examples of modern art的八卦，YOUTUBE和Yahoo名人娛樂都在討論

根據計算，100萬人遊行隊伍要從維多利亞公園排到廣東；200萬人遊行則要排到泰國。

順道一提香港15～30歲人口約莫100出頭萬人。以照片人群幾乎都是此年齡帶來看，兩個數字都是明顯誇大太多了。

另一個可以參考的是1969年的Woodstock Music & Art Fair，幾天內湧進40萬人次，照片看起來也是滿山滿谷的人。（http://sites.psu.edu/…/upl…/sites/851/2013/01/Woodstock3.jpg）

當年40萬人次引發驚人的大塞車，幾乎花十幾個小時才逐漸清場。

而香港遊行清場速度明顯快得多。

順道一提，因此運動而認定「你的父母不愛你」的白痴論述也如同文化大革命時的「爹親娘親不如毛主席親」般開始出現：

https://www.facebook.com/SaluteToHKPolice/videos/350606498983830/UzpfSTUyNzM2NjA3MzoxMDE1NjMyMTM4NjY3MTA3NA/

EVERY MAJOR NEWS outlet in the world is reporting that two million people, well over a quarter of our population, joined a single protest.
.
It’s an astonishing thought that filled an enthusiastic old marcher like me with pride. Unfortunately, it’s almost certainly not true.
.
A march of two million people would fill a street that was 58 kilometers long, starting at Victoria Park in Hong Kong and ending in Tanglangshan Country Park in Guangdong, according to one standard crowd estimation technique.
.
If the two million of us stood in a queue, we’d stretch 914 kilometers (568 miles), from Victoria Park to Thailand. Even if all of us marched in a regiment 25 people abreast, our troop would stretch towards the Chinese border.
.
Yes, there was a very large number of us there. But getting key facts wrong helps nobody. Indeed, it could hurt the protesters more than anyone.
.
For math geeks only, here’s a discussion of the actual numbers that I hope will interest you whatever your political views.
.
.
DO NUMBERS MATTER?
.
People have repeatedly asked me to find out “the real number” of people at the recent mass rallies in Hong Kong.
.
I declined for an obvious reason: There was a huge number of us. What does it matter whether it was hundreds of thousands or a million? That’s not important.
.
But my critics pointed out that the word “million” is right at the top of almost every report about the marches. Clearly it IS important.
.
.
FIRST, THE SCIENCE
.
In the west, drone photography is analyzed to estimate crowd sizes.
.
This reporter apologizes for not having found a comprehensive database of drone images of the Hong Kong protests.
.
But we can still use related methods, such as density checks, crowd-flow data and impact assessments. Universities which have gathered Hong Kong protest march data using scientific methods include Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, University of Hong Kong, and Hong Kong Baptist University.
.
.
DENSITY CHECKS
.
Figures gathered in the past by Hong Kong Polytechnic specialists using satellite photo analysis found a density level of one square meter per marcher. Modern analysis suggests this remains roughly accurate.
.
I know from experience that Hong Kong marches feature long periods of normal spacing (one square meter or one and half per person, walking) and shorter periods of tight spacing (half a square meter or less per person, mostly standing).
.
.
JOINERS AND SPEED
.
We need to include people who join halfway. In the past, a Hong Kong University analysis using visual counting methods cross-referenced with one-on-one interviews indicated that estimates should be boosted by 12% to accurately reflect late joiners. These days, we’re much more generous in estimating joiners.
.
As for speed, a Hong Kong Baptist University survey once found a passing rate of 4,000 marchers every ten minutes.
.
Videos of the recent rallies indicates that joiner numbers and stop-start progress were highly erratic and difficult to calculate with any degree of certainty.
.
.
DISTANCE MULTIPLIED BY DENSITY
.
But scientists have other tools. We know the walking distance between Victoria Park and Tamar Park is 2.9 kilometers. Although there was overspill, the bulk of the marchers went along Hennessy Road in Wan Chai, which is about 25 meters (or 82 feet) wide, and similar connected roads, some wider, some narrower.
.
Steve Doig, a specialist in crowd analysis approached by the Columbia Journalism Review (CJR), analyzed an image of Hong Kong marchers to find a density level of 7,000 people in a 210-meter space. Although he emphasizes that crowd estimates are never an exact science, that figure means one million Hong Kong marchers would need a street 18.6 miles long – which is 29 kilometers.
.
