Get Your YouTube Summary:
- Copy the video link.
- Paste it into the input field.
- Click 'Summarize' to get your summary with timestamps.
Important Note on Subtitles:
- Automatic summary generation requires English subtitles on the video.
- If the video has no English subtitles, the automatic download of the transcript using the link will fail.
- Manual Alternative: You can still get a summary!
- Find the transcript on YouTube (usually below the video description when viewed on a desktop browser).
- Copy the entire transcript text manually. (Need help finding/copying? Watch the 'Demo Video' linked at the top right of this page).
- (Optional) Add any additional instructions after the transcript (e.g., 'Translate the summary to German.', 'Add a glossary of medical terms and jargon to the summary.').
For videos longer than 20 minutes:
- Select a Pro model for automatic summarization. Note that Pro usage is limited daily.
- If the Pro limit is reached (or if you prefer using your own tool), use the Copy Prompt button, paste the prompt into your AI tool, and run it there.
- 0:00 - The Need for Honesty in Vaccine Discussions: The video opens with a call for honest, open conversations about vaccines, treating them like any other medical treatment with both benefits and risks. Dr. Joel Gator, a pediatrician, advocates for informed choices.
- 0:21 - Flawed Vaccine Study Design: A major point of concern is that vaccine studies often use non-inert placebos (e.g., other vaccines) instead of saline, potentially masking side effects and preventing true safety baselines.
- 0:28 - Individual Variability in Vaccine Response: Emphasizes that individual genetics and immune systems vary, leading to different responses to vaccines, highlighting the need for personalized approaches currently being studied by institutions like Mayo Clinic (vaccinomics).
- 0:47 - The Taboo Nature of Vaccine Discussions: Dr. Hyman shares his personal experience of being labeled "anti-vax" simply for recounting a patient's history involving an MMR vaccine reaction, illustrating the widespread suppression of such discussions in the medical field.
- 2:01 - Challenging Medical Dogmas: Compares the fixed dogma around vaccines to historical medical beliefs (e.g., autism caused by "refrigerator mothers," ulcers by stress) that were later overturned by scientific inquiry, stressing that science should always involve questioning.
- 3:08 - Impact on Trust and Transparency: Argues that the inability to openly discuss vaccine risks and potential side effects, often met with censorship and vilification, has led to a significant decline in public trust in medicine and health authorities like the CDC.
- 5:00 - Dr. Gator's Stance and Book: Dr. Gator clarifies he is not anti-vaccine and administers them in his practice, but he opposes forced vaccination and promotes his book, "Between a Shot and a Hard Place," which aims to provide balanced information on vaccine pros and cons, addressing the gap between pro-vax and anti-vax narratives.
- 10:25 - The Expanding Vaccine Schedule: Discusses the dramatic increase in the number of mandated vaccines for children over the decades (from a few to 72 jabs), raising concerns about the cumulative impact on a child's developing immune system.
- 11:07 - Pharmaceutical Indemnification: Explains that following issues with the swine flu vaccine in the 1980s, pharmaceutical companies were granted legal protection from liability for vaccine injuries, which removed their incentive to produce safer vaccines and contributed to the proliferation of new vaccines.
- 11:43 - Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: Notes the existence of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and the federal government's payout of over $5 billion to vaccine-injured individuals, which seemingly contradicts the "safe and effective" narrative.
- 16:22 - Lack of Independent Safety Research: Argues that pharmaceutical companies have no incentive to fund long-term safety studies that might reveal problems with their products, and scientists who do conduct such research are often vilified, creating a disincentive for crucial inquiry.
- 27:38 - Thimerosal (Mercury) in Vaccines: Highlights the historical use of thimerosal (ethyl mercury) as a preservative in vaccines, noting that total mercury exposure in babies from vaccines exceeded EPA safety limits. It was quietly removed from most vaccines around 2000, but its past use underscores a lack of comprehensive safety assessment.
- 32:28 - Absence of Long-Term Prospective Studies: Emphasizes the critical need for long-term (e.g., 5-20 years) prospective studies comparing health outcomes in vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations to identify potential associations with chronic diseases like asthma, allergies, or autoimmune conditions.
- 39:19 - Susceptibility and Immunological Changes: Proposes a theory that modern lifestyle factors (C-sections, lack of breastfeeding, early antibiotic use, environmental toxins) can dysregulate a child's immune system, making them more susceptible to adverse reactions from vaccines.
- 48:38 - Autism and Vaccine Triggers: Clarifies that while vaccines are not believed to cause autism, they could act as a trigger for immune dysregulation in susceptible children, leading to neuroinflammatory conditions like regressive autism, which is observed by many clinicians.
- 52:49 - Call for a Dispassionate Data Review: Advocates for an independent, unbiased commission of respected medical professionals to compile and present all existing vaccine research data, including both benefits and potential risks, to doctors and the public in an understandable format.
- 1:04:25 - Personalized Vaccination Choices: Dr. Gator advises parents on informed consent, emphasizing their right to choose whether to follow the CDC schedule, a slower schedule, or selective vaccination based on individual risk-benefit assessment, rather than being forced.
- 1:09:25 - Debating Early Vaccination: Discusses the trade-offs of vaccinating infants with developing immune systems. While early vaccination provides protection, it also means exposure to potential risks (e.g., fever leading to hospital visits and invasive procedures) at a highly vulnerable stage.
- 1:12:21 - Advocacy for Public Debate and Research Funding: Calls for public, televised debates among experts on complex vaccine questions and urges government agencies like NIH to fund research that addresses unanswered questions and improves vaccine safety, stressing that genuine scientific inquiry should never be shut down.
- 1:15:00 - Conclusion and Book Promotion: The discussion concludes by reinforcing the idea that questioning vaccines is about wanting safer products, not being "anti-vaccine," akin to wanting safer fish or planes. Dr. Gator's book is recommended as a resource for balanced information.
- 0:00 - The Human Cost of AI Perfection: The discussion opens with an anecdote about using AI (ChatGPT) to resolve a relationship conflict, illustrating how "perfect" AI-generated responses lack the authenticity and human imperfection that are vital for genuine connection and personal growth.
- 0:33 - Journey Over Destination: Simon Sinek articulates his core philosophy: life is about the journey and the inherent value of doing the work (e.g., writing a book, solving a problem) yourself, as this struggle fosters resourcefulness and intellectual growth, which AI bypasses by providing instant solutions.
- 0:58 - Erosion of Human Skills: Sinek warns that over-reliance on technology can lead to the "giving up" of crucial human skills (e.g., knowing what to do when a friend is struggling, coping with stress), comparing it to having a boat but not knowing how to swim when a storm hits.
- 4:14 - The Irony of Job Displacement: An interesting parallel is drawn between the displacement of factory workers by robotics (met with calls to "reskill") and the current threat of AI to knowledge workers, noting the ironic shift in societal concern and the discussion of universal basic income.
- 7:16 - Authenticity vs. Artificiality: AI-generated content (emails, art) is making digital interactions feel inauthentic, creating a new premium on "human-written language" and the beauty found in imperfection, drawing on the Japanese concept of Wabi-sabi.
- 12:55 - Embracing the Value of Struggle: The conversation reiterates that genuine personal growth, stronger relationships, and increased confidence come from navigating and resolving difficulties, not from avoiding them or seeking perfect, instant solutions.
- 18:22 - Essential Human Skills for the Future: Sinek stresses that critical human skills such as listening, holding space, conflict resolution, giving/receiving feedback, accountability, and empathy are increasingly vital but are suffering in the modern world.
- 31:08 - Potential for Reclaiming Time and Purpose: While AI may lead to job shifts, Sinek suggests it could also free up time, allowing individuals to pursue hobbies, deepen relationships, and combat loneliness, arguing that this return to personal time is something society has "been desperate for."
- 35:54 - The Pursuit of "Enough" and Gratitude: Happiness is not solely tied to money beyond a certain point; true fulfillment often comes from having a vision that exceeds current resources, fostering creativity, and practicing gratitude for what one has.
- 46:12 - The Profound Impact of Gratitude: Personal experiences (e.g., the LA fires) illustrate how confronting loss and embracing the temporary nature of things can lead to a deeper appreciation and gratitude for life and relationships.
- 55:59 - Scale Breaks Quality: The speaker argues that efforts to achieve massive scale often compromise quality and authenticity (e.g., mass-produced clothing, Apple's curated store experience), leading to a growing demand for handmade, unique items.
- 1:09:59 - Friction Creates Freedom: The paradox that technological convenience has reduced the "friction" that once created boundaries between work and personal life, thereby diminishing freedom and increasing stress.
- 1:11:05 - The Rise of In-Real-Life Community: Sinek predicts a "community revolution," defining community as "a group of people who agree to grow together," emphasizing the increasing value of offline, intentional human connection.
- 1:52:50 - Friendship: The Ultimate Biohack: Sinek highlights the underserved topic of friendship, arguing that strong friendships are fundamental for navigating life's challenges and are the most potent "biohack" for combating loneliness, depression, and anxiety.
- 2:01:01 - Mentorship and Lasting Legacy: Sinek shares his commitment to mentoring his team, imparting his knowledge and lessons from past mistakes to build a resilient organization that can thrive independently. He presents a military challenge coin engraved with "Build, Teach, Lead," symbolizing the responsibility to accumulate, give, and serve.
- 0:16 The Most Influential Hacker: Kevin Mitnick is cited as the most influential and infamous hacker, renowned for his social engineering tactics and past arrests for phone system abuse.
- 1:00 Origin of "Hack": The term "hack" originated in the 1960s at MIT's model train club, referring to creative, unconventional uses of technology. By the 1970s-80s, it evolved to mean unauthorized access.
- 1:27 Types of Hackers: Hackers are categorized by "hat colors": "black hats" (malicious intent), "white hats" (ethical, report vulnerabilities for good), and "grey hats" (cross ethical lines despite claiming good intentions).
- 2:10 Evolution of Hacking: Early hacking in the 1960s focused on physical access to computers. The 1970s saw "phone phreakers" manipulating phone systems, and the 1980s-90s brought the internet, drastically expanding hacking possibilities globally.
- 3:38 Government Website Hacking: A notable early instance was the 1996 defacement of the CIA website. To prevent such attacks, key advice includes changing default credentials, disabling unnecessary services, regularly updating software, and using multi-factor authentication.
- 4:59 Open-Source Encryption and Kirkoff's Principle: The principle states that the security of a cryptographic system should rely solely on the secrecy of the keys, not the algorithm itself, meaning open-source algorithms can be secure.
- 6:39 The Deep and Dark Web: The internet is likened to an iceberg: the "surface web" (5%) is indexed, while the "deep web" (95%) is not and requires authentication. The "dark web" is a subset of the deep web, unindexed and requiring special tools, used for both illicit activities and anonymous communication by whistleblowers or dissidents.
- 8:17 Stuxnet Virus: This malware was designed to physically disrupt Iranian nuclear centrifuges by making them speed up and slow down, impairing uranium enrichment. It was widely attributed to the US and Israel.
- 9:33 OPM Data Breach: Discusses the implications of data breaches where personal information, including fingerprints, is compromised. Recommends avoiding unnecessary data sharing and utilizing credit monitoring/freezes to mitigate risks.
- 10:43 TikTok Ban Concerns: Banning applications like TikTok is generally ineffective as it drives activity underground. Concerns about data privacy and misinformation are universal, regardless of a company's country of origin.
- 12:06 Election Vulnerabilities: Paper ballots are preferred over electronic voting systems for their resilience against power outages and for recountability, as electronic votes are difficult to verify retrospectively.
- 12:53 The I Love You Virus: This virus spread virally by overwriting various file types, making systems harder to disinfect and maximizing its reach.
- 13:17 Stopping WannaCry: Marcus Hutchins halted the WannaCry ransomware in May 2017 by registering a specific domain name that the malware was programmed to check, acting as a "kill switch" to stop its replication.
- 14:18 Colonial Pipeline Ransomware: The pipeline shutdown was a cautious decision by operators, not directly caused by the ransomware itself. Although a $5 million ransom was paid, the decryption tool was ineffective, forcing reliance on backups, with the FBI later recovering half the ransom.
- 15:47 Firewall Explained: A firewall acts as a digital "gatekeeper" or "zone of separation" between networks of different trust levels (e.g., internal vs. internet), enforcing security policies to control incoming and outgoing traffic.
- 16:41 VPNs and Anonymity: VPNs primarily encrypt internet traffic to protect sensitive information and can hide a user's original IP address, offering anonymity. However, trust is transferred from the ISP to the VPN provider, who can see all traffic, making provider choice crucial.
- 18:54 Why Phishing and Scams Persist: These scams remain profitable due to the human tendency to trust, which attackers exploit through social engineering. Tactics constantly evolve, including "smishing" (SMS), "vishing" (voicemail), and "quishing" (QR codes).
- 21:11 Password Managers and Passkeys: While no system is perfectly "safe," password managers can be "safe enough" if a strong master password and multi-factor authentication are used. Passkeys, a newer cryptographic standard, are more phishing-resistant as they don't require users to remember passwords and rely on device-based cryptographic keys.
- 21:54 Virus Likelihood Today: Catching a virus is still possible, despite advanced antivirus software. Modern antivirus systems have evolved from signature-based detection to behavior-based analysis. Regular software updates and reboots are crucial defenses.
- 23:01 Most Damaging Hacks: Damage is measured in various ways (financial, systems, lives). An indirect example of life loss is a hospital ransomware attack that redirected emergency services, leading to a patient's death during transport.
- 23:40 The CIA Triad: A foundational concept in cybersecurity, standing for Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability—the three core principles of protecting information.
- 24:10 The First Computer Virus: The Morris Worm (1988), a self-replicating program, is considered the first widespread example of malware that brought public awareness to harmful software.
- 24:49 Phone Phreaking Revisited: An older attack method from the pre-internet era, where individuals manipulated the phone system using specific tones (like the 2600 Hz tone from a Captain Crunch whistle) to make free calls or reconfigure switches.
- 26:08 Realistic Hacking in Movies: Real-world hacking is often tedious and not visually exciting, involving hours of background processes. Movies dramatize it for entertainment, often inaccurately.
identifier: 3058
model: gemini-2.5-flash-preview-05-20| input-price: 0.15 output-price: 3.5 max-context-length: 128_000
host: 193.8.40.111
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcNt0kgCNfYinclude_comments: None
include_timestamps: 1
include_glossary: None
output_language: en
cost: 0.0130689
*Abstract:* This video features a discussion with pediatrician Dr. Joel Gator, author of "Between a Shot and a Hard Place," advocating for honest, data-driven conversations about vaccines. The dialogue challenges the prevailing "safe and effective" dogma, arguing that vaccines, like all medical treatments, carry both benefits and risks that require open discussion and informed consent. Key criticisms include the lack of inert placebo-controlled trials, the cumulative effect of numerous mandated vaccines, and the problematic indemnification of pharmaceutical companies from liability for adverse effects. The speakers highlight declining public trust in medical institutions due to perceived dishonesty and censorship around vaccine safety concerns. They call for comprehensive, long-term, and unbiased research into vaccine effects, personalized vaccination strategies, and transparent communication to rebuild trust and continuously improve vaccine safety. *Summary:* * *0:00 - The Need for Honesty in Vaccine Discussions:* The video opens with a call for honest, open conversations about vaccines, treating them like any other medical treatment with both benefits and risks. Dr. Joel Gator, a pediatrician, advocates for informed choices. * *0:21 - Flawed Vaccine Study Design:* A major point of concern is that vaccine studies often use non-inert placebos (e.g., other vaccines) instead of saline, potentially masking side effects and preventing true safety baselines. * *0:28 - Individual Variability in Vaccine Response:* Emphasizes that individual genetics and immune systems vary, leading to different responses to vaccines, highlighting the need for personalized approaches currently being studied by institutions like Mayo Clinic (vaccinomics). * *0:47 - The Taboo Nature of Vaccine Discussions:* Dr. Hyman shares his personal experience of being labeled "anti-vax" simply for recounting a patient's history involving an MMR vaccine reaction, illustrating the widespread suppression of such discussions in the medical field. * *2:01 - Challenging Medical Dogmas:* Compares the fixed dogma around vaccines to historical medical beliefs (e.g., autism caused by "refrigerator mothers," ulcers by stress) that were later overturned by scientific inquiry, stressing that science should always involve questioning. * *3:08 - Impact on Trust and Transparency:* Argues that the inability to openly discuss vaccine risks and potential side effects, often met with censorship and vilification, has led to a significant decline in public trust in medicine and health authorities like the CDC. * *5:00 - Dr. Gator's Stance and Book:* Dr. Gator clarifies he is not anti-vaccine and administers them in his practice, but he opposes forced vaccination and promotes his book, "Between a Shot and a Hard Place," which aims to provide balanced information on vaccine pros and cons, addressing the gap between pro-vax and anti-vax narratives. * *10:25 - The Expanding Vaccine Schedule:* Discusses the dramatic increase in the number of mandated vaccines for children over the decades (from a few to 72 jabs), raising concerns about the cumulative impact on a child's developing immune system. * *11:07 - Pharmaceutical Indemnification:* Explains that following issues with the swine flu vaccine in the 1980s, pharmaceutical companies were granted legal protection from liability for vaccine injuries, which removed their incentive to produce safer vaccines and contributed to the proliferation of new vaccines. * *11:43 - Vaccine Injury Compensation Program:* Notes the existence of the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) and the federal government's payout of over $5 billion to vaccine-injured individuals, which seemingly contradicts the "safe and effective" narrative. * *16:22 - Lack of Independent Safety Research:* Argues that pharmaceutical companies have no incentive to fund long-term safety studies that might reveal problems with their products, and scientists who do conduct such research are often vilified, creating a disincentive for crucial inquiry. * *27:38 - Thimerosal (Mercury) in Vaccines:* Highlights the historical use of thimerosal (ethyl mercury) as a preservative in vaccines, noting that total mercury exposure in babies from vaccines exceeded EPA safety limits. It was quietly removed from most vaccines around 2000, but its past use underscores a lack of comprehensive safety assessment. * *32:28 - Absence of Long-Term Prospective Studies:* Emphasizes the critical need for long-term (e.g., 5-20 years) prospective studies comparing health outcomes in vaccinated versus unvaccinated populations to identify potential associations with chronic diseases like asthma, allergies, or autoimmune conditions. * *39:19 - Susceptibility and Immunological Changes:* Proposes a theory that modern lifestyle factors (C-sections, lack of breastfeeding, early antibiotic use, environmental toxins) can dysregulate a child's immune system, making them more susceptible to adverse reactions from vaccines. * *48:38 - Autism and Vaccine Triggers:* Clarifies that while vaccines are not believed to *cause* autism, they could act as a trigger for immune dysregulation in susceptible children, leading to neuroinflammatory conditions like regressive autism, which is observed by many clinicians. * *52:49 - Call for a Dispassionate Data Review:* Advocates for an independent, unbiased commission of respected medical professionals to compile and present all existing vaccine research data, including both benefits and potential risks, to doctors and the public in an understandable format. * *1:04:25 - Personalized Vaccination Choices:* Dr. Gator advises parents on informed consent, emphasizing their right to choose whether to follow the CDC schedule, a slower schedule, or selective vaccination based on individual risk-benefit assessment, rather than being forced. * *1:09:25 - Debating Early Vaccination:* Discusses the trade-offs of vaccinating infants with developing immune systems. While early vaccination provides protection, it also means exposure to potential risks (e.g., fever leading to hospital visits and invasive procedures) at a highly vulnerable stage. * *1:12:21 - Advocacy for Public Debate and Research Funding:* Calls for public, televised debates among experts on complex vaccine questions and urges government agencies like NIH to fund research that addresses unanswered questions and improves vaccine safety, stressing that genuine scientific inquiry should never be shut down. * *1:15:00 - Conclusion and Book Promotion:* The discussion concludes by reinforcing the idea that questioning vaccines is about wanting safer products, not being "anti-vaccine," akin to wanting safer fish or planes. Dr. Gator's book is recommended as a resource for balanced information. I used gemini-2.5-flash-preview-05-20| input-price: 0.15 output-price: 3.5 max-context-length: 128_000 on rocketrecap dot com to summarize the transcript. Cost (if I didn't use the free tier): $0.0131 Input tokens: 54576 Output tokens: 1395
Abstract:
This video features a discussion with pediatrician Dr. Joel Gator, author of "Between a Shot and a Hard Place," advocating for honest, data-driven conversations about vaccines. The dialogue challenges the prevailing "safe and effective" dogma, arguing that vaccines, like all medical treatments, carry both benefits and risks that require open discussion and informed consent. Key criticisms include the lack of inert placebo-controlled trials, the cumulative effect of numerous mandated vaccines, and the problematic indemnification of pharmaceutical companies from liability for adverse effects. The speakers highlight declining public trust in medical institutions due to perceived dishonesty and censorship around vaccine safety concerns. They call for comprehensive, long-term, and unbiased research into vaccine effects, personalized vaccination strategies, and transparent communication to rebuild trust and continuously improve vaccine safety.
Summary:
Below, I will provide input for an example video (comprising of title, description, and transcript, in this order) and the corresponding abstract and summary I expect. Afterward, I will provide a new transcript that I want you to summarize in the same format.
**Please give an abstract of the transcript and then summarize the transcript in a self-contained bullet list format.** Include starting timestamps, important details and key takeaways.
Example Input:
Fluidigm Polaris Part 2- illuminator and camera
mikeselectricstuff
131K subscribers
Subscribed
369
Share
Download
Clip
Save
5,857 views Aug 26, 2024
Fluidigm Polaris part 1 : • Fluidigm Polaris (Part 1) - Biotech g...
Ebay listings: https://www.ebay.co.uk/usr/mikeselect...
Merch https://mikeselectricstuff.creator-sp...
Transcript
Follow along using the transcript.
Show transcript
mikeselectricstuff
131K subscribers
Videos
About
Support on Patreon
40 Comments
@robertwatsonbath
6 hours ago
Thanks Mike. Ooof! - with the level of bodgery going on around 15:48 I think shame would have made me do a board re spin, out of my own pocket if I had to.
1
Reply
@Muonium1
9 hours ago
The green LED looks different from the others and uses phosphor conversion because of the "green gap" problem where green InGaN emitters suffer efficiency droop at high currents. Phosphide based emitters don't start becoming efficient until around 600nm so also can't be used for high power green emitters. See the paper and plot by Matthias Auf der Maur in his 2015 paper on alloy fluctuations in InGaN as the cause of reduced external quantum efficiency at longer (green) wavelengths.
4
Reply
1 reply
@tafsirnahian669
10 hours ago (edited)
Can this be used as an astrophotography camera?
Reply
mikeselectricstuff
·
1 reply
@mikeselectricstuff
6 hours ago
Yes, but may need a shutter to avoid light during readout
Reply
@2010craggy
11 hours ago
Narrowband filters we use in Astronomy (Astrophotography) are sided- they work best passing light in one direction so I guess the arrows on the filter frames indicate which way round to install them in the filter wheel.
1
Reply
@vitukz
12 hours ago
A mate with Channel @extractions&ire could use it
2
Reply
@RobertGallop
19 hours ago
That LED module says it can go up to 28 amps!!! 21 amps for 100%. You should see what it does at 20 amps!
Reply
@Prophes0r
19 hours ago
I had an "Oh SHIT!" moment when I realized that the weird trapezoidal shape of that light guide was for keystone correction of the light source.
Very clever.
6
Reply
@OneBiOzZ
20 hours ago
given the cost of the CCD you think they could have run another PCB for it
9
Reply
@tekvax01
21 hours ago
$20 thousand dollars per minute of run time!
1
Reply
@tekvax01
22 hours ago
"We spared no expense!" John Hammond Jurassic Park.
*(that's why this thing costs the same as a 50-seat Greyhound Bus coach!)
Reply
@florianf4257
22 hours ago
The smearing on the image could be due to the fact that you don't use a shutter, so you see brighter stripes under bright areas of the image as you still iluminate these pixels while the sensor data ist shifted out towards the top. I experienced this effect back at university with a LN-Cooled CCD for Spectroscopy. The stripes disapeared as soon as you used the shutter instead of disabling it in the open position (but fokussing at 100ms integration time and continuous readout with a focal plane shutter isn't much fun).
12
Reply
mikeselectricstuff
·
1 reply
@mikeselectricstuff
12 hours ago
I didn't think of that, but makes sense
2
Reply
@douro20
22 hours ago (edited)
The red LED reminds me of one from Roithner Lasertechnik. I have a Symbol 2D scanner which uses two very bright LEDs from that company, one red and one red-orange. The red-orange is behind a lens which focuses it into an extremely narrow beam.
1
Reply
@RicoElectrico
23 hours ago
PFG is Pulse Flush Gate according to the datasheet.
Reply
@dcallan812
23 hours ago
Very interesting. 2x
Reply
@littleboot_
1 day ago
Cool interesting device
Reply
@dav1dbone
1 day ago
I've stripped large projectors, looks similar, wonder if some of those castings are a magnesium alloy?
Reply
@kevywevvy8833
1 day ago
ironic that some of those Phlatlight modules are used in some of the cheapest disco lights.
1
Reply
1 reply
@bill6255
1 day ago
Great vid - gets right into subject in title, its packed with information, wraps up quickly. Should get a YT award! imho
3
Reply
@JAKOB1977
1 day ago (edited)
The whole sensor module incl. a 5 grand 50mpix sensor for 49 £.. highest bid atm
Though also a limited CCD sensor, but for the right buyer its a steal at these relative low sums.
Architecture Full Frame CCD (Square Pixels)
Total Number of Pixels 8304 (H) × 6220 (V) = 51.6 Mp
Number of Effective Pixels 8208 (H) × 6164 (V) = 50.5 Mp
Number of Active Pixels 8176 (H) × 6132 (V) = 50.1 Mp
Pixel Size 6.0 m (H) × 6.0 m (V)
Active Image Size 49.1 mm (H) × 36.8 mm (V)
61.3 mm (Diagonal),
645 1.1x Optical Format
Aspect Ratio 4:3
Horizontal Outputs 4
Saturation Signal 40.3 ke−
Output Sensitivity 31 V/e−
Quantum Efficiency
KAF−50100−CAA
KAF−50100−AAA
KAF−50100−ABA (with Lens)
22%, 22%, 16% (Peak R, G, B)
25%
62%
Read Noise (f = 18 MHz) 12.5 e−
Dark Signal (T = 60°C) 42 pA/cm2
Dark Current Doubling Temperature 5.7°C
Dynamic Range (f = 18 MHz) 70.2 dB
Estimated Linear Dynamic Range
(f = 18 MHz)
69.3 dB
Charge Transfer Efficiency
Horizontal
Vertical
0.999995
0.999999
Blooming Protection
(4 ms Exposure Time)
800X Saturation Exposure
Maximum Date Rate 18 MHz
Package Ceramic PGA
Cover Glass MAR Coated, 2 Sides or
Clear Glass
Features
• TRUESENSE Transparent Gate Electrode
for High Sensitivity
• Ultra-High Resolution
• Board Dynamic Range
• Low Noise Architecture
• Large Active Imaging Area
Applications
• Digitization
• Mapping/Aerial
• Photography
• Scientific
Thx for the tear down Mike, always a joy
Reply
@martinalooksatthings
1 day ago
15:49 that is some great bodging on of caps, they really didn't want to respin that PCB huh
8
Reply
@RhythmGamer
1 day ago
Was depressed today and then a new mike video dropped and now I’m genuinely happy to get my tear down fix
1
Reply
@dine9093
1 day ago (edited)
Did you transfrom into Mr Blobby for a moment there?
2
Reply
@NickNorton
1 day ago
Thanks Mike. Your videos are always interesting.
5
Reply
@KeritechElectronics
1 day ago
Heavy optics indeed... Spare no expense, cost no object. Splendid build quality. The CCD is a thing of beauty!
1
Reply
@YSoreil
1 day ago
The pricing on that sensor is about right, I looked in to these many years ago when they were still in production since it's the only large sensor you could actually buy. Really cool to see one in the wild.
2
Reply
@snik2pl
1 day ago
That leds look like from led projector
Reply
@vincei4252
1 day ago
TDI = Time Domain Integration ?
1
Reply
@wolpumba4099
1 day ago (edited)
Maybe the camera should not be illuminated during readout.
From the datasheet of the sensor (Onsemi): saturation 40300 electrons, read noise 12.5 electrons per pixel @ 18MHz (quite bad). quantum efficiency 62% (if it has micro lenses), frame rate 1 Hz. lateral overflow drain to prevent blooming protects against 800x (factor increases linearly with exposure time) saturation exposure (32e6 electrons per pixel at 4ms exposure time), microlens has +/- 20 degree acceptance angle
i guess it would be good for astrophotography
4
Reply
@txm100
1 day ago (edited)
Babe wake up a new mikeselectricstuff has dropped!
9
Reply
@vincei4252
1 day ago
That looks like a finger-lakes filter wheel, however, for astronomy they'd never use such a large stepper.
1
Reply
@MRooodddvvv
1 day ago
yaaaaay ! more overcomplicated optical stuff !
4
Reply
1 reply
@NoPegs
1 day ago
He lives!
11
Reply
1 reply
Transcript
0:00
so I've stripped all the bits of the
0:01
optical system so basically we've got
0:03
the uh the camera
0:05
itself which is mounted on this uh very
0:09
complex
0:10
adjustment thing which obviously to set
0:13
you the various tilt and uh alignment
0:15
stuff then there's two of these massive
0:18
lenses I've taken one of these apart I
0:20
think there's something like about eight
0:22
or nine Optical elements in here these
0:25
don't seem to do a great deal in terms
0:26
of electr magnification they're obiously
0:28
just about getting the image to where it
0:29
uh where it needs to be just so that
0:33
goes like that then this Optical block I
0:36
originally thought this was made of some
0:37
s crazy heavy material but it's just
0:39
really the sum of all these Optical bits
0:41
are just ridiculously heavy those lenses
0:43
are about 4 kilos each and then there's
0:45
this very heavy very solid um piece that
0:47
goes in the middle and this is so this
0:49
is the filter wheel assembly with a
0:51
hilariously oversized steper
0:53
motor driving this wheel with these very
0:57
large narrow band filters so we've got
1:00
various different shades of uh
1:03
filters there five Al together that
1:06
one's actually just showing up a silver
1:07
that's actually a a red but fairly low
1:10
transmission orangey red blue green
1:15
there's an excess cover on this side so
1:16
the filters can be accessed and changed
1:19
without taking anything else apart even
1:21
this is like ridiculous it's like solid
1:23
aluminium this is just basically a cover
1:25
the actual wavelengths of these are um
1:27
488 525 570 630 and 700 NM not sure what
1:32
the suffix on that perhaps that's the uh
1:34
the width of the spectral line say these
1:37
are very narrow band filters most of
1:39
them are you very little light through
1:41
so it's still very tight narrow band to
1:43
match the um fluoresence of the dies
1:45
they're using in the biochemical process
1:48
and obviously to reject the light that's
1:49
being fired at it from that Illuminator
1:51
box and then there's a there's a second
1:53
one of these lenses then the actual sort
1:55
of samples below that so uh very serious
1:58
amount of very uh chunky heavy Optics
2:01
okay let's take a look at this light
2:02
source made by company Lumen Dynamics
2:04
who are now part of
2:06
excelitas self-contained unit power
2:08
connector USB and this which one of the
2:11
Cable Bundle said was a TTL interface
2:14
USB wasn't used in uh the fluid
2:17
application output here and I think this
2:19
is an input for um light feedback I
2:21
don't if it's regulated or just a measur
2:23
measurement facility and the uh fiber
2:27
assembly
2:29
Square Inlet there and then there's two
2:32
outputs which have uh lens assemblies
2:35
and this small one which goes back into
2:37
that small Port just Loops out of here
2:40
straight back in So on this side we've
2:42
got the electronics which look pretty
2:44
straightforward we've got a bit of power
2:45
supply stuff over here and we've got
2:48
separate drivers for each wavelength now
2:50
interesting this is clearly been very
2:52
specifically made for this application
2:54
you I was half expecting like say some
2:56
generic drivers that could be used for a
2:58
number of different things but actually
3:00
literally specified the exact wavelength
3:02
on the PCB there is provision here for
3:04
385 NM which isn't populated but this is
3:07
clearly been designed very specifically
3:09
so these four drivers look the same but
3:10
then there's two higher power ones for
3:12
575 and
3:14
520 a slightly bigger heat sink on this
3:16
575 section there a p 24 which is
3:20
providing USB interface USB isolator the
3:23
USB interface just presents as a comport
3:26
I did have a quick look but I didn't
3:27
actually get anything sensible um I did
3:29
dump the Pi code out and there's a few
3:31
you a few sort of commands that you
3:32
could see in text but I didn't actually
3:34
manage to get it working properly I
3:36
found some software for related version
3:38
but it didn't seem to want to talk to it
3:39
but um I say that wasn't used for the
3:41
original application it might be quite
3:42
interesting to get try and get the Run
3:44
hours count out of it and the TTL
3:46
interface looks fairly straightforward
3:48
we've got positions for six opto
3:50
isolators but only five five are
3:52
installed so that corresponds with the
3:54
unused thing so I think this hopefully
3:56
should be as simple as just providing a
3:57
ttrl signal for each color to uh enable
4:00
it a big heat sink here which is there I
4:03
think there's like a big S of metal
4:04
plate through the middle of this that
4:05
all the leads are mounted on the other
4:07
side so this is heat sinking it with a
4:09
air flow from a uh just a fan in here
4:13
obviously don't have the air flow
4:14
anywhere near the Optics so conduction
4:17
cool through to this plate that's then
4:18
uh air cooled got some pots which are
4:21
presumably power
4:22
adjustments okay let's take a look at
4:24
the other side which is uh much more
4:27
interesting see we've got some uh very
4:31
uh neatly Twisted cable assemblies there
4:35
a bunch of leads so we've got one here
4:37
475 up here 430 NM 630 575 and 520
4:44
filters and dcro mirrors a quick way to
4:48
see what's white is if we just shine
4:49
some white light through
4:51
here not sure how it is is to see on the
4:54
camera but shining white light we do
4:55
actually get a bit of red a bit of blue
4:57
some yellow here so the obstacle path
5:00
575 it goes sort of here bounces off
5:03
this mirror and goes out the 520 goes
5:07
sort of down here across here and up
5:09
there 630 goes basically straight
5:13
through
5:15
430 goes across there down there along
5:17
there and the 475 goes down here and
5:20
left this is the light sensing thing
5:22
think here there's just a um I think
5:24
there a photo diode or other sensor
5:26
haven't actually taken that off and
5:28
everything's fixed down to this chunk of
5:31
aluminium which acts as the heat
5:32
spreader that then conducts the heat to
5:33
the back side for the heat
5:35
sink and the actual lead packages all
5:38
look fairly similar except for this one
5:41
on the 575 which looks quite a bit more
5:44
substantial big spay
5:46
Terminals and the interface for this
5:48
turned out to be extremely simple it's
5:50
literally a 5V TTL level to enable each
5:54
color doesn't seem to be any tensity
5:56
control but there are some additional
5:58
pins on that connector that weren't used
5:59
in the through time thing so maybe
6:01
there's some extra lines that control
6:02
that I couldn't find any data on this uh
6:05
unit and the um their current product
6:07
range is quite significantly different
6:09
so we've got the uh blue these
6:13
might may well be saturating the camera
6:16
so they might look a bit weird so that's
6:17
the 430
6:18
blue the 575
6:24
yellow uh
6:26
475 light blue
6:29
the uh 520
6:31
green and the uh 630 red now one
6:36
interesting thing I noticed for the
6:39
575 it's actually it's actually using a
6:42
white lead and then filtering it rather
6:44
than using all the other ones are using
6:46
leads which are the fundamental colors
6:47
but uh this is actually doing white and
6:50
it's a combination of this filter and
6:52
the dichroic mirrors that are turning to
6:55
Yellow if we take the filter out and a
6:57
lot of the a lot of the um blue content
7:00
is going this way the red is going
7:02
straight through these two mirrors so
7:05
this is clearly not reflecting much of
7:08
that so we end up with the yellow coming
7:10
out of uh out of there which is a fairly
7:14
light yellow color which you don't
7:16
really see from high intensity leads so
7:19
that's clearly why they've used the
7:20
white to uh do this power consumption of
7:23
the white is pretty high so going up to
7:25
about 2 and 1 half amps on that color
7:27
whereas most of the other colors are
7:28
only drawing half an amp or so at 24
7:30
volts the uh the green is up to about
7:32
1.2 but say this thing is uh much
7:35
brighter and if you actually run all the
7:38
colors at the same time you get a fairly
7:41
reasonable um looking white coming out
7:43
of it and one thing you might just be
7:45
out to notice is there is some sort
7:46
color banding around here that's not
7:49
getting uh everything s completely
7:51
concentric and I think that's where this
7:53
fiber optic thing comes
7:58
in I'll
8:00
get a couple of Fairly accurately shaped
8:04
very sort of uniform color and looking
8:06
at What's um inside here we've basically
8:09
just got this Square Rod so this is
8:12
clearly yeah the lights just bouncing
8:13
off all the all the various sides to um
8:16
get a nice uniform illumination uh this
8:19
back bit looks like it's all potted so
8:21
nothing I really do to get in there I
8:24
think this is fiber so I have come
8:26
across um cables like this which are
8:27
liquid fill but just looking through the
8:30
end of this it's probably a bit hard to
8:31
see it does look like there fiber ends
8:34
going going on there and so there's this
8:36
feedback thing which is just obviously
8:39
compensating for the any light losses
8:41
through here to get an accurate
8:43
representation of uh the light that's
8:45
been launched out of these two
8:47
fibers and you see uh
8:49
these have got this sort of trapezium
8:54
shape light guides again it's like a
8:56
sort of acrylic or glass light guide
9:00
guess projected just to make the right
9:03
rectangular
9:04
shape and look at this Center assembly
9:07
um the light output doesn't uh change
9:10
whether you feed this in or not so it's
9:11
clear not doing any internal Clos Loop
9:14
control obviously there may well be some
9:16
facility for it to do that but it's not
9:17
being used in this
9:19
application and so this output just
9:21
produces a voltage on the uh outle
9:24
connector proportional to the amount of
9:26
light that's present so there's a little
9:28
diffuser in the back there
9:30
and then there's just some kind of uh
9:33
Optical sensor looks like a
9:35
chip looking at the lead it's a very
9:37
small package on the PCB with this lens
9:40
assembly over the top and these look
9:43
like they're actually on a copper
9:44
Metalized PCB for maximum thermal
9:47
performance and yeah it's a very small
9:49
package looks like it's a ceramic
9:51
package and there's a thermister there
9:53
for temperature monitoring this is the
9:56
475 blue one this is the 520 need to
9:59
Green which is uh rather different OB
10:02
it's a much bigger D with lots of bond
10:04
wise but also this looks like it's using
10:05
a phosphor if I shine a blue light at it
10:08
lights up green so this is actually a
10:10
phosphor conversion green lead which
10:12
I've I've come across before they want
10:15
that specific wavelength so they may be
10:17
easier to tune a phosphor than tune the
10:20
um semiconductor material to get the uh
10:23
right right wavelength from the lead
10:24
directly uh red 630 similar size to the
10:28
blue one or does seem to have a uh a
10:31
lens on top of it there is a sort of red
10:33
coloring to
10:35
the die but that doesn't appear to be
10:38
fluorescent as far as I can
10:39
tell and the white one again a little
10:41
bit different sort of much higher
10:43
current
10:46
connectors a makeer name on that
10:48
connector flot light not sure if that's
10:52
the connector or the lead
10:54
itself and obviously with the phosphor
10:56
and I'd imagine that phosphor may well
10:58
be tuned to get the maximum to the uh 5
11:01
cenm and actually this white one looks
11:04
like a St fairly standard product I just
11:06
found it in Mouse made by luminous
11:09
devices in fact actually I think all
11:11
these are based on various luminous
11:13
devices modules and they're you take
11:17
looks like they taking the nearest
11:18
wavelength and then just using these
11:19
filters to clean it up to get a precise
11:22
uh spectral line out of it so quite a
11:25
nice neat and um extreme
11:30
bright light source uh sure I've got any
11:33
particular use for it so I think this
11:35
might end up on
11:36
eBay but uh very pretty to look out and
11:40
without the uh risk of burning your eyes
11:43
out like you do with lasers so I thought
11:45
it would be interesting to try and
11:46
figure out the runtime of this things
11:48
like this we usually keep some sort
11:49
record of runtime cuz leads degrade over
11:51
time I couldn't get any software to work
11:52
through the USB face but then had a
11:54
thought probably going to be writing the
11:55
runtime periodically to the e s prom so
11:58
I just just scope up that and noticed it
12:00
was doing right every 5 minutes so I
12:02
just ran it for a while periodically
12:04
reading the E squ I just held the pick
12:05
in in reset and um put clip over to read
12:07
the square prom and found it was writing
12:10
one location per color every 5 minutes
12:12
so if one color was on it would write
12:14
that location every 5 minutes and just
12:16
increment it by one so after doing a few
12:18
tests with different colors of different
12:19
time periods it looked extremely
12:21
straightforward it's like a four bite
12:22
count for each color looking at the
12:24
original data that was in it all the
12:26
colors apart from Green were reading
12:28
zero and the green was reading four
12:30
indicating a total 20 minutes run time
12:32
ever if it was turned on run for a short
12:34
time then turned off that might not have
12:36
been counted but even so indicates this
12:37
thing wasn't used a great deal the whole
12:40
s process of doing a run can be several
12:42
hours but it'll only be doing probably
12:43
the Imaging at the end of that so you
12:46
wouldn't expect to be running for a long
12:47
time but say a single color for 20
12:50
minutes over its whole lifetime does
12:52
seem a little bit on the low side okay
12:55
let's look at the camera un fortunately
12:57
I managed to not record any sound when I
12:58
did this it's also a couple of months
13:00
ago so there's going to be a few details
13:02
that I've forgotten so I'm just going to
13:04
dub this over the original footage so um
13:07
take the lid off see this massive great
13:10
heat sink so this is a pel cool camera
13:12
we've got this blower fan producing a
13:14
fair amount of air flow through
13:16
it the connector here there's the ccds
13:19
mounted on the board on the
13:24
right this unplugs so we've got a bit of
13:27
power supply stuff on here
13:29
USB interface I think that's the Cyprus
13:32
microcontroller High speeded USB
13:34
interface there's a zyink spon fpga some
13:40
RAM and there's a couple of ATD
13:42
converters can't quite read what those
13:45
those are but anal
13:47
devices um little bit of bodgery around
13:51
here extra decoupling obviously they
13:53
have having some noise issues this is
13:55
around the ram chip quite a lot of extra
13:57
capacitors been added there
13:59
uh there's a couple of amplifiers prior
14:01
to the HD converter buffers or Andor
14:05
amplifiers taking the CCD
14:08
signal um bit more power spy stuff here
14:11
this is probably all to do with
14:12
generating the various CCD bias voltages
14:14
they uh need quite a lot of exotic
14:18
voltages next board down is just a
14:20
shield and an interconnect
14:24
boardly shielding the power supply stuff
14:26
from some the more sensitive an log
14:28
stuff
14:31
and this is the bottom board which is
14:32
just all power supply
14:34
stuff as you can see tons of capacitors
14:37
or Transformer in
14:42
there and this is the CCD which is a uh
14:47
very impressive thing this is a kf50 100
14:50
originally by true sense then codec
14:53
there ON
14:54
Semiconductor it's 50 megapixels uh the
14:58
only price I could find was this one
15:00
5,000 bucks and the architecture you can
15:03
see there actually two separate halves
15:04
which explains the Dual AZ converters
15:06
and two amplifiers it's literally split
15:08
down the middle and duplicated so it's
15:10
outputting two streams in parallel just
15:13
to keep the bandwidth sensible and it's
15:15
got this amazing um diffraction effects
15:18
it's got micro lenses over the pixel so
15:20
there's there's a bit more Optics going
15:22
on than on a normal
15:25
sensor few more bodges on the CCD board
15:28
including this wire which isn't really
15:29
tacked down very well which is a bit uh
15:32
bit of a mess quite a few bits around
15:34
this board where they've uh tacked
15:36
various bits on which is not super
15:38
impressive looks like CCD drivers on the
15:40
left with those 3 ohm um damping
15:43
resistors on the
15:47
output get a few more little bodges
15:50
around here some of
15:52
the and there's this separator the
15:54
silica gel to keep the moisture down but
15:56
there's this separator that actually
15:58
appears to be cut from piece of
15:59
antistatic
16:04
bag and this sort of thermal block on
16:06
top of this stack of three pel Cola
16:12
modules so as with any Stacks they get
16:16
um larger as they go back towards the
16:18
heat sink because each P's got to not
16:20
only take the heat from the previous but
16:21
also the waste heat which is quite
16:27
significant you see a little temperature
16:29
sensor here that copper block which
16:32
makes contact with the back of the
16:37
CCD and this's the back of the
16:40
pelas this then contacts the heat sink
16:44
on the uh rear there a few thermal pads
16:46
as well for some of the other power
16:47
components on this
16:51
PCB okay I've connected this uh camera
16:54
up I found some drivers on the disc that
16:56
seem to work under Windows 7 couldn't
16:58
get to install under Windows 11 though
17:01
um in the absence of any sort of lens or
17:03
being bothered to the proper amount I've
17:04
just put some f over it and put a little
17:06
pin in there to make a pinhole lens and
17:08
software gives a few options I'm not
17:11
entirely sure what all these are there's
17:12
obviously a clock frequency 22 MHz low
17:15
gain and with PFG no idea what that is
17:19
something something game programmable
17:20
Something game perhaps ver exposure
17:23
types I think focus is just like a
17:25
continuous grab until you tell it to
17:27
stop not entirely sure all these options
17:30
are obviously exposure time uh triggers
17:33
there ex external hardware trigger inut
17:35
you just trigger using a um thing on
17:37
screen so the resolution is 8176 by
17:40
6132 and you can actually bin those
17:42
where you combine multiple pixels to get
17:46
increased gain at the expense of lower
17:48
resolution down this is a 10sec exposure
17:51
obviously of the pin hole it's very uh
17:53
intensitive so we just stand still now
17:56
downloading it there's the uh exposure
17:59
so when it's
18:01
um there's a little status thing down
18:03
here so that tells you the um exposure
18:07
[Applause]
18:09
time it's this is just it
18:15
downloading um it is quite I'm seeing
18:18
quite a lot like smearing I think that I
18:20
don't know whether that's just due to
18:21
pixels overloading or something else I
18:24
mean yeah it's not it's not um out of
18:26
the question that there's something not
18:27
totally right about this camera
18:28
certainly was bodge wise on there um I
18:31
don't I'd imagine a camera like this
18:32
it's got a fairly narrow range of
18:34
intensities that it's happy with I'm not
18:36
going to spend a great deal of time on
18:38
this if you're interested in this camera
18:40
maybe for astronomy or something and
18:42
happy to sort of take the risk of it may
18:44
not be uh perfect I'll um I think I'll
18:47
stick this on eBay along with the
18:48
Illuminator I'll put a link down in the
18:50
description to the listing take your
18:52
chances to grab a bargain so for example
18:54
here we see this vertical streaking so
18:56
I'm not sure how normal that is this is
18:58
on fairly bright scene looking out the
19:02
window if I cut the exposure time down
19:04
on that it's now 1 second
19:07
exposure again most of the image
19:09
disappears again this is looks like it's
19:11
possibly over still overloading here go
19:14
that go down to say say quarter a
19:16
second so again I think there might be
19:19
some Auto gain control going on here um
19:21
this is with the PFG option let's try
19:23
turning that off and see what
19:25
happens so I'm not sure this is actually
19:27
more streaking or which just it's
19:29
cranked up the gain all the dis display
19:31
gray scale to show what um you know the
19:33
range of things that it's captured
19:36
there's one of one of 12 things in the
19:38
software there's um you can see of you
19:40
can't seem to read out the temperature
19:42
of the pelta cooler but you can set the
19:44
temperature and if you said it's a
19:46
different temperature you see the power
19:48
consumption jump up running the cooler
19:50
to get the temperature you requested but
19:52
I can't see anything anywhere that tells
19:54
you whether the cool is at the at the
19:56
temperature other than the power
19:57
consumption going down and there's no
19:59
temperature read out
20:03
here and just some yeah this is just
20:05
sort of very basic software I'm sure
20:07
there's like an API for more
20:09
sophisticated
20:10
applications but so if you know anything
20:12
more about these cameras please um stick
20:14
in the
20:15
comments um incidentally when I was
20:18
editing I didn't notice there was a bent
20:19
pin on the um CCD but I did fix that
20:22
before doing these tests and also
20:24
reactivated the um silica gel desicant
20:26
cuz I noticed it was uh I was getting
20:28
bit of condensation on the window but um
20:31
yeah so a couple of uh interesting but
20:34
maybe not particularly uh useful pieces
20:37
of Kit except for someone that's got a
20:38
very specific use so um I'll stick a
20:42
I'll stick these on eBay put a link in
20:44
the description and say hopefully
20:45
someone could actually make some uh good
20:47
use of these things
Example Output:
**Abstract:**
This video presents Part 2 of a teardown focusing on the optical components of a Fluidigm Polaris biotechnology instrument, specifically the multi-wavelength illuminator and the high-resolution CCD camera.
The Lumen Dynamics illuminator unit is examined in detail, revealing its construction using multiple high-power LEDs (430nm, 475nm, 520nm, 575nm, 630nm) combined via dichroic mirrors and filters. A square fiber optic rod is used to homogenize the light. A notable finding is the use of a phosphor-converted white LED filtered to achieve the 575nm output. The unit features simple TTL activation for each color, conduction cooling, and internal homogenization optics. Analysis of its EEPROM suggests extremely low operational runtime.
The camera module teardown showcases a 50 Megapixel ON Semiconductor KAF-50100 CCD sensor with micro-lenses, cooled by a multi-stage Peltier stack. The control electronics include an FPGA and a USB interface. Significant post-manufacturing modifications ("bodges") are observed on the camera's circuit boards. Basic functional testing using vendor software and a pinhole lens confirms image capture but reveals prominent vertical streaking artifacts, the cause of which remains uncertain (potential overload, readout artifact, or fault).
**Exploring the Fluidigm Polaris: A Detailed Look at its High-End Optics and Camera System**
* **0:00 High-End Optics:** The system utilizes heavy, high-quality lenses and mirrors for precise imaging, weighing around 4 kilos each.
* **0:49 Narrow Band Filters:** A filter wheel with five narrow band filters (488, 525, 570, 630, and 700 nm) ensures accurate fluorescence detection and rejection of excitation light.
* **2:01 Customizable Illumination:** The Lumen Dynamics light source offers five individually controllable LED wavelengths (430, 475, 520, 575, 630 nm) with varying power outputs. The 575nm yellow LED is uniquely achieved using a white LED with filtering.
* **3:45 TTL Control:** The light source is controlled via a simple TTL interface, enabling easy on/off switching for each LED color.
* **12:55 Sophisticated Camera:** The system includes a 50-megapixel Kodak KAI-50100 CCD camera with a Peltier cooling system for reduced noise.
* **14:54 High-Speed Data Transfer:** The camera features dual analog-to-digital converters to manage the high data throughput of the 50-megapixel sensor, which is effectively two 25-megapixel sensors operating in parallel.
* **18:11 Possible Issues:** The video creator noted some potential issues with the camera, including image smearing.
* **18:11 Limited Dynamic Range:** The camera's sensor has a limited dynamic range, making it potentially challenging to capture scenes with a wide range of brightness levels.
* **11:45 Low Runtime:** Internal data suggests the system has seen minimal usage, with only 20 minutes of recorded runtime for the green LED.
* **20:38 Availability on eBay:** Both the illuminator and camera are expected to be listed for sale on eBay.
Here is the real transcript. Please summarize it:
00:00:01 vaccines. We're not allowed to talk
00:00:01 about it as any other medical treatment
00:00:02 which is has ri benefits and has risks.
00:00:05 We need honesty. We need to have
00:00:06 discussions not to stop people from
00:00:08 vaccinating, not to stop vaccines, but
00:00:10 to hold these companies liable in some
00:00:13 way or to hold them accountable. Dr.
00:00:15 Joel Wor is a pediatrician and opening
00:00:17 up honest conversations around vaccines,
00:00:19 helping people make informed choices
00:00:21 with confidence. Every single vaccine
00:00:23 before it hits the market, it's studied
00:00:25 against a placebo. The thing is, a lot
00:00:26 of those placeos are not inert. Not
00:00:28 everybody is the same. Each of us have
00:00:30 different genetics, different immune
00:00:31 systems. At Mayo Clinic, they're looking
00:00:32 at how different people respond to
00:00:34 vaccines. Why do the kids that are
00:00:35 living an unvaccinated lifestyle have a
00:00:37 lower risk of autoimmune disease? Is it
00:00:39 the food that they're eating? What is it
00:00:40 about their lifestyle that's different?
00:00:43 Joe, welcome to the Dr. Heyman show. I'm
00:00:46 so excited about this conversation
00:00:47 because it's a conversation that nobody
00:00:49 is allowed to have, which is about
00:00:51 vaccines. Yeah. No, I'm I'm so excited
00:00:53 to be here. And before we jump into
00:00:55 that, I just want to say thank you to
00:00:56 you. Back when I was in training, I met
00:00:59 my wife and she was very integrative
00:01:01 minded and that kind of set me on the
00:01:03 path towards learning integrative
00:01:04 medicine. Yeah. But at that time there
00:01:07 really wasn't a lot of integrative
00:01:08 medicine, certainly not for kids. No.
