very little about it, except it got mentioned on one of our free juries brain calls a while ago. That's why I even know about it. Yep, it's a it's a back end agnostic tool. So it could, you know, use hollow chain IPFS, any of the, any of the databases that doesn't matter, which people are using for the back end. It's really just a connect connectivity. So interesting. Yeah. Yeah, it uses the RDF triples. So the subject predicate object, in terms of creating, you know, graphing and relational databases. And that's what I'm very interested in doing, like in conjunction with trust graph, and these verifiable claims, these trust claims that people can cryptographically sign. And so it helps like protect sources, private sources from people. Is this the right trust graph, by the way? Yeah, I think so. Okay, I connected to our call. Yeah, trust Adam. I connect Adam to our call. Yeah. I mean, part of the part of the issue with hollow chain has been a platform, a stable enough platform for people to write apps on. And I think it's gotten there. But I'm not actually sure. Yeah, I mean, they have they have working hollow chain applications, for sure. What I would like to see is I'd like to see a lot more open source code. And so that's what the mission I'm on is to, to write it myself. Now I had to learn a new language. It's written in a language called rust, which is not as many people are familiar with, but it has a lot of advantages. I'm a huge fan of it. And so I had to learn that and study do some studying, plus I'm newer to software development.  Yeah, I'm a restation now. I had coding experience from engineering. I mean, I taught myself how to code on my TIA three calculator when I was in junior high. Yeah. And I've always played around with circuits. I'm an engineer is my background. But when it comes to just software development, specifically, I'm like, I was a total new. So I've been spending many, many months now studying. And now I'm actually ready to go ahead and begin the work. And so yeah, my, my plan is to continue to contribute to the hollow chain open modules. And so they have these different things that people can take and build, right? And what I want to do is automate that process. So I'm a huge proponent for low code, no code tools. Yeah, because I believe that if the that non technical people have the ability to create applications, we're going to see a totally different shift and how things are going because Yeah, I don't know if you in the OJM community, a mutual friend of ours has been sent arena, who's fresh out of school. And he went and first used air table. And now he's using bubble. But he's used low code, no code tools to build out a really big, beautiful directory that goes really quite deep. Yeah, I think he's done a really nice job. And so yeah, with Trove and everything. And so yeah, that's those tooling, those tools are very fundamental. What we need to be able to synergize ourselves on a broader scale. Yeah. Yeah, I'm glad that he's doing that work. So how can I bring myself up to date on that part of these architectures, like, and I'm not a coder, I mean, I can program Hello World and probably I used to be a little sorry, my first computer in the world was an Apple two plus. And one of my questions back then was why are there so many programming languages. So I started collecting interpreters and pilers.  And I could write Hello World on all those plus I could write Hello World on IBM mainframe and make it run. And beyond that I've done nada. But but but just that context has been incredibly helpful to me in understanding what else is going on and being an analyst, a tech analyst in the software, you know, software world and all that. But I'm trying to figure out how to jump into the middle of these conversations about modularity, agent architectures, composability, model view controller, I don't know, there's a whole bunch of things here that different communities are trying to solve in different ways because they have different philosophical perspectives on what's right and how to fix it. And I don't need to master all those things, but I'm trying to make wise choices between them. Yeah, well, I mean, experience myself, and I don't use social media and pay attention so much. I have not worked for corporations really. So like, you know, I've been unplugged. And so I don't know how to answer that in terms of like the industry level and what's out there and what's standard, how to because I'm lost as well in terms of how to like assimilate into this. I'm more of an algorithm person. My background is like math and data and analytics complex systems theory. I had experience, you know, researching and doing reports for cryptography. So I'm more knowledgeable blockchain cryptography, as opposed to, you know, really where the tech industry is in general and these different tools, I will just say, from my view, it's convoluted. And I tend to just like any time I see something that's really like overtly complex, I tend to think that maybe there's just alternative options because, you know, like I see these white papers like, and we're going to do this, we got this and this and there's all this fancy math. And like, I understand what the fancy math is saying. And I'm reading them and I'm like, do they even know what they're talking about? Like, what is going on?  It's not so, you know, complicated of a situation. And so I try to think of that, you know, like an elegant equation, like E equals MC square, even though that's probably that example, because it's not really necessarily accurate, but it's just like, in terms of the simplicity factor of it, that's kind of what I tend to think. And so, you know, it's like, if it's so difficult, the barrier of entry is so high to building technology that benefits these corporations, right? It doesn't help us as a collective. So I want to really significantly reduce that barrier of entry. And so I wish I could be more helpful other than, you know, well, I usually just hop into Discord and ask questions. And sometimes people will give you great links, like the hollow chain Discord, you can go in and they'll answer your questions. They're happy to like point people in directions. Got the core concepts now they use like biology. So they've got zones in DNA and the visuals. And so, you know, they're doing, they're doing a good job of helping explain it in ways that like, you know, make sense and have more visuals and stuff. So I love that. Yeah. Thank you. I mean, I mean, you're clearly you're clearly an independent itinerant sense maker, which is, which is lovely, right? And doesn't matter to me that you haven't been inside the corporate world and all that kind of stuff, because mostly they're 20 years behind everything.   So that puts things out in the public commons in the states.  And I love the regenerative frame around a whole bunch of things. But I didn't want to call it the regenerative commons, because like generativity seems like a good thing. Yeah.  Here's a bunch of calls around trying to create a generative commons agreement or something like that, which you can find here. I'll connect the generative commons agreement to our call today. But I think that the actions that you're the approach you're taking to finding your way through this is like kind of the right approach. It's like, you know, go smell the different flowers, see which ones feel right, feel, see which ones fit the architecture of society that you think needs to exist, right? And then go push them until they break and see where, how solid are they and how broken are they. And then maybe buzz around some more to get broader perspective on what neighboring communities are doing or what might be different approaches to do this. And at some point in the next decade, I think a bunch of these efforts will kind of crystallize and connect to the point where we have a new platform. But I was just on a thought my doubts about NFTs and NFT games. And I have a thought called obfuscation through complexity is a great way to mask fraud or mistakes, which goes back to my diagnosis of the global financial crisis, where ever more abstract securities were impossible to understand, but everybody else was buying them. So others were forced to join. This is like a perfect global scam. Like like the global financial crisis was the perfect global scam because because the math was faulty inside the securities, they had higher returns because they had higher returns, you would get fired if you didn't buy them. And because everybody was buying them, there was a whole big pool of money in the middle that if you got off the merry-go-round before everybody else did, you would do really, really well. It turns out that that smart capitalists don't like stability. They like beta, beta is volatility, right? And that those are the people we have, you know, society is in their hands right now. Sorry, Stacy. That's OK. I have to leave, but see it was a pleasure to meet you and I hope you come back. I really I'll see you on matter most, right?  