Extrapolating these figures for the June 16 claim of two million marchers, you’d need a street 58 kilometers long.
.
Could this problem be explained away by the turnover rate of Hong Kong marchers, which likely allowed the main (three kilometer) route to be filled more than once?
.
The answer is yes, to some extent. But the crowd would have to be moving very fast to refill the space a great many times over in a single afternoon and evening. It wasn’t. While I can walk the distance from Victoria Park to Tamar in 41 minutes on a quiet holiday afternoon, doing the same thing during a march takes many hours.
.
More believable: There was a huge number of us, but not a million, and certainly not two million.
.
.
IMPACT MEASUREMENTS
.
A second, parallel way of analyzing the size of the crowd is to seek evidence of the effects of the marchers’ absence from their normal roles in society.
.
If we extract two million people out of a population of 7.4 million, many basic services would be severely affected while many others would grind to a complete halt.
.
Manpower-intensive sectors of society, such as transport, would be badly affected by mass absenteeism. Industries which do their main business on the weekends, such as retail, restaurants, hotels, tourism, coffee shops and so on would be hard hit. Round-the-clock operations such as hospitals and emergency services would be severely troubled, as would under-the-radar jobs such as infrastructure and utility maintenance.
.
There seems to be no evidence that any of that happened in Hong Kong.
.
.
HOW DID WE GET INTO THIS MESS?
.
To understand that, a bit of historical context is necessary.
.
In 2003, a very large number of us walked from Victoria Park to Central. The next day, newspapers gave several estimates of crowd size.
.
The differences were small. Academics said it was 350,000 plus. The police counted 466,000. The organizers, a group called the Civil Rights Front, rounded it up to 500,000.
.
No controversy there. But there was trouble ahead.
.
.
THINGS FALL APART
.
At a repeat march the following year, it was obvious to all of us that our numbers were far lower that the previous year. The people counting agreed: the academics said 194,000 and the police said 200,000.
.
But the Civil Rights Front insisted that there were MORE than the previous year’s march: 530,000 people.
.
The organizers lost credibility even with us, their own supporters. To this day, we all quote the 2003 figure as the high point of that period, ignoring their 2004 invention.
.
.
THE TRUTH COUNTS
.
The organizers had embarrassed the marchers. The following year several organizations decided to serve us better, with detailed, scientific counts.
.
After the 2005 march, the academics said the headcount was between 60,000 and 80,000 and the police said 63,000. Separate accounts by other independent groups agreed that it was below 100,000.
.
But the organizers? The Civil Rights Front came out with the awkward claim that it was a quarter of a million. Ouch. (This data is easily confirmed from multiple sources in newspaper archives.)
.
.
AN UNEXPECTED TWIST
.
But then came a twist. Some in the Western media chose to present ONLY the organizer’s “outlier” claim.
.
“Dressed in black and chanting ‘one man, one vote’, a quarter of a million people marched through Hong Kong yesterday,” said the Times of London in 2005.
.
“A quarter of a million protesters marched through Hong Kong yesterday to demand full democracy from their rulers in Beijing,” reported the UK Independent.
.
It became obvious that international media outlets were committed to emphasizing whichever claim made the Hong Kong government (and by extension, China) look as bad as possible. Accuracy was nowhere in the equation.
.
.
STRATEGICALLY CHOSEN
.
At universities in Hong Kong, there were passionate discussions about the apparent decision to pump up the numbers as a strategy, with the international media in mind. Activists saw two likely positive outcomes.
.
First, anyone who actually wanted the truth would choose a middle point as the “real” number: thus it was worth making the organizers’ number as high as possible. (The police could be presented as corrupt puppets of Beijing.)
.
Second, international reporters always favored the largest number, since it implicitly criticized China. Once the inflated figure was established in the Western media, it would become the generally accepted figure in all publications.