00:01:10 And your work really resonated with me.
00:01:12 I was following a lot of what you did. I
00:01:14 went to functional medicine courses
00:01:15 because of you and um I I used to tell
00:01:18 people, you know, I want to be the
00:01:20 Markman of pediatrics. Yes, we need you.
00:01:22 So that's probably why I'm sitting here
00:01:24 today. So, I just want to say thank you
00:01:25 for everything that you do because it
00:01:26 makes a huge difference. Well, that is
00:01:28 really appreciate that. And you know,
00:01:29 I've worked really hard to try to spread
00:01:31 the word and help people open their
00:01:33 minds and think differently about
00:01:35 health. And one of the challenges is
00:01:37 that is that you know, there's such a
00:01:40 set of dogmas in medicine, which is very
00:01:42 strange. You know, we had all these
00:01:44 beliefs that have been overturned by the
00:01:48 progress of science and science is
00:01:49 really about asking questions. What
00:01:51 really strikes me around the issue
00:01:53 around vaccines and your new book,
00:01:54 Between a Shot and a Hard Place,
00:01:55 tackling difficult vaccine questions
00:01:58 with balanced data and clarity, it's a
00:02:00 breath of fresh air. It's just it's
00:02:01 extraordinary to me that when you look
00:02:03 at the progress of science we've seen
00:02:05 historically, we used to think that
00:02:06 autism was caused by refrigerator
00:02:08 mothers. Mhm. We used to think that
00:02:10 ulcers were caused by stress and not by
00:02:13 a bacteria which we now know and the guy
00:02:14 who figured this out won the Nobel Prize
00:02:16 and was laughed at for making this
00:02:18 hypothesis that a bacteria would cause
00:02:20 ulcers. Recently and we used to think
00:02:22 that aspirin was the best thing to give
00:02:24 to everybody to prevent heart attacks
00:02:26 and that that has completely flipped and
00:02:28 it's only good for a certain subset of
00:02:29 people who are at high risk not
00:02:31 everybody else because it's going to
00:02:32 cause brain hemorrhaging and intestinal
00:02:34 bleeding or we used to give arsenic and
00:02:36 mercury as well that was a long time
00:02:38 ago. Those were the the medicines of the
00:02:40 day. That was a long time ago. Yeah. In
00:02:42 fact, one of the one of the things they
00:02:43 did for teething for babies back in the
00:02:46 30s and 40s would give them this powder
00:02:49 that actually they would kind of relieve
00:02:51 some of the pain and discomfort and it
00:02:52 was full of mercury and it caused a
00:02:54 whole syndrome that actually looks like
00:02:57 autism which is crazy. So, I I want to
00:03:00 kind of have a far-ranging conversation
00:03:01 about the history of vaccines, what we
00:03:03 know, what we don't know, and open up
00:03:05 the question because this has been one
00:03:08 of those areas that is just off limits.
00:03:10 I when I was at Cleveland Clinic, we
00:03:12 started the functional medicine center
00:03:13 there, it was fun, it was great, and a
00:03:15 lot of openness to what we're doing. And
00:03:17 there was an article I wrote like maybe
00:03:19 a decade before about a patient with
00:03:20 autism that I just said in the history,
00:03:23 this patient had an MMR vaccine and the
00:03:26 mother said that after that the kid had
00:03:27 issues. And so I was just sort of
00:03:29 recounting the history and even I even
00:03:31 put in the in the kind of disclaimer at
00:03:33 the beginning, I'm not saying that
00:03:35 vaccines cause autism. I'm just noting
00:03:37 the historical context of this patient.
00:03:40 And I was called out by the the
00:03:42 pediatric department and and said,
00:03:44 "You're an antibaxer. Prove that you're
00:03:46 not. You know, we we think you're you're
00:03:48 a heretic or you know, you're in
00:03:50 trouble." Basically, I was like in
00:03:51 trouble. So I had to write a a letter to
00:03:53 the entire pediatric department saying,
00:03:55 "No, no, I'm not antiax." But I I I
00:03:58 think they're important and essential
00:03:59 and great advance in medicine. And you
00:04:01 know, I think there it's worth more
00:04:03 conversation and discussion, but it's
00:04:04 crazy that you can't talk about it. I
00:04:06 mean, you never could. And same thing
00:04:08 for me. I mean, I never talked about
00:04:10 this outside the office until recently.
00:04:13 Yeah. You know, even I was even on RFK's
00:04:15 podcast in 2022, and before I went on, I
00:04:17 said, you know, is it okay if we don't
00:04:18 talk about vaccines? And he was totally
00:04:20 fine with it. He said, "Yeah, I get it."
00:04:21 And I mean, I should have at that time,
00:04:23 but it was just so controversial. It's
00:04:25 still so controversial, but I think the
00:04:27 times have changed a little bit and
00:04:29 people are much more interested and and
00:04:30 I feel like we need to have that
00:04:32 conversation and we need to be open to
00:04:34 discussing everything for our kids
00:04:36 health because our health is suffering
00:04:38 and we're seeing higher rates of chronic
00:04:41 disease and we have to be open to
00:04:43 looking into everything. Not to say that
00:04:45 we shouldn't vaccinate our vaccines are
00:04:46 are bad or anything like that, but we
00:04:48 want the best possible vaccines. We want
00:04:50 the most minimal side effects and we
00:04:52 shouldn't assume that we have the best
00:04:54 vaccines that we're ever going to have
00:04:55 in the history of the world. Like we
00:04:57 should try to continue improving things.
00:04:59 Yeah. And and there there's no reason
00:05:00 why that should be controversial and and
00:05:03 that's why I wrote the book. I'm not
00:05:04 against vaccines at all. I give vaccines
00:05:06 in my office. I just don't believe
00:05:07 people should be forced to do things. I
00:05:09 think we should have discussions and we
00:05:11 should have debates and we should
00:05:13 provide the best information so people
00:05:14 can make the best decisions for for
00:05:16 themselves. And I don't have any motive
00:05:19 behind this book in terms of pushing
00:05:21 people to vaccinate or pushing people
00:05:22 not to vaccinate. Everything that you
00:05:24 see on the market when it comes to a
00:05:25 book really seems to be one-sided. It
00:05:28 really seems to be super provax or super
00:05:30 antivax and there's nothing in between.
00:05:32 That doesn't help, I think, the majority
00:05:35 of parents who are concerned and want
00:05:37 information and want to discuss the pros
00:05:39 and the cons, the risks versus the
00:05:40 benefits. And and I think that's the
00:05:42 conversation that we need to be having
00:05:43 and that's what we have about every
00:05:44 other topic in medicine. Yeah. There
00:05:46 there's a there's a thing we're supposed
00:05:48 to do called informed consent, which is
00:05:50 you lay out the the risks and the
00:05:52 benefits of any treatment, whether it's
00:05:54 surgery. I mean, I even had surgery.
00:05:56 Okay, you could die from bleeding from
00:05:58 infection from this, from that. I'm
00:05:59 like, okay, you know, like I mean, I had
00:06:02 I had an ablation for atrial fib years
00:06:04 ago, and the doctor this long list,
00:06:06 well, you could have perforated your
00:06:07 aorta, you could do this, you could do
00:06:08 that, and I could die. I mean, oh god,
00:06:10 you know, this is terrible. and and
00:06:12 okay, I I chose to do it because I I
00:06:14 didn't want to have this problem anymore
00:06:16 and I had informed consent. But with
00:06:19 vaccines, we're not allowed to talk
00:06:20 about it as any other medical treatment,
00:06:21 which is has ri benefits and it has
00:06:24 risks. And it's just it's extraordinary
00:06:25 to me that we hear this trope that it's
00:06:27 they're safe and they're effective.
00:06:29 They're safe and they're effective,
00:06:30 right? Well, they're sort of safe and
00:06:32 they're sort of effective for a lot of
00:06:34 them, right? And I I think that phrase
00:06:36 over the pandemic is what really shifted
00:06:39 things. It certainly did for me. is one
00:06:41 of the big concerns. I mean, that was
00:06:43 something that we all lived through
00:06:45 recently and we saw the marketing around
00:06:48 vaccines. We saw how that played out.
00:06:51 And when you talk about a new vaccine,
00:06:53 safe and effective doesn't make any
00:06:55 sense. It's just propaganda. What should
00:06:57 have been said, what would have been
00:06:59 completely reasonable if we were being
00:07:01 honest would be based on the information
00:07:03 that we have, the benefits seem to
00:07:05 outweigh the known risks at this time.
00:07:08 uh we don't have any long-term data, so
00:07:09 we don't know anything about the
00:07:10 long-term risks from the the vaccine.
00:07:12 But we we do feel like based on what we
00:07:14 know, the risks seem minimal. The
00:07:15 benefits seem, you know, great for
00:07:17 decreasing death, decreasing
00:07:19 hospitalizations. So here's why we're
00:07:20 recommending it. We're recommending it
00:07:21 to these individuals because they're
00:07:23 more high risk for the individuals that
00:07:25 are less high risk. Here's our
00:07:26 recommendation. What what's wrong with
00:07:28 that? Like that's honest. That's what we
00:07:29 should have been saying instead of
00:07:30 saying safe and effective. Safe and
00:07:32 effective. And then people had problems.
00:07:34 With anything you're going to take,
00:07:35 there's going to be issues. And if
00:07:36 you're not honest, then you see this
00:07:39 decrease in trust in medicine because
00:07:41 people say, "Well, they're not being
00:07:42 honest with me about that. What else are
00:07:44 they not being honest with me about?"
00:07:45 And I'm seeing that in the office. I
00:07:47 mean, we're seeing the vaccine rates
00:07:49 decline across the board. Trust in
00:07:51 medicine is at the lowest it's ever
00:07:53 been. It was 70% before the pandemic. In
00:07:55 many studies, now it's around 40%.
00:07:57 That's crazy. The the vaccination rates,
00:07:59 there are more kids than ever that are
00:08:01 unvaccinated. There are more kids than
00:08:02 ever that are not fully vaccinated. We
00:08:04 have to take a hard look as physicians
00:08:06 and as a medical establishment and look
00:08:08 in the mirror and say, "What are we
00:08:11 doing?" I mean, medicine's trying to
00:08:13 stop vaccine hesitancy. They're actually
00:08:15 creating it by not having discussions
00:08:17 and having debate. And we have to look
00:08:18 in the mirror and say, "What can we do?
00:08:20 How do we bridge that divide to bring
00:08:22 honesty back and trust back in the
00:08:25 system and to hear what concerns parents
00:08:28 have and not to vilify them or to call
00:08:30 them antiax but to listen to what their
00:08:34 concerns are so that way we can address
00:08:35 those concerns, get the research that we
00:08:37 need to either disprove what they're
00:08:40 saying or to make some changes to make
00:08:42 the vaccine safer, whatever it is. But
00:08:44 we're we're vilifying people for talking
00:08:46 about it. And that creates this system
00:08:49 where where people don't want to do
00:08:50 anything with medicine anymore. They
00:08:52 don't want to go to doctors. They don't
00:08:53 trust anything. And that is bad. Look at
00:08:55 the COVID vaccine rates right now. I
00:08:57 mean, you're talking like 10% for kids
00:08:59 getting the vaccine this year with a
00:09:01 recommendation from the CDC. That means
00:09:03 that people don't trust the CDC anymore.
00:09:05 If if half of kids are getting flu shots
00:09:08 and 10% are getting co shots and 20% of
00:09:10 adults are getting COVID shots, then
00:09:12 there's this distrust of of the things
00:09:15 that the CDC are recommending and that
00:09:17 is very bad. We need to have our
00:09:19 establishments there to protect us and
00:09:21 to provide us information. And if we
00:09:23 don't trust what they're saying, it's
00:09:24 like the boy who cried wolf. What
00:09:25 happens next year or the year after
00:09:26 where something does come out that we
00:09:28 need to be listening to and everybody
00:09:29 decides I don't trust the CDC. They
00:09:31 don't know what they're talking about
00:09:32 and and then we don't do the things that
00:09:34 we need to do. So that's very concerning
00:09:36 to me and we have to take that
00:09:37 seriously. I think what you're saying is
00:09:39 so is so important. The public trust in
00:09:41 medicine has gone down. The questioning
00:09:44 of vaccines has gone way up. And one of
00:09:46 the things I find very disturbing is
00:09:48 that when you hear people in government
00:09:50 saying it's a waste of money to do any
00:09:53 further studies on vaccines because we
00:09:57 know they're
00:09:58 perfect. Like and I'm like what is this?
00:10:02 Is this medicine? Is this science?
00:10:03 There's nothing else that I can think of
00:10:04 in medicine that's like that. No, it's
00:10:06 prop. It's a science fundamentally is
00:10:08 based on hypothesis generation, which is
00:10:11 questioning an assumption and then
00:10:13 trying to prove your hypothesis.
00:10:15 Correct. And and it's it's always about
00:10:17 the question. It's never about the
00:10:18 answer. And and yet to say we don't need
00:10:21 any more research and a waste of federal
00:10:23 dollars to actually look at this. Well,
00:10:24 I want to sort of go back a little bit,
00:10:26 Joel, because I think people need to
00:10:27 understand how we got here. You know
00:10:29 when I was in medical school we had just
00:10:32 DTAP which was dtheria tetanus and
00:10:34 ptasus and we had MR which is measles
00:10:37 mumps and rebella and we had polio
00:10:38 vaccines that was it correct that's what
00:10:41 I got that's what my kids got that's
00:10:43 what I got when I was little and you
00:10:45 know when I was in medical school I got
00:10:46 hepatitis vaccines because you know you
00:10:48 were at risk you know getting hepatitis
00:10:50 B or A or whatever from from from
00:10:52 traveling or from from the uh from
00:10:54 medical work we do and I think that's
00:10:56 fine for certain high-risisk
00:10:58 populations. But now, you know, instead
00:11:00 of getting like, you know, eight jabs or
00:11:02 whatever, we get like 72 jabs that are
00:11:05 from a whole host of different vaccines.
00:11:07 There was a problem with the swine flu
00:11:08 vaccine where it was a problem and it
00:11:11 caused a lot of side effects and
00:11:12 complications and deaths and greet
00:11:14 syndrome which is paralysis. It was it
00:11:16 was not a good situation and that was in
00:11:18 the 80s. And then the vaccine maker
00:11:20 says, "We're not going to in kind of
00:11:22 invest any more money in vaccines unless
00:11:26 you the government protect us." So
00:11:29 rather than us being liable for any
00:11:30 complications or problems or side
00:11:32 effects, the government is going to take
00:11:34 that on. And it's called
00:11:36 indemnification. We indemnify the
00:11:38 pharmaceutical manufacturers who make
00:11:40 vaccines so that they can't be sued. And
00:11:43 since that time there's a vaccine
00:11:45 adverse reporting event reporting system
00:11:48 called VES which has received over 2.6
00:11:51 million adverse effects. Now not all of
00:11:54 them are causal. So it doesn't mean you
00:11:55 know if you've got uh a vaccine and you
00:11:58 got a fever didn't mean the fever was
00:11:59 caused by the vaccine but they report
00:12:00 this. And there's more importantly
00:12:02 there's been5 billion dollars of federal
00:12:04 money that's been
00:12:05 spent to pay people who've been injured
00:12:09 by vaccines. So on one hand, the
00:12:11 government's paying out all this money
00:12:13 and acknowledging there's a problem, and
00:12:15 on the other hand, they're like, "No, no
00:12:16 problem. It's perfect. Don't study it
00:12:18 anymore." Right? So that kind of led to
00:12:21 this plethora of vaccines on the market.
00:12:24 We're like, "Okay, it's kind of open
00:12:26 field day and we can just make vaccines.
00:12:27 No one's ever going to sue us and we can
00:12:29 make a ton of money." And the RSV
00:12:30 vaccine, which is a an important, you
00:12:32 know, disease that kids get, respiratory
00:12:34 sensitial, it's a respiratory disease.
00:12:35 And, you know, they the company made a
00:12:37 hundred billion dollars off this
00:12:38 vaccine. Why are we protecting them? You
00:12:40 know, so can you talk about a little bit
00:12:42 about that? Why what's wrong with it and
00:12:44 what we need to do to sort of think
00:12:45 about it differently? It's such a
00:12:47 problematic setup for for safety and
00:12:50 research. It's great that we have more
00:12:53 vaccines. I mean, that that's a good
00:12:54 thing. We want to protect against
00:12:55 diseases that we can protect against,
00:12:57 but the issue is we have this system now
00:13:00 that protects the companies. They were
00:13:02 going out of business in the 1980s. They
00:13:04 were threatening to go out of business,
00:13:06 especially around like what you were
00:13:07 saying and also the DTP vaccine. And
00:13:08 there were a lot of lawsuits around
00:13:10 that. They had to stabilize the market
00:13:12 in some way and that's what they decided
00:13:13 to do to take their liability away. But
00:13:15 the problem with that is if you take
00:13:17 away the liability, they have no
00:13:18 incentive to make them better. And they
00:13:20 have every incentive to get a vaccine on
00:13:22 the market. They have every incentive to
00:13:25 get something on the schedule. And they
00:13:28 have so much money and so much power.
00:13:30 And that has grown over the last 40
00:13:32 years to the point where they're bigger
00:13:34 than many countries. I mean, they have
00:13:35 just so much money. They know what
00:13:36 they're doing. and and they know how to
00:13:39 lobby everything and and push things
00:13:41 forward. And so we're at this point now
00:13:43 where we are hearing from doctors. I
00:13:47 mean, we're trained. We're not talk
00:13:48 we're not talking about safety when
00:13:49 we're learning in in med school, right?
00:13:50 We're talking about here's the schedule.
00:13:52 Here are the diseases that you protect
00:13:53 against. Go do it. You don't think
00:13:55 anything differently. And I didn't I
00:13:56 didn't think anything differently when I
00:13:57 was going through school and start get
00:14:00 your mamogram. Get your colonoscopy. Get
00:14:01 your whatever. Those are fine. But like
00:14:03 it's sort of in that same bucket of like
00:14:05 this is just a general safe thing to do.
00:14:07 Exactly. And anybody that says anything
00:14:08 about vaccines, you're crazy. You're a
00:14:10 crackpot. You're vilified. Parent who
00:14:13 whose child has a reaction to a vaccine,
00:14:15 or at least that they think had a
00:14:16 reaction to a vaccine, they're vilified.
00:14:18 They're called antivax, which makes no
00:14:19 sense. This is a parent who took their
00:14:21 child to get a vaccine. They believed in
00:14:23 vaccines and they had what they think is
00:14:25 a reaction and and then they're vilified
00:14:28 for for being a crazy crackpot tin
00:14:30 tinfoil hatwearing individual and and
00:14:32 vilified for talking about it. And yes,
00:14:34 sometimes it's correlation. Sometimes
00:14:36 you could get a vaccine today, have a
00:14:38 heart attack this afternoon and and die
00:14:40 and that might have nothing to do with
00:14:41 the vaccine. But certainly it's
00:14:42 reasonable if it happens that you should
00:14:44 consider that it could be related. And
00:14:46 just asking the question should not be
00:14:48 something that we're unable to do. But
00:14:50 it has seemed like that's the case for
00:14:52 the last certainly last few years to the
00:14:54 point where the censorship was so great
00:14:57 that that things were labeled as
00:14:59 misinformation or taken down even when
00:15:01 they were true. Mark Zuckerberg said it
00:15:03 recently that the government was
00:15:05 pressuring them to take down true
00:15:07 information about vaccines because it
00:15:09 would lead to hesitancy. And that's the
00:15:11 opposite of what we need to be doing.
00:15:12 That's not honest. We need honesty. We
00:15:14 need to have discussions not to stop
00:15:16 people from vaccinating, not to stop
00:15:18 vaccines, but to hold these companies
00:15:22 liable in some way or to hold them
00:15:24 accountable. Right now, we're seeing
00:15:25 this back and forth between the
00:15:27 pharmaceutical companies and government.
00:15:28 They fund all the politicians. They fund
00:15:31 the news. They fund everything and they
00:15:33 do it on purpose. It's not, you know,
00:15:35 philanthropic philanthropic. They they
00:15:37 they know what they're doing. They they
00:15:38 are, you know, you scratch my back, I'll
00:15:40 scratch yours. And and and that's what
00:15:42 we're seeing. And it's to the point
00:15:43 where doctors just don't even realize
00:15:45 how much we're being fed a a
00:15:49 pharmaceutical curriculum. I mean,
00:15:50 there's no the joke in the book. There's
00:15:52 no there's no why do we not trust Pharma
00:15:55 101 in med school, right? It's here are
00:15:57 the things that you should do and and
00:15:59 they're funding the med school. They're
00:16:00 funding the journals. They're funding
00:16:01 the studies. They're doing the research.
00:16:02 They know what they're doing. And and
00:16:05 that doesn't mean that the vaccine is
00:16:06 unsafe or a medical product is unsafe.
00:16:08 We need medicines. They're fantastic. We
00:16:10 have a lot of amazing medications and
00:16:11 things that that are fantastic. But who
00:16:15 is watching over the pharmaceutical
00:16:17 companies? Who's pushing back? Who's
00:16:19 making sure they're they're safer
00:16:20 tomorrow than they are today? and who is
00:16:23 doing the research to look at things
00:16:25 that they don't do. They look at the
00:16:27 products before they go on the market.
00:16:29 They're not going to look at their
00:16:30 products again to find problems with
00:16:32 them. If you're a CEO of a company,
00:16:33 you're not funding a study to say, "Hey,
00:16:35 let me check my my medication again to
00:16:37 see if it's causing allergies. Let me
00:16:39 see if it's causing asthma 5 years from
00:16:41 now." Why would they do that? Who was
00:16:43 doing that? Nobody's doing And then
00:16:44 there are, you know, in medicine there
00:16:46 are cases where there have been
00:16:48 scientists who've questioned or doctors
00:16:50 who question things like bio, which is a
00:16:52 one of the most powerful
00:16:53 anti-inflammatory drugs we've ever had.
00:16:55 And and Steve Niss at Cleveland Clinic
00:16:58 actually who I know very well is an
00:16:59 brilliant guy. And he's like, gee, it
00:17:01 seems like there may be, you know, some
00:17:03 connection between increased heart
00:17:04 attacks and taking vio. And so he he did
00:17:07 the research and he showed that there
00:17:09 was a problem and it was taken off the
00:17:11 market, but you can't do that with
00:17:12 vaccines. You certainly can't do it
00:17:13 anymore. I mean, you're almost everybody
00:17:15 who does a study on vaccines, if they
00:17:17 show any sort of problem, they get
00:17:19 vilified. And and and so I think there's
00:17:21 this huge incentive or or disincentive
00:17:24 to even do research on vaccines. People
00:17:26 just don't we just don't see a lot of it
00:17:28 these days. I mean, there certainly is a
00:17:29 little bit, but most of what you see is
00:17:31 individuals who are very pro vaccine
00:17:33 doing provaccine studies looking for an
00:17:36 outcome that's funded by a
00:17:37 pharmaceutical
00:17:39 agency in the first place. And so that
00:17:40 that is what we're seeing. And you can't
00:17:42 say that we don't ever have problems
00:17:44 with vaccines. We took the original DTP
00:17:46 off the market because it could
00:17:48 theoretically causing a lot of um
00:17:50 encphilitis and neurologic issues. We
00:17:52 took a roto virus vaccine off the market
00:17:53 because it was causing a deception.
00:17:55 That's what we should be thinking about.
00:17:57 Not that we don't want the rotoirus
00:17:59 vaccine, but hey, is there an issue with
00:18:01 the vaccine that we have now? Maybe we
00:18:03 can figure out why that we have that
00:18:04 issue and and make it better. Wouldn't
00:18:06 we want to do that? Doctors don't want
00:18:08 to harm patients. No. Doctors are good
00:18:10 people. And if there was good research
00:18:12 and good studies to say, hey, this
00:18:14 ingredient in vaccines is increasing
00:18:16 your risk for asthma or this this
00:18:18 ingredient or or this combination of
00:18:20 vaccines increases your risk for eczema.
00:18:23 Doctors would want to know that. We'd
00:18:24 want to look at the schedule, adjust the
00:18:26 schedule and figure out how do we
00:18:29 provide the most benefit from vaccines
00:18:31 while minimizing the risk. While there
00:18:33 isn't a lot of research out there on
00:18:34 long-term risks, there is some. And if
00:18:37 you look at a very pro-science book,
00:18:40 they just say, "Oh, vaccines have
00:18:41 nothing to do with allergies. Vaccines
00:18:42 have nothing to do with eczema. There is
00:18:44 no research on that." But if you look at
00:18:45 a different book, you look at Neil
00:18:47 Miller's book or something like that,
00:18:48 there are good studies out there that
00:18:50 that show that there are some
00:18:53 connections potentially between eczema
00:18:54 and vaccines. There are some connections
00:18:56 between allergies and and and autoimmune
00:18:58 conditions. And the majority of research
00:19:00 still says that there isn't, but there
00:19:02 certainly is some there certainly are
00:19:04 some good studies that that that show
00:19:05 that there there might be some relation
00:19:07 or if you change up the schedule a
00:19:09 little bit or you delay things a little
00:19:10 bit that you can you can see a
00:19:12 difference and that's the kind of
00:19:13 research we should have more of. There's
00:19:14 nothing controversial with saying, "Hey,
00:19:16 let's study the the schedule that we
00:19:18 have. Maybe we can try some alternate
00:19:19 schedules. See if some of these rates go
00:19:22 down. If they don't, great." That's the
00:19:24 research that parents want. That's
00:19:26 right. And I think the other problem
00:19:27 with this is that, you know, when we
00:19:29 look at a studies on vaccines, when
00:19:31 they're done, they're basically done
00:19:32 with a single vaccine. Most of them
00:19:34 aren't even tested against placeos.
00:19:36 Right. Well, I I want to talk because I
00:19:38 think that's super important because
00:19:39 it's really really important to be very
00:19:41 specific because I've even heard RFK say
00:19:43 this incorrectly. I know he knows, but
00:19:44 he doesn't always say it very
00:19:45 specifically and it's really important.
00:19:47 So, every single vaccine before it hits
00:19:49 the market, it's studied against a
00:19:50 placebo. The thing is a lot of those
00:19:53 placeos are not inert. That's right. And
00:19:54 that's the the giving. But they say the
00:19:57 word placebo, they say, "No, no, it was
00:19:59 placeboc controlled studied and they
00:20:01 were, but it was studied against another
00:20:02 vaccine or an earlier version of the
00:20:04 vaccine." Basically all the vaccines on
00:20:06 the market that are the children
00:20:07 vaccines were never studied against an
00:20:09 inert placebo like a water like they
00:20:11 were never studied against saline and
00:20:12 and so when somebody says they weren't
00:20:14 studied against a placebo then then then
00:20:16 another person listening who's you know
00:20:17 very pro vaccine says oh no no they were
00:20:19 what are you talking about they have all
00:20:20 this pre-licenture testing but it's very
00:20:23 specific they rigged the deck they
00:20:24 studied against another vaccine they
00:20:26 study it in the setting of doing other
00:20:28 vaccines most studies are looking at one
00:20:30 vaccine versus another vaccine in the
00:20:32 setting of getting all your the rest of
00:20:33 your vaccines So you're not studying
00:20:34 vaccinated versus unvaccinated kids. So
00:20:36 you don't have a true baseline of
00:20:38 safety. And there's a huge difference in
00:20:40 a vaccine study between saying the old
00:20:42 DTP versus the new DTP is safe versus
00:20:46 DTP is safe versus nothing. And that
00:20:48 doesn't mean that there's a safety
00:20:50 issue, but they're all studied in that
00:20:51 way. And if you go back through a
00:20:53 history, there's sort of a lack of
00:20:55 integrity in a way in science. It is a
00:20:57 lack of integrity to a degree. So I
00:21:00 think they design the studies to show
00:21:02 the outcomes they want. They they
00:21:03 certainly want to minimize their their
00:21:06 chance for having a problem. They rig
00:21:07 the deck in in a sense because if you're
00:21:09 doing a blinded study, unless you're
00:21:10 lying, then you don't really know who's
00:21:12 getting what. So the best way to rig the
00:21:14 deck is to put it against something
00:21:15 that's going to have a similar profile
00:21:17 and then you minimize your chance to
00:21:19 have a problem. So it's like testing
00:21:20 Advil against the leave. Correct.
00:21:22 Exactly. And then when they both have
00:21:24 the same profile of of of issues, so
00:21:27 let's say you test Advil versus a leave,
00:21:29 you're not going to see any increase in
00:21:30 problems, right? Let's say they get
00:21:31 three seizures in that study, okay? They
00:21:33 say, "Well, there were three seizures
00:21:34 from both groups, so there's no there's
00:21:36 no concerns." But if you studied it
00:21:37 against water, you had zero seizures.
00:21:40 There would be a difference there. And
00:21:41 that's not the way things are done. And
00:21:42 we're in this weird place now because of
00:21:45 ethics where it's hard to do a study
00:21:49 against unvaccinated kids when you have
00:21:51 a vaccine that's already on the market
00:21:52 because there's an ethics there around
00:21:54 not giving the the standard of care. And
00:21:56 so we're because they weren't done
00:21:58 correctly or the best way in the
00:22:00 beginning. Now we're in this catch
00:22:01 because we have all these vaccines on
00:22:02 the market. If we want to restudy them,
00:22:04 how do we do that in a way where we can
00:22:06 get a baseline? Makes it really tough.
00:22:08 It's tough. You got to go to, you know,
00:22:09 populations that are unvaccinated like
00:22:11 the Amish or Menanites or groups like
00:22:13 that. But we should acknowledge this. So
00:22:15 if we do bring something new on the
00:22:16 market, then we can increase those
00:22:18 standards. Say we we we need you to do a
00:22:20 study against an inert placebo for a new
00:22:22 product. Like the Prevnar vaccine, the
00:22:24 original study, there were no other
00:22:25 prevars on the market. They studied
00:22:27 against the menitis vaccine. That makes
00:22:28 no sense. They could studed against free
00:22:30 solution water, but they said it against
00:22:32 menagitis. Yeah, that's that's sort of
00:22:34 shady science. And it's it's amazing the
00:22:36 FDA allows that and then would approve
00:22:37 it. There's no reason that you should
00:22:39 approve that. They they should require
00:22:41 them to have a third group that's also
00:22:43 saltwater. There's no logical reason you
00:22:45 wouldn't do it unless you don't want to
00:22:47 take the chance to show what the
00:22:48 difference is between that and and salt
00:22:50 water. you may find the exact same
00:22:51 thing, but we should require that. And
00:22:53 and you know, Peter Marks just resigned
00:22:55 from the FDA. He was sort of the head of
00:22:57 vaccine program. Do you think it was
00:22:58 because of some of these reasons that
00:23:00 were he didn't want to look at or why do
00:23:02 you think he left? I think he left in
00:23:03 part because he knows there's going to
00:23:05 be a greater lens on vaccines and and I
00:23:07 think that for anybody who has lived in
00:23:09 that world for a long time that's been
00:23:11 extraordinarily provaccine that doesn't
00:23:13 want this discussion or debate then I
00:23:15 think it's going to be really tough for
00:23:16 them moving forward because there's a
00:23:18 lot of people moving in that that do
00:23:20 seem to want to have the discussion a
00:23:21 little bit more for individuals who've
00:23:22 had a long career they don't want to
00:23:24 necessarily be in a battle again these
00:23:25 are people that are love what they do
00:23:27 love helping patients and and most
00:23:29 doctors I mean almost all doctors firmly
00:23:31 believe in vaccines and they don't want
00:23:33 to have that discussion. They're not
00:23:34 even aware that they should or should
00:23:37 look into it. I really think that people
00:23:39 should look into it. You don't have to
00:23:40 take my word for it. Go look at the
00:23:42 research yourself. I didn't know any of
00:23:45 this 10 years ago. I didn't even know
00:23:46 most of this two years ago until you
00:23:48 really dive into it. You you don't know.
00:23:52 And and and I feel like with presenting
00:23:54 this information, I've showed it to a
00:23:55 few doctors who are conventionally
00:23:56 trained thus far and and all of them are
00:23:58 still my friends and they're still
00:23:59 talking to me, which is great, you know,
00:24:01 cuz I don't know how this is going to be
00:24:02 taken. And are they open to it when you
00:24:04 share the data? They were open to it.
00:24:05 That you know, the discussion calms very
00:24:08 quickly when you know they say, "But
00:24:10 what do you what do you what do you
00:24:11 think? Do you don't want people to get
00:24:12 vaccines?" I'm like, "No, no, I do want
00:24:13 to get people to have vaccines. I just
00:24:15 want people to have information and I
00:24:17 think that we could always have better
00:24:18 research and here's the information."
00:24:19 And that seems to calm people down.
00:24:34 RFK vaccinated and that as far as I know
00:24:34 is not the truth in any way and and I
00:24:36 and certainly not what I'm aiming for
00:24:38 and I I think that doctors want to know
00:24:41 that we're moving forward in a way that
00:24:44 is still going to promote vaccination
00:24:46 but maybe do it in a safer way but they
00:24:48 have to at least be open to the
00:24:50 discussion first and And I think if you
00:24:51 come at it from that angle, then there
00:24:54 isn't any doctor out there that doesn't
00:24:55 want safety for their patients and
00:24:58 science and better science. They they
00:24:59 want that and I just don't think that
00:25:01 they know because I didn't know. And we
00:25:02 we we sort of take for granted it's like
00:25:04 there's all these vaccines now on the
00:25:06 market. The schedule has how many
00:25:07 vaccines now? I don't even a lot. I mean
00:25:09 it depends what you know how many
00:25:11 depends on much how many combos you
00:25:12 take, but you're talking like 30 to 40
00:25:14 actual pokes if you're doing combination
00:25:16 shots. You know, when we talk about
00:25:17 evidence-based medicine, it's sort of a
00:25:19 trope that's used to discredit people
00:25:21 who question science. To my knowledge,
00:25:23 and maybe I'm wrong, but there's no
00:25:25 studies that look at what is the
00:25:27 combination of all these vaccines at
00:25:30 these ages. Each each one is studied
00:25:32 signaling singly. So, if you do 30
00:25:34 different jabs with combos of so maybe
00:25:37 dozens of vaccines, what is the
00:25:39 cumulative effect? No one's really
00:25:40 looked at that. There's nothing even
00:25:42 close to that. And how many vaccines are
00:25:44 new in the last few years? You have to
00:25:46 do vaccinated versus unvaccinated
00:25:47 studies and you have to look at them
00:25:49 together and it's not unreasonable to do
00:25:52 that. There are so many parents that are
00:25:54 concerned about too many vaccines. Like
00:25:56 that is one of the biggest concerns that
00:25:57 I hear over and over again. That is a
00:26:00 reasonable thing to discuss. When you
00:26:02 have more and more vaccines, even if
00:26:03 there is a small risk, that risk
00:26:05 compounds. And when you're doing four
00:26:06 vaccines on a day, when you're doing
00:26:08 vaccines at birth and two months and
00:26:10 four months and six months and one year
00:26:12 and 15 months, and you're just getting
00:26:14 more and more vaccines, logic would
00:26:16 state that at some point there's going
00:26:17 to be a breaking point that there are
00:26:19 going to be too many. And so, we need to
00:26:21 be thinking about where is that breaking
00:26:23 point? when do the risks increase to the
00:26:25 point where we don't appreciate or we
00:26:27 don't approve of that level of risk and
00:26:28 where we need to bring it back to some
00:26:31 degree. But the the issue still right
00:26:32 now is if you look at immunize.org, you
00:26:35 look at, you know, Paul Offett's
00:26:36 information and and I love Paul Offett's
00:26:38 book. I think he's a really bright guy.
00:26:39 He says things like, "Oh, you could have
00:26:41 10,000 vaccines. You have as many
00:26:42 antigens as you want." I don't think
00:26:44 that interact with the immune system.
00:26:46 Totally correct. I I understand the the
00:26:49 general thought that, okay, we're
00:26:50 exposed to a lot of antigens on any
00:26:51 given day. Okay, you eat an apple,
00:26:53 you're eating all sorts of bacteria and
00:26:54 all sorts of stuff that's on there. So,
00:26:56 yes, you're not getting adgivants.
00:26:57 You're not getting adgivants, but but
00:26:58 even still, you're not getting injected
00:27:00 with that. It's going through the
00:27:01 regular pathways that our body has
00:27:03 always developed to to deal with these
00:27:05 pathogens. You're not injecting it into
00:27:07 your body. So, it's a different pathway.
00:27:09 And on top of that, you're you have all
00:27:11 the other things in the vaccines. You
00:27:13 have all sorts of adgivants and all
00:27:14 sorts of other ingredients. And we don't
00:27:15 100% know how those interact. And so,
00:27:17 there has to be some upper limit of
00:27:19 safety for the adgivants. I mean, we
00:27:21 it's not woo woo or anti-science say
00:27:23 there's there's got to be some upper
00:27:24 limit to the amount of aluminum that you
00:27:26 could safely take from a vaccine. We
00:27:28 have upper limits for for it in every
00:27:30 other aspect of our life like drinking
00:27:32 water and the amount that we breathe.
00:27:34 Giving yourself 10,000 vac vaccines with
00:27:36 aluminum that doesn't sound like a great
00:27:38 idea. No. And and historically it's
00:27:40 interesting when you look at the the
00:27:41 vaccines and this happened very quietly
00:27:44 where there was a preservative that was
00:27:45 used in most vaccines called thyosol
00:27:48 which is ethyl mercury and it's been
00:27:51 used you know for was used for like 100
00:27:53 years and it it it you know mercury is
00:27:56 the most potent neurotoxin second most
00:27:59 potent toxin after plutonium on the
00:28:02 planet and you could argue that this
00:28:04 form is better than that form but at the
00:28:06 end of the day it's mercury
00:28:08 And what happened was no one had ever
00:28:11 added up all the amount of mercury in
00:28:13 the vaccines that the kids were getting.
00:28:14 And but isn't that crazy before you go
00:28:15 on? Isn't that crazy that no one ever
00:28:17 added it up and no one thought about
00:28:19 that before they put it in a vaccine and
00:28:20 injected into their kids? No, it's
00:28:22 crazy. But you would think that they
00:28:23 talked about that and there were it was
00:28:25 like oops. But but how could you inject
00:28:28 something like that without at least
00:28:29 having the discussion that is it safe or
00:28:32 not? Is it okay to put this in here? And
00:28:34 by the way of a kid, it's about 162
00:28:37 times the amount of mercury that the EPA
00:28:39 says is safe to have in a baby, right?
00:28:42 And then quietly around 2000, they took
00:28:44 it out of most vaccines except the
00:28:46 multi-dosese flu vaccine and a few other
00:28:48 vaccines. So, it's still out there, but
00:28:50 it's, you know, I I actually went to the
00:28:53 U federal government, met with the head
00:28:55 of vaccines for every single uh
00:28:59 department, CDC, NIH, HHS, FDA, and I
00:29:02 said, "Look, you know, here's the data."
00:29:04 And we present over 900 studies on the
00:29:07 the effect of thyosol in in human
00:29:10 health. And as a sort of cumulative
00:29:12 amount of data, it was pretty
00:29:13 compelling. Not any one study will tell
00:29:15 you what or is good or bad. Maybe you
00:29:17 kind of look at the the salt of
00:29:18 everything. It's like, okay, this is
00:29:19 probably not a good idea. And they kind
00:29:21 of all agreed. And and one of them said,
00:29:24 well, oh, maybe maybe it's an adgivant.
00:29:27 I'm like, well, it's not approved as an
00:29:28 advent for everybody listening is
00:29:30 basically something that pisses off your
00:29:32 immune system so the vaccine will work
00:29:33 better. So, you give something
00:29:34 irritating like aluminum or mercury. Is
00:29:36 that a good thing? And one, it's not a
00:29:38 proof of that. And then I and then I
00:29:39 also said, "Hey, any of you would you
00:29:41 willingly inject your grandkid or your
00:29:43 kid with mercury if there was a better
00:29:46 alternative?" And there there is and
00:29:48 there was. And they're like, "No." So
00:29:50 why is it still in the market? And why
00:29:52 is the FDA still approve it as a as a
00:29:54 preservative which is in vaccines? It's
00:29:56 kind of crazy to me. Yeah. I mean, I've
00:29:57 read what you've you've written on it
00:29:58 and and I totally agree with your
00:30:00 perspective. I always have. And it's the
00:30:02 research still to this date is not clear
00:30:05 that thyarosol is is damaging to the
00:30:08 human body. I mean, that's what you hear
00:30:09 people say back all the time. Oh, the
00:30:10 research still doesn't show that that it
00:30:12 is damaging. It's a different form of
00:30:14 mercury and it's a very small dose and
00:30:16 it's safe, but at the same time, you
00:30:17 could just walk by a whiff of a peanut
00:30:19 if you have a bad allergy and it can
00:30:20 cause some sort of serious reaction. So,
00:30:21 even a small amount can cause harm for
00:30:24 some people. Yeah, it's heterogeneous
00:30:25 and and I think I think this is a really
00:30:27 important point. Not everybody is the
00:30:28 same and each of us have different
00:30:30 genetics, different immune systems and
00:30:32 there's a whole field of vaccinomics
00:30:35 which is at Mayo Clinic they're leading
00:30:36 this field where they're looking at how
00:30:38 different people respond to vaccines
00:30:40 which is great, right? But that means it
00:30:42 should be personalized. Where where is
00:30:43 that though? Like we're putting 50
00:30:46 vaccines in kids. Where is the the
00:30:48 research to say all right here are the
00:30:50 10 things that you should do to minimize
00:30:52 your risk of having a reaction from a
00:30:53 vaccine? What is controversial about
00:30:55 that? What are the genetic markers? What
00:30:58 are the lifestyle factors that you could
00:31:00 do? How could you decrease your risk to
00:31:01 have a reaction? That's going to give
00:31:03 parents more confidence to give their
00:31:05 kids vaccines because they're decreasing
00:31:07 the risk and it's going to decrease the
00:31:09 side effects for kids. Why wouldn't we
00:31:11 want that? But where is that research?
00:31:13 Where are the studies? But I think it's
00:31:14 because you have to admit that there's a
00:31:16 potential problem. Nobody wants to do
00:31:18 that. Then nobody wants to nobody wants
00:31:19 to say you could have a side effect even
00:31:21 though they we know that we have a an IO
00:31:23 we have Im reports. We have individuals
00:31:25 that get encphilitis and gonareet and
00:31:28 febil seizures and again these are
00:31:29 fairly rare but they happen and if those
00:31:32 things happen then I don't know why
00:31:33 other things couldn't happen too in
00:31:34 certain kids if we would study it you
00:31:35 probably would see that some of these
00:31:37 things have at least a slight
00:31:39 correlation for for some people because
00:31:40 everybody's different yeah we're moving
00:31:42 into precision medicine or personalized
00:31:44 medicine and the science is going there
00:31:45 and and we're going to be able to map
00:31:47 your whole genome for a few hundred
00:31:48 bucks and be able to understand what's
00:31:50 going on with you and how to personalize
00:31:51 medicine and this is happening already I
00:31:53 mean I do this so if someone, you know,
00:31:54 has a lipid issue and I want to
00:31:56 prescribe a statin, which I don't do
00:31:57 that often, but if I do, I'll check
00:31:58 their genetics. Are they going to get
00:32:00 statin myopathy? Are going to get muscle
00:32:01 damage from statin or there's genetic
00:32:03 tests you can see people might not
00:32:04 tolerate aspirin or other things. So,
00:32:06 we're already doing this medicine. It's
00:32:07 called phiccogenomics and it's a whole
00:32:09 field of understanding the differences
00:32:11 in each individual and how they'll
00:32:12 respond to different treatments. This
00:32:14 should be also the case for for
00:32:16 vaccines. And we we we we just have this
00:32:18 kind of knee-jerk reaction that they're
00:32:20 just safe and effective. And if you
00:32:21 question it, you're you're a cook. And
00:32:23 I'm not a cook. you're not a cook. We we
00:32:24 look hard at the science and and the
00:32:26 reality is we need more because we don't
00:32:28 really have all the answers. It's still
00:32:29 confusing even to me. I'm like, I don't
00:32:31 know, right? We because we don't know.
00:32:33 Anybody that says the science is settled
00:32:35 on on long-term issues, how can you say
00:32:38 that? Where is the research for that?
00:32:40 Who is following kids for five or 10
00:32:42 years? How do we have any idea? I mean,
00:32:44 you talked about vees before that verse
00:32:46 reporting um that we have, but that's
00:32:48 personal report. You do it, the company
00:32:50 does it, the doctor does it if they
00:32:52 decide to do it. But you have to
00:32:53 associate the issue with a vaccine. If
00:32:56 you get hepatitis B vaccine today and
00:32:58 you get some sort of cancer 10 years
00:33:00 from now, you're not going to be
00:33:01 thinking, "Oh, well, my kid probably got
00:33:04 cancer because of the vaccine they got
00:33:05 when they were 2 months old, so let me
00:33:07 go report that to theirs." There's no
00:33:09 way to see those things unless you
00:33:11 follow kids prospectively. You follow
00:33:13 them for 10 or 15 or 20 years and you
00:33:15 say, "Hey, how come the kids that are
00:33:16 getting more vaccines have more of this
00:33:18 kind of cancer? How come those kids have
00:33:20 more asthma or allergies?" You don't
00:33:22 know that unless you follow it
00:33:23 prospectively. People can do research on
00:33:25 that topic, but nobody wants to do
00:33:26 research on vaccines. You'd have to
00:33:27 follow people for a long time. You'd
00:33:30 have to have that association in mind
00:33:31 beforehand and have 10 years of time to
00:33:33 follow those kids. It it it hasn't been
00:33:35 done. But we could do it. We could do
00:33:37 something like the Framingham study. We
00:33:38 can start following kids for 10 or 15
00:33:40 years. Yes, the ethics are difficult
00:33:43 around it, but you can certainly have
00:33:44 people self- select which group they're
00:33:46 going to be in. There are plenty of
00:33:46 people that are going to choose not to
00:33:48 vaccinate. It's not going to be the
00:33:49 perfect study because there's going to
00:33:50 be some bias there, but at least you can
00:33:52 get some good information. Wouldn't it
00:33:54 be really useful to know 10 years from
00:33:56 now that the kids that live an
00:33:58 unvaccinated lifestyle have a lower rate
00:34:00 of asthma than the kids that that get
00:34:03 vaccines? And then you can say, okay,
00:34:05 autoimmune disease or autism or
00:34:07 whatever, whatever comes up. Yeah. Then
00:34:09 you say, well, why why do the kids that
00:34:11 are living an unvaccinated lifestyle
00:34:13 have a lower risk of autoimmune disease?
00:34:15 Is it the food that they're eating? What
00:34:16 is it about their lifestyle that's
00:34:18 different? There's nothing wrong with
00:34:20 that. That would be super useful
00:34:21 information. And if if we found that
00:34:23 there are no differences, that is the
00:34:25 information that parents want, that will
00:34:28 make them be more confident to get
00:34:31 vaccines. That's what they want. And if
00:34:32 we have that research and we show those
00:34:34 things, then you're going to improve
00:34:36 confidence in the vaccine program. And
00:34:38 if you do find problems, you're going to
00:34:40 improve the confidence because you're
00:34:41 going to fix those problems. And and I
00:34:43 think that's right. Right. I mean, it's
00:34:44 just really about upleveling the science
00:34:46 and that's really, I think, what what is
00:34:47 happening now. And I'm I'm I'm glad that
00:34:49 that's the case. And yes, it's going to
00:34:50 cost money and it's going to take time,
00:34:52 but we have to ask the questions and we
00:34:54 we can't just fall into this. There's no
00:34:57 evidence that it's been settled that the
00:34:59 science I mean, this is these are things
00:35:00 I hear all the time in the news. I'm
00:35:01 like,
00:35:02 what? What? First of all, you're a
00:35:04 reporter. You shouldn't be talking about
00:35:05 that. Second of all, like, you know,
00:35:08 this is just anti-science. So, it's
00:35:10 truly anti-cience to say the science is
00:35:11 settled. It doesn't it doesn't make any
00:35:13 sense. You never say that in science.
00:35:15 You're always looking forward and and
00:35:17 the science is definitely not settled on
00:35:19 any of these topics. I mean, there's no
00:35:20 way that you could say that going
00:35:22 through it at this point. I have no
00:35:24 reason to say anything other than that
00:35:25 I'm not against vaccines, but there are
00:35:27 so many aspects of the science that is
00:35:28 just not settled on. And the foundation
00:35:31 of a lot of this research is quite
00:35:33 flawed and not great. And you go back to
00:35:35 the research on some of these original
00:35:37 vaccines like DTP and polio. those
00:35:39 studies were not done in the way we do
00:35:41 studies today. And so you're basing the
00:35:44 safety profile on some of the things
00:35:46 that we used to do. We didn't have
00:35:47 randomized control. We didn't have
00:35:48 randomized control trials back then. So
00:35:50 other than the polio, the polio, the
00:35:51 original one, which was an amazing
00:35:53 study, still wasn't quite to the the
00:35:55 degree of the things that we do today,
00:35:56 but it was like 2 million people in that
00:35:58 in that original polio study because
00:35:59 people were really invested. Can you
00:36:00 imagine if we had studies today that had
00:36:02 2 million people in them? That is the
00:36:04 kind of research that we we should
00:36:06 require to give a new vaccine to our
00:36:08 kids especially to a baby. You know we
00:36:10 have a hepatitis B vaccine on the market
00:36:12 that the original studies in the package
00:36:14 insert say the safety was studied for
00:36:15 four or five days and and there are all
00:36:17 sorts of you know requests to look where
00:36:19 is the other research where is the data
00:36:21 that it's safe. How can we give
00:36:23 something to babies that we don't have
00:36:24 the most strict evidence that is safe
00:36:27 and the most benefit? That's why again
00:36:30 so many people question the vaccine
00:36:31 program because they say giving
00:36:32 hepatitis B to a one day old baby it
00:36:34 doesn't make sense to me. So why are we
00:36:36 doing this? A disease that's only
00:36:38 acquired by sex or introvenous drug use.
00:36:41 So no baby is doing those two things.
00:36:43 And the theory is well they're here in
00:36:44 the hospital. We got them. Let's just do
00:36:46 it because they're going to leave and we
00:36:47 don't know it's going to be a problem.
00:36:48 Right. But now we have other countries
00:36:49 actually don't mandate that. Most
00:36:51 countries don't mandate it. Certainly in
00:36:52 the first couple of days. I I
00:36:53 understand. I mean it certainly has
00:36:54 worked. The program to give vaccines for
00:36:56 hepatitis B has decreased the risk of
00:36:57 hepatitis B. You're basically making the
00:36:59 notion that vaccines don't have any
00:37:01 potential harm or issue when you're
00:37:02 giving to one day old baby. And we have
00:37:05 to be reasonable. Now, we're doing a
00:37:06 hepatitis B, a vitamin K, and an RSV
00:37:09 potentially in those first couple of
00:37:10 days. There has to be a point where you
00:37:12 say, how many things do you want to give
00:37:13 to a newborn baby that is one day old?
00:37:15 Okay, let's look at hepatitis B. Do we
00:37:17 truly need to give that to a one-day old
00:37:18 baby or if the parents been tested, if
00:37:21 they don't have hepatitis B, is this
00:37:23 something that we could say, if you want
00:37:24 to get it now, go for it. But if you
00:37:26 want to move it back a few months or you
00:37:27 want to do it later in life when you're
00:37:29 going to get your other vaccines, maybe
00:37:30 your teen vaccines, like can we have
00:37:32 that discussion? Because you're throwing
00:37:34 a lot of patients off of vaccines in
00:37:36 general because they say this doesn't
00:37:37 make sense. My baby's not having sex.
00:37:39 I'm giving them you're telling me that I
00:37:40 have to do a vaccine on the first day of
00:37:42 life. Now I don't trust you. Well, I
00:37:43 think I think that's an important thing.
00:37:45 And I I I kind of want to sort of zoom
00:37:46 out a little bit and and kind of ask you
00:37:48 about a theory I have, which is that
00:37:50 there's been a real change in our
00:37:52 overall immune health as a population.
00:37:55 We've seen a dramatic decrease in
00:37:57 infectious disease, which I I think we
00:38:00 can talk about why that is and I think
00:38:02 it has a lot to do with sanitation and
00:38:04 hygiene and not necessarily the
00:38:06 vaccines. And we can talk about that
00:38:07 like for example vaccines measles
00:38:10 decreased by over 90% in 1968 when the
00:38:12 measles vaccine came out and it already
00:38:14 had decreased by 90% in the population.
00:38:17 Yeah. And measel vaccines do work and
00:38:18 they help reduce the the risk especially
00:38:20 in you know developing nations where
00:38:22 these kids are susceptible and that's
00:38:23 that was what was going on in in the in
00:38:25 the early uh 1900s and 1800s was the
00:38:29 sanitation and the lack of hygiene and
00:38:31 flush toilets and I mean it was just
00:38:33 like a disaster. So yeah people were
00:38:34 were getting really sick. They were
00:38:36 malnourished. They didn't have vitamins
00:38:37 and minerals. They were there was so
00:38:38 many reasons why they were so
00:38:40 susceptible and died from these. And
00:38:41 when you look at the developing world,
00:38:42 that's that's those are the kids who
00:38:43 die. The kids are malnourished, don't
00:38:44 have nutrients in their system to be
00:38:46 able to fight these things. And the same
00:38:47 thing with CO, you know, CO only killed
00:38:48 the people who are susceptible, which
00:38:50 was those chronically ill and obese. And
00:38:52 that's why we had, you know, four times
00:38:53 the rate of of other countries in terms
00:38:55 of the number of deaths per population.
