Hey everyone shave your 1,000 here today we've got another Box here with a product in it run an open Excuse me. We're gonna open this up and check it out. So stay tuned. Let's see what it is Okay guys, so I got this in the mail I'm not quite sure what it is But I'm gonna open it up right now And let's see What's in here? I'm I have an idea, but I'm not sure if it's the one I'm thinking of Okay, well, this is not what I thought it was but this is a Trebo 32 ounce tumbler, which is at 946 millimeter So I can't get it in shot. Let's do this There we go Okay, well stainless Turbo stain or trebo stain steel t-shaped water bottle 32 ounces Indigo crush I think that must be the Let's see. I'm gonna look to see where it came from Trebo direct Trebo Hopefully I'm saying this right from This came out. Well, it's a China product, but it came out of Orlando I I did the one I'm not sure if it's from the same It's not the same company though Okay. Well Let's go ahead and open this up. Cool Well, that's me Being here and that looks like some paracord. We've got a book in here tumbler cord or Tom 32 ounce tumbler paracord installation manual So it shows you how to put it on here Um, okay. Let's read this. This is a we'll get this out here in just a second. This is a function overview Water bottle paracord with compass whistle safety ring metal carabiner and cord stopper Comes with two different lids For meeting different drinking scenarios and drinking methods made of durable 304 18 slash 8 food grade stainless steel BPA free and without any odors Use double layer stainless steel vacuum technology cold drink stay for At least 48 hours And hot drinks stay for at least 24 hours huh The large bottom out design is convenient To put ice cubes in and easily clean and there's tips for cleaning You get the tumbler you get the paracord handle strap Uh straw lid you get a spout lid Uh two reusable straws and one straw brush Okay, well Let's open this up here Okay Okay. Yeah, so there's the little compass inside there. I can read a compass never had to use one So There's your stop right there. Here's the the carabiner and the whistle These whistles are loud See here This must be Okay For the straw lid The straws that it comes with There's a little nipple there You just put the straw on there like that And you can just drink all that if you want All right, so there's that Nice little handle there 32 ounces It's nice Like the color scheme on that there's your What about deal there? Okay All right, it shows how to put this on here. So this According to the pictures Goes on to here. Okay, and then you separate These two like this make sure the paracord is down underneath Now let's pull this down Oh, okay.  Well, you know, what's next let's do a leak test with each one of these These lids here I like That this Flips down out of the way and flip it up and carry it All right, let me get some water in here and I'll be right back. Okay. We got some water in here All right, let's do the straw one first And no leaks Again, we're not going to do the 24 hour 48 hour thing I know you want me to test the claims, but In reality, if I haven't drank 32 ounces of something In 24 48 hours, I'm probably not going to so Got this handle. We've got this handle No leaks. All right Cool. Okay. Well, that's uh That's a plus I'm not sure how well these compasses work, but nice that it's on there, you know But um, like I said, I've never had to use a compass. I can read compass I uh When I was in sixth grade actually, um, I went to camp for three days and uh I took compass reading and I got an a plus. I aced it The teacher would take certain things out She would show us what she's going to hide and then We would go somewhere and do something and then on our next, uh Class, I guess you would call it um She would tell us okay Um, she would hand us a little piece of paper That would tell us, you know, so many from this tree like from this tree so many steps East or west or whatever and then turn right or left or actually east or or north or south or whatever and we would We would have to go find them Oh, we had actual compasses, of course, but um, yeah, so Yeah, I uh I like this I'll flip down out of your way Again, you can pick it up It flips out of your way That's uh And you can't lose that It's it's on there. So you have to lose the whole cap now this I will use I will use this this will be on my uh on my pack On my backpack it fits right where This water bottle Used to be see here's a spout on this one. I never use that spout. So I can never get enough water out of it So I would just always take it off and just drink out of it. But as you can see That's where this bottle used to be And it fits in there perfect a lot better water bottle. This does leak too this one here leaks And as you guys saw this one don't so Two thumbs up As of right now I will give it a four and a half star um Out of five, you know Uh And that you know that rating could go up as I use this thing Um, I need to use it a couple times make sure there's no leaks That's the only thing I'm worried about is the seal is going to fail or whatnot. Um, I have high hopes for this So right now it is a four and a half star so That's what it looks like on the pack not to mention perfect match Looks like it belongs on there. I need to get me one of those, uh Water filters, you know that you can get out of the river or creek or whatever and it filters your water I need to get me one of them So I like it. I mean right now I will give it a two thumbs up. It's awesome.  That is awesome. I had a pickup truck It was a 66 Chevy pickup truck and uh, it was uh, it was painted this scheme just like this Um, it was like a turquoise on the top part and then as it went down it faded into a Into a black. It was just like this and reminds me of that I do like the paracord the color scheme is the same on the paracord There's quite a bit of paracord here. So, uh, you know, if you need to A length of uh, a paracord, you know, you have it here in an emergency situation You never know, right? I have made traps and snares with paracord before To catch animals. I wasn't in a survival situation. I just I did it because I wanted to see if I could and it worked. So this I can tell you right now. This is plenty to do that with so Yeah, if you need a little extra cordage There you go. I mean and then you know, you still got your whistle and your compass there I like it Very nice So thank you very much I'm going to look this up and see if I can find it And I'm going to leave the information in the description below I was not notified of this. So this was a pleasant surprise. So thank you for sending it to me. I appreciate it and again I'll get the information necessary and I'll put it Link in the description below if you're interested in this thing As of right now, I would recommend it Not a drop of spilling All right guys, there you go the 32 ounce Trebo trebo, there's the name right there 32 ounces awesome. I love it There's another name with their logo Fiction on it. All right guys, there we go. This is awesome, man It was supposed to be a good surprise. It was not what I was expecting I wasn't expecting this at all and I'm going to tell you what this is something I will have on my pack for sure So thanks for watching guys. Appreciate it again. I'll get the necessary information for you It'll be in the description below Shaber the myth man alleged I'm gone for now Weekend is coming up. So enjoy the rest of your week. Have a safe weekend. We'll see you in the next one. Bye. Bye guys. Take care


Hello, hello, everyone. My name is Laura. This is my channel, Laura's Little Library, and welcome to today's video, which is my summer TBR. Some TBRs this year because I felt like monthly TBRs were just too pressure-filled and I'm a mood reader, but I still like to have some semblance of books that I am excited to read and interested in reading, and when I look at my shelf, I see, ah, yes, I shall read that book. So I have selected this time quite a few of those books. So this is a very large TBR for just for a season in general, but also for this particular season, because I don't know how much reading I'm gonna get done this summer. I'm certainly gonna try, but this is a big TBR. So I'm not expecting to read all of them, but I'd love to read as many as possible. So let's get right into the TBR. I have really only two books that aren't fantasy. Like, I'm planning on having a very fantasy-heavy reading season this summer, but the ones that aren't fantasy are This Delicious Death by Camel Cunningham. This is a sapphic-very-queer summer horror, so this takes place at some sort of music festival, and it's a very summery event, and they're cannibals, which is gonna be a very new thing for me, and I don't know how excited I am, but I am actually very excited because I read this author's debut novel last year, and I really enjoyed it. And yeah, I think it's a good, like, horror summer book, so I'm definitely gonna give it a try, and I'm excited. And then in the almost completely opposite vein, the other non-fantasy book that I cannot wait to read this summer is, of course, Happy Plays by Emily Henry. This is Emily Henry's newest book. It just came out, and it's definitely, like, summer vacation vibes. Like, a lot of her books are. So we are following a second chance romance where this couple dated for a really long time, and they're gonna go to, like, this, like, beachy kind of vacation with their friends. However, they haven't told their friends that they have broken up. So they're going back to this place, and they are pretending that they are still together, and I think they're just gonna get back together again anyway. But I love the bright pink solid color on the cover, and it just screams summer in every aspect of this book. And I've been a big fan of Emily Henry's other books, so I'm really excited to read this. I hope that I can just fly through it, and I'm ready. I'm ready to do this. Let's go, Emily Henry. Let's go. Now we can get into the fantasy based. So a lot of this... Okay, some of them are, like, good fantasy to read in the summer, and some of it are just, like, I want to read this fantasy. I want to devote time to it, and summer is the best time for me to devote time to it. Like, I'm going back to school in the fall. So I'm about to start having homework again. Ooh, yay. So I want to get as many of these fantasy series and books done before that as I can. Starting with a great summer fantasy, The Adventures of Amina Al-Sarafi by Shannon Cekroborty. And this follows a female pirate who's, like, ready to throw in the hat to retire to be done.  