Yeah, please, please send me a message. Cool. And I hadn't noticed that we can't pass the hour. See you, Stacy. Yeah, and we can we can wrap our call too. But yeah. Well, you know, it's like duplicating efforts is not necessarily a bad thing. Like if you have an experiment, you might want to do several iterations in different branches, but I'm trying to help us like minimize or maximize our resource allocation. Yeah. That flow and to know that if we are duplicating efforts, then it's intentional and it's for we can use that information somewhere else later right now.  It's just so much untapped value just sitting there. So ideally, like minimizing duplicating efforts in ways that don't make sense is really what I'm trying to help figure out how to do because, you know, after I get an idea of this and figure out whether to, you know, where to plug into a team and stuff. I'm just going to lock myself in a lab for quite a while and just go to go after it. So I love that. And I want to know I want to learn what you're learning. So I want to follow whatever we're where are you? Are you you're not on the major platforms? Are you publishing, posting videos or anything about what you're learning? No, not yet. Maybe eventually, I'm not sure. Yeah, that yeah, because I'd love I'd love to be like in your wake going, oh, that was really cool. But I can tell you that. So my friend Denise, she put on this group of wake and dream synergy. That's how I met a lot of like the conscious technologists that I'm working with now. And what they want to do is they like conversations like this, they can generate an artificial intelligence, can generate artwork from it and then make it with tea out of it. And so in that NFT, you can have additional things is not just necessarily the art, but you can have membership and other access to things or discounts on stuff can be baked into the smart contract. Yeah, it's really cool. I'm thinking like if I was someone that wanted to buy an NFT, if I wanted to sponsor this, that's exactly what I would want is I want to be going to fund people that are having these conversations, right? And you can do that now, right? So you can just like the money goes there and you know that you sponsored this conversation and then your reputation can be built into it. And then then you these, you know, there's now there's a filter into why is someone joining a call or joining a community in a space? And it's not just like who has the most money or this and that, but it's actually like you've earned like access to these different groups. And so what happens in that is the information in the calls is valuable, right? All of the things that we've learned. And so when they purchased that, then now they also have access to that intellectual property. And so it's taking intellectual property and it's collectively stewarding those assets. So I'm totally torn about what you said because it's a blend of stuff I'm thrilled about and completely agree with.  So the part that I'm thrilled about, for example, one of the pieces is, I don't know, eight or 10 months ago, my friend, John Borthwick said, hey, Jerry, is OGM a Dow? And then he and another friend on the West Coast basically launched NFTs and they've got a lot of experience on this. And at one point I was asking John, could we have an NFT for OGM? And I think, and I think this is really parallel to what you just said, I think some investor would be really happy to buy an NFT that isn't a stupid pixel art picture of some apes or whatever, but instead is a snapshot of the nascent collective memory of civilization. This is what it looked like when it was like a little fetus with bulb eyes and a spinal cord in the tail. And then as it grows and evolves, you could take different snapshots and float them as NFTs. And because NFTs have some more contracts and future subsequent sales actually generate cash that goes back to the creator, which is not like any kind of art we've ever had before, right? That's a brand new, fantastic feature. I love that feature. I would think that having like a worthwhile NFT that does that kind of thing would be terrific. And that we didn't do anything with that conversation. So you're telling me that this community is doing that already? Yeah, that's what we're looking to do very shortly. They're working with like an NFT team that helps manage that kind of stuff. Yeah. And so what it is is like, as we are figuring out this collective sense making and collective governance, then that's valuable to future DAOs. And so I'll send you the PDF on slides I came up with to kind of show visually show this concept, but the idea is to support DAOs. So we want to help these DAOs start up, but the idea is that you don't want to scale too fast too soon. You have to have the like underlying framework to support infrastructure there to make it happen. And cause right now it's just like, it seems like this crazy mad house is running around, there's just needs to be a more grounded structure to it. And so the more we can get people to kind of like put in their value, put in their intellectual property and collectively have that as a pie, then people can build off of that. It's like bootstrapping. And that's the place where you lost me, where I fell off the back of the truck, so to speak. But I don't know why, but that metaphor I use a lot, which is I'm a big believer that IP should be out there in the open to help everybody. And the idea of protecting it, locking it away, earning your way into getting the IP doesn't make any sense to me. And for me, NFTs are like the autograph, the Babe Ruth autograph baseball card. I support Babe Ruth, in which case when you bought the top baseball card, you weren't supporting Babe Ruth, although he might have gotten a royalty, who knows? But in this case, NFTs can very directly support the communities that are busy churning out open intellectual property for everybody that is perfectly replicable at zero marginal cost. And that's fantastic.  I can't stand that conversation. It makes me nuts. So I need to understand what you mean. Because I agree and I disagree. So from a fun, like a moral standpoint, I absolutely agree. However, there's a challenge and this is what I'm trying to figure out. So maybe you can help me because open source projects have trouble gaining momentum and getting funding. It's very difficult to get that funding. And so on the one hand, I would much rather everything be open. I don't patents and intellectual property. I don't agree with that, really. But the problem that I'm seeing is that it's hard to incentivize people to wanna sponsor those projects. And it's hard to get funding for that. So if we can find a way to get funding, then great. But I'm just seeing it like this is if we have this like circular thing, okay? And it's not centralized. So it's not subject to the same corruption. So it's transparent and it's collectively owned. Then instead of being open source, it's actually like any organization that wants to have access to it can do, they could still have access for free. It's not necessarily that we have to charge although we could. But the idea is that they're saying, well, but we buy sustainable products. We are fair trade. We treat our employees this way. We are transparent into where our money is going in our organization. So it's kind of like on the one hand, it's great to just get open free everything to everyone, but it's still not necessarily empowering, right? The proper movement and groups and communities because, so I kind of like I've always been terrible at debate class because I'm always like, yeah, you know, I can see both sides. And this is one that's really tough because on the one hand, I have many friends that are doing some amazing work in open source projects and I'm very much looking forward to contributing as much as I possibly can to those. But on the other hand, I'm really tired of all the wrong people having all the money. Like I'm just really tired of that. So like I'm trying to figure out what can we do with that? So, you know, I feel you, but I just like