Hello everyone! How are you today? This is Marc. I'm doing just great. Thanks for asking. Actually, I'm Marc. I come from Canada, but I teach English to adults in Rome. I have a small dog called Dallas. We sometimes go jogging in a park near where I live. We love spending time outdoors in the summertime. In this lesson, I'm going to talk about the present simple. So stay tuned. Right, I chose to talk about the present simple or the simple present. It's the same. Why? Because it's very, very important in English and you need to know it. So if you look at the timeline that I drew here, we have the past, the future, and the vertical nine is now. We can find the present simple or the simple present everywhere. We need an auxiliary. What kind of an auxiliary in this case? Do or does? Yes, the auxiliary is an indicator of what tense we're speaking of. So if you look at the first example or the first type of sentence is a negative and in the negative we need the auxiliary. So we have the subject first, then the auxiliary plus not, then the base of the verb, then the object, and maybe the time expression. I chose to start with the verb to be and you know that the verb to be acts by itself. So it doesn't need an auxiliary. So the example is I'm not John. Mark, you know that. So I'm not John. I am not John. Now an example without the verb to be would be he doesn't speak Hungarian. So you can see does is the auxiliary plus not, doesn't, does not, we prefer to use the contractive form, then the base of the verb which is speak and then the object Hungarian. Now for a question, WH question word. If you haven't seen my lesson on making questions you can click here. So as I said WH question word sometimes, then the auxiliary, do or does, then the subject, then the base of the verb, then the object sometimes, and then the time expression sometimes. I gave you two examples also showing the verb to be. So where do you live for example? Where do you live? You can see where is the WH question word auxiliary do because it's not the third person singular. You would be do you do. So do you and then live the base of the verb. Or if you want to use the verb to be who is he. So he would be the verb to be doesn't need an auxiliary because it acts as itself as an auxiliary. Who is he? Now if we look at the most important sentence here because we have the third person singular which changes let's start first with the easiest one. So the subject, then the base of the verb, then the object, and then the time expression sometimes. This referring to I, you, we and they only. So the example we like music. If we have an example with a verb to be they are friendly. They are friendly so that's it. Now if you look at the third person singular we have the subject, then the verb, the base of the verb, then we add S or ES depending on the verb you're using. Then the object, then the time expression sometimes and I noted here is for the third person singular he, she or it. So the example he works as he works at a bank. Or the other example she studies with ES, she studies math. I'm going to erase this and I'm going to show you when to use this tense. So when do we use the present simple or the simple present? First general present including the present moment. For example I teach English to adults in Rome. Then the second situation when talking about feelings or thoughts at the present moment. So we love spending time outdoors in the summertime. Here the verb of feeling is love. Now if you want to watch a lesson of verbs of feelings such as love, like, enjoy, hate, you can click here. Remember that we need the ing love spending. Now the third situation where we use the present simple or the simple present is when talking about general truths. For example the sun rises in the east. This is always true and is a general truth, right? Now the fourth, when talking about habitual or regular actions. We sometimes go jogging in the park. And what do I mean by habitual or regular actions? Well you can see sometimes is an adverb of frequency and there is a lesson on this you can click here if you want to watch it. That tells you that is a regular or habitual action. We sometimes go jogging in the park. Now the fifth situation when discussing about what's happening in a book, a film, etc. This is used when you want to make the story vivid. So for example at the end of the book he looks up, he looks up and smiles at her to make the story vivid. Now the sixth situation is when commentators are describing an event going on they use the present simple. So for example in a football match or a soccer match. So Totty takes the ball. He passes to Perotti and shoots. Now let's recap. In this video we talked about the present simple or the simple present. We use it with general truths. Don't forget to use the auxiliary do or does. Does is for the third person singular. I show you six situations where you can use the present simple. I recommend watching the lesson again. That's it for today you people. Thank you very much for all your comments and your suggestions for new lessons. I have a question for you. Do you study English because you love it or do you study English because you need it? If you have subscribed to my channel please do so. If you want to share the lesson I would really appreciate it and I see you next week with a new lesson. Have a great day. Take care. Bye bye.


I'm gonna go for a safety words What we'll continue Appreciate it man appreciate that no no appreciate that bro What's up, man? How you doing man? We'll give her a safety words Hey So just turn the mic on Okay Hello, hey guys How we doing good to see everybody Did we really just clear this place out? This is just us right y'all give it up for Whitley and Carlin They pretty ain't it? Now guys, I just want to say thank you from the bottom of my heart You guys know the the effort and time and energy I put into just trying to help you guys increase volume Doesn't matter what Area you're in brokerage. You're with none of that stuff matters to me Right everything is so far down on the whoa Everything's so far down on the on the ladder for me in terms of what I'm trying to accomplish Except for one thing increasing as many agents income as I possibly can Everything else is so far down here. Everybody's like oh, what about this? What about that? It's like that stuff doesn't even matter Right. I'm up here thinking about this what I could do to Maximize the entire industry But I want you guys to realize I'm gonna always stand up To increase volume of as many agents in the industry as I can I don't care if somebody says You shouldn't be coaching for free Why are you coaching for free? That's a ridiculous question in my mind, right for somebody to even challenge that But for somebody to say I'm here to increase I'm here to because I care about the industry, but they're trying to tear me down Like I'm a fraud Right somebody who has made a major impact on the industry That tells me you don't really care about the industry honestly But that's neither here nor there I figured a lot of you guys might have watched that debate and I urge you to that just so that you can see The fact that I'm gonna stand firm on my core principles And the foundation that I put in place in terms of just caring about you guys Right So I want to answer some questions in a minute. Maybe take a couple questions, but Honestly, I Wanted to kind of talk about this for just a second the fact that we are in a different market than we were 90 days ago, right? This is super exciting This should be super exciting to you that we're in this different market because How many people here felt like the market last year was really tough nobody Like like like how hard was it to go out there and get a listing? Right, and then if you had a buyer, how hard was it to compete against seven other buyers to win the to win the the deal? That was a really hard market I was telling everybody last year if you can make it through that market you can make it through any market That's as hard as it gets Right now it's getting easier and easier and easier But you got the people who were complaining about no inventory last year. They're slowly going to start continuing to Make the excuse that there's too much inventory right Okay You guys know that the reason right now why inventory is rising, right? It's because we're in a seller denial stage of the market, right? And this seller denial stage is Slowly deteriorating as we have more and more data behind Things sitting on the market not selling at certain prices that our next seller wants. Okay, so understand this Demand is still extremely high Right, because if you look at historically five months of inventory is a balanced market That that's balance between buyers and sellers Okay, so we're We're nowhere near close to five months worth of inventory and if you take out the listings that are overpriced due to the The new market climate that we're in we're really below if you look at viable listings We're way way way under now. We're even close. It's still a sellers market You guys understand this and it's gonna because it's gonna stay a sellers market for a while Before inventory reaches this five months of inventory level that is going to take to balance the market Then inventory has to go higher to become a buyer's market, which is going to happen But it's gonna take a while This is the sweet spot right now where you can go out Sellers are more apt to list their properties right now than they were last year and Demand is still extremely high Do you guys understand how how what kind of opportunity this is right the second? And if you're not if you're not changing your your if you don't realize that and you're not like going Harder right now, then you have been then you're missing the boat Because this isn't gonna last either and then we're gonna be in the next market the part of the market cycle And then the next part in the next part You guys got to be going all in right this second now Let's talk about recessions for a minute because that that's the moment that people that that the future top top top producers That's where they build their entire business That's where I built my business right you guys know my story in 2008. I got back in the business That's when the market crashed to start market crash. That's when I got back in I was out from 05 to 8 When I got back in There were foreclosures everywhere and I went all that's when I went all in on people you guys know know how blessed I am to have been born in 1981 Because the fact I was born in 1981 put me becoming an agent in 2002 that that that made me go through the the The last peak and then crash and lose everything and it took all that to make me realize that it's relationships over transactions And then when I got back in at the bottom of the market, I was able to take that philosophy that I learned To apply to that down market and just gobble up market share That that moment took me to number one in in Alabama right by 2014 The the fact that I was born in 81 and how the whole thing worked out You guys got to understand that I kind of had an advantage because I was born in 1981 to put me through the market during that time to learn Those lessons to take advantage of the down market now. What happens? This is what happens The future top producers take a recession every period They go all in with what? Creating more relationships with people in the market than anyone else. That's market share And so if you raise your market share from say point zero zero one to say one percent in In the in the retracted market Okay, as the market re-expands, which it will in a massive massive way that 1% Doubles quadruples 5x is 10x is still 1% of the overall market But it's a lot bigger because the market's larger.  I'm going to be doing so much content Through this recessionary period about what we need to be doing as an industry in your individual businesses To take you to the next level because when we come out of this thing, it's going to be amazing It's going to be amazing for a lot of you that understand what I'm saying but if you sit back doing the same stuff and you say, oh, I'm not going to make calls because You know less transactions this year. It's not going to do us any good. You got to be thinking about five years from now not this year This is a major opportunity for your five-year from now business And let unless you just don't if you're not thinking five years out if you're thinking this year You're thinking less transactions. Why make calls? Great. Let all the other ones let all the other agents think that we know what we're going to be in five years Kind of get a hallelujah Cool. So I'm just I'm excited to to be here. I'm excited about the direction of the market We all knew this was going to come and if you guys look at my videos if you go back to I don't know if you go back to the pandemic Right or for so long I was talking about different things, right? Like closings happening every day regardless of market conditions What happened during the pandemic? 