.
Both of the activists’ predictions turned out to be bang on target. In the following years, headcounts by social scientists and police were close or even impressively confirmed the other—but were ignored by the agenda-driven international media, who usually printed only the organizers’ claims.
.
.
SKIP THIS SECTION
.
Skip this section unless you want additional examples to reinforce the point.
.
In 2011, researchers and police said that between 63,000 and 95,000 of us marched. Our delightfully imaginative organizers multiplied by four to claim there were 400,000 of us.
.
In 2012, researchers and police produced headcounts similar to the previous year: between 66,000 and 97,000. But the organizers claimed that it was 430,000. (These data can also be easily confirmed in any newspaper archive.)
.
.
SKIP THIS SECTION TOO
.
Unless you’re interested in the police angle. Why are police figures seen as lower than others? On reviewing data, two points emerge.
.
First, police estimates rise and fall with those of independent researchers, suggesting that they function correctly: they are not invented. Many are slightly lower, but some match closely and others are slightly higher. This suggests that the police simply have a different counting method.
.
Second, police sources explain that live estimates of attendance are used for “effective deployment” of staff. The number of police assigned to work on the scene is a direct reflection of the number of marchers counted. Thus officers have strong motivation to avoid deliberately under-estimating numbers.
.
.
RECENT MASS RALLIES
.
Now back to the present: this hot, uncomfortable summer.
.
Academics put the 2019 June 9 rally at 199,500, and police at 240,000. Some people said the numbers should be raised or even doubled to reflect late joiners or people walking on parallel roads. Taking the most generous view, this gave us total estimates of 400,000 to 480,000.
.
But the organizers, God bless them, claimed that 1.03 million marched: this was four times the researchers’ conservative view and more than double the generous view.
.
The addition of the “.03m” caused a bit of mirth among social scientists. Even an academic writing in the rabidly pro-activist Hong Kong Free Press struggled to accept it. “Undoubtedly, the anti-amendment group added the extra .03 onto the exact one million figure in order to give their estimate a veneer of accuracy,” wrote Paul Stapleton.
.
.
MIND-BOGGLING ESTIMATE
.
But the vast majority of international media and social media printed ONLY the organizers’ eyebrow-raising claim of a million plus—and their version soon fed back into the system and because the “accepted” number. (Some mentioned other estimates in early reports and then dropped them.)
.
The same process was repeated for the following Sunday, June 16, when the organizers’ frankly unbelievable claim of “about two million” was taken as gospel in the majority of international media.
.
“Two million people in Hong Kong protest China's growing influence,” reported Fox News.
.
“A record two million people – over a quarter of the city’s population” joined the protest, said the Guardian this morning.
.
“Hong Kong leader apologizes as TWO MILLION take to the streets,” said the Sun newspaper in the UK.
.
Friends, colleagues, fellow journalists—what happened to fact-checking? What happened to healthy skepticism? What happened to attempts at balance?
.
.
CONCLUSIONS?
.
I offer none. I prefer that you do your own research and draw your own conclusions. This is just a rough overview of the scientific and historical data by a single old-school citizen-journalist working in a university coffee shop.
.
I may well have made errors on individual data points, although the overall message, I hope, is clear.
.
Hong Kong people like to march.
.
We deserve better data.
.
We need better journalism. Easily debunked claims like “more than a quarter of the population hit the streets” help nobody.
.
International media, your hostile agendas are showing. Raise your game.
.
Organizers, stop working against the scientists and start working with them.
.
Hong Kong people value truth.
.
We’re not stupid. (And we’re not scared of math!)