at the same time I do want to see the right people being able to like take care of themselves and have the resources they need to really get the ball rolling on this stuff. Totally, I totally agree. That makes total sense. So, and also one thing that we talked about, you know, GM over time, especially in that generative comments thing is that high well-functioning comments need some boundaries and need some protections because when anybody can go riff on the thing and copy it and then mash it up or drop some malware into it or whatever else, that's not actually functional code anymore. It gets confused and you lose whatever the value was that was created in the middle. It's easy to bury or drown or whatever or corrupt. So, stewardship needs some boundaries. On the other hand, if I had a choice between an NFT where, if I had a choice between one where the property IP was locked away or the IP was completely open, I would buy the NFT that was completely open and it would just be a choice between NFTs in the marketplace. Like, to me, it's like, why not try to float NFTs around completely open IP and see if people will invest because you're investing in the movement, not in the IP? Well, that would be the most ideal situation. Yeah, but has anybody done that? I don't think so, but you know, what you're talking about could be a huge opportunity for crowdsourcing because you don't need a million dollars from one person if you can get one dollar from a million people, right? Bingo, bingo. I think you're on something with that. And I definitely would be like very interested in figuring out how could we make that happen to get a bunch of people to put in a little bit to sponsor some open tools and intellectual property. Yeah, heck yeah. So, yeah. So if you're getting close to a conversation with others about this and whatever, like can you ring the bell and I'll like shine the bat signal and I'll show up because I'm really, really interested in this. And I think that there's a pony here. I think that this is a really good way to fund open source communities, artists and others. But for me, it's not about scarcity and protecting the IP. It's in fact about releasing it. And I think, and this is an experiment we can run, I think there's people who will invest in those NFTs with that premise for those ethical reasons. I mean, that would be the most ideal.  And I've been away or you can think of me like a caveman. And so, my limited experience is just tough to get money for free stuff that you're free. It's hard and you can't blame people for not being as incentivized, but I know that they're out there. I know that they exist. Yeah, I don't know. How can we connect those people? Right. I mean, Wikipedia exists and yet if you had taken a business plan for Wikipedia to any venture capitalist 20 years ago, they would have laughed you out of the room, right? So some groups are doing it and I know those people are out there, but I don't know, that's one of the questions I maybe would be a good question for people that have more knowledge and experience. Like I want to hopefully talk to Peeke and Missy sometimes and ask them some questions about these things because like I'm trying to figure out exactly how to make this happen. Cool, me too. On the same quest, on the same quest. So who else is on the top of the list of people who would be wise on this? Well, just XR engines and open source community, creating open source metaverse tools and they're all incredibly passionate about open source software. Huh, okay. That's some people I kind of talked to and asked questions here and there. Like I was even asking a question about like the protections that you'd mentioned stuff and so I'm trying to, you know, here I'll post their link as well. And then, you know, Holochain. Again, I haven't talked to them so much about these kinds of things because like I really want to focus on being able to code and to engineer. So my bandwidth for like the funding stuff and non-technical ideas and activities, I'm just, I'm more limited at the moment just because I simply feel like the best service I can do for the collective is to be, you know, getting my hand dirty, jumping, diving in. Makes sense, makes sense. Cool, cool, cool, cool. But I'm really glad because like, I just want to make this happen. Yeah, exactly. And I don't care about anything else. Like it's not about me, it's so much bigger. It's just like the result. What is like, can we, you know, achieve this outcome as a society? Because I believe in unity. I don't believe in pointy fingers and divisiveness. I really try to approach things from a place of compassion. And I would really like to see more people doing the same thing, you know, it's heartbreaking. And so, yeah. It's totally heartbreaking. Where did you grow up? In a small town in the Midwest. Uh-huh. Normal, Illinois. Normal, I've heard of normal, never been there. Never been there. Closest I've ever lived in St. Louis. I could say I'm far from normal. Yeah, exactly. Exactly. And I can say show me. So I feel like living, I feel like living almost three years in Missouri gave me the right to use their motto. This is super cool. I'm thrilled you're here. Thank you for showing up. Let's keep the conversation going. And anything I can answer for you right now? Yeah, well, just I want to figure out how can I onboard to OGM? Because I'm just not even sure if I totally fully understand exactly what it is. We aren't either. So you're on the Google group and you're on the matter most. Those are our two principal platforms. So you're seeing all the conversations. We have a Thursday morning call at 8 a.m. Pacific every Thursday. Is our standing group call about 25 people usually come in. And we alternate between two formats. One is the traditional format of checking in where I just look at my Zoom gallery view and I walk across and just I ask people what's going on in your life that has anything to do with OGM. And then when they say something that sort of sparks a little bit, I'll dig in a little bit. And we might spend 25 minutes on the thing that the third person raised and that's perfectly okay. And then the alternate format is a topic and I think this Thursday is another topic day. And so we've been picking different kinds of topics. We had a couple really good calls on the metaverse and I'm a bit of a metaverse skeptic. I don't like Mark Zuckerberg's vision of the metaverse and I don't really like the web three version of the metaverse. And so I bought the betterverse.org. And on the idea of why don't we design a metaverse together? Yeah, I like that metaverse. I've heard of Holoverse, but that's like too associated with Holochain and company. So metaverse is great. Yeah, exactly. So if you wanna think out loud about that kind of stuff and you wanna post on the metaverse site or it's just a Google site, it's really simple to edit and post stuff on and so forth. Let me know like if it appeals to you. But I feel like I've had, I've got 24 years using this brain thing. And I feel like I've been at the coal phase for 24 years by myself. And it's like, hey, everybody, this is really fun to do. Where are you all? Right? And why can't we build something like Wikipedia, but with opinions and narratives above Wikipedia and all the other assets out on the inner tubes? Why can't we build that thing together? Yeah, yeah, that's what I wanna do. And then tell stories on this medium and figure out like what to do. I wanna build that sucker. That's exactly what I'm looking to do. Okay, so I may have just gotten some funding to build some a little lightweight straw man prototype for some part of this. And as soon as I've wrapped my brains around it, I'll probably come back and talk to you. Cause I've like, if you're enthused and this is like a common vision, then. Yeah, for sure. Definitely. I mean, this is really the crux, right? Yep. Yeah, this is what makes sense. And, you know, I haven't unfortunately been able to attend any of the massive Wiki calls. The mornings are really tough for me that early morning. So, but like, I do wanna figure out like, what is in conjunction with massive Wiki? I have been talking a lot with Wendy McClain. And so I know there's a ton of overlap with what she's doing with tapestry and everyone's wisdom. And so I told her, I was like, you have the front end for what I wanna build the back end for. So like, seems like maybe- Let's figure out how these things fit. Exactly. Yeah. Exactly. Love that. Cool. Awesome. Thank you. Yeah. Pleasure. Nice to meet you. Appreciate it. Bye.