80% of the same amount of closings 80% of the same amount of pending deals During the pandemic and during the 45-day shutdown I do a video We're fixing to see the largest real estate surge We've ever seen it's still on YouTube in April 2020 before the the reopening of the economy What happened the largest real estate surge we've ever seen I'm not saying I'm a fortune teller or a genius or a Profit or anything like that, but I'm saying this stuff after you've been through so many market cycles It's really easy to see what's coming next Right before interest rates went up 2% I mean they're up like 2 and a half to 3% now from where they were But before that before that started to happen. I put out a video that said Prepare for the upcoming market shift or crash or whatever I said I was talking about exactly what was fixing to happen and I'm telling you what's gonna happen right now Your business is gonna blow up if you'll take what I taught teach you in zero-to-diamond and go make five new friends or property owners every day And and collect their information and remarket to them so they never forget who you are. It's real simple stuff Does anybody here? Think the mark the business is super over complicated. Does anybody think this business can be super simple? Right this this is real simple stuff, but people want to come want to make it complicated a Lot of people that make it complicated Want you to pay for their program so they can make it uncomplicated for you, right? This is what I want you to do and Then I'll take some questions I want you to really think about what I say about putting your systems in place Around figuring out what works best for you in terms of prospecting. I don't care that you if you make cold calls or not It could be video. It could be open I don't care what you do do I think sitting in a room and calling property owners is the is the greatest hack in the history of the game. Yeah because every single Legion Avenue that's out there right is all comes back to creating a list of people there was a guy who I'm not going to say his name But he he's part of my group right and and I've coached him and try to get him to make calls And he just can't get in the swing of making calls, right? Well, he came at me and said hey You know, I'm really good at content. I want to do content. I want to build my business on content I'm like great What do you want to do? He said I want to jump out of a helicopter do a video coming up to an open house And I said that's awesome. I think you should do it. How much is that going to cost thousands and thousands thousands dollars? I said cool. I said but and listen, I want you to do that. Okay, I said, but here's the thing. I want you to understand When you do that You know, he wants to make a viral piece of content. I said when you do that here's what's going to happen You're going to make this file piece of content if it goes viral, right? Number one about what is viral you're trying to hit your local market for something to go viral It's got to be like, you know nationwide or worldwide But let's just say that it does hit locally of some sorts. It hits I say what next there's got to be a call to action with that video Whether you're going to run that thing as an ad whether you have some kind of call to action in the in the copy There's got to be a call to action somewhere. That's going to collect your information Right and then and then that's going to create a list and then what are you going to do with that list?  I'm I'm in real estate is anything you could do to help you if that jazzes you up If that's what makes you excited about making the calls Then i'm going to play off that so what I have to do is I have to figure out What jazz is you up about sitting down and making calls because every single lead gen opportunity zilla leads You just collect in a list of people in your market to call Open houses do the sign-in sheet collect the list of people to call Right obsidian realtor.com Every lead gen activity Right if you do if you do a massive giveaway, right if you do a raffle if you do a networking event All this is set up So that you can then follow up with a phone call to see if there's an opportunity to do business with them There's nothing's going to happen. Conversation is the gatekeeper between you and a closing It's the gatekeeper no matter what your lead gen source is it's all going to come back to the gatekeeper before anything else is going to happen And so all i'm saying is I don't need to jump out of a helicopter to get jazzed up about calling somebody that actually Demotivates me because now I spent thousands of dollars. I know I didn't have to spend to get the list of people It could have got for two cents a piece and just call them up to say hi. I'm ricky How are you doing today? What can I do to help you? right So then it all comes back to just communication who you are as a person Can you effectively communicate and show people who you are as a person? right, can you communicate that? because a lot of people who especially newer people or people that are longtime advocates of the traditional prospecting methods When they when they're talking to their prospects They're not sounding like theirself. They sound like somebody that's just trying to do a deal And the prospect smelling a mile away So one thing I want you to take away is is that you got to go all in And you the the amount of conversations was the gatekeeper of all closings the amount of those gatekeepers Situations that you have the more closings you're going to have it's real simple math And so if you can hack the system, this is a hack You don't have to do all this stuff to create a list of people You can just boom get a list of the exact people you want to do business with to call them For less than two cents a piece. Why would you do anything else?  It's how this is the greatest hack in the history of the real estate because Listen, obviously I believe in social media and video, right? That's why we're all here Obviously I believe in that but you use that to go build a brand with real estate agents like I did Do a little something something with the real estate business if you want to But we don't have to go out there and create all this stuff to try to attract people so that we can just sit there and call them I can just call them up and make friends with them right now for nothing This makes sense I don't want to be a dead horse, but come on guys All right, cool. Um, again, I love you guys so much. Thank you guys for coming I'm gonna hang around for a while take pictures and all that stuff But can I get a couple questions? Maybe If you guys have any if not, I'll just Okay You don't you don't make someone do anything Right, you tell them what the facts are and say what do you want to do? Um, I get this all the time. Um Uh, there was a deal happening and it was under contract and You know the buyer basically was going to walk away. It was like a million dollar deal was a hundred thousand dollar swing and And the agent was like, how do I make my my seller take this deal because at 900? It's actually a good deal with what's happening in the market. They need to take this I'm like, yeah, but it's their choice They don't have to take it if they don't want to Right, it's their choice. It's their property. They could do what they want to if you show them the facts The data and say, okay And this is probably People talking about Stuff that's listed trying to get them to reduce the price We're doing it. We're we're getting reductions. We're getting tons of reductions every week, you know on on our listings Because we're going back to the seller saying here's the data. All right Your property's been on the market this long. No showings. What do you want to do? We're way off on the price, right? This interest rate thing is a real thing Here's other listings in the same area same civil division same complex that's been on the market of x amount of days No showings. They're even priced lower. This is our competition. They're priced way lower. They're still not getting any showings What do you want to do? Um, and then you let them make the decision, right? Here's the punchline to the that whole equation Get more listings Go get more listings Right, you can't make this seller do anything that deal is already done That seller either really wants to sell or he doesn't That's out of your hands. That's already played out. The future's already played out on that deal. It's done. You've done your job Now you need to go get 20 more Right, and then you'll sell, you know 13 of them and then seven of them won't reduce their price And they don't really care if it sells or not and that's their choice Right Okay, cool All right. I hope you guys are jazzed up as I am I'm going to stand over here. You guys can come and take pictures and say hello or whatever And uh, yeah, let's keep crushing it guys. Let's just keep working together And uh, all our dreams are going to come true. Thank you


Hello everyone! This is Alice Gao. In this video, I'm going to discuss the greedy best-first search or greedy BFS algorithm. In the previous video, I introduced the lowest cost-first search algorithm. It uses the cost function to determine which state to explore next. Besides the cost function, the heuristic function is another source of information that a search algorithm can use. Greedy BFS makes use of the heuristic function. In fact, it relies on the heuristic function as the only source of information. For Greedy BFS, the frontier is a priority queue ordered by the heuristic value. At every step, the algorithm removes the path with the smallest heuristic value. Intuitively, we're choosing the state that we think is the closest to the goal according to our heuristic function. Let's trace Greedy BFS on a search graph. We will use the same tie-breaking rule as before. Order the path by their last nodes and choose the one that comes first in alphabetical order. Pause the video and trace the algorithm yourself. Then, keep watching for the answer. Here's the final search tree when the algorithm terminates. Please watch a separate video for the tracing process. Greedy BFS did pretty well on this problem because the heuristic values are quite accurate. Let me discuss the properties of Greedy BFS. First, what are its space and time complexities? Unfortunately, both complexities are exponential. Intuitively, the heuristic function does not improve the worst case scenario. In the worst case, the heuristic function may be completely uninformative. For instance, having a heuristic value of zero for every state. Then, Greedy BFS is equivalent to an uninformed search algorithm and may have to search the entire space to find the goal. What about completeness and optimality? Unfortunately, we have some bad news again. Greedy BFS is neither complete nor optimal. Here's the intuition. Greedy BFS relies on the heuristic function. Unfortunately, we have absolutely no guarantee on the quality of the heuristic function. If the heuristic values are extremely inaccurate, they will cause the algorithm to be stuck on paths that do not terminate or return a path that's not optimal. Let me leave these two examples as practice problems for you. First, construct the search graph where Greedy BFS does not terminate on the search graph. Second, construct a search graph where Greedy BFS terminates but does not return the optimal solution. Basically, I am asking you to prove that Greedy BFS is not complete nor optimal. There are many correct examples you can come up with. Let me give you some hints. For the not complete example, construct a graph with two paths. One path ends with a cycle and the other one ends with a goal state. Then, design the heuristic function such that Greedy BFS will go through the cycle forever. For the not optimal example, again, construct the graph with two paths. Both paths start from the same initial state and end at the same goal state. Then, design the heuristic function such that the algorithm will find and return the suboptimal path first. Try to make your examples as simple as possible. In my opinion, if you can come up with the simplest examples, it shows that you have really understood the algorithm. That's everything on the Greedy Best First Search algorithm. Let me summarize. After watching this video, you should be able to do the following. Explain Greedy Best First Search on a high level. Trace Greedy Best First Search on a search graph. Explain the properties of Greedy BFS. Space complexity, time complexity, completeness, and optimality. Thank you very much for watching. I will see you in the next video. Bye for now.