- Luyện đọc và tìm kiếm từ mới nào cả nhà!
Đề Cambridge IELTS 14 Test 2 - passage 2:
BACK TO THE FUTURE OF SKYSCRAPER DESIGN

Answers to the problem of excessive electricity use by skyscrapers and large public buildings can be found in ingenious but forgotten architectural designs of the 19th and early-20th centuries

A. The Recovery of Natural Environments in Architecture by Professor Alan Short is the culmination of 30 years of research and award-winning green building design by Short and colleagues in Architecture, Engineering, Applied Maths and Earth Sciences at the University of Cambridge.
'The crisis in building design is already here,' said Short. 'Policy makers think you can solve energy and building problems with gadgets. You can't. As global temperatures continue to rise, we are going to continue to squander more and more energy on keeping our buildings mechanically cool until we have run out of capacity.'

B. Short is calling for a sweeping reinvention of how skyscrapers and major public buildings are designed - to end the reliance on sealed buildings which exist solely via the 'life support' system of vast air conditioning units.
Instead, he shows it is entirely possible to accommodate natural ventilation and cooling in large buildings by looking into the past, before the widespread introduction of air conditioning systems, which were 'relentlessly and aggressively marketed' by their inventors.

C. Short points out that to make most contemporary buildings habitable, they have to be sealed and air conditioned. The energy use and carbon emissions this generates is spectacular and largely unnecessary. Buildings in the West account for 40-50% of electricity usage, generating substantial carbon emissions, and the rest of the world is catching up at a frightening rate. Short regards glass, steel and air-conditioned skyscrapers as symbols of status, rather than practical ways of meeting our requirements.

D. Short's book highlights a developing and sophisticated art and science of ventilating buildings through the 19th and earlier-20th centuries, including the design of ingeniously ventilated hospitals. Of particular interest were those built to the designs of John Shaw Billings, including the first Johns Hopkins Hospital in the US city of Baltimore (1873-1889).
'We spent three years digitally modelling Billings' final designs,' says Short. 'We put pathogens• in the airstreams, modelled for someone with tuberculosis (TB) coughing in the wards and we found the ventilation systems in the room would have kept other patients safe from harm.

E. 'We discovered that 19th-century hospital wards could generate up to 24 air changes an hour-that's similar to the performance of a modern-day, computer-controlled operating theatre. We believe you could build wards based on these principles now.
Single rooms are not appropriate for all patients. Communal wards appropriate for certain patients - older people with dementia, for example - would work just as well in today's hospitals, at a fraction of the energy cost.'
Professor Short contends the mindset and skill-sets behind these designs have been completely lost, lamenting the disappearance of expertly designed theatres, opera houses, and other buildings where up to half the volume of the building was given over to ensuring everyone got fresh air.

F. Much of the ingenuity present in 19th-century hospital and building design was driven by a panicked public clamouring for buildings that could protect against what was thought to be the lethal threat of miasmas - toxic air that spread disease. Miasmas were feared as the principal agents of disease and epidemics for centuries, and were used to explain the spread of infection from the Middle Ages right through to the cholera outbreaks in London and Paris during the 1850s. Foul air, rather than germs, was believed to be the main driver of 'hospital fever', leading to disease and frequent death. The prosperous steered clear of hospitals.
While miasma theory has been long since disproved, Short has for the last 30 years advocated a return to some of the building design principles produced in its wake.

G. Today, huge amounts of a building's space and construction cost are given over to air conditioning. 'But I have designed and built a series of buildings over the past three decades which have tried to reinvent some of these ideas and then measure what happens. 'To go forward into our new low-energy, low-carbon future, we would be well advised to look back at design before our high-energy, high-carbon present appeared. What is surprising is what a rich legacy we have abandoned.'