00:38:58 16% of the the global deaths and 4% of
00:39:01 the population of the world. So, how did
00:39:03 that kind of sink? But the theory I kind
00:39:05 of have is that our immune systems have
00:39:07 been just screwed up because there's
00:39:10 been increase in C-section rates,
00:39:11 there's been a lack of breastfeeding,
00:39:13 there's been early use of antibiotics,
00:39:15 there's other stresses that the baby
00:39:17 has, environmental toxins, all of which
00:39:19 disregulate the immune system. And you
00:39:22 give a vaccine on the top of that and
00:39:24 there's a problem. And I don't know if
00:39:25 you were trained like this, but I was
00:39:26 trained when when when I was trained in
00:39:28 and I did family medicine, so I did a
00:39:30 lot of pediatrics that if if a kid came
00:39:31 in and they were sick, had a cold,
00:39:33 something, you cannot give them a
00:39:35 vaccine. Like, just don't do it cuz it's
00:39:37 going to mess them up and it's going to
00:39:38 be bad. And so that was what I learned.
00:39:40 But then what's happened is that doctors
00:39:42 will say, "Oh god, I don't know if the
00:39:43 kid's going to come back in the office.
00:39:44 I'm just going to give it to him
00:39:45 anyway." And that that kind of seems odd
00:39:47 to me. And I'd love you to sort of
00:39:48 comment on my theory and this this whole
00:39:50 sort of sense of, "Well, we got him in
00:39:52 the office. We got him in the hospital.
00:39:53 let's just give a vaccine even if it's a
00:39:55 bad idea. Well, I totally agree going
00:39:57 back to the first point. So, it is
00:39:59 really important. Physicians, everybody
00:40:01 needs to go look back at the history.
00:40:03 There are some good books on it. I
00:40:04 didn't know any of this even a couple of
00:40:07 years ago, but the reality is that
00:40:09 sanitation and nutrition had a huge role
00:40:12 in our immune systems. Before the
00:40:14 vaccines came out, all of the diseases
00:40:16 were way on the downswing. So, most of
00:40:20 the diseases had almost no death anymore
00:40:22 or very, very little death. I mean,
00:40:23 you're talking even measles before the
00:40:25 vaccine, you had a couple, you know, a
00:40:26 couple hundred deaths a year, lots of
00:40:28 cases, but but still not as many deaths.
00:40:31 And so, because we we had antibiotics,
00:40:33 because we had hospitals, because we
00:40:36 understood medicine better, we knew what
00:40:37 a virus was and a bacteria was, we knew
00:40:40 how to treat things, we were eating
00:40:41 better, we had vitamin C, you know,
00:40:42 people didn't have scurvy anymore. I
00:40:44 mean, all these things that that make a
00:40:45 huge difference for your immune system.
00:40:48 We saw the death rates plummet. Now
00:40:50 there were still lots of cases of some
00:40:52 of these diseases and so the you look at
00:40:54 when the vaccines came out and a lot of
00:40:56 the vaccine preventable diseases did
00:40:58 decrease to almost zero after those
00:41:00 vaccines came out. So they certainly had
00:41:02 an impact. I mean the the the most I
00:41:04 guess memorable for a lot of young
00:41:06 adults would be chickenpox, right? We
00:41:08 all had chickenpox when we were young. I
00:41:09 got a little chickenpox going. We used
00:41:11 to have chickenpox parties, right? And
00:41:12 we did but but there were still lots of
00:41:14 chickenpox around, right? And then the
00:41:15 vaccine came out and then we don't see
00:41:16 chickenpox almost at all anymore. So you
00:41:19 can't say that the vaccines don't do
00:41:20 anything. I mean, you can see that they
00:41:21 clearly dropped the the morbidity and
00:41:23 and and some kids from chickenpox. I
00:41:26 mean, you know, I hear it too from
00:41:27 parents, right? It's like, oh,
00:41:27 chickenpox, I had it. It was nothing.
00:41:29 But when you have an entire population
00:41:30 of kids getting chickenpox and millions
00:41:32 of people, some kids get a really bad
00:41:34 infection, it puts them in the hospital,
00:41:35 some kids get a menitis, some kids get a
00:41:37 pneumonia. So, things do happen at a
00:41:39 population level. There is some benefit
00:41:41 certainly from from from public health
00:41:43 initiatives and and that's where the
00:41:44 vaccines certainly come into play. To
00:41:46 say that our health is better because of
00:41:47 vaccines or that's the thing that's
00:41:49 doing it. I think that's an
00:41:50 overstatement. I think it's a part of
00:41:52 everything that we've done that has um
00:41:54 brought us to where we are today. We we
00:41:56 certainly are better than we used to be
00:41:58 in terms of our health. We used to live
00:41:59 till 40. We live till, you know, in our
00:42:00 70s now. That's good. So, not all of
00:42:02 medicine is bad, but we're seeing our
00:42:04 life expectancy go back down. We're
00:42:06 seeing chronic disease rates skyrocket.
00:42:08 And we need a little humility in
00:42:10 medicine to say, "Hey, maybe some of the
00:42:12 things we've done in the last 20 or 30
00:42:14 years aren't all the best. Maybe we're
00:42:16 not doing everything perfectly. And
00:42:18 maybe there's some sort of middle ground
00:42:19 here that can get our life expectancy to
00:42:21 90 or 100 or 120. And and maybe all the
00:42:25 toxins that we're being exposed to and
00:42:27 the chemicals that we're being exposed
00:42:29 to and the the food that we're eating
00:42:30 that's not the best anymore. Uh and most
00:42:32 kids are eating just mostly
00:42:34 ultrarocessed foods. Maybe that has
00:42:35 something to do with what we're seeing.
00:42:37 And maybe, just maybe, vaccines have
00:42:39 some part in that for some kids. Maybe
00:42:42 there's a certain genetics where it
00:42:44 throws you over the edge. Or maybe for
00:42:45 kids that are already so depleted, don't
00:42:47 have the right nutrients, have a toxic
00:42:49 load, it throws them over the edge.
00:42:51 That's right. And and most kids do fine
00:42:53 with vaccines. I mean, I've given
00:42:54 vaccines in my office and I've never
00:42:56 seen the horrible things that are
00:42:57 written. I' I've taken care of patients
00:42:59 after that swear by it and and there are
00:43:01 way too many stories not to believe it.
00:43:02 And there are certainly people that have
00:43:04 gone to court and won in their cases for
00:43:06 it. So there's a lot of establish in
00:43:08 your in your practice adverse effects. I
00:43:10 mean, we see a lot of benefit. I'm I'm
00:43:11 acknowledging that. I think I'm I'm you
00:43:13 know, I've seen that as well. And I I
00:43:14 definitely recommend vaccinations. The
00:43:16 question is, you know, what kinds of
00:43:18 things have you seen? Because I I
00:43:19 personally have seen a lot of things and
00:43:21 I I'm like, hm, this is interesting. It
00:43:23 it's supposed to be okay, but I'm seeing
00:43:25 these these problems. In the short term,
00:43:27 I wouldn't say that I've seen all the
00:43:28 horrible things that are out there. I've
00:43:30 seen really bad rashes. I've seen
00:43:32 fevers. I've seen kids crying for a long
00:43:33 time and being super fussy. I've seen
00:43:35 all the minor or moderate things. never
00:43:38 personally yet seen any of the super
00:43:41 severe things that that people have had,
00:43:43 but they've come to me after the fact
00:43:44 and and sworn by it. So, I've seen lots
00:43:46 of kids that have stated it as well as
00:43:48 I've seen, you know, certainly lots of
00:43:49 kids. So, you've seen you've seen kids
00:43:50 who were ill who had been vaccinated,
00:43:51 who had been vaccinated, who swear by
00:43:52 it, like one one patient who um they had
00:43:56 a newborn and they got vaccines and then
00:43:59 they had a super heart f super fast
00:44:01 heart rate in, you know, the 200s and
00:44:03 they had, you know, super SVT and they
00:44:05 had to go to the hospital. It was just
00:44:06 right after like a couple hours and then
00:44:07 everybody said, "Oh, no, it's not
00:44:08 because of the vaccines. It's probably
00:44:10 not to do with it." And then they ended
00:44:11 up getting more vaccines, you know, a
00:44:13 couple months later after being
00:44:14 convinced because they were going to
00:44:15 kick them out of the office if they
00:44:16 didn't. The exact same thing happened.
00:44:18 The doctors still didn't relate it in
00:44:20 the hospital to the vaccines, the doctor
00:44:22 they had still didn't relate it to the
00:44:23 vaccines. And and the mom was crying
00:44:25 because she was like, "I don't want to
00:44:26 give my kid vaccines anymore." Like
00:44:27 this. She had another kid that was fully
00:44:29 vaccinated that was older. She wasn't
00:44:31 against vaccines, but this kid was
00:44:32 having a clear reaction an hour or two
00:44:34 hours after getting vaccines was
00:44:36 affecting this child's heart. And the
00:44:38 doctors at the hospital wouldn't call it
00:44:39 a vaccine reaction. The their doctor
00:44:42 wouldn't call it a vaccine reaction.
00:44:44 When they wanted to stop doing vaccines,
00:44:45 at that point for that child, the doctor
00:44:47 kicked them out of the office or told
00:44:49 them they couldn't come back if they
00:44:50 didn't continue vaccinating. So that's
00:44:51 when they came to me and I was
00:44:52 heartbroken because it's like we're at
00:44:55 this point where doctors are so afraid
00:44:57 to call something a vaccine reaction
00:44:59 that we're doing our patients a
00:45:01 disservice. Like in my state it's like
00:45:03 impossible to do an exemption at this
00:45:05 point unless the child is like basically
00:45:07 on their deathbed. And that's doing a
00:45:08 disservice to kids that have all sorts
00:45:10 of concerns and taking ability for
00:45:12 parents who have a reasonable concern
00:45:14 around a vaccine or a reaction or a
00:45:15 previous reaction or a family history of
00:45:17 something. You can't take that into
00:45:18 consideration as a doctor, which I think
00:45:20 is unfortunate because people are
00:45:22 scared. It is interesting. You know,
00:45:23 it's interesting this moment because you
00:45:25 know, RFK Jr. is now held and human
00:45:27 services secretary and he's been labeled
00:45:28 as an antivax conspiracy theorist and I
00:45:30 know him personally and I've he's been
00:45:32 on my podcast a number of times a and
00:45:34 you know I've had deep conversations
00:45:36 with him about this and he's all about
00:45:38 questioning the data which is something
00:45:41 that should be just a natural part of
00:45:43 the evolution of our scientific inquiry
00:45:45 about anything vaccines or anything
00:45:48 drugs surgery anything he gets labeled
00:45:50 in that way and he's just calling for
00:45:52 better science and and to actually ask
00:45:55 the questions. Is there a problem? You
00:45:57 know, he was an environmental lawyer and
00:45:59 he was giving talks about mercury in the
00:46:02 rivers and the pollution from the coal
00:46:04 burning that we had in this country and
00:46:06 the in cement plants and how it was
00:46:08 really causing huge pollution that was
00:46:11 contaminating all the fish. You know,
00:46:12 you if you look at the EPA
00:46:14 recommendations, you shouldn't eat fish
00:46:16 from any lake or river in America period
00:46:18 ever. Like they're just a poison
00:46:20 mercury. And when he was giving these
00:46:22 talks about this, the women would come
00:46:23 up to him and say, "Hey, you know, you
00:46:25 know, my kid got these vaccines with
00:46:26 mercury in them. Maybe you should look
00:46:28 at that because the kid got sick after
00:46:30 or they got autism and maybe there's
00:46:32 something there." And so he went down
00:46:33 that rabbit hole and you know, he's a
00:46:35 smart guy and he saw there was some
00:46:37 signal there. Now, do we know absolutely
00:46:39 it's true? No. But there's some there's
00:46:41 some noise there. And I can tell you
00:46:42 there is a there's a in medicine there's
00:46:44 something called the doctor years of a
00:46:45 disease. In other words, how many years
00:46:47 you have to be practicing medicine in
00:46:48 order to see a certain condition. So
00:46:50 like I've never seen a fiochromocytoma
00:46:52 which is a rare tumor of your adrenal
00:46:54 glands. Like I just never seen it and
00:46:55 I'm probably never going to see it and
00:46:56 you've never seen it. I've never seen it
00:46:58 right and you could probably ask 30
00:46:59 doctors and they've never seen it and
00:47:01 they collectively practice hundreds of
00:47:02 years of medicine. Personally I have
00:47:04 seen many many cases where parents say
00:47:07 look my kid got vaccinated and then
00:47:08 afterwards they got sick or they got
00:47:10 autism and I could I literally say
00:47:12 dozens in my small kind of cohort of
00:47:15 patients who who've had autism. It's not
00:47:17 uncommon. And so it calls in the
00:47:19 question of like what's happening with
00:47:21 these kids? Are they just susceptible to
00:47:22 it? And I always hear the same story.
00:47:24 That's why I sort of mentioned the
00:47:25 susceptibility. C-section, bottlefed,
00:47:27 collic, lots of antibiotics, ear
00:47:29 infections, you know, strep throat,
00:47:31 whatever. Boom, they get the vaccine at
00:47:34 15 months and then wow, they're they're
00:47:36 they're off to the races where they have
00:47:38 regressive autism. A regressive autism
00:47:40 is where you're developing fine, you're
00:47:42 talking, you're walking, you're doing
00:47:43 all the normal things, and then you stop
00:47:44 and you go backwards. And it's like,
00:47:45 well, they weren't born with this. what
00:47:48 happened? And and so nobody wants to ask
00:47:51 that question. And when I sort of dug
00:47:53 deep into these kids' health, they had
00:47:54 terrible gut issues. They had tons of
00:47:57 heavy metals in their system. They had
00:47:59 lots of nutritional deficiencies. They
00:48:02 sort of had a susceptibility when you
00:48:05 start to look at it. And when you
00:48:06 correct these things, these kids often
00:48:07 would improve or get better, which was
00:48:09 amazing to me. So was able to undo the
00:48:12 harmful effects by actually treating it.
00:48:13 People would say, almost everybody would
00:48:15 say, "No, the science has been done."
00:48:17 They would say that and that's what I
00:48:18 would have said 10 years ago. And I
00:48:20 think that's why it's so important to
00:48:21 talk about it because when you say
00:48:23 something like, "Oh, well, you know,
00:48:24 this child had this this thing happen
00:48:26 after they got a vaccine." Then the
00:48:28 knee-jerk reaction is say, "No, no, what
00:48:29 are you talking about? The science is
00:48:30 settled. It's been debunked. We have so
00:48:32 much research on on all the vaccines,
00:48:34 and we know that vaccines don't have
00:48:36 anything to do with autism." Nothing
00:48:38 shocked me more when doing this book
00:48:40 than looking at the autism research.
00:48:42 Now, let me be clear. I don't think
00:48:43 vaccines cause autism. Correct. There's
00:48:45 nothing to say that. But but they they
00:48:47 can be a trigger in a susceptible kid
00:48:49 for dysregulation of their immune
00:48:51 system. And autism is a
00:48:53 neuroinflammatory disease. When you look
00:48:54 at kids' brains with autism who maybe
00:48:56 died in a car accident, their brains are
00:48:58 just full of inflammation. The goal
00:49:00 cells are litten up. In fact, on MRI
00:49:02 scans, their brains are literally larger
00:49:04 because they're swollen. Right. and and
00:49:06 your your your point is the same point
00:49:07 that I have which is there are so many
00:49:09 parents that are saying this so many
00:49:11 stories thousands hundreds of thousands
00:49:14 millions it's information it's data it's
00:49:16 parents we have to listen to them we
00:49:18 have to take that into account and we
00:49:21 have to have discussions you can't just
00:49:23 just dismiss these parents who so
00:49:25 believe in science and so believe in
00:49:27 vaccines that they took their kid to get
00:49:29 vaccines and then they swear that
00:49:30 something happened and then you call
00:49:32 that person antiax crazy for saying look
00:49:35 I think my kid was normal today and then
00:49:37 the next day they had issues after
00:49:38 getting a vaccine. This is my
00:49:40 experience. Those people are the
00:49:42 information that we need to figure out
00:49:43 what's going on. It's true funny like
00:49:45 one of the one of the kids I saw I saw
00:49:46 their mother was a top executive at
00:49:48 Fizer which does vaccines. She was like
00:49:51 this has happened. The research doesn't
00:49:52 show that vaccines cause autism. It
00:49:54 doesn't really show anything. I mean
00:49:55 there is research on MMR and there's
00:49:57 research on thyarisol and that's the
00:49:59 majority of the research. So we we have
00:50:02 some data on that. But when people say,
00:50:04 "Oh, it's been debunked." Or, "Oh, it's
00:50:06 been
00:50:06 studied." I looked through everything. I
00:50:09 went in to, you know, ride in on a white
00:50:11 horse and say, "Look, here's all the
00:50:12 research that shows that vaccines don't
00:50:14 cause autism." Like, this is why people
00:50:16 say it. And when you look at what's
00:50:17 actually out there, most of the research
00:50:19 is from a long time ago. It's on those
00:50:20 two specific things. And it's not on all
00:50:23 vaccines. It's certainly not on
00:50:24 vaccinated versus unvaccinated kids. So
00:50:25 when somebody says we should get more
00:50:28 research and then everybody rushes to to
00:50:30 yell at them and call them anti-cience,
00:50:31 say that the science is settled, that
00:50:33 makes no sense. There's nothing wrong
00:50:34 with getting more research. It's
00:50:36 certainly not settled in terms of we
00:50:38 have all these prospective great
00:50:40 clinical trials to show this. We don't
00:50:41 have that at all. And and that is really
00:50:44 important that when we're talking about
00:50:45 moving forward, we should do more
00:50:47 research. We should listen to these
00:50:48 parents. There's nothing wrong with
00:50:49 that. Let's do more studies and we'll
00:50:51 see what it finds and then we'll go from
00:50:52 there. you know as someone who's
00:50:54 practiced medicine for 30 years and seen
00:50:56 a lot of these kids but very various
00:50:57 things you know kids even for example
00:50:59 who the vaccine I don't think was a
00:51:01 problem there there are things that co
00:51:04 cause issues we we learned from Phil
00:51:06 Landrian and others that lead which was
00:51:09 measured in kids teeth was causing
00:51:11 severe behavioral issues aggression
00:51:14 violence ADD I like and so they made the
00:51:18 conclusion gee lead's bad let's get lead
00:51:21 out of gasoline Let's get lead out of
00:51:23 paint. But we didn't stop using gas. No,
00:51:26 we didn't stop using paint. We just
00:51:28 stopped having lead in there. So that
00:51:30 way when kids were living in their
00:51:32 house, they weren't ingesting lead. But
00:51:34 it started with somebody recognizing it
00:51:36 started with somebody talking about it.
00:51:37 And and I hope if if RFK is listening or
00:51:40 someone's passing this along to like we
00:51:41 do need more information and we do need
00:51:43 more research, but what I think needs to
00:51:46 be done first is we need to get actual
00:51:49 data and information of what vaccine
00:51:50 information exists to the doctors.
00:51:52 That's one of the things that I hope
00:51:54 that my book can help with. But I think
00:51:55 we need some sort of either a new
00:51:57 commission or a new M or or some sort of
00:52:01 literature review done by the most pro-
00:52:05 vaccine people mixed with other
00:52:07 individuals. And we need to go through
00:52:08 the research and we need to show what
00:52:10 actually does exist so that doctors can
00:52:12 see it and read it and put in the New
00:52:13 England Journal of Medicine or Journal
00:52:14 of American Medical Association or
00:52:16 whatever some sort of major body that
00:52:18 doctors are going to respect. I think if
00:52:20 we can get the information out there of
00:52:22 what actually exists, what research has
00:52:24 been done, what we have and what we
00:52:26 don't have, that's going to be a really
00:52:28 good first step because just to go to a
00:52:30 bunch of studies, which is good. We need
00:52:32 them. But I think if you get a study
00:52:33 here or there that shows vaccines are
00:52:35 related to X, Y, or Z, people are just
00:52:36 going to trash it. They're not going to
00:52:38 be even willing to listen to it. And I
00:52:40 think we need to first get the doctor's
00:52:43 information on what the research
00:52:44 actually shows cuz I'm 99% positive that
00:52:47 most people don't know. Yeah. Yeah. And
00:52:49 when you say that, you mean a
00:52:50 dispassionate look at the data. Correct.
00:52:52 And not just some of the data, but all
00:52:53 of the data. All of the data in a
00:52:55 report. Presented in a way that is
00:52:57 digestible and easy to understand for
00:52:59 both practitioners and even lay people
00:53:01 because I think that that would not
00:53:03 increase what people call vaccine
00:53:05 hesitancy, but it would actually
00:53:06 decrease it. It would and it hasn't not
00:53:08 come from someone like RFK. I mean, he
00:53:10 could push it to happen, but it needs to
00:53:12 be someone that the doctors are not just
00:53:13 going to say, "Hey, you know, this is an
00:53:15 antivax cook. We're not going to listen
00:53:17 to it. Get somebody who doctors love. I
00:53:20 don't know. Get Paul off headed. I I
00:53:21 don't care. Whoever wants to do it and
00:53:23 get a group of people together and go
00:53:26 through and show here's what the
00:53:27 research shows. Here's what it shows on
00:53:29 autism. Here's what it shows on asthma.
00:53:31 Here's what it shows. List it all out.
00:53:33 Let people read it. Let people digest
00:53:35 it. And then they're going to have an
00:53:36 understanding. But it has to be
00:53:37 dispassionate and it can't be provax. It
00:53:40 has to be balanced and it has to show
00:53:42 both sides. Nothing thus far does that.
00:53:45 I hope I did it in some way in my book.
00:53:47 That was the goal, but it's still just a
00:53:48 book. It's not it's not fully
00:53:50 comprehensive of everything. There's
00:53:51 only so much you can go through. It
00:53:52 would help doctors. I think doctors
00:53:54 would be willing to listen if they
00:53:56 receive the information in a way that
00:53:58 they would respect. And right now, I
00:54:00 think there's this concern on everything
00:54:02 that's talked about when it comes to
00:54:03 vaccines that there's this push to stop
00:54:04 people from vaccinating or take away
00:54:05 their polio vaccines, which is not the
00:54:07 case. But that's what they hear and they
00:54:09 never hear past the headline. And we
00:54:11 have to get past that headline. Have to
00:54:12 get the information to doctors. That way
00:54:14 we can come together to say hm that
00:54:17 that's what the autism research shows.
00:54:18 Interesting. Okay. Well then I'm not
00:54:20 super against getting more research
00:54:22 because I thought there was a lot more
00:54:23 research than that. Like that that's
00:54:24 what would actually I think move the
00:54:26 needle in the first part. So when you
00:54:28 started digging into this Joel in
00:54:30 talking about the research, what were
00:54:32 the things that were the most surprising
00:54:34 that you learned both in terms of things
00:54:37 that were in support of the vaccination
00:54:40 approach to to managing disease risk and
00:54:44 also things that sort of challenged
00:54:45 that? What were the things that you
00:54:46 found in your discovery of of these
00:54:49 things by just having a pediatric kind
00:54:52 of open-minded view of like I'm just
00:54:54 going to look at what does the science
00:54:55 say? What does the data say? The first
00:54:57 thing that I was most surprised at was
00:54:59 that everything is super one-sided. So,
00:55:01 you read one book and you get one view
00:55:02 of a product and you read another book
00:55:04 and you get a completely different view
00:55:05 and they never talk about the
00:55:06 information on both. That's number one.
00:55:08 Number two, it's like a tennis match.
00:55:10 You kind of go back and forth and you're
00:55:11 like, hm, that's pretty bad about
00:55:12 vaccines. Oh, well, that's really good.
00:55:14 So, you have to be willing to do that
00:55:15 and kind of go back and forth and and
00:55:17 look at, okay, here's what the diseases
00:55:19 were. Oh, I don't want that disease. I
00:55:21 don't want my kid to have this disease.
00:55:22 This is what the vaccines actually done.
00:55:24 That's good. You have to be willing to
00:55:26 go back and forth. Next, the long the
00:55:28 the way that research was done, I was
00:55:30 very surprised at how things haven't
00:55:32 been inert placeboc control trial and go
00:55:34 going back through the research and
00:55:36 going back through the history and the
00:55:37 data how we really didn't have the best
00:55:40 trials a long time ago and we're basing
00:55:42 a lot on that. They're kind of rigged in
00:55:44 some way. Yeah, there's some rig they're
00:55:46 rigged or they were just done in the way
00:55:47 that they were done back then and and
00:55:48 they weren't as rigorous as as as that.
00:55:51 Um, I found listening to Aaron series,
00:55:54 his lawyer. Um, some of his trials and
00:55:56 some of the the depositions of different
00:55:58 individuals like Stanley Platkin and
00:56:01 Kathleen Edwards just very eye opening
00:56:03 in terms of just asking them questions
00:56:05 and and getting their honest opinions on
00:56:07 on vaccines and how the research was
00:56:09 done in the past. I think that was
00:56:10 really interesting because can you
00:56:11 unpack that because Aaron C is a lawyer
00:56:13 who was involved in some of these
00:56:14 vaccine cases and who are these other
00:56:16 people you're talking about and what
00:56:17 were they? So Stanley Pluckkins, one of
00:56:19 the founders of vaccines, you know,
00:56:21 brilliant guy, one of the founders of
00:56:23 the the Rebella vaccine, and he's been
00:56:25 involved in in in multiple trials and
00:56:28 and I listened to his trial with Aaron
00:56:31 Siri on it was a like a religious
00:56:33 exemption uh case and and it's just
00:56:36 really interesting to hear him discuss
00:56:38 the use of of aborted fetal tissue uh
00:56:41 back when they were doing the research
00:56:42 and how they were doing the research
00:56:44 many years ago and how many fetuses they
00:56:46 were using and and just the way that
00:56:48 they were studying things back, you
00:56:50 know, 50 or 60 years ago is really
00:56:52 interesting. Pass the ethical review at
00:56:54 this time. It it wouldn't pass ethical
00:56:55 review and and there is still an ongoing
00:56:58 debate about religious freedom and
00:57:00 religious exemptions with with vaccines
00:57:01 and whether you know the use of aborted
00:57:03 tissue should be considered in in that
00:57:06 as of right now all religions
00:57:08 technically state that you can you can
00:57:10 get vaccines and there's nothing that's
00:57:11 problematic about it. But when you look
00:57:13 at the way that things were done
00:57:14 originally and using aborted fetal
00:57:16 tissue, then it does at least bring up
00:57:18 that discussion and I think that whether
00:57:21 your your church says that it's okay to
00:57:22 get vaccines that you still might
00:57:23 personally feel like that's unethical to
00:57:25 you. And and I just thought that was
00:57:26 interesting because I never considered
00:57:28 any of that before. I mean, I really
00:57:29 didn't even know that aborted fetal
00:57:30 tissue was in there. Yeah. Until you
00:57:32 start learning about vaccines. I mean,
00:57:33 these are just things that they're not
00:57:34 aborting fetuses now. They're using old
00:57:37 old aborted fetal tissue. But it it just
00:57:39 brings into question when when people
00:57:40 are called antivax cooks. Well, maybe
00:57:42 they have a reason why they're they're
00:57:44 concerned or or maybe they're they're
00:57:46 vegan and and they don't want to inject
00:57:48 something that has pork, you know, pork
00:57:50 products in there, which gelatin does. I
00:57:52 mean, they're they're taken from from
00:57:53 from pigs. So, some of the vaccines have
00:57:55 that in there. So, these are just things
00:57:57 that as someone who's open-minded,
00:57:59 doesn't mean you shouldn't do it, but I
00:58:00 think it's reasonable if you understand
00:58:02 those reasons why somebody might be
00:58:04 hesitant. That can help build bridges.
00:58:06 And I think we need to build bridges as
00:58:09 an understanding to why people might be
00:58:12 more hesitant that we give them, you
00:58:14 know, credit for as opposed to calling
00:58:15 them some sort of crazy crazy mom, crazy
00:58:17 dad, or crazy antivaxer. Well, maybe
00:58:19 they have personal beliefs that are
00:58:20 different than than mine. And not
00:58:22 everyone has to have the same beliefs or
00:58:23 the same understanding of everything. So
00:58:25 that that was really interesting.
00:58:27 Long-term studies that we don't have any
00:58:29 we really don't have any vaccinated
00:58:31 versus unvaccinated trials. That's crazy
00:58:32 to me. And autism research. I mean, it's
00:58:34 interesting. You know, I've heard RFK
00:58:37 Jr. talk about this in Del Big Tree also
00:58:41 who is worked with him on on this issue.
00:58:44 Um he he said they they actually met
00:58:46 with Anthony Fouchy and Francis Collins.
00:58:48 They went to the NIH. They sat with them
00:58:50 and they asked them, "Can you please
00:58:51 show us the data on which this is sort
00:58:55 of this whole program is based and the
00:58:58 randomized control trials?" And and they
00:59:00 they said, "We have them." And then they
00:59:03 push, they push, they push, and then
00:59:04 ultimately they don't have them. Um, can
00:59:06 you kind of speak to that? Is that legit
00:59:08 or that is legit? That's in there. You
00:59:10 know, I read all those those transcripts
00:59:12 and I read the the FOYA, the Freedom
00:59:14 Information Act requests and and they
00:59:18 they were I mean, they they've put in
00:59:19 many Freedom Information Acts over the
00:59:21 years now, but they were basically
00:59:23 saying like, "Show us the research and
00:59:25 the data. Show us the placebo control
00:59:26 trials. Show us the data that shows that
00:59:28 that all vaccines don't cause autism.
00:59:30 like provide it to us, please. We're not
00:59:33 saying that it doesn't exist, but for
00:59:35 example, with the hepatitis B vaccine,
00:59:36 like we were talking about, please show
00:59:39 us the information and the safety trials
00:59:42 that were more than four or five days.
00:59:44 Please show us the polio studies that
00:59:47 were done. That's what those when we're
00:59:50 talking about like the Eron Siri and and
00:59:53 RFK not wanting the polio vaccine, like
00:59:55 that's what they're talking about. they
00:59:56 they were asking for more information
00:59:58 and more more data and and what data
01:00:01 exists because they couldn't find it and
01:00:03 that's the same thing for I couldn't
01:00:04 find this stuff like you're really
01:00:06 trying to look for it and so it either
01:00:07 doesn't exist or it's not readily
01:00:10 accessible and I would hypothesize that
01:00:13 if you had some amazing study then it
01:00:15 would be front page news at the New York
01:00:17 Times so it doesn't exist probably and
01:00:20 and I've read you know multiple Apollo's
01:00:22 books and Paulett is is a researcher
01:00:26 vaccine researcher like one of the most
01:00:27 prominent individual many vaccines.
01:00:28 Yeah. Yeah. And he's part of all the all
01:00:30 the committees and and if there was more
01:00:32 I would think he would have it in his
01:00:33 books. Peter Hotz another um you know
01:00:36 prominent vaccine doctor it would be in
01:00:38 his books. The research that I found is
01:00:40 the same research that they had and I
01:00:42 went through all these books before and
01:00:45 after because I didn't believe what I
01:00:46 was finding. Yeah. Because I was I was
01:00:48 thinking there had to be more. You had
01:00:50 to read the other side and there was
01:00:51 there was nothing there. it just didn't
01:00:53 didn't exist that I could find uh in in
01:00:56 any way. And so the the research that I
01:00:57 could find was what they reported on.
01:00:59 And I think that's shocking and that's
01:01:01 why I think doctors don't know because I
01:01:04 didn't know. I'm an integrative doctor.
01:01:05 I get asked about vaccines all the time.
01:01:07 The reason why I'm doing a vaccine book
01:01:08 is because I didn't have the answers to
01:01:10 some of these questions. People ask me
01:01:11 about vaccines every single day. It's
01:01:13 why most people come to my office or
01:01:14 what they ask me on social media. And I
01:01:16 wanted to look at the research and
01:01:19 figure out what is out there. not to
01:01:20 convince people to do it or to tell them
01:01:22 not to, but to say, "Okay, here's what's
01:01:24 out there. Here's what we have. Here's
01:01:26 what we can move forward." And I was
01:01:29 shocked at what we didn't have. And the
01:01:32 people that were calling antivax
01:01:34 conspiracy theorists back in the day
01:01:35 like Del Big Tree and RFK who are
01:01:37 pushing for these things. And I found
01:01:39 the very same things that they're asking
01:01:41 for. when you get the sound bites of
01:01:43 these people, well maybe we need to look
01:01:46 at ourselves and say we got to get past
01:01:48 the headlines to look at the actual
01:01:50 research and we have to care about kids
01:01:52 and we have to care about kids more than
01:01:54 what pharma is pushing for us and what
01:01:57 we were trained originally. We have to
01:01:58 get past that and say well what is the
01:02:00 research actually show and what do we
01:02:03 need to do next? Let's not call names of
01:02:06 people have the NIH actually build a
01:02:08 research agenda that asks the right
01:02:11 questions. Yeah. Or or just just
01:02:13 just move forward. It's not about
01:02:16 blaming anybody. There's no shame in
01:02:18 this. We we know what we know and then
01:02:20 we know more in the future. And nobody's
01:02:23 taking away vaccines. But we want safer
01:02:26 vaccines. We want better vaccines. We
01:02:28 want more research on vaccines. So that
01:02:29 way in a decade or two decades, we have
01:02:32 better vaccines than we have today. We
01:02:34 have lower risk of side effects,
01:02:36 whatever those might be. And we have
01:02:37 more data. Yeah. I think, you know, it's
01:02:39 important. I mean I I as a physician
01:02:41 I've seen vaccinereventable disease and
01:02:43 working in the developing world in Haiti
01:02:45 I saw tetanus which I'd never seen
01:02:46 before and it was horrifying to see
01:02:48 someone with a disease that was just so
01:02:51 awful that was hard to treat that could
01:02:53 die from just it could be prevented by a
01:02:56 simple vaccine or my my stepfather had
01:02:59 mumps when he was a kid. He was you know
01:03:01 born in the 20s and ended up getting
01:03:04 infertility and sterile because of that.
01:03:07 So the vaccines do have a role in
01:03:10 medicine. The question is how do we best
01:03:11 apply them? So this has been quite
01:03:14 enlightening and we've uncovered a lot
01:03:16 of the problems in medicine and science.
01:03:18 Uh we clearly need more and better
01:03:20 science and the trope it's all safe and
01:03:23 effective. I think we need to just kind
01:03:25 of get past that and say look this is
01:03:27 like anything else in medicine. There's
01:03:28 risks and there's benefits. So when when
01:03:30 a parent comes into your office and says
01:03:34 Dr. Gator, which is your kind of
01:03:35 nickname, what should I do? Like, I I I
01:03:39 want to protect my kid. What's the best
01:03:42 way to vaccinate my kid? Cuz the CDC,
01:03:45 Center for Disease Control and
01:03:46 Prevention, which they don't really
01:03:48 focus on much, um is is uh is telling me
01:03:52 I should do this whole list of, you
01:03:54 know, dozens of vaccines and this is the
01:03:56 schedule they given. I mean, I when I
01:03:58 was doing my board certification, my
01:04:01 reapping my board certification, I went
01:04:02 to a review course and the pediatrician
01:04:04 from UCSF was like, "Here's a vaccine
01:04:07 schedule." I'm like, "Boy, this is what
01:04:09 we're told to tell you, but it's a lot."
01:04:11 You know, even he was like, "It's a
01:04:12 lot." And then he was a regular
01:04:14 pediatrician from UCSF. So, when a when
01:04:16 a parent comes in and wants to know how
01:04:18 do they proceed, which vaccine should I
01:04:19 give in what order, which one's
01:04:21 together, at what time? Uh how do I how
01:04:24 do I navigate that? So, what do you
01:04:25 advise your your uh patients for that?
01:04:28 It really goes back to my philosophy on
01:04:31 on vaccines or everything, which is
01:04:32 informed consent. And and I, as I said,
01:04:35 I don't tell people what to do. I I
01:04:37 never do. I don't tell people what to do
01:04:39 in the book. I don't think that we
01:04:41 should. I don't think that's reasonable.
01:04:43 Uh I think it's a doctor's job to inform
01:04:45 and to discuss and let parents make the
01:04:47 best decision that's for them. The only
01:04:49 thing that a doctor can recommend
01:04:50 currently is the CDC schedule. And so if
01:04:52 individuals want to follow the CDC
01:04:54 schedule, I think that's fine and and
01:04:56 reasonable for them to do. I think that
01:04:58 it would be extremely arrogant of me to
01:05:02 say that I know better than the CDC or I
01:05:04 should tell them to do something
01:05:05 different than the CDC should do based
01:05:07 on my own, you know, personal knowledge.
01:05:09 But I I don't feel that people should be
01:05:11 forced to do anything and we should have
01:05:13 discussions and parents should be able
01:05:14 to do whatever they feel is right for
01:05:16 them. I have patients in my office that
01:05:18 follow the CDC schedule. I have uh lots
01:05:20 of patients that go on a slower schedule
01:05:22 and I have some patients that don't do
01:05:23 any vaccines. Most people that come do
01:05:25 want to vaccinate. Most people do end up
01:05:27 vaccinating and and many do some sort of
01:05:29 a slower schedule. And so we can
01:05:31 certainly talk about that, but there is
01:05:33 no studied or researched or specific
01:05:37 slow schedule. It's really just personal
01:05:39 choice of how uh quickly you want to go,
01:05:41 how many you want to do, and how you
01:05:42 weigh the risks and the benefits of any
01:05:44 any given vaccine. And and that is how
01:05:46 people go about things. And vaccine
01:05:48 schedules are different in different
01:05:49 countries. They're very different in
01:05:50 different countries. So I talked about
01:05:51 that in um at the end of the book a
01:05:54 little bit. Most of the countries have a
01:05:56 fairly similar schedule. I mean most of
01:05:57 the vaccines are are the same, but
01:05:59 they're done in a different order. Not
01:06:01 everything is required um that we
01:06:03 require here. So a lot of countries
01:06:04 don't require he or he a lot of
01:06:06 countries don't require chickenpox. A
01:06:09 lot of countries have measles the MMR
01:06:11 vaccine on different schedules. So a lot
01:06:12 of them do it later. And actually our
01:06:14 country is one of the few that doesn't
01:06:16 do the menitis shot early. A lot of
01:06:17 countries actually do the the menitis
01:06:19 shot earlier, the the meninja caucus. So
01:06:21 there there is and are different
01:06:23 schedules out there, but there they are
01:06:25 fairly similar. But when you're talking
01:06:26 about a a slow schedule, I think the way
01:06:28 that I talk to parents about it is
01:06:30 really weighing risks versus benefits of
01:06:32 of each vaccine. So what are you more
01:06:34 likely to get? What is more likely to
01:06:36 kill you or cause serious harm? What's
01:06:37 going on in the community right now? uh
01:06:39 versus um you know what we know about
01:06:42 about any specific risks and that that
01:06:44 is usually how people go about things
01:06:45 and they're certainly whooping cough all
01:06:47 the time um we see it in our communities
01:06:49 there there is homophos influenza is
01:06:52 still around is was pertessus yeah so
01:06:55 the ptasessus part is probably the
01:06:56 biggest part of that I mean there is
01:06:57 still a little bit of tetanus but that's
01:06:59 pretty rare dtheria is extremely rare
01:07:01 these days um but we wouldn't want
01:07:03 dtheria to come back homophus is not
01:07:07 common anymore but certainly very
01:07:08 concerning ing. So that is around still
01:07:10 and that's something that people do tend
01:07:12 to choose to do. Polio, obviously nobody
01:07:14 wants polio, but we haven't had polio in
01:07:16 a very long time in this country. So
01:07:17 sometimes people choose to push that one
01:07:18 back. And there's live versus, you know,
01:07:21 inactive virus, right? Yeah. Well, we
01:07:23 Yeah, we don't do the the live one
01:07:24 anymore just because um we realize that
01:07:27 we're causing more polio with the live
01:07:29 virus that you actually um have and we
01:07:31 haven't had a case in a very long time
01:07:33 from wild wild polio. So people
01:07:35 sometimes push that back. I think it's
01:07:36 important. We don't want polio to come
01:07:38 back obviously and if you're traveling
01:07:39 somewhere where there is polio then that
01:07:40 makes a lot of sense but there isn't a
01:07:42 lot of polio in our country so sometimes
01:07:44 people push that back. Roto virus um is
01:07:47 a common one that we give to to children
01:07:49 but in our country we have ivy fluids so
01:07:52 a lot of people do tend to choose to
01:07:53 push that one back. Yeah. Um roirus
01:07:56 gives you bad diarrhea. Bad diarrhea.
01:07:57 Numoccus can cause menitis and
01:07:59 pneumonia. So that's one that people
01:08:00 tend to prioritize um in that first
01:08:02 year. And then that the measles ms
01:08:04 reubella certainly the measles part
01:08:06 people prioritize that and certainly are
01:08:07 prioritizing that a lot more uh in the
01:08:09 last few months and chickenpox they tend
01:08:11 to prioritize less. So that that's the
01:08:13 way that people think about it. If they
01:08:14 want to do the regular schedule go for
01:08:16 it. If they want to do a slow they can
01:08:18 do all Yeah. then they can do and they
01:08:19 can do what I mean and a lot of times
01:08:21 people still do all the vaccines and
01:08:22 they still get them on the the same
01:08:24 general time frame but they just might
01:08:26 come in a little bit more and do one at
01:08:28 a time and that makes them feel more
01:08:29 comfortable. So that's fine by me.
01:08:31 Sometimes they'll do it every couple of
01:08:32 months. That is a rational for giving
01:08:35 like one at a time as opposed to just
01:08:37 loading them all up visits. That goes to
01:08:40 a little bit more on common sense, I
01:08:41 would say, because there's no research
01:08:43 to show that if you do a slower schedule
01:08:45 or you do one at a time, it's going to
01:08:46 decrease your risk. So, we don't we
01:08:47 don't know and we don't have science on
01:08:49 the current schedule either, right? So,
01:08:51 I I don't know that it decreases your
01:08:52 risk at all. But the theory that a
01:08:54 parent would have is I don't want to
01:08:55 give my kid four vaccines on a day.
01:08:57 There's more toxic load. there's more
01:08:59 that the body has to deal with and
01:09:00 therefore it in potentially increases
01:09:02 their risk to have a reaction. So I feel
01:09:03 more comfortable giving one at a time
01:09:05 instead of doing two vaccines today.
01:09:06 I'll do one today and I'll come back in
01:09:08 a month and do the other one. They're
01:09:09 still doing them. They're just doing
01:09:10 them one at a time. And that yes, it
01:09:12 means more visits. Like they're still at
01:09:14 the end of the day doing all the
01:09:15 vaccines. So I don't have the research
01:09:17 to say that's better, but we should have
01:09:19 that research. We should be studying
01:09:20 that. We should be looking, hey, if we
01:09:22 space it out, does that decrease your
01:09:23 risk of anything? That would be good to
01:09:25 know. And and the other question is, you
01:09:26 know, know vaccines are a really big
01:09:28 immune irritant and babies don't have a
01:09:32 fully developed immune system until
01:09:34 they're over a year old. You know, just
01:09:36 like they don't have a developed
01:09:38 neurological system. When you look at a
01:09:39 a baby, their emotions are like jerky.
01:09:41 They look like they have like cerebral
01:09:43 pausy or some moves movements,
01:09:45 but that's because their their
01:09:46 neurologic system's not developed and
01:09:47 their immune system not developed and
01:09:49 their gut and their oral tolerance not
01:09:50 developed. Is there a rationale for
01:09:52 waiting a little longer when a kid's not
01:09:55 so immune sort of underdeveloped in
01:09:57 their immune response or do we want do
01:10:00 we still want to give it to little kids
01:10:01 babies before a year old? There there's
01:10:03 two sides to that question. The the
01:10:05 first part of that would would say and
01:10:06 this is what the general consensus is.
01:10:08 We want to give the vaccines early
01:10:10 because you get the protection and you
01:10:12 want to protect before you get the
01:10:13 disease. So that's the the general body
01:10:15 of science. The concern around giving
01:10:17 vaccines early is like you said, the
01:10:19 immune system is developing. The baby's
01:10:21 developing, they're still small, so any
01:10:23 sort of toxic load or any chemicals or
01:10:25 any sort of stimulation is going to most
01:10:27 likely have more of effect on them than
01:10:28 it would for an adult um or somebody
01:10:31 older. And and so that's the the concern
01:10:34 there. There certainly are some studies
01:10:36 that say if you delay certain vaccines
01:10:39 then then you decrease risk of asthma,
01:10:40 you decrease risk of eczema. I mean,
01:10:42 these studies exist. They're not the
01:10:43 majority, but they they're out there.
01:10:45 Um, and there's there are some actually
01:10:46 very good studies and good journals that
01:10:47 that show this. So, it's not an
01:10:50 unreasonable hypothesis to have. And
01:10:52 again, it goes back to the research we
01:10:53 should be getting. We should be asking,
01:10:56 hey, if we move the hepatitis B vaccine
01:10:58 back, does that decrease your risk of
01:11:00 anything? Um, I mean, just in basic
01:11:02 common sense, if you give a vaccine to
01:11:04 anybody, the biggest risk you have is
01:11:06 having a fever, right? Having a fever,
01:11:08 not feeling good. If a baby in the first
01:11:10 week gets a fever, what happens? Right?
01:11:12 Right? If you give a hepatitis B vaccine
01:11:14 and they have a normal side effect from
01:11:15 a vaccine of getting a fever, what
01:11:17 happens to a baby? They're going to the
01:11:18 hospital. They're getting a lumbar
01:11:20 puncture. They're getting a full workup.
01:11:21 They're being exposed to all these
01:11:23 potential diseases in the hospital. Um
01:11:26 that maybe they got that fever just from
01:11:29 the reaction from the vaccine. But we
01:11:30 don't know that in a newborn baby. So,
01:11:32 we're going to do the full workup
01:11:33 anyways because we want to protect them.
01:11:35 But we don't talk about that that risk
01:11:37 versus benefit. Do we do those babies
01:11:38 need that risk? They need the risk to go
01:11:40 to the hospital. Do they need to risk to
01:11:41 get the fever? good, they wait till 2
01:11:43 months old or four months old and and
01:11:45 and take away that risk. I mean, those
01:11:47 are the questions that smart people need
01:11:48 to have. They need to sit on stage. They
01:11:51 need to debate. They need to go to
01:11:52 Harvard and Hopkins and on TV on full
01:11:56 cameras, sit there and debate these
01:11:58 questions. They need to talk about that.
01:11:59 They need to talk about all of these
01:12:01 ethics so people can watch it and say,
01:12:03 "Well, you know, maybe maybe you're
01:12:04 right. Maybe we we should rethink our
01:12:06 hepatitis B." Or maybe somebody smarter
01:12:08 than me is going to say, "No, no, no.
01:12:10 Here's why we do it. here's what the
01:12:12 reason is, here's why the the risks the
01:12:14 benefits outweigh the risks and and I'll
01:12:16 say okay well that makes sense you know
01:12:17 like that's what we need but we can't
01:12:19 shut down the discussion which is what's
01:12:21 happened for the last decade how are we
01:12:23 going to move forward unless we can have
01:12:24 these conversations and it has to be
01:12:27 someone who's pro versus someone who's
01:12:28 anti whatever labels you want somebody
01:12:30 who is who knows this research and
01:12:33 understands it really well and can
01:12:35 debate it and discuss it publicly so
01:12:38 that way we can I I don't have any skin
01:12:40 in the game. I Whatever the research is,
01:12:42 it's fine by me. I I want kids to be the
01:12:44 healthiest. I agree. Me, too. And I And
01:12:45 I think what I think what I would love
01:12:47 to see is a catalog of the key questions
01:12:49 that need to be answered. Here's what we
01:12:51 know. Here's what we don't know. But
01:12:53 let's fund research that helps us
01:12:55 understand what we don't know and have
01:12:56 better answers and be able to actually
01:12:58 show population, show doctors and
01:13:01 healthare system what actually we should
01:13:03 be doing because right
01:13:04 now there's so many questions because
01:13:08 there's a lot of unanswered questions.
01:13:10 But those questions won't even be asked
01:13:11 until the literature is written down and
01:13:14 we're allowed to ask the questions. You
01:13:16 have to be allowed to ask the questions.
01:13:17 And no one's going to allow that to
01:13:18 happen until they realize that there are
01:13:20 holes in the research. And so I think it
01:13:23 starts with putting that all down,
01:13:26 having open discussions about what
01:13:27 exists, getting doctors on board with
01:13:29 the research that actually is present
01:13:31 right now today. And then we move
01:13:34 forward from there with debate and
01:13:36 discussion on the open topics. And then
01:13:38 people will say, "Hey, okay, well,
01:13:40 hepatitis B is a reasonable discussion
01:13:42 to have. Let's let's get the the
01:13:44 committees together and let's talk
01:13:46 about, okay, here's what we have. Here's
01:13:47 what we don't have. Here's what the
01:13:48 smart people say. Maybe we move
01:13:50 hepatitis B back or maybe we just make
01:13:52 it a a general recommendation for those
01:13:54 that test positive for hepatitis B or
01:13:56 don't don't know their hepatitis B risk.
01:13:58 let's start to focus on safety because
01:14:01 what I think is happening most right now
01:14:03 and especially when you're talking about
01:14:04 the people that are hesitant and I hear
01:14:06 this over and over again they don't feel
01:14:07 like anybody cares about their kids they
01:14:09 feel like right now everything is about
01:14:12 money and about pushing more medications
01:14:14 and drugs and nobody actually cares
01:14:16 about safety and everybody understands
01:14:18 that there is some safety risk with any
01:14:20 medication that we have or any vaccines
01:14:22 and they'll be okay with some risk but
01:14:24 they want to know that we're
01:14:26 acknowledging the risk that we're
01:14:28 studying the risk, that we're figuring
01:14:30 out what that actual risk is, and that
01:14:31 we're moving to make things safer and
01:14:33 better over time. And until those
01:14:36 discussions are had publicly, more and
01:14:38 more people and more and more parents
01:14:40 are going to be hesitant about vaccines.
01:14:42 And that is what we're seeing. The rates
01:14:44 are plummeting. People don't believe in
01:14:46 anymore. Even doctors, there's some
01:14:48 studies that show that doctors, there's
01:14:50 like 5 to 10% of doctors don't fully
01:14:52 believe that vaccines are are safe
01:14:54 anymore. That's a huge crisis. It is. I
01:14:57 agree. And I think I think these
01:14:58 questions need to be answered and I I
01:14:59 got to thank you for having the courage
01:15:01 to step out in this field because I know
01:15:04 for me personally it's been an area that
01:15:05 I often avoid because all of a sudden
01:15:08 you get labeled as a quack and all the
01:15:09 rest of the work you want to try to do
01:15:10 in the world is compromised. But all all
01:15:13 we're asking for is is you know like
01:15:16 better science so we can have safer
01:15:18 vaccines. You know Bobby always says
01:15:19 this is I was calling out the fact that
01:15:22 fish were poisoned with mercury in our
01:15:25 rivers. I'm not anti-fish. I just want
01:15:28 safer fish. You know, if you want safe
01:15:31 planes to fly on, doesn't mean you're
01:15:33 anti-flying, right? And I think it's the
01:15:35 same thing with vaccines. So, Between a
01:15:36 Shot and a Hard Place is a great book
01:15:38 tackling difficult vaccine questions
01:15:40 with balance, data, and clarity.
01:15:42 Everybody should definitely get a copy
01:15:44 if you're interested in this topic. If
01:15:46 you're um have a kid or thinking of
01:15:48 having a kid or a grandkid, I think this
01:15:50 is such an important conversation, and I
01:15:52 encourage doctors out there listening. I
01:15:54 encourage scientists out there listening
01:15:55 to ask these questions to not kind of
01:15:58 lean into the propaganda that the
01:16:00 science is settled. They're safe and
01:16:02 effective. That's just a nonsense
01:16:03 statement when you think about
01:16:05 everything else in medicine that doesn't
01:16:06 apply to. So Joel, thank you for writing
01:16:09 this book. Thank you having the courage.
01:16:10 And uh hope you all love this. Make sure
01:16:12 you check out Joel's work. Uh you can
01:16:14 find him online. Tell us how to find you
01:16:17 where where we can get get more
01:16:18 information about you and your social
01:16:20 media. Yeah, the best places are
01:16:21 probably at Dr. Joel Gator on Instagram
01:16:24 or X or you can find the book between a
01:16:27 shot and a hard place on on Amazon or
01:16:28 anywhere books are sold or you can go to
01:16:30 theshotbook.com.