So Amina Al-Sarafi says, yep, I got you. And so I think it's just going to be a great summer piratey fantasy. So I'm very much looking forward to this. It's gotten quite a bit of hype since it's come out. And even before it came out, people were getting all hyped up and excited for it, and that eventually won me over. So this is the book that I will bring with me on my vacation. It's definitely going to get read. Then I have an entire trilogy here that I want to read. City of Brass by S.A. Cekroborty. And like I said, I have the entire trilogy here. I have been wanting to read this for a very long time, pretty much. Like, I think this has been on my TBR for at least as long as I've been on Booktube, and that's been a few years now. So it's about time that I actually read this trilogy. I think it's going to be a great summer read because it is a desert. And actually in the month of May is the desert-a-thon, desert-a-thon, not the desert-a-thon, desert-a-thon. And so that's very much putting me in the mood to read a desert fantasy, which I think is great for summer because it's hot and sunny and summery, I guess. So I'm going to try my darndest to read as much of this trilogy as I can, if not the whole trilogy, but we will have to see with these Junkers. But I know a lot of people love this books and a lot of friends of mine and people really like them, so I'm excited. I also have two other very like aquatic-y style fantasy books that I want to read, one being Crown of Coral and Pearl. Again, this has been on my TBR for so long. I know it's some sort of mermaid type fantasy, but when you go on my Goodreads and you go to my TBR, scroll all the way to the bottom to like first books added, this is the second book on that list. The first book is Journey to the Center of the Earth, but that's not important. This is the second book on that list and my Goodreads TBR is huge. So I don't even remember what this book is about. All I remember is that it's mermaid fantasy, so I've been wanting to read it in the summer. I just haven't gotten my hands on a copy of it yet. So hopefully, hopefully this year will be the year. The other like very obviously summer fantasy is Skin of the Sea. This is like a siren fantasy where sirens are a real thing, but it's very much like our world plus sirens type of book. And there is actually another like companion book following one of the characters that influences a character in this book. So if I want to read that book, which I kind of do, I should probably I want to start with this one. So I should read that one. Then I also really want to read the Guild series. This is a four book series. It is a King Midas retelling. So everything they touch is gold and it focuses on this girl. And it's gotten like surprisingly good reviews for like it's a romance kind of. I don't know if it's like a dark fantasy romance or if it's not dark, but I'm intrigued. I was very intrigued by the summary of it at first. And then I heard people like reading it and they're like, oh my word, this is so much better than I thought. And now I'm just all kinds of excited and ready to read it. So hopefully another good summer fantasy I want to read is Mirage. I believe this is a standalone, but it's another desert fantasy style. So there we go. Now this next one is another one that's been out for quite a while and I can't believe I haven't read it. And I'm sure a lot of you can't believe that I haven't read them. But the Ember and the Ashes series, I haven't read any of those. I want to, I think it's another desert fantasy style. I don't know. All I know is that it got a whole like new cover release a while back and it has like, I believe the South Asian main character on the cover and that's super exciting and super awesome. And a lot of people loved it. So I got to hop on that train. I got to do it. I just got to leap right into the series and go. Speaking of South Asian main characters in fantasy, the Jasmine Throne is a chunky fantasy that I want to read. I think. Yeah. Yeah. Honestly, I don't know much more. All I know is that it's on my TBR. And so as soon as I have access to it, I will read it. And the final book on my summer TBR. This is such a huge TBR. I'm so screwed. There are so many good books on here. That is Witches, Steeped in Gold. I believe this is like a Caribbean mythology esque or I think specifically Jamaican. I'm not super sure. But yeah, I mean, how exciting, right? And the second book just came out. I don't know if it's a duology or trilogy or what, but there is another book. So I need to get on this ever since it's come out. I've had my eye on it and I've been wanting to read it. So those are all the books. Again, so many series. I think personally, I would prefer to start and finish one series than start like most of these. I want to be able to kind of just do start to finish. That's why I have the entire Dave Bad trilogy here. Not just the first one. It's like I want to read the whole trilogy just because I don't want to be in the middle of like 10 series. Again, even though that is still my true for my current situation. But I don't want to make it worse. So I'm going to try and read series at a time. So wish me luck because I'm definitely going to need it. But if you like this video and give it a thumbs up, feel free to comment down below. What is on your summer TBR? What books do you like to read in the summer? Is summer a time that you can devote to reading? Or is that actually when you're at your busiest or your most social or whatever? I also have bookish social media linked down below. So you can see what I do end up picking up and what I think about it. Otherwise, feel free to subscribe. I am posting videos only once a week over the summer. So make sure you hit the bell to be notified when those videos go up again. Thank you all for watching this video. And until I see you in the next one, I wish you happy reading.


If you've ever wanted to take a new step in your artistic journey, but we're just a bit nervous about getting into a class that was too artistically serious, the 30 days to more confident sketching might be right up your alley. To become a better artist, spending a few minutes a day sketching is crucial to seeing progress. Even 15 minutes a day can make a huge difference. Lots of my students want to be able to take more advanced classes from me, learn to draw animals and scenes and people and landscapes, but the drawing part can be really intimidating. So let's just call it sketching and lighten up on ourselves just a little bit. Whether you're an urban sketcher, a painter in any medium, a Bible journal or a crafter wanting to up your game and creating scenes in Copic markers or pencils, some basic confidence that you can look at a subject or a photo and sketch it freehand will enable you to do so much more than you can right now. I created this 30 days class to take away that nervousness. Just get a simple sketchbook and a couple pencils and spend time drawing every day for a month. At $1 a day, the class is affordable with assignments that are doable and entertaining as well. I had a ton of fun with every lesson. The subject matter for each day is something fun to practice just sketching a whole page of bamboo or birds or bears or bridges that practice a simple skill each day with just a pencil. You'll be concentrating on becoming confident in your own style, even learning what that style is. This class will run a little differently than most on my site. If you sign up say at 2 in the afternoon, then the first lesson is open to you immediately and then the next day at 2 o'clock, the next lesson will be open to you and the following day the third lesson will be open and so on and so forth. You don't have to do them that day, but the schedule that matches the time of day that you started continues since it's all automated. I do encourage you to attempt to keep up with maybe a half an hour a day to see the best progress. It's like trying to get in shape. If you only go to the gym occasionally, it takes a lot longer than it would be if you did a little bit every day. See the free pre-class lesson on the website which lists the really limited supplies needed and you can click on the annotation on the screen or the link in the doobly-doo. I hope to see you soon on your sketching journey.