Hello and welcome to the EFF at Home Creators Town Hall on copyright. We held one of these last year and it was so successful. We are having it again where for the first 30 minutes a panel of experts will update you on the state of copyright in 2022 and the second half will be devoted to answering your questions on today's panel. In addition to me, I just realized I didn't introduce myself, I'm Katherine Trennicosta, the Associate Director of Policy and Activism at the Electronic Frontier Foundation. And on our panel we have Betsy Rosenblatt, the legal chair for the Organization for Transformative Works, which runs the Archive of Our Own, the award-winning Archive of Our Own. And we have Kara Gagliano, staff attorney here at EFF. Hello. It's been a very busy year already in the world of copyright. So I'm going to start with a question for both of you about what is going on in the copyright office. The copyright office is in the middle of holding proceedings on what they call standard technical measures. Betsy, can you tell us what those are and what those proceedings aim to do? Maybe. I can tell you what they say they are and what they and we might hope that they would do. So the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which I'm sure many viewers have heard of, has a piece in it that says that online service providers should comply with standard technical measures for protecting copyright. And the idea behind standard technical measures is that if all of the consensus of technologists agree that there's a particular way to protect copyright against Internet piracy, that it would be a good idea for online service providers to allow that to work. The problem is there's no such thing. The technology does not allow this to happen. And so since the DMCA was passed many years ago, this provision about standard technical measures has been on the books, but it's just been waiting for standard technical measures to come into existence should they ever do so, which let's face it, they probably won't. The copyright office has started looking into the question of whether such things exist. And they've held a big plenary session asking stakeholders, including online service providers like the Archive of our Own, whether there are any technical measures that would help prevent piracy on a large scale. And the answer we've given the copyright office is really no. So that's what's... But in fact, to the extent there are technical measures, they are A, not standard and B, really bad at preventing copyright infringement. They're both bad at preventing copyright infringement and bad at identifying and allowing pure uses. Yeah, I think it's important to sort of underline that the law sort of requires this to be a consensus among all of the various stakeholders that this thing works and that we all want it. The problem is that they don't exist. And so the copyright office had its big plenary, which is a thing that most people, anyone could really participate in. They are supposed to be moving on to more quote unquote industry specific meetings. And our argument has been that if you are going to claim to be doing something that affects the online creative industry, it is not just Hollywood and Google who have to be in those meetings, right? That's right. And the archive of our Own is an online service provider under the definitions of the law. But we're very different in almost every way from say Verizon, which is also an online service provider. And we're very different from say YouTube, which has some things in common with the AO3 and lots of things not in common with the AO3, including for example, depth of resources. And so just having the horizons of the world and the YouTubes of the world in that room is useless and almost as useless as just having movie studios and record companies in the room. But either way with the movie studios and record companies have a louder voice right now than online service providers. And a much louder voice than users who are completely out of the conversation entirely. I think there were over 600 submissions to that copyright office plenary, most of which were from users saying we think this is a really bad idea for technical or self-expression reasons. And when I say most, I mean almost all. But they really haven't been included in the conversation beyond that initial flood of responses. Yeah. And it is concerning for all of us the idea that there are vastly more in terms of humans that are independent creators than there are movie studios or major platforms. And the major platforms have spent millions of dollars to build their own filters, whereas something like A03 for both resource reasons and also policy reasons doesn't have a content ID-like system, right? Not only do we not have such a system nor want one, but it would be impossible to make one. We rely on a policy of what we call maximum inclusivity. We want to include a wide a different range of material as our creators have to offer. We also have terms of service that are very important to us. We want to make sure that illegal material that is to say, for example, child sexual abuse material is not available on the A03. And we don't want pirated material available on the A03. And in fact, those things are very seldom posted. But when they are, we rely on user reports to tell us. And then we look at them. And a human being looks at them, volunteer human being looks at them and says, oh yeah, this is a problem and takes it down. But that's our filtering system is a human being who's volunteering their time. And if we want a future where we are not dependent on Google, it can't be that a $100 million system is required. That's how much, by the way, content ID cost Google to create. $100 million that it doesn't work. So that's what's going on in the copyright office. Obviously both OTW and EFF have are engaged in this process and keeping track of it and are prepared to object if anything comes of it that does not take into account the actual wider base of people who depend on the internet. The other thing that is going on in the world is that Senator Tom Tillis has written and introduced a draft of a bill called the quote unquote smart copyright act, smart being an acronym that I can't quite remember. He's the same person who last year had his draft bill of the digital copyright act, which was terrible in separate and horrible ways from this one, which is the smart copyright act. Kara and Betsy, can you sort of outline what it is and why we're so concerned about it? I'll start with Kara. Sure. So what the smart copyright act, which we really don't like having to call it that, so we prefer to call it the filter mandate bill, would essentially impose a different, kind of slightly different take on the standard technical measures process, but make it, I would say, even worse, requiring something called designated technical measures. And the reason they would be called designated rather than standard is that there would not actually have to be any kind of industry consensus. They would not have to be independently developed. It would be up to the copyright office to do a study and decide, like, we think this should be standard, like it's not, but we think everyone should have to use this, which is really not within the copyright office's expertise. And from what we hear, they actually are not very happy with this proposal because they're like, we don't want to do this, like this, the STM stuff is already hard enough. The other thing that would make the designated technical measures, we think even worse is that they are not tied to how to get immunity for a platform, right? So the DMCA provides ways for platforms to get immunity from copyright claims that are based on material uploaded by users. So when you have immunity or a safe harbor, you might hear it called, that basically means that the legislation says, if you do XYZ, you won't get in trouble for this other thing. The filter mandate bill, not calling it the smart act, the filter mandate bill would not be linked to that existing safe harbor, existing immunity. Instead, it would actually be a new requirement, a true mandate and say, if you don't do XYZ, if you don't use these filtering systems that the copyright office decides in however much wisdom it may have that you have to use, then you will get punished. It doesn't even matter if there's infringement going on. It's just use these or there's a penalty. So we often say with the DMCA safe harbor, there is somewhat of an illusion of choice. Like technically, you're not required to implement the things that are required to get the safe harbor. You won't be penalized outright if you don't unless there is some infringement on your platform. But practically speaking, for most platforms, they can't afford to take the risk. But there is at least some flexibility for them where they might be able to say, well, this might not exactly fit the safe harbor parameters, but we feel confident enough that there really is no infringement here that we're going to be flexible on this. The filter mandate bill would not allow for that kind of common sense flexibility, because the platform would know if we don't do this, no matter how reasonable it is for us to not, we're going to be penalized. I'm just going to remind everyone if you put questions in the chat at any time, we have lovely moderators collecting them, and we will answer them in the second half. I do want to answer one that we got real quickly. And by me, I mean Betsy, which is someone asked what AO3 is. So the archive of our own is one of the largest fan work and specifically focused on fan fiction archives. The organization for transformative works is an advocacy group for fans and fan work. So people who make fan art, fan fiction, fan music, fan games, all sorts of wonderful fan things about the things they love. The AO3 specifically hosts fan fiction and provides a way for fans to find each other through that fan fiction. To add to what Kara said, one of the sort of challenges of this is that there's a no win situation, because if this is tied to that safe harbor, that's bad too. And in fact, one of the things that we've been talking to the Copyright Office about in the previous proceeding is that the tying filter mandates to the safe harbor could deprive online service providers like the AO3 of a safe harbor, even if there's no infringement that they're sort of looking toward. And that the failure to sort of adopt technical measures that you can't afford, or that don't make sense based on what you host, isn't something that the safe harbor should hinge on. On the other hand, as Kara points out, being punished for not following a technical measure when it's not even tethered to anything at all makes also no sense. So the problem with filter mandates is that filter mandates don't make sense. Yeah, and I think another thing to point out about Smart Copyright, or the filter mandate bill, which I'm not going to call Smart Copyright, is there has been some question about, you know, there's an illusion of choice with the DMCA. There's also been some question about whether or not ISPs are covered in the same way because of internet access concerns. But the way that the filter mandate bill is written, every layer of your internet access could be required to have a filter of a different kind. And once you layer filters on top of each other, if you've ever done that, very little comes out the end of that. And so that's the other reason this bill is so concerning. If your ISP is, it has to have a filter. And also if your ISP has a filter that requires them to have some knowledge about what you're doing online, which is a, we don't necessarily want to encourage ISPs to collect more information on their users than they already have. They consistently would like more data on us, and we don't want to give them the