Community servings is on a mission to save Thanksgiving for critically ill individuals in Massachusetts and they're doing just that one meal at a time. Every day we go out across the state and bring beautifully prepared medically appropriate meals to people struggling with cancer, HIV, heart disease, MS, etc. What started as an organization to feed HIV and AIDS victims now feeds clients who suffer from 35 different life-threatening illnesses. As the holiday season sets in, the organization is bustling to provide for their clients. We are preparing a Thanksgiving meal with all the fixings for our clients, about a thousand people. We're also in the middle of a huge pie sale pie in the sky where we're selling 18,000 pies to benefit our program. For every pie baked here at Community Servings this season, a family of five will be able to sit down to a nutritious Thanksgiving dinner. A dinner they might not have otherwise had without Community Servings help. Once per day, especially with Thanksgiving coming up, we're doing about over 2,000 meals a day. Even with twice as much food going out for Thanksgiving, Community Servings is reminded of the importance of their meals not just for the holidays but also year-round. This meal that they have before them for today, it may be the only thing that they may eat, but it's there to try to strengthen them and that's what brings me here. It really does. Keeping a tradition of using food as medicine, the organization will deliver meals for over 1,500 home-bound individuals this Thanksgiving. For BUTV News, I'm Supreme Appala.


Welcome to Ohtani Day in MLB DFS, Shohei Ohtani pitching for the Angels for tonight. And honestly, I think probably the best pitching option for today in MLB DFS. And I've been hesitant to use Ohtani this year because of the pitch counts, the injuries, sometimes too many walks. But today, I think we're gonna take the leashes off and go full Ohtani, which is always more fun. So let's dive on in to get you set for today's slate of MLB DFS. This is the FanDuel Fantasy Q&A right here on the FanDuel YouTube, Twitch, Facebook and Twitter channels. My name is Jim Sonnis. I am a senior writer and analyst for numberfire.com here to answer your questions live on air for the next 25 minutes to get you set for tonight's slate of MLB DFS. As always, no matter where you are watching, you can get your questions in for today. We'll take them via Facebook, Twitter, Twitch, YouTube. Wherever you are watching, get those questions in and we'll answer them live here on air to get you set for tonight's slate of MLB DFS. And as you can see, it is in fact Ohtani Day across America. Before we get into the questions for today, quick scheduling announcement that we are not going to be here tomorrow. Dr. Disrespect is taking over the FanDuel YouTube channel. We'll be playing, I think it's FIFA? I think it's FIFA for tomorrow. So we're playing some FIFA on the YouTube channel and talking about some DFS stuff. So if you're a Dr. Disrespect fan, come on back tomorrow afternoon and check out Dr. Disrespect. I'm not on a stream, but you can always hit me up on Twitter. I'm at Jim Sonnis, J-I-M-S-A-N-N-E-S and I'll take questions there throughout the afternoon for tomorrow. But first, let's talk about today's slate. As mentioned, I do think that Shohei Ohtani is the top arm for today as we pull up the pitching map for today. Ohtani facing the Tigers, they have a 27% strikeout rate versus Reides Ohtani. The sample I have here is in the four starts since his velocity declined. So it's a four start sample, basically looking at him in his, I would say his lowest state so far this year, but he's been good still, 3.37 skill interactive ER rate, 31% strikeout rate. The walk rate has come down, which is a good thing. It's at 9% and he's not letting up that many fly balls. You add all that together. I think that Ohtani is going to be the top option for me by a decent little margin. I think that we can feel pretty good about him. The one lingering downside is a pitch count. He did go 93, three starts ago, but he's kind of up and down. So I think that does put a lid on his ceiling, but given the alternatives for today, there are too many great ones. So I do think that we should feel good about Ohtani in this spot. First question comes from DJ over on Facebook. Hello, DJ, is Dylan Cease safe for tonight? Absolutely not. He's facing the Astros, Astros really good team, 120 WRC plus 19% strikeout rate. Cease, this is over his past seven starts with more forcing fastballs, 28% strikeout rate. He's been good. However, he is one of those guys who had his spin rate go down last time. Now let me show you how we find that here. Go to Dylan Cease over on Baseball Savant. We are going to click on the game logs here. If I can get it to low, there we go. Click on the game logs. We're going to go to 612, which was his most recent start. And we're going to click on the game up here, the White Sox and the Tigers. And when you click on player breakdown, it's going to show you spin rates, everything, pitch usage for each pitcher, and it'll show you what they did there. So we go to spin rate. You see that in that game that gets destroyed, Cease's spin rate on his forcing fastball went down 129 revolutions per minute. That's really, really scary. And he was still good in that game. He was effective in that game, but it came against the Tigers and the Tigers are a very different offense than Houston. So no, I don't think Dylan Cease is safe tonight. I don't think he has a lot of upside tonight either. So I would avoid him at all costs effectively for today. DJ also asked about Kyle Hendricks. Hendricks is facing the Mets. They are an okay offense league average, but Hendricks is not a big strikeout guy, 18% strikeout rate. He hasn't been as good with the bat of ball suppression this year as he was previously. His velocity has been up. So the numbers I have here are since his velocity increased, but still in that time, 18% strikeout rate, I think that if you're looking for safety, Hendricks could have that, but I don't think he has upside. And that's what we care more about for DFS. So Hendricks is not a guy who is on my radar for today. If you're looking for lower salary guys, I would say Joe Musgrove and Charlie Morton are the two who stand out for me. Aaron is asking, does Otani provide any upside for today? I think he does. I talked before about the pitch count being an issue and it is, but if we look here at his game logs and we see here 33, 52, 28. 52 is actually a pretty good number. And I think he did that on 76 pitches. So he can have upside in the right matchups. And I think the Tigers are the right matchup again due to the high strikeout rate. So to me, if we're looking for the pitcher with the best ceiling on the slate, I think that it's probably Brandon Woodruff just because he's been the best pitcher I would say for this year. He goes super deep into games, but the odds he reaches his ceiling are lower, which is why I would go with Otani over Woodruff. Just I think that Woodruff, given his salary 10A, given the fact that he's at Coorsfield, it's enough where I'd rather go with Otani over Woodruff despite the fact that Woodruff's pure, pure ceiling is higher than Otani's. Let's talk to Kyle over on YouTube. Any thoughts on Rich Hill against Seattle? Rich Hill has been affected this year and Seattle is bad versus lefties, but his pitch count's been really weird. I have his past five starts here. It's 90, 99, and then 56, 59, and 70. His velocity has been down a lot in that three-start sample. So I'm worried about that because if it's a pitch count thing where I think maybe it'll rebound the next time out, it's fine. If I see the velocity go down but he's still been effective, that's fine too. But when you combine the two together, it's possible his pitch count has gone down because the effectiveness has gone down and that's where I start to really worry. So let's check out Rich Hill here just to see what the matchups have been in those starts. He faced Baltimore last time out and again as we'll talk about tomorrow, I guess. Baltimore are pretty good against lefties. It's not a Marco's shame to struggle against them. He had Texas and New York, two, three, and five strikeouts. I'm okay avoiding him for today when you combine the pitch count with a decreased velocity for Rich Hill. Mateo, how do you like Tampa Bay lefty bats and Rich Hill pitching? Talk about Hill before, so good timing on that Mateo with that question there. Tampa Bay is facing Justin Dunn. I think that they will grade out very well. I had the raise ranked fourth for me for today from a stacking perspective. Dunn really struggled in his return from the injured list. He had a five earned runs there. His worst outing so far. His spin rate was down, whether that be because of injury or because of sticky stuff, I don't know. But either way, it was down for whatever reason it was down. So I think we should assume that we'll continue. The raise are also a very good offense. 