Becky Burr, who is formerly with NTIA now, an ICANN board member, Becky, thank you for taking the time to talk to us. If Vince Surf is considered the father of the Internet, I've heard you refer to as the mother of the Internet, what was it like in those early years working with Ira Magazine or to get ICANN going? So first of all, I have been called the godmother of ICANN, but I'm not going to take credit for the Internet. The early years were very exciting in the following way. There was a problem, funding for both the, funding for the IANA functions had been stopped by the National Science Foundation. There was need to sort of secure a firm foundation on which to continue the DNS work. There was talk about moving it into a more international organization kind of UN agency, and a lot of people were very concerned about it, and a lot of people were very concerned about it from many, many different focuses from keeping the Internet, the Internet being able to continue to move at Internet speed, not having a heavy governmental overlay, allowing the sort of creativity that comes from private sector writ large management. And so in order to figure out what to do, we conducted a very extensive sort of talking couple of months where dozens and dozens, hundreds of people came in and talked to us about what it was they needed to see going forward, what their problems with the way things were running then. There was a lot of disputes, trademark disputes, other kinds of disputes that had been kind of building up. And so we got an enormous amount of input from speaking with people, and this was around the world, so it wasn't just the U.S. And then we sort of crafted the green paper, which we wanted to throw out there and see what's coming back at us. We sort of put it out there, and we got thousands of comments, and thousands of comments, they were online comments from around the world, which was, I think, in, this was 1997, it was probably first in terms of online comments globally from the U.S. government perspective. So then we did more talking, more talking around the world, more talking with people and produced the white paper. There was a huge amount of excitement about it, there was an enormous amount of energy. Was there a crepidation as well? Well, of course there were some people that were saying that it wasn't going to work or that it should be managed by the ITU. But in fact, it was a pretty small number. There was very strong global consensus for allowing this to move into a non-governmental setting. In fact, it was really trying to replicate or preserve as much of what had been going on because while DARPA had been funding the work that John did, it was with a very light touch and he was really running it. So it sounds like there was pretty much universal acceptance that the DNS management of the DNS would at least go toward a private model instead of a government model, right? Yes. And just to put this in context, that was a time in which there was an enormous amount of optimism and awareness about what the Internet was doing. The U.S. government produced a paper on a framework for global Internet commerce that called for a very light regulatory touch. The European Union produced one, there was one produced by Japan and there were big international conferences where people were very focused on not imposing a heavy governmental regulatory regime on the Internet. And there was a little bit of a sense of what if everyone did, so a few passed the regulation. So I grew up in the midst of a very vibrant global discussion about allowing the Internet to be the Internet and a sort of light-handed regulatory approach to it. So some of the things that we've seen in more recent years were really not there. The whole concept, I can't as such an unusual beast in this sort of bottom-up policy formation system with multiple inputs, unlike traditional organizations where it goes from the top down. Where did that come from? It came from what we were saying was the whole notion all along was private sector leadership. Now today we wouldn't call that, we wouldn't say private sector leadership, we would say multi-stakeholder. We didn't mean just business or anything like that, but stakeholders who were part of it would be involved. That had always been the case. John Postel worked very closely with the ITF and with the CCNSO managers and the like. There was a need in that transition to expand the definition of stakeholder. There were more stakeholders, there were end users, there were business users of the Internet. The pot was getting bigger, the stakeholder group was getting bigger. What we wanted to do was really preserve what was going on and what had traditionally been the basis of DNS management, which is sort of consensus among the stakeholders, but recognize that the group of stakeholders had gotten much bigger and much more diverse and much more global. Help me understand the timeframe. Were you at NTIA then? I moved to NTIA on June 1st of 1997 and we published the first request for comments on June 2nd or something like that. What was it like working with Magazine or on this endeavor? So I was great. He had a group of people from all over the US government working on the framework for global electronic commerce and I was working on privacy and Internet governance. There were people from the US trade rep talking about tariffs, there were people from all over the government putting together the sort of if we want to enable us to take advantage of the opportunity that the Internet represented from an economic growth perspective, what structure would we need to have in place? And so this DNS management piece came directly out of the e-commerce. To that point, Magazine or told us, he said, you know, when he finished with the failed Clinton healthcare initiative and he was going into this, he said a primary driver of this was we wanted a long-term economic growth model. Was the economic viability of the Internet recognized by everybody at those very early stages? We were talking about what percentage of the global economy was already sort of riding on the Internet and how that would grow over time. So there was a clear recognition that the Internet was the growth engine of the future and that we needed to get it right. People got it. Yeah. People definitely got it. Now, some, I think actually our numbers were probably quite low in terms of what we thought would be happening five years down the road. Globally, people understood that this was a paradigm shift like the industrial revolution in a way. Was there a, across the board acceptance throughout the U.S. government in the other agencies, or was there, did you have to argue this sort of, for lack of a better phrase, we built it, we sort of own it attitude? There was remarkably little of that in the administration. Certainly the science agencies that had been part of it never had that attitude. I mean, they had gone global, although in a university and research institute model. There was, interestingly enough, there was a little more resistance to commercialization. But you heard it once in a while, but not at all the executive order that President Clinton signed included moving this out of the government and the private sector. So every once in a while you'd hear it. How about Capitol Hill? Was there acceptance there? Well, there was. First of all, it's pretty complex and what we were proposing to do was pretty unique. We couldn't point precisely to a model of what we were doing because we were building something. Some people on the Hill understood that. There were, of course, some economic issues that created some lobbying on Capitol Hill. We were changing the competitive landscape in a pretty fundamental way and the current winners in the economic landscape of the DNS were resisted a little bit and they got some traction on Capitol Hill. So we had a series of hearings and a series of investigations to make sure that we were doing it right. What was the reaction throughout ICANN's history? There have always been congressional hearings about some aspect. Whether it was the new GTLD program, whether it was the IANA stewardship transition. What was the reaction both within the administration, multiple administrations, I guess, and globally for ICANN being called up to the legislative branch and being asked to explain this or that? Well, so frankly, I think it's not clear but for the change in veriscience position in this that it's not clear to me how much Capitol Hill interest would have been. I think that honestly generated the interest. You think that drove it? I think that there were, I know, that there were concerted efforts to get Congress interested in this. That's fair game. I just want to make sure people do it all the time. But I want to make sure I understand what you're saying. So you're saying veriside drove that interest. And that happens all the time. And you would expect a publicly traded company that has an obligation to maximize shareholder value would take the steps that it could to retain its position. Had there not been that lobbying push, there would not have been as great an interest as there was? There would not have been as great an interest. There clearly would have been interest from the science committees. The Commerce Committee would have looked at it. We also had the Judiciary Committees looking at it from a trademark and an IP perspective. So there were enough issues going on that I think that there would have been some hearings. I suspect that they would not have been quite as hostile. But we did have a Democratic administration and a Republican Congress at that time. So there would have been some of the natural partisan politics. Whenever ICANN was called up to the Hill, it always appeared to me that it was never truly understood that whenever there was a hearing, even right up to the end when the final cruise hearing on the transition, there was a sort of underlying current that a lot of members just didn't quite get ICANN. Well, I think that's right. They didn't get the DNS, right? So you have to understand the DNS to be in with. And then you have to understand how the management is dispersed and how there really isn't a kind of central other than the coordination role that ICANN plays. It's not a single monolithic, it's not a thing. It's a vast network of networks with, you know, managed by the DNS system or navigated by the DNS system. That is, it's complicated. We've gotten better about explaining it. The other thing is that to the extent there was a we built it, we own it, that was based on this fundamental misunderstanding about what it meant to be the authoritative root, right? And John tried to demonstrate that one night by directing the root server system to point to another authoritative root. That could have been, for those of us who understood what he was doing, it was clearly John saying, you guys are just confused, here's how it works. It wasn't John pushing back about the government, it was John trying to. Well, I think it was a moment in which John was trying to demonstrate that some of the arguments were quite silly and taking the opportunity to, in a very tangible way, what where control lay and how control could move from place to place. Now, that's the way I always interpreted it. There were multiple administrations, the Bush administration, the Clinton administration, and so on. Could you ascertain a difference in the way that ICANN was handled or dealt with from administration to administration? Was there a difference? So, you know, the Clinton administration ended in 2000 and it was still really in its infancy. We clearly had the commitment to complete the transition and move it forward. I think that could have been, that might have been the way subsequent administrations would have proceeded. It took ICANN a while to get sort of stable and we had the 2003, 2004 evolution and reform committee. It really changed things with September 11th. At that moment, there was a sort of where are all of the potential control safety kinds of places. And I think that for a while, the intelligence community was pretty convinced that there was an important reason to control the authoritative route. That changed by the end of the Bush administration. And they had sort of worked through the evaluation and understood the system had gotten much more robust and much more dispersed in all of those things. And so, while there was always this commitment to transfer, ultimately it happened that there was a period of time where there was increasing anxiety about what would happen if we didn't have this sort of backstop control over the route. And ICANN was, it was hard work to sort of get to a stable period. So that kind of supported allowing this time to pass. But by the end of the Bush administration, it was pretty clear that people had understood that this wasn't a sort of national security tool. And so that paved the way in the Obama administration for finishing the transition. Let me ask you about another issue, and you were involved in this one, which was dot XXX. Was this a case, because it's often pointed to, is this is a case where the government did try to influence ICANN? So we did do FOIAs, and I don't think that there's anything in the written record that proves that the U.S. government intervened. I had conversations with people who were directly in that line. The U.S. government did intervene in the XXX decision. And it was sort of after the fact, because we had been working very closely with NTIA to make sure they understood what the TLD was about, what was going on. It was all fine until after ICANN board had actually already approved it. And at that moment, there was a very strong political pushback, somebody reaching, a conservative organization reaching back into the Bush administration at the highest level, which resulted in really a sea change from NTIA's perspective. How would you characterize, I asked Vint Cerf this question, and I said, how would you characterize historically the USG's relationship with ICANN? And he said problematic and not very supportive. How would you characterize it? Well, I think that there was support initially. There was a great deal of frustration on the part of NTIA in the early years. The IANA functions were not delivered in the best way. They were not, there were delays, it took a long time. They got lots and lots and lots of complaints from the direct consumers that just serving the IANA functions was difficult. There were some kind of heavy-handed moves to try to get country code, top-level domains to enter into contracts that were well-intended but seriously backfired. And so there was a great deal of frustration in the early days with performance and sort of heavy-handed tactics. And I think that the government pushed back on that. And then after that, until Larry Strickling sort of got fully up to speed about it, I would imagine it could have been difficult. I think that Larry was fully supportive of ICANN throughout. But I think there was probably frustration on both sides right up to the end. Did you think the transition was going to fly? I was really happy on October, on October 1st, I just have to say. I think it was touch and go. The between the announcement in 2014 and when it finally happened in October of 2016, were there points where you're going, I don't think this is going to work? I think that until the community came together right after the announcement in which the announcement was really focused on the IANA functions technical transition. And the community stood up and said in a kind of astonishing unity that never before seen, that's not good enough. We need these accountability fixes. This is the moment to do this. And ICANN resisted. And frankly, so did NTIA, didn't really understand why we needed this. So we did both complicate the transition process by demanding a more robust review and change to get there. And I was very worried about it until ICANN finally acknowledged the community's views on this and worked to put together the CCWG on the cross-community working group on accountability. After that, I felt pretty good about it. There were moments in between now and then, and it obviously took a lot longer than anybody had hoped that it would. You have had a unique perspective in that you were at NTIA, you were an attorney involved in the dot triple X case, and now you're an ICANN board member. So you've been along the entire continuum. So actually, it's a little more complicated than that. I was at NTIA, but I was also the GAC representative from the United States to the GAC for the first couple of years. And then I was a lawyer in private practice, but I was also on the country-con-name-supporting organization council for many years. So I have had a kind of nice look at the process. So my question, given that broad range of experience, how has that shaped your perception of ICANN? Well, I think I have a pretty good view of sort of what the drivers are across the organization. I think I understand and share the concerns, have a sort of, I have many, many different perspectives, I can look at it and say, as a country code manager, here are the issues at stake. As a business participant, as an industry participant in the DNS industry, here are the concerns. As a government, here are the concerns. And as a member of the board, here are the concerns, you put them together and figure it out. Great. Becky Burr, thank you very much. Appreciate you taking the time to talk to us. It's a pleasure.