cover of law for that. I think a lot of online creators might think, well, what's wrong with trying to filter out infringing material? But the answer is, you can't do that without also filtering out the stuff that as an online creator, you want to put out there. Yeah, I think what often happens is the argument is made that like, well, if it reduces piracy by 2%, isn't that good? Isn't that a 2% reduction in piracy? But if it's accompanied by a 10% reduction in legal free expression, that's not a trade-off worth making. It's not even a trade-off worth making if it's 1% of free expression, which you have a right to. And if it comes at the expense of privacy and cybersecurity, it's probably not worth it for that reason either. Just so that you all know, like we did for the Digital Copyright Act, we have a letter up on act.eff.org that internet creators, which most people actually are at this point. We all write and share things online. You can sign it and we will be delivering it to the Senate on April 25th, which is the day they get back from their recess, because they have already received letters of support from the major content organizations like the Motion Picture Association, the RIAA, the classics. And we want to make sure that they get a countervailing opinion that is from real individual people and a much larger, and to proportionally shows them that it is a larger group of people than those few multi-billion dollar companies. So I would say that the concern also really isn't that this thing will stand up on its own. It has so many problems that everyone understands. But as we learned in late 2020, early 2021, there has been a nasty habit on the part of Congress to put these copyright bills into giant legislation that's like 6,000 pages long, and everyone just wants to vote for it because it's must pass, it's like funds the government, and they get through. So that's what happened with case act, which creates the tribunal system to sort of force people to pay out. And that's what happened with the felony streaming bill, which was particularly concerning because no text had ever been released to the public of it before it was put into the must pass legislation. It hadn't had any hearings on it. No one really knew what it was until it was passed. And that's a process we want to make sure is not repeated with the filter mandate bill. I'm going to move on slightly away from copyright, but not too far away because it's still filters, and it's still a filter mandate, which is a bill called ShopSafe, which currently lives, like we were just talking about, currently lives inside this giant trade package. It's only in the House version and not in the Senate version. So we are urging Congress to pass this when they meet to figure out which version goes through that ShopSafe is not included. Kara, you want to describe the joys that are in this ShopSafe? Oh, I would love to. And just to start to give some context to what Catherine was saying about this, it being kind of tucked into this massive bill to try to get it to pass often without it even being read by the people who are voting on it. In the America Compete Act, this trade bill where it has been inserted into the House building, ShopSafe starts on page 1672 of the legislation. So if you make it that far, great. You might figure out the problems with ShopSafe. If you don't, well, hope you know what you're voting on. So ShopSafe takes the magic of filters and takes it to the trademark arena. Apparently, some legislators saw how terribly copyright filters work and thought, let's require that, but have them filter for trademarks, which not only are subject to many fair uses, expressive uses protected by the First Amendment, also often just like basic words that you can use for a lot of different reasons. So as you can imagine, extra hard to filter for and so extra susceptible to the kind of issues that we see with over filtering in the copyright context. And you already see this in the kind of filters that brands use to send automated takedowns, much like they do with copyright. We have written about an example where Volkswagen sent takedowns to Etsy for all these different products involving beetles. It was red bubble. Okay, red bubble. So all these different insect related items were getting taken down because they used the word beetle or bug. So you can see the problem here. And ShopSafe would, again, this is another one where the supporters of the bill will try to say, no, it doesn't mandate filters, but it essentially does without getting into the nitty gritty of the language, say for our purposes. It essentially requires trademark filters to avoid liability. And once again, even though the legislators keep claiming it's a safe harbor, like the DMCA, it is not. It is not a safe harbor. It is not formatted in the way I explained a safe harbor work saying, if you do X, Y, and Z, don't worry, you won't get in trouble. You will be safe from infringement liability. It says, you have to do X, Y, and Z, or you will be liable by any counterfeiting for any counterfeiting on your platform. That's not safe harbor. It's just a law. And just to piggyback on that, it's not just sort of mistakes about individual words like beetle and bug. It's also self-expressive things like fan products where if somebody wants to make a thing that says, I love Star Wars or I love Harry Potter, those things could be taken down, although they have no trademark impact and they're certainly not counterfeits. Yeah. Another example, if anyone has noticed my favorite relevant shirt for this town hall, making both a copyright fair use and a trademark expressive use purchase from an independent creator at an art show, this is not infringing under either copyright or trademark. But if there were any mention of the fact that it says, just do it in the title or description with a trademark filter and knowing Nike, there is a very, very good chance that it would never make it online. Other example, just another quick thing as a way to think about this is if you even think of the word Apple, that's susceptible to both the beetle kind of problems and issues where you might have really good reasons to use it, like if say you make fan stickers that are like for Apple computers, like how people will cover the Apple logo on the back with different stickers, you should be allowed to mention that it is for Mac computers or Apple computers, but that would very likely end up getting you filtered out, even though there is absolutely nothing infringing about that. Plugs that fit into Apple computers and you just want to say this is compatible with Apple computers. Yeah, I like to think of it too is like everyone sort of knows that there's this weird madness that comes over people in the early part of every year where they think they can't say the word Superbowl because NFL is so intent on sending cease and desist and protecting the trademark where obviously you can call it the Superbowl, like that's its name as long as you are not in any way implying that you own the Superbowl or people would think you own the Superbowl, but if you take that example and apply it out, it would make speaking online very difficult. So that is shop safe. So the goal there is to keep it out of the trade package, the final trade package that gets passed. I'm going to do a little recap of things because we've covered a lot of ground in the half hour. So the first thing we talked about is the copyright office standard technical measure proceedings that is related to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, which is the thing that if you have a takedown notice, that is what that is. And what they're doing there is trying to figure out if there is an industry consensus that some form of technical measure is a standard that everyone should have to accommodate. That is impossible. That doesn't exist. We say it doesn't exist. The only way the copyright office could get people to agree that it exists is if it excludes 90% of the people it would affect, probably more. The second thing we talked about is the filter mandate bill, which is a bill that was introduced in the Senate by Tom Tillis. That bill would create a whole new proceeding that would create a process by which the copyright office could create designated technical measures. It has fewer requirements than the standard technical measures, which is why they're doing it, because if nothing comes from that, they want to make sure they have a backup so that there's a way for filters to be required. That has been introduced, and we want to make sure that people understand that it deserves fair hearing and that people can object to it and that it's not non-controversial and shouldn't be slipped into other things.  We got over 900 signatures last year. I would like an even thousand for this one. I would like more than that, but my achievable goal is a thousand. The third thing we have talked about is shop safe, which would require filters for trademark, which as bad as filters are at telling if one thing is a copy of another for copyright, filters trying to figure out if a use of a word is trademark infringement or not are even worse. That is the three things we have talked about. Pretty much all of them require filters in some form or another. Think about Content ID not just being used by YouTube. As bad as Content ID is, if there is a problem with it, Google could fix it if they wanted to. If it's a standard technical measure, they could not fix it because it would be required by law. Now, I'm going to move to our Q&A. The first one we have is, are there any requirements for proof of ownership of copyrighted material? Example registration before it gets into the filter. Kara, I'm going to ask you about shop safe first, about requirements that it be listed and what that would even mean in the trademark context. Yeah. I think shop safe would not have any requirement like that. In fact, some of the dispute is over whether the trademark owners should even have to do anything. They are of the opinion and shop safe basically takes the position that platforms are supposed to be policing trademark use without even being told to do it by the trademark owners. They're supposed to know everyone's trademarks of which there are at least millions. The other thing is that to have trademark rights, you do not have to have a registered trademark. Having a registration gives you some extra protections and can make things easier to prove, but you can have what's called common law rights where it just develops through your use of the trademark. So Betsy filters and requiring some sort of proof of ownership? No. Yeah. The short answer is no. And in fact, it would again, it would be technically impossible because for similar reasons, you don't need to register a copyright to own a copyright. And there are a lot of ways to use copyrighted material that might sort of evoke the copyrighted material or incorporate aspects of the copyrighted material that don't require owning that the underlying copyright in a thing. So when you post something to YouTube, you have to say, you have to check a box saying it's not infringing, but you don't have to check a box saying you own copyright in it because you shouldn't have to. There are lots of reasons why you shouldn't have to own copyright in something in order to post it on the internet the same way that you shouldn't have to own a trademark in something to talk about that trademark. So there are no such requirements and there shouldn't be as a practical matter. I will say just as another example is the way that Content ID works, and this is a voluntary one, so think about if it were required, the way that Content ID works is rights holders that Google deems to be large enough and important enough to be a part of Content ID. They just say like, upload everything you own and we'll check it and so they do that, but what can happen is the things they own could contain public domain music, for example, that anyone could use, but it will ping as a match and they can or it can be things they've licensed. We've also heard from musicians who licensed their music to one of a large rights holder and then they can't put it up online because it's in the database, it is in part of something that is owned by someone else. So while there could or couldn't be such a requirement, it would be difficult and at the end of the day they're not that useful in terms of sort of beating back these problems. Are there any proposed sanctions for people or entities who make frivolous or commercially harmful copyright claims, 512F? Kar, you want to go first? Sure, yeah. So there is an existing provision for this under the DMCA. It is the number of the provision is 512F, which is by Catherine just saying that. And it basically says that if your material gets taken down because someone makes a copyright claim in bad faith, you can sue them for damages and make them pay your attorney's fees. The thing is this really rarely gets used, especially A, it is expensive and time consuming and difficult to file a lawsuit. And also at least in, I mean, there have been barely any judicial opinions interpreting this, but at least in the Ninth Circuit, the court has said to establish that it was a bad faith claim, you have to actually show subjective, not just objective bad faith, which means you don't just have to show that you did not infringe and it wouldn't be reasonable to think that you did, you have to show that the person who submitted it actually knew that it was not infringing.  