115, WRC plus, 181 ISO. They're a good team versus righties. So to me, they rank fourth in terms of stacking and it's not because I don't like them. I mean, fourth is still high. The reason that they're fourth is because I like the other stacks a lot. Let's talk about the other stacks. We have a question from Diffuse on YouTube about the Blue Jays. So he wants me to rank the Blue Jays. The Blue Jays are my favorite stack for today. Let's see if their lineup is out yet. It was not last time I refreshed and it's still not out. That's okay though. We'll go over here and sort by plate appearances versus righties and see who is cooking this year versus righties. Obviously, if you can get to Vlad, do it, just do it because he's tremendous. I have no pushback here. I have no downsides. I have no criticism. He's the best. No criticism here at all. Then looking after that, I think that Semi-N would be worthwhile at a, what's the salary for Semi-N? Let's call it the Blue Jays over here. And okay. So Semi-N is 38. Bichette is 42. Bichette's been hitting for a good amount of power recently. Overall, Semi-N has a higher fly ball rate, the better ISO. So if I'm picking between the two, I will go with Semi-N over Bichette. So to me, the rankings at the top end are Vlad one by a mile, Semi-N two, and then Bichette three. If we're looking at the non-elite options, like the non-super high salary options, random Gritchick is a good option. 39% fly ball rate versus righties, 184 ISO. Definitely can get behind that. Gritchick is $2,700, I believe. Yeah, $2,700, that works out well. If we're considering salary, if Rowdy Tiles is in there, I think that he's someone you'd want to include. It's just a 133 ISO for Tiles, but decent hard hit rates, decent fly ball rate, not a big strikeout guy, he's $2,300. So if we go here with Gritchick and Tiles and put those guys in first, that should give us a lot of flexibility. Let's go over here and plug in Otani and see how much damage we can do with the rest of our lineup. Okay, so let's put Vlad at third base. That brings us to 29, 20. Probably can't get to Semi-N there, but we can at least give it a shot. 2,700 is gonna put us in a bind, but I think it's at least worth trying. If you can't get to Semi-N, I would say that you can go to Teoscar Hernandez as well. He could work. Let's check out Lourdes-Gurriel versus righties, 103 ISO. No, okay, so no Lourdes-Gurriel, preferably, but I do think that Teoscar works at $3,300, but I think these are kind of the core three guys for me when stacking the blue jays. Assuming I go Otani, if I'm going with Joe Musgrove, a pitcher, I've got a lot more flexibility for that one there. Let's talk to Jonathan over on Facebook. Should I stack the Padres against the Reds? Okay, the Padres are facing, I believe it's Wade Miley. Yeah, facing Wade Miley, Miley really good at suppressing hard contact in the, let's see here, this was, oh, he had a big spin rate decrease last time out, but in his past six starts with more forcing fast balls. He's allowed a 29% hard hit rate, 20% fly ball rate. So good numbers there from a bad at ball suppression perspective. And the Padres, a lot worse versus lefties than they are versus righties. Just an 82 WRC plus, superb lack of power. So if this were straight up, I would not be looking to stack the Padres. Let's dig into what Miley did in that one start though, with the decreased spin rate, because if he was still effective, then that's fine. And I won't worry too much about it. Seven innings, two earn runs, three strikeouts. He's not a big swinging strike rate guy, but did get 11% there. So no Padres for me because Wade Miley does such a good job of suppressing hard contact. Let's talk to DJs, Detroit or Colorado, a better stack for tonight. Detroit's facing Otani, so don't stack them. Colorado is facing Woodruff. I wouldn't want to stack them either. Colorado is a better stack because they're a Coors field, but I don't want to stack either. I think they're both facing like the two best pitchers in the slate. So I would not be going there for either of them. Let's go to Alvin. Do you like Strowman for tonight? I think that he's fine, I guess, because he's a good pitcher. The question I have with Strowman as always will be upside. The Cubs do strike out 25% strike array versus righties and Strowman, he's not as much of a strike out drain as he used to be, it's above 20%, but he's also not a major contributor there and he's also not super low salary, I believe he's 99, yeah, $9900. To me, he's too close to Otani and actually if I were ranking things straight up, I'd rank Joe Musgrove ahead of him without considering salary and Musgrove is $1400 cheaper, I believe, yeah. $1400 cheaper, so I would go, I don't think I'll get to Strowman for tonight. Good pitcher, which means he could have a good game, but I think that we can get better strike out upside and a better ceiling overall from other options. DeFuse, is Musgrove still the number two pitcher? Yes, he is for me. I know it's been weird with him recently, like he had that game against, I think it was Colorado where he had, no, it was Milwaukee, where he had a no-hitter in the fifth inning and then didn't finish off the inning because he walked, he hit a dude, walks some guys, it was rough. So the game logs for Musgrove don't look great. You've got that three-run game against the Mets and then face the Mets again, but what you see here is the strikeouts. You get 11 strikeouts against Colorado, 10 against the Mets, seven against the Mets. Overall for Musgrove, this is over his, ever since he cut down on his cutter usage, he has a 32% strikeout rates, 2.92 skill interactive ERA. He's basically got the same plate discipline numbers as Woodruff, but he's not at Coorsfield. Now, Musgrove is not perfect because he does let up some impactful contact and the Reds are a powerful team, but I'd rather have that in San Diego than in Cincinnati. So to me, I think Musgrove makes a lot of sense. And I think that he will be number two for me. I do worry about length because he can occasionally get yanked kind of early, but to me, when you consider all things on this slate, I do think that he deserves to be number two, especially the salary discount at $8,500. Let's lock two Red Balls over on Twitter, least likely stack that could go off. Okay, this is fun. I would say least likely stack. So we're looking for a bad team, facing a good pitcher. I mean, the Tigers honestly, I think that I know that Otani has had some shaky outings before. Maybe there's something like that that could allow them to, you know, not go super far, but maybe it would be the Tigers, I guess. Potentially that'd be the answer there. Jenna, who do you think is the best low rostered secondary stack? Okay, good question. So we talk about this a lot for single entry, trying to identify a low rostered stack, kind of like that second tier stack, and to identify which stacks that you just being second tier, you can usually look at implied totals because those will tell you, you know, if people are sorting by that and trying to decide which teams they want to stack, these are the