ly expected was our language, not the operator. So I just apologize because we had seen that comment before, but didn't want to be misquoted on that. Thank you, Mina, for that. I think for next steps, first off, I think the first next step is to thank everybody for your time and your willingness to be candid and to help us understand commissioners. I'm going to let you express your gratitude. And then we'll go, I think in terms of general next steps, we have an agenda-setting meeting next week, commissioners. And I think we can think about how we want to digest this information. I know we have a November 17 deadline and there's some process that Caitlin outlined that we are hoping that the operators can give us. It's more nuanced, but I also hear that they're looking for more guidance from us and to the extent that we can be helpful that way. On one of five, I would be inclined to be as helpful as we can, but we need to circle back as to next steps. Commissioners, feedback on that point and then we can express our gratitude. Commissioner Maynard, what are you thinking on process for next steps? Mr. O'Brien, are you okay? Oh, I'm sorry, Mr. O'Brien, I think so. Caitlin talked about, and I can't remember who else talked about it too, which is this is a work in progress. So I thank everyone for their time and their comments. I think we did put a lot of thought into this when we looked at it the first time and when we voted. And I do think we have the mechanisms in terms of we've given some information for clarification. We've asked for other information from the operators in terms of what's implemented now, what's possible, timelines, what's still TBD, because maybe they need more information from us. To me, that next document will then guide where we go prior to the 17th of November, because it may be a more tailored waiver, really speaking to what it is that needs longer times to figure out what timelines you're going to be. But this has been very helpful for me as one commissioner. Mr. O'Brien, what about the tweaks that Mina has mentioned and that we've addressed today that are possibilities? What would be the process for that? I know we already have a reg, but the beauty about regulations is we can always revisit them. What about those tweaks? So I think what they need to do is be memorialized so we're all clear on exactly what the tweaks are to make sure that that's not requiring further clarification, that the operators don't need something even more pointed than what's already been discussed, and then I think we can deal with it. It may be that this reg is going to have to come back up in front of us a series of times for minor tweaks, but ideally, if we get this information memorialized, we get the information we had asked for in terms of you now have some answers, give us what is done, what is doable on a certain timeline, what is still unanswerable potentially because you're looking for clarification, then I think we can get to the next stage in terms of any cleanups that might be easy to do and any waivers that might be necessary. So legal, commissioners, if you're in agreement with that, we need some guidance from legal as to the process for properly doing that in the regulatory promulgation process. Commissioner Hill? I would agree with what Commissioner O'Brien just stated, and I want to thank everybody who came today. It was very, very informative. Food for thought, for sure. And I think the processes have been set up where we can be helpful to you and you can be helpful to us. Excellent. Commissioner Skinner, what are you thinking? There's not much for me to add on process, although it's almost a question for me is what comes first, the chicken on the egg. We've had a lot of give and take here and I understand the operators need to have the commission provide some clarification. Hopefully you did get some good clarification on some of the points today. I am looking forward to the material that you that we have asked back on August 8th for you to submit for us to further consider in terms of any additional waivers or an extension of the current waiver. I want to add my voice to the chorus of thanks to each of you for participating in this roundtable today. And in particular, our partner from the Attorney General's Office, very, very informative in terms of your contribution to this discussion today. To our sports waging operators, I think that you've expressed a real sincerity in working in your desire to work with the commission and in the team here to get this right. And so with the additional time that we have between now and November 17th, I'm hoping we can make some real headway on a regulation that does exactly what the commission intends for it to do, but then also respects your technical challenges and some of the other concerns that you raised before us today. So just I'll stop there. But just a thank you once again. Thank you, Commissioner Skinner. Commissioner Mayer. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. I echo my fellow commissioners. I appreciate the operators for coming on in the candid conversation. I think that, you know, by trying to ask questions that were outlier questions, because I'm trying to figure out, you know, I'm trying to parse everything out, right, versus what's impossible, what's possible and what's inconvenient. And to that aim, it's always in the back of my head that I am speaking for myself as one commissioner put intense pressure on the MGC team to implement 23N and get it going. And I will put as much pressure on making sure that the citizens of the Commonwealth's privacy is protected. And that's just where I come from on this. I think Jared and Nina and GLI and our RG partners for putting more light into what's going on and where they're coming from. And I just want to get this right. I want to make sure that a citizen of Massachusetts knows how their data is being used, that they're treated fairly, that and we may be on the cusp, we may be ahead of the game nationally. That's okay with me. I'm fine with that. And so, you know, but I want to get it right and I want to be fair. I want to be fair to everyone. So, thank you. Excellent. To all of you, thank you for joining today. I echo all of my fellow commissioner's sentiments. This is a complicated topic. We appreciate that you asked for this opportunity. And I'm really pleased that we were able to extend it. But I appreciate that you're comfortable asking. And so, to that degree, we're cooperating. We will always agree with every element that I think we are operating always with open minds. And I too echo my fellow commissioners. We may not have been terribly vocal during that meeting, but we worked on it. And so, with that, you've given us a lot to think about. We've got some process questions to go forward. Again, thank you. Attorney General's office has been very important. There's our Commissioner Skinner's term partner in this effort because it is your area of expertise. Quite simply across the nation, the Attorney General's offices are meeting in on these conversations. And I really very much respect Attorney General Campbell's efforts here. And she's very well represented by Attorney Ryan. So, thank you for that. And then to our GLI partners, thank you. We may be meeting you again as we get the feedback on the timelines and implementation. I've learned a lot today. And always respect the fact that I am not in the operator's shoes. I don't understand all the complexities, although we, you know, I think you conveyed them to us today with a degree of precision that will be really helpful for us going forward. So, thank you. Anything else to, and of course to A&K and our legal team, thank you. I always feel like it just means more work. But as everybody said, you know, we're all working to get this right. So, thank you. Okay. Commissioners, I just want to turn to all the guests.  I just want to thank you for your time. And, you know, we really look forward to continue to work with you moving forward.  So, thank you for that. Yeah. You know, and Bruce, thank you. I know that you've been reaching out and your team, we're all working hard to stand up this industry in a way that will work to make a sustained, strong industry here in Massachusetts. And we're pretty lucky to be able to have these kinds of conversations with the quality of operators that we now call licensees. So, thank you. And thank you, Bruce. And thanks, David, for that. That means a lot. All right. Then with that, I need a motion to adjourn. Move to adjourn. Second. Thank you. Any edits, questions? Michelle Bryan. Aye. Mr. Hill. Aye. Mr. Skinner. Aye. Mr. Maynard. Aye. And I vote yes.