If you say like, well, I thought fair use means it's only fair use if you acknowledge that I'm the owner, which isn't true at all. But if they really believed that and they can convince the court that they really believed that, then the court would likely say, well, no subjective bad faith. So you don't win. You have to pay all your own fees for this litigation. Too bad. And with these, these filter mandates is that they don't even get to that stage, because in the takedown system, there was a punishment for engaging in bad faith takedown potentially, although as Kara points out, it's a pretty remote potential. But it at least exists. There's something to stop people from engaging in bad faith takedowns under this safe harbor rules. But at the filter level, the bad faith claims happen before things even make it up onto the internet. And so there's really no opportunity to challenge these sorts of filtering restrictions on and they're not it's being done by an algorithm or a computing program. It's not being done by a person. So there's no person to challenge on what they did. And there's no this filter doesn't work because they think they are wrong, that this filter doesn't work will stop it from being come a standard technical measure or designated technical measure. But that that does that requires a level of knowledge that the copyright office just doesn't really have or even listen to when it is brought up to them. So that that is fun. I would point out one more thing about 512f, which is the one of the most recent high profile 512f suits was YouTube, bringing it against a copyright troll who was filing false takedowns and then extorting people. And the reason YouTube did that was because they were harmed because they had to deal with these bad faith takedowns. And for their users and because YouTube has the the ability to file a lawsuit of that type and like do that whereas a regular user really doesn't. So reshop safe. Does the filter apply even if you indicate the contact is a registered trademark of XYZ company? I don't know if I necessarily understand this question. I think I understand like would you be protected from the filter if you kind of acknowledge who owns the trademark? I can't really answer that question definitively because it's the bill doesn't kind of dictate the contours of how the filter should work. I think it is extremely unlikely that anyone would build into their filter something like that especially because that actually does not a lot of people think like well all I have to do is you know give a citation credit the owner. It's not actually true makes very little difference in the infringement analysis. The kind of ultimate question for trademark infringement is are consumers likely to be confused about the relationship between the product and the trademark owner? And here so you might say well if you acknowledge it's not your trademark then maybe people are less likely to be confused but that's actually like a pretty minimal factor in how courts consider it. Betsy I have a couple of questions that feel right in your wheelhouse because people want to know about fan works the relationship they have with copyright law are they allowed? Are they not? What can people do if they find themselves targeted by takedowns for their fan works? This is this feels right in your wheelhouse. So yeah so the answer is fan works are allowed based on a pretty nuanced and fact specific analysis which means not every fan work is allowed but the law of fair use under copyright says that when a work transforms the underlying work which it might do by parody or criticism or commentary and it doesn't compete with the underlying work then it's not copyright infringement it's not like infringement but it's just not infringement and a commerciality is another factor that's considered so non-commercial fan works are less likely to be infringing than commercial fan works but every case in history that's found a fair use to exist has been about a commercial work so clearly commercial works can be fair use and can be allowed. So there's this nuanced case by case specific analysis that so often in the law the answer is maybe it depends and that's true with fan works but fan works that have any sort of aspect of criticism or commentary or transformation of the underlying work are likely to not infringe. So what happens if your fan work is targeted for a takedown you can do what's called counter notifying and say my work is a fair use and therefore shouldn't be taken down there are pros and cons to counter notifying the pros are it gets your work put back up the cons are you have to give your real name and that can open you up to a federal lawsuit but this is part of why the safe harbor process is effective there's a takedown part of it there's a counter notice part of it there's a punishing people for bad faith part of it and the filters just like short circuit all of that so we like the DMCA notice and takedown system is a perfect but it works partly because it has this counter notification part of it. I'm going to add in here and then Cara I will let you I will just say that if this happens and you want to counter notice but you're afraid if you email info at EFF.org we can hopefully either talk to you ourselves or find you a lawyer at low or no cost that'll sort of help you figure out what to do Cara. Yeah and actually on on that note if you specifically are concerned about revealing your real name if you do go through an attorney it's not super clear in the statute but our interpretation and what I think is a reasonable interpretation that that platforms generally agree with is that you can have like a lawyer or an agent submit the counter notice on your behalf using their name and say you know to be contacted you're to be contacted through them. Yeah your name and like the legal office is addressed rather than someone's like yeah home which is the concern especially when people not be doxxed through takedowns. That's what I was about to say there have been cases where people use this process not because they want to take something down or or whatever but because they want to get the information about someone that they have some problem with so if you if you do that there is a way to to go around that and I want to make sure people know that because it's often a concern. Um and we have something slightly related to the fan work question which is would you speak of these issues with regard to derivative works especially derived works that are not in any way recognizable or hardly recognizable in respect to the original. So those works are I think in some ways the ones were were worried about in terms of filters the less recognizable something is as a derivative of an underlying work those the less likely it's going to be captured in a filter if the serial numbers have been filed off well enough a filter might not get um but uh so many of the most sort of important and valuable expressions political expressions personal expressions are our expressions that use a work in a in an identifiable way specifically because that brings understanding and value to the new expression um as a priority as a criticism that sort of thing and um those are explicitly allowed by the law but would get caught in filters. Yeah and I would also point out that like we live in a world of means now the internet this was always the case like it's not new to the internet people have spoken in quotations and so on like frankly my dear I don't give a damn is for me moving far predates the internet but we live in a world of means where you and the way we have always expressed ourselves and the way culture has always worked is something has a cultural meaning and you use it to reinforce what you're saying or you twist it to make a comment about the original and that's how human culture evolves and it is therefore important that it be allowed which sort of um which sort of uh feeds into a question that we have about will things ever go out of copyright it keeps getting extended will the extensions ever stop and I will say first of all I would like to shout out the genius on archive of our own when the great gaps be was taken or released into the public domain this year uploaded it to archive of our own but replaced gaps be with gritty just my favorite use of a public domain work to be clear the archive of our own didn't do that a user did that which was awesome um but I think the short answer is uh copyright does eventually expire it just expires at a time that is so distant from now that it seems like forever um and Disney's worked very hard to make that length as long as possible we don't have any reason to think that they're gonna keep doing that if they if they did they probably would have had to start making noises about it already but um and no one knows for sure yeah um I I always like to point out that if you read the constitution the purpose of copyright is to incentivize creation not lock it down it's to incentivize creation by giving um the people who make things a period of time by which they can make money by the exclusive use of it it is not till last 90 years after someone is no longer around or a court or give it to a corporation forever and ever and ever that's not what copyright is supposed to do um and I don't care what the supreme court says I don't think it's a limited time just because it lists years that is not limited that is long um so yeah I think um we have a colleague who always quotes the axiom no one does to Disney what Disney did to the brother's grim which I think is is fair um so yeah so that is I think almost all of the questions um oh no here's one sorry I missed this one uh how do podcast producers and online storytellers protect themselves with all of these things and what can they do I can speak to that a little bit um I think there are there are a few different considerations for uh for podcasters um and the like um and one of the key ones is that when you're podcasting you're almost certainly not just sending something out into the world from your living room directly you're going through some portal right some right through iTunes or Stitcher or some other it's some