H. Successful examples of Short's approach include the Queen's Building at De Montfort University in Leicester. Containing as many as 2,000 staff and students, the entire building is naturally ventilated, passively cooled and naturally lit, including the two largest auditoria, each seating more than 150 people. The award-winning building uses a fraction of the electricity of comparable buildings in the UK.
Short contends that glass skyscrapers in London and around the world will become a liability over the next 20 or 30 years if climate modelling predictions and energy price rises come to pass as expected.

I. He is convinced that sufficiently cooled skyscrapers using the natural environment can be produced in almost any climate. He and his team have worked on hybrid buildings in the harsh climates of Beijing and Chicago - built with natural ventilation assisted by back-up air conditioning - which, surprisingly perhaps, can be switched off more than half the time on milder days and during the spring and autumn.
“My book is a recipe book which looks at the past, how we got to where we are now, and how we might reimagine the cities, offices and homes of the future. There are compelling reasons to do this. The Department of Health says new hospitals should be naturally ventilated, but they are not. Maybe it’s time we changed our outlook.”

TỪ VỰNG CHÚ Ý:

Excessive (adj)/ɪkˈsesɪv/: quá mức
Skyscraper (n)/ˈskaɪskreɪpə(r)/: nhà trọc trời
Ingenious (adj)/ɪnˈdʒiːniəs/: khéo léo
Culmination (n) /ˌkʌlmɪˈneɪʃn/: điểm cao nhất
Crisis (n)/ˈkraɪsɪs/: khủng hoảng
Gadget (n)/ˈɡædʒɪt/: công cụ
Squander (v)/ˈskwɒndə(r)/: lãng phí
Reliance (n)/rɪˈlaɪəns/: sự tín nhiệm
Vast (adj)/vɑːst/: rộng lớn
Accommodate (v)/əˈkɒmədeɪt/: cung cấp
Ventilation (n)/ˌventɪˈleɪʃn/: sự thông gió
Habitable (adj)/ˈhæbɪtəbl/: có thể ở được
Spectacular (adj)/spekˈtækjələ(r)/: ngoạn mục, đẹp mắt
Account for /əˈkaʊnt//fə(r)/ : chiếm
Substantial (adj)/səbˈstænʃl/: đáng kể
Frightening (adj)/ˈfraɪtnɪŋ/: kinh khủng
Sophisticated (adj)/səˈfɪstɪkeɪtɪd/: phức tạp
Pathogen (n)/ˈpæθədʒən/: mầm bệnh
Tuberculosis (n)/tjuːˌbɜːkjuˈləʊsɪs/: bệnh lao
Communal (adj)/kəˈmjuːnl/: công cộng
Dementia (n)/dɪˈmenʃə/: chứng mất trí
Fraction (n)/ˈfrækʃn/: phần nhỏ
Lament (v)/ləˈment/: xót xa
Panicked (adj): hoảng loạn
Lethal (adj)/ˈliːθl/: gây chết người
Threat (n)/θret/: mối nguy
Miasmas (n)/miˈæzmə/: khí độc
Infection (n) /ɪnˈfekt/: sự nhiễm trùng
Cholera (n)/ˈkɒl.ər.ə/: dịch tả
Outbreak (n)/ˈaʊt.breɪk/: sự bùng nổ
Disprove (v)/dɪˈspruːv/: bác bỏ
Advocate (v)/ˈæd.və.keɪt/: ủng hộ
Auditoria (n)/ˌɔːdɪˈtɔːriə/ : thính phòng
Comparable (adj)/ˈkɒm.pər.ə.bəl/: có thể so sánh được
Contend (v) /kənˈtend/: cho rằng
Liability (n)/ˌlaɪ.əˈbɪl.ə.ti/: nghĩa vụ pháp lý
Convince (v) /kənˈvɪns/: Thuyết phục
Assist (v) /əˈsɪst/: để giúp đỡ

Các bạn cùng tham khảo nhé!