Welcome to Nothing Exempt. I am Nick Partini and I'm here with Brian Piotter and we have a special guest today, Stefan Kinsella. Before we get to our guests, just like to mention for those who have been listening, we've got a lot of new listeners since the Mark Fawber show a couple days ago. The best way to find us is on nothingexempt.com or on the Reddit Nothing Exempt or on Twitter at nothingexempt. Please review us on iTunes and spread the word of the show and we'll continue to bring on good quality guests and make this more engaging conversation. And also a quick note from our sponsor is the Cause and Effect Report. It's a way to learn more about the markets and macro trading from the direct perspective of a hedge fund trader. It kind of just helps you figure out like some of the big picture trends and how to position your risk in the right way and pick the right companies to profit off that. However, the Cause and Effect Report on the loan is not investment advice. You still need to do your own research, but it might be a good way to just make you think a little bit differently about financial markets. Now, Brian will introduce our guest. Well, Nick, you already did that, but Stefan here is a patent attorney in this great state of Texas. And he is also a libertarian, which seems like quite the contradiction. And Stefan, I haven't introduced myself. My name is Brian and I am a mechanical engineer. I happen to have my name on a patent and I've attempted another one and I've become very disillusioned by the whole system and know that it is a giant big waste of money and a way to go after small guys with lawyers. So I wanted to hear from you. What's it like trying to run into the patent system as a libertarian?  Or does it feel like it's a making a myth that is going to win in the end? Oh, that's a good question. I mean, it's not a career path I would necessarily recommend. It's a career that would not exist in a free market where there wasn't patent copyright law.  You hope that you can have a world where there's not cancer, but so long that there's cancer, there's a need for cancer doctors. Or so long as there's the state prosecuting people for tax violations or for drug crimes, you need defense attorneys. So they do a useful service given the system that exists. And that's what patent lawyers do. So given that the system exists, they perform a useful function for companies who have to navigate and respond to the system.  It's hard to get motivated to do it. And then you also have to make decisions about, am I going to help people use patents aggressively or just in one way? And that's hard to do in a career in this world. So I've tried in my career to just say, listen, I'm going to put my foot down and say, I will help people obtain patents for defensive purposes and defend themselves, but I will not participate in aggressive use of patents. But not everyone has that luxury. So the whole system corrupts everything and the whole legal system. Okay, Nick, what's your first question for them? Okay. I'm probably on the other side of this debate versus both of you in terms of the idea of intellectual property patents, because I think they have value. And especially in a knowledge economy where people are paid based on their intellectual property and their expertise, you need some way to protect that. First of all, my first question is say if you're like an author or if you are a financial expert or a person who has something that is unique that you do not want to be copied, but you want it to be distributed. Like a good example of this is writing a novel. And if there's no copyright protection, anybody, especially in the age of print on demand and e-books and just to make a free copy or cheaper copy of your book and sell it and you don't get any of the rights for it. I know there's piracy now, but what would the legal framework to reward creative people for their talent? Or say like, for example, with like Disney, if they make like a cartoon series, but without copyright or intellectual property, somebody can make the exact same one and mess up the story came in or to damage their brand or dilute their product. Like how do you protect creative people without intellectual property? Well, so you understand, you just asked me about 10 questions and you had about 10 presuppositions and you didn't clarify any terms. So you're kind of just hitting me with a barrage of things, which presuppose a lot of status ideas. So let me ask you, are you a libertarian? It's a really simple question. I would not consider this a libertarian podcast. I mean, my views are more about 80%. Yeah, I would say you're libertarian on most things, but then you run up against these really weird parts like intellectual property. I'm asking because if you're a status and you're in favor of the government using coercion against people and hurting people, taking their property without their permission, then of course you'd be in favor of intellectual property because that's what that is. So if you don't have a principle basis for favoring peace and freedom and property rights and the non-aggression principle, then we don't really have a common basis to have a discussion. It'd be like if I was a Jew and you are not the concentration camp guard and you wanted to put me in my cage and I was trying to explain to you why you shouldn't do it. You think Jews are inferior and should be killed and I don't know where we can go from there.  So if you're not a libertarian, we really have no, I can explain to the libertarian case like for people that prefer peace and private property rights and freedom and a principled case against the state, I can explain why intellectual property is bad. But if you just hit me with a barrage of questions like, hey, tell me, dude, how can I make my novel make money, dude? I mean, I guess the answer is, I don't know. It's not my job to tell you how you can make money publishing a novel. I mean, it's just using as a hypothetical example. I just think of intellectual property as any sort of other private property. Yeah, but I asked you a question, are you a libertarian or not? You can't even answer that question. So are you a libertarian or not? I'm probably not, I'm not stated. You don't even know. I mean, I don't know how to answer this question. If you're not a libertarian. I lean libertarian on most things but on this issue. So you're against aggression usually, but sometimes you're in favor of the government using aggression against innocent people. Is that right?  I should have you on as much as you're willing because this is fun to see Nick painted into a corner. Well, it's just you have to know who your audience is and someone, you know, someone is a status and they want, they want me to tell them. I mean, I just want to know, are you against aggression or not? Are you in favor of private property rights or not? Yes, I'm in favor of private property rights and I just think intellectual property to be one of those private property out there. Well, then why don't you define for me what you think intellectual property means? Intellectual property is either through patent or a copyright. It's a creation that somebody makes that you have as your exclusive right to sell, which is that you don't know what it is and that's not a definition. But you think the word I heard in there was the word creation. So you have in your head this idea that if you create something, you have a property right in that thing that you create, right? So you kind of probably think that if you use your intellectual creativity or your labor and you work hard at something, then whatever results from that you have a property right in. That's kind of your basic thing here, is that correct? Yeah, that's correct. Well, that's totally wrong because you don't own your labor, first of all, and you don't have a property right in the fruits of your labor. All we own is scarce resources in the world. This is the entire purpose of property rights. Property rights are a solution to the problem that we live in a world of scarce resources where there are things out there that we want to use to accomplish things in the world, but they are scarce, which means that only one person can use them at a time. So there can be conflict over these things. And people that are interested in peace and cooperation want rules to say, okay, for this resource, A owns it instead of B. And that's the solution to the problem. And then they go about their business and they use it and that we have a division of labor economy specialization of labor. And everyone can trade with each other and everything is fine. Okay, so that's basically the roots of libertarianism, which I thought this is libertarian podcast, and that you guys would understand what it means to have free market principles and protection of private property rights. Okay, now you can't just make up a word like, Oh, yeah, I believe in intellectual property to I mean you might as well say you believe in property rights to freedom from fear and freedom from wants and freedom from deprivation and that your social security payments are some kind of property right to me what's the difference really, or you have a right to health care or right to an education or housing or closing or whatever. These are all positive rights that always take away from the negative property rights in cash resources that the legal libertarian system would always protect. So, I don't know what to tell you but there is no right to get rewarded for your intellectual creations. All you have the right to is the physical integrity of a piece of physical property that you own by one of the rules and there's only really two rules. One is, if you find something in the world that is unowned, you can appropriate it. Okay, that's called homesteading, or you can acquire it by contract from previous owner. So, contract and homesteading are really the only ways to come to own things. Okay, so there's a piece of land or a car or a stick or whatever, and the person who finds it or buys it from someone else can sell it to you in commerce. Right, and those are the only two legitimate ways there are also illegitimate ways theft, bribery and extortion. So, there's a political means and there's economic means. One is productive, one is expropriated. So, one is unlibertarian, one is libertarian. I am actually what we call, with quotes, a libertarian. So, I'm against stealing things from people, and that's what an awful property does. Patents and copyrights mean that the government tells some person they can use the government courts to prevent, to prevent a person who owns property from using it as they see fit. And to my mind that's theft. So now, let's go back to your question. Your question was, if I'm a novelist, how can I make money, right? Something like that. Well, let me ask you a question. How can you make money today in today's world where there is copyright? How do you make money with a novel? You write a book and you sell it, either self-publishing or through a publisher, and you collect royalties on every sale. I've written several books and this is how I've gone, paid on it. Right. And why is that impossible if there's no copyright? Because right now, people can copyright, they can pirate your book, right? They can copy your book. Yeah. Yeah. There's probably priority copies on the internet of your book if it's at all popular, correct? And if it's not popular, then we're not talking about a lot of money anyway. Yeah. But if the thing is, if it was legal to just copy and pirate books, everybody would do it and therefore basically the value is all.  