way of getting your podcast out into the world and uh so these legal proposals affect you but the part that I think is of greater concern is that they affect the platforms that you use to get your podcast out into the world and the incentives created by these laws are uh to limit what people can say first and ask questions later because the penalties for not doing that limiting are very severe when we look at this filter mandate law for example the numbers are very high or they can bankrupt a small business very quickly um and so the the concern is that podcasters will lose their platforms uh that they would be broadcasting through um and so how can podcasters protect themselves um well this is where I I put in a pitch for contact your legislature later send it back over to Catherine um I would say yeah this was the thing that that I actually wanted to point out is the this system does not incentivize creating filters that not that they could but that arm better at it because the legal risk is so high and you know Cara and Betsy are both lawyers everyone in my life is a lawyer I am not um but and and lawyers and companies are risk averse especially if you don't have a lot of cash on hand at which point it becomes a good idea to be over inclusive in in the filter you choose because the penalty for getting sued by Disney versus a frustrated user if you're making a risk analysis not to pick on Disney although I love to pick on Disney um if you're if you're doing a risk analysis you are far more concerned about a billion dollar company that can send lawyers after you and you and you can be forced to pay statutory damages far in excess of what you have on hand versus a user saying your filter is a problem can't you let my thing up um and I think another thing to point out the reason that I also hate these and I do a lot is you know speech can be like timeliness is important when it comes to speech if you are commenting on something because it is an issue going on right now your voice needs to be out there right now not after weeks of going through some system with a filter um and in the similar way like this is why we see police officers there's just this week another story of police officers playing music so that any filmed uh interaction with them will get caught by a filter this time it was they were blasting Disney and they happened to be outside a local council member's home when they did it and so he came out and said stop but they they say if they always do that they are exploiting the flaw in the copyright filter system you can't put your thing up on YouTube if it is Disney music on the background um my personal favorite part of that was that the officer then said to the council member uh yeah it was a mistake so sorry sir which it's not a mistake the mistake was doing it outside a council member's home not knowing that you clearly knew what you were doing especially I mean picked Disney right famous copyright troll um so and and the story that I read said that the members members of the community who didn't want to be identified because of you know police reprisal I'll say that this is something that's been going on for a while in their neighborhood if they just happen to be in front of a council member's house this time um and like if you are filming police for example you need that to be up and seen sooner rather than later um or if you are saying don't support this work it's a problem or you're just reviewing it because like I used to be a reviewer like your time is valuable if a three hour movie is bad and someone is telling you why the three hour movie is bad before you go and pay your money at a movie theater they should be able to get you that information while it is still in theaters if a filter can keep something like that down for two weeks that can increase the bottom line and that is not what copyright is for it is not to prevent people from criticizing your work so uh that is that is my little spiel I I hate filters a lot I'm going to plug one more time if you go to act.eff.org right now you can sign our petition you can also take part in many of our other actions if you click on see all our actions you can see our shop safe action for example um you can also do a a copyright filter mandate action separate from the creator's letter that we will be bundling with letters from various segments of the population to explain the many different ways in which the filter mandate bill is a problem. I want to thank our panelists Betsy Rosenblatt and Cara Gangliano so much for joining me especially on sort of short notice but I think it was important in a valuable um conversation if you want to see this again later it will be up on all of the EFF uh websites and channels and if you want to support the work we do uh go to EFF.org slash donate um we as as our executive director says we work for tips um same for OTW I am sure um and I think our fundraising drive is is starting very soon complete like totally genuinely completely coincidentally but I I think that's happening so if you want to support um the OTW uh head over to transformativeworks.org or a03.org um so that is uh all of those things keep your eyes peeled EFF.org will also be we will be writing um as these processes go along about the status of things and what we think is going on so you can also stay informed that way uh again thank you to our panelists thank you to everyone who joined us and thank you for all of the really great questions


Hi everybody. My name is Matt. I work at Automatic on the VIP team. And I am obviously speaking in English, so it's better than me speaking in French because that's sort of like a null operation. It wouldn't happen. But I appreciate you listening to me in English here in Paris. The VIP team at Automatic, we were responsible for hosting and providing services to some very large WordPress sites that are part of media, government, and industry. And we host some very major and highly-scaled brands on our platform. And for me it means I'm an engineer, so I have the pleasure of working on these really cool themes and watching really great WordPress developers all over the world do what they do. So if you want to know more about that, let me know. But for today, we're going to be talking about term meta. And as most of you probably know, term meta is the sort of newest major feature in WordPress Core. I was full disclosure, I was not part of creating term meta, but because of the open way we work, you can see how it was made. So a little bit of what we're going to do today is talk about how and why this feature came into Core. And we'll also be talking about, you know, what the feature is, what's new in Core, what new powers you now have now that you have a term meta API, how it actually works. So I intend to go down into the guts a little bit and we'll talk about why the feature was difficult to create and something about how the tables work behind the scenes in WordPress to surface terms. And then I just think it's a cool story. When you hear a little bit about how this feature happened and what caused it to happen, it's sort of just a fun story to tell. So we'll focus on the human side of it a little bit too. But first let's talk about metadata. So metadata is basically just data about other data, right? So you have a table that provides some data and it refers to another piece of data. And historically before 4.4, and we're actually somewhere in there for a long time, WordPress allowed meta on posts, users and comments. And this feature is pretty simple. We're just adding to that. So we now allow meta to be attached to terms. And just so we're super clear term, you know what that is? That's a single tag, a category or another member of some custom taxonomy that you define. Okay. So now let's go back in time a little bit. Way back to June 13th, 2009. And I'm going to start talking about some actual people who are involved in this. So actually maybe they're here. So sorry, I'm going to talk about you if you're here. This is a guy named Daniel. He lives in Poland. He has the cool wordpress.org username of sirzuro. And he opened this core ticket on that day in 2009. And basically the core ticket said, why is there no term meta in WordPress? It would be great to have. So this is a feature request he opened. This became a very famous and long ticket. It actually lived for six years. And we'll talk all about its history in a moment. But you can see what he's asking for this for here. Like, let's have term meta. It's kind of crazy that we have to do all these tricks to attach term meta to terms. Why can't we just do it naturally in the API? And in fact, Daniel was right. You know about this screen. This is the edit screen for a term, either a category, tag, whatever. This was historically quite difficult to extend. There were some hooks available for that, but you had to do lots of crazy tricks to make this work. So adding a field here was a challenge. There were a bunch of plugins that came about to help you with that. But not only was it an engineering challenge to even make it happen, but if you did, the results were sometimes not so great. Some unnatural things would occur, like the description would hold the meta that you wanted, or they would be attached using an option. And then what's more, the resulting queries to retrieve that on your templates or whatever were quite expensive sometimes and performance could be an issue. So this is Daniel's issue and we'll come refer to it a few times here. Let's go further back in time. February 10th, 2008, on this day, a guy named Ryan, who I think maybe many of you know, this is Ryan McHugh. I think he was perhaps 15 at the time, I don't know, but he opened this ticket, number 5809. And this is a very famous ticket. I think you all will immediately recognize this. This is the bug in WordPress where if you make a category and then you make a tag with the same name, and then you edit the category, what happens? You edit the tag too! It's insane, right? So if I change the name of the tag, this is prior to again 4-2 in these recent changes, I magically have changed the name of the category as well. And this was a super annoying bug and really embarrassing, right? Hard to explain why this happens. Well, it turns out that these two bugs are related. We'll talk about how in a minute. And here's a little bit of a timeline just so you can get a sense of how hard this was to solve, okay? So Ryan's bug, Daniel's feature request, here's when they were actually solved, okay? This one lasted, I think, seven years. That was six and a half years. So these are major, seem very simple, right? But major stuff going on in the background. Let's talk about why this took so long.  