01:16:32 You've also written another book
01:16:33 parenting your at your child's pace the
01:16:35 integrative pediatrician's guide to the
01:16:37 first three years came out last year so
01:16:39 you're prolific. I don't know if you're
01:16:41 going to follow my pace. I hope you're
01:16:42 not. It's almost killed me. But yeah,
01:16:44 the the last one not as controversial I
01:16:46 guess. But uh this one I mean this one I
01:16:48 I have wor I've had it for a while and
01:16:51 we've been working on it but this is the
01:16:52 time to get it out there. So I've been
01:16:54 working super hard to get it out and
01:16:55 that's why it's you know kind of two
01:16:56 interrupt. Well thanks Joel and thanks
01:16:58 for having the courage and doing this
01:16:59 and uh we're all going to keep looking
01:17:00 at what you're doing and taking guidance
01:17:02 from your thinking and hopefully the
01:17:04 people listening will in the right
01:17:05 places will advance the science so we
01:17:07 can all have better answers to these
01:17:08 difficult questions. Thank you. If you
01:17:11 loved that last video, you're going to
identifier: 3057
model: gemini-2.5-flash-preview-05-20| input-price: 0.15 output-price: 3.5 max-context-length: 128_000
host: 193.8.40.111
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W4tqbEmplug&pp=0gcJCbAJAYcqIYzvinclude_comments: None
include_timestamps: 1
include_glossary: None
output_language: en
cost: 0.014992349999999998
*Abstract:* This video features a discussion with visionary thinker Simon Sinek on the profound impact of artificial intelligence and modern technology on human connection, personal growth, and societal well-being. Sinek argues that while AI offers unprecedented efficiency and convenience, it risks devaluing the human journey of struggle, imperfection, and authentic experience that fosters true wisdom, resilience, and meaningful relationships. He critiques a "result-obsessed" society that prioritizes output over the valuable process of learning and self-development. The conversation emphasizes the increasing importance of cultivating essential "human skills" like empathy, conflict resolution, and genuine connection, especially as technology automates traditional knowledge-based work. Sinek advocates for a re-prioritization of human relationships, intentional engagement, and embracing imperfection as the foundation of beauty and growth in an increasingly digital and fast-paced world. *Exploring the Human Experience in the Age of AI: Insights from Simon Sinek* * *0:00 - The Human Cost of AI Perfection:* The discussion opens with an anecdote about using AI (ChatGPT) to resolve a relationship conflict, illustrating how "perfect" AI-generated responses lack the authenticity and human imperfection that are vital for genuine connection and personal growth. * *0:33 - Journey Over Destination:* Simon Sinek articulates his core philosophy: life is about the *journey* and the inherent value of *doing the work* (e.g., writing a book, solving a problem) yourself, as this struggle fosters resourcefulness and intellectual growth, which AI bypasses by providing instant solutions. * *0:58 - Erosion of Human Skills:* Sinek warns that over-reliance on technology can lead to the "giving up" of crucial human skills (e.g., knowing what to do when a friend is struggling, coping with stress), comparing it to having a boat but not knowing how to swim when a storm hits. * *4:14 - The Irony of Job Displacement:* An interesting parallel is drawn between the displacement of factory workers by robotics (met with calls to "reskill") and the current threat of AI to knowledge workers, noting the ironic shift in societal concern and the discussion of universal basic income. * *7:16 - Authenticity vs. Artificiality:* AI-generated content (emails, art) is making digital interactions feel inauthentic, creating a new premium on "human-written language" and the beauty found in imperfection, drawing on the Japanese concept of *Wabi-sabi*. * *12:55 - Embracing the Value of Struggle:* The conversation reiterates that genuine personal growth, stronger relationships, and increased confidence come from navigating and resolving difficulties, not from avoiding them or seeking perfect, instant solutions. * *18:22 - Essential Human Skills for the Future:* Sinek stresses that critical human skills such as listening, holding space, conflict resolution, giving/receiving feedback, accountability, and empathy are increasingly vital but are suffering in the modern world. * *31:08 - Potential for Reclaiming Time and Purpose:* While AI may lead to job shifts, Sinek suggests it could also free up time, allowing individuals to pursue hobbies, deepen relationships, and combat loneliness, arguing that this return to personal time is something society has "been desperate for." * *35:54 - The Pursuit of "Enough" and Gratitude:* Happiness is not solely tied to money beyond a certain point; true fulfillment often comes from having a vision that exceeds current resources, fostering creativity, and practicing gratitude for what one has. * *46:12 - The Profound Impact of Gratitude:* Personal experiences (e.g., the LA fires) illustrate how confronting loss and embracing the temporary nature of things can lead to a deeper appreciation and gratitude for life and relationships. * *55:59 - Scale Breaks Quality:* The speaker argues that efforts to achieve massive scale often compromise quality and authenticity (e.g., mass-produced clothing, Apple's curated store experience), leading to a growing demand for handmade, unique items. * *1:09:59 - Friction Creates Freedom:* The paradox that technological convenience has reduced the "friction" that once created boundaries between work and personal life, thereby diminishing freedom and increasing stress. * *1:11:05 - The Rise of In-Real-Life Community:* Sinek predicts a "community revolution," defining community as "a group of people who agree to grow together," emphasizing the increasing value of offline, intentional human connection. * *1:52:50 - Friendship: The Ultimate Biohack:* Sinek highlights the underserved topic of friendship, arguing that strong friendships are fundamental for navigating life's challenges and are the most potent "biohack" for combating loneliness, depression, and anxiety. * *2:01:01 - Mentorship and Lasting Legacy:* Sinek shares his commitment to mentoring his team, imparting his knowledge and lessons from past mistakes to build a resilient organization that can thrive independently. He presents a military challenge coin engraved with "Build, Teach, Lead," symbolizing the responsibility to accumulate, give, and serve. I used gemini-2.5-flash-preview-05-20| input-price: 0.15 output-price: 3.5 max-context-length: 128_000 on rocketrecap dot com to summarize the transcript. Cost (if I didn't use the free tier): $0.0150 Input tokens: 74609 Output tokens: 1086
Abstract:
This video features a discussion with visionary thinker Simon Sinek on the profound impact of artificial intelligence and modern technology on human connection, personal growth, and societal well-being. Sinek argues that while AI offers unprecedented efficiency and convenience, it risks devaluing the human journey of struggle, imperfection, and authentic experience that fosters true wisdom, resilience, and meaningful relationships. He critiques a "result-obsessed" society that prioritizes output over the valuable process of learning and self-development. The conversation emphasizes the increasing importance of cultivating essential "human skills" like empathy, conflict resolution, and genuine connection, especially as technology automates traditional knowledge-based work. Sinek advocates for a re-prioritization of human relationships, intentional engagement, and embracing imperfection as the foundation of beauty and growth in an increasingly digital and fast-paced world.
Exploring the Human Experience in the Age of AI: Insights from Simon Sinek
Below, I will provide input for an example video (comprising of title, description, and transcript, in this order) and the corresponding abstract and summary I expect. Afterward, I will provide a new transcript that I want you to summarize in the same format.
**Please give an abstract of the transcript and then summarize the transcript in a self-contained bullet list format.** Include starting timestamps, important details and key takeaways.
Example Input:
Fluidigm Polaris Part 2- illuminator and camera
mikeselectricstuff
131K subscribers
Subscribed
369
Share
Download
Clip
Save
5,857 views Aug 26, 2024
Fluidigm Polaris part 1 : • Fluidigm Polaris (Part 1) - Biotech g...
Ebay listings: https://www.ebay.co.uk/usr/mikeselect...
Merch https://mikeselectricstuff.creator-sp...
Transcript
Follow along using the transcript.
Show transcript
mikeselectricstuff
131K subscribers
Videos
About
Support on Patreon
40 Comments
@robertwatsonbath
6 hours ago
Thanks Mike. Ooof! - with the level of bodgery going on around 15:48 I think shame would have made me do a board re spin, out of my own pocket if I had to.
1
Reply
@Muonium1
9 hours ago
The green LED looks different from the others and uses phosphor conversion because of the "green gap" problem where green InGaN emitters suffer efficiency droop at high currents. Phosphide based emitters don't start becoming efficient until around 600nm so also can't be used for high power green emitters. See the paper and plot by Matthias Auf der Maur in his 2015 paper on alloy fluctuations in InGaN as the cause of reduced external quantum efficiency at longer (green) wavelengths.
4
Reply
1 reply
@tafsirnahian669
10 hours ago (edited)
Can this be used as an astrophotography camera?
Reply
mikeselectricstuff
·
1 reply
@mikeselectricstuff
6 hours ago
Yes, but may need a shutter to avoid light during readout
Reply
@2010craggy
11 hours ago
Narrowband filters we use in Astronomy (Astrophotography) are sided- they work best passing light in one direction so I guess the arrows on the filter frames indicate which way round to install them in the filter wheel.
1
Reply
@vitukz
12 hours ago
A mate with Channel @extractions&ire could use it
2
Reply
@RobertGallop
19 hours ago
That LED module says it can go up to 28 amps!!! 21 amps for 100%. You should see what it does at 20 amps!
Reply
@Prophes0r
19 hours ago
I had an "Oh SHIT!" moment when I realized that the weird trapezoidal shape of that light guide was for keystone correction of the light source.
Very clever.
6
Reply
@OneBiOzZ
20 hours ago
given the cost of the CCD you think they could have run another PCB for it
9
Reply
@tekvax01
21 hours ago
$20 thousand dollars per minute of run time!
1
Reply
@tekvax01
22 hours ago
"We spared no expense!" John Hammond Jurassic Park.
*(that's why this thing costs the same as a 50-seat Greyhound Bus coach!)
Reply
@florianf4257
22 hours ago
The smearing on the image could be due to the fact that you don't use a shutter, so you see brighter stripes under bright areas of the image as you still iluminate these pixels while the sensor data ist shifted out towards the top. I experienced this effect back at university with a LN-Cooled CCD for Spectroscopy. The stripes disapeared as soon as you used the shutter instead of disabling it in the open position (but fokussing at 100ms integration time and continuous readout with a focal plane shutter isn't much fun).
12
Reply
mikeselectricstuff
·
1 reply
@mikeselectricstuff
12 hours ago
I didn't think of that, but makes sense
2
Reply
@douro20
22 hours ago (edited)
The red LED reminds me of one from Roithner Lasertechnik. I have a Symbol 2D scanner which uses two very bright LEDs from that company, one red and one red-orange. The red-orange is behind a lens which focuses it into an extremely narrow beam.
1
Reply
@RicoElectrico
23 hours ago
PFG is Pulse Flush Gate according to the datasheet.
Reply
@dcallan812
23 hours ago
Very interesting. 2x
Reply
@littleboot_
1 day ago
Cool interesting device
Reply
@dav1dbone
1 day ago
I've stripped large projectors, looks similar, wonder if some of those castings are a magnesium alloy?
Reply
@kevywevvy8833
1 day ago
ironic that some of those Phlatlight modules are used in some of the cheapest disco lights.
1
Reply
1 reply
@bill6255
1 day ago
Great vid - gets right into subject in title, its packed with information, wraps up quickly. Should get a YT award! imho
3
Reply
@JAKOB1977
1 day ago (edited)
The whole sensor module incl. a 5 grand 50mpix sensor for 49 £.. highest bid atm
Though also a limited CCD sensor, but for the right buyer its a steal at these relative low sums.
Architecture Full Frame CCD (Square Pixels)
Total Number of Pixels 8304 (H) × 6220 (V) = 51.6 Mp
Number of Effective Pixels 8208 (H) × 6164 (V) = 50.5 Mp
Number of Active Pixels 8176 (H) × 6132 (V) = 50.1 Mp
Pixel Size 6.0 m (H) × 6.0 m (V)
Active Image Size 49.1 mm (H) × 36.8 mm (V)
61.3 mm (Diagonal),
645 1.1x Optical Format
Aspect Ratio 4:3
Horizontal Outputs 4
Saturation Signal 40.3 ke−
Output Sensitivity 31 V/e−
Quantum Efficiency
KAF−50100−CAA
KAF−50100−AAA
KAF−50100−ABA (with Lens)
22%, 22%, 16% (Peak R, G, B)
25%
62%
Read Noise (f = 18 MHz) 12.5 e−
Dark Signal (T = 60°C) 42 pA/cm2
Dark Current Doubling Temperature 5.7°C
Dynamic Range (f = 18 MHz) 70.2 dB
Estimated Linear Dynamic Range
(f = 18 MHz)
69.3 dB
Charge Transfer Efficiency
Horizontal
Vertical
0.999995
0.999999
Blooming Protection
(4 ms Exposure Time)
800X Saturation Exposure
Maximum Date Rate 18 MHz
Package Ceramic PGA
Cover Glass MAR Coated, 2 Sides or
Clear Glass
Features
• TRUESENSE Transparent Gate Electrode
for High Sensitivity
• Ultra-High Resolution
• Board Dynamic Range
• Low Noise Architecture
• Large Active Imaging Area
Applications
• Digitization
• Mapping/Aerial
• Photography
• Scientific
Thx for the tear down Mike, always a joy
Reply
@martinalooksatthings
1 day ago
15:49 that is some great bodging on of caps, they really didn't want to respin that PCB huh
8
Reply
@RhythmGamer
1 day ago
Was depressed today and then a new mike video dropped and now I’m genuinely happy to get my tear down fix
1
Reply
@dine9093
1 day ago (edited)
Did you transfrom into Mr Blobby for a moment there?
2
Reply
@NickNorton
1 day ago
Thanks Mike. Your videos are always interesting.
5
Reply
@KeritechElectronics
1 day ago
Heavy optics indeed... Spare no expense, cost no object. Splendid build quality. The CCD is a thing of beauty!
1
Reply
@YSoreil
1 day ago
The pricing on that sensor is about right, I looked in to these many years ago when they were still in production since it's the only large sensor you could actually buy. Really cool to see one in the wild.
2
Reply
@snik2pl
1 day ago
That leds look like from led projector
Reply
@vincei4252
1 day ago
TDI = Time Domain Integration ?
1
Reply
@wolpumba4099
1 day ago (edited)
Maybe the camera should not be illuminated during readout.
From the datasheet of the sensor (Onsemi): saturation 40300 electrons, read noise 12.5 electrons per pixel @ 18MHz (quite bad). quantum efficiency 62% (if it has micro lenses), frame rate 1 Hz. lateral overflow drain to prevent blooming protects against 800x (factor increases linearly with exposure time) saturation exposure (32e6 electrons per pixel at 4ms exposure time), microlens has +/- 20 degree acceptance angle
i guess it would be good for astrophotography
4
Reply
@txm100
1 day ago (edited)
Babe wake up a new mikeselectricstuff has dropped!
9
Reply
@vincei4252
1 day ago
That looks like a finger-lakes filter wheel, however, for astronomy they'd never use such a large stepper.
1
Reply
@MRooodddvvv
1 day ago
yaaaaay ! more overcomplicated optical stuff !
4
Reply
1 reply
@NoPegs
1 day ago
He lives!
11
Reply
1 reply
Transcript
0:00
so I've stripped all the bits of the
0:01
optical system so basically we've got
0:03
the uh the camera
0:05
itself which is mounted on this uh very
0:09
complex
0:10
adjustment thing which obviously to set
0:13
you the various tilt and uh alignment
0:15
stuff then there's two of these massive
0:18
lenses I've taken one of these apart I
0:20
think there's something like about eight
0:22
or nine Optical elements in here these
0:25
don't seem to do a great deal in terms
0:26
of electr magnification they're obiously
0:28
just about getting the image to where it
0:29
uh where it needs to be just so that
0:33
goes like that then this Optical block I
0:36
originally thought this was made of some
0:37
s crazy heavy material but it's just
0:39
really the sum of all these Optical bits
0:41
are just ridiculously heavy those lenses
0:43
are about 4 kilos each and then there's
0:45
this very heavy very solid um piece that
0:47
goes in the middle and this is so this
0:49
is the filter wheel assembly with a
0:51
hilariously oversized steper
0:53
motor driving this wheel with these very
0:57
large narrow band filters so we've got
1:00
various different shades of uh
1:03
filters there five Al together that
1:06
one's actually just showing up a silver
1:07
that's actually a a red but fairly low
1:10
transmission orangey red blue green
1:15
there's an excess cover on this side so
1:16
the filters can be accessed and changed
1:19
without taking anything else apart even
1:21
this is like ridiculous it's like solid
1:23
aluminium this is just basically a cover
1:25
the actual wavelengths of these are um
1:27
488 525 570 630 and 700 NM not sure what
1:32
the suffix on that perhaps that's the uh
1:34
the width of the spectral line say these
1:37
are very narrow band filters most of
1:39
them are you very little light through
1:41
so it's still very tight narrow band to
1:43
match the um fluoresence of the dies
1:45
they're using in the biochemical process
1:48
and obviously to reject the light that's
1:49
being fired at it from that Illuminator
1:51
box and then there's a there's a second
1:53
one of these lenses then the actual sort
1:55
of samples below that so uh very serious
1:58
amount of very uh chunky heavy Optics
2:01
okay let's take a look at this light
2:02
source made by company Lumen Dynamics
2:04
who are now part of
2:06
excelitas self-contained unit power
2:08
connector USB and this which one of the
2:11
Cable Bundle said was a TTL interface
2:14
USB wasn't used in uh the fluid
2:17
application output here and I think this
2:19
is an input for um light feedback I
2:21
don't if it's regulated or just a measur
2:23
measurement facility and the uh fiber
2:27
assembly
2:29
Square Inlet there and then there's two
2:32
outputs which have uh lens assemblies
2:35
and this small one which goes back into
2:37
that small Port just Loops out of here
2:40
straight back in So on this side we've
2:42
got the electronics which look pretty
2:44
straightforward we've got a bit of power
2:45
supply stuff over here and we've got
2:48
separate drivers for each wavelength now
2:50
interesting this is clearly been very
2:52
specifically made for this application
2:54
you I was half expecting like say some
2:56
generic drivers that could be used for a
2:58
number of different things but actually
3:00
literally specified the exact wavelength
3:02
on the PCB there is provision here for
3:04
385 NM which isn't populated but this is
3:07
clearly been designed very specifically
3:09
so these four drivers look the same but
3:10
then there's two higher power ones for
3:12
575 and
3:14
520 a slightly bigger heat sink on this
3:16
575 section there a p 24 which is
3:20
providing USB interface USB isolator the
3:23
USB interface just presents as a comport
3:26
I did have a quick look but I didn't
3:27
actually get anything sensible um I did
3:29
dump the Pi code out and there's a few
3:31
you a few sort of commands that you
3:32
could see in text but I didn't actually
3:34
manage to get it working properly I
3:36
found some software for related version
3:38
but it didn't seem to want to talk to it
3:39
but um I say that wasn't used for the
3:41
original application it might be quite
3:42
interesting to get try and get the Run
3:44
hours count out of it and the TTL
3:46
interface looks fairly straightforward
3:48
we've got positions for six opto
3:50
isolators but only five five are
3:52
installed so that corresponds with the
3:54
unused thing so I think this hopefully
3:56
should be as simple as just providing a
3:57
ttrl signal for each color to uh enable
4:00
it a big heat sink here which is there I
4:03
think there's like a big S of metal
4:04
plate through the middle of this that
4:05
all the leads are mounted on the other
4:07
side so this is heat sinking it with a
4:09
air flow from a uh just a fan in here
4:13
obviously don't have the air flow
4:14
anywhere near the Optics so conduction
4:17
cool through to this plate that's then
4:18
uh air cooled got some pots which are
4:21
presumably power
4:22
adjustments okay let's take a look at
4:24
the other side which is uh much more
4:27
interesting see we've got some uh very
4:31
uh neatly Twisted cable assemblies there
4:35
a bunch of leads so we've got one here
4:37
475 up here 430 NM 630 575 and 520
4:44
filters and dcro mirrors a quick way to
4:48
see what's white is if we just shine
4:49
some white light through
4:51
here not sure how it is is to see on the
4:54
camera but shining white light we do
4:55
actually get a bit of red a bit of blue
4:57
some yellow here so the obstacle path
5:00
575 it goes sort of here bounces off
5:03
this mirror and goes out the 520 goes
5:07
sort of down here across here and up
5:09
there 630 goes basically straight
5:13
through
5:15
430 goes across there down there along
5:17
there and the 475 goes down here and
5:20
left this is the light sensing thing
5:22
think here there's just a um I think
5:24
there a photo diode or other sensor
5:26
haven't actually taken that off and
5:28
everything's fixed down to this chunk of
5:31
aluminium which acts as the heat
5:32
spreader that then conducts the heat to
5:33
the back side for the heat
5:35
sink and the actual lead packages all
5:38
look fairly similar except for this one
5:41
on the 575 which looks quite a bit more
5:44
substantial big spay
5:46
Terminals and the interface for this
5:48
turned out to be extremely simple it's
5:50
literally a 5V TTL level to enable each
5:54
color doesn't seem to be any tensity
5:56
control but there are some additional
5:58
pins on that connector that weren't used
5:59
in the through time thing so maybe
6:01
there's some extra lines that control
6:02
that I couldn't find any data on this uh
6:05
unit and the um their current product
6:07
range is quite significantly different
6:09
so we've got the uh blue these
6:13
might may well be saturating the camera
6:16
so they might look a bit weird so that's
6:17
the 430
6:18
blue the 575
6:24
yellow uh
6:26
475 light blue
6:29
the uh 520
6:31
green and the uh 630 red now one
6:36
interesting thing I noticed for the
6:39
575 it's actually it's actually using a
6:42
white lead and then filtering it rather
6:44
than using all the other ones are using
6:46
leads which are the fundamental colors
6:47
but uh this is actually doing white and
6:50
it's a combination of this filter and
6:52
the dichroic mirrors that are turning to
6:55
Yellow if we take the filter out and a
6:57
lot of the a lot of the um blue content
7:00
is going this way the red is going
7:02
straight through these two mirrors so
7:05
this is clearly not reflecting much of
7:08
that so we end up with the yellow coming
7:10
out of uh out of there which is a fairly
7:14
light yellow color which you don't
7:16
really see from high intensity leads so
7:19
that's clearly why they've used the
7:20
white to uh do this power consumption of
7:23
the white is pretty high so going up to
7:25
about 2 and 1 half amps on that color
7:27
whereas most of the other colors are
7:28
only drawing half an amp or so at 24
7:30
volts the uh the green is up to about
7:32
1.2 but say this thing is uh much
7:35
brighter and if you actually run all the
7:38
colors at the same time you get a fairly
7:41
reasonable um looking white coming out
7:43
of it and one thing you might just be
7:45
out to notice is there is some sort
7:46
color banding around here that's not
7:49
getting uh everything s completely
7:51
concentric and I think that's where this
7:53
fiber optic thing comes
7:58
in I'll
8:00
get a couple of Fairly accurately shaped
8:04
very sort of uniform color and looking
8:06
at What's um inside here we've basically
8:09
just got this Square Rod so this is
8:12
clearly yeah the lights just bouncing
8:13
off all the all the various sides to um
8:16
get a nice uniform illumination uh this
8:19
back bit looks like it's all potted so
8:21
nothing I really do to get in there I
8:24
think this is fiber so I have come
8:26
across um cables like this which are
8:27
liquid fill but just looking through the
8:30
end of this it's probably a bit hard to
8:31
see it does look like there fiber ends
8:34
going going on there and so there's this
8:36
feedback thing which is just obviously
8:39
compensating for the any light losses
8:41
through here to get an accurate
8:43
representation of uh the light that's
8:45
been launched out of these two
8:47
fibers and you see uh
8:49
these have got this sort of trapezium
8:54
shape light guides again it's like a
8:56
sort of acrylic or glass light guide
9:00
guess projected just to make the right
9:03
rectangular
9:04
shape and look at this Center assembly
9:07
um the light output doesn't uh change
9:10
whether you feed this in or not so it's
9:11
clear not doing any internal Clos Loop
9:14
control obviously there may well be some
9:16
facility for it to do that but it's not
9:17
being used in this
9:19
application and so this output just
9:21
produces a voltage on the uh outle
9:24
connector proportional to the amount of
9:26
light that's present so there's a little
9:28
diffuser in the back there
9:30
and then there's just some kind of uh
9:33
Optical sensor looks like a
9:35
chip looking at the lead it's a very
9:37
small package on the PCB with this lens
9:40
assembly over the top and these look
9:43
like they're actually on a copper
9:44
Metalized PCB for maximum thermal
9:47
performance and yeah it's a very small
9:49
package looks like it's a ceramic
9:51
package and there's a thermister there
9:53
for temperature monitoring this is the
9:56
475 blue one this is the 520 need to
9:59
Green which is uh rather different OB
10:02
it's a much bigger D with lots of bond
10:04
wise but also this looks like it's using
10:05
a phosphor if I shine a blue light at it
10:08
lights up green so this is actually a
10:10
phosphor conversion green lead which
10:12
I've I've come across before they want
10:15
that specific wavelength so they may be
10:17
easier to tune a phosphor than tune the
10:20
um semiconductor material to get the uh
10:23
right right wavelength from the lead
10:24
directly uh red 630 similar size to the
10:28
blue one or does seem to have a uh a
10:31
lens on top of it there is a sort of red
10:33
coloring to
10:35
the die but that doesn't appear to be
10:38
fluorescent as far as I can
10:39
tell and the white one again a little
10:41
bit different sort of much higher
10:43
current
10:46
connectors a makeer name on that
10:48
connector flot light not sure if that's
10:52
the connector or the lead
10:54
itself and obviously with the phosphor
10:56
and I'd imagine that phosphor may well
10:58
be tuned to get the maximum to the uh 5
11:01
cenm and actually this white one looks
11:04
like a St fairly standard product I just
11:06
found it in Mouse made by luminous
11:09
devices in fact actually I think all
11:11
these are based on various luminous
11:13
devices modules and they're you take
11:17
looks like they taking the nearest
11:18
wavelength and then just using these
11:19
filters to clean it up to get a precise
11:22
uh spectral line out of it so quite a
11:25
nice neat and um extreme
11:30
bright light source uh sure I've got any
11:33
particular use for it so I think this
11:35
might end up on
11:36
eBay but uh very pretty to look out and
11:40
without the uh risk of burning your eyes
11:43
out like you do with lasers so I thought
11:45
it would be interesting to try and
11:46
figure out the runtime of this things
11:48
like this we usually keep some sort
11:49
record of runtime cuz leads degrade over
11:51
time I couldn't get any software to work
11:52
through the USB face but then had a
11:54
thought probably going to be writing the
11:55
runtime periodically to the e s prom so
11:58
I just just scope up that and noticed it
12:00
was doing right every 5 minutes so I
12:02
just ran it for a while periodically
12:04
reading the E squ I just held the pick
12:05
in in reset and um put clip over to read
12:07
the square prom and found it was writing
12:10
one location per color every 5 minutes
12:12
so if one color was on it would write
12:14
that location every 5 minutes and just
12:16
increment it by one so after doing a few
12:18
tests with different colors of different
12:19
time periods it looked extremely
12:21
straightforward it's like a four bite
12:22
count for each color looking at the
12:24
original data that was in it all the
12:26
colors apart from Green were reading
12:28
zero and the green was reading four
12:30
indicating a total 20 minutes run time
12:32
ever if it was turned on run for a short
12:34
time then turned off that might not have
12:36
been counted but even so indicates this
12:37
thing wasn't used a great deal the whole
12:40
s process of doing a run can be several
12:42
hours but it'll only be doing probably
12:43
the Imaging at the end of that so you
12:46
wouldn't expect to be running for a long
12:47
time but say a single color for 20
12:50
minutes over its whole lifetime does
12:52
seem a little bit on the low side okay
12:55
let's look at the camera un fortunately
12:57
I managed to not record any sound when I
12:58
did this it's also a couple of months
13:00
ago so there's going to be a few details
13:02
that I've forgotten so I'm just going to
13:04
dub this over the original footage so um
13:07
take the lid off see this massive great
13:10
heat sink so this is a pel cool camera
13:12
we've got this blower fan producing a
13:14
fair amount of air flow through
13:16
it the connector here there's the ccds
13:19
mounted on the board on the
13:24
right this unplugs so we've got a bit of
13:27
power supply stuff on here
13:29
USB interface I think that's the Cyprus
13:32
microcontroller High speeded USB
13:34
interface there's a zyink spon fpga some
13:40
RAM and there's a couple of ATD
13:42
converters can't quite read what those
13:45
those are but anal
13:47
devices um little bit of bodgery around
13:51
here extra decoupling obviously they
13:53
have having some noise issues this is
13:55
around the ram chip quite a lot of extra
13:57
capacitors been added there
13:59
uh there's a couple of amplifiers prior
14:01
to the HD converter buffers or Andor
14:05
amplifiers taking the CCD
14:08
signal um bit more power spy stuff here
14:11
this is probably all to do with
14:12
generating the various CCD bias voltages
14:14
they uh need quite a lot of exotic
14:18
voltages next board down is just a
14:20
shield and an interconnect
14:24
boardly shielding the power supply stuff
14:26
from some the more sensitive an log
14:28
stuff
14:31
and this is the bottom board which is
14:32
just all power supply
14:34
stuff as you can see tons of capacitors
14:37
or Transformer in
14:42
there and this is the CCD which is a uh
14:47
very impressive thing this is a kf50 100
14:50
originally by true sense then codec
14:53
there ON
14:54
Semiconductor it's 50 megapixels uh the
14:58
only price I could find was this one
15:00
5,000 bucks and the architecture you can
15:03
see there actually two separate halves
15:04
which explains the Dual AZ converters
15:06
and two amplifiers it's literally split
15:08
down the middle and duplicated so it's
15:10
outputting two streams in parallel just
15:13
to keep the bandwidth sensible and it's
15:15
got this amazing um diffraction effects
15:18
it's got micro lenses over the pixel so
15:20
there's there's a bit more Optics going
15:22
on than on a normal
15:25
sensor few more bodges on the CCD board
15:28
including this wire which isn't really
15:29
tacked down very well which is a bit uh
15:32
bit of a mess quite a few bits around
15:34
this board where they've uh tacked
15:36
various bits on which is not super
15:38
impressive looks like CCD drivers on the
15:40
left with those 3 ohm um damping
15:43
resistors on the
15:47
output get a few more little bodges
15:50
around here some of
15:52
the and there's this separator the
15:54
silica gel to keep the moisture down but
15:56
there's this separator that actually
15:58
appears to be cut from piece of
15:59
antistatic
16:04
bag and this sort of thermal block on
16:06
top of this stack of three pel Cola
16:12
modules so as with any Stacks they get
16:16
um larger as they go back towards the
16:18
heat sink because each P's got to not
16:20
only take the heat from the previous but
16:21
also the waste heat which is quite
16:27
significant you see a little temperature
16:29
sensor here that copper block which
16:32
makes contact with the back of the
16:37
CCD and this's the back of the
16:40
pelas this then contacts the heat sink
16:44
on the uh rear there a few thermal pads
16:46
as well for some of the other power
16:47
components on this
16:51
PCB okay I've connected this uh camera
16:54
up I found some drivers on the disc that
16:56
seem to work under Windows 7 couldn't
16:58
get to install under Windows 11 though
17:01
um in the absence of any sort of lens or
17:03
being bothered to the proper amount I've
17:04
just put some f over it and put a little
17:06
pin in there to make a pinhole lens and
17:08
software gives a few options I'm not
17:11
entirely sure what all these are there's
17:12
obviously a clock frequency 22 MHz low
17:15
gain and with PFG no idea what that is
17:19
something something game programmable
17:20
Something game perhaps ver exposure
17:23
types I think focus is just like a
17:25
continuous grab until you tell it to
17:27
stop not entirely sure all these options
17:30
are obviously exposure time uh triggers
17:33
there ex external hardware trigger inut
17:35
you just trigger using a um thing on
17:37
screen so the resolution is 8176 by
17:40
6132 and you can actually bin those
17:42
where you combine multiple pixels to get
17:46
increased gain at the expense of lower
17:48
resolution down this is a 10sec exposure
17:51
obviously of the pin hole it's very uh
17:53
intensitive so we just stand still now
17:56
downloading it there's the uh exposure
17:59
so when it's
18:01
um there's a little status thing down
18:03
here so that tells you the um exposure
18:07
[Applause]
18:09
time it's this is just it
18:15
downloading um it is quite I'm seeing
18:18
quite a lot like smearing I think that I
18:20
don't know whether that's just due to
18:21
pixels overloading or something else I
18:24
mean yeah it's not it's not um out of
18:26
the question that there's something not
18:27
totally right about this camera
18:28
certainly was bodge wise on there um I
18:31
don't I'd imagine a camera like this
18:32
it's got a fairly narrow range of
18:34
intensities that it's happy with I'm not
18:36
going to spend a great deal of time on
18:38
this if you're interested in this camera
18:40
maybe for astronomy or something and
18:42
happy to sort of take the risk of it may
18:44
not be uh perfect I'll um I think I'll
18:47
stick this on eBay along with the
18:48
Illuminator I'll put a link down in the
18:50
description to the listing take your
18:52
chances to grab a bargain so for example
18:54
here we see this vertical streaking so
18:56
I'm not sure how normal that is this is
18:58
on fairly bright scene looking out the
19:02
window if I cut the exposure time down
19:04
on that it's now 1 second
19:07
exposure again most of the image
19:09
disappears again this is looks like it's
19:11
possibly over still overloading here go
19:14
that go down to say say quarter a
19:16
second so again I think there might be
19:19
some Auto gain control going on here um
19:21
this is with the PFG option let's try
19:23
turning that off and see what
19:25
happens so I'm not sure this is actually
19:27
more streaking or which just it's
19:29
cranked up the gain all the dis display
19:31
gray scale to show what um you know the
19:33
range of things that it's captured
19:36
there's one of one of 12 things in the
19:38
software there's um you can see of you
19:40
can't seem to read out the temperature
19:42
of the pelta cooler but you can set the
19:44
temperature and if you said it's a
19:46
different temperature you see the power
19:48
consumption jump up running the cooler
19:50
to get the temperature you requested but
19:52
I can't see anything anywhere that tells
19:54
you whether the cool is at the at the
19:56
temperature other than the power
19:57
consumption going down and there's no
19:59
temperature read out
20:03
here and just some yeah this is just
20:05
sort of very basic software I'm sure
20:07
there's like an API for more
20:09
sophisticated
20:10
applications but so if you know anything
20:12
more about these cameras please um stick
20:14
in the
20:15
comments um incidentally when I was
20:18
editing I didn't notice there was a bent
20:19
pin on the um CCD but I did fix that
20:22
before doing these tests and also
20:24
reactivated the um silica gel desicant
20:26
cuz I noticed it was uh I was getting
20:28
bit of condensation on the window but um
20:31
yeah so a couple of uh interesting but
20:34
maybe not particularly uh useful pieces
20:37
of Kit except for someone that's got a
20:38
very specific use so um I'll stick a
20:42
I'll stick these on eBay put a link in
20:44
the description and say hopefully
20:45
someone could actually make some uh good
20:47
use of these things
Example Output:
**Abstract:**
This video presents Part 2 of a teardown focusing on the optical components of a Fluidigm Polaris biotechnology instrument, specifically the multi-wavelength illuminator and the high-resolution CCD camera.
The Lumen Dynamics illuminator unit is examined in detail, revealing its construction using multiple high-power LEDs (430nm, 475nm, 520nm, 575nm, 630nm) combined via dichroic mirrors and filters. A square fiber optic rod is used to homogenize the light. A notable finding is the use of a phosphor-converted white LED filtered to achieve the 575nm output. The unit features simple TTL activation for each color, conduction cooling, and internal homogenization optics. Analysis of its EEPROM suggests extremely low operational runtime.
The camera module teardown showcases a 50 Megapixel ON Semiconductor KAF-50100 CCD sensor with micro-lenses, cooled by a multi-stage Peltier stack. The control electronics include an FPGA and a USB interface. Significant post-manufacturing modifications ("bodges") are observed on the camera's circuit boards. Basic functional testing using vendor software and a pinhole lens confirms image capture but reveals prominent vertical streaking artifacts, the cause of which remains uncertain (potential overload, readout artifact, or fault).
**Exploring the Fluidigm Polaris: A Detailed Look at its High-End Optics and Camera System**
* **0:00 High-End Optics:** The system utilizes heavy, high-quality lenses and mirrors for precise imaging, weighing around 4 kilos each.
* **0:49 Narrow Band Filters:** A filter wheel with five narrow band filters (488, 525, 570, 630, and 700 nm) ensures accurate fluorescence detection and rejection of excitation light.
* **2:01 Customizable Illumination:** The Lumen Dynamics light source offers five individually controllable LED wavelengths (430, 475, 520, 575, 630 nm) with varying power outputs. The 575nm yellow LED is uniquely achieved using a white LED with filtering.
* **3:45 TTL Control:** The light source is controlled via a simple TTL interface, enabling easy on/off switching for each LED color.
* **12:55 Sophisticated Camera:** The system includes a 50-megapixel Kodak KAI-50100 CCD camera with a Peltier cooling system for reduced noise.
* **14:54 High-Speed Data Transfer:** The camera features dual analog-to-digital converters to manage the high data throughput of the 50-megapixel sensor, which is effectively two 25-megapixel sensors operating in parallel.
* **18:11 Possible Issues:** The video creator noted some potential issues with the camera, including image smearing.
* **18:11 Limited Dynamic Range:** The camera's sensor has a limited dynamic range, making it potentially challenging to capture scenes with a wide range of brightness levels.
* **11:45 Low Runtime:** Internal data suggests the system has seen minimal usage, with only 20 minutes of recorded runtime for the green LED.
* **20:38 Availability on eBay:** Both the illuminator and camera are expected to be listed for sale on eBay.
Here is the real transcript. Please summarize it:
00:00:01 Let's say you have a fight with your
00:00:01 girlfriend. You want to do the right
00:00:02 thing. So you go to chat GBT and you be
00:00:04 like, "This is exactly what happened.
00:00:05 Tell me what to do." And you go, "Babe,
00:00:07 I just want you to know I want to take
00:00:08 full accountability and I care about
00:00:09 this relationship." And she says, "Did
00:00:11 you get this answer from chat GBT?" And
00:00:12 you go, "I did." How's that going to go
00:00:15 now? You did everything right, but what
00:00:17 makes people beautiful is not that we
00:00:19 get everything right. It's that we get
00:00:21 many things wrong. And I think in the
00:00:22 modern world we live in, we forget that.
00:00:24 Simon Synynic is back. He's the
00:00:27 visionary thinker inspiring millions to
00:00:29 cultivate human connection, find their
00:00:30 purpose, and overcome any modern-day
00:00:33 challenges. So with AI, do you think it
00:00:35 really is cause for concern and deeper
00:00:37 thought? So I'm not in the AI business,
00:00:38 but I am in the humanity business. And
00:00:40 here's the problem that we never talk
00:00:42 about here. People keep telling us life
00:00:43 is not about the destination. Life is
00:00:45 about the journey. But when we think
00:00:47 about AI, we only think about the
00:00:48 destination. And it's remarkable ability
00:00:50 to write the book, paint the painting,
00:00:51 solve the problem. But we forget the
00:00:53 importance of doing the work yourself.
00:00:55 And I think in our modern day and age,
00:00:56 we have underrepresented the value of
00:00:58 struggle. I am smarter, better at
00:01:00 problem solving, more resourceful, not
00:01:02 because a book exists with my ideas in
00:01:04 it, but because I wrote it. That
00:01:06 excruciating journey is what made me
00:01:08 grow. But it's the same for love,
00:01:10 friendships, conflict. And I think that
00:01:12 we forget that we give up certain skills
00:01:14 or abilities because of technology. But
00:01:16 it's like saying AI will provide boats
00:01:18 for everyone except for the time there's
00:01:20 a storm and you don't know how to swim.
00:01:23 And unless we take personal
00:01:25 accountability to teach and learn human
00:01:27 skills, they will disappear. Sure, you
00:01:28 can have an AI friend and trained like
00:01:30 the best psychologist to affirm you, the
00:01:32 best listening skills that exist, but my
00:01:34 ability to know what to do when my
00:01:35 friend is struggling, my ability to
00:01:37 function in the world or my ability to
00:01:38 cope with stress. These very very human
00:01:40 skills are suffering. So what are the
00:01:43 other skills that we need to equip
00:01:44 ourselves with based on the way that the
00:01:46 world is heading? Two things. One
00:01:49 is this has always blown my mind a
00:01:51 little bit. 53% of you that listen to
00:01:54 the show regularly haven't yet
00:01:55 subscribed to the show. So, could I ask
00:01:57 you for a favor before we start? If you
00:01:59 like the show and you like what we do
00:02:00 here and you want to support us, the
00:02:02 free simple way that you can do just
00:02:03 that is by hitting the subscribe button.
00:02:05 And my commitment to you is if you do
00:02:07 that, then I'll do everything in my
00:02:08 power, me and my team, to make sure that
00:02:10 this show is better for you every single
00:02:12 week. We'll listen to your feedback.
00:02:13 We'll find the guests that you want me
00:02:15 to speak to and we'll continue to do
00:02:16 what we do. Thank you so much.
00:02:23 Simon,
00:02:23 good to see you again.
00:02:27 It's just familiar.
00:02:30 Familiar. It's so interesting because
00:02:31 when I sit down to talk to you, you're
00:02:33 one of the very few people that I don't
00:02:34 come with a preconception as to what
00:02:36 we're going to talk about. But but I I
00:02:38 come with a feeling and the feeling that
00:02:41 I bring forth is the feeling of change
00:02:44 and transition. I have lived for 32
00:02:47 years, but I don't think I can ever
00:02:49 think of a time where the future has
00:02:52 felt unclear, uncertain, scary,
00:02:56 exciting,
00:03:03 and I guess unknown. And I don't just
00:03:03 mean with with technology, but
00:03:05 technology is one protagonist in the
00:03:07 story, and there's many other social
00:03:08 stories playing out from politics to
00:03:11 relationships to all of these things. So
00:03:13 my first question to you Simon is what
00:03:15 are those things? What are the biggest
00:03:17 forces of changes that you see happening
00:03:19 at the moment in all of our lives that
00:03:21 you think we should probably talk about
00:03:23 today? That is a big question and I
00:03:27 think one of the mistakes we make and
00:03:30 this is in general is we like things to
00:03:33 be very neatly organized. We like them
00:03:35 to be black and white. Yes or no, right
00:03:37 or wrong. And as you know the world is
00:03:41 messier than that. It is more nuanced
00:03:43 than that. And nothing operates in a
00:03:45 vacuum. Everything is connected to
00:03:46 everything. Especially in a in a world
00:03:49 that's filled with this rising
00:03:52 technology called the internet and this
00:03:53 burgeoning technology called the social
00:03:55 media and desires and feeling like
00:03:58 belonging become more and more
00:04:00 important. We're struggling to find
00:04:01 them. Loneliness epidemic, stress
00:04:03 epidemic, suicide epidemics. These are
00:04:05 all feelings of disconnection, lack of
00:04:06 control, and loneliness. And so that
00:04:09 only exaggerates our feeling of
00:04:10 loneliness and despair. and wanting more
00:04:12 and etc etc etc and then you add in AI
00:04:15 and now those feelings of insecurity are
00:04:17 just exaggerated like crazy right so now
00:04:21 I find AI there's an irony to AI right
00:04:24 so if you go back to the 70s and 80s
00:04:27 right you had the rise of robotics and
00:04:29 so robots are now coming into our
00:04:31 factories and we're able to cut
00:04:35 employees by dramatic amounts and we put
00:04:39 people out on the street who They're
00:04:41 they worked in a factory, their their
00:04:43 father worked in a factory, their
00:04:44 father's father worked in a factory.
00:04:45 Like this is this is what they know. And
00:04:47 they say, "But these robots are
00:04:48 changing. They're taking our jobs." And
00:04:52 the ruling classes and the and the Wall
00:04:54 Street classes and the CEO classes, they
00:04:56 go, "Yeah, I know technology. You're
00:04:59 going to have to find a new skill.
00:05:00 Reskll. Reskill. That's what you have to
00:05:02 do to reskill." Okay. Flash forward to
00:05:03 AI. Here's where the irony comes in
00:05:05 because the world is always nature pours
00:05:07 vacuum and life seeks balance at all
00:05:09 times, right? Not always immediately,
00:05:11 but it seeks balance at all times. It's
00:05:13 always seeking equilibrium. Okay, so
00:05:15 flash forward to AI. Now you hear the
00:05:18 knowledge workers. It's the knowledge
00:05:21 workers who are going, "My job. It's the
00:05:23 coders. It's the finance people. My job,
00:05:28 the plumber is not worried about AI at
00:05:31 all. the baggage handler at the airport.
00:05:34 Here's zero about AI. And so maybe the
00:05:37 right response is it's the future, man.
00:05:40 It's technology. Reskill, res-kill, you
00:05:42 know, maybe maybe become a plumber, you
00:05:45 know. By the way, money's really good.
00:05:46 You get to work for yourself if you
00:05:48 want, you know. Um, so I just find the
00:05:51 pendulum kind of funny. With AI, do you
00:05:54 think it's overblown or do you think it
00:05:56 really is cause for concern and deeper
00:05:59 thought? The honest answer is I don't
00:06:03 know.
00:06:04 Everybody falls on one side of you're
00:06:07 over you're over you're you know the sky
00:06:09 is not falling ch chicken little or the
00:06:12 sky is falling and we're all going to
00:06:13 die. Right. The truth the truth like
00:06:16 most things is probably somewhere in the
00:06:18 middle. But the the real answer is I
00:06:21 don't know and neither does anybody
00:06:22 else. Yeah. And it seems that we should
00:06:25 have some sort of controls because we
00:06:26 didn't put any controls on the internet.
00:06:28 They did put controls on the internet in
00:06:30 China. Like children don't have the same
00:06:33 access to uh social media like kids do
00:06:36 here. Europe has controls on the
00:06:39 internet and America doesn't. And we're
00:06:42 the ones that seem to be suffering more
00:06:44 because of the lack of controls on the
00:06:47 internet. So I think some some And by
00:06:51 the way, when people, you know, talk
00:06:52 about deregulation and no controls, I
00:06:53 mean, they make us wear seat belts in
00:06:55 our cars. Yeah. you know, there's
00:06:57 nothing that we have speed limits, you
00:06:59 know, and and it's for the greater good.
00:07:02 And yeah, sure, your seatelt's
00:07:03 uncomfortable, but you'll get used to
00:07:04 it, like, and it's fine, you know. So, I
00:07:08 I think the call for no reform is is
00:07:11 wrong. Um, there are correct limits to
00:07:14 keep things safe. I am fascinated by AI,
00:07:18 both the benefits and the weaknesses of
00:07:20 it. But it is revealing to me
00:07:25 something more important than what other
00:07:28 people are talking
00:07:30 about which is we are uh we're a result
00:07:34 obsessed society right
00:07:38 we care about output we care about
00:07:39 performance we care about numbers we
00:07:41 care about final product more than
00:07:43 anything right and when people talk
00:07:45 about AI they talk about its remarkable
00:07:48 ability to write the symphony paint the
00:07:50 painting
00:07:51 write the book, write the article, uh,
00:07:54 solve the problem. Like it it is. And by
00:07:57 the way, the technology is incredible. I
00:08:00 asked only a few months ago to please
00:08:02 take this and put it in the style of me
00:08:04 and it was it was fine. I did it with a
00:08:07 friend of mine who's also an author and
00:08:08 we both did it for ourselves. We did it
00:08:10 on each other. It was really fun and it
00:08:12 was fine. I don't think it was good. It
00:08:14 was it was it gave me a good start and I
00:08:16 could edit it. I did it recently. We
00:08:18 both did it. It was damn near flawless.
00:08:21 It was It was scary good.
00:08:25 Right now, AI doesn't know the thing I'm
00:08:28 thinking about. It doesn't know that the
00:08:29 next book I'm going to write about is
00:08:30 friendship. It doesn't know the point of
00:08:31 view I'm going to have on friendship. If
00:08:32 you ask it what would Simon Synynic say
00:08:34 about friendship, it's going to be why
00:08:35 this and why that, you know? So, it's
00:08:37 derivative, right? We know that. It's
00:08:38 not original. We know that. But at the
00:08:41 end of the day, the work is good. The
00:08:42 symphony is good. The art is good. The
00:08:43 article is good. The book is decent.
00:08:45 Like, it's getting better and better and
00:08:46 better. But here's the problem that we
00:08:48 keep not talking about. People keep
00:08:50 telling us that life is not about the
00:08:53 destination. Life is about the journey.
00:08:55 That's what we keep being told.
00:08:57 Right? But when we think about AI, we
00:09:00 only think about the destination. We
00:09:01 only think about the output. We never
00:09:02 think about the input. Right? I can tell
00:09:05 you that and you and I can both say the
00:09:07 same thing which is I am
00:09:10 smarter, better at problem
00:09:13 solving, more resourceful, better at
00:09:16 pattern pattern recognition, not because
00:09:18 an a book exists with my ideas in it,
00:09:21 but because I wrote it. The excruciating
00:09:24 pain of organizing ideas, putting them
00:09:27 in a linear fashion, trying to put them
00:09:30 in a way that other people can
00:09:31 understand what I'm trying to get out of
00:09:32 my brain. That excruciating journey is
00:09:35 what made me
00:09:37 grow. And sure, you can have an AI
00:09:39 friend and that AI friend has been
00:09:41 trained like the best best psychologist
00:09:44 to affirm you the best listening skills
00:09:46 that exist. Tell me about your day. That
00:09:49 sounds difficult. Boy, it's hard being
00:09:51 you. Oh my god, it's so great being you.
00:09:52 Have you, you know, like it's it's a
00:09:54 it's an affirmation machine built by a
00:09:57 for-profit company that wants you to
00:09:59 stay on. Can't neglect that.
00:10:02 but for the fact that nobody's learning
00:10:04 how to be a
00:10:05 friend. It'll feel good. You'll feel
00:10:07 like you have a friend, but you're not
00:10:09 learning to be a friend. Right. And it's
00:10:12 the what made you a great entrepreneur
00:10:15 is not that the company exists. Is that
00:10:17 you built it with your hands and you've
00:10:19 got the scars to show for it. Yeah. It
00:10:22 was when things went wrong and you were
00:10:23 forced to fix them. And think that now
00:10:26 when problems show up, you're quick,
00:10:28 you're smarter. You're a much smarter
00:10:30 businessman now than you were five years
00:10:33 ago, six years ago. Yeah. Because you
00:10:36 did it. And I think what we're
00:10:38 forgetting is that there's something to
00:10:39 be said for, and by the way, I'm a fan
00:10:41 of AI. I want AI to make things, but I
00:10:44 would hate to lose out on becoming a
00:10:47 better version of me. And I think that
00:10:50 um to really learn to grow. And by the
00:10:54 way, I used to have a steel trap for
00:10:56 phone numbers. I knew everybody's phone
00:10:58 number and then all of a sudden my
00:11:00 phone, my
00:11:02 PDA, I don't need to memorize a phone
00:11:04 number anymore. I don't know most of the
00:11:06 people that I love. I don't know their
00:11:07 phone numbers. I type their name in,
00:11:10 right? I just have to know their name.
00:11:11 And so my brain literally went on
00:11:13 strike. It said, "Fine, fine. You no
00:11:16 longer have the capacity to remember
00:11:17 phone numbers and I can't remember phone
00:11:19 numbers to save my life." Right? So we
00:11:21 give up certain skills or abilities
00:11:23 because of technology regularly, right?
00:11:26 That's fine. I don't have a problem with
00:11:28 any of those things because whether I
00:11:29 can remember a phone number or not will
00:11:31 not affect my relationships, my ability
00:11:33 to function in the world, or my ability
00:11:34 to cope with stress. But my ability to
00:11:38 know what to do when my friend is
00:11:41 struggling. My ability to know what to
00:11:43 do when I have a fight with my
00:11:46 spouse, my or my partner. My ability to
00:11:50 know what to do when my boss yells at
00:11:52 me, but I don't want to escalate it
00:11:55 or my employee is acting out and I don't
00:11:58 want to escalate it or fire them. Well,
00:12:01 how do I resolve this? I've missed out
00:12:03 on those skills. and simply asking AI
00:12:06 how should I resolve this thing it'll
00:12:08 give you an answer and it may work and
00:12:09 you've learned nothing right and so it's
00:12:12 the difference between it's it's it's
00:12:14 like saying AI will provide boats for
00:12:17 everyone except for the time there's a
00:12:20 storm and you don't know how to
00:12:22 swim and I'm okay use the boat also
00:12:27 learn to swim so I think there's
00:12:28 something to be said for writing your
00:12:29 own symphony painting your own painting
00:12:33 building your own business, you know,
00:12:36 writing your own book, not for them, not
00:12:38 for the output, not for the output, for
00:12:41 your personal growth. Before I got here
00:12:44 today, I was writing a post for LinkedIn
00:12:47 and I was trying to make the case that
00:12:49 everybody using Chat GPT to write their
00:12:52 emails, their social media posts, their
00:12:54 investment pitches that I
00:12:56 received is now making the internet feel
00:12:59 really inauthentic because people that I
00:13:02 want I knew for many many years are now
00:13:04 sending me these perfect cookie cutter
00:13:06 emails with words that I've never heard
00:13:08 them use before. Yeah, of course. And so
00:13:10 when I read it, my brain mentally
00:13:11 discounts it as not being their opinion,
00:13:14 not actually being them. Yeah. And and
00:13:16 when you feel like you're speaking to
00:13:17 someone's AI, the meaning is gone. So I
00:13:20 I was writing this post about how
00:13:21 actually now there's this premium on
00:13:24 human written language. Like if you make
00:13:25 a couple of mistakes and you use the old
00:13:28 words, you don't use words like forged
00:13:30 and robust. I'd like to forge a
00:13:33 partnership with you, Stephen.