Why do you think everybody would do it? Let me ask you a question. It's not legal now, but it is possible, right? It's easy to pirate books, correct? Yeah. I mean, let me ask you a question. Do you think that the Bible or Shakespeare's plays are covered by copyright? No. Okay. Well, why don't people publish Shakespeare or the Bible under their own name on Amazon now? Because there's no legal prohibition against that. Because the publishing company, it's the lowest marginal cost will do that. That was real. The thing is, it's not illegal. That's why. Because you as an individual cannot polish it as low marginal cost as a big distributor. That's why these classic books sell for a fraction of the price of newer books because the author does not need to be compensated. Yeah, but this doesn't happen. So you can't go on Amazon right now and find a pirated version of as you like it by Shakespeare or the Bible. It just doesn't exist. It doesn't happen, even though there's no legal prohibition against it. Well, that's because you can get it for free anyway on Project Gutenberg. There's no need to pirate it. Yeah, but that's my point is that if you write novels, you always face people that can compete with it, okay? And so let me give you the example. Let's suppose you started a new business, like you want to sell new circuits or new widgets or new bicycle chains or new circuit boards or whatever you want to do or new pizza restaurants. You know that if you're successful, then there are going to be people to compete with you, right? You will face competition, right? Yeah. Okay. So as soon as you make a profit and people see that you're profitable, you will face competition. And that will start making it harder for you to keep to maintain your profit levels. Now, is that a, from a free market perspective, is that a good thing or a bad thing? I think it's a good thing. I think free market competition is a good thing. Yeah, that is generally a good thing. The other thing is, in the place of intellectual property and patents, especially in the area we have with a lot of tech oligopolies right now, if you invent a new, say, technological software application at Silicon Valley and you have no intellectual property protection, what's going to stop Facebook or Amazon from putting out a business in like a week? Okay, Nick, can I answer that one? First of all, nothing. Okay. And they'll do it even if you have intellectual property and they'll stall you in court until you run out of money and you probably won't win. I think that the average American has this really misconceived notion of what the patent system is. It's about like the little man protecting himself against the big man and his mousetrap is going to be protected because he's a good inventor and now he'll be able to be rich. The big corporations won't put him down and make him poor by copying and stealing his inventions. But that's not how the patent system works. That's not my experience with it anyways. My experience with it is it's slow, it's convoluted, and your patent isn't worth very much at the end when you have it.  No, and that's all correct, but Nick basically is asking what to stop people from competing with me. And he's actually being inadvertently honest, I think by admitting that the entire impetus behind the patent system is to have the government come in and to interfere with competition. That is protectionism. You know, we call that in libertarianism and economics, we call that protectionism is protecting people from competitors. That's what mercantilism is. That's what protectionism is. And why would you be worried about the fact that if you make a product, people can easily compete with you. I understand as an entrepreneur, your job is to try to figure out how I can make a profit and keep the profit going. And what competitors what I say. Okay, but the fact that it's easier for someone to compete with you because they can just copy your novel or your or your design. If a lot of value of your product is embodied and things that are intellectual in nature and design oriented in nature and easy to copy. I understand why as a entrepreneur, you will be worried about the threat of competition. But that's the free market. The free market is that you face the threat of competition and people can copy and emulate you and do what you're doing. You know, if you build a log cabin and people have been living in caves before, everyone will see, oh, this guy built a log cabin. That's a possible thing to do. And because you've made this feature of the world public by doing it in public in a way that people can see, you've taught them something inadvertently or inadvertently. I don't know. It doesn't matter. But you revealed information to people and they are totally free to use this information to make their own log cabins with their own logs.  And there's no distinction between that and between someone competing with you. If you open up the first Taco Bell in a neighborhood or the first pizza restaurant or the first hardware store or the first general store. Or if you start selling, you know, jumbo jets, or if you start selling smartphones that have rounded corners with the touchscreen, or if you sell a novel called Great Expectations by Charles Dickens. As soon as you release this information into the public, you have people learn from this and they're free to compete with you as they see fit as long as they don't violate the borders of your property rights. That is as long as they don't trespass against you. And if I copy your novel, it does not trespass against you because it doesn't take anything from you that you own. You still have that pattern. You still have the ability to print these novels. You still have the ability to sell them. You might not be able to sell them for as high a price, but you don't own the right to buy, to sell things to customers at that price. And Stefan, can I move into a different question but on the same topic? I've always thought that bringing the patent system down from the inside would be a little bit difficult, to say the least. But now that I've seen different people on the internet at Alibaba or Amazon and many other sites openly selling copies of things, I realize it has become almost impossible to shut down what is a thousand copycats. You're finally at the stage where it's not one or two or ten law-abiding companies in the United States that you're stopping from copying you and violating patents. It's a thousand little guys from all around the world selling globally on the internet. Do you think this could be the final, like, destruction of the patent system that keeps people from filing patents in the first place and going through the process anymore? Well, I think that the advent of the internet has severely damaged the copyright model. In other words, it's easy to copy things now, like books and design, things that are covered by copyright. And so I don't really think that things will ever be harder to copyright things in the future. It will be only easier because the internet is the world's greatest copying machine. So people can easily use encryption and BitTorrents and things like that. Some drives, whatever they want to do, they will get around these things. That's why only a small percentage of movies and music is now sold, so to speak. So the question is, what about patents? So patents cover the production of physical goods that have a certain design implemented inside of them. And because it's anchored in the physical world, it's fairly easy so far for the legal system of our status court system to enforce patent rights. But I believe that in the future, as the 3D printing type technologies and things like that become more advanced. And I'm talking decades down the road, when you can imagine a home printer or a community printer that could print an iPhone or something that advanced. Let's say 50, 60, 80 years down the road. At that point in time, it will become almost impossible to enforce patent laws just like it's almost impossible to enforce copyright laws right now. And I think that's a good thing. And I am hopeful that the advent of Bitcoin and other technologies will make it impossible for the state to enforce drug laws and tax laws and things like that. Every one of these illegitimate government laws, drug laws, tax laws, transcription laws, patent and copyright, state monopolized education. Every time we have a technological revolution that makes it easier for people to obey these laws is a good thing. I won't encourage people to evade the law in the open right now, but I think that in a societal perspective, the easier it is for people to evade these laws, the better. And the government will become more and more impotent and it will just wither away. That's my goal. That's my hope in the state. This leads me to another question. One of the benefits, I think at least side benefits of intellectual property. And I'd like to have your answer on this because I may be completely off base, but just based on like my observation of technological advancement, it really started to accelerate around the industrial revolution, which is also the time where you got the first development of intellectual property law as patents became kind of an incentive to push innovation forward.  