One is it's a deep problem. And we'll talk a little bit about the structure of tables in the background that made this hard. And it was so deep in fact that it affected stuff like the upgrade path of WordPress. There were many ideas over many years about how to make this change in a way that wouldn't cause an upgrade nightmare for everyone using WordPress. And the same with what if we change some fundamental facts about the table structure that cause backward compatibility issues and how much backward compatibility, how many backward compatibility issues are acceptable. So these are major and serious problems. So let's dive in here a little bit and talk about the tables. Okay, why is this hard? This is how WordPress organizes its meta, right? You have some table containing data, users, comments, posts, and then you have the corresponding meta tables. This is everything I'm going to say in the next slide that's true before 4.2, okay? With terms is a little different. One of these things is not like the other, right? These are the three tables that deal with terms and we'll look at them a little more closely here. Prior to 4.2, you had a terms table, right? And what was it for? It basically listed all the terms in a unique way. That means no term with the same slug was repeated. In fact, on the MySQL level, there was a unique, that column was unique, right? So you couldn't insert a term that had the same, twice with the same slug. So that was a unique list of all the terms. WP term taxonomy mapped each of those terms to various taxonomy. So the same term could be in categories and tax and perhaps a custom taxonomy that you made. And then term relationships, the third table, in a one to many way again, governed sort of what was tagged in categories with what? Related posts to these objects. So Ryan's issue here is pretty obvious immediately, right? This uniqueness of slugs is the problem, right? So you can see if I rename a table or change anything in the WP terms table, it will affect all of the objects in WP term taxonomy that are associated with that term. So let's look a little closer at how WordPress stores meta. WordPress has a uniform API for all meta. In fact, when you call, update, create, delete, get meta, you're just right underneath calling another function that handles all of the different types of meta. And this is a good practice. It's done this way on purpose. And there's an enforced uniformity of these meta tables as well that corresponds to that. So the question became, and if you read the ticket that is a feature request for this, the big problem was how do you relate a table like this and the core, the whole API that we have for meta to tables like these, right? So it was decided early, and if you read, it's actually really fun to read that whole ticket. It was decided quite early that it was not really possible to relate this, this kind of table to WP term taxonomy. And that's because there are two keys here. There's both a taxonomy and a term. And in this table, there's only one key, and we want to keep it that way, a single object, right? So that was ruled out over, I think it took a long time, maybe a year of arguing, but they finally decided no. And likewise, it doesn't really work over here either, because when I attach some meta to a term, I wanted to apply differently to my category than a tag, even if they have happened to have the same name. So they were really kind of in a quandary here. And because neither of these strategies worked, Daniel's request sort of slept. And it became known as the problem of shared terms. So I like to think of it as a fierce argument happened, and then if you look and read the history of the ticket, it kind of went to sleep. Yeah. And it slept. And it slept. And it slept for almost three, four years before it woke up. So July 2013, there was a renewed energy around getting this feature finally into core. And this is one, Nason, kind of following the history here he made this post, which outlined a roadmap for how a solution might work. And we'll look at that solution now. And soon after that, Boone, who many might also know, became sort of involved in this ticket and eventually went on to be the main implementer of everything we'll talk about here. So these are the two guys who sort of helped push this forward. Here's the plan. First of all, it was decided that we should stop making things worse. So WordPress should not make any more shared terms. And so as a 401, this was rolled out. So at that time, if you were to create a category or a tag, you stopped trying to reuse the same term in that table. Unfortunately, another behavior where you had that little dash two that would appear next to your slugs was introduced, but it was temporary. So that was 401, no more new shared terms. In 4.2, WordPress started to fix proactively the shared terms when you would edit a term. So I think there were other times in which this would happen, but particularly if you edited a term, it would do what's called a term split. It would create a new entry in WP terms so that there was now a one to one correspondence between WP term taxonomy and that table and terms would start to be fixed. This actually fixed Ryan's bug, right? Because when you change the name of the term, that whole problem we described before was fixed in 4.2. In 4.3, all remaining terms were split. And this happened on install or update. So when you updated WordPress, process ran, found all of the terms that had this problem, created new entries in WP terms for those shared terms. The issue here was that sometimes a term ID would change in that process. So if you had a category that needed to be split, its term ID might have changed due to it being in a new row. And this could cause a sort of minor commotion because then if you were caching term IDs, for example, you had to compensate for that. But this happened in 4.3. And finally in 4.4, we get the real thing. We get term meta. So that was sort of the process. And I should note this is not quite finished. There's another step here we'll talk about in a minute that is coming sometime we don't know it. Okay, so what's the state of affairs right now? Right now, WP terms and WP term taxonomy no longer have as of 4.4 that one to many relationship. They have a one to one relationship. There are no shared terms. For each row and WP terms, there's a row and WP term taxonomy. So they actually even though they're still joined when you query them, they function as a single table. And there is this brand new table, WP term meta that looks exactly like all the other meta tables. You get this new API, add to meta update to meta all of the usual meta functions are now available for terms. You can use them now. You can, and as I say, it's the same stuff under the hood as all of the other stuff. Meta query arguments for get terms are available so you can select your terms in all the same way you do posts with meta queries, right? And there's also some performance stuff around caching in the background going on that was introduced. So let's talk about how you would apply these new powers that you have with term meta. Well, there's many applications. I won't be able to list them all here, but here's a great example that people keep talking about, right? Few tag stuff in GitHub ever, right? You can apply a tag and has these cool colors that go with each of the tags. How do they do that? How does it know that a color is associated with the tag or a category? Well, it's using something like this if you do it in the logical way. So things like this are now very easy to implement at WordPress, just with core. These are examples of index pages, right? Like category listings or tag listings. And these pages are going to get a lot cooler, because you can now associate meta with all of these kind of objects that you would present to a user, right? And it's super easy to do it. On the back end, adding fields to edit screens for terms is very quick and quite easy. So you can start to extend these sorts of screens like you would a post screen. And then listings have all kinds of cool stuff you can do with them, right? You can add columns and display your new meta in these ways as well. So how do you do all this? I'm not going to actually go into all of the detail of how this stuff works, but these two guys, Thomas and Justin, have written really awesome tutorials that will take you through all of the steps for doing this. If you're familiar with extending posts, it should be quite something that you're used to. So I'd really suggest either of these. I've just tweeted out the link to this, so you can go and explore all of these links that I have up there after this. And then JJJ, the famous JJJ, he actually has a starter class for all of this UI. So you can go here and he's done all of the boring work about the hooks that you need to use to modify all of this stuff. So if I were you, if I were doing this now, I would probably go and download this class, extend it, and build all kinds of cool UI really quickly. So there is one thing left that will happen here. It's promised slash threatened that the WP terms table and WP taxonomy terms table will be combined into a single table. There's from what I can tell not 100% certainty that this will happen, but I would say high probability. It was in the original nascent plan. So we could expect this maybe in four, five, four, six. I think it will be done in as safe a way as possible. But if you do have a plugin or a theme that directly queries either of these tables, you might want to look into that. You shouldn't have one that does that. But it would be something like your writing sequel and the wrong way. But just be warned that these tables are under flux at this point. So it's something to watch out for. And just to be clear, this would mean this grouping of tables up here that are now joined each and every time you look for a term would be just become a single table with preserved, probably preserved column names and stuff like that. Okay, so I just want to like, rhapsodize for a moment about how cool this whole thing is. Right? It was frustrating that these two guys submitted their issues like six years ago, and finally only now is it getting done. But if you think about all of the, the care and concern that went into this, you know, like, there was a lot of people who contributed and I've just picked out all their pictures. These are the folks who had something to do with either of those two tickets. And over time, they either contributed code or they put comments in or they tested things or they, they wrote, wrote requests or sometimes they even just closed duplicate tickets. But this is a fantastic example of how the community can come together, make decisions and get really big things done in WordPress core. So I'd encourage you if you find this kind of a cool story and want to learn how to do it yourself, go to make.wordpress.org. For those of you who aren't involved and get involved in some of these discussions that are happening really close to the center of the product that we all use. So I think that's kind of all I have. You can get the slides there. And should we do questions and stuff? Cool. Indeed. That was a cool story. Yeah. We have a couple of cool question now. Yeah. In the last version of VP, you introduce in the last version of VP, you introduce the new VP class term or class term to define the object of term. You know, you know that? Yeah, there are why, why is this class is a final class? I don't know the answer to that. There are there are underlying classes for everything I just talked about. But so you're asking why can't you extend that class even more? Why is it declared final? Yeah. Why is this class a why is this class is final class? Okay. Why is there a class? I would imagine there's a class for for all of many of the objects here that correspond to other classes that you have for posts and things like that. So there it's not surprising that there is a class. Why is it final? I'm maybe someone knows the answer that to that immediately, but let's go check. We can read in core after this and we'll find out. Bonjour, je vais pas faire l'effort de parler en anglais parce que je suis vraiment trop de nul. Si on pouvait me traduire, je serais vraiment c'est super merci. En fait, ma question, en fait, je voudrais savoir s'il était prévu dans les costumes post-tip, s'il était possible de, il était prévu de faire quelque chose comme ça, en fait, c'est-à-dire que je me retrouve souvent en tant qu'intégratrice, je me retrouve souvent dans des cas où j'ai une liste d'archives et le référencement veut évidemment mettre du texte dedans et bref, vous voyez apparemment tout à fait ce que je veux dire. Et donc voilà, je voulais savoir s'il existait, enfin si c'était prévu, en fait. Right. The question is about custom post-types and do we have the same mechanism to have custom files or met at it for custom post types or the person don't know them actually. Okay, so can there be meta on