00:13:35 Furthermore, can we I'm like you you've
00:13:37 never said that to me, mate.
00:13:39 So, the the end dashes. Oh my gosh. It's
00:13:42 funny, right? It's crazy. Yeah. But you
00:13:45 but you're talking about what you're
00:13:46 talking about. Have you ever heard of
00:13:48 the Japanese concept of um uh uh
00:13:52 wabishabi? No. So, wabishabi is a
00:13:55 Japanese design concept which is beauty
00:13:57 in that which is temporary or imperfect.
00:14:00 Okay. So, have you ever seen Japanese
00:14:02 ceramics? Yeah. They're wonky or the the
00:14:05 the glaze is not even. Yeah. And they're
00:14:07 beautiful. You know why? Because they're
00:14:09 handmade. Tree bark. Trees. You know
00:14:12 when you have a wooden bowl, wood is
00:14:15 beautiful. Why? It's
00:14:17 imperfect, right? Think and unique.
00:14:20 Things made on a machine are the same
00:14:24 and less beautiful. And things made by
00:14:27 hand are beautiful because they're
00:14:30 imperfect. What makes people beautiful
00:14:33 is not that we get everything right.
00:14:36 It's that we get many things wrong. And
00:14:38 what makes us fall in love is not the
00:14:41 person who's perfect. It's the person
00:14:42 who accepts our imperfections. And we
00:14:44 know we're in love when we learn to
00:14:46 accept theirs. Not learn to want to.
00:14:49 Right. And you're 100% right. I now know
00:14:52 in the art world, artists are being
00:14:54 asked to sign affidavit that say, "I
00:14:58 painted this. I made this." Not AI. Not
00:15:03 because it's better or worse. It's
00:15:06 because I want to know it was touched by
00:15:07 human hands. And so I think you're
00:15:10 right. What will happen is everything
00:15:12 will be so perfect that it'll be as if
00:15:15 we're all driving or using things that
00:15:19 everything came off a conveyor belt. And
00:15:22 what we will start to desire is things
00:15:24 that are made by hand. Because by the
00:15:26 way, we think Rolls-Royce, Ferrari. You
00:15:29 takes 39 months to get a Ferrari. You
00:15:31 know why? It was made by hand. Yeah.
00:15:34 Right. And one of the things that makes
00:15:36 it expensive is the technology and the
00:15:37 carbon fiber and all that, but the other
00:15:39 thing is it's slow and it was made by
00:15:41 people. Human error. The value of human
00:15:44 error. The value of human error. Scooter
00:15:46 Brawn said to me the other day, he said,
00:15:48 um, we could watch a computer play chess
00:15:52 with another computer. He goes, but the
00:15:54 the chess games that have the highest
00:15:56 demand are one human versus another.
00:15:58 Because when a computer plays a
00:15:59 computer, the moves are predictable and
00:16:01 they're the same and they're perfect.
00:16:02 But it's the human error of two human
00:16:04 chess players who are worse, objectively
00:16:06 worse at chess that makes it so
00:16:07 fascinating. It's that's any sporting
00:16:10 event, any sporting event. It's not the
00:16:12 perfection of the game. It's the error
00:16:14 that loses the game that adds the drama.
00:16:16 And and and it's like trying not to make
00:16:19 a mistake is as powerful as trying to
00:16:21 get everything right. And it's the
00:16:22 humanity of the sport, the humanity of
00:16:24 the competition. It is the imperfection.
00:16:26 And I think that we forget as people
00:16:27 what makes us beautiful. Like when you
00:16:29 go on a first date or a first interview,
00:16:33 all you do is present perfection.
00:16:36 Put on my my best clothes, you know,
00:16:39 dressed up. I I don't dress like this
00:16:41 every day. I dressed up on my date,
00:16:43 right? My interview. I don't wear this.
00:16:46 This is what I wore for my interview cuz
00:16:47 I want to put out a good impression. And
00:16:49 I practiced I and I and I make myself
00:16:52 confident and I've got a great job and I
00:16:54 got a great personality and I love my
00:16:55 mother and my goodness, everything's
00:16:56 great. And then you get in the
00:16:58 relationship, you get the job, and you
00:16:59 become a slob, right? This is what AI
00:17:02 is. It's it's it's to your point, it's
00:17:06 it's it's
00:17:07 fake. On the interview example, the
00:17:09 minute you started describing that, I
00:17:11 immediately flashed back to an interview
00:17:12 I had last week in our company where a
00:17:14 young kid walks in wearing a suit and I
00:17:16 thought, now I have no idea who you are
00:17:19 because I know that's not you. I know
00:17:21 that you don't wear a suit. You're 22
00:17:23 years old. You do not wear a suit. So I
00:17:26 have no indication. I have no clues as
00:17:28 to who you are and therefore it's harder
00:17:30 for me to figure out if you fit here.
00:17:32 And I think of because what he tried to
00:17:34 do there was show up perfect how he what
00:17:37 he thought perfect was and in some ways
00:17:39 to hide who he actually was. Whereas
00:17:41 this is why I like now on the internet
00:17:43 sloppy text. I like grammatical
00:17:44 mistakes. But you at the same time you
00:17:46 don't want him to show up and put his
00:17:48 feet on kick his shoes up and put his
00:17:49 feet on the table either. In the same
00:17:50 way that there's an element of respect
00:17:52 you want and you want somebody in that
00:17:54 first interview to put on some effort.
00:17:56 Too much effort, yeah, is pretty
00:17:59 inauthentic, but too little effort,
00:18:02 what's that? This is my diagram. You've
00:18:04 got perfect Yeah. on one end, which is
00:18:07 low, and then you've got poor, which is
00:18:09 also low. The sweet spot Yeah. is right
00:18:11 here in the middle. Yeah. Well, I think
00:18:13 there's some truth to that. And so
00:18:15 there's a level of, you know, like it's
00:18:17 the same thing as like we all want
00:18:18 vulnerability in our relationships, but
00:18:19 not on the first date. Yeah. like I
00:18:22 don't need to know that quite yet. You
00:18:25 know, what are the other skills that you
00:18:27 think we need to equipped ourselves with
00:18:29 based on the way that the world is
00:18:31 heading? Because we're, you know, like
00:18:33 the calculator came along and we no
00:18:34 longer needed to be able to do
00:18:36 complicated maths. Completely forgotten
00:18:38 my time tables. I can't spell anymore.
00:18:40 So, I I said to my friends, the most I
00:18:41 can do is 9* 9. That's like the top end
00:18:43 of my range. But with spelling, it's the
00:18:46 same. I get like half the word correct
00:18:48 now with it. But again, you know, so
00:18:51 what are those skills? I think it's all
00:18:53 human skills. I think there needs So I
00:18:54 think where the world is going to go and
00:18:56 at least this is where I'm taking a bet
00:18:58 is that as the end product becomes
00:19:01 easier to produce, it's the humanity
00:19:03 that's going to suffer. And unless we
00:19:06 take personal accountability both as
00:19:08 individuals and organizations to teach
00:19:10 and learn human skills, they will
00:19:12 disappear for all the reasons we're
00:19:13 talking about. So how do I listen? How
00:19:17 do I hold space? How do I resolve
00:19:20 conflict peacefully? How do I give and
00:19:22 how do I receive feedback? Those are all
00:19:24 two different skills. How do I have an
00:19:27 effective confrontation? You pissed me
00:19:28 off. Do I know how to approach you as a
00:19:31 friend, as a colleague without creating
00:19:34 a massive fight or losing a friendship
00:19:36 over it? Um, how to take accountability,
00:19:38 how to express empathy. these skills,
00:19:41 these very very human skills are the
00:19:43 things that we're already starting to
00:19:44 see just with the internet and social
00:19:46 media um are suffering. And so I think
00:19:49 AI will only exaggerate the loss of
00:19:51 those skills and those skills are more
00:19:53 important than learning how to spell.
00:19:55 One of the concerning things was I heard
00:19:57 Sam Alman who's the founder of OpenAI
00:19:59 and ChatPT launch this thing called
00:20:01 Worldcoin a couple of years ago when
00:20:03 chatt really started taking off and it
00:20:06 has been closely tied to the concept of
00:20:08 universal basic income. Mhm. The idea
00:20:11 the overarching idea is that in a world
00:20:13 where AI and automation eliminate many
00:20:16 jobs UBI may be necessary worldcoin is
00:20:20 one way to help implement it. That was
00:20:22 stated by the founder of chachi Samman.
00:20:25 Yeah, I just again I'll go back to my
00:20:26 ironic statement before. Isn't it ironic
00:20:29 that they want to do a universal income,
00:20:31 standard universal income now that the
00:20:33 knowledge workers are losing their jobs,
00:20:34 but when the factory workers were losing
00:20:36 their jobs, those same people were
00:20:39 massively against uh uh these kinds of
00:20:42 things. So, I mean, yes, what happens to
00:20:46 purpose? It's ironic. And meaning if
00:20:48 we're being because for anybody that
00:20:49 doesn't know what universal basic income
00:20:51 is, the idea is the government, the
00:20:52 state, whatever would pay you a certain
00:20:54 amount of money every single minimum
00:20:55 salary. So $2,000, $3,000, whatever it
00:20:58 might be. Um because they don't think
00:21:01 many of us are going to have there's not
00:21:03 going to be enough jobs to go around.
00:21:04 And I wonder what happens to purpose and
00:21:06 meaning and pursuit and challenge and
00:21:08 all these things in a world where we're
00:21:10 just being handed money. So we're not
00:21:12 being given wealth. There's a
00:21:14 difference. we're being given survival
00:21:17 money, right? And so, you know, you
00:21:20 know, we have to be very careful that
00:21:21 says, you know, everybody who's on
00:21:22 welfare is lazy. You know, that's not
00:21:24 true, you know. So, we have to be very
00:21:26 careful that just because we give
00:21:27 somebody something doesn't mean that
00:21:29 they cease to have ambition or purpose
00:21:31 or drive. It's like somebody who who
00:21:34 makes a a commission salary, commission,
00:21:36 you know, works on commission and they
00:21:37 make just enough to pay their rent and
00:21:39 buy food and that's it. Like, that's a
00:21:42 loss that's a lack of ambition. you
00:21:44 know, the cases, at least the people
00:21:47 I've heard talk about it, they make a
00:21:48 compelling case for it, especially in a
00:21:50 world where there is plenty of wealth.
00:21:53 Um, but you know, I don't know enough
00:21:55 about it to make an argument for or
00:21:57 against it, if I'm honest. Um, but I do
00:21:59 find it ironic that the Sam Olman's of
00:22:02 the world are calling for it given the
00:22:03 fact that there's going to be so many
00:22:04 job losses when it's jobs of their kind.
00:22:07 And like I also think that's funny like
00:22:09 what's going to happen when Sam
00:22:12 Altonman's product gets good enough that
00:22:14 he can lay off most of his
00:22:17 staff. Just
00:22:19 curious what
00:22:22 happens. He has made a point of having I
00:22:26 think it's 100 people or less in his
00:22:28 company. He doesn't have like a big
00:22:31 team. And I think part of that is
00:22:32 because when I heard his TED talk a
00:22:33 couple of days ago, he's saying, "Yeah,
00:22:34 I think AGI is sooner than we think
00:22:36 actually." And I think we're gonna have
00:22:38 a fast takeoff, which means it's going
00:22:40 to arrive very quickly and accelerate
00:22:42 very quickly. So I think he's actually
00:22:43 preparing not to. Yeah. But when happen
00:22:45 what happens to the 90 people he lays
00:22:46 off when he doesn't need 100, he only
00:22:49 needs 10. This is the question. I'm just
00:22:51 curious. I don't know. And this is why
00:22:53 anybody who has an opinion about it, the
00:22:54 answer is we don't know. But I think
00:22:56 people react very differently when it's
00:22:58 their job on the line, when it's their
00:23:00 income on the line, when it's their
00:23:02 pride, when it's their ego. You know, I
00:23:06 keep hearing from companies. I mean, you
00:23:08 we were talking about this before we
00:23:10 turned on the cameras. You know, you
00:23:12 know, you talk to if you want a new
00:23:14 website, I guarantee you I I don't care
00:23:16 which company you talk to, they will all
00:23:18 talk about how they're AI this, AI that.
00:23:21 And you ask the question, are you using
00:23:22 AI? Yes, we're using AI. We're doing it
00:23:24 differently. we're the future, blah blah
00:23:26 blah. And then you ask them for a
00:23:27 proposal. It's going to look like all
00:23:29 the other proposals from
00:23:31 2015, you know, and this is how many
00:23:34 hours it's going to take our people to
00:23:35 program this and code this. And I was
00:23:37 like, what happened to all the AI? Why
00:23:39 is this slow and expensive when
00:23:42 everything's supposed to be fast and
00:23:43 inexpensive? Because they're taking the
00:23:45 margin. Of course, they're taking the
00:23:47 margin. and and they've got a lot of
00:23:48 people doing things the oldfashioned way
00:23:50 because the business model, you know, pe
00:23:52 people work very hard to predict the
00:23:54 status quo exists because there are
00:23:56 people who benefit from the status quo,
00:23:58 you know, that's why there is a status
00:24:00 quo and it's uh and you know, like I
00:24:02 said, everybody's into change the
00:24:04 future, you know, until it's until it's
00:24:07 them that's threatened or their income.
00:24:10 the the billionaires that I that I know,
00:24:12 the one consistent thing they've
00:24:13 whispered to me about AI is that people
00:24:17 are going to have a lot of free time.
00:24:18 That's one of the things that's been
00:24:19 really consistent. You're so right when
00:24:21 you say that when I asked you about the
00:24:22 future of AI, you said, "I don't know."
00:24:24 The reason why I know that's probably
00:24:25 the correct answer generally is because
00:24:27 when I sat with the most advanced people
00:24:28 in AI, whether it's Mustafa who's head
00:24:30 of Microsoft AI, now CEO of Microsoft AI
00:24:33 or people from Google or the CEO of
00:24:36 Google or Reed Hoffman who's the founder
00:24:38 of LinkedIn, they all had different
00:24:40 opinions, which made me to think
00:24:43 actually the right answer is nobody
00:24:44 knows. The right answer is nobody. That
00:24:46 is correct. And and and you always be be
00:24:48 be aware of the messenger, right? Like
00:24:49 you won't have anybody who owns an AI
00:24:51 company talking doomsday scenarios. it's
00:24:54 not in their economic interest even if
00:24:56 they secretly harbor that. It's like
00:24:57 people who used to run cigarette
00:24:59 companies didn't smoke and let they
00:25:00 didn't let their family smoke. It's like
00:25:02 I remember visiting Facebook in the
00:25:04 earlier days and they I went into the
00:25:07 cafeteria and they had like like picnic
00:25:10 benches and I was like and they were
00:25:13 telling me with pride how they have
00:25:14 these communal eatings areas to help
00:25:16 people maintain relationship and I was
00:25:19 like this is hilarious. You literally
00:25:21 have a product that breaks relationships
00:25:23 and yet you understand enough to make
00:25:25 people eat together at lunchtime so that
00:25:27 they'll maintain relationship. I mean
00:25:30 the point being if your economic
00:25:31 interest, you know, show me how
00:25:33 someone's paid and I'll show you how
00:25:34 they behave. You know, one of the
00:25:35 scarest conversations I was privy to was
00:25:38 one a friend of mine who's a billionaire
00:25:40 in London, he knows the CEO of one of
00:25:43 the biggest air companies in the world
00:25:44 who I can't name. And he said, "By the
00:25:46 way, what he tells me in private is not
00:25:48 what he's saying publicly." Yeah. I he
00:25:50 he said to me that what this particular
00:25:52 CEO thinks is going to happen with AI is
00:25:54 pretty horrific. And the CEO of this big
00:25:57 AI company is totally cool with it. It's
00:25:59 it's and it's horrific what he thinks is
00:26:00 about to happen. And then when I watched
00:26:02 this guy do his like online talks and
00:26:04 give his opinion. He's so nuanced and
00:26:07 everything will be fine and he's an AI
00:26:08 optimist. Then I heard this scenario at
00:26:10 this kitchen table in East London from
00:26:12 his friend about what he really thinks
00:26:13 and it was chilling. Yeah. Like actually
00:26:16 the lack of empathy. Yeah, that makes
00:26:18 sense to me. But like the obsession with
00:26:21 power was shocking to me. Yeah. The
00:26:24 obsession with power and money and all
00:26:25 the rest of it. Yeah. But this is
00:26:27 because the internet has done something
00:26:29 really strange and and challenged one of
00:26:32 my theories head on, right? So I talk
00:26:35 about in an infinite game, you know, Jim
00:26:38 Jim Carse his theory, you know, in an
00:26:40 infinite game there's no winners or
00:26:42 losers, right? And so like nobody wins,
00:26:45 you know, fast food, nobody wins cars.
00:26:49 Like General Motors, Ford, Vauhall, they
00:26:52 can all exist at the same time, right?
00:26:55 And they'll have degrees of success or
00:26:56 not success, but they can all exist
00:26:58 simultaneously. No, nobody's going to
00:27:00 win. The exception is in the internet,
00:27:02 in in the like like
00:27:05 Amazon, it won. Yeah. Like you know,
00:27:08 Google for search. Yep. They won, right?
00:27:12 And if you start going down like the big
00:27:14 big tech companies, there is only one. I
00:27:17 mean, sure, there's competition, but not
00:27:18 really, right? Who, you know, Walmart is
00:27:22 making a run of it to threaten Amazon,
00:27:23 but Amazon's still so damn big. You
00:27:26 know, all of these companies that
00:27:27 there's only one.
00:27:29 And that's not good. That you can't have
00:27:33 winners in a in a category. And so, this
00:27:35 is why I think the the race for AI is so
00:27:38 aggressive, for AI dominance is so
00:27:40 aggressive. And which is why people are
00:27:42 not being careful and which is why
00:27:43 they're not putting controls is because
00:27:45 the way that tech seems to work is there
00:27:48 probably will be one dominant standard
00:27:50 and then that's it. And the question is
00:27:52 which one? Because I don't think it just
00:27:55 seems to be the way it is, which is a
00:27:57 very scary prospect to me that the the
00:27:59 fact that we can have winners is is a
00:28:01 bad thing. Especially if we if we pride
00:28:03 ourselves on being capitalists, then
00:28:05 there cannot be there cannot be a winner
00:28:07 and there cannot be one that is so
00:28:08 dominant that that nobody else can even
00:28:10 compete except for scraps. What are your
00:28:13 emotions when you think about AI and
00:28:15 what's happening? because I I feel like
00:28:18 the moment we're living in is a profound
00:28:20 one and that we don't actually realize
00:28:21 it because when these tools come out,
00:28:23 OpenAI released yesterday 3.0. It's the
00:28:26 best model ever. The day after my life
00:28:28 was the same. So, we don't really notice
00:28:30 it cuz we go back to work, our clients
00:28:32 ask for the same thing. We have the same
00:28:33 team members sat around us. The it
00:28:35 almost seems like the sand timer is
00:28:37 rotated and we're on a clock and it's a
00:28:40 slow disruption of our everyday lives.
00:28:43 Sam Alman the other day on his TED talk
00:28:45 3 4 days ago said in the short term
00:28:47 everything will appear the same but in
00:28:49 the long term he goes life is going to
00:28:50 be completely different. Yeah, I think
00:28:51 that's right. I mean and look at any any
00:28:53 technology like the like AI it was kind
00:28:57 of the same until it wasn't and these
00:28:59 are evolutions not revolutions. Like
00:29:00 there's a revolutionary bit. Mhm. You
00:29:03 know, like I remember when when the
00:29:04 internet showed up and like brick and
00:29:06 internet shopping showed up and all the
00:29:08 technologists were like it's the end of
00:29:10 stores, it's the end of bricks and
00:29:11 mortar. Like they're done. Like we'll
00:29:12 never go to a shop again. Well, that
00:29:14 didn't happen. Now shops struggle to
00:29:16 compete against internet, but that's a
00:29:18 price thing, right? That's that's a
00:29:19 business model thing. But we like going
00:29:21 shopping because again, they've all of
00:29:23 these companies always forget,
00:29:24 especially technologists. They all
00:29:26 forget that the end user is a human
00:29:28 being. And most of us don't fully
00:29:31 understand everything. Even even our
00:29:33 iPhones, most people use a a small
00:29:36 percentage of all the capabilities of
00:29:37 our iPhones. Most of us don't even know
00:29:38 how to change the damn settings to make
00:29:40 it do something we want, right? Even and
00:29:43 you neither do your kids. It's not an
00:29:45 adult thing, right? It's not an old
00:29:46 person thing. Like, and there's a few
00:29:49 people who get more out of it and good
00:29:51 for them. Some people use it just as a
00:29:53 phone. Fine. And it's a bell curve. So,
00:29:56 I think there will be a few people and a
00:29:58 few companies that will get more value
00:30:00 out of these things than the rest of us.
00:30:02 But I think he's right. I think there'll
00:30:04 be a revolutionary bit and then it'll
00:30:07 settle. I I I'm find this whole thing
00:30:10 fascinating when you ask me how do I
00:30:11 feel, you know, depending on what
00:30:13 subject I'm talking about. Absolute fear
00:30:16 and absolute amazement. I I I have I
00:30:19 have both and everything in between.
00:30:21 When I think about how it affects
00:30:22 democracy and the ability to make deep
00:30:24 fakes and and how it can manipulate
00:30:28 people and their opinions to vote one
00:30:29 way or another, I have real fear. Yeah.
00:30:33 Right. When it comes to like
00:30:35 productivity and the reshaping of
00:30:37 business, you know, technologists and
00:30:38 people who who were part of the internet
00:30:40 revolution, they love to say, you know,
00:30:42 20 years ago, 80% of the jobs we have
00:30:44 now didn't exist. They love to say that,
00:30:46 right? But when you ask them now they
00:30:48 they like they they they seem to think
00:30:51 that I think it's the same which is all
00:30:52 those people are going to lose those
00:30:53 jobs in white color you know white
00:30:55 collar jobs and knowledge workers I
00:30:58 they're not they're not going to not
00:30:59 work there's going to be new jobs the
00:31:01 IRS digitized a whole bunch of years ago
00:31:04 right they got rid of all the
00:31:05 accountants and they put in all the
00:31:06 computers right do you know how much
00:31:09 money the IRS saved when it when it
00:31:12 completely changed the the way it looked
00:31:14 the answer is zero yes they got rid of
00:31:16 all the accountants and they need to
00:31:17 hire all the IT people. So the the the
00:31:21 the workforce looked different but it
00:31:23 didn't get smaller. And so I think it's
00:31:26 the same thing what it's going we also
00:31:28 we already know the massive incredible
00:31:31 amounts of
00:31:32 energy that it takes for AI to work.
00:31:35 Data centers that use up massive amounts
00:31:38 of electricity like we've never seen in
00:31:39 our lives. Like nuclear has to be a
00:31:42 thing. There isn't enough coal or oil or
00:31:45 solar or wind to power these things. It
00:31:48 just doesn't exist. So nuclear has to be
00:31:50 a thing. So go be a nuclear engineer. Go
00:31:53 you want to get an advanced degree. I
00:31:55 don't need you to be a coder. You know,
00:31:56 coding was a thing for a go be a nuke
00:31:59 because by the way, you got to be just
00:32:00 as smart to be a nuke as you have to be
00:32:02 a a a So you're going to start to see
00:32:05 that. You know, you're going to see
00:32:06 energy work. Um I just think the jobs
00:32:09 will change. I don't think they're going
00:32:11 to like I I completely one thing I do
00:32:13 disagree with, you know, it's not like
00:32:15 you're going to be a bunch of people
00:32:16 walking around bored. I just think the
00:32:18 jobs will change. If there was a a
00:32:20 10-year-old kid stood here now and the
00:32:22 10-year-old said to us said, "Guys, what
00:32:25 do you think I should focus on?" I would
00:32:28 say two things. Um uh one is going back
00:32:33 to human skills, learn how to be a good
00:32:34 friend to your friends. Okay. How do I
00:32:36 learn that? You're going to really need
00:32:37 that. How does a 10-year-old learn that?
00:32:39 Or how do you and I learn that? Both. A
00:32:41 10-year-old learns it that when they go
00:32:43 and have a play date at a friend's
00:32:44 house, a smart parent takes away all the
00:32:46 phones. I would hate that the
00:32:48 10-year-old has a phone in the first
00:32:49 place, but if they do, take away all the
00:32:50 phones and make the kids go play. That
00:32:54 when they have a fight, the parents make
00:32:56 them say sorry. You know, go over to
00:32:59 your friend's house and knock on the
00:33:01 door and you're going to say sorry for
00:33:02 the thing that you did. Um, we're going
00:33:04 to teach kids how to resolve conflict.
00:33:06 We're going to teach kids how to pay
00:33:07 compliments. We're going to teach kids
00:33:08 how to take accountability and these are
00:33:10 all the skills of you know what did you
00:33:13 do wrong versus what did your what what
00:33:15 you know like it's not like you
00:33:19 know it's not always the school or the
00:33:21 teacher maybe your kid did is disruptive
00:33:24 you know and so accountability is a real
00:33:26 thing and so I think if we teach those
00:33:28 things to 10-year-olds and to adults um
00:33:30 I think it makes for a better society
00:33:31 and the other thing is go learn a real
00:33:33 skill and I don't mean like that you
00:33:35 know prompting isn't a real skill That's
00:33:37 not what I mean. It's what I said
00:33:39 before, which is it's the excruciating
00:33:41 like what makes great relationships
00:33:43 great is not that you get along all the
00:33:45 time. The best marriages, the best
00:33:47 relationships, they're not absent of
00:33:49 conflict. It's they know how to resolve
00:33:52 conflict peacefully. By the way, I
00:33:54 believe in world peace. I don't believe
00:33:55 in a world without conflict. I believe a
00:33:57 world in which we can resolve our
00:33:58 conflict peacefully without the need to
00:34:00 go to war to resolve conflict. This is
00:34:01 why I like democracies because
00:34:03 democracies can solve conflict without
00:34:05 bullets. So I the human skills one but I
00:34:07 say a real skill mean like go do
00:34:09 something difficult build something
00:34:12 design something imagine something write
00:34:15 something and and and and by the way I'm
00:34:18 totally fine even if you plug it into
00:34:19 chat GBT and say tell me what's wrong
00:34:20 with this your grammar's all screwed up
00:34:23 you know and like I said
00:34:26 I I am smarter because I did it I'm the
00:34:32 reason I'm more confident than when I
00:34:35 was younger
00:34:36 And I think that's one of the things you
00:34:37 people talk about you get wise with age,
00:34:39 you know, and like and you know, you
00:34:41 have more confident as you get older and
00:34:43 and yes, that's all true and there's
00:34:45 multiple reasons for it, but I think one
00:34:47 of the reasons is is the things that are
00:34:48 happening to me
00:34:50 now. I've gone through those things
00:34:52 before. They were scary and kept me up
00:34:55 at night the first time and
00:34:58 now I know how to do it. I'm not afraid
00:35:00 of it anymore. And so I think what
00:35:03 happens as you gain experience is you
00:35:05 lose
00:35:07 fear. And if chat GBT or whatever AI
00:35:10 product we use does everything for us, I
00:35:12 think you just end up scared. One of the
00:35:15 things that I'm contending with at the
00:35:16 moment with this new technology that's
00:35:19 arrived, being an entrepreneur, seeing
00:35:22 this huge opportunity, thinking about
00:35:24 the dotcom boom and all the great
00:35:26 opportunity that that
00:35:28 created, people talking about the age of
00:35:31 abundance and all these things is I'm
00:35:32 contending with the question on a
00:35:34 personal level, which is when is enough
00:35:37 enough? And maybe this question is more
00:35:38 pertinent now than ever in a world where
00:35:40 creating stuff, building stuff, starting
00:35:42 a company, launching a book, the cost of
00:35:45 creating these things, whether they're
00:35:47 good or not so good, has gone to
00:35:49 basically zero. Yeah. So we can all
00:35:51 theoretically from our computers now
00:35:53 become movie directors and authors and
00:35:56 software developers. And so with this
00:35:59 possibility,
00:36:04 opportunity and the the thing we need to
00:36:04 deploy is intention like what do I do?
00:36:06 What is the thing that's going to lead
00:36:08 me to happiness? Do I pursue all of
00:36:10 these things and start building and
00:36:11 creating and running off down that path
00:36:12 to climb some ladder? Or do I take a
00:36:15 second? When is enough enough? And as an
00:36:17 entrepreneur who is in this moment, has
00:36:19 a lot of resources, could roll the dice,
00:36:21 could start all these new companies,
00:36:22 could do all of these things. When is
00:36:24 enough
00:36:26 enough?
00:36:35 like
00:36:35 we there's something to be said for
00:36:37 gratitude and if you want to make it
00:36:39 money we know the data on this right I
00:36:42 think once you reach I can't remember
00:36:43 the number it's $70,000 a year of
00:36:46 income like like when you're talking
00:36:49 about money you can't buy happiness like
00:36:50 it absolutely buys happiness up to a
00:36:52 certain level which is survival and then
00:36:54 a little bit more you know but once you
00:36:56 reach a certain level like the there is
00:36:58 no discernable increase in happiness
00:37:01 iness that comes with money. Now, what
00:37:03 money buys is options. You know, what
00:37:06 money buys is time. You know, um those
00:37:10 things are true. And you you said it
00:37:12 like some of the people that you and I
00:37:14 know who have made generational
00:37:18 wealth. They're not discernably happy.
00:37:20 The ones that are happier were happy
00:37:22 before they made the money. And the ones
00:37:25 who thought the money would buy them
00:37:26 happiness or worse, the money took away
00:37:29 their purpose. Because when they made
00:37:30 the money, they were driven by something
00:37:32 that they accidentally made the money.
00:37:34 They built businesses that were th those
00:37:36 were their passions and their cause and
00:37:38 then the money came and they weren't
00:37:40 building the thing anymore. And you know
00:37:44 this this is this is the difference is
00:37:45 like why this this is really
00:37:47 interesting. It also gets the question
00:37:49 is why is it that small companies are
00:37:50 more innovative than big companies,
00:37:52 right? Like you think about it when you
00:37:54 say what's the secret for for
00:37:55 innovation? where you want to have
00:37:56 resources, you want to have great
00:37:57 people, and you want to have great
00:37:58 market opportunities, and then you can
00:37:59 have great ideas. Okay? So, big
00:38:01 companies have tons of money. They hire
00:38:03 have all the best people. They have
00:38:04 mature uh marketplaces that people
00:38:06 generally know who they are, and they're
00:38:08 the least innovative organizations on
00:38:10 the planet, right? Then you have little
00:38:12 companies that have no money. They're
00:38:14 bootstrapping it. They don't have enough
00:38:15 people. Nobody knows who they are. And
00:38:16 there's [ __ ] market conditions. And yet,
00:38:18 they're more innovative. And then big
00:38:19 companies innovate by buying the little
00:38:21 companies. You know, that's basically
00:38:22 what happens. My exit. Your exit. big
00:38:25 company can't innovate, they just bought
00:38:26 you, right? Why is
00:38:29 that? Why is that the rule? And so it
00:38:32 goes directly to this. I think I think
00:38:33 the reason is is because when you're
00:38:35 small, your ambitions are bigger than
00:38:38 the resources you have to achieve those
00:38:40 ambitions. Every small business has
00:38:43 outsized ambitions, like beyond
00:38:46 objectively stupid. Like you look at
00:38:49 what they have and what they've got and
00:38:50 you they tell you where they're going to
00:38:51 be and you're just like no. And yet some
00:38:54 of them do. And I think the problem with
00:38:57 big companies is their ambitions are
00:38:58 well within their their capabilities,
00:39:01 their resources. In other words, their
00:39:02 vision isn't big enough. And I think
00:39:05 your vision has to be bigger than the
00:39:07 amount of money, resources, and
00:39:08 intelligence that you have to achieve
00:39:10 that. And what that produces is
00:39:12 creativity.
00:39:14 And so it goes right back to this, which
00:39:16 is if if if we can do so much with
00:39:20 AI, then we need bigger visions. And so
00:39:24 when you ask me how do you find
00:39:26 happiness, I think that we need to set
00:39:29 our sights on things that are bigger
00:39:30 than finite
00:39:32 success. Um, and I think we do need a
00:39:34 gratitude practice. Regardless of how
00:39:36 little or how much you have, to be
00:39:38 grateful for what you do have is a
00:39:41 profound impact. I went through this
00:39:42 with the LA fires, right? The I was very
00:39:46 lucky that my house survived and I
00:39:48 didn't have to get evacuated, but the
00:39:49 evacuation zones were getting closer and
00:39:51 closer. And two things happened that
00:39:54 were profound that live that I will that
00:39:57 live with me now. One which is
00:39:58 resolvable and one which is
00:39:59 unresolvable. We were all obsessed with
00:40:01 this app called Watch Duty, which is how
00:40:03 we track the fires. It basically took
00:40:05 all the publicly available information
00:40:06 and put it in one place in a really
00:40:08 amazing way, right? started by this
00:40:10 amazing amazing amazing entrepreneur
00:40:11 named John Mills. And we were all
00:40:14 obsessed with Watchd Duty. We all were
00:40:15 watch on this app the whole time. And
00:40:17 one of the things we were watching was
00:40:18 the wind cuz if the wind shifted, it
00:40:21 could profoundly impact your life. And I
00:40:24 remember having this experience like we
00:40:25 were all watching the wind and the wind
00:40:28 went away from me and I thought, "Oh,
00:40:31 thank God." And in that moment, I knew
00:40:34 that somebody was looking at the app
00:40:36 going, "Oh god, no."
00:40:38 And it's not like service where I'll eat
00:40:40 a little less so that somebody can eat
00:40:41 more. I'll give up some of my income so
00:40:42 that somebody has it's not one of those
00:40:44 I don't want my house to burn down so
00:40:45 somebody else's house doesn't burn down.
00:40:46 And I has I had to live with this
00:40:48 paradox of how unfair the world is that
00:40:51 simultaneously my relief and good news
00:40:53 was somebody was somebody else's stress
00:40:55 and bad news and there was nothing I
00:40:56 could do to change that. So that paradox
00:40:59 I is horrible and I it was it was right
00:41:02 in front of me. So that's one, but it's
00:41:04 the second part, which is the evacuation
00:41:07 zones were coming a little closer, and
00:41:09 they were one zone away from where where
00:41:11 I
00:41:12 live, and we didn't know if we were
00:41:14 going to be woken in the middle of the
00:41:16 night with a with an alarm to evacuate.
00:41:18 We didn't know. And so we had I had to
00:41:20 go through the process of packing up my
00:41:23 car and making my go bag. And I put as
00:41:26 much stuff in my car as I could. And I
00:41:27 had to, you know, we all play that game
00:41:28 like if there's a fire and you have to
00:41:29 run out and grab two things, what would
00:41:31 you grab? I had to do that. Right? A lot
00:41:33 of people in LA had to do that. Right?
00:41:35 You actually had to make the decisions,
00:41:37 what am I going to take and what I'm
00:41:38 going to leave behind. And I found
00:41:39 myself bringing things that I never
00:41:41 thought were important to me. And I
00:41:43 found myself leaving things behind that
00:41:46 I thought I would
00:41:47 take. But the one thing that was amazing
00:41:50 was stuff that I couldn't fit, but I
00:41:53 still had love for. Like my favorite
00:41:54 painting in the world. It's just I
00:41:56 couldn't fit it in my car. I stood there
00:41:58 in front of it and I said thank you and
00:42:01 I said
00:42:02 goodbye and it was like saying goodbye
00:42:04 to a loved one. You know, I hear this,
00:42:05 you know, somebody loses a parent, they
00:42:06 go, "Look, it was awful. And, you know,
00:42:08 he suffered as on his deathbed, but I'm
00:42:10 glad I was with him to say
00:42:12 goodbye." And it was the most amazing
00:42:15 thing to have gratitude for something
00:42:17 that I don't want to lose, but accepted
00:42:19 that
00:42:20 I I might.
00:42:23 And it's made me a lot more disconnected
00:42:27 from my material things, especially the
00:42:30 things I said goodbye to because I've
00:42:31 already said goodbye to them. I had I I
00:42:33 just sold some of my art for for charity
00:42:36 and people said, "How did you love your
00:42:37 art?" I'm like, "I know. Like my art's
00:42:39 like my babies." Like, "How did you
00:42:41 choose?" And I said, "I've already said
00:42:42 goodbye to everything here. I did it
00:42:44 months ago." You know, and I think this
00:42:46 idea of gratitude, gratitude for what we
00:42:49 have, but also
00:42:52 um like you're going to lose your
00:42:54 parents. All of us will lose our
00:42:56 parents. Hopefully. Hopefully.
00:42:58 Hopefully, uh they don't never have to
00:43:00 say goodbye to us. But we if things go
00:43:02 well, we're going to have to say goodbye
00:43:03 to our parents.
00:43:05 And we can't be angry about it. We want
00:43:08 to say thank you for the times we had.
00:43:11 And I think to have that level of
00:43:14 appreciation for everything in our
00:43:15 lives, how temporary all of this is, I
00:43:18 think that's it makes you happier. I
00:43:20 know it sounds I don't it's it makes you
00:43:24 happier to just look at someone and be
00:43:26 grateful. You know, failed
00:43:28 relationships. You could be angry at the
00:43:30 other person or you can be grateful for
00:43:32 the lessons they taught you and or for
00:43:34 the good times you had. And I think to
00:43:36 change our minds to gratitude and you
00:43:39 can, you know, it sounds it's a little
00:43:41 bit, you know, hippie dippy to have a
00:43:42 gratitude practice and that's fine. You
00:43:45 know, if that's your thing, lie in bed
00:43:46 every night or keep a journal and just
00:43:48 say the things you're grateful for.
00:43:51 But I don't know if it works without an
00:43:54 evacuation zone
00:43:56 approaching. I don't know. But to go
00:43:58 around your home and just say thank you
00:44:00 to the things that you like is a weird
00:44:03 thing. How many of us How many of us
00:44:06 when was the last time you called a
00:44:07 friend out of the blue and just said
00:44:10 thanks for being my friend? Like hey
00:44:14 just wanted to call and just tell you I
00:44:16 love you. Just tell you thank you and
00:44:18 you know that's all. No just a quick
00:44:22 just two minutes. Just just want to say
00:44:23 thank you for being my friend. I think
00:44:25 if I said that to one of my best friends
00:44:26 that think I was losing my mind or
00:44:28 something or that something was wrong,
00:44:29 they'd be so concerned because it's such
00:44:30 an unusual thing for me to have. Okay,
00:44:32 so you can do it this way. So, I had a
00:44:34 guest on the podcast and he came up with
00:44:36 this thing that is so outside of my
00:44:38 personality, but I'm going to try it.
00:44:40 Yeah, that would make sense. Then you
00:44:42 can do that. You know, I'm I'm new to
00:44:45 this. You know, I I know for years
00:44:47 people have been like, you should have a
00:44:48 gratitude practice and keep a gratitude
00:44:49 journal. And I tried it. I was like,
00:44:52 "Okay." Uh, I'm grateful for my sister,
00:44:55 grateful for what I've um for my family,
00:44:57 grateful for my friends, grateful for
00:44:59 the life that I live, right? Good night.
00:45:02 All right, next day. I'm grateful for my
00:45:04 sister, grateful for my family, grateful
00:45:06 for my friends, you know, and I found it
00:45:08 so repetitive that I was like, is this
00:45:11 worth it? Like, sure, like every now and
00:45:14 then something was different and new.
00:45:15 And I've come to come to the conclusion
00:45:17 like if it's the same three things every
00:45:20 single
00:45:21 day, it's good. I was thinking about
00:45:24 this a lot the other day when someone
00:45:25 asked
00:45:27 me, "Think about all the people in your
00:45:29 life and imagine if they were sick and
00:45:31 imagine if you had a billion dollars in
00:45:32 your bank and a billion dollars could
00:45:33 cure their
00:45:36 sickness." Like, who would you cure it
00:45:38 for? four, would you would you spend a
00:45:40 billion dollars to cure your your
00:45:42 girlfriend's sickness, your your
00:45:43 mother's sickness, your father's
00:45:44 sickness, your whatever, even if it was
00:45:47 the the the risk to them was was low?
00:45:49 And you would. I'd give every p penny I
00:45:51 had to cure an illness that my
00:45:53 girlfriend had, even if the risk was
00:45:54 low. And as I was thinking through that,
00:45:56 I was like, but then if you look at my
00:45:57 calendar and how I'm allocating my time
00:45:59 against these individuals and against my
00:46:01 priorities, there's a real imbalance
00:46:03 here. And over the last couple of weeks
00:46:04 in particular, I've been on a bit of a
00:46:05 journey of realizing just how
00:46:07 important four or five people in my life
00:46:10 are. I I uh how much I neglect them.
00:46:12 Yeah. I mean like of course I mean we
00:46:16 only when it's and it's you're right
00:46:18 like which is if you say give a billion
00:46:19 dollars and you can cure this disease
00:46:21 that affects you know two million
00:46:22 people, 10 million people, you'd be like
00:46:25 I'll give some money, right? But if it
00:46:28 was one family member, you would exhaust
00:46:30 every resource. You would quit your job.
00:46:32 you would do everything you can to for a
00:46:34 1% chance for for a 1% chance you know
00:46:37 and people do they quit their jobs when
00:46:39 and and be and like so many charities
00:46:41 have been started because my father died
00:46:43 my mother died my sister died my brother
00:46:45 died and now I've devoted my life to duh
00:46:47 right like like literally that's the
00:46:49 reason and it's because it's personal of
00:46:51 course that makes sense it's why why are
00:46:53 some entrepreneurs good and some
00:46:54 entrepreneurs bad well how personal is
00:46:56 the thing that you're working on to you
00:46:58 because then I only like to like the
00:47:00 entrepreneurs that I
00:47:02 I want to know that they are solving a
00:47:04 problem that they struggled with or that
00:47:06 somebody they love struggled with or
00:47:07 something if they they read an article
00:47:09 in a magazine they thought this is a
00:47:10 great market opportunity. There is no
00:47:12 passion there that is driven by money
00:47:14 and power only. I want to know somebody
00:47:16 that is it's so deeply personal to them
00:47:18 that they will stop at nothing. They
00:47:21 will run through a brick wall and find
00:47:22 every creative solution. And it goes
00:47:24 right back to the small company versus
00:47:27 big company. It's it's passion and a
00:47:29 vision that is bigger than the resources
00:47:31 that I have which you know I had a
00:47:34 conversation with somebody recently
00:47:35 actually
00:47:37 where they wanted to uh we we uh it was
00:47:41 a business problem and they wanted to
00:47:44 change the goals and I said we can't
00:47:46 just change the goals because they're
00:47:48 difficult you know so we might miss the
00:47:51 goal it's true yes we have a very
00:47:52 aggressive goal and the likelihood of us
00:47:54 hitting it is incredibly low but why
00:47:57 would we lower it? And they said to me,
00:48:00 you know, I don't like to fail. They
00:48:02 said, I don't like to fail and I know
00:48:03 you don't either. And I said, ah, that's
00:48:05 where you're wrong. That's where you're
00:48:07 wrong. I have spent most of my life a
00:48:09 failure. And I'm very comfortable being
00:48:11 a failure. And I think of myself not as
00:48:14 a success. I think of myself as a
00:48:16 failure. And that's because my ambitions
00:48:18 are bigger than my skills or my ability
00:48:20 to achieve those ambitions. And so
00:48:22 almost everything I've done, with a
00:48:23 couple of exceptions, have fallen short
00:48:25 of what I had hoped for. I'm very
00:48:27 comfortable with that because failing at
00:48:29 80% is really much better than
00:48:31 succeeding at
00:48:33 30%. And I think this idea of fear of
00:48:36 failure and embracing failure, I don't
00:48:38 want to fail, but I just I I have I
00:48:43 think it's important to have dreams that
00:48:45 are beyond your skills or your resources
00:48:48 because that's where creativity comes
00:48:50 from. That's where resourcefulness comes
00:48:54 from. You know, would you go How am I
00:48:56 gonna figure this one out? And you told
00:48:58 me the stories of your own team, you
00:49:00 know, it's the resourceful ones. And now
00:49:03 we go back to AI. AI is not going to
00:49:05 figure that out, right? There's there's
00:49:08 data on this. I I've actually never
00:49:10 thought about this. This is good. There
00:49:11 was a book called Oh, it was the wisdom
00:49:13 of crowds. I think it was that one. I
00:49:16 think it was the wisdom of crowds by
00:49:17 James Herki where people with experience
00:49:20 knew what to do versus people who were
00:49:22 just trained. So I'll give you the
00:49:23 example. This is I and again I might
00:49:25 have the book wrong but this was I
00:49:26 remember the case. So there was a a
00:49:28 bunch of firemen fighting a fire in like
00:49:31 the in wildfires, right? And the wind
00:49:34 picked up and the fire was coming really
00:49:36 fast towards these firemen. True story.
00:49:39 And they all started running for their
00:49:41 lives as this fire was approaching them
00:49:42 unbelievably quickly. But the problem
00:49:44 was if they looked
00:49:46 ahead there was a small hill which means
00:49:49 you're going to slow down because you
00:49:50 can't run fast up a hill and this fire
00:49:52 is coming fast, right? The senior guy on
00:49:56 the on the team started screaming, "Get
00:49:59 down. Get down. Get down." And they all
00:50:01 ignored him. They were all running for
00:50:02 their lives. And he just stopped running
00:50:04 and got down and put his hands over his
00:50:07 head and just lay in a ball. And the
00:50:09 fire was going so fast that it blew
00:50:11 right over him. and it caught up with
00:50:14 the other guys and burned them all to
00:50:16 death. Now, they didn't teach them that
00:50:18 in fire school. It it was accumulated
00:50:21 knowledge of wisdom of that came from
00:50:23 experience that he knew the right thing
00:50:25 to do in the moment. He was able to read
00:50:27 the tea leaves in a way and his his gut,
00:50:31 whatever that means, his gut said the
00:50:33 right thing to do is to drop down.
00:50:35 You'll be okay. And this is why I'm
00:50:38 going to sound like a a broken record.
00:50:40 the importance of doing the work
00:50:42 yourself, of writing the book, painting
00:50:44 the painting, choreographing the dance,
00:50:46 you know, composing the symphony,
00:50:48 building the business, having the
00:50:50 difficult conversation, stumbling and
00:50:52 bumbling, right? The reason for it, like
00:50:55 let's say you have a fight with your
00:50:56 your your girlfriend. You don't want to
00:50:58 be in a fight. You don't like being in a
00:51:00 fight. You want to do the right thing.
00:51:01 So, you go to chat GBT and you be like,
00:51:03 "My girlfriend and I had a fight. This
00:51:04 is what the fight was about. Okay, I
00:51:07 think I did some stuff wrong. I think
00:51:08 she's did some stuff wrong. this is
00:51:10 exactly what happened. Tell me what to
00:51:11 do." And you go, "Babe, I just want you
00:51:14 to know I want to take full
00:51:15 accountability. I'm really I'm really
00:51:17 sad that this happened and I want you to
00:51:19 know that I care about this
00:51:20 relationship." And she says to you, "Did
00:51:23 you get this answer from Chad GBT?" And
00:51:25 you go, "I did." How's that going to go
00:51:29 right now? You did everything right. You
00:51:31 did everything
00:51:33 right. You did everything right. but for
00:51:36 the fact and it goes right back to what
00:51:38 you said which is it removed the
00:51:40 humanity. It removed the personality.
00:51:42 It's artificial. It's fake. It's
00:51:43 everything you said about the job
00:51:44 interview. It's everything you said
00:51:46 about all those other things about all
00:51:47 the resumes, all of the pitch
00:51:49 decks. It's not you telling me sorry,
00:51:52 it's Chat GBT telling me sorry. And even
00:51:54 though you went with good intention to
00:51:55 get it right, I would rather you get it
00:51:57 wrong and bumble and fumble it with me
00:51:59 and be like, "Babe, I don't know how to
00:52:00 do this. I'm an asshole." You know, and
00:52:03 then she fights with you because you get
00:52:04 it wrong and you rumble through it
00:52:07 together. And what happens when you
00:52:09 come, you've had this happen. I know
00:52:10 because I have, and I know anybody,
00:52:12 everybody has. When you come out of the
00:52:14 fight, you're closer. Mhm. Not cuz you
00:52:17 got it right because you got it wrong.
00:52:19 And if you learn the
00:52:21 skill and you get better and better and
00:52:23 better and better and you do learn the
00:52:24 skill of saying the right thing and you
00:52:26 do learn the skill, she knew it wasn't
00:52:27 because you asked AI in the moment
00:52:29 because you just wanted to resolve the
00:52:30 problem and remove the tension. It's
00:52:32 because you learn the skill for the time
00:52:34 that you don't know when it's going to
00:52:36 happen because you're equipped for this
00:52:37 relationship. Mhm. And it's that
00:52:40 investment in the relationship rather
00:52:41 than trying to transactionally solve the
00:52:43 problem before me. And that's the
00:52:44 difference. It's infinite versus finite.
00:52:46 transaction versus it's destination
00:52:49 versus journey. I'm in the journey of
00:52:51 this relationship versus I have a
00:52:52 destination. I got to solve this problem
00:52:54 now. Otherwise, this is going to destroy
00:52:56 my relationship. And all of this is
00:52:58 coming full circle. And it comes right
00:53:00 back to everything we started. this. I
00:53:02 think it's hilarious that you and that
00:53:03 you're having a conversation with me
00:53:04 about AI because I'm not an AI expert
00:53:06 and I'm not an AI
00:53:08 business, but I I am in the humanity
00:53:11 business. And I think everything we're
00:53:13 talking about from every angle, we're
00:53:15 battle testing this idea. And what we
00:53:17 can't get away from is human beings
00:53:19 really want human
00:53:22 beings and human beings really want
00:53:26 human experiences and human beings
00:53:28 really want things made by human beings.
00:53:30 And we are not only okay with we want
00:53:34 imperfection because imperfection is the
00:53:37 sign of human. I was just thinking about
00:53:40 how how when I'm in an argument with my
00:53:44 partner, if she was perfect, if she was
00:53:47 completely composed, if she was looking
00:53:49 at me without emotion, without
00:53:52 expression, and if she was spewing chat
00:53:55 GPT like responses back at me,
00:53:58 it would it would be a little bit
00:53:59 infuriating, but also it would be
00:54:02 completely dehumanizing as you say. And
00:54:04 it's funny how actually even in
00:54:05 conflict, I want emotion. I want
00:54:07 imperfection. Yeah, I want res human
00:54:09 resonance. So, it's interesting because
00:54:11 I've been like thinking about what my
00:54:13 struggle is a good thing. Yeah. And I
00:54:14 think in our modern day and age, we have
00:54:17 under appreciated and underrepresented
00:54:20 the value of struggle. And if you ask
00:54:23 anybody in their life, you know, tell me
00:54:26 about a time in your
00:54:27 career
00:54:29 where like you felt like, boy, this is
00:54:32 the most amazing thing I've ever done.
00:54:33 I'm so glad I'm a part of this. It's not
00:54:35 the big win. It's not the big success.
00:54:37 It's not we finished everything on time
00:54:38 and under budget. It's oh my god, this
00:54:41 one thing went horribly wrong. Oh my
00:54:43 god, it went so badly and yet the way we
00:54:46 came together like the most important
00:54:48 thing in my career was when I lost my
00:54:50 passion and went into deep depression.
00:54:52 Never want to go through that again.
00:54:53 Really glad it happened. And all of our
00:54:55 relationships, professional, personal,
00:54:57 romantic, whatever they are, right? All
00:54:59 of our relationships get better when we
00:55:02 go through struggle together. And we
00:55:04 know we know the way the human animal
00:55:05 works. We know that oxytocin is released
00:55:07 when you have shared struggle. That's
00:55:08 why when you put people in boot camp and
00:55:10 they go through [ __ ] together or there's
00:55:12 a a natural a n a natural disaster. Like
00:55:15 all all of a sudden I don't care who you
00:55:17 voted for. I saw your house blow down in
00:55:19 the tornado. I got you. Don't worry,
00:55:20 we're neighbors, right? Like we can put
00:55:22 aside all the rational
00:55:25 nonsense, the the intellectual nonsense.
00:55:27 And at the end of the day, human beings
00:55:30 are are are good at helping human
00:55:32 beings. struggle also in many contexts
00:55:35 is the value. So when I think about a
00:55:37 Simon Synynic book, the reason why I
00:55:40 value it is because I know that Simon
00:55:42 Synynic spent years writing that thing
00:55:44 and pulling it together. The reason why
00:55:46 certain handmade things that we talked
00:55:47 about earlier are valuable is because of
00:55:49 the pain and the toil that went into
00:55:50 them. And when you think about the art
00:55:52 world and other creations through
00:55:53 history, the value comes from the fact
00:55:55 that human beings came together for a
00:55:57 prolonged period of time and did
00:55:59 something. And actually the investment
00:56:01 is the value. Like the the amount that
00:56:03 went in the top creates we're not buying
00:56:05 the product. We're buying the story.