So, let's take patent law. So patent law was rooted in the practice of monarchs in England and Europe in the, in centuries ago of granting just monopoly so that they would write on a piece of paper. John Jones has the sole exclusive right to sell sheepskin or wine or playing games or playing cards in this town. And that was a monopoly privilege that he grants to them and usually an exchange for some kind of payment. Like he would say, I'll give you the monopoly to be the only one who can do this in this town. I don't have to give me taxes or help me collect taxes or something like that. So there's always some kind of arrangement. And it got out of hand. And so parliament passed the statute of monopolies in 1623. And they prescribed or limited what the monarch could do, but they retained his ability to keep granting these monopolies for technical innovations. So basically, it arose out of the practice of granting monopoly privileges, which is protectionism because you're protecting someone from competition. That's explicitly the purpose. And, you know, even your arguments earlier, you were saying like, how are you going to make a profit? I mean, the idea is that if the government gives you a monopoly privilege grant to make this invention, you can sell these things without competition. And so you can sell them at a higher price. You can make a higher profit and therefore you're incentivized to put R&D research and development dollars into it, right? So implicit in all these arguments is that you can sell things at a higher price. There was a monopoly price, which means you're ripping off the consumers, right? And that was the original argument hundreds of years ago for the whole patent system. And it was rained in and then at the beginning of the Industrial Revolution right around the time the United States succeeded from Britain. We put that under constitution. The Congress passed patent copyright laws and we started having these laws and then Europe, Europe followed suit. So for the last 200, 240 years, we've had an institutionalized, democratized data diversion of patent copyright laws. And everyone assumes that because they accompanied the rise of industrial progress in the West and the U.S., they are a type of copyright that goes hand in hand with incentivize the innovation and promoting progress and promoting wealth. That's the assumption, but there's no proof of this. In fact, all the econometric studies of this prove the opposite. You know, they showed that the patent system is a drag on innovation. It's a cost. It distorts innovation. It makes people not invest resources in a given field because they know that they can't compete in this field. Because if I compete in this field, I'll be sued into oblivion by Apple. Like if I want to make a new smartphone right now, I don't have any patents to defend myself. I'm a small guy. I might have a new, a good idea for a new smartphone. But Apple and Samsung and Motorola and Google are going to sue me into oblivion with their treasure chest of huge patent portfolios. So what happens is the patent system results in oligopolies that wouldn't exist without the patent system in the first place. Because without the patent system, there would be no barriers to entry, no legal barriers to entry. People could easily compete and they would be able to make a duplicate of a smartphone if they wanted to. A duplicate of the iPhone as long as they didn't defraud people. And that's a fraud law case. So the patent system hinders innovation and distorts the entire scientific culture and it makes us poor. I mean, I literally believe that we are, the human race has been retarded by centuries because of the patent system. The last 240 years have been an amazing period of industrial advance, but it's been despite the patent system, not because of it. And that's not to mention millions of people who may have died due to protected drugs, patents, who couldn't afford drugs. Maybe not millions, maybe hundreds of thousands, but if your drug would have been $200 without the patent system, but it's $5,000 a month, then maybe it's a bad thing. But hey, that's just me. I totally agree. So before we go, is there something that's on your mind that you've been reading about these days that you want to talk about or any other questions that's on your mind right now? Nick, sorry, talking to Stefan. No, I'm open to any questions you guys want to ask, but I talked about property rights, IP, anything that people are interested in and I try to answer it. Bitcoin, of course, is one interesting topic and the question of whether Bitcoin can be owned and legal issues like that, but that's a little bit esoteric for some people, depends on who's interested in it. Well, actually that leads me to two questions. The first one is how would you have, how would a service economy, or not a service economy, like an innovation economy work without intellectual property if a lot of creative people are compensated? Like how would you design your, like how would people legally, maybe not have a patent, but what would the alternative be in your non-patent world? Nick, no, let's just go over it. So you're asking what would people do to protect, to have trade secrets? Is that what you're asking? Yeah, so, yeah, that trade secrets without having their product be reverse engineered. Like, I mean, I'm not an expert in patent law, but that's a general question. Well, I have a little monograph which Jeff Tucker published at Lucifer Books a couple of years ago. It's something like doing business without intellectual property. And it's basically like kind of quasi-practical, quasi-libertarian advice for if you want to try to avoid using intellectual property, here's how you can understand it and do it. And it's on my website, c4sis.org. I don't necessarily recommend that people pretend like patent and copyright and trade secret law don't exist. It does exist for now. I hope it will be abolished eventually, but in the meantime, you have to use it. I think you can use it judiciously and morally and try to use it only defensively and not aggressively. So, for example, trade secret is like everyone thinks that trade secret means that you should have the right to keep things secret, but you already have that right. If you have the right to protect your property rights and your body, like your factory, your house, your body, your printer, you have the right to keep things secret. No one's going to compel you to make things public. So you don't really need a separate right called a trade secret right to keep things secret. It just means you keep things secret. Just like if you keep a secret from your friends, you don't need a body of law to say that you have a right to keep things secret from your family or friends or whoever. You just do what you want to do. You reveal information you want to reveal or not. So I think that in today's world, most companies, like let's say some startup high tech companies, you probably should consider whether some of your innovations that your engineers come up with, you should file a patent for them.  As your business model, I think that's probably fun wise. On the other hand, some patent trolls have become fabulously wealthy. So the problem is not the way people respond to legal incentives to legal incentives themselves right. So, you know, it's like the typical critique of the welfare recipient of the Archie Bunker conservative who worked all his life and he stayed for his retirement. And he gets annoyed by the fact of some minority in the shopping line when Dixie getting a steak with welfare food stamps. And so he gets angry at her. But if you have a troll, pigs will come to it. If you give away free things, people will take the free things. That's the problem with doing that in the first place. The problem is not the people that respond to it, the problem is with the system itself. And the same thing is true with the patent and the copyright system and the trademark system. If you have such a system, people will have no choice but to take advantage of it. You know, if you're the board of directors of a company and your engineers come up with unique designs, you would be irresponsible not to file a patent on those designs because you could exploit them later either defensively or offensively. So once you set in motion a system, people will respond to the system. And the problem is not the people that respond naturally to these incentives that you set in place. The problem is the incentives that you set in place in the first place. So we should not have a patent system. We shouldn't have a copyright system and we wouldn't have these problems to worry about. Yeah, that also leads me to the question of cryptocurrencies versus gold. Whereas gold is a physical commodity and you can't, at least with current technology, replicate gold molecules at a cost-effective level. Whereas since there is no real intellectual property in the cryptocurrencies, you can make your own copy of a Bitcoin with the same exact properties, label it something else. And that kind of effectively dilutes the money supply. I mean, what is your view on gold versus cryptocurrencies? Does cryptocurrencies need intellectual property to be viable? So I think you have a point in that one defect of any real-world currency is that it's not ideal. In other words, gold is not perfectly scarce. It can be produced or found, right? So supply is limited, but it's not zero. It just takes more resources to find more gold or even to make gold. But it works good enough to be a currency, right, to be a medium of exchange. Bitcoin, if you look at Bitcoin itself, the one Bitcoin of all the other cryptocurrencies has a limited supply, $20 million, about the year 2040. And therefore, it's got advantages over something like gold, but it's got disadvantages. The disadvantages or legal ones, mainly like the government treats it as a commodity which is subject to capital gains and sales factors and things like that, which severely hamper and impede this adoption. But I think that's temporary. I mean, this is just temporary in the phase of human evolution. So no, I don't think intellectual property wouldn't help Bitcoin at all. I think Bitcoin just needs to be released from government restrictions like being classified as a commodity and being taxed. If the government would just have a hands-off approach and stand back and let it do what it's going to do, then we'll see what Bitcoin is going to do. And I think it probably would out-compete fiat currencies because it's got advantages in almost every way to these currencies. But it would take time. So classifying as intellectual property only reifies the intellectual property concept and intellectual property, as I believe it, is one of the biggest, the largest of ways the government creates destruction and harms human race. I mean, it's up there with war and the drug war and taxation and central banking and public education. So, you know, we don't want to extend the intellectual property idea to Bitcoin. We want to free it from government clutches. Okay, well, you have given us a lot of time today and I really appreciate it, Stefan. I know that you're a busy man and coming on this podcast is something you didn't have to do. So I just wanted to say thank you. And if there's any way that a listener to this podcast can find you, how would you prefer that they do that? Oh, just go to StefanKinfella.com and everything is findable from there. Okay. And I did want to remind you that we did a poll on who to invite on the podcast and you were number one, and that's how we found you. So I'm really thankful to everybody on Reddit who suggested you because I had a blast today and listening to you go after Nick on this is just made my week. Is there anything else? Hey, Nick, is there anything else you wanted to say before we close off? Well, no, thanks for coming on. I mean, I agree with libertarians are like 80% of issues that this is one that I have a different point of view and I like to see the other side and ask them questions about this. So thank you for taking my questions, Stefan, and I learned quite a bit from this podcast. You're welcome. Glad to do it, guys. Okay, until next time.