a custom post type? Yeah. Yes. Yes, you can attach meta to any post that you want, even if you define a custom post type, it can also have post meta. I think is that the right question? Yes. Yes, we can. It already exists, in fact, that is to say that in fact on the I'm just going to Truth, please, yeah. On the post, the pages or the custom post type, you ask what we call the custom fields. And so in fact, that's what your meta is about, that you can attach to the archive. Okay. Okay, the question was different actually, and I'm just thinking about how to translate it. She wants to attach meta data to archive page. Yes. Directly. Yes, this is exact. If the archive page is based on a term. It is not. It is the archive page of a custom post type. I see. I'm sure there is a way to do that. Yes. So talk to me after and we can have maybe a translator and we'll figure it out. Yeah, but it's possible. Should we start a ticket or something? Yeah. Yeah, six years from now, no problem. Anything. Yeah. No, we can let's talk after and we can discuss it. Yeah. Out of curiosity, because I could read through the comments of the on the ticket, of course, has there been a discussion about adding the fields automatically in the UI, like is the case for custom fields for posts? Interesting. I have not seen that yet. There were many discussions in the in the ticket. The fact that it ended up implemented this way was a compromise and only arrived here after many iterations of can we do it this way? And then they would think through all of the implications of that. And so but as far as your question, I yeah, I think what's available to begin with is just the API more or less that I described here. You can register the meta in the same way as any other meta. Pretty much you can do you can call all of the core meta stuff around terms that you can for posts. The UI on term editing in particular, I don't think there's any automated way for those fields to appear unless I'm mistaken about that. Yeah. Is that answer your question? Okay. Hello. My question is about if there are other issues like this one that haven't been fixed yet and that we should expect and keep in mind when when developing new websites. Wow. And the other question is, are you aware of any new features that will be introduced in the next major versions of WordPress? I mean, major features that will change how WordPress works. Thank you. Oh, that's awesome. For me, actually, this was one of the most obvious features that was missing from WordPress. That's and I think the question of whether I mean, I would argue I guess there's not one quite as large as this. That's an obvious problem with the basic API. Obviously, this weekend you've heard a lot of discussion and even today this morning, there was some of an online explosion again about the REST API and its pathway into core. So I would say the major thing that we're all going to be getting used to in the next three, four releases is how will the REST API enter core? And how will we manipulate it? That's the new kind of world of WordPress, I think. I can say that our clients in VIP are all preparing to use the REST API in these very large and scaled sites. Many of them currently write their own endpoints for all sorts of reasons, as I'm sure many of you do, and they're looking forward to some uniformityacross.organ.com as far as how the REST API works. So I think that's a very important area for everyone to watch and learn about. I know for me personally, I'm a PHP person. It's going to be a change of mentality about how I think about things and many things with WordPress. Hi, so I have a question. Apart from design feature like adding icon and what would be useful is going to be term meta for other things like maybe like your thing? Sure. Yeah, how useful is going to be for me? So there are many other examples. I just listed a few. I helped to maintain a plugin called coauthors plus, which uses some very what I would describe as exotic workarounds because term meta was not available. So I think many large plugins may find that they can be rewritten and simplified because of this. And as a result, the intensity of the queries behind many of these plugins that we all use will go down. So I think performance will be a huge factor in this. Even those two tables that we talked about becoming one will eliminate a join from so many queries underneath WordPress. It's crazy. And then if you think that table is then again joined, if you've ever looked inspected like the queries WordPress generates the ones with like seven joins in them and stuff, the number of those joins is going to be become less because of this. So features is just a product of your imagination. What can you build the term meta, but fundamental performance stuff for me is actually more exciting almost. And we know we have to put a term to your talk. Thank you very much. Thanks, guys.


All right, let's check it out. I was watching this before. I think this is super close. Some really good stuff that you have, you know, through things like here. It's nice movement so it doesn't feel stiff, but you still have proper contacts on back legs for stabilizing. Let's see here. This one's a bit tricky. Hold up. I think everything is really, really good. There's a lot of good stuff in there. Offside in the mouth pieces. That has a nice arc. My dad, I mean this. That has changed. I would say the only thing that's still a bit harsh is the body. So I have no problem with these guys, you know, shooting over and then coming back quickly. But body wise, this guy goes from here to here to here and I like that he's in there. But boom, then he comes right back. This is as if, you know, either there's a wall or he gets pulled back or she hits or like the legs are super strong. But you know pointing this way, they're really absorbing the momentum going this way and you can just shoot it back. But looking at what these guys are on, at least these guys plant in before he stops, so for it to stops, kind of on the same frame. That's the thing I would change here, just give this, eases in like one more in and then one back and then a bit more back and then you can get into where you're now. Because the back is pretty even. See that, that move? Shoots over, hits that wall right there, right? And then comes back pretty evenly, like the spacing is pretty even. So you can steal some frames in here to add a bit more of a back to them what you have. There's a bit of a softer body transition just because this is already so much heavier than these guys and you want to make sure that it doesn't look too light. It still has that sharp hit when coming back and then let me see the body here. Same thing here, you can track his eyes. Over there. Tracking, screen left side. So it has a little bit of an arc, but looking at it, you know, especially if it's in real time, it has that feeling of like this versus a bit more of a softer thing and you can towards the end, like before it ends the position here, it translates over, you can start rotating the body where it goes from this to like this. So it goes over, that's the orientation of the body, right? It's like this, like this, and then it starts to shift over and then it starts to get up and then as it stops it shifts back to this position. I'm not sure if that makes any sense. It's in this rotation, right? You can see how the eyes are and starting around here-ish or whatever, you start rotating the body over this way. So that by the time it's here, those eyes are not like that, but they're more like this. Then it goes up and then maybe a frame or two after this, you are around where you are now, maybe a bit less. Then as you come down, you end up there. There's a bit more than just translate over going up, but also rotationally it's staying put. So you have a bit of a variation. So I don't know if my my hands can show this, but let's pretend my awesome time cop! DVD is the level, like imagine this is this is the creature and you got the eyes here. So right now it's doing this and I'm looking at something where it probably will be going this way, right? So it goes over and starts to rotate and then goes over and down. It starts to rotate over before it stops translating and translates up with an arc like this, not that. Like that, over, and that. Not super swimmy, I might have acted it out too strongly, but something so that it doesn't A, stops so harshly and has a bit more complexity in its rotations. And speaking of rotation, same thing, you want to track that tip here. It goes up, up, and then boom, goes back over one frame. So again, the spacing is go straight back versus a little bit of a ease in. And then you can always come back faster and my scribbles are not. I would just be very careful with anything that involves the one frame direction change on something that's that big. And I know in the grand scheme of things, you know, I don't know, that's a human foot and that's the leg and this is light, but in this world, I would watch out. One frame direction changes I can almost see in these legs. Even here, same thing here. I like that you have a little bit of rotation this way, like the point you can track the tip. But there are a couple of things.  All right. But then also goes back in the same direction. So it feels a bit repetitive in CG. So you want to have if you're initiating momentum up and at the end over this way, it has to be all fancy. It has to go at least like that. A little bit of momentum has to continue and now I can change direction. Even if it's small, brutal or red, all right. So even if you want to go back and end up here, you say, oh, and then come back versus this. That's just too harsh. But you know, you can easily go over this way and it comes back this way. And as it comes down, have a bit of a straightening on one of these guys or pushing here so that that initiates them back. So the body comes back this way and ends where it is here. That's all cool. Got the body in this one. It's a little bit harsh. Look at this line here. Right there. So on this guy, you want one more frame was rotated back a bit more. And then a little bit. So it's a bit harsh, but it's better. I mean, it's not like I don't want to take the snappiness away. And then the overlap on the on his on its arms helps, but except this guy. So this is where the body stops. So this continuing helps, helps, helps, all that helps this one, especially because it's holding something that's even heavier. It's going to take more time for this pincher and this to come back. So on this body stop, this one would overshoot a bit more and then come back and be the slowest out of all of them. And I think that's okay because you have ample time. So this one would lay that this guy. So this would stop maybe this would stop and then one frame ease in and one frame ease out again. So this one seems better. Let's see. Yeah, because you have big shooting up, but then you ease in. Although you might argue that it's usually at the same heights. You could potentially go a bit higher, but then you softly come back and back up. So it has that bounce that softens the momentum stop. So that one I buy a lot more. So stuff like that, that idea in all the other big moves. And I think that should be it. I know that's going to change, you know, some of the pincher stuff because I don't know, I'm not sure how the body is rigged and how it's going to influence the legs. But I would say do that and then we can do one last pass on the legs if needed. So far the legs look pretty cool. So I would just do that body pass for sure because that's going to change some little things here and there. All right. Thank you. All right. There's an email you can sign up. You can start whenever you want. You can submit whatever you want. You get 16 submissions. Either way, a like and subscribe would be awesome. All right. Thank you.