00:56:07 Yeah. Like the Mona Lisa is You're not
00:56:09 buying the Mona Lisa. You're not buying
00:56:11 a piece of art. You're buying the story
00:56:12 that goes with the art. The story that
00:56:14 it took to create the art, what the
00:56:16 artist was going through, what they were
00:56:17 thinking. You're not buying my book.
00:56:19 You're buying the story of the making of
00:56:20 my book. And the Mona Laisa was stolen
00:56:22 from what I understand. I mean, we don't
00:56:24 even know if the the one in the Lou is
00:56:26 the real one. Because I heard much of
00:56:27 the the reason why the Mona Lisa is so
00:56:29 valuable is because at one point it was
00:56:30 stolen and then they like managed to rec
00:56:32 find it again and actually it's just a
00:56:34 painting but the story of the is worth
00:56:37 100 million 200 million whatever
00:56:39 whatever I mean and so this is what we
00:56:41 the reason artists are famous is because
00:56:43 you buy the story of that artist not not
00:56:44 their talent there's a lot of famous
00:56:47 singers and actors and painters dancers
00:56:50 who are a lot less talented than the
00:56:52 unknown ones but you buy into the story
00:56:56 And this is why some
00:56:59 celebrities, as much as they talk about
00:57:01 the paparazzi and the tabloids, they
00:57:03 want to be in the paparazzo. They want
00:57:05 the paparazzi to follow them because it
00:57:07 keeps their story relevant. It keeps
00:57:08 them, you know, they're worth more
00:57:10 because they're in the zeitgeist. Apple
00:57:12 know this better than anybody cuz you go
00:57:14 to an Apple store and they've laid out
00:57:16 their products as if it was an art
00:57:19 gallery. The three feet either side of
00:57:23 the iPhone create the impression in my
00:57:25 mind that that this is a piece of art
00:57:27 and there's only one of them. And the
00:57:28 fact that they've wasted all this space,
00:57:30 which I know real estate costs money and
00:57:32 that must have been expensive, pours
00:57:34 into the device itself. If I gone into
00:57:36 an Apple store and there was a thousand
00:57:38 iPhones, like the old electronic stops,
00:57:39 all stacked on top of each other, I
00:57:41 would assume the iPhone was worth less.
00:57:42 But the story, just by the frame in
00:57:44 which I see it means that, oh my god,
00:57:45 this thing is it's theater. It looks
00:57:47 like one of one. Yeah, it's theater. and
00:57:49 and some would call it
00:57:51 manipulative, but we want things to feel
00:57:55 valuable, not just be valuable. Right? I
00:57:58 could tell you I've got a I I I found a
00:58:01 guy who makes Kashmir jerseys and he
00:58:03 uses the exact same cashmere as, you
00:58:05 know, Laura Piano, whatever, some fancy
00:58:07 fancy ass brand, you know. But the
00:58:10 problem is it says like Dave's Kashmir
00:58:12 shop, you know. I could tell you
00:58:15 everything about where he sources the
00:58:16 Kashmir, how he makes it. That's the
00:58:18 same everything. And you'd be like,
00:58:21 "Yeah, Dave's Kashmir shop." Because
00:58:24 you're not buying the Kashmir. You're
00:58:26 buying the brand. You're buying the
00:58:28 story. You're buying the association.
00:58:29 That's what's that's why brands have
00:58:32 value because it's irrational. Yeah. And
00:58:36 humans are irrational. And that's why
00:58:38 companies invest in building
00:58:40 brands for the story. And
00:58:44 so yeah, I I think I'm, you know, as
00:58:48 much as chat AI scares me, I still
00:58:51 believe the thing that the technologist
00:58:53 the technologists don't appreciate and
00:58:55 won't appreciate and there there will be
00:58:57 a
00:58:58 rebellion and handmade will become more
00:59:01 valuable and handmade will become more
00:59:03 expensive and people will want to say
00:59:07 that. You know, it's like you had that
00:59:10 person write your speech for you. you
00:59:12 wait who did the painting? They they did
00:59:14 it themselves, you know, and I think
00:59:18 that's good. You know, it's a pendulum,
00:59:21 right? We're going to get enamored with
00:59:22 the technology until we're until it's
00:59:24 boring. This also just expands
00:59:26 generally. I know this sounds quite big
00:59:27 and we're talking about these big
00:59:28 things, but just everything that you
00:59:30 create. It's very very tempting at the
00:59:32 moment to just create something with AI
00:59:34 and throw it up on your website, on your
00:59:36 social media pages, or present it to the
00:59:38 world, a presentation deck at work. But
00:59:40 actually, I'm I'm already noticing I'm
00:59:43 attributing huge value and interest in
00:59:45 things that I can identify as
00:59:48 humanmade. I had a flashback a second
00:59:50 ago as we were talking about this idea
00:59:52 of
00:59:52 scarcity to one of my favorite brands in
00:59:55 the world. It's a clothing brand and I
00:59:58 was obsessed with this clothing brand.
00:59:59 I'd spend a huge amount I don't spend
01:00:00 money on clothes. I would spend a huge
01:00:02 amount of money every time they came out
01:00:03 with a new item. One day the founder of
01:00:06 the brand and everybody knows this
01:00:07 brand. He posted a photo from his
01:00:11 factory. It was like a video. And what I
01:00:14 saw in the video was the shirt I was
01:00:16 currently wearing as I watched the video
01:00:18 in a massive bucket with 4,000 others of
01:00:22 the exact same shirt. And in that moment
01:00:25 fell out of love. I fell out of love.
01:00:27 Exactly. Because in my head, I'd painted
01:00:29 this like artisan picture of of them
01:00:31 sewing it. These two guys sewing it in
01:00:33 their bedroom. And then like it's
01:00:35 probably what it was on the ad, too. I
01:00:37 think it kind of like used to be. So I
01:00:40 still had that big. Yeah. One thing that
01:00:43 I've always understood, this is true for
01:00:45 businesses, this is true for absolutely
01:00:46 everything. Scale breaks things. You
01:00:48 know, scale breaks things in the in the
01:00:50 military. They they special forces,
01:00:52 special operating forces, Navy Seals,
01:00:54 SAS, you know, all those folks, right?
01:00:58 And there's a there's a saying in the
01:01:00 special forces that's basically um
01:01:03 special you can't scale special right so
01:01:07 you can take whatever training skills
01:01:08 whatever you have for the special forces
01:01:10 and you give it to everybody it's not
01:01:11 going to work special can only be small
01:01:15 you know and and so scale breaks things
01:01:19 scale always so I mean like Microsoft
01:01:22 versus Apple right so Apple wanted the
01:01:25 highest quality operating system in the
01:01:26 world Right? So what did they do? They
01:01:28 they refused to clone, right? They
01:01:30 wouldn't they wouldn't they wouldn't
01:01:31 clone their their operating system and
01:01:35 they uh as a result of of refusing to to
01:01:40 do that they they never for years Apple
01:01:43 had like in the height of the the PC
01:01:45 wars maybe 4% of the world's operating
01:01:47 systems. Microsoft said we're happy to
01:01:50 clone our operating system. So it was a
01:01:52 little bit different on Dell. It was a
01:01:53 little bit different on an IBM. wherever
01:01:54 you use it was slightly different and
01:01:56 they had 90 something% of the world's
01:01:57 operating systems. It's because you have
01:02:00 to trade quality for scale every time.
01:02:02 There's a reason why buying fancy goods
01:02:05 for a lot of money like because as you
01:02:08 said the way you make things has to
01:02:10 change and you have to start making them
01:02:11 in factories and you have to scale scale
01:02:14 scale breaks companies. Think about how
01:02:15 beautiful companies are. The number of
01:02:16 companies that talk about, oh, our
01:02:18 company's like a family. Get to about
01:02:19 150 people, 200 people, get to Dunar's
01:02:21 number. Not so much of a family anymore.
01:02:25 I think B2B marketeers keep making this
01:02:27 mistake. They're chasing volume instead
01:02:30 of quality. And when you try to be seen
01:02:32 by more people instead of the right
01:02:34 people, all you're doing is making
01:02:35 noise. But that noise rarely shifts the
01:02:37 needle. And it's often quite expensive.
01:02:40 And I know as there was a time in my
01:02:41 career where I kept making this mistake
01:02:43 that many of you will be making it too.
01:02:45 Eventually, I started posting ads on our
01:02:47 show sponsors platform, LinkedIn. And
01:02:49 that's when things started to change. I
01:02:51 put that change down to a few critical
01:02:53 things. One of them being that LinkedIn
01:02:55 was then and still is today the platform
01:02:57 where decision makers go to, not only to
01:02:59 think and learn, but also to buy. And
01:03:01 when you market your business there,
01:03:03 you're putting it right in front of
01:03:04 people who actually have the power to
01:03:06 say yes. And you can target them by job
01:03:08 title, industry, and company size. It's
01:03:11 simply a sharper way to spend your
01:03:12 marketing budget. And if you haven't
01:03:14 tried it, how about this? Give LinkedIn
01:03:16 ads a try and I'm going to give you a
01:03:18 $100 ad credit to get you started. If
01:03:21 you visit
01:03:22 linkedin.com/diary, you can claim that
01:03:24 right now. That's
01:03:30 linkedin.com/diary. Is it harder now to
01:03:30 find love? Because there's lots of stats
01:03:32 that say we're having less sex, we're
01:03:34 lonier than ever before. Um,
01:03:37 interestingly, this is maybe an adjacent
01:03:39 point, but I was looking at Bumble share
01:03:41 price.
01:03:42 I
01:03:43 love the founder of Bumble. The CEO is a
01:03:46 really really good friend of mine. I
01:03:47 think she's amazing. Whitney. Whitney.
01:03:49 Yes, I think she is amazing. She has and
01:03:52 I know her and she's a wonderful human
01:03:54 being. But when I was looking at the
01:03:56 Bumble share price, it painted a really
01:03:59 interesting picture because then you you
01:04:01 overlay that with some of these other
01:04:02 dating apps and you see I mean this is
01:04:04 the Well, she's had to come back. She's
01:04:07 just come back in yet to turn the
01:04:08 company around. And actually,
01:04:09 interestingly, I saw her do an
01:04:11 interview, which is one of these ones
01:04:12 here. And in the interview, she says
01:04:13 she's going to revamp Bumble to make it
01:04:15 not about finding love with others, but
01:04:18 falling in love with yourself. Yeah. And
01:04:20 there's also going to be this dating
01:04:22 marketplace, but her first objective is
01:04:24 going to be get people to love
01:04:25 themselves. Yeah. Through coaching and
01:04:27 all these kinds of things on the app and
01:04:28 then find a partner. Sure. Yes. I mean,
01:04:31 I I agree with that. I mean, it's like
01:04:35 it's I mean, we're all broken records,
01:04:37 right? And I don't mean that as it like
01:04:39 a like we're all broken souls. Like you
01:04:42 know you your customers will never love
01:04:44 you until your employees love you first.
01:04:46 You'll never find somebody to love you
01:04:48 unless you love yourself first. And look
01:04:50 at failed relationships right where
01:04:52 there's so much tension. It's somebody's
01:04:53 lack of self-love that contributes to
01:04:55 the failing of that relationship. I mean
01:04:57 I have a dear friend who's going through
01:04:59 it right now. She just can't find love
01:05:00 and she it just but it's because she
01:05:05 doesn't love herself and and she knows
01:05:08 it. You know, it's a hard thing to do.
01:05:10 So, if Bumble can crack that code, more
01:05:12 power to him. It's it's a but this is
01:05:14 the problem with a lot of these things.
01:05:16 You know, they're common knowledge. We
01:05:18 just don't do them. Everybody knows how
01:05:20 to be healthy. Everybody knows how to
01:05:22 exercise. Everybody knows what eating
01:05:24 right means.
01:05:26 Don't do it because wrong is easier and
01:05:30 right takes effort. Everybody knows what
01:05:32 we're supposed to do in a relationship.
01:05:33 Everybody knows that we're supposed to
01:05:35 like hold space. Everybody Everybody
01:05:37 knows philosophically what we're
01:05:38 supposed to do, but we don't do it. By
01:05:40 the way, it's the reason why most people
01:05:41 I've written all these lovely books and
01:05:42 it's the reason why most companies don't
01:05:44 use them. It's because my work is like
01:05:47 exercise, which is I can tell you every
01:05:49 single if you want to get into shape,
01:05:50 hey Simon, how do I get into shape?
01:05:52 Easy. Every single day, work out for 20
01:05:53 minutes every single day. Okay. Can I
01:05:56 take the occasional day off? Yes, but
01:05:57 not too many. Work out every single day.
01:05:59 And 100% of you will get into shape. I
01:06:02 know it 100%. When? I don't know. And
01:06:05 neither does any doctor. And that's my
01:06:07 work. Yes, I can profoundly help you
01:06:09 find purpose with start with Y. I can
01:06:12 help you build trust on a team with
01:06:13 leaders at last. I can help you embrace
01:06:15 the infinite mindset and have this
01:06:17 incredible calm in life. And the reason
01:06:19 most companies won't do it, this
01:06:20 innovate, this is a book for innovation
01:06:22 right here. You want to innovate?
01:06:23 Infinite game. The reason most companies
01:06:25 won't do it is because they need it to
01:06:26 happen by the end of the quarter or the
01:06:27 end of the financial year. It may or may
01:06:29 not. I have no clue and I cannot predict
01:06:31 that it will or won't. It'll work 100%.
01:06:34 I just don't know when. And the problem
01:06:36 is goes right back to the beginning of
01:06:37 this conversation. We're all so obsessed
01:06:39 with the output. We're all so obsessed
01:06:41 with the result that we've completely
01:06:44 ignored the value of the journey. And
01:06:47 people would rather hit the number at
01:06:48 the end of the year than build a good
01:06:50 strong company. Think about it, right?
01:06:53 If I meet another entrepreneur when I
01:06:55 say, "So, tell me about your company."
01:06:56 Like, "We're hyperrowth. We're a
01:06:58 hyperrowth company. We're a gazelle,
01:06:59 right?" Like, "Show me." Then I always
01:07:01 say the same thing because I'm an ass.
01:07:04 Can you please give me one article from
01:07:05 a reputable publication? Just one. And I
01:07:07 don't care the publication that says
01:07:10 that building a hyperrowth company is
01:07:12 good for business. Just one. And the
01:07:16 answer is you can't because it's
01:07:19 not. And so why are we're so obsessed
01:07:21 with highspeed growth? It's because our
01:07:23 investors want us to be obsessed with
01:07:24 high-speed growth, right? Or our egos
01:07:26 want us to be obsessed with high
01:07:27 high-speed growth, right? And if
01:07:29 high-speed growth happens by accident,
01:07:31 that happens for many of the unicorns,
01:07:33 right? It was an accident. I think
01:07:35 building a good company is better than
01:07:37 building a fast company. I think
01:07:38 building a good relationship is better
01:07:40 than building a fast relationship. And
01:07:42 we're all so obsessed with speed and
01:07:46 immediate results. present company
01:07:49 included. I've had to learn this the
01:07:50 hard way that I think there's something
01:07:52 joyful and beautiful about slowing down,
01:07:57 saying thank you, rep prioritizing
01:08:00 friends. It's okay. I mean, by the way,
01:08:03 cell phones and so but before cell
01:08:05 phones, we went to work and then we went
01:08:09 home and we didn't do work at home
01:08:11 because we couldn't do work at home.
01:08:12 Yeah. Because we didn't have computers
01:08:13 at home and we didn't have cell phones
01:08:14 or people to call us. And so you you did
01:08:16 work at work and then you left. And I
01:08:21 remember when cell phones started, I
01:08:23 remember the advertising, AT&T had this
01:08:25 campaign that they showed people working
01:08:28 on the beach, you know, with their
01:08:30 computers. I mean, this is like the
01:08:33 future, right? And they said now, um,
01:08:37 well, I what was the what was the
01:08:39 tagline? It was really funny. It's like
01:08:40 now you can leave work, right?
01:08:45 And that's not what happened. Work came
01:08:47 with us. We never left work. Work came
01:08:49 with us wherever. This is the problem
01:08:50 with cell phones and computers and the
01:08:52 internet, which is we do not leave work.
01:08:55 Work is with us in our pocket every day,
01:08:58 every vacation, every evening, every
01:09:01 weekend. As you said that, I thought, do
01:09:03 you know what that's so interesting
01:09:04 because that kind of means that
01:09:07 friction creates freedom in that regard,
01:09:10 if you know what I'm saying. So the
01:09:11 friction of not being able to go home
01:09:13 and tap away on my computer all night
01:09:16 meant that I had a certain level of
01:09:17 freedom because I had to kind of wait
01:09:18 for things, right? So in the same
01:09:20 context with AI coming along, now I can
01:09:22 build software throughout the weekend
01:09:23 whether the agency is working or not.
01:09:24 Now I can build anything I want at any
01:09:26 time using the phone in my pocket, the
01:09:29 friction has come down again and
01:09:30 therefore the pressure to do it now
01:09:32 because I can do it now goes up. And
01:09:35 this is kind of maybe what I was
01:09:36 alluding to earlier on in, you know,
01:09:37 when I was saying about how you're gonna
01:09:38 get more stressed and more overwhelmed
01:09:40 and more isolated. That's so good.
01:09:43 That's so right. It's we're taking work
01:09:44 with us. I mean, it's like, you know,
01:09:46 then everybody has a story of like where
01:09:47 the battery ran out on their phone and
01:09:49 they ended up having the best night.
01:09:50 Yeah. Or the internet went out at work
01:09:52 and they actually got more done. Like
01:09:54 you hear these stories all the time, you
01:09:57 know that that when when we're forced
01:10:01 not to take work with us, forced. It
01:10:05 takes a bit of time sometimes to relax,
01:10:07 but it's always better because you learn
01:10:10 to stop worrying, stop checking, you
01:10:13 know, you know, and you just I one of
01:10:16 the things I did I I can't delete
01:10:19 Instagram completely as much as I'd love
01:10:21 to, but I hid it. So, you know, you can
01:10:24 do that on iPhone. You can take it off
01:10:26 the It's gone. It's hidden. It says hide
01:10:29 app. And then I and when you go into the
01:10:31 search, you know, when you go search
01:10:32 suggest, I took it off the suggestions,
01:10:33 which most people don't even know you
01:10:35 could do that. So, I took it off the
01:10:36 suggestions. So, when I go to because I
01:10:38 realized what I was doing is I'm like
01:10:39 when I'm bored, I just pick up my phone
01:10:40 and I just like and then I see Instagram
01:10:42 like and I just click it like a like a
01:10:44 zombie and then I'm done for an hour,
01:10:46 you know? So, I hit it. So, the only
01:10:48 time I go to Instagram is when I have to
01:10:49 go to it and I have to type in Nst, you
01:10:52 know, and then it pops up. And my usage
01:10:55 of Instagram has plummeted,
01:10:58 plummeted because it has to be
01:11:00 intentional. And the problem with most
01:11:02 social media is it's unintentional.
01:11:05 One of the big things talking about
01:11:07 community, Instagram, AI that I think a
01:11:09 lot about
01:11:11 is is
01:11:13 the is the value of in real life
01:11:16 community going to rise? And I I think
01:11:18 we might be on the precipice of the
01:11:21 community revolution. I say this because
01:11:24 when I think about what's going to
01:11:25 remain in a world where creating things
01:11:26 goes to zero like when you know once
01:11:29 upon a time if you made a social network
01:11:31 or if you built an app or if you built a
01:11:34 med a movie or a media company or a
01:11:36 podcast that was half of the job and the
01:11:39 other half of the job is like getting it
01:11:40 out there in the world. Yeah. And so now
01:11:42 the people that have the other half of
01:11:44 the job which hasn't gone to zero now
01:11:47 have this tremendous advantage because
01:11:48 we can all create but we can't all
01:11:49 distribute. And so having community and
01:11:52 building and fostering community I think
01:11:53 now is one of the things that remains.
01:11:55 What are the values of a community? Like
01:11:57 how do I build the community? Well, I
01:11:58 have a definition of community and I
01:12:00 think we said it before which is
01:12:01 community is a group of people who agree
01:12:02 to grow together. Interesting. Community
01:12:05 is a group of people who agree to grow
01:12:06 together and I believe friends are at
01:12:09 least two people who agree to grow
01:12:10 together. In marketing this is the
01:12:12 absolute obsession at the moment.
01:12:13 Community run clubs and yeah brands
01:12:16 becoming um offline is the new online,
01:12:18 right? Um, offline's the new black. Um,
01:12:21 like there's a there's a company called
01:12:22 Clicks and it was started by she's a
01:12:26 talented entrepreneur and she was in
01:12:27 college and she suffered severe
01:12:28 depression and loneliness and literally
01:12:31 struggled didn't know how to make
01:12:32 friends and uh she oh I just call her by
01:12:36 her name. Her name's Alex. Um but her
01:12:40 company clicks she started it to solve
01:12:42 her own problem right my favorite kind
01:12:44 of company. and basically to help her
01:12:48 friends at school, quote unquote
01:12:49 friends, people at school make friends.
01:12:51 And she did it by taking people offline
01:12:53 and taking their phones away. And she
01:12:54 would come up with reasons to come
01:12:55 together, whether it was running or this
01:12:57 or that. Just like it didn't matter what
01:12:58 the reason was. Come and just a reason
01:13:00 to come that made you that when you saw
01:13:01 the ad hung up on a piece of paper at
01:13:03 college, you know, they' be like, I
01:13:07 like horror movies, whatever. I like
01:13:10 baking. I'll go to that. Right? Just a
01:13:13 trick.
01:13:14 and then basically just and so she's
01:13:16 built this business predominantly for
01:13:18 young people but it's available to
01:13:20 anyone but she's built this business to
01:13:21 just bring people together to meet
01:13:23 people without phones offline and she
01:13:26 want she has and there's a great irony
01:13:27 in it she has an app that she wants
01:13:29 people not to be on you know and what is
01:13:33 it that holds the community together is
01:13:34 it so like sh we want to improve
01:13:36 together so we have to have some kind of
01:13:38 shared value that we want to improve on
01:13:41 presumably it's like a community of
01:13:43 runners. They're trying to get fit
01:13:45 together or they're trying to improve
01:13:46 their I don't think it matters. I mean,
01:13:48 it's like it's it's shared shared
01:13:51 interests is a is a is a way to start a
01:13:53 a relationship, right? Comic-Con, you
01:13:56 know, you know, Nerd Vana, you know,
01:13:58 Burning Man, all of these larger than
01:14:01 life events, big and small, going to the
01:14:03 going to the going to the football, you
01:14:05 know, it's like you're everybody's
01:14:07 friend when you wear when you wear the
01:14:09 right when you wear the right colors,
01:14:11 you know. You know, you see people on
01:14:12 the on on the tube who's going to go
01:14:14 into the same game. They're wearing the
01:14:15 same jersey, your friends. Yeah. Your
01:14:17 friends, right? So, I think common
01:14:19 interest is a is a is a trick. It's a
01:14:22 way of getting people to come together.
01:14:23 And it's a nice place to start because
01:14:24 at least conversation is easy, right?
01:14:26 You know at least one thing about this
01:14:27 person that you have in common with
01:14:28 them. Do you need a shared goal in a
01:14:30 community, do you think? Thinking
01:14:32 because in the football analogy, we have
01:14:33 a shared goal. Oh, yeah. You want to
01:14:35 win? I think that's a very good
01:14:36 question. Do you have a shared goal even
01:14:37 in a relationship? Yeah, I think so.
01:14:39 That seems to make sense. The reason why
01:14:41 I'm asking these questions is I am
01:14:43 building businesses and brands. And I
01:14:46 know that community is one of the most
01:14:47 important things that everyone building
01:14:48 a brand or business is thinking about at
01:14:50 the moment. So there's a big difference
01:14:52 between having an audience, which is
01:14:55 what you might have on like a podcast or
01:14:56 something, and having a
01:14:58 community. And I'm as a brand leader and
01:15:01 as an entrepreneur, I'm trying to shift
01:15:02 from having an audience over to having a
01:15:04 community. And that's about like
01:15:06 relationships and shared values. Shared
01:15:08 values. I
01:15:15 mean, I like to think the people who
01:15:15 really like my work, not the ones who
01:15:16 just like passively like it, but the
01:15:18 ones who really like my work, like if
01:15:20 somebody says, "I love Start with Y or I
01:15:24 live my life by the infinite game." that
01:15:27 it says something about who they are and
01:15:29 how they see the world and that we share
01:15:30 the same values and that if and because
01:15:34 I am you know me you know I'm an
01:15:37 idealist and and my I I'm consistent in
01:15:42 the way I talk about things from the day
01:15:44 I started to to now and won't ever
01:15:46 change and and I think that's the value
01:15:49 of values and the problem with the
01:15:52 modern world we live in and the
01:15:53 pressures that people face is money and
01:15:55 fame and all the rest of it and you know
01:15:57 influencer status. I think it sometimes
01:15:59 forces us to question our values or walk
01:16:02 away from them. I was invited to a a
01:16:04 group of they called it a mastermind
01:16:06 group where it's a bunch of folks like
01:16:07 me author speakers who wanted this is
01:16:09 what they told me come together based on
01:16:11 shared shared goals shared values how we
01:16:14 can work together to improve the world
01:16:16 together and I'm like oh sign me up I'm
01:16:17 in right so I went and we sat around and
01:16:20 you know who some of these people are
01:16:22 you know and we sat around a room and
01:16:25 they spent all of their time talking
01:16:27 about how they can share their lists
01:16:28 with each other and how they can
01:16:29 cross-promote with each other and what
01:16:31 margins are you getting on this? And I'm
01:16:33 like, you guys are and I spoke up. I was
01:16:36 like, you guys are just talking about
01:16:37 making more money. What? I thought we
01:16:39 came here to like do common good
01:16:42 together. They didn't invite me back.
01:16:46 But it was but the point is is like the
01:16:48 money and the fame is seductive. You
01:16:50 know this is this is this is this is
01:16:51 Joseph Campbell's hero's journey which
01:16:53 is you start off as the reluctant hero
01:16:56 and you get called to your mission for
01:16:58 some reason and at some point in your
01:17:01 journey there will be something seduce
01:17:05 you away from your mission money or
01:17:06 power you know Luke Skywalker was nearly
01:17:09 seduced away from the vision you know
01:17:12 from the journey like this is what this
01:17:14 is what the hero has to go through and
01:17:17 do you have the friends who will slap
01:17:19 you around and keep you in line and say,
01:17:21 "No, you signed up for this. You have to
01:17:24 stay true to what you're doing." Because
01:17:25 I think none of us have the courage or
01:17:27 the strength to stay true to our cause
01:17:29 by ourselves. Very few of us. We need to
01:17:31 have at least one person who believes in
01:17:32 us to give us the strength to stick to
01:17:35 it because the temptation the temptation
01:17:37 you and I have both at various times
01:17:38 gone through it like when you start
01:17:40 making money and you start making money
01:17:41 for something you didn't expect. Like I
01:17:43 never expected to have a career from any
01:17:45 of this stuff, right? It happened by
01:17:47 accident. And you get to the point where
01:17:49 you start thinking you're more important
01:17:51 than you are. Do they know? Do they do
01:17:54 they know who I am? No. No. Get over
01:17:58 yourself. You know, and you start
01:18:00 becoming seduced. And I think the
01:18:02 seduction when we turn on social media
01:18:04 and we watch
01:18:05 Kardashian, the Kardashian model, and
01:18:08 like you have people who pursue
01:18:10 influence without knowledge or skill,
01:18:13 like those two buckets. They have the
01:18:15 other three buckets, but they don't have
01:18:16 the first two buckets. And it is
01:18:18 temporary for some or unfulfilling for
01:18:21 others. And you know the funny thing
01:18:24 about that job, you know, I was I was I
01:18:27 went to a concert and there was this
01:18:31 this woman who walked down the aisle and
01:18:32 some guy was taking pictures of her and
01:18:33 she was posing and the person next to me
01:18:35 goes, "She's a famous influencer." And I
01:18:39 said, "You mean she's a freelance
01:18:40 employee of an algorithm?"
01:18:49 And and somebody who chooses to be an
01:18:49 influencer, that's what you are. You are
01:18:51 a freelance employee of an algorithm.
01:18:53 And the minute they change the
01:18:54 algorithm, you might be out of business.
01:19:04 Uh you just lost like 170 followers.
01:19:04 I mean, maybe you just lost like 170
01:19:07 blue ticks. But like I don't have a
01:19:10 problem with the concept of being an
01:19:11 influencer if you bring something of
01:19:13 value. The only time I have a problem
01:19:16 with it is is if you make it about you
01:19:19 and I have to get more of everything. In
01:19:21 the early days of influencing, there was
01:19:24 a young couple that were trying to get
01:19:26 followers and they would do crazier and
01:19:27 crazier things. And
01:19:30 so what they did is he took a d a big
01:19:33 book, a dictionary I think it was, and
01:19:34 he put it over his chest and she took a
01:19:36 gun and shot it at the book thinking
01:19:38 that the book would stop the bullet. And
01:19:41 she killed him. She killed him on
01:19:43 camera. right
01:19:45 now. They admitted she admitted
01:19:47 afterwards she he's dead. But she
01:19:48 admitted afterwards they were doing it
01:19:50 to do bigger and crazier stunts to get
01:19:51 more and more followers because the
01:19:52 financial pressures of driving at those
01:19:54 YouTube views was overwhelming. And so
01:19:57 it's an extreme case obviously of the
01:20:01 the the the the how we will lose our
01:20:03 minds trying to gain followers. And I
01:20:06 don't mind if people gain followers by
01:20:09 giving but to gain followers by taking.
01:20:12 Look at me. Look at me.
01:20:14 versus I have something that I think
01:20:15 this will help you. And like there's not
01:20:19 there's I don't have a problem with what
01:20:21 it's it's the it's the input, right?
01:20:23 It's the intention.
01:20:27 Um anyway, anyway, I sound like an old
01:20:30 man complaining about No, but you kids
01:20:32 these days and you were influencers. S I
01:20:34 printed off some graphs which I think
01:20:36 are absolutely fascinating and dovetail
01:20:38 into everything you've said today, but
01:20:39 also into your work generally. So, I'm
01:20:40 just going to give you all of these to
01:20:42 give you a second to look through them
01:20:44 and I want to get your read and
01:20:45 interpretation on them. Okay.
01:20:49 Adults lack of meaning and purpose.
01:20:50 Overall,
01:20:52 lonely. Okay. I mean, that makes sense.
01:20:56 To me, that didn't make sense. I
01:20:58 couldn't understand how if someone is
01:21:01 low in purpose, then they are lonier.
01:21:05 I mean, it just makes sense that when
01:21:06 you have lack of purpose, the likelihood
01:21:10 that loneliness comes nearby. Like, I
01:21:12 think family gives meaning, friends give
01:21:14 meaning. Like, you feel like you're
01:21:15 there for someone else. Um, but if you
01:21:18 don't know why you're showing up every
01:21:19 day, I think it it it feels like a
01:21:21 lonely existence. Like, you feel like
01:21:22 you're searching. When you have a sense
01:21:24 of purpose, it gives you a mechanism to
01:21:26 meet people. It gives you a mechanism to
01:21:27 make decisions. It gives you a mechanism
01:21:28 to talk about yourself in a way that's
01:21:30 quite inspiring to others. You know,
01:21:31 when you say your why and somebody says,
01:21:33 "So, what do you do?" So I I wake up
01:21:35 every single day to inspire people to do
01:21:36 what inspires them. What do you do? You
01:21:38 know, like it's it's I Yeah, I do. I do.
01:21:43 And I think it's it's not the thing that
01:21:45 makes you less lonely. I think it's a
01:21:46 mechanism to make you less lonely. Just
01:21:48 as you said that that why you just gave
01:21:51 it becomes a magnet for me. Yeah.
01:21:52 Because then I know who your people are
01:21:54 and I know what to talk to you about and
01:21:55 it throws down this bridge for me to
01:21:57 walk across. Yeah. Versus Yeah. I'm a
01:21:59 dentist
01:22:01 or I don't know. Which is even worse.
01:22:03 which is even worse. Yeah. Yeah. So, so
01:22:05 yeah, that that doesn't seem unusual.
01:22:07 Distribution of people feeling lonely
01:22:09 worldwide by gender. So, it's about
01:22:11 50/50.
01:22:14 Are you surprised by that? I thought
01:22:16 for some reason I thought men were more
01:22:18 lonely.
01:22:20 Not at all lonely. Looks like women do
01:22:24 better. I would think. Do you think you
01:22:26 thought men were more lonely? I thought
01:22:28 men would be more lonely. I al I also
01:22:29 don't know what the age groups are cuz
01:22:31 like I want to know what how they like
01:22:33 what age are they to start are they
01:22:35 starting at is it 18 I guess if we just
01:22:38 put that all aside I mean women being
01:22:40 slightly less lonely than
01:22:42 men I think makes sense because I think
01:22:45 women are probably better at making
01:22:47 friends maybe I have that wrong what
01:22:49 else we got here adults mental health
01:22:51 health ratings 68% of people who have
01:22:53 depression are lonely and 67% of people
01:22:55 have anxiety are lonely do you think
01:22:58 good mental health is a foundation for
01:23:01 being not lonely, I guess. No, I think
01:23:05 having somebody who cares about you is a
01:23:07 foundation for not being lonely. And
01:23:09 when you're in a period of strained
01:23:11 mental fitness, it definitely can
01:23:14 manifest as loneliness and
01:23:16 anxiety. And the best way to manage
01:23:19 through that period of is to lean on the
01:23:21 people who you know love you. That will
01:23:23 help. So I don't think you can separate
01:23:26 the two. So does it affect it? Of course
01:23:28 it affects it. Can it make you withdraw
01:23:30 from your friends? Of course it
01:23:32 can.
01:23:34 Um so I don't think you can separate the
01:23:37 two. I read um a couple of years ago
01:23:39 that when people are lonely, they fall
01:23:42 into a state of self-preservation
01:23:43 because of some evolutionary uh sort of
01:23:46 mechanism which meant that if we were
01:23:48 alone on the Serengeti in Africa, we
01:23:51 would sleep worse. We'd become more
01:23:53 selfish. We'd become more angry. our
01:23:55 cortisol levels will be up which means
01:23:56 more inflammation. And this idea of
01:23:58 self-preservation basically means that
01:23:59 lonely people become more selfish, more
01:24:01 bitter, more angry. And that that's not
01:24:03 conducive, ironically, with finding more
01:24:05 friends, but it is conducive with
01:24:07 survival. It is conducive with being
01:24:09 able to fend for yourself. It makes it's
01:24:11 more conducive survival as an
01:24:12 individual. Yeah. So like if you're in a
01:24:14 deserted island and you're lonely and
01:24:17 all those things and the cortisol rises
01:24:19 and you become better at being on edge
01:24:22 being on edge which is a survival
01:24:24 mechanism right but if you live in a
01:24:27 community with other people then it is
01:24:29 counterproductive because we are social
01:24:31 animals and I need you to help me and
01:24:34 you need to help me. So if we live in
01:24:36 tribe together and I'm the selfish
01:24:39 [ __ ] I'm not you're not going to
01:24:40 wake me and alert me to danger tonight.
01:24:42 Mhm. you're just going to leave me. So,
01:24:44 so it's a it's a it's a though I think
01:24:46 it's 100% true in a social environment
01:24:49 it becomes counterproductive. And I
01:24:51 think you're right. When somebody feels
01:24:52 lonely, they do go into survival and
01:24:54 they become paranoid and they think
01:24:55 everybody's out to get them. And it's
01:24:56 but the problem is is you don't live on
01:24:58 a desert island. And that's one of the
01:24:59 reasons I think it's it's dangerous.
01:25:02 We're increasingly being living on
01:25:04 islands. The islands are different now.
01:25:06 They're four walls in a in a white city.
01:25:09 And um it's so funny that so many of my
01:25:11 friends are using this word
01:25:13 loneliness when 10 20 years ago it
01:25:15 wasn't it wasn't something that I heard
01:25:17 frequently from from adults but now it
01:25:19 seems to be also common. In fact my
01:25:20 masseuse yesterday was saying to me that
01:25:24 she's lonely and this is a woman that
01:25:27 lives in Los Angeles has people around
01:25:30 her but she's lonely. Yeah. And I
01:25:31 remember when she went and she's cuz we
01:25:33 had a conversation and I text her and
01:25:34 said oh thank you for for being so open
01:25:36 and stuff. I was thinking about like
01:25:37 what advice I could give her. She's got
01:25:39 no friends. She's in Los Angeles. She's
01:25:42 desperate for friends. She doesn't have
01:25:43 a partner anymore because she's had a
01:25:44 divorce. What advice do you give
01:25:46 someone? Is it take more risks? So, it's
01:25:49 it's too it's easy to give the obvious
01:25:51 advice like you got to put yourself out
01:25:52 there, right? But when you're in a
01:25:54 period of loneliness and stress, it it's
01:25:56 hard to find that that energy and that
01:25:58 risk takingaking, right? Especially when
01:25:59 you're down on yourself. We've all been
01:26:01 there. I've definitely been there. But
01:26:02 the um I think for me what I've learned
01:26:05 is um to put myself second meaning don't
01:26:08 worry don't try and solve my problem but
01:26:09 do I have somebody else who's lonely
01:26:10 that I can help like how do I help
01:26:13 somebody else who's dealing with their
01:26:14 loneliness and it's the act of service
01:26:16 that is so valuable if you know you guys
01:26:19 are talking and she has many clients and
01:26:21 somebody else like and her willing to
01:26:22 admit that I'm lonely that one of her
01:26:24 clients might say you know me too like
01:26:27 her ability to admit her loneliness out
01:26:29 loud creates a safe environment for
01:26:30 somebody else to admit the
01:26:32 And then once she learns that they're
01:26:33 lonely, now she can say, "Tell me about
01:26:35 it." And then she can talk them through
01:26:37 it and hold space for them. And her
01:26:40 ability to help somebody else manage or
01:26:41 understand their own loneliness will
01:26:43 will help her. So interesting because
01:26:45 one of the hallmarks of her personality,
01:26:46 if you met this person, something she
01:26:47 says to me every single time she comes
01:26:49 over um for the treatment is that she
01:26:52 doesn't like sharing herself with people
01:26:55 because she thinks if people get to know
01:26:56 her, they'll change. So literally, she
01:26:58 has been my misuse for many years now.
01:27:01 And if people get to know her, they will
01:27:03 change. She's scared about people
01:27:04 knowing her. She's scared about people
01:27:06 knowing the details of her life. So, she
01:27:07 guards it all. And it's it took me, and
01:27:10 I'm someone that just asks way too many
01:27:11 questions of every student I meet.
01:27:14 It took me like 20 sessions just to
01:27:17 figure out she had a family. I had no
01:27:18 idea she had two kids. Took me She goes,
01:27:20 And when I asked her, her her body
01:27:22 language went like
01:27:24 this. Yes, I have kids. And I was like,
01:27:27 why why are you so guarded with your
01:27:28 information? Well, if people know who
01:27:30 really I really am and they know more
01:27:31 about me, then they'll change or um they
01:27:34 may not like me anymore or they'll think
01:27:35 differently about me. So, I just keep it
01:27:37 to myself. But, I mean, this is the
01:27:38 age-old problem. I mean, it's everything
01:27:39 you said when you when people who are
01:27:41 driven only by the thing that they want,
01:27:42 you know, versus the givers. And this I
01:27:45 mean, this is the age-old problem, which
01:27:46 is I'm never I'm going to keep my walls
01:27:47 up high. I never want to love anybody
01:27:48 because then I'll get hurt. And then you
01:27:50 just end up learning and hurt. And this
01:27:52 is this is goes this this is goes back
01:27:54 to struggle which is this goes look you
01:27:56 and I both know that that if somebody
01:27:59 who chooses to go on an entrepreneurial
01:28:00 venture or ad venture the statistics
01:28:04 bear out that the over 90% of all new
01:28:07 businesses will fail in the first three
01:28:08 years right what idiot would ever start
01:28:11 a business right you have to be
01:28:12 compelled by something else to make you
01:28:15 do something with overwhelming stat
01:28:18 statistical chance of failure right and
01:28:20 And it's opening yourself up to failure
01:28:23 that is the thing that makes it work you
01:28:26 know at least for a small percentage of
01:28:30 course but it's the same for love which
01:28:31 is or a relationship or friendship which
01:28:34 is it absolutely comes with risk there's
01:28:37 nothing risk- free like yeah they will
01:28:39 they some of them might change yes some
01:28:42 of them might not like you for that very
01:28:44 yes
01:28:46 yes and the odds are equal that somebody
01:28:49 will fall in love with you and love you
01:28:50 and like you and think you're the best
01:28:51 thing and think you're amazing. And so
01:28:53 if you can't take the risk, you can't
01:28:55 get the reward. If you don't play the
01:28:56 lottery, you don't win the, you know,
01:28:57 you don't win the jackpot. If you aren't
01:28:59 willing to take, I'm not telling you to
01:29:01 open up and tell everybody your deepest
01:29:02 darkest secrets. But if you're not
01:29:04 willing to give somebody anything to
01:29:07 latch on to to be like if you can't give
01:29:09 them anything to say me too,
01:29:14 then then it's going to be a hard road
01:29:16 or it'll take somebody to chip away at
01:29:18 you 20 times, you know, to before you
01:29:21 open up. But but the fact that you did
01:29:23 and she got her to open up a little bit,
01:29:26 she could make a friend in you. Now
01:29:28 she's fully open and we've been through
01:29:29 everything. I know where she wants her
01:29:30 house to be. Well, there you go. You see
01:29:32 that thing down? So, you have to point
01:29:33 out to her that this friendship and that
01:29:36 you know so much and that she feels so
01:29:37 safe with you only happened because
01:29:41 um you chipped away at her and she
01:29:43 finally you wore her down and she opened
01:29:46 up. And it can happen in two directions,
01:29:47 right? Which is sometimes we have to
01:29:49 take the little risk to just tell
01:29:50 somebody some a little something about
01:29:52 ourselves to find something. Or
01:29:56 sometimes it's somebody who's so curious
01:29:58 about us that they chip away and chip
01:29:59 away and chip away and chip away and
01:30:00 chip away until we give up and open up
01:30:02 and that that person becomes a friend,
01:30:04 you know, and so one of the reasons you
01:30:06 should be grateful for the friendship is
01:30:07 you kept trying. You could have just
01:30:08 tried it three times and like forget it.
01:30:10 I'll just lie here quietly and have a
01:30:11 massage, you know. So yeah, I mean all
01:30:15 of this stuff comes with risk. I could
01:30:17 see it in her face though. I could see.
01:30:19 But you're also curious. Yeah, I could
01:30:21 see this. She locked out because you're
01:30:23 curious about people. Is this what
01:30:25 connection is? You when you said me too,
01:30:28 finding something to say me too with
01:30:30 someone, is that the essence of what
01:30:32 like connection is? I mean, it can mean
01:30:36 it could be values, it could be
01:30:37 interest, it could be many things. But I
01:30:39 think to
01:30:40 find I think yes, like this is I mean,
01:30:43 if you want to go political, you know,
01:30:46 one of the problems in our politics is
01:30:49 both sides think they're right and both
01:30:51 sides think the other side is wrong.
01:30:52 Mhm. And neither side is willing to try
01:30:55 to even understand what the other
01:30:58 person's point of view is without
01:31:00 thinking them an idiot or thinking them
01:31:01 wrong or thinking them
01:31:02 sheeple. And the ability to say, "Can
01:31:06 you tell me more about how you came to
01:31:08 your beliefs? I'm genuinely curious."
01:31:11 and to not agree or disagree, but to be
01:31:14 curious, to be an investigator, you
01:31:17 know, and I and I have done this with
01:31:20 people who have polar opposite political
01:31:22 views with me. At some point, we will
01:31:25 get to a level of me just chipping away
01:31:27 trying to understand that they will say
01:31:29 something that I'm like, 100% I agree
01:31:31 with that. M and then from that point on
01:31:34 there's a there's a simple validation
01:31:35 not agreement but a validation that your
01:31:38 opinions do matter and we do have common
01:31:40 ground that we can build from there and
01:31:42 on that on that validation they become
01:31:45 vastly more open to my point of view
01:31:46 also and curious to my point of view
01:31:48 also and so yeah the person the person
01:31:52 like the ability to listen and be
01:31:54 curious even if you disagree is one of
01:31:57 the most underappreciated skills on the
01:31:59 planet and yeah I think when you find
01:32:01 the ability to say I agree. Then you can
01:32:03 find community. You can and maybe that's
01:32:05 what we need to heal this country or
01:32:07 most of the countries in the world right
01:32:09 now which is one group or one person to
01:32:13 just be curious rather than agree or
01:32:15 disagree. There's something about
01:32:16 relationships here as well because my
01:32:18 girlfriend is you've met my partner and
01:32:20 um she's very spiritual but also like
01:32:22 all of us she's emotional. So sometimes
01:32:24 in those interactions when we sit down
01:32:26 and there's a problem and we spend the
01:32:28 first 60 minutes to 90 minutes trying to
01:32:29 figure out what the problem is. It
01:32:31 doesn't sound very logical to me. And
01:32:34 one of the things that I think sort of
01:32:36 is adjacent to what you're saying is my
01:32:38 job in that moment actually isn't to
01:32:40 like pass through truth and to figure
01:32:43 and to correct truth. It is to sit and
01:32:46 let someone get it out. Get it out. So
01:32:50 you and I have the same problem.
01:32:52 We do. Which is we live above our necks.
01:32:56 Yeah. And you and I both have the same
01:32:57 struggle, which is to learn to live
01:32:59 below our necks, right? Like you and I
01:33:01 are head people and we have to learn to
01:33:03 be more heart right and I want to
01:33:05 understand everything explain everything
01:33:07 you know evaluate everything analyze
01:33:10 everything and when I come to my
01:33:11 emotions I'll give you an analysis you
01:33:13 know when it comes to your emotions I'll
01:33:15 give you an analysis and so I have to
01:33:17 learn to be like I feel this and that's
01:33:20 it and I feel the same way it's funny
01:33:21 because I'm good at it with art you know
01:33:22 I always tell people you don't have to
01:33:24 understand art I'll take you to a museum
01:33:25 I'll take you to a gallery and if you
01:33:26 look at a piece and I know you're
01:33:28 intimidated to come because you don't
01:33:30 understand art or you don't understand
01:33:32 music, whatever it is. And all you need
01:33:33 to do, this is the only rule, is do you
01:33:35 like it? I
01:33:37 do. Why? I don't know. I just like it.
01:33:40 That's it. You're done. You're done. I
01:33:43 don't like it. Why? I don't know. I just
01:33:44 don't like it. Great. Excellent. And now
01:33:47 we're going to look at four, five, six,
01:33:48 10 pieces that you like. And I'm going
01:33:50 to see four, five, six, 10 pieces that
01:33:52 you don't like. And I'd be like, you
01:33:54 like all of the impressionists and you
01:33:56 hate all the old masters. So why don't
01:33:58 we just go see more impressionists, you
01:34:00 know? And so when when your girlfriend
01:34:03 opens up to you, you know, you don't
01:34:05 have to agree. You don't have to
01:34:06 disagree. You just have to and you and I
01:34:08 both have to learn to stop thinking and
01:34:10 to just like feel something. When
01:34:13 somebody says, "Where do you feel it?"
01:34:14 I'm like, "What? That's the stupidest
01:34:15 question I've ever heard. Where do I
01:34:16 feel it?" And they've literally like
01:34:18 I've had somebody take me on this
01:34:19 journey and she goes, "You told me an
01:34:21 emotion you have, Simon. You told me an
01:34:24 emotion." Yes. Where do you feel it in
01:34:27 your body? Where do you feel it? And I'm
01:34:30 sitting there going, "You've got to be
01:34:32 kidding me." You know, but all right,
01:34:35 we'll go through this. All right. And
01:34:38 she says, "So you said you feel X." I'm
01:34:40 like, "Yes." All right. Where in your
01:34:41 body did you have some sort of reaction?
01:34:44 I here. What happened? It got a little
01:34:47 tighter in my chest. Okay. And I went on
01:34:51 this journey with my friend with my
01:34:54 friend Bea. Beavce. She's she's
01:34:58 incredible. And she took me on this
01:35:00 journey and she does repair with couples
01:35:02 and she's just incredible. And she
01:35:05 helped me recognize that my body does
01:35:07 react to my feelings. Tension in my
01:35:10 shoulders, heavier breathing in my
01:35:13 chest, clenching my fists, you know,
01:35:16 like my body does react. And so I'm
01:35:19 learning to
01:35:21 experience feelings beneath my neck when
01:35:24 my inclination is to do everything above
01:35:26 above the neck. It's a hard skill. Oh my
01:35:28 god, it's hard. And so I have for men.
01:35:30 And so when you're when you meet
01:35:31 spiritual people, they are all below the
01:35:34 neck and we think it's stupid, but they
01:35:39 recognize that we have an ability to
01:35:41 feel because we want to think about
01:35:42 everything. And so we both have a lot to
01:35:45 learn from each other which is there the
01:35:46 thinking about things has value not all
01:35:49 the time. And so your girlfriend and I
01:35:52 because I know her ability
01:35:55 to know her body when she has feelings I
01:35:59 think is way more is has a lot of value
01:36:02 to you and to me. I think it's like the
01:36:03 biggest opportunity I have to form
01:36:05 relationships. Yeah. Yeah. Change in
01:36:07 number of posts for automationprone jobs
01:36:10 compared to manual intensive jobs. So
01:36:12 this is a graph that shows the drop in
01:36:15 job postings online for jobs around
01:36:20 automation is yeah the knowledge work is
01:36:23 going to get hammered by AI.
01:36:25 [Music]
01:36:27 Um I met a guy in
01:36:30 Japan
01:36:31 who he's one of the very few guys left
01:36:35 like a hundred of them left 150 of them
01:36:37 left who makes samurai swords in the
01:36:39 traditional samurai sword way you make
01:36:41 them. hammer them metal and he folds his
01:36:43 own metal and he makes samurai swords.
01:36:45 They made them the way they made them
01:36:46 200 years
01:36:47 ago. And we went to this little workshop
01:36:50 and he's this little old guy and he's
01:36:53 telling us the story like how did you do
01:36:55 this? He's like well I had a desk job. I
01:36:57 worked in a company and I woke up one
01:36:58 day I was like I can't this I can't do
01:37:00 this. Like this is this can't be my
01:37:02 life. And I just I've always been
01:37:04 enamored by sword making. I found an
01:37:07 apprenticeship and tried to learn and
01:37:11 you know I'm I I'm just starting to get
01:37:13 the hang of it and but I have a lot of
01:37:15 room for improvement. And we're like how
01:37:17 long have you been doing this? He said
01:37:18 30 years. 30 years. But that's so
01:37:21 Japanese, you know, the Japanese like
01:37:23 they'll never be good at this. I'll just
01:37:24 keep working at it. And and like it's
01:37:26 such hard work.
01:37:28 But he I think there's something to be
01:37:31 said for I think a lot of us like think
01:37:34 about how many white uh knowledge
01:37:36 workers like ask them what their hobbies
01:37:37 are
01:37:39 you
01:37:44 know and like maybe there is an
01:37:44 opportunity to learn a skill. I mean
01:37:46 look at look at look at lockdown when we
01:37:48 all went through lockdown. I mean what
01:37:50 skill did you practice during lockdown?
01:37:52 What did you learn? DJing, running,
01:37:55 cycling.
01:37:56 DJing.
01:37:58 DJing, right? I did kugi, but it's the
01:38:03 Japanese art of fixing broken things
01:38:04 with gold. So, basically, you take a
01:38:07 broken plate or broken cup and you put
01:38:09 it together and with gold paint or gold
01:38:12 epoxy, you put it together and you make
01:38:15 it. The whole concept is you can make
01:38:17 something more beautiful. Like, things
01:38:19 can get more beautiful after they're
01:38:21 broken, right? I love the philosophy of
01:38:23 it. I spent hours doing freaking Kugi.
01:38:25 Ask me how much Kugi have done since we
01:38:27 came out of lockdown. How much DJing
01:38:29 have you done? Zero.
01:38:36 And so maybe all this free time that
01:38:36 we're supposed to get, which I still
01:38:38 don't think will
01:38:39 happen, maybe it's not such a bad
01:38:42 thing. Think about the joy you had
01:38:44 DJing. I had so much fun doing kinugi. I
01:38:46 had so much fun. I would spend hours
01:38:48 just my head down, focused. I was so
01:38:52 relaxed, not thinking about work. So why
01:38:55 why that's the other question we talking
01:38:57 about how we're all going to have all
01:38:59 the spare time. We've lost all of our
01:39:01 spare time. We have no spare time
01:39:03 because all we do is work and think
01:39:04 about work and talk about work. Like if
01:39:07 we go back 40 years, 50 years, there was
01:39:09 plenty of spare time and people went
01:39:11 bowling and they went to the movies and
01:39:13 they went over to each each other's
01:39:14 houses for dinner and they cooked.
01:39:23 Isn't it a good thing that we're getting
01:39:23 time back? You know, a lot of us got a
01:39:25 lot of con good things out of lockdown
01:39:28 and that's extreme. So like
01:39:31 maybe maybe it's okay that we get some
01:39:34 time back because it sounds like we've
01:39:36 lost all of our own time. It'd fix the
01:39:38 loneliness. You'd have space for
01:39:39 relationship. You'd have space for
01:39:40 relationships. You'd have space to try
01:39:41 things and we couldn't bury ourselves in
01:39:43 work and escape from our lives that we
01:39:46 hate by just burying ourselves in work.