teams that may go overlooked. So if you look at teams with more middling implied totals, who I would be okay with stacking, then we are looking at Tampa Bay. I think that Tampa Bay would probably grade out pretty well there and Los Angeles. I think both these teams, Jenna, are gonna be ones that I like a lot. Los Angeles facing Manning, Manning coming up from AAA. He really struggled in AAA. So kind of confuses why he's coming up. Stacking Los Angeles does mean you can't use Otani because Otani is just a pitcher for today and Fangel is not a hitter. That's annoying for sure because we'd love to use Otani because he's the best hitter they've got right now. But you've got Jared Walsh, you've got Justin Upton, Max Stasi, I think is in play despite it being a righty. So I would say the Angels grade out well there and then the Rays. We talked about before facing Justin Dunne. I think that these two teams are going to be the two you wanna focus on. If you're looking for like low rostered secondary stacks and Alvin, if you're looking for a single entry stack, I would say both the Angels and the Rays grade out really well from that perspective we're trying to identify stacks that may go overlooked by the public as a whole. Good question, Jenna. Let's talk to Jason, Braves stack. I think they're a good stack. I think that they're gonna be a bit overrated based on the implied total here. It's 5.41, I am lower on them than that. They're facing John Gantt and Gantt got knocked around his past two starts. So I understand why the implied total is high. And again, like really bad play discipline numbers but still does a decent job of contact suppression that matters. So to me, I think that they are one of my favorite stacks. They're definitely in the top five but I'm okay being a bit lower on them than consensus as a result of the ability John Gantt has to sometimes wiggle his way out of impossible situations. He's kind of like a magician and not in the good way for us for stacking. So I would say the Braves are a team I will stack for today. And the lineup is out and I think the lineup looks pretty good honestly from a stacking perspective because William Contreras is in there and Contreras is a low salary, weirdly good against writing so far this year. So I think the Contreras works for a value play. Got Abraham Amante, batting cleanup again. I'm okay with that. Riley and Swanson work well. So if you want like a lower salary in stack that can help you get to Ohtani, I think the Braves do work pretty well but I would say most of those guys probably gonna carry popularity because of the super high implied total that the Braves have for today. So I'm on board with the Braves but I'm likely to be lower on them than Consensus because of Gantz's batted ball suppression. Let's talk to DJ over on Facebook. Should I start Marquez against Milwaukee? For a season long, I think you can. If that's what you're asking I think that that definitely works. For daily fantasy, I think it's like a consideration and I think when I was talking this morning I'm pretty sure I ranked Marquez number five for tonight. So that's in play, that's a viable option. He's $9,000, Marquez, the numbers I have here are since he started using more sliders and fewer curve balls. I guess it's been relatively even since in that time but 3.93 skill interactive ERA, 25% strike-out rate, good batted ball numbers. So I wouldn't say Marquez is off the map for DFS and I would consider him as my number five pitcher but I wanna make sure I get enough Ohtani first, enough Musgrove, enough Charlie Morton and also enough Woodruff because I'd prefer Woodruff in this same game as well but Marquez, I would say DJ, a consideration. Someone I'd be okay looking into for today. Let's talk to DJ, it says the Cubs lineup is out. This is what Strowman is facing for today. Cubs, yeah, I think that's the same. That's basically what you would expect from them. So no alterations to the way I'm viewing Strowman based on that lineup. I think that they're still Strowman just not quite enough upside for me to get super jazzed about using him for today. Mentioned in passing, Charlie Morton, let's talk about him a bit more in depth here and why I'm in on him. At home facing the Cardinals. I think that we are in a situation where it's a good pitcher, like he's got good, bad at ball numbers, decent walk rate. He's at home, 3.37 skill interactive ERA. Facing an offense, I don't fear that much with an 87 WRC plus. So I think in a situation where he just got, he checks enough boxes to be in play for DFS and despite that Morton is down to $8,200. I think that's very forgiving. So if you're looking for a value play and we talked to Rich Hill before, Rich Hill is a better matchup because the Mariners will strike out against lefties. But I think Morton is a better overall situation. We saw here a 55 point game, he's capable of upside. So I think that Charlie Morton to me, if you're not going Musgrove would be the guy I would turn to first for a value play. Let's put Musgrove in here and see what this Blue Jay stack looks like if we go Musgrove. If we go Musgrove, 34-20 left. So I'm actually going to take Thales out of there. I'm going to go to Semian at shortstop to fill that. And I'm probably going to put Tailscar in there in the outfield at $3,300. And we'll do that. And then we have 30-75 left. That's pretty easy to get to. And I think that honestly, like, I talked about the Yankees stack for today and the Yankees would probably mesh pretty well with that. So I think you can game stack this game very easily. I'm not looking to like game stack it because that's not what we're doing here overall, but I do think that that's in play for today. You could also go, if you want to go with Thales, then it make it easier to get Paul Stanton and a judge in there within this Musgrove lineup. So if you want to go all out for Vlad, Stanton, Judge, et cetera, et cetera, I think that Musgrove is a good way to do so. And again, I'm a very okay with Musgrove. I prefer Ohtani over him despite the salary discount, but I do think that Musgrove very deserving of consideration for today. I wanna see if there are any other stacks that I like this morning, but I've not talked up yet. Talk briefly about the Angels. Do like them, that's my number three stack. Let's talk about the Yankees here. Facing TJ Zoik, Zoik coming in from AAA. He struggled down in AAA. He struggled in the big leagues. The numbers I have here are across his career in the majors, 5.4 rates, skill interactive, VRA, 14% strikeout rate, a lot of hard contact, not a ton of fly balls, and the Yankees offensively not grading out as well versus righties as the Blue Jays are. That's why I had the Blue Jays as my number one stack and the Yankees number two, but there's still plenty here to feel good about the Yankees. So the Yankees to me, number two stack for today. Let's talk to Jerry. How do you feel about Atlanta? Feel pretty good. I think that they're a high quality stack for today. Again, not my favorite stack. They wind up being fifth for me. So for ranking the stacks, it is Blue Jays one Yankees two, Angels three, Ray is four, Braves five. You could easily put the Braves higher though. The Braves are in that top tier to me. I just wound up grading them lower as a result of Gant's ability to keep the ball on the ground, get his way out of weird situations. It's so frustrating to stack against him. Maybe it's just like a bias because it's burned me so many times, but I think that that's why I'm lower on the Braves. There's still my number five stack. I think they're a very good stack, but I'm guessing based on reading the tea leaves for today, I'll probably wind up being lower on them than Consensus because I think that they will be probably the most popular stack for today. I think that might wind up being the case. So I might wind up being lower, but again, they've got so many good value options here. Let's tinker around with this here. Let's go Otani. And then I'm gonna go with Almonte first. Let's pull up the Braves. Not sure if the lineup