Okay There we go. We got SRV and Yeah, that's pretty much all I care about So I am going to the FSD booster, but I got a I got to go get the Guardian stuff for it Eventually but today we're gonna go to the Guardian beacons and all the new Guardian sites I'm gonna need to take a break here before we head out, but I want to make sure let me see if Guardian If that stuff is in Galnet wait, it's under status, right? Yeah If not, I'll just go to reddit because I'm pretty sure everybody found everything already Cinefue E&A H region So somewhere over there. All right, we'll have to go to reddit. Oh There you go. I mean most opposed to the chat All right, let's target that I'm gonna take like a 10 minute break I got to go and do some stuff and take some medicines and come back If sinew F a Before that That's 700 light years away. Good god. The money that's got to be 20 30 jumps 14 jumps. That's not a bad. All right guys. I shall return a little bit Thanks for watching feel free to follow the stream if you enjoy yourself if you are twitch prime user Please disable ad block because when I go on my breaks, I run three minutes worth of ads And if you are twitch prime, you don't see ads currently That's going away. You don't see ads, but I'll still get credit for them. Thanks for watching guys. I shall return I'll put on some music Let's get some Pretzel ambient music going We got a few more days and then you guys will see ads on twitch prime Which unless you're sub here All right station Ambient Ambient there we go ambient Turn that up, I'll be right back guys Sorry about that guys. Hopefully I won't have any more long breaks like that Should be good to go for a while now Okay, so let's head out So much better than the other empty chair streams Turn the music down a little bit retracting gear What does Kappa mean anyway? I believe I learned how to fly Thanks Dylan for the welcome back jump Sure Okay, so we're heading to this site that Mimosa gave me that's a guardian beacon requires.  I got no lasers. Thanks. I'm so glad you put that in there I was about to go all the way out there with the wrong weapons That would have been embarrassing So I guess I'll throw some beams on here That would have been really bad That would have been awful that would have been awful request talking Shields at max shifting to crash protocol We're good. I used to fly this little thing again deploy lightning gear wheels down command That was an impressive stoopage a boopage All right all beams You know at some point I'm gonna actually do something on the string. That's a big a beam. Wait. These are engineered Well, that was a guardian. I just did so I need to store store these two Almost sold some engineered stuff Modest well have all the beams Man, I'm glad somebody said that I had no clue that was a requirement. I wonder how many people went all the way out there 700 light years away. It was like oops I've got multi cannons and torpedoes. What am I gonna do? I still plot it. Yeah, and power should be all right, right? Yeah, that's fine retracting here.   Yeah, 14 jumps away. We'll be at a guardian beacon To do the things next fire group next fire group Mines will get some exploration data jump Engage sure.  I forgot that was The national command my bad the voice attack rust is real chat jump you got it commander It's baby. You know my favorite Did he did he really do that? Oh My goodness was wrong with that dog. I Said what is wrong with him? Don't just gave us a little astronomical nugget Surprise on the carpet Where are you getting this big music from our background music pretzel that rocks? The service I use No, I'm talking to this guy in chat I was gonna ask you to make me some coffee whenever you can. I'm gonna need a refill because it's not working This is a service called pretzel pretzel rocks or pretzel rock They have an app you can run you can play the music from your browser they've got a ton of twitch extensions and Integrations, there's a bot in chat named pretzel rocks which actually gives you links to the songs that are playing the website is pretzel Dot rocks Pretty sure that is the The URL highly recommended for your streamer. It's all royalty free Streamer YouTube safe music So I can play this music and not get copyright strikes So and it's even if you're not a streamer. It's really good music Like just the other day when I was playing I was playing Minecraft on stream as a kind of like a golden center Or something we did and I had a chiptune station and it went perfectly with everything that was going on The app actually has different stations. I'm listening to a station called ambient But it has pop chill mixed upbeat hype epic EDM ambient is what you listen to now happy chiptune hip-hop rock, etc. So it's pretty cool bring back move by Move by this. Oh gee Yeah, they got a playlist feature to them proud as I listen to the music.  So From those likes, I'll probably create some playlists and stuff I wonder how well they protect their users in terms of archive content and song artists ending their partnership Ending their partnership I haven't heard of anybody Leaving pretzel pretzel is usually pretty chill. I never even thought about that though Never even thought about that like I don't even know what happens if that happens a monster cat Like what do they do if somebody ends their partnership like what if like Name of the people I can't think of anybody on monster cat right now But what if somebody were to end their partnership? That'd be that'd be an interesting scenario but monster cat Now monster cat is partnered with other people What's I gonna say I guess I get copyright strikes from monster cat on YouTube Like I have a I have a monster cat license for streaming But I don't think it covers YouTube and if you play monster cat stuff on your YouTube bot They will claim it they will copyright claim it That's happened to me before and it was claimed by monster cat. I was like, oh Well, I guess I can't use monster cat for my YouTube videos.  I have a Zircon license for twitching YouTube. So all of Zircon's music. I paid I bought his license I have a license for Ronald Jinkies his album. I bought a license. I didn't buy a license, but I have I use overclocked musics over OC remix That'll work. Their stuff is YouTube safe They protect you from from all that copyright stuff overclocked remix and pretzel Those you should never get copyright strikes for And that's a pretty wide variety of music especially Zircon's Zircon's library is just massive I use his stuff for like a lot of my YouTube videos that need background music And I have gotten copyright strikes for Zircon stuff and I've had to contact him And we've had to dispute it because people like to steal Shocker people on YouTube like to steal your ad revenue. So they'll come up with these bogus copyright strikes I'm like, this is a Zircon song and they're like they claim it's some other song from something And I'm like and I googled the song they said it was and it sounds nothing like it Just like they're just making up stuff So I contacted Zircon a couple times. He's like no this should not be no. Thank you for telling me He goes on the warpath to make sure it doesn't happen again, but pretzel that rocks man Highly recommend it. They really got some good twitch stuff. They've got song requests overlays, you know status panels All kinds of cool little toys you can do if you're a streamer


Hello! In this presentation we're going to talk about adjusting entry rules. In order to talk about adjusting entry rules we first want to distinguish what adjusting entries are from normal journal entries. Normal journal entries being those transactions we will be recording throughout the month including the payment of the utility bill, paying of wages, purchasing something on account, the things that the accounting department typically does. Within the adjusting process we're going to draw a line in our head and say the adjusting department is done in a separate department or is a separate process, have a separate set of rules, some of those rules being the same as for every journal entry, some differing. The adjusting process is going to adjust accounts such as prepaid insurance, depreciation, unearned revenue, those types of accounts that need to be adjusted as of the end of the time period as is the financial statement date in order to make the accounts on an accrual basis as of that date. The rules for every transaction including adjusting journal entries or normal journal entries will include every transaction has at least two accounts affected. So if this is our chart of accounts we would need at least two of these accounts involved in every transaction, maybe more but the minimum would be two. Why? Because we need an equal number of debits and credits in each journal entry. So each journal entry would need at least two accounts in order to achieve the goal of every transaction having an equal number of debits and credits. Then we have rules that are going to be specific to adjusting journal entries. These are going to be really important because we're going to construct our thought process based on these rules, slightly different thought process in constructing the adjusting journal entries than we have when constructing just normal journal entries. Rules for adjusting journal entries again these only apply to adjusting journal entries include dated end of the period. So if it's the end of the year we're going to say 1231 or the end of the month the date of the financial statements the balance sheet date that point in time generally will be the date of the financial statements. We have no cash involved when we are making journal entries for adjusting journal entries. This is important because cash is involved in just about every or many transactions for the normal journal entry process and it's one of the first accounts that is the first account we typically think of when trying to construct a normal journal entry not going to be there for the adjusting journal entries. Cash is going to be done as far as what needs to be done to cash. The bank account will generally be reconciled before the adjusting process. No change to cash within then the adjusting process. We're going to have one balance sheet account and one income statement account. So in our trial balance the balance sheet accounts it's going to include the capital but typically everything above the capital account we're going to pick one of those accounts related to the transaction the adjusting entry we are working on and we're going to have one income statement account the accounts below the capital account of the drawings here revenue or expense accounts they're typically going to be one of each why because those are the timing accounts down here and when we do the adjusting entries we're dealing with timing we'll talk more about the reasons for these rules in a future presentation however. So the rules recapped here are going to be rules for all transactions including adjusting journal entries every transaction has at least two accounts affected every transaction will have an equal number of debits and credits rules for the adjusting entries only that we want to keep separate in our minds for the adjusting entry process dated at the end of the period no cash involved one balance sheet account and one income statement account we're going to use these rules to construct a new thought process one that will be used for the adjusting entries will really help us to create the adjusting entries even if we don't know exactly what the journal entry is doing so we can actually put it together and it'll help us to start through that process even if we don't know exactly why we are doing what we are doing then of course we'll think about more why we are doing what we're doing when we construct the adjusting journal entries