01:39:49 Maybe maybe AI doing some of the work
01:39:52 for us is the thing we've been desperate
01:39:54 for for the past 30
01:39:57 years. Just
01:40:03 saying this is quite embarrassing for me
01:40:03 to admit, but if you know me well,
01:40:04 there's something that you know about me
01:40:06 which is a function of my personality
01:40:08 and that is that I lose everything. I've
01:40:10 lost my wallet. I've lost multiple
01:40:11 passports. I now actually have two
01:40:13 passports because there's a high
01:40:15 probability of me losing one. And when
01:40:16 you lose your wallet overseas, as I have
01:40:18 many times, it's a particular
01:40:19 inconvenience because you also lose your
01:40:21 driving license and your credit cards
01:40:22 and those kinds of things. And that's
01:40:23 why I'm so happy that our show sponsor
01:40:25 Extra have invented this thing I have in
01:40:27 my hand. They have partnered with
01:40:29 Apple's Find My Technology. So, all I
01:40:31 have to do is open their app and play a
01:40:34 noise and it will tell me where my
01:40:36 wallet is. Extra wallets are slim.
01:40:38 They're made of recycled aluminium and
01:40:40 they block various types of digital
01:40:42 theft. And with one click, your cards
01:40:44 can pop up and are ready to go. So, if
01:40:47 this sounds like the kind of thing you
01:40:48 or a friend needs, visit extra.com. You
01:40:51 can use code Steven and you'll get 10%
01:40:53 off plus free shipping and a 100day
01:40:56 trial. That's extra.com and use code
01:40:58 Steven at checkout. For anybody that
01:41:00 likes matcha, for anybody that likes
01:41:02 lattes, one of my companies has just
01:41:04 launched canned matcha lattes. And I was
01:41:07 speaking with the founder, Marissa, and
01:41:08 she said that creating this product has
01:41:10 been no easy feat. They tried launching
01:41:13 in 2021, but as is often the case in
01:41:15 business, the development process turned
01:41:17 out to be extremely complex. So, they've
01:41:19 spent the last four years testing and
01:41:21 refining every single detail to create
01:41:23 this, which is a perfect Ted matcha
01:41:26 vanilla latte and a perfect Ted matcha
01:41:29 strawberry latte. So, what we have here
01:41:31 in these cans is barista quality matcha
01:41:34 straight from the can. And it tastes
01:41:36 like it's just been made from your
01:41:37 favorite cafe. Naturally sweet and
01:41:40 naturally creamy in a can. And the
01:41:42 reason why I've invested in this company
01:41:43 and I drink matcha is because matcha as
01:41:45 an energy source gives me lasting energy
01:41:47 without the big crashes that I get from
01:41:49 other products. Grab their ready to
01:41:50 drink canned matcha lattes at Waitro,
01:41:52 Tesco's and Holland and Barrett and
01:41:54 perfected.com where you can use code
01:41:56 Steven40 for 40% off your first
01:42:04 order. What are you struggling with in
01:42:04 this season of life? I think I've asked
01:42:06 you this in every conversation we've had
01:42:07 and the answer's evolved conversation to
01:42:11 conversation. Yeah, we'll both go.
01:42:14 I'm doing so much right now. By the way,
01:42:17 absolute
01:42:18 joy and I wish I had more time in a day.
01:42:23 And not in the sense that I'm dep
01:42:24 prioritizing my friends. You know, you
01:42:26 talked about how you you know, you you
01:42:27 would give them all your money to to
01:42:29 secure them, but you don't give them any
01:42:30 time. I actually treat a lot of I've
01:42:32 actually gotten very good at this. It's
01:42:34 probably when you write a book about
01:42:35 friendship, you sort of like take
01:42:36 yourself on a little bit where I I will
01:42:39 schedule friends like meetings in the
01:42:41 middle of the day. Haven't seen a friend
01:42:42 for a while. Um 4:00 in the
01:42:46 afternoon, tea
01:42:48 with I go and I leave the office like
01:42:52 I'm going to a meeting because nobody
01:42:53 says, "Hey, Simon, where you going?" Go
01:42:54 to a meeting. Where you having the
01:42:56 meeting? At that restaurant. People like
01:42:57 have fun. Nobody will give me any kind
01:43:00 of grief if I'm leaving to go to a
01:43:02 meeting.
01:43:04 Now I go and see a
01:43:06 friend and and when somebody says can I
01:43:08 cancel this French tea with friend
01:43:10 because that you have a phone call you
01:43:11 have to I'm like no just like you
01:43:13 wouldn't cancel on my meeting don't
01:43:15 cancel on so I treat I I put it in and I
01:43:19 give them equal waiting to things that I
01:43:21 have to do at work because I become much
01:43:22 more discerning like do I have to have
01:43:25 this meeting or this phone call today or
01:43:27 can I do it next week? I could do it
01:43:29 next week. And you realize we fake we
01:43:32 fake ur we add fake urgency to
01:43:35 things and I I have a friend who's kind
01:43:38 of amazing. He he's way busier than me
01:43:41 and
01:43:43 he he says I don't want to spend time
01:43:46 with anybody like I saw I saw it was
01:43:47 really funny. He came out of a meeting
01:43:48 and it was he had a meeting with a very
01:43:50 fancy person who's who's courting him
01:43:52 for business, right? Or he should be
01:43:55 courting the other guy actually.
01:43:58 very fancy person and he comes out of
01:44:00 the meeting. I'm like, "How was it?"
01:44:01 He's like, "Total waste of time." I'm
01:44:02 like, "You don't want to do business?
01:44:04 You he doesn't want to work with you?" I
01:44:05 was like, "No, he wants to work with me.
01:44:07 He wants to work with me badly. Total
01:44:09 waste of time." I'm like, "What are you
01:44:11 talking about?" I was like, "He's just
01:44:12 some rich [ __ ] Like, I learned
01:44:15 nothing. I didn't enjoy it and I don't
01:44:18 want to work with them." And I was like,
01:44:19 "Tell me more." He's like, "I only want
01:44:21 to work with people who when I spend
01:44:23 time with them, they teach me something.
01:44:25 I laugh or I feel inspired when I walk
01:44:29 away. And if somebody is sucks my
01:44:31 energy, I do not want to I do not want
01:44:33 to work with them. And I was like,
01:44:36 that's amazing to have that level of
01:44:39 confidence that you would turn down
01:44:41 money in your business. And and now what
01:44:45 if we applied that to as much as
01:44:47 possible in our lives? Like what if we
01:44:49 stopped hanging out with friends who
01:44:50 just sucked our energy? Are they really
01:44:53 friends? rather than spend more time
01:44:56 with people who we enjoy. What if we
01:44:58 take meetings from people we're excited
01:45:00 to take a meeting with, not that we just
01:45:01 see dollar signs and opportunity? And
01:45:04 what if we only partner with companies
01:45:05 where we really like the people who are
01:45:08 who work at those companies? Doesn't you
01:45:10 don't have to have a relationship with
01:45:10 the CEO, but I really they've got a good
01:45:12 culture. I really like working with them
01:45:14 and we make a little less money with
01:45:15 them versus that other company, but I I
01:45:19 really like them because when things go
01:45:20 wrong, I want to call that person. And
01:45:22 and people ask me this all the time.
01:45:24 They say, "How do I choose a publisher?"
01:45:25 And I've seen this mistake a thousand
01:45:26 times. I've seen people like like former
01:45:29 CEOs who are like, "I now I'm going to
01:45:31 write my book." I'm like, "Great. You've
01:45:32 got a lot to say." And they've got
01:45:34 multiple offers and there's a bidding
01:45:35 war. And they always ask me, "Which one
01:45:38 should I go with? Which publisher should
01:45:39 I go with?" And I always say the same
01:45:41 thing. Choose the one you're going to
01:45:42 fight with best. Choose the publisher
01:45:44 you're going to fight with best. They're
01:45:46 like, "What?" I'm like, "The goal is to
01:45:47 make a good book. There's going to be
01:45:49 creative tension. There's going to be
01:45:50 fights. Choose the the the publisher who
01:45:52 you believes in your idea, believes in
01:45:54 you, wants to make a great book, who
01:45:56 you're going to fight with really well.
01:45:58 They every single one of them ignores
01:45:59 me. Every single one of me takes the
01:46:01 biggest bid. And every single one of
01:46:03 them has written a shitty book that
01:46:04 didn't sell. Isn't that just
01:46:05 relationship advice as well, though?
01:46:07 Probably. Yeah.
01:46:10 Choose the person you're going to fight
01:46:11 with best.
01:46:13 And the the the number of times that we
01:46:16 forget about the quality of the product
01:46:18 and we just want the it's the same it's
01:46:21 the same for job interviews. You know,
01:46:23 don't take this is especially true for
01:46:25 for young people. Like when you're
01:46:26 interviewing in in in a relatively
01:46:29 junior job, entry level or slightly
01:46:32 above, don't worry about how much
01:46:33 they're going to pay you. Like just as
01:46:36 long as they pay you a livable wage, you
01:46:39 know, choose the job. Choose the job
01:46:42 based on who you're going to work for.
01:46:44 Choose the person. I used to in early on
01:46:47 in my career, people, you know, HR
01:46:48 people would say, "What are you looking
01:46:49 for?" I always I'd always say the same
01:46:50 thing. I said, "The thing that I'm
01:46:52 looking for is probably like looking for
01:46:53 love, but I'm looking for a mentor." And
01:46:56 every time I would evaluate a job, I
01:46:57 didn't care how glamorous the brand was.
01:46:59 I didn't care how much money they were
01:47:00 going to pay me. And by the way, it's
01:47:01 not like I had money. I knew they were
01:47:03 going to pay me something. I knew I
01:47:03 could pay my bills. It's not like I've
01:47:05 got I'm not a I'm not a trust fund baby.
01:47:07 Like, I needed I needed an income. Mhm.
01:47:09 But one company offered me, you know,
01:47:11 $5,000 more and one company offered me
01:47:13 $5,000 less, but I really like the
01:47:15 person over here. I took that job. And
01:47:17 it was a simp if I got one thing right
01:47:20 as a as a as a as a young person, it's
01:47:22 that I always chose jobs based on who I
01:47:24 would work for, not how much they were
01:47:26 going to pay me or what account or what
01:47:27 brand I was going to work on.
01:47:30 And that's the one thing I got right
01:47:31 because yes, I made less money than all
01:47:33 my friends in the short term, but I got
01:47:35 a I got a I got an education and a care
01:47:37 and a love from somebody who took me
01:47:39 under their wing. I am a I am I am I
01:47:42 learned leadership from Dennis Glennon.
01:47:45 I learned leadership from Peter and
01:47:47 Tomaggio. I learned leadership from
01:47:49 Pamela Muffet. I learned leadership from
01:47:51 these leaders who took a weird liking to
01:47:53 me and took me under their wing. And
01:47:55 they were exceptionally good leaders
01:47:57 themselves. and I got that education and
01:48:00 all of them in the early days paid me
01:48:01 less than I could have got somewhere
01:48:03 else and it's the same choose the people
01:48:07 in my um my book that I wrote I was the
01:48:09 first chapter in it talks about this
01:48:11 idea of these five buckets and I'm
01:48:14 giving I'm trying to give young kids
01:48:15 advice on how to prioritize their career
01:48:17 and it sounds somewhat similar to you so
01:48:18 I'm going to throw this concept at you
01:48:19 and see see how it lands with you so the
01:48:22 idea was that we all have these five
01:48:23 buckets when we're starting our career
01:48:25 and the first bucket is your knowledge
01:48:26 the second bucket is your skills. Now,
01:48:28 these are the f the only buckets that
01:48:31 no professional earthquake in your
01:48:33 career can unfill. You can be fired, you
01:48:35 can be cancelled, whatever. You still
01:48:36 have your knowledge and skills. But the
01:48:38 other three buckets I'm about to name,
01:48:39 they can fluctuate. Bucket number three
01:48:42 is your network can fluctuate. Bucket
01:48:46 number four is your resources can
01:48:48 fluctuate. And bucket number five is
01:48:49 your reputation can fluctuate. And the
01:48:51 idea is that focusing on those first two
01:48:53 buckets when you're young optim choosing
01:48:56 jobs based on how much they're going to
01:48:57 fill those two buckets and also what
01:48:59 they're going to fill them with and how
01:49:00 relevant that information is. And when
01:49:02 knowledge is applied, it becomes a
01:49:04 skill. So you focus on filling your
01:49:06 knowledge. You apply that knowledge into
01:49:07 skills and that really is the essence of
01:49:09 career longevity. And as I noticed over
01:49:11 time with people that I I hired and then
01:49:13 watched them throughout their careers
01:49:14 and what they did, it seems to me that
01:49:17 life over the long term typically brings
01:49:19 you back down or up to the level of your
01:49:22 knowledge and skills. I.e. I had this
01:49:23 one kid stepped down from my company
01:49:25 because he got a job offer at 21 to go
01:49:26 be a CEO in America. And as he departs,
01:49:29 I'm thinking he has not got the
01:49:30 knowledge and skills to be a CEO. Within
01:49:32 24 months, the company had gone bust. He
01:49:34 was back down to doing the same job he
01:49:36 did for me. And I thought life just like
01:49:38 resets you to the level of your
01:49:39 knowledge and skills over time. So what
01:49:41 do you think of this? Are these I think
01:49:43 we're saying the exact same thing. You
01:49:44 did it more eloquently than me, you
01:49:46 know. I think I think it's 100% right.
01:49:49 Uh um and the people who will fill that
01:49:53 bucket with knowledge and skills are the
01:49:55 people who again for some reason they're
01:49:57 good people. They're good leaders. They
01:49:58 take a liking to you and they will give
01:50:00 you they will put you in
01:50:02 situations and they will let you screw
01:50:04 up and fix your own problems. fix your
01:50:06 own mistakes. Then that's what my bosses
01:50:08 did for me. They rewarded my behavior
01:50:10 when I got it right as opposed to my
01:50:12 results. Never got rewarded for my
01:50:14 results. I always got rewarded for my
01:50:15 behavior. So if I showed initiative, I
01:50:17 got a I got a reward even if the results
01:50:19 didn't follow right. And I could there's
01:50:22 I can tell you a great story on that.
01:50:23 And if I got things wrong, they would
01:50:25 say, "Hm, wow, what are you going to
01:50:27 do?" Really screwed that one up, didn't
01:50:30 you? Okay, what are you going to do? And
01:50:32 they didn't they weren't happy with me,
01:50:36 but they let me fix my own messes and
01:50:38 they stood by and I knew that they were
01:50:39 there if I needed them. You know, Peter
01:50:41 and Tomaggio, one of the best leaders I
01:50:43 ever worked for, annoyingly he never
01:50:44 answered a single question I asked. Hey,
01:50:46 Peter, what should I do? I don't know.
01:50:48 What do you think we should do? Well, I
01:50:49 think we should do this. I'm like, okay,
01:50:50 so go do that. You know, what do you
01:50:52 think, Peter? I'm asking you because I
01:50:55 don't know. That's why I'm asking you.
01:50:57 He's like, well, should probably go
01:50:59 think about that. He was he it was the
01:51:01 worst. But what he taught me was
01:51:03 self-reliance. What what he taught me
01:51:05 was self-reliance. What he taught me was
01:51:07 if I don't know then I have to go keep
01:51:09 searching and keep talking to people. I
01:51:11 have to have a point of view. Mhm. And
01:51:13 may not be right and I'll find that out
01:51:16 myself too. And I also learned to have
01:51:18 backup plans from him because something
01:51:19 went haywire on me and it went so wrong.
01:51:22 It ended up being okay. But they he made
01:51:25 me sweat it. And I remember at the end
01:51:27 of the day, at the end of this whole
01:51:29 thing that went wrong. That was totally
01:51:30 my fault. The phone rings. I see his 6
01:51:34 p.m. phone rings. I see his name come up
01:51:36 on the caller ID. And I pick up the
01:51:37 phone. I remember the whole call word
01:51:38 for word. Right. Pick up the phone. I
01:51:41 go, "Hello." He says, "Close call
01:51:44 today." I said, "Yep." He said, "Better
01:51:47 to get shaved by the bullet than hit by
01:51:49 the bullet." I went, "Yep." He said,
01:51:52 "Have a good night." I said, "You too."
01:51:55 That was the whole phone call. And so
01:51:58 since then, since that experience, I
01:52:00 always have a backup plan. Now, it
01:52:01 doesn't mean it's all ready to go, but
01:52:02 I've thought about if this thing that
01:52:04 I'm trying to do doesn't work, what will
01:52:06 I do? And I have at least committed some
01:52:09 thought to it. So, if if something does
01:52:10 go wrong, I'm like, I'm a little bit
01:52:12 ahead. Either have it planned or I'm
01:52:14 like, okay, okay, don't worry. I kind of
01:52:16 if this happened, I thought about this
01:52:17 already. And it's only because of these
01:52:19 great leaders. And it goes, this is this
01:52:22 recurring theme of this whole
01:52:23 conversation, which is it's the
01:52:24 struggle. It's the journey, not the
01:52:27 destination. It's the human beings that
01:52:29 guide us. It's the human beings that
01:52:30 hold space for us that make us better
01:52:33 what we do better better than how we
01:52:35 show up in the world. And AI will
01:52:37 absolutely make our lives easier. Like
01:52:38 most technology makes our lives easier.
01:52:41 That's kind of the role, the rule of
01:52:42 technology, which is to make life a
01:52:44 little easier, a little more efficient,
01:52:46 a little quicker, a little less, you
01:52:48 know, strain on the muscles. you know,
01:52:50 that's kind of what it does, you know,
01:52:53 from the from the plow, you know, all
01:52:56 the way up to the internet and AI. It
01:52:58 just makes life a little
01:53:00 easier. But we're still human beings who
01:53:02 are forced to live with human beings.
01:53:03 You're writing a book about friendship
01:53:05 that we're all waiting for. Yeah. I'm
01:53:07 not going to ask you when it's due cuz I
01:53:09 don't want to be your publisher, but um
01:53:10 I know that they they chase and chase
01:53:12 and chase and chase, but my I guess my
01:53:15 closing question is why? Of all the
01:53:16 things you could have written about,
01:53:17 Simon, you're someone who's able to
01:53:19 traverse se several subject matters
01:53:20 across business and life and everything
01:53:22 in between, but you've committed
01:53:23 yourself to the struggle of writing a
01:53:27 book about friendship. Mhm. There's an
01:53:30 entire industry to help us be better
01:53:32 leaders, right? There's an entire
01:53:34 industry to help you have a successful
01:53:36 relationship or successful marriage or
01:53:38 even find a partner, right? Industries,
01:53:41 books, companies.
01:53:43 There's very little on how to be a
01:53:45 friend. And if you think about if you're
01:53:48 going to have a successful career and
01:53:50 can and can survive the stresses of
01:53:53 career and if you're going to have a
01:53:54 successful romantic relationship or
01:53:56 marriage and survive that, do you know
01:53:58 what what you need in both of those
01:54:00 circumstances? Friends. Because when
01:54:02 your marriage is falling apart, you go
01:54:04 to a friend. When your job is falling
01:54:05 apart, you go to a friend. When and and
01:54:08 there's a few things that I've
01:54:09 discovered about friends that I find
01:54:12 delightful. And I have been reorganizing
01:54:15 my life to as I and I mentioned it
01:54:18 before like I've been reorganizing my
01:54:19 life to ensure that my friends aren't
01:54:22 taken for granted and that sometimes I
01:54:24 do depp prioritize work in order to see
01:54:26 my friends and spend time with my
01:54:27 friends because I know it feels good to
01:54:29 them and I know it feels good to me and
01:54:32 I know that the only reason I can get
01:54:35 through any work stress or personal
01:54:36 stress I have is because of those
01:54:38 magical human beings and I will not take
01:54:39 them for granted and um doesn't I mean
01:54:42 it's always easy. I'm conflicted often
01:54:47 but I'm trying. And I also know if you
01:54:49 look at the work the world today and
01:54:50 like there's so much conversation about
01:54:52 loneliness, depression, anxiety,
01:54:53 inability to cope with stress, even the
01:54:55 obsession with longevity. Like there's
01:54:57 so much about these subjects and some
01:55:00 people treat it with drugs and then
01:55:01 meditation and vacations and burn. Like
01:55:03 there's so many theories. The one thing
01:55:05 that fixes all of those things is
01:55:08 friends. Friendship is the ultimate
01:55:10 biohack. You know, we've talked about
01:55:12 this before. I fundamentally believe
01:55:14 that. And if it's so valuable, like if I
01:55:17 know if you know vegetables are good for
01:55:18 you, you eat more vegetables. If you
01:55:21 know exercise is good for you, you do
01:55:23 more exercise. So if I say friends are
01:55:24 good for you, shouldn't you do more
01:55:26 friendships, right? Like shouldn't you
01:55:29 exercise is not fun or easy and you have
01:55:31 to get over a hump sometimes? Eating
01:55:34 vegetables can sometimes be boring and
01:55:36 unsatisfying, but you do it and you find
01:55:38 new ways. And so maybe friendship is not
01:55:41 always easy or fun, but it's still
01:55:44 really really good for you. And it the
01:55:46 best thing about friends is it actually
01:55:47 doesn't taste like spinach. It's like
01:55:49 you get the benefits of spinach, but it
01:55:51 tastes like chocolate cake. If you get
01:55:52 friendship right, it's it's the
01:55:55 healthiest thing in the world. How do I
01:55:56 know if someone's a friend?
01:55:59 Have that conversation with them because
01:56:01 I know a lot of people. Yeah. Yeah. I
01:56:03 mean, like, and you have deal friends,
01:56:04 you know, you have a lot of deal
01:56:06 friends, you know, podcast friends.
01:56:07 Podcast. Yeah. uh work friends, you
01:56:10 know, and you and we have and not look,
01:56:12 I'm not talking about there's all kinds
01:56:14 of friends. There's friends that you
01:56:14 just like hanging out with. They're just
01:56:16 fun, but you're not going to go with
01:56:17 them with your problems or to sort out,
01:56:19 you know, issues. You're not you're just
01:56:20 not work or personal. They're just fun,
01:56:24 right? There's nothing wrong with that.
01:56:26 Um, but I think, you know, I'm certainly
01:56:28 guilty of spending time with people
01:56:30 that, you know, they fill a space and
01:56:32 they make me feel not lonely, but at the
01:56:33 end of the day, I don't feel
01:56:36 smarter, inspired, brighter, lighter
01:56:39 when they when I say goodbye. I'm just
01:56:41 like, "All right, bye. That was fun."
01:56:42 And I kind of want to spend more time
01:56:44 with people who lift me, teach me,
01:56:46 support me, love me, give me a give me a
01:56:49 chance to serve. They open up to me and
01:56:51 let me serve as well. You know, I
01:56:53 struggled to make friends and I
01:56:56 think Do you know why? I
01:57:00 think
01:57:02 I I think I'm lazy with it. Lazy with
01:57:06 friendships. So, I will meet someone,
01:57:08 I'll have a great connection with them
01:57:11 and then my followup like I don't really
01:57:14 know what to do next. So, I'll meet your
01:57:16 followup is crap. Oh, [ __ ] But this
01:57:19 is what I mean. Like my I'll meet
01:57:21 someone. I'll text you and maybe I'll
01:57:23 get a response. Vice versa.
01:57:26 I think you left me on red.
01:57:32 But you you're the same. Are you the
01:57:32 same or is it just with me? It's just
01:57:34 with me. It's just with you. But but I
01:57:36 think my follow-up game is like crap.
01:57:38 I'll meet someone. I'll go, "Oh my god,
01:57:39 I'll see I'll see the potential for a
01:57:41 friendship and then I won't know what I
01:57:45 have." Or maybe I'm just being lazy. I'm
01:57:46 trying to I want to be honest. So I I I
01:57:49 maybe I just don't prioritize it enough.
01:57:51 I think also when you start having fame
01:57:52 and money and you're used to being the
01:57:55 boss, you get away with stuff. So you
01:57:59 show up late, everybody's like pissed
01:58:01 off and angry and then you show up and
01:58:03 they're like and you're like sorry. Like
01:58:04 no, no, no, don't worry, don't worry.
01:58:05 Right? Like you get away with stuff in
01:58:07 the world, right? And so I think what
01:58:09 that does is I see this with celebrities
01:58:11 all the time, right? Because everybody
01:58:13 yeses them to death and they get away
01:58:14 with it and nobody ever holds them
01:58:16 accountable. At some point they just get
01:58:18 lazier and lazier and lazier because
01:58:19 they can. Oh yeah. You know. Yeah. And
01:58:22 so they don't have to put in the effort
01:58:23 because other people put in the effort.
01:58:24 Yeah. And nobody bees like like somebody
01:58:27 who's a nobody won't say to them, "Yo,
01:58:31 [ __ ] Not respectful. What? You think
01:58:34 my schedule doesn't matter? I've been
01:58:36 waiting here for 3
01:58:38 hours. Just because you're a celebrity,
01:58:40 you think you can just keep me waiting?
01:58:42 Not cool. Nobody says that to them."
01:58:44 Yeah. And somebody should say that to
01:58:45 them. But uh they should say it to
01:58:47 themselves. They should say it to
01:58:48 themselves. That would be ideal. And
01:58:50 some of them have the self-awareness to
01:58:51 know they're getting away with it.
01:58:52 That's even worse cuz then they're doing
01:58:53 it on purpose. At least blindness, I
01:58:55 think. You know, they can at least hide
01:58:56 behind ignorance. But, uh, yeah, I mean,
01:59:00 friendship takes effort. Yeah. There'll
01:59:03 be a lot of people listening now, I
01:59:04 know, that understand. I think they'll
01:59:06 resonate with what I'm saying, which is
01:59:08 I'll meet someone, I'll be like, we
01:59:09 could be really good friends. I see so
01:59:11 much in us. I love what you stand for.
01:59:13 We we have so much in common. and then
01:59:15 it drifts because neither party have the
01:59:18 tools or the skill of like what to do
01:59:21 then. We also live in a strange world
01:59:23 where I've met people where I have all
01:59:25 of that and I follow up like
01:59:26 immediately. I'm like, "Hey, I had such
01:59:28 a good time. Let's make a plan." And
01:59:29 they're like, "What? Huh? What?" Or I
01:59:30 call as opposed to like texting. And
01:59:33 people like, "What? Why are you
01:59:34 calling?" Like, "Well, we we had a nice
01:59:35 time. I thought we'd maybe talk, you
01:59:38 know, and I think we live in this
01:59:40 strange world where people put it out
01:59:42 there, but they don't really want it."
01:59:43 Looping us right back to the beginning
01:59:44 of this conversation as you said that
01:59:46 about the call. That made me think again
01:59:48 about how this going to become a premium
01:59:50 on human because calling is so archaic
01:59:54 to me that when someone does it, it's
01:59:56 like a treat now. And I was thinking
01:59:58 what's what's taking that even further
02:00:00 would be writing someone a letter. If
02:00:02 someone Do you know who wrote me a
02:00:03 letter? Evan from Snapchat came on the
02:00:05 podcast, the founder and CEO of
02:00:06 Snapchat. And then by the time I'd got
02:00:08 back to London, there was a letter on my
02:00:10 desk from Evan and it just said, "I had
02:00:11 a great conversation with you. Um, thank
02:00:13 you for being so thoughtful with the
02:00:15 questions. Thank you for the research.
02:00:16 Here's my number. would love to stay in
02:00:17 touch. Yeah. And it blew me away. AI
02:00:19 wrote that.
02:00:24 No, it was with He had an auto pen. He
02:00:24 just It was with a pen. I had a
02:00:27 signature and his phone number. I
02:00:28 thought that is so beautiful. It's
02:00:29 classic. It's classic and classy.
02:00:32 There's a premium on being human.
02:00:34 Simon, thank you so much. Thank you for
02:00:36 being so generous with your time always.
02:00:37 Thank you for always my show. um you
02:00:39 always move me forward in my thinking in
02:00:41 such a profound and unexpected always
02:00:42 unexpected way that I'll tremendous I'll
02:00:44 value tremendously for a very very long
02:00:46 time in our friendship I I'm going to
02:00:48 text back even faster you know we need
02:00:50 to go on more dates um and I look
02:00:52 forward to that and look forward to our
02:00:53 next date in London which I know is
02:00:54 coming up sometime soon yeah we'll go
02:00:55 out for sure it'll be fun we have a
02:00:57 closing tradition which nearly forgot I
02:00:58 do know the tradition which is the last
02:00:59 guest leaves a question for the next
02:01:01 guest yes what's my question what are
02:01:02 you doing in your life to mentor someone
02:01:06 coming up behind you and Then who is a
02:01:09 person that you'd like to mentor, teach,
02:01:12 or coach that needs your voice the
02:01:15 most? I it's it's my team is everything
02:01:19 right now. Like I want to give
02:01:21 everything I've learned to my team. I
02:01:22 want the folks on my team to benefit
02:01:25 from all the mistakes I've made. And one
02:01:28 of the joys of being in founder mode
02:01:30 when it's
02:01:31 not the the actual beginning is I have
02:01:36 way more in my skill and knowledge
02:01:38 bucket that I want to pour out. And so I
02:01:42 one of the reasons I'm having so much
02:01:44 fun in founder mode is because I want to
02:01:48 give away everything that I've learned
02:01:49 so that my team can be stronger and
02:01:51 stronger and better and better cuz I
02:01:53 want to leave something that can survive
02:01:54 me that you know if if I you know the
02:01:58 whole school bus test you know if the
02:01:59 founder gets hit by a bus will the
02:02:00 company continue or will it not and I
02:02:03 really want to build something where
02:02:05 they want to build it without me. Feels
02:02:07 like there's been a change here. M what
02:02:09 was the catalyst? For the past couple
02:02:11 years, I've been just trying out a lot
02:02:12 of different things to find to to find
02:02:15 uh a level of excitement and energy that
02:02:18 I think I'd lost for a little bit and I
02:02:19 found it. Like this has been like the
02:02:22 founder mode. My team are so great and
02:02:25 they so want to they so want to push
02:02:27 boundaries and all I want to do is take
02:02:29 take the reinss off like take the leash
02:02:31 off. Like I want them to experiment. I
02:02:33 want them to try things and I'm trying
02:02:34 to create an environment where they're
02:02:35 creative. They do things. Half of them
02:02:37 will fail. I don't care. Let's try
02:02:39 again. And I I just love being around
02:02:42 all the creative ideas that they're
02:02:44 coming up with. My team asked you to
02:02:46 bring something that meant a lot to you,
02:02:47 and you brought me this. And I don't
02:02:49 know what's in this
02:03:01 Oh, two medallions. Medals. Mhm. Those
02:03:01 are military challenge coins. Um, I
02:03:04 brought the one, the round one, just to
02:03:05 show you what the traditional ones look
02:03:06 like. Um, uh, this is the one I care
02:03:10 about. I mean, I care about them both,
02:03:11 but this is the one I brought. So, these
02:03:13 are, uh, only generals or commanders
02:03:16 will give these out. They're hard to
02:03:17 get. You get them when you do something
02:03:20 of service. It's, it's less formal than
02:03:23 a medal. They can give it out to
02:03:24 whomever they want. And it's their way
02:03:26 of saying thank you. And the challenge
02:03:28 coins that I've been given, I'm very,
02:03:29 very proud of because I feel like I
02:03:30 earned them. And the thing that I love
02:03:32 is when they give them to you, they
02:03:33 don't just hand it to you. They put it
02:03:35 in their hand like this and they shake
02:03:36 your
02:03:37 hand. Go
02:03:39 on. And that's how they give them to
02:03:41 you. And they say, "Thank you, Simon, so
02:03:43 much for coming here and helping us
02:03:44 out." And that's how they give me the
02:03:46 coin. The reason this one means a lot to
02:03:49 me is because I did some work with the
02:03:52 with Air Force Top Gun. It's called the
02:03:54 Weapons School, but it's Air Force Top
02:03:55 Gun. And this is their coin and this is
02:03:58 their patch. That's And um I did some
02:04:00 work with them to help them get to the
02:04:02 core of their why, what their true value
02:04:03 was. just to make sure that their
02:04:05 culture stays clear and good for a long
02:04:07 time. And we came up with three words,
02:04:09 three actions that everybody who goes
02:04:11 through Air Force Top Gun is required to
02:04:12 do, which is build, teach, lead, which
02:04:15 is the idea that you build a skill set,
02:04:18 you teach that skill set to other
02:04:20 people, and then you build leaders and
02:04:22 you lead, right? This whole idea that
02:04:24 you have you have a responsibility to
02:04:26 build, to teach, and to lead, accumulate
02:04:28 and give and serve. And the thing that
02:04:31 is so powerful is the comedant of the
02:04:33 weapon school after we did the work. He
02:04:35 took those words and he put them on the
02:04:37 coin. Oh really? And they exist on the
02:04:39 coin and they have been on there for
02:04:41 years since. And I am so proud to have
02:04:43 given something that has longevity that
02:04:46 is literally on the coin.
02:04:49 Build, teach, lead. Yeah. That is such a
02:04:53 beautiful mantra for life. Yeah. And
02:04:55 they're they're wonderful people who go
02:04:57 there. And uh what an honor that work
02:05:00 that I did ended up on a coin. And so
02:05:03 they gave me the coin out of gratitude
02:05:06 for the work that I did and it had my
02:05:07 words on it. So it's not my words, it's
02:05:09 their words. I just helped distill them.
02:05:11 It's who they are when they're at their
02:05:13 natural best. I just helped them put it
02:05:15 and codify it. Simon, thank you. Thanks.
02:05:18 Always love our conversations and long
02:05:20 may they continue. Likewise.
02:05:25 This has always blown my mind a little
02:05:25 bit. 53% of you that listen to this show
02:05:28 regularly haven't yet subscribed to the
02:05:30 show. So, could I ask you for a favor?
02:05:32 If you like the show and you like what
02:05:33 we do here and you want to support us,
02:05:35 the free simple way that you can do just
02:05:36 that is by hitting the subscribe button.
02:05:38 And my commitment to you is if you do
02:05:40 that, then I'll do everything in my
02:05:41 power, me and my team, to make sure that
02:05:43 this show is better for you every single
02:05:45 week. We'll listen to your feedback.
02:05:47 We'll find the guests that you want me
02:05:48 to speak to and we'll continue to do
02:05:50 what we do. Thank you so much. Heat.
02:05:52 Heat. N.
identifier: 3056
model: gemini-2.5-flash-preview-05-20| input-price: 0.15 output-price: 3.5 max-context-length: 128_000
host: 193.8.40.111
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc6q04o8Y6oinclude_comments: None
include_timestamps: 1
include_glossary: None
output_language: en
cost: 0.0089323
*Abstract:* This video features Jeff Kr, a cybersecurity architect and adjunct professor, answering various internet questions about the history of hacking and contemporary cybersecurity challenges. The discussion covers the evolution of hacking, from early phone phreaking and physical access to modern internet-based attacks. Key topics include influential hackers like Kevin Mitnick, the origin and types of "hackers" (black, white, and grey hat), significant cyber incidents such as the Stuxnet virus, WannaCry ransomware, and the Colonial Pipeline attack, and the OPM data breach. Kr also explains fundamental cybersecurity concepts like the CIA triad, firewalls, and encryption, and discusses the security implications of open-source software, VPNs, password managers, and election systems. He emphasizes the human element in cybersecurity vulnerabilities, particularly regarding social engineering and phishing scams, while offering practical advice for personal and organizational security. *A Deep Dive into Cybersecurity: History, Threats, and Defenses* * *0:16 The Most Influential Hacker:* Kevin Mitnick is cited as the most influential and infamous hacker, renowned for his social engineering tactics and past arrests for phone system abuse. * *1:00 Origin of "Hack":* The term "hack" originated in the 1960s at MIT's model train club, referring to creative, unconventional uses of technology. By the 1970s-80s, it evolved to mean unauthorized access. * *1:27 Types of Hackers:* Hackers are categorized by "hat colors": "black hats" (malicious intent), "white hats" (ethical, report vulnerabilities for good), and "grey hats" (cross ethical lines despite claiming good intentions). * *2:10 Evolution of Hacking:* Early hacking in the 1960s focused on physical access to computers. The 1970s saw "phone phreakers" manipulating phone systems, and the 1980s-90s brought the internet, drastically expanding hacking possibilities globally. * *3:38 Government Website Hacking:* A notable early instance was the 1996 defacement of the CIA website. To prevent such attacks, key advice includes changing default credentials, disabling unnecessary services, regularly updating software, and using multi-factor authentication. * *4:59 Open-Source Encryption and Kirkoff's Principle:* The principle states that the security of a cryptographic system should rely solely on the secrecy of the keys, not the algorithm itself, meaning open-source algorithms can be secure. * *6:39 The Deep and Dark Web:* The internet is likened to an iceberg: the "surface web" (5%) is indexed, while the "deep web" (95%) is not and requires authentication. The "dark web" is a subset of the deep web, unindexed and requiring special tools, used for both illicit activities and anonymous communication by whistleblowers or dissidents. * *8:17 Stuxnet Virus:* This malware was designed to physically disrupt Iranian nuclear centrifuges by making them speed up and slow down, impairing uranium enrichment. It was widely attributed to the US and Israel. * *9:33 OPM Data Breach:* Discusses the implications of data breaches where personal information, including fingerprints, is compromised. Recommends avoiding unnecessary data sharing and utilizing credit monitoring/freezes to mitigate risks. * *10:43 TikTok Ban Concerns:* Banning applications like TikTok is generally ineffective as it drives activity underground. Concerns about data privacy and misinformation are universal, regardless of a company's country of origin. * *12:06 Election Vulnerabilities:* Paper ballots are preferred over electronic voting systems for their resilience against power outages and for recountability, as electronic votes are difficult to verify retrospectively. * *12:53 The I Love You Virus:* This virus spread virally by overwriting various file types, making systems harder to disinfect and maximizing its reach. * *13:17 Stopping WannaCry:* Marcus Hutchins halted the WannaCry ransomware in May 2017 by registering a specific domain name that the malware was programmed to check, acting as a "kill switch" to stop its replication. * *14:18 Colonial Pipeline Ransomware:* The pipeline shutdown was a cautious decision by operators, not directly caused by the ransomware itself. Although a $5 million ransom was paid, the decryption tool was ineffective, forcing reliance on backups, with the FBI later recovering half the ransom. * *15:47 Firewall Explained:* A firewall acts as a digital "gatekeeper" or "zone of separation" between networks of different trust levels (e.g., internal vs. internet), enforcing security policies to control incoming and outgoing traffic. * *16:41 VPNs and Anonymity:* VPNs primarily encrypt internet traffic to protect sensitive information and can hide a user's original IP address, offering anonymity. However, trust is transferred from the ISP to the VPN provider, who can see all traffic, making provider choice crucial. * *18:54 Why Phishing and Scams Persist:* These scams remain profitable due to the human tendency to trust, which attackers exploit through social engineering. Tactics constantly evolve, including "smishing" (SMS), "vishing" (voicemail), and "quishing" (QR codes). * *21:11 Password Managers and Passkeys:* While no system is perfectly "safe," password managers can be "safe enough" if a strong master password and multi-factor authentication are used. Passkeys, a newer cryptographic standard, are more phishing-resistant as they don't require users to remember passwords and rely on device-based cryptographic keys. * *21:54 Virus Likelihood Today:* Catching a virus is still possible, despite advanced antivirus software. Modern antivirus systems have evolved from signature-based detection to behavior-based analysis. Regular software updates and reboots are crucial defenses. * *23:01 Most Damaging Hacks:* Damage is measured in various ways (financial, systems, lives). An indirect example of life loss is a hospital ransomware attack that redirected emergency services, leading to a patient's death during transport. * *23:40 The CIA Triad:* A foundational concept in cybersecurity, standing for Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability—the three core principles of protecting information. * *24:10 The First Computer Virus:* The Morris Worm (1988), a self-replicating program, is considered the first widespread example of malware that brought public awareness to harmful software. * *24:49 Phone Phreaking Revisited:* An older attack method from the pre-internet era, where individuals manipulated the phone system using specific tones (like the 2600 Hz tone from a Captain Crunch whistle) to make free calls or reconfigure switches. * *26:08 Realistic Hacking in Movies:* Real-world hacking is often tedious and not visually exciting, involving hours of background processes. Movies dramatize it for entertainment, often inaccurately. I used gemini-2.5-flash-preview-05-20| input-price: 0.15 output-price: 3.5 max-context-length: 128_000 on rocketrecap dot com to summarize the transcript. Cost (if I didn't use the free tier): $0.0089 Input tokens: 24362 Output tokens: 1508
Abstract:
This video features Jeff Kr, a cybersecurity architect and adjunct professor, answering various internet questions about the history of hacking and contemporary cybersecurity challenges. The discussion covers the evolution of hacking, from early phone phreaking and physical access to modern internet-based attacks. Key topics include influential hackers like Kevin Mitnick, the origin and types of "hackers" (black, white, and grey hat), significant cyber incidents such as the Stuxnet virus, WannaCry ransomware, and the Colonial Pipeline attack, and the OPM data breach. Kr also explains fundamental cybersecurity concepts like the CIA triad, firewalls, and encryption, and discusses the security implications of open-source software, VPNs, password managers, and election systems. He emphasizes the human element in cybersecurity vulnerabilities, particularly regarding social engineering and phishing scams, while offering practical advice for personal and organizational security.
A Deep Dive into Cybersecurity: History, Threats, and Defenses
Below, I will provide input for an example video (comprising of title, description, and transcript, in this order) and the corresponding abstract and summary I expect. Afterward, I will provide a new transcript that I want you to summarize in the same format.
**Please give an abstract of the transcript and then summarize the transcript in a self-contained bullet list format.** Include starting timestamps, important details and key takeaways.
Example Input:
Fluidigm Polaris Part 2- illuminator and camera
mikeselectricstuff
131K subscribers
Subscribed
369
Share
Download
Clip
Save
5,857 views Aug 26, 2024
Fluidigm Polaris part 1 : • Fluidigm Polaris (Part 1) - Biotech g...
Ebay listings: https://www.ebay.co.uk/usr/mikeselect...
Merch https://mikeselectricstuff.creator-sp...
Transcript
Follow along using the transcript.
Show transcript
mikeselectricstuff
131K subscribers
Videos
About
Support on Patreon
40 Comments
@robertwatsonbath
6 hours ago
Thanks Mike. Ooof! - with the level of bodgery going on around 15:48 I think shame would have made me do a board re spin, out of my own pocket if I had to.
1
Reply
@Muonium1
9 hours ago
The green LED looks different from the others and uses phosphor conversion because of the "green gap" problem where green InGaN emitters suffer efficiency droop at high currents. Phosphide based emitters don't start becoming efficient until around 600nm so also can't be used for high power green emitters. See the paper and plot by Matthias Auf der Maur in his 2015 paper on alloy fluctuations in InGaN as the cause of reduced external quantum efficiency at longer (green) wavelengths.
4
Reply
1 reply
@tafsirnahian669
10 hours ago (edited)
Can this be used as an astrophotography camera?
Reply
mikeselectricstuff
·
1 reply
@mikeselectricstuff
6 hours ago
Yes, but may need a shutter to avoid light during readout
Reply
@2010craggy
11 hours ago
Narrowband filters we use in Astronomy (Astrophotography) are sided- they work best passing light in one direction so I guess the arrows on the filter frames indicate which way round to install them in the filter wheel.
1
Reply
@vitukz
12 hours ago
A mate with Channel @extractions&ire could use it
2
Reply
@RobertGallop
19 hours ago
That LED module says it can go up to 28 amps!!! 21 amps for 100%. You should see what it does at 20 amps!
Reply
@Prophes0r
19 hours ago
I had an "Oh SHIT!" moment when I realized that the weird trapezoidal shape of that light guide was for keystone correction of the light source.
Very clever.
6
Reply
@OneBiOzZ
20 hours ago
given the cost of the CCD you think they could have run another PCB for it
9
Reply
@tekvax01
21 hours ago
$20 thousand dollars per minute of run time!
1
Reply
@tekvax01
22 hours ago
"We spared no expense!" John Hammond Jurassic Park.
*(that's why this thing costs the same as a 50-seat Greyhound Bus coach!)
Reply
@florianf4257
22 hours ago
The smearing on the image could be due to the fact that you don't use a shutter, so you see brighter stripes under bright areas of the image as you still iluminate these pixels while the sensor data ist shifted out towards the top. I experienced this effect back at university with a LN-Cooled CCD for Spectroscopy. The stripes disapeared as soon as you used the shutter instead of disabling it in the open position (but fokussing at 100ms integration time and continuous readout with a focal plane shutter isn't much fun).
12
Reply
mikeselectricstuff
·
1 reply
@mikeselectricstuff
12 hours ago
I didn't think of that, but makes sense
2
Reply
@douro20
22 hours ago (edited)
The red LED reminds me of one from Roithner Lasertechnik. I have a Symbol 2D scanner which uses two very bright LEDs from that company, one red and one red-orange. The red-orange is behind a lens which focuses it into an extremely narrow beam.
1
Reply
@RicoElectrico
23 hours ago
PFG is Pulse Flush Gate according to the datasheet.
Reply
@dcallan812
23 hours ago
Very interesting. 2x
Reply
@littleboot_
1 day ago
Cool interesting device
Reply
@dav1dbone
1 day ago
I've stripped large projectors, looks similar, wonder if some of those castings are a magnesium alloy?
Reply
@kevywevvy8833
1 day ago
ironic that some of those Phlatlight modules are used in some of the cheapest disco lights.
1
Reply
1 reply
@bill6255
1 day ago
Great vid - gets right into subject in title, its packed with information, wraps up quickly. Should get a YT award! imho
3
Reply
@JAKOB1977
1 day ago (edited)
The whole sensor module incl. a 5 grand 50mpix sensor for 49 £.. highest bid atm
Though also a limited CCD sensor, but for the right buyer its a steal at these relative low sums.
Architecture Full Frame CCD (Square Pixels)
Total Number of Pixels 8304 (H) × 6220 (V) = 51.6 Mp
Number of Effective Pixels 8208 (H) × 6164 (V) = 50.5 Mp
Number of Active Pixels 8176 (H) × 6132 (V) = 50.1 Mp
Pixel Size 6.0 m (H) × 6.0 m (V)
Active Image Size 49.1 mm (H) × 36.8 mm (V)
61.3 mm (Diagonal),
645 1.1x Optical Format
Aspect Ratio 4:3
Horizontal Outputs 4
Saturation Signal 40.3 ke−
Output Sensitivity 31 V/e−
Quantum Efficiency
KAF−50100−CAA
KAF−50100−AAA
KAF−50100−ABA (with Lens)
22%, 22%, 16% (Peak R, G, B)
25%
62%
Read Noise (f = 18 MHz) 12.5 e−
Dark Signal (T = 60°C) 42 pA/cm2
Dark Current Doubling Temperature 5.7°C
Dynamic Range (f = 18 MHz) 70.2 dB
Estimated Linear Dynamic Range
(f = 18 MHz)
69.3 dB
Charge Transfer Efficiency
Horizontal
Vertical
0.999995
0.999999
Blooming Protection
(4 ms Exposure Time)
800X Saturation Exposure
Maximum Date Rate 18 MHz
Package Ceramic PGA
Cover Glass MAR Coated, 2 Sides or
Clear Glass
Features
• TRUESENSE Transparent Gate Electrode
for High Sensitivity
• Ultra-High Resolution
• Board Dynamic Range
• Low Noise Architecture
• Large Active Imaging Area
Applications
• Digitization
• Mapping/Aerial
• Photography
• Scientific
Thx for the tear down Mike, always a joy
Reply
@martinalooksatthings
1 day ago
15:49 that is some great bodging on of caps, they really didn't want to respin that PCB huh
8
Reply
@RhythmGamer
1 day ago
Was depressed today and then a new mike video dropped and now I’m genuinely happy to get my tear down fix
1
Reply
@dine9093
1 day ago (edited)
Did you transfrom into Mr Blobby for a moment there?
2
Reply
@NickNorton
1 day ago
Thanks Mike. Your videos are always interesting.
5
Reply
@KeritechElectronics
1 day ago
Heavy optics indeed... Spare no expense, cost no object. Splendid build quality. The CCD is a thing of beauty!
1
Reply
@YSoreil
1 day ago
The pricing on that sensor is about right, I looked in to these many years ago when they were still in production since it's the only large sensor you could actually buy. Really cool to see one in the wild.
2
Reply
@snik2pl
1 day ago
That leds look like from led projector
Reply
@vincei4252
1 day ago
TDI = Time Domain Integration ?
1
Reply
@wolpumba4099
1 day ago (edited)
Maybe the camera should not be illuminated during readout.
From the datasheet of the sensor (Onsemi): saturation 40300 electrons, read noise 12.5 electrons per pixel @ 18MHz (quite bad). quantum efficiency 62% (if it has micro lenses), frame rate 1 Hz. lateral overflow drain to prevent blooming protects against 800x (factor increases linearly with exposure time) saturation exposure (32e6 electrons per pixel at 4ms exposure time), microlens has +/- 20 degree acceptance angle
i guess it would be good for astrophotography
4
Reply
@txm100
1 day ago (edited)
Babe wake up a new mikeselectricstuff has dropped!
9
Reply
@vincei4252
1 day ago
That looks like a finger-lakes filter wheel, however, for astronomy they'd never use such a large stepper.
1
Reply
@MRooodddvvv
1 day ago
yaaaaay ! more overcomplicated optical stuff !
4
Reply
1 reply
@NoPegs
1 day ago
He lives!