was in last time I refreshed. Indeed it was. Okay. So let's go with Almonte. We're gonna go Austin Riley. I'm gonna go Contreras because I think that he'll be a fun... I think if you wanna stack the Braves while being different Contreras is actually a pretty fun way to do. So I wouldn't expect him to be on all that many rosters. And then I'm gonna try to get Acunia, which I think I can here at $4,500. Yeah, that works. So 20, 50 left. You're definitely scrambling a bit to try to get there, but I think that that's a worthwhile option for me. So I would say this is my... If I'm trying to be different while stacking the Braves I would say getting Contreras in there is a good way to do so. Let's pull up his numbers here versus Riley's quick to show you why I am intrigued by William Contreras and sort by plate appearances. Okay, William Contreras against Riley's 91 plate appearances, 198 ISO, high enough fly ball rates. He does strike out a bit, but I think overall this is a fun profile. So I think that he's a solid option. Jonathan, that's about Acunia. Definitely on board with Acunia as well. And I would rank him above Freddie Freeman for today. That's my general philosophy is to rank Acunia above Freeman if I have to choose between the two. Ideally you get both, but realistically probably pickin and I tend to pick Acunia over Freeman personally. Let's go back to Twitter and talk to Red Balls under on 10 and a half from Milwaukee against Colorado. I am undecided on this. I think that like if you look at this from a starting pitching perspective, it tells you yes. But it is course field still, 90 degree weather. I think that the one thing in favor of an under is that both these offenses are really bad. 68 WRC plus of the Rockies versus Riley's, 83 for the Brewers. So I would say Red Balls, if I were to bet the total for this game, I would go with the under. However, there are factors keeping me away from it. So to me, it's a no play personally and I personally would not have enough conviction to go with the under. But if you do wanna bet the total for that game, I think the under is a play there. But again, for me, it's a no play because I don't have enough conviction in the situation here, bull pens at times. Haters had some spin rate decreases for the Brewers. So to me, I would say a no play, but if you're going with it, I would say go towards the under. That is all the time that we have here for today on the FanDuel Fantasy Q&A. Once again, do wanna mention we are not here tomorrow, Dr. Disrespect. Taking over the FanDuel YouTube channel, playing some FIFA. So swing by tomorrow has some fun with Dr. Disrespect. If you have questions for me tomorrow, we'll answer them on the solo shop, but also on my Twitter feed at Jim Sonnis. More than happy to answer questions there if you have them as the day goes along. Big thank you to Calvin Theobald, our video producer for running the video side of things here today. Thank you, Cal, as always. Make sure you are subscribed on your platform of choice, whether it be YouTube, Twitch, Facebook or Twitter will take your questions live on air every weekday, 4 p.m., same place, same time, getting us out for that day's slate of MLB DFS. I hope you all have a fantastic night. Have a great weekend. We'll talk to you once again next week. This has been the FanDuel Fantasy Q&A.


What's up guys, welcome to today's video. So guess what? Today we're gonna be doing a celebrity haircut. We're gonna do the Harry Styles haircut. I'm really excited to share this with you. I wanna break it down. I'm not only gonna show you guys how to do the cut, I'm gonna show you guys my favorite tool that I like to do it with. And then also I'm gonna show you guys my favorite products to style it with at the very end. So I think all of you guys can get something out of this haircut. Before we get into this cut, this look, I wanna share with you guys something that's coming up at Freestyle on Education that I'm very excited about. January 2020, we're launching a brand new stylistlocator.com website. This is gonna be those of you guys that don't do hair that watches channel and are looking for a talented hairstylist. We're gonna have a website where stylists can go on there, train, watch our videos, learn, and then also have a profile that you guys as customers can go on there and search their profiles, send them messages, and it's really just gonna be a great connection between you as a client or you as a hairdresser and getting new clients. That's the goal. That's gonna be coming out in 2020, so I'm really excited about it. If you wanna get more information on that website, all you have to do is go to stylistlocator.com and then just fill out the little email form and we'll keep you updated. As soon as the site launches, you'll get an email and you can go on there, sign up. As a customer, you can also create a profile and it's just gonna be a really, really cool connection between the hairstylist and the customer. And that's what it's all about. Probably the number one question that I get sent to my direct messages or to my private messages, my email, whatever it is, is people asking either where I cut hair or if I know someone that is good at cutting hair. So what I wanted to do is build a website that builds that connection. So people that watch these videos or other videos that other companies put into the portal, they can train through those videos and then a customer can have that connection. So if they like this hairstyle's haircut, for instance, you'll know that the hairdressers that are on that thing have access to that video, can watch it and you could send them a message and talk about it and then book an appointment with that stylist. So I'm really, really excited for January, just coming up only a few weeks away. The website should be at least in its first version able for you guys to start building your profiles and getting started, but I'm really excited about it. So go check out stylistlocator.com whether you're a stylist or a customer, fill out the form so you know when we launch and you guys can start connecting together. All right guys, so onto the Harry Styles haircut for 2019 fall. So basically what I did was I went to Instagram, I go to the search, I click, I type in Harry Styles and this is something that if a customer were to come in and they were asking for the Harry Styles haircut, going to Instagram and not to Google is sometimes the best thing to do because if they're looking for the current style, I don't know if Google is showing me the right one, the most current one, if it's coming from a magazine article and you don't look at the date. So just knowing that you can go through there and you can also look at all of the more natural looks of it, right? So I think the challenge that we have as hairdressers is clients bring in a picture, it's on the cover of Glamour magazine and they say they want that hair and that hair isn't realistic, it's Photoshop, it's edited, they spent five hours getting it right and then they took the picture, right? So going on to that celebrity, even if they show you a picture from Glamour magazine, go on to that celebrity's Instagram and start looking at some real photos of what their hair really looks like and see if that's actually what the customer wants that's sitting in your chair. So I go through here, I picked a couple of pictures. This is the one that I based what the haircut's gonna look like on. So I looked at where he parts his hair, the texture that's in the haircut, the wave that's in there, the style look of it, the product that I thought was used and then that's how I create the end result, the mimic style that we're gonna do today on our doll head, our mannequin, just to show you guys educationally how I would do it. So I hope you guys are as excited to watch this video as I am to make it. Thank you guys so much for being a part of the channel. Make sure you subscribe if you haven't done that already and let's get started, here we go. All right guys, so I'm super excited to break down this haircut for you. We're gonna start off by going through this sectioning. Sectioning is pretty simple, it's parietal ridge following the curve of the head, back to mid crown, cross mid crown with a slight curve to that line as well and then this is where it's gonna change up. Normally I would probably go parietal ridge over, keep the sectioning symmetrical but because it's a side parting, I'm gonna follow that part all the way down. So the left hand side has a part, the right hand side is right on parietal ridge. So it sits that rectangle shape just a little bit off balance on the haircut but what that's gonna do is in turn in the very end is gonna give us a balanced feel to the haircut. So I'll go more into that later on. So now we're gonna use the carving comb for this haircut. It's a razor with a 100% cutting side and a 50% cutting side. I'll get more into that later as well. The sectioning is pretty simple. We're working the round of the head following back. I'm working on the heavy side first. So what I wanna do is I wanna move a little extra weight from that top part of this section because I'm trying to take some of that weight out of the haircut and I'm working the razor with a medium stroke back and forth and the reason I'm doing that is because that's gonna give us the softest line. The thing about this haircut that I like so much is the texture that is put into it. So as I go through, you get more texture the more you move that razor. Now my sectioning is following or my partings are following the round of the head. So just notice how I kinda dip around. I'm not building any length towards the bottom. Everything is being cut at about the same length at this point. I'm just allowing the head shape to kinda create the weight distribution in the haircut, the density. So towards that top part, where the parting is on the parietal ridge, you're gonna see that I get a little bit of a weight line and that's because basically the elevation, not the length that I'm cutting the hair but the elevation that I'm holding it. So as I go through, you just wanna be aware that towards that parietal ridge, if you're too low with your elevation, you're gonna get too much weight and then when that top part falls over it, it's gonna be very, very bulky. So just be aware of that as you go through. Now in this cut, I just go back to that back corner and then I pause and I go to the opposite side. Now we're gonna work the part side. I don't go all the way through the back. I'm gonna finish the back at the very end. So same thing here. Now I'm gonna go a little bit longer up near that part line. So now we're gonna get even a heavier weight line because I want this haircut to sit balanced and if you've got a heavy side and you've got a weak side, you wanna go a little bit longer on the weak side and that's gonna give you balance within the density of the haircut. So keep working diagonal back throughout the haircut and I'm gonna do that same thing that I did on the opposite side and just work my way through to that back corner. So if you guys are paying close attention, which you should be, you'll notice that on the left-hand side, I'm combing the hair differently than I did on the right-hand side. Now I'm not actually combing it differently. Just my technique to do it is different but the way I'm pushing the hair is the exact same. So I'm pushing the hair towards the front of the head. I'm pushing the hair towards the guideline. I never wanna take the guideline and pull it back to the new hair because that's gonna make me cut the new hair shorter, right? So I've talked about that a lot. If you guys are long-time subscribers, you definitely have heard me say that. If you're just new to the channel, it might be your first time but keep that thought in your mind as you go through and do a haircut because you always wanna push the new hair towards the guideline so you can use that guideline for what it is, what its purpose is. The other thing about the carving comb that I love so much is that it is a comb. It's two different razors. So not only can you use the two different razors and you have a comb, now it frees up your hand so that you could have a pair of scissors in your hand as well. That's something that I don't personally do that often. I have done it but I've seen people do it and they like it for that reason and that's the reason that the carving comb was kind of invented. So you could have every tool in your hand at the same time. For me, I have my favorite combs and I like to use them that way. But when I'm using the carving comb, I like the convenience of that. This is also the 50% carve side. You'll notice I just went in there and I combed through the hair with the 50% carve and that takes out 50% of the hair, adds some texture, takes out some weight. It's really awesome. As I move through the back here, you'll see diagonal forward partings and just gliding that razor through. The quality of the razor blade that's in these carving combs is my favorite part. It allows you to just slide the blade over the hair. It's a really strong blade unlike a lot of other razors. So for $39.95 or whatever it is on freeslineeducation.com, it's really a steal in the fact that it's a good quality tool that you can use over and over again. So notice my elevation as I move up the head. It stays nice and low. And then I'm gonna go in 50% carve side right on the corner edge of the nape and just carve through a little bit of 100%. Just adding some of those details. And then I'm gonna work this same thing, diagonal forward partings up the head shape on the right hand side. Now notice as I go up the head, right now I'm at about 90 degrees straight out from the head, but then as I work up the head, I'm gonna keep pulling out towards my body and the head's gonna start to move away from me. So the curve of the head moves away. That's gonna help me build up some weight and kind of build a shape that mimics what the head shape is, gives it a real nice natural feel.  So again, I'll go through with that 50% carve and just kind of work the nape and add that texture. Now we're gonna work the top. The top is so simple. When you're using a razor, the heavier the stroke, notice how big the stroke is now that I'm going through with. The heavier the stroke, the more layers you create, the more weight you take out and the more texture you create. So you don't always have to elevate the hair completely. And now I'm gonna show you guys a trick that I'm gonna do. So we'll go through this 50% carve. So I just break the section in half, 50% carve, take out some weight. And now I'm gonna show you guys a little point cutting technique that we do with the razor.  So really, really fun technique to do with this. It's unique, throws hair all over the place and it's just a pretty cool way to use the razor. So now we'll finish that up. I'll work all the way around the head, just kind of following the curve of the head. This isn't so much a structure thing, it's more of a texture thing. So I like to go through and just add that texture. And now we're gonna finish the cut with Maverick. This is the original palmade. It's got a really, really nice hold. If you like that kind of sleek, wet kind of look to your hair, I put it in the 80% dry damp hair and work it through. And then I'll grab a little bit more and I'll work that through. I try not to do too much on my hand at once. I think that's a tip that a lot of people could take with them is that you don't have to put all the product you're gonna use on your hand right away, work a little bit through, add a little bit more to your hand, comb it through, add a little bit more to your hand. That way, you're not getting too much product in one part of the head. So I brush it through, I work through the style and you can see how it's coming together. I love this style, I love the look of it. Hope you guys like it too. Let me know in the comments below if you have any questions, see that texture popping through, just love it. Make sure you hit that like button, subscribe to the channel. Thank you so much for watching. I'll see you on the next video.