11
Reply
1 reply
Transcript
0:00
so I've stripped all the bits of the
0:01
optical system so basically we've got
0:03
the uh the camera
0:05
itself which is mounted on this uh very
0:09
complex
0:10
adjustment thing which obviously to set
0:13
you the various tilt and uh alignment
0:15
stuff then there's two of these massive
0:18
lenses I've taken one of these apart I
0:20
think there's something like about eight
0:22
or nine Optical elements in here these
0:25
don't seem to do a great deal in terms
0:26
of electr magnification they're obiously
0:28
just about getting the image to where it
0:29
uh where it needs to be just so that
0:33
goes like that then this Optical block I
0:36
originally thought this was made of some
0:37
s crazy heavy material but it's just
0:39
really the sum of all these Optical bits
0:41
are just ridiculously heavy those lenses
0:43
are about 4 kilos each and then there's
0:45
this very heavy very solid um piece that
0:47
goes in the middle and this is so this
0:49
is the filter wheel assembly with a
0:51
hilariously oversized steper
0:53
motor driving this wheel with these very
0:57
large narrow band filters so we've got
1:00
various different shades of uh
1:03
filters there five Al together that
1:06
one's actually just showing up a silver
1:07
that's actually a a red but fairly low
1:10
transmission orangey red blue green
1:15
there's an excess cover on this side so
1:16
the filters can be accessed and changed
1:19
without taking anything else apart even
1:21
this is like ridiculous it's like solid
1:23
aluminium this is just basically a cover
1:25
the actual wavelengths of these are um
1:27
488 525 570 630 and 700 NM not sure what
1:32
the suffix on that perhaps that's the uh
1:34
the width of the spectral line say these
1:37
are very narrow band filters most of
1:39
them are you very little light through
1:41
so it's still very tight narrow band to
1:43
match the um fluoresence of the dies
1:45
they're using in the biochemical process
1:48
and obviously to reject the light that's
1:49
being fired at it from that Illuminator
1:51
box and then there's a there's a second
1:53
one of these lenses then the actual sort
1:55
of samples below that so uh very serious
1:58
amount of very uh chunky heavy Optics
2:01
okay let's take a look at this light
2:02
source made by company Lumen Dynamics
2:04
who are now part of
2:06
excelitas self-contained unit power
2:08
connector USB and this which one of the
2:11
Cable Bundle said was a TTL interface
2:14
USB wasn't used in uh the fluid
2:17
application output here and I think this
2:19
is an input for um light feedback I
2:21
don't if it's regulated or just a measur
2:23
measurement facility and the uh fiber
2:27
assembly
2:29
Square Inlet there and then there's two
2:32
outputs which have uh lens assemblies
2:35
and this small one which goes back into
2:37
that small Port just Loops out of here
2:40
straight back in So on this side we've
2:42
got the electronics which look pretty
2:44
straightforward we've got a bit of power
2:45
supply stuff over here and we've got
2:48
separate drivers for each wavelength now
2:50
interesting this is clearly been very
2:52
specifically made for this application
2:54
you I was half expecting like say some
2:56
generic drivers that could be used for a
2:58
number of different things but actually
3:00
literally specified the exact wavelength
3:02
on the PCB there is provision here for
3:04
385 NM which isn't populated but this is
3:07
clearly been designed very specifically
3:09
so these four drivers look the same but
3:10
then there's two higher power ones for
3:12
575 and
3:14
520 a slightly bigger heat sink on this
3:16
575 section there a p 24 which is
3:20
providing USB interface USB isolator the
3:23
USB interface just presents as a comport
3:26
I did have a quick look but I didn't
3:27
actually get anything sensible um I did
3:29
dump the Pi code out and there's a few
3:31
you a few sort of commands that you
3:32
could see in text but I didn't actually
3:34
manage to get it working properly I
3:36
found some software for related version
3:38
but it didn't seem to want to talk to it
3:39
but um I say that wasn't used for the
3:41
original application it might be quite
3:42
interesting to get try and get the Run
3:44
hours count out of it and the TTL
3:46
interface looks fairly straightforward
3:48
we've got positions for six opto
3:50
isolators but only five five are
3:52
installed so that corresponds with the
3:54
unused thing so I think this hopefully
3:56
should be as simple as just providing a
3:57
ttrl signal for each color to uh enable
4:00
it a big heat sink here which is there I
4:03
think there's like a big S of metal
4:04
plate through the middle of this that
4:05
all the leads are mounted on the other
4:07
side so this is heat sinking it with a
4:09
air flow from a uh just a fan in here
4:13
obviously don't have the air flow
4:14
anywhere near the Optics so conduction
4:17
cool through to this plate that's then
4:18
uh air cooled got some pots which are
4:21
presumably power
4:22
adjustments okay let's take a look at
4:24
the other side which is uh much more
4:27
interesting see we've got some uh very
4:31
uh neatly Twisted cable assemblies there
4:35
a bunch of leads so we've got one here
4:37
475 up here 430 NM 630 575 and 520
4:44
filters and dcro mirrors a quick way to
4:48
see what's white is if we just shine
4:49
some white light through
4:51
here not sure how it is is to see on the
4:54
camera but shining white light we do
4:55
actually get a bit of red a bit of blue
4:57
some yellow here so the obstacle path
5:00
575 it goes sort of here bounces off
5:03
this mirror and goes out the 520 goes
5:07
sort of down here across here and up
5:09
there 630 goes basically straight
5:13
through
5:15
430 goes across there down there along
5:17
there and the 475 goes down here and
5:20
left this is the light sensing thing
5:22
think here there's just a um I think
5:24
there a photo diode or other sensor
5:26
haven't actually taken that off and
5:28
everything's fixed down to this chunk of
5:31
aluminium which acts as the heat
5:32
spreader that then conducts the heat to
5:33
the back side for the heat
5:35
sink and the actual lead packages all
5:38
look fairly similar except for this one
5:41
on the 575 which looks quite a bit more
5:44
substantial big spay
5:46
Terminals and the interface for this
5:48
turned out to be extremely simple it's
5:50
literally a 5V TTL level to enable each
5:54
color doesn't seem to be any tensity
5:56
control but there are some additional
5:58
pins on that connector that weren't used
5:59
in the through time thing so maybe
6:01
there's some extra lines that control
6:02
that I couldn't find any data on this uh
6:05
unit and the um their current product
6:07
range is quite significantly different
6:09
so we've got the uh blue these
6:13
might may well be saturating the camera
6:16
so they might look a bit weird so that's
6:17
the 430
6:18
blue the 575
6:24
yellow uh
6:26
475 light blue
6:29
the uh 520
6:31
green and the uh 630 red now one
6:36
interesting thing I noticed for the
6:39
575 it's actually it's actually using a
6:42
white lead and then filtering it rather
6:44
than using all the other ones are using
6:46
leads which are the fundamental colors
6:47
but uh this is actually doing white and
6:50
it's a combination of this filter and
6:52
the dichroic mirrors that are turning to
6:55
Yellow if we take the filter out and a
6:57
lot of the a lot of the um blue content
7:00
is going this way the red is going
7:02
straight through these two mirrors so
7:05
this is clearly not reflecting much of
7:08
that so we end up with the yellow coming
7:10
out of uh out of there which is a fairly
7:14
light yellow color which you don't
7:16
really see from high intensity leads so
7:19
that's clearly why they've used the
7:20
white to uh do this power consumption of
7:23
the white is pretty high so going up to
7:25
about 2 and 1 half amps on that color
7:27
whereas most of the other colors are
7:28
only drawing half an amp or so at 24
7:30
volts the uh the green is up to about
7:32
1.2 but say this thing is uh much
7:35
brighter and if you actually run all the
7:38
colors at the same time you get a fairly
7:41
reasonable um looking white coming out
7:43
of it and one thing you might just be
7:45
out to notice is there is some sort
7:46
color banding around here that's not
7:49
getting uh everything s completely
7:51
concentric and I think that's where this
7:53
fiber optic thing comes
7:58
in I'll
8:00
get a couple of Fairly accurately shaped
8:04
very sort of uniform color and looking
8:06
at What's um inside here we've basically
8:09
just got this Square Rod so this is
8:12
clearly yeah the lights just bouncing
8:13
off all the all the various sides to um
8:16
get a nice uniform illumination uh this
8:19
back bit looks like it's all potted so
8:21
nothing I really do to get in there I
8:24
think this is fiber so I have come
8:26
across um cables like this which are
8:27
liquid fill but just looking through the
8:30
end of this it's probably a bit hard to
8:31
see it does look like there fiber ends
8:34
going going on there and so there's this
8:36
feedback thing which is just obviously
8:39
compensating for the any light losses
8:41
through here to get an accurate
8:43
representation of uh the light that's
8:45
been launched out of these two
8:47
fibers and you see uh
8:49
these have got this sort of trapezium
8:54
shape light guides again it's like a
8:56
sort of acrylic or glass light guide
9:00
guess projected just to make the right
9:03
rectangular
9:04
shape and look at this Center assembly
9:07
um the light output doesn't uh change
9:10
whether you feed this in or not so it's
9:11
clear not doing any internal Clos Loop
9:14
control obviously there may well be some
9:16
facility for it to do that but it's not
9:17
being used in this
9:19
application and so this output just
9:21
produces a voltage on the uh outle
9:24
connector proportional to the amount of
9:26
light that's present so there's a little
9:28
diffuser in the back there
9:30
and then there's just some kind of uh
9:33
Optical sensor looks like a
9:35
chip looking at the lead it's a very
9:37
small package on the PCB with this lens
9:40
assembly over the top and these look
9:43
like they're actually on a copper
9:44
Metalized PCB for maximum thermal
9:47
performance and yeah it's a very small
9:49
package looks like it's a ceramic
9:51
package and there's a thermister there
9:53
for temperature monitoring this is the
9:56
475 blue one this is the 520 need to
9:59
Green which is uh rather different OB
10:02
it's a much bigger D with lots of bond
10:04
wise but also this looks like it's using
10:05
a phosphor if I shine a blue light at it
10:08
lights up green so this is actually a
10:10
phosphor conversion green lead which
10:12
I've I've come across before they want
10:15
that specific wavelength so they may be
10:17
easier to tune a phosphor than tune the
10:20
um semiconductor material to get the uh
10:23
right right wavelength from the lead
10:24
directly uh red 630 similar size to the
10:28
blue one or does seem to have a uh a
10:31
lens on top of it there is a sort of red
10:33
coloring to
10:35
the die but that doesn't appear to be
10:38
fluorescent as far as I can
10:39
tell and the white one again a little
10:41
bit different sort of much higher
10:43
current
10:46
connectors a makeer name on that
10:48
connector flot light not sure if that's
10:52
the connector or the lead
10:54
itself and obviously with the phosphor
10:56
and I'd imagine that phosphor may well
10:58
be tuned to get the maximum to the uh 5
11:01
cenm and actually this white one looks
11:04
like a St fairly standard product I just
11:06
found it in Mouse made by luminous
11:09
devices in fact actually I think all
11:11
these are based on various luminous
11:13
devices modules and they're you take
11:17
looks like they taking the nearest
11:18
wavelength and then just using these
11:19
filters to clean it up to get a precise
11:22
uh spectral line out of it so quite a
11:25
nice neat and um extreme
11:30
bright light source uh sure I've got any
11:33
particular use for it so I think this
11:35
might end up on
11:36
eBay but uh very pretty to look out and
11:40
without the uh risk of burning your eyes
11:43
out like you do with lasers so I thought
11:45
it would be interesting to try and
11:46
figure out the runtime of this things
11:48
like this we usually keep some sort
11:49
record of runtime cuz leads degrade over
11:51
time I couldn't get any software to work
11:52
through the USB face but then had a
11:54
thought probably going to be writing the
11:55
runtime periodically to the e s prom so
11:58
I just just scope up that and noticed it
12:00
was doing right every 5 minutes so I
12:02
just ran it for a while periodically
12:04
reading the E squ I just held the pick
12:05
in in reset and um put clip over to read
12:07
the square prom and found it was writing
12:10
one location per color every 5 minutes
12:12
so if one color was on it would write
12:14
that location every 5 minutes and just
12:16
increment it by one so after doing a few
12:18
tests with different colors of different
12:19
time periods it looked extremely
12:21
straightforward it's like a four bite
12:22
count for each color looking at the
12:24
original data that was in it all the
12:26
colors apart from Green were reading
12:28
zero and the green was reading four
12:30
indicating a total 20 minutes run time
12:32
ever if it was turned on run for a short
12:34
time then turned off that might not have
12:36
been counted but even so indicates this
12:37
thing wasn't used a great deal the whole
12:40
s process of doing a run can be several
12:42
hours but it'll only be doing probably
12:43
the Imaging at the end of that so you
12:46
wouldn't expect to be running for a long
12:47
time but say a single color for 20
12:50
minutes over its whole lifetime does
12:52
seem a little bit on the low side okay
12:55
let's look at the camera un fortunately
12:57
I managed to not record any sound when I
12:58
did this it's also a couple of months
13:00
ago so there's going to be a few details
13:02
that I've forgotten so I'm just going to
13:04
dub this over the original footage so um
13:07
take the lid off see this massive great
13:10
heat sink so this is a pel cool camera
13:12
we've got this blower fan producing a
13:14
fair amount of air flow through
13:16
it the connector here there's the ccds
13:19
mounted on the board on the
13:24
right this unplugs so we've got a bit of
13:27
power supply stuff on here
13:29
USB interface I think that's the Cyprus
13:32
microcontroller High speeded USB
13:34
interface there's a zyink spon fpga some
13:40
RAM and there's a couple of ATD
13:42
converters can't quite read what those
13:45
those are but anal
13:47
devices um little bit of bodgery around
13:51
here extra decoupling obviously they
13:53
have having some noise issues this is
13:55
around the ram chip quite a lot of extra
13:57
capacitors been added there
13:59
uh there's a couple of amplifiers prior
14:01
to the HD converter buffers or Andor
14:05
amplifiers taking the CCD
14:08
signal um bit more power spy stuff here
14:11
this is probably all to do with
14:12
generating the various CCD bias voltages
14:14
they uh need quite a lot of exotic
14:18
voltages next board down is just a
14:20
shield and an interconnect
14:24
boardly shielding the power supply stuff
14:26
from some the more sensitive an log
14:28
stuff
14:31
and this is the bottom board which is
14:32
just all power supply
14:34
stuff as you can see tons of capacitors
14:37
or Transformer in
14:42
there and this is the CCD which is a uh
14:47
very impressive thing this is a kf50 100
14:50
originally by true sense then codec
14:53
there ON
14:54
Semiconductor it's 50 megapixels uh the
14:58
only price I could find was this one
15:00
5,000 bucks and the architecture you can
15:03
see there actually two separate halves
15:04
which explains the Dual AZ converters
15:06
and two amplifiers it's literally split
15:08
down the middle and duplicated so it's
15:10
outputting two streams in parallel just
15:13
to keep the bandwidth sensible and it's
15:15
got this amazing um diffraction effects
15:18
it's got micro lenses over the pixel so
15:20
there's there's a bit more Optics going
15:22
on than on a normal
15:25
sensor few more bodges on the CCD board
15:28
including this wire which isn't really
15:29
tacked down very well which is a bit uh
15:32
bit of a mess quite a few bits around
15:34
this board where they've uh tacked
15:36
various bits on which is not super
15:38
impressive looks like CCD drivers on the
15:40
left with those 3 ohm um damping
15:43
resistors on the
15:47
output get a few more little bodges
15:50
around here some of
15:52
the and there's this separator the
15:54
silica gel to keep the moisture down but
15:56
there's this separator that actually
15:58
appears to be cut from piece of
15:59
antistatic
16:04
bag and this sort of thermal block on
16:06
top of this stack of three pel Cola
16:12
modules so as with any Stacks they get
16:16
um larger as they go back towards the
16:18
heat sink because each P's got to not
16:20
only take the heat from the previous but
16:21
also the waste heat which is quite
16:27
significant you see a little temperature
16:29
sensor here that copper block which
16:32
makes contact with the back of the
16:37
CCD and this's the back of the
16:40
pelas this then contacts the heat sink
16:44
on the uh rear there a few thermal pads
16:46
as well for some of the other power
16:47
components on this
16:51
PCB okay I've connected this uh camera
16:54
up I found some drivers on the disc that
16:56
seem to work under Windows 7 couldn't
16:58
get to install under Windows 11 though
17:01
um in the absence of any sort of lens or
17:03
being bothered to the proper amount I've
17:04
just put some f over it and put a little
17:06
pin in there to make a pinhole lens and
17:08
software gives a few options I'm not
17:11
entirely sure what all these are there's
17:12
obviously a clock frequency 22 MHz low
17:15
gain and with PFG no idea what that is
17:19
something something game programmable
17:20
Something game perhaps ver exposure
17:23
types I think focus is just like a
17:25
continuous grab until you tell it to
17:27
stop not entirely sure all these options
17:30
are obviously exposure time uh triggers
17:33
there ex external hardware trigger inut
17:35
you just trigger using a um thing on
17:37
screen so the resolution is 8176 by
17:40
6132 and you can actually bin those
17:42
where you combine multiple pixels to get
17:46
increased gain at the expense of lower
17:48
resolution down this is a 10sec exposure
17:51
obviously of the pin hole it's very uh
17:53
intensitive so we just stand still now
17:56
downloading it there's the uh exposure
17:59
so when it's
18:01
um there's a little status thing down
18:03
here so that tells you the um exposure
18:07
[Applause]
18:09
time it's this is just it
18:15
downloading um it is quite I'm seeing
18:18
quite a lot like smearing I think that I
18:20
don't know whether that's just due to
18:21
pixels overloading or something else I
18:24
mean yeah it's not it's not um out of
18:26
the question that there's something not
18:27
totally right about this camera
18:28
certainly was bodge wise on there um I
18:31
don't I'd imagine a camera like this
18:32
it's got a fairly narrow range of
18:34
intensities that it's happy with I'm not
18:36
going to spend a great deal of time on
18:38
this if you're interested in this camera
18:40
maybe for astronomy or something and
18:42
happy to sort of take the risk of it may
18:44
not be uh perfect I'll um I think I'll
18:47
stick this on eBay along with the
18:48
Illuminator I'll put a link down in the
18:50
description to the listing take your
18:52
chances to grab a bargain so for example
18:54
here we see this vertical streaking so
18:56
I'm not sure how normal that is this is
18:58
on fairly bright scene looking out the
19:02
window if I cut the exposure time down
19:04
on that it's now 1 second
19:07
exposure again most of the image
19:09
disappears again this is looks like it's
19:11
possibly over still overloading here go
19:14
that go down to say say quarter a
19:16
second so again I think there might be
19:19
some Auto gain control going on here um
19:21
this is with the PFG option let's try
19:23
turning that off and see what
19:25
happens so I'm not sure this is actually
19:27
more streaking or which just it's
19:29
cranked up the gain all the dis display
19:31
gray scale to show what um you know the
19:33
range of things that it's captured
19:36
there's one of one of 12 things in the
19:38
software there's um you can see of you
19:40
can't seem to read out the temperature
19:42
of the pelta cooler but you can set the
19:44
temperature and if you said it's a
19:46
different temperature you see the power
19:48
consumption jump up running the cooler
19:50
to get the temperature you requested but
19:52
I can't see anything anywhere that tells
19:54
you whether the cool is at the at the
19:56
temperature other than the power
19:57
consumption going down and there's no
19:59
temperature read out
20:03
here and just some yeah this is just
20:05
sort of very basic software I'm sure
20:07
there's like an API for more
20:09
sophisticated
20:10
applications but so if you know anything
20:12
more about these cameras please um stick
20:14
in the
20:15
comments um incidentally when I was
20:18
editing I didn't notice there was a bent
20:19
pin on the um CCD but I did fix that
20:22
before doing these tests and also
20:24
reactivated the um silica gel desicant
20:26
cuz I noticed it was uh I was getting
20:28
bit of condensation on the window but um
20:31
yeah so a couple of uh interesting but
20:34
maybe not particularly uh useful pieces
20:37
of Kit except for someone that's got a
20:38
very specific use so um I'll stick a
20:42
I'll stick these on eBay put a link in
20:44
the description and say hopefully
20:45
someone could actually make some uh good
20:47
use of these things
Example Output:
**Abstract:**
This video presents Part 2 of a teardown focusing on the optical components of a Fluidigm Polaris biotechnology instrument, specifically the multi-wavelength illuminator and the high-resolution CCD camera.
The Lumen Dynamics illuminator unit is examined in detail, revealing its construction using multiple high-power LEDs (430nm, 475nm, 520nm, 575nm, 630nm) combined via dichroic mirrors and filters. A square fiber optic rod is used to homogenize the light. A notable finding is the use of a phosphor-converted white LED filtered to achieve the 575nm output. The unit features simple TTL activation for each color, conduction cooling, and internal homogenization optics. Analysis of its EEPROM suggests extremely low operational runtime.
The camera module teardown showcases a 50 Megapixel ON Semiconductor KAF-50100 CCD sensor with micro-lenses, cooled by a multi-stage Peltier stack. The control electronics include an FPGA and a USB interface. Significant post-manufacturing modifications ("bodges") are observed on the camera's circuit boards. Basic functional testing using vendor software and a pinhole lens confirms image capture but reveals prominent vertical streaking artifacts, the cause of which remains uncertain (potential overload, readout artifact, or fault).
**Exploring the Fluidigm Polaris: A Detailed Look at its High-End Optics and Camera System**
* **0:00 High-End Optics:** The system utilizes heavy, high-quality lenses and mirrors for precise imaging, weighing around 4 kilos each.
* **0:49 Narrow Band Filters:** A filter wheel with five narrow band filters (488, 525, 570, 630, and 700 nm) ensures accurate fluorescence detection and rejection of excitation light.
* **2:01 Customizable Illumination:** The Lumen Dynamics light source offers five individually controllable LED wavelengths (430, 475, 520, 575, 630 nm) with varying power outputs. The 575nm yellow LED is uniquely achieved using a white LED with filtering.
* **3:45 TTL Control:** The light source is controlled via a simple TTL interface, enabling easy on/off switching for each LED color.
* **12:55 Sophisticated Camera:** The system includes a 50-megapixel Kodak KAI-50100 CCD camera with a Peltier cooling system for reduced noise.
* **14:54 High-Speed Data Transfer:** The camera features dual analog-to-digital converters to manage the high data throughput of the 50-megapixel sensor, which is effectively two 25-megapixel sensors operating in parallel.
* **18:11 Possible Issues:** The video creator noted some potential issues with the camera, including image smearing.
* **18:11 Limited Dynamic Range:** The camera's sensor has a limited dynamic range, making it potentially challenging to capture scenes with a wide range of brightness levels.
* **11:45 Low Runtime:** Internal data suggests the system has seen minimal usage, with only 20 minutes of recorded runtime for the green LED.
* **20:38 Availability on eBay:** Both the illuminator and camera are expected to be listed for sale on eBay.
Here is the real transcript. Please summarize it:
00:00:01 Hopefully, we'll stay out of jail on
00:00:01 this. Ladies and gentlemen, start your
00:00:03 lawyers. I'm Jeff Kr. I'm a cyber
00:00:05 security architect and adjunct professor
00:00:07 at NC State University. Let's answer
00:00:09 some questions from the internet. This
00:00:11 is history of hacking
00:00:12 [Music]
00:00:16 support. Atmatscary 34 asks, "Who do you
00:00:19 think is the most influential hacker in
00:00:21 cyber history?" Some of the really great
00:00:23 hackers are ones you've never heard of
00:00:25 because they in fact were so good they
00:00:26 didn't get caught. Certainly one of the
00:00:28 big names. He was certainly the most
00:00:29 influential and infamous back in the day
00:00:32 is Kevin Mitnik. Kevin Mitnik was
00:00:34 particularly known for his social
00:00:36 engineering where he would basically try
00:00:38 to con people, rely on their desire to
00:00:41 trust each other and get information out
00:00:43 of people by pretending to be someone
00:00:45 else. He served 5 years in prison. He
00:00:48 was arrested for abusing the phone
00:00:51 system. Back in those days, you had to
00:00:52 pay for long-distance calls. He was able
00:00:54 to break into the phone system and make
00:00:57 calls for free. at Raymond Goch one asks
00:01:00 where does the term hack come from? The
00:01:02 term really traces its evolution from
00:01:05 the 60s where at MIT there was a model
00:01:08 train club and they use the term hack or
00:01:10 hacker to refer to someone who was able
00:01:12 to use the technology in an
00:01:14 unconventional way in a creative way.
00:01:17 Then about the 70s 80s it kind of took a
00:01:20 change and most people began to
00:01:22 associate hacking with unauthorized
00:01:24 access. In the security community, we
00:01:27 actually refer to at least three
00:01:28 different types. And we refer to them by
00:01:30 their hat color, believe it or not. No,
00:01:32 they're not actually wearing hats
00:01:34 necessarily, but we refer to black hats
00:01:36 as the ones who are breaking into
00:01:38 systems in order to do damage, in order
00:01:40 to steal things, operating without
00:01:41 permission. The white hat hackers, those
00:01:44 are more like that original terminology
00:01:46 that we referred to with the the group
00:01:48 from NI MIT who were basically hobbyists
00:01:52 trying to find out where the limits of
00:01:53 the technology. this sort of thing. They
00:01:56 report those vulnerabilities and they're
00:01:57 trying to do something for the overall
00:01:59 good. Now, you've got something in
00:02:00 between, a grey hat hacker where they
00:02:03 claim to be doing some good, but maybe
00:02:05 they don't. They cross a few lines here
00:02:06 and there. James K. Poke, how did
00:02:08 computer hackers do their hacking back
00:02:10 in the 60s and 70s? It was all about
00:02:12 physical access because computers, there
00:02:14 was no internet. All the computers that
00:02:16 existed were pretty much in very known
00:02:19 places. A company had a data center. It
00:02:21 was on raised floor. It had to be cooled
00:02:24 with air conditioning. The entry and
00:02:26 access to those systems was controlled
00:02:28 via badge reader. There were cameras.
00:02:30 So, it was basically security was
00:02:32 guards, guns, and gates back in those
00:02:34 days. If you didn't have access
00:02:36 physically to the system, you couldn't
00:02:37 do much damage. Then it started moving
00:02:40 to where attackers were starting to use
00:02:42 the phone system. Hackers that were
00:02:44 hacking on the phone system were known
00:02:45 as freakers, phone hackers. They would
00:02:48 do different things to try to figure out
00:02:50 how they could get into the phone system
00:02:52 and control it remotely, maybe from a
00:02:54 pay phone. There were not a lot of
00:02:55 computer systems for them to break into
00:02:57 yet. And then we start moving into the
00:02:58 70s now. We didn't really have an
00:03:01 internet that everyone had access to,
00:03:02 but more and more systems were being
00:03:04 made available over the public phone
00:03:07 network. So they had modems and you
00:03:09 could call into a system and then get
00:03:11 access. If you knew the password, you
00:03:13 could log in and then maybe take control
00:03:15 of the system that way. So that's what
00:03:17 happened really more in the '7s. In
00:03:19 the8s, especially as we move into the
00:03:21 '90s. Then we had the internet and
00:03:23 that's when really hacking changed very
00:03:25 dramatically because everyone had access
00:03:28 to everyone everywhere in the world. It
00:03:30 was a great thing for pretty much
00:03:32 everyone including the attackers at
00:03:35 Charlie's Curious asks, "Have hackers
00:03:38 ever taken down a government website?"
00:03:39 One of the first that I remember was
00:03:41 back in about 1996 when the Central
00:03:43 Intelligence Agency had their main
00:03:46 website hacked and at least for a short
00:03:48 period of time it said welcome to the
00:03:50 Central Stupidity Agency. Not a lot of
00:03:52 damage done there, more just a
00:03:54 reputational damage. It was basically
00:03:56 electronic graffiti. So what could
00:03:58 people do to prevent their websites for
00:04:00 instance from being hacked? One of the
00:04:02 first things is make sure that you
00:04:04 change all of the default user IDs and
00:04:07 passwords. We call that hardening.
00:04:09 That's one form of hardening. Another is
00:04:11 turn off all the unnecessary services.
00:04:13 Every single thing that's turned on on a
00:04:15 system is potentially another way a bad
00:04:18 guy can use to get into your system.
00:04:19 Also, keep your software up to date
00:04:21 because all the time vendors are fixing
00:04:24 bugs in their software and many of those
00:04:26 bugs are security bugs and the bad guys
00:04:28 will know about what those bugs are and
00:04:30 they'll take advantage of them. Needs to
00:04:32 be at minimum multiffactor
00:04:34 authentication. Don't rely on voice
00:04:36 recognition. By the way, we have deep
00:04:37 fake technology from AI that potentially
00:04:40 could fake that stuff out. Weeds asks,
00:04:42 "Question for cyber security mavens.
00:04:44 Since signal is open- source, doesn't
00:04:46 that mean that some intelligent
00:04:48 adversary could determine its encryption
00:04:50 algorithm and come up with a way to
00:04:51 decrypt signal communications?" Well,
00:04:54 yes, in general. But first of all, don't
00:04:56 add people to your group chat if you
00:04:58 don't know who they are. There's a a
00:04:59 notion in cryptography that's known as
00:05:02 Kirkoff's principle and it says that
00:05:04 nothing should be secret about a crypto
00:05:06 system except the keys. In other words,
00:05:08 knowing how an algorithm works should
00:05:10 not give you any insight into how to
00:05:14 break it. A good crypto algorithm will
00:05:16 stand the test of time. Everyone can
00:05:18 know how it works and yet they still
00:05:20 can't break it. The only way to break an
00:05:22 encrypted message is to guess what the
00:05:24 key is. That's been the case. So if the
00:05:26 keys are the secret to the system, then
00:05:28 one thing you want to be able to do is
00:05:29 generate those keys and keep them
00:05:31 secret. You want a random key and then
00:05:34 you want to store it somewhere safe. The
00:05:36 more randomness you can get, the better
00:05:38 your key will be and then you you don't
00:05:40 have to remember that. You'll use some
00:05:42 other form of multiffactor
00:05:44 authentication or things like that in
00:05:45 order to get access to the key. But the
00:05:47 key itself will be saved on your system.
00:05:49 And if it's really sensitive, you'll
00:05:51 store it in a special place in hardware
00:05:54 where if someone tries to access that
00:05:56 without permission, it'll actually blank
00:05:58 the key and just wipe it out completely.
00:06:01 Then that crypto device uh becomes
00:06:03 effectively just a paper weight at that
00:06:05 point. Deadbird Rugby says, "I've seen
00:06:07 some older generation folks on LinkedIn
00:06:09 as cyber security analysts in the '90s."
00:06:11 Yeah, he's probably talking about me. Uh
00:06:13 from what I remember, the internet was
00:06:16 like the Wild West in the '90s. A lot of
00:06:18 focus was just on putting up a firewall,
00:06:20 putting up some sort of technology that
00:06:22 gave us an initial block, an initial
00:06:24 front door to separate our internal
00:06:26 network from the external wild west. But
00:06:29 firewalls weren't nearly enough. They
00:06:30 weren't enough then and they're not
00:06:32 enough now. But that was what a lot of
00:06:34 the view was. And we talk about the wild
00:06:36 west. Well, there was a wild west then
00:06:38 on the internet because everything was
00:06:39 kind of unknown and unmonitored. We
00:06:42 still have that today to a great extent.
00:06:44 But then there's another layer deep
00:06:46 below the surface that most people never
00:06:48 see. Where you exist for the most part,
00:06:50 if you're typical uh of most people is
00:06:53 you're on the surface web. That's maybe
00:06:54 5% of the content that's on the
00:06:57 worldwide web. And it's stuff that you
00:06:59 can get to from your favorite search
00:07:00 engine. It's been indexed, in other
00:07:02 words. So you can go to the search
00:07:03 engine and find it. The other 95% is
00:07:06 kind of think of an iceberg. This is the
00:07:07 stuff below the surface. You know, the
00:07:09 iceberg is deeper below the water level.
00:07:11 So think about the iceberg. The other
00:07:13 95% that's below, that's the deep web.
00:07:16 It's not necessarily nefarious stuff.
00:07:17 It's just not stuff that everyone needs
00:07:19 to get to. It's business records. It's
00:07:21 things like that. Only authorized users
00:07:23 would be able to go in and authenticate
00:07:25 and be able to see that stuff. But
00:07:27 there's a subset that's in an area we
00:07:29 call the dark web. And it's dark because
00:07:32 it's not indexed. You have to know where
00:07:34 it is. So, you're not likely to just
00:07:35 stumble into it. In fact, you've got to
00:07:37 use special tools to get there. And for
00:07:38 what it's worth, I don't recommend that
00:07:40 you go there because it's a rough
00:07:41 neighborhood. Your system could be taken
00:07:44 over, could be hacked, could have
00:07:45 malware on it after you visited some of
00:07:47 these illicit sites. Now, is everything
00:07:49 on the dark web terrible? No. Some group
00:07:52 of the people that are on the dark web
00:07:54 are people who are whistleblowers,
00:07:56 people who are political dissident,
00:07:58 people who live in areas of the world
00:08:00 where they can't speak freely, and maybe
00:08:02 it's even journalists who need to be
00:08:03 able to get a message out and be able to
00:08:05 do it with anonymity. But with anonymity
00:08:07 comes also the possibility of illegal
00:08:10 and illicit activities. It's dark
00:08:11 because the lights are off. It's not
00:08:13 dark because of what the content is
00:08:14 there, but certainly some of the content
00:08:16 is of a dark nature. A user on Reddit
00:08:18 asked, "What was the Stuckset virus and
00:08:21 why was it so successful?" Well,
00:08:23 Stuckset was some malware. I'll just use
00:08:26 that general term to refer to it.
00:08:28 Designed specifically to target nuclear
00:08:31 centrifuges in Iran. It was unleashed on
00:08:34 those systems. Those systems didn't have
00:08:36 general internet access. So the idea was
00:08:38 that it would be brought into the system
00:08:41 physically implanted on those systems
00:08:43 and then it would cause these
00:08:45 centrifuges to speed up and slow down
00:08:46 and speed up and slow down which caused
00:08:48 them to not be functional. The idea of
00:08:50 course was to disrupt Iran's ability to
00:08:53 enrich uranium. So who was looking out
00:08:56 for doing that? Well, there's a lot of
00:08:57 attribution and it's one of those
00:08:59 situations. One of my favorite quotes is
00:09:01 those who know aren't talking and those
00:09:03 who don't, well, you can't shut them up.
00:09:04 I'm going to keep talking. So now you
00:09:06 know which one of those categories I'm
00:09:07 in. I don't have any firsthand
00:09:09 information, but it's been widely
00:09:11 attributed in the public space that the
00:09:13 US and Israel were involved in this
00:09:15 particular attack as a way to try to
00:09:17 subvert Iran's nuclear ambitions. It was
00:09:20 pretty successful for a good period of
00:09:23 time until it turns out that the virus
00:09:25 spread to some other systems. Those
00:09:27 other systems then were discovered with
00:09:30 an antivirus tool. Then from there, the
00:09:32 whole game started to unravel. at Mach 5
00:09:35 turtle says, "Yay, my data has been
00:09:38 compromised due to the OPM data breach.
00:09:40 Not sure that's a reason for
00:09:41 celebration. Uh, my fingerprints and
00:09:43 everything. Uh, where will it all turn
00:09:45 up next? How exciting." That's a case
00:09:47 where data is turned over to someone
00:09:49 else and you have to trust that they're
00:09:51 going to do the right thing. And maybe
00:09:52 they do the right thing 99% of the time,
00:09:55 but it's that other 1% where they didn't
00:09:58 and then that's where an attack occurs.
00:09:59 So, what can you do about this? Well,
00:10:01 first of all, don't give your data to
00:10:03 places where you don't have to. And most
00:10:04 people give their data up very freely
00:10:07 for very little in exchange. So, make
00:10:09 sure that you're understanding the
00:10:11 bargain. Understand that your data is
00:10:12 worth something to those companies.
00:10:14 That's why they want to keep it. And
00:10:15 make sure that what you're getting back
00:10:17 in exchange for it is really a fair
00:10:19 bargain. Also, you can do some things
00:10:21 like credit monitoring, like credit
00:10:23 freeze, credit lock, things like that.
00:10:25 So that way if someone tries to open a
00:10:28 line of credit in your name, tries to
00:10:29 get a credit card, tries to get a home
00:10:31 loan, whatever like that, they try to do
00:10:33 that in your name using information that
00:10:35 they got from one of these data
00:10:36 breaches. Well, they won't be able to.
00:10:38 That's something that you can do at
00:10:39 least in the US, and there are probably
00:10:41 similar things you can do in other
00:10:43 countries as well. ATC magazine asks, "A
00:10:45 question for cyber security pros. Would
00:10:47 you ban Tik Tok from your organization
00:10:49 over security and privacy concerns
00:10:51 raised about its ownership being based
00:10:53 in China?" First of all, my general
00:10:56 approach to bans is I don't think they
00:10:58 work. Not in the way that people hope
00:11:00 that they will. When you ban something,
00:11:03 you drive its behavior below ground. And
00:11:05 once you drive it underground, then it's
00:11:07 hard to monitor. Now, am I concerned
00:11:10 about ownership? I'm concerned about
00:11:11 ownership of all of these because just
00:11:14 because a company is in China or even if
00:11:16 they're in the US doesn't necessarily
00:11:18 make me think that there's going to be
00:11:20 no violations of privacy or no
00:11:22 manipulation of information. We've
00:11:24 already seen that every country on earth
00:11:26 is really good and has people who will
00:11:29 find ways to be good at manipulating
00:11:33 people through misinformation and fake
00:11:35 news. And we know that privacy
00:11:36 violations occur everywhere. And we also
00:11:39 know that privacy violations can occur
00:11:42 even unintentionally. So there are
00:11:44 concerns certainly if a government is
00:11:45 able to say we are going to make you
00:11:48 turn over those records to us and now
00:11:50 there's not independence from that
00:11:52 service and the government and that's a
00:11:54 big concern but that happens in a lot of
00:11:57 cases. I heard Daikaiu asks what are
00:12:00 some ways elections are vulnerable from
00:12:02 a security standpoint and what can be
00:12:04 done to shore up these platforms. almost
00:12:06 every case I will choose the more
00:12:07 high-tech alternative to the lower tech
00:12:09 alternative except when it comes to
00:12:11 voting. In that case, the reason I like
00:12:12 paper ballots is because with a paper
00:12:15 ballot, if the counting machine messes
00:12:17 up, well, we just go back and take the
00:12:19 paper ballots and run them through
00:12:20 another one. If we have only electronic
00:12:22 votes to begin with, we can't go run
00:12:24 them all back through. We can't line up
00:12:25 all the people that voted on that day
00:12:27 and say, "Please go back, get in line
00:12:29 again, and vote exactly the way you did
00:12:31 before." Doesn't work like that. We
00:12:32 could have a power outage at a voting
00:12:34 station. Well, again, that doesn't
00:12:36 affect paper ballots. It might affect
00:12:37 the counting, and if we want to use
00:12:39 machines to do counting of those, I
00:12:41 think that's not so unreasonable, but
00:12:44 there there are a lot of things that
00:12:46 technology helps us with. This is one
00:12:48 where a lower tech solution is probably
00:12:51 better. Chronoport asks, "Why did the I
00:12:53 love you virus overwrite other files?"
00:12:55 If you're a virus, you're trying to
00:12:56 spread yourself as much as you can. The
00:12:59 more types of files that you can
00:13:01 overwrite, the more things you can
00:13:02 infect and the more other systems you
00:13:04 can infect and the harder it is to get
00:13:06 the system disinfected. If you're the
00:13:08 designer of a virus, you want it to
00:13:10 spread as virally as possible. So,
00:13:13 infect as much stuff as you possibly
00:13:14 can. At Allah asks, "Who stopped W to
00:13:17 Cry?" Wann to Cry was one of the most
00:13:20 famous examples of malware. Did a lot of
00:13:22 damage. The guy that's given credit for
00:13:24 stopping it is named Marcus Hutchkins.
00:13:26 He did it in May of 2017. He was doing
00:13:28 some analysis of the malware and found
00:13:31 that it actually made a call out to a
00:13:33 particular website to a particular
00:13:35 domain name. It was really long and
00:13:37 complex and gorpy looking. Nothing that
00:13:38 you would ever guess unless you were
00:13:40 just decompiling the code. And he
00:13:42 realized that as long as it didn't find
00:13:43 the presence of that, it would continue
00:13:45 to spread. So what he did then was go
00:13:48 register that domain name so that then
00:13:50 whenever the malware went out to go ping
00:13:52 that site to see if it exists, it would
00:13:54 in fact exist and therefore the malware
00:13:56 would stop replicating. So he basically
00:13:58 found what was a kill switch that was
00:14:00 built into the code, but that didn't
00:14:03 necessarily stop and eradicate. The
00:14:06 malware was still on a lot of people's
00:14:07 systems and may still be out there in
00:14:09 some cases, but at least it was a way to
00:14:12 turn a kill switch and make it stop so
00:14:14 that it didn't hurt other people for at
00:14:16 least a good period of time. At the boss
00:14:18 almighty asks, "How exactly can hackers
00:14:21 shut down a pipeline?" I'm assuming this
00:14:23 is a reference to the Colonial Pipeline
00:14:25 ransomware case that was very infamous
00:14:27 because in fact there was a pipeline
00:14:29 that transported oil across the
00:14:32 southeastern portions of the US. Well,
00:14:33 it turns out that the attacker, the
00:14:36 actual malware, the ransomware did not
00:14:38 actually shut down the pipeline. The
00:14:40 operators of Colonial Pipeline decided
00:14:42 they needed to shut it down in order to
00:14:44 prevent further damage cuz they weren't
00:14:46 quite really sure what was going on.
00:14:48 They knew that they had experienced a
00:14:50 ransomware case. They were being
00:14:52 demanded a $5 million ransom in order to
00:14:55 restore the systems. And they, in an
00:14:57 abundance of caution, just felt like it
00:14:59 was better to shut things down until
00:15:01 they could figure out what happened.
00:15:02 They eventually did turn things back on
00:15:04 and of course we got back in
00:15:05 operational. Interesting sideline with
00:15:07 that story is they actually paid the $5
00:15:09 million ransom, but here was the unhappy
00:15:12 part of that ending. The attackers gave
00:15:14 them a tool that would decrypt the data
00:15:17 that had been encrypted. So they paid
00:15:19 the ransom, they got the tool, but the
00:15:21 tool was so inefficient and so slow that
00:15:24 it would never have recovered the data
00:15:25 in time to do anyone any good. So they
00:15:27 ended up having to rely on their own
00:15:29 backups, incomplete as they might have
00:15:31 been. And so they paid the $5 million
00:15:33 ransom, didn't get their data, and it
00:15:35 was kind of a worst of both worlds
00:15:36 situation. However, in the end, there
00:15:39 was one more twist, and that was that
00:15:40 the FBI actually recovered half of that
00:15:42 ransom. Don't expect that to happen in
00:15:44 your case. At Noble Infantry asks, "What
00:15:47 is a firewall, and how does it work?"
00:15:49 Well, a firewall was a building
00:15:51 mechanism that was fire retardant
00:15:53 materials that would at least slow the
00:15:55 spread of fire from one unit to the
00:15:56 next. Now, when you apply that concept
00:15:58 into network security, it's a place a
00:16:01 zone a se of of separation where we're
00:16:04 going to keep one level of trusted
00:16:06 network away from another. Maybe an
00:16:08 untrusted internet will keep that
00:16:10 separate from a trusted internal
00:16:11 network. And the firewall will basically
00:16:13 be the gatekeeper. So, we'll have a
00:16:15 security policy in it and it will look
00:16:17 for certain types of traffic and say
00:16:19 that kind of stuff can come in. This
00:16:20 other kind of stuff we're going to block
00:16:22 because we don't use that kind of
00:16:23 traffic. we don't need traffic coming
00:16:25 from that area of the internet or we
00:16:28 don't need users of that sort they're
00:16:30 not part of our organization so we put a
00:16:32 gating factor basically a guard between
00:16:35 areas of networks where we have
00:16:37 different zones of trust AI pitch side
00:16:39 asks I'm curious to know how people
00:16:41 balance online security with the need
00:16:43 for convenience do VPNs really offer the
00:16:46 anonymity we think they do the original
00:16:48 purpose of VPNs was really just as a way
00:16:51 to transport sensitive information over
00:16:53 a public network. So if I wanted to send
00:16:55 a secret message to you that only you
00:16:57 could see and that someone else who saw
00:16:59 the traffic going across the internet
00:17:01 would not be able to read, I would
00:17:02 encrypt the message and then send it to
00:17:04 you. So that way we have an encrypted
00:17:06 connection between the two of us. Now
00:17:07 the VPNs that most people use today not
00:17:10 only can do that, but they also will
00:17:12 hide the IP address that you're coming
00:17:14 from. And that's where you start to get
00:17:16 some of these anonymity features. The
00:17:17 idea is that your ISP, whoever it is
00:17:21 that's providing your internet
00:17:22 connection and getting you as the
00:17:24 on-ramp onto the highway, that is the
00:17:26 internet, they know what your IP address
00:17:28 is. And they can see everything that
00:17:30 comes and goes into your home network or
00:17:32 into your computer itself, unless you
00:17:34 use a VPN, which then all they can do is
00:17:37 see where the packets are coming from
00:17:38 and where they're going, but they can't
00:17:39 see the contents of it. So, that gives
00:17:41 you a certain level of anonymity.
00:17:43 However, if you use a VPN, then what it
00:17:45 will do is also hide where your
00:17:47 originating IP address is because what
00:17:49 will happen is no matter where you want
00:17:51 to send a packet, if you've got the VPN
00:17:53 turned on, it's going to go to the VPN
00:17:55 access point first. Then from there, it
00:17:57 will get routed to where it's supposed
00:17:58 to go. So the ISP then at that point
00:18:01 only sees here you are sending all your
00:18:03 traffic to this one VPN entry point,
00:18:06 this VPN access point, and then stuff
00:18:08 comes back from there. They won't be
00:18:10 able to see the contents. they won't be
00:18:11 able to see where it goes after that
00:18:13 point. Now, that gives you some
00:18:14 anonymity and some privacy. However,
00:18:16 don't be fooled. What you've done is
00:18:18 shifted your trust from your ISP, which
00:18:21 maybe wasn't so trustworthy in terms of
00:18:23 guarding your privacy, to the VPN
00:18:25 provider because the VPN provider now
00:18:27 gets to see where all your traffic is
00:18:29 going. And you don't really have a way
00:18:30 to verify the way they're operating. So,
00:18:32 some VPNs will be very rock solid and
00:18:35 will preserve your privacy. Others will
00:18:37 not. So just by using a VPN, you may
00:18:40 just be making it easier by
00:18:41 concentrating all your data to one
00:18:43 place. And if that place gets attacked
00:18:45 or if that place is a bad actor, then
00:18:47 you've given them all your information.
00:18:49 So be careful. A VPN is not a panacea.
00:18:51 It can help. At hot geologist 6330 asks,
00:18:55 why are fishing emails and telephone
00:18:56 scams still profitable despite increased
00:18:59 awareness? Simple answer is people. Have
00:19:01 you ever met them? Well, they can be
00:19:03 exploited. We have this tendency as
00:19:05 humans to trust other people. Even if
00:19:07 you're very jaded, you see someone
00:19:09 walking toward a building, their arms
00:19:10 are full of stuff and it's raining and
00:19:12 you're at the door. So maybe you hold
00:19:13 the door open for them. But if that
00:19:15 person was planning to do that as a way
00:19:16 to get into the building, well then they
00:19:18 basically just socially engineered you
00:19:20 into letting them come into the building
00:19:22 and tailgate without using their badge.
00:19:24 Social engineering is what lies at the
00:19:26 heart of these types of attacks of
00:19:28 fishing emails, telephone scams, and
00:19:30 things like that. Our tendency to trust.
00:19:32 And in one context, that's a beautiful
00:19:34 thing because we wouldn't want everyone
00:19:35 to be so jaded that we never trusted
00:19:37 another person ever again. But we can't
00:19:40 be trusting of everything either because
00:19:42 then everything falls. The attackers are
00:19:44 always going to try to find that crack
00:19:46 that they can exploit. And they keep
00:19:49 changing their tactics. They keep ch
00:19:50 changing different ways of doing this.
00:19:52 Fishers originally used mostly just
00:19:54 email. Now they've moved into other
00:19:56 areas as well in addition to email. They
00:19:58 could do an SMS message to you. We call
00:20:01 that instead of fishing, we call that
00:20:02 smishing. They could do fishing via
00:20:04 voicemail. We call that fishing. There's
00:20:06 even a new one called quishing where
00:20:08 they use QR code. This is a pseudo asks,
00:20:11 "Are password managers safe?" If you're
00:20:13 asking a security person, is it safe?
00:20:15 The answer is no. I don't even have to
00:20:17 know what the question was. The answer
00:20:18 is it's not safe. Nothing is ever fully
00:20:20 safe. Nothing is ever fully secure. Now,
00:20:22 is it safe enough? It depends on which
00:20:24 password manager you use and how you use
00:20:26 it and where you put the password
00:20:30 manager and how you get access to the
00:20:32 password manager itself. Most of these
00:20:34 password managers will require you to
00:20:36 set a strong password that you type in
00:20:39 once and then that unlocks all the other
00:20:41 passwords that it keeps in its storage.
00:20:43 If you have a trivial password on your
00:20:45 password manager, you have an unsafe
00:20:47 system. So you need to have at least one
00:20:49 really good password. And again, maybe
00:20:51 use multiffactor authentication so that
00:20:53 it doesn't rely just on a password to
00:20:55 get in. Let me tell you what's better
00:20:56 than a password. If you're trying to
00:20:59 make sure that no one steals your
00:21:00 password, don't have one in the first
00:21:02 place. And you say, "What does that
00:21:04 mean? How I don't get to choose that?"
00:21:05 Well, actually, you are more and more
00:21:07 getting to choose a newer technology
00:21:09 called pass keys. There's an
00:21:11 organization called PHO, fast identity
00:21:13 online, that came out with this
00:21:14 standard. And pass keys sounds like the
00:21:17 same kind of thing, password, pass key.
00:21:19 It's actually very different. Pass keys
00:21:21 use cryptographic techniques. You don't
00:21:23 have to reme remember what the password
00:21:25 is. You don't have to choose what the
00:21:26 password is. You unlock your device. The
00:21:29 pass key is a cryptographic key that's
00:21:31 kept on your device and may or may not
00:21:33 be synced with other devices that you
00:21:35 have. It's relatively fishing resistant,
00:21:38 if not almost impossible to fish because
00:21:40 it uses a challenge response system. And
00:21:42 all of this stuff happens under the
00:21:44 covers. And the good news is password
00:21:46 managers support both passwords, the
00:21:48 good ones, and pass keys, so you don't
00:21:51 have to choose. Curious Brain 2781 asks,
00:21:54 "How likely is it to catch a virus
00:21:56 nowadays, assuming a standard up-to-date
00:21:59 antivirus?" It's actually still very
00:22:01 possible. We continue to see that
00:22:03 certain types of malware proliferate.
00:22:05 Thankfully, we've gotten a little better
00:22:06 at this, but the problem is the game
00:22:09 constantly keeps changing. So then we
00:22:11 had to as an industry come out with
00:22:12 things that were not just looking for
00:22:14 literal signature that is a a string of
00:22:17 bits that were in there in the
00:22:19 particular malware itself and that was
00:22:21 the identifier. Now we're looking for
00:22:23 things like behaviors and if we're
00:22:25 looking for those behaviors maybe we're
00:22:27 able to block these things more often. A
00:22:29 lot of these viruses and malware will
00:22:31 exploit different vulnerabilities in
00:22:34 software. So that's why as patching and
00:22:37 updating of software levels has become
00:22:39 more and more automated, we've been able
00:22:40 to deal with a better defense than we
00:22:42 had back in the day when these things
00:22:45 were first coming out. Reboot your
00:22:46 system every so often because some
00:22:48 viruses and malware are not able to
00:22:51 survive across a reboot. So you'd like
00:22:53 to get rid of those and clean things
00:22:54 that way. But in general, use tools that
00:22:57 can disinfect your system. That will
00:22:58 help a lot. Tyrone Bigums asks, "What
00:23:01 hack has caused the most damage?"
00:23:02 depends on how you measure damage. Would
00:23:04 it be financial damage? Would it be in
00:23:06 terms of the number of systems that were
00:23:08 affected? Would it be in terms of the
00:23:09 number of lives that were impacted?
00:23:12 Would it be in terms of the number of
00:23:13 lives that were lost? There's a lot of
00:23:15 different ways to to look at this. There
00:23:16 was one case where a ransomware instance
00:23:19 happened at a hospital and it caused the
00:23:21 hospital systems to not be available and
00:23:24 they started redirecting emergency
00:23:26 traffic to other hospitals. One person
00:23:29 died during transport to a more distant
00:23:31 hospital. So there's a case where
00:23:32 indirectly ransomware cost a person
00:23:35 their life at sector
00:23:37 quadruple07 says but what is the CIA
00:23:40 triad? Well CIA if you talk to a cyber
00:23:43 security person probably doesn't mean
00:23:44 central intelligence agency although it
00:23:46 could. We think of this as one of the
00:23:48 classical security teachings and that is
00:23:51 really lies at the fundamentals of
00:23:53 everything we do in cyber security.
00:23:55 Everything in cyber security is about
00:23:56 these three confidentiality integrity
00:23:58 and availability. So CIA,
00:24:00 confidentiality, integrity, and
00:24:02 availability, that's really everything
00:24:04 we do in cy cyber security is about
00:24:06 doing those three things. At gunlaze
00:24:08 1969 asks, what was the name of the
00:24:10 first computer virus? Well, if you use
00:24:12 the term virus in the larger sense of
00:24:14 malware, I'm actually going to shift
00:24:16 this question to refer to the first real
00:24:18 example that the world came to know, and
00:24:21 that was the Morris worm back in 1988.
00:24:23 And that was where an MIT student came
00:24:26 up with a way of planning a a piece of
00:24:30 software on a lot of different systems
00:24:32 across the internet and it spread
00:24:34 automatically. That's what a worm does.
00:24:35 It self-replicates. And it did this and
00:24:37 got to 10% of the internet before it
00:24:39 finally got shut down. So that was
00:24:41 really the first one that made the world
00:24:43 wake up to the fact that this stuff
00:24:46 could actually have software that could
00:24:47 do harm. At Peter Burkehead asks, "How
00:24:49 is it I never heard about phone
00:24:51 freaking? It's an old attack. In the
00:24:53 early days when there really were not a
00:24:55 lot of computers to break into, there
00:24:57 was a phone system and it was worldwide
00:24:59 and phone freakers were the ones who
00:25:01 tried to manipulate the phone system.
00:25:02 And it was discovered that you could
00:25:05 actually control the phone system, maybe
00:25:07 even reconfigure the switch that's
00:25:09 involved. You could get free
00:25:11 long-distance phone calls. There's a lot
00:25:13 of different things you could do. And
00:25:15 you could do this because the phone
00:25:17 systems used a specific tone in order to
00:25:20 put them into a management control mode.
00:25:22 That mode was triggered by a tone at
00:25:26 2600 hertz. So if you could whistle 2600
00:25:29 hertz or get a tone generator and hold
00:25:31 it up to a phone, you could then take
00:25:33 over the phone and maybe even penetrate
00:25:36 into the system from that. It turned out
00:25:38 that Captain Crunch, the cereal, came
00:25:41 out with a toy prize, a whistle inside.
00:25:44 And guess what? That whistle blew 2600
00:25:47 hertz. Now, Captain Crunch, I'm sure,
00:25:49 had no idea that that's what was going
00:25:50 to happen when they did that. They were
00:25:52 just making a toy for kids. But the
00:25:53 phone freaker community learned about
00:25:55 that pretty quickly and they got all
00:25:58 over that and bought up a lot of Captain
00:25:59 Crunch boxes and now they were able to
00:26:02 go into payoneses and get free phone
00:26:04 calls. But you don't hear about it much
00:26:05 now because nobody really pays for
00:26:07 long-distance phone calls. Barrow Wolf
00:26:09 asks, "What movie has the most realistic
00:26:11 concept of hacking?" Sorry, movie
00:26:13 industry. I'm not sure any of them have
00:26:15 gotten it really all that right. How it
00:26:16 works in the real world is not
00:26:17 necessarily all that exciting to watch.
00:26:19 It's often hours and hours of just
00:26:22 mind-numbing activity of running
00:26:24 different programs in the background
00:26:25 until finally you trip onto something.
00:26:27 It's not something that makes for a
00:26:28 great spectator sport. So that's why you
00:26:30 see the movies take liberties with this
00:26:33 in order to make it a lot more
00:26:35 interesting. I don't know if hackers
00:26:36 ever actually say I'm in, but in every
00:26:38 movie they certainly do. Okay, those are
00:26:40 all the questions. Thanks for watching
00:26:41 History of Hacking Support.