五年前買了這本書，是一本捷克在08-09年舉辦一個捷克同波蘭的電影海報展覽圖集。眾所周知，波蘭的電影海報世界知名，然而其實捷克都曾經輝煌。這本書介紹兩地海報設計歷史同發展，把兩地同一電影但設計唔同的海報並排（左捷克右波蘭）進行比較，看到兩大設計巨頭在設計上的分別。

這本書很難找，花了我許多時間。首先找過各大網上書店，但都無功而回。後來我直接聯絡出版商（Terry Posters, 捷克出版社），他們也無存貨，不過卻找了兩間捷克小書店的網址給我。我再問了那兩家店，終在其中一家找到那本書。

小店負責人電郵我商討付款方法，但因他們沒有paypal，要直接匯款。我問過數間銀行，又上網查看過，弄了一週才找到方法從香港匯款到捷克。結果又花多數星期，書才到手。

從書中抄了Intro 數小段 (這本書是捷克語／波蘭語／英語三語對照）, 可了解多少少兩地海報發展:

//Let's mention a few widely known facts. Polish posters are, as opposed to the Czechoslovak posters, more pictorial. Polish graphic designers used collage, photo collage, montage, plucking of paper or unique author typorgraphy to a much lesser extent than Czechoslovak artists. The core of their posters lied in their perfectly mastered painting itself. Also, letters on posters are often written by hand (Franciszek Starowieyski, Jerzy Flisak), unlike famous examples of an imaginative typography and playing with letters in the Czechoslovak poster (Zdenek Ziegler, Zdenek Kaplan, Karel Vaca, Milan Grygar). //

//The czechoslovak film poster in the early 1960s when it was dynamically shaping into its form absorbed modern art styles like Czech infomral, abstraction, op art, pop art or others, more than the poster art in Poland. Many Czechoslovak Posters use a play with letters, cutouts, plucking and often a very wild and daring combination of techniques. It is quite an interesting fact that among Czechoslovak graphic designers there were more "non-painters" than in Poland.//

//After the fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989, Pollish and Czechoslovak graphic design posters found themselves in a much worse situation. [...] Producers of foerign films which started to flood Czechoslovak and Polish cinemas supplied the filmes with commercial material typical for the West and the USA with a governing elements of photography - a portrait of an actor in the centre of a poster. The Producers also included a new condition into their contracts - taht posters printed in Ploand and in Czechoslovakia must look just like the original photography, commercial promotion materials which were the same all over the world. The possibilitiy of creating new graphic design posters was, in fact, eliminated. However, the situation in both countries may differ today. Twenty years after the change of conditions, the balance is clear and evertyhing points to Poland as the country in a more favorable situation. One might want to say - and it would not be too far fetched - that the Polish poster, unlike the Czech poster, has managed to survive.//

P.S. 這是那家捷克小店的網址：
http://levnyantikvariat.cz/czech/index.php

#現在不宜消費
#唯有回顧以往買到的心頭好

Are You Shy In Public? Do You Get Sweaty Palms When Speaking In Public? This Video Will Change Everything… Now, If You Want To Know How To Unlock True Confidence To Become Financially Successful, Click Here: http://artofpublicspeaking.danlok.link

WARNING! Embarrassing photo of Dan Lok in this video! In this excerpt of one of Dan’s private classes, he goes in-depth with how Dan went from being a shy asian immigrant to mastering the art of public speaking. So if you want to master public speaking and get confidence in any public situation you get into, watch this video now.

? SUBSCRIBE TO DAN'S YOUTUBE CHANNEL NOW ?
https://www.youtube.com/danlok?sub_confirmation=1

Check out these Top Trending Playlists -
1.) Boss In The Bentley - https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLEmTTOfet46OWsrbWGPnPW8mvDtjge_6-

2.) Sales Tips That Get People To Buy - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E6Csz_hvXzw&list=PLEmTTOfet46PvAsPpWByNgUWZ5dLJd_I4

3.) Dan Lok’s Best Secrets - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FZNmFJUuTRs&list=PLEmTTOfet46N3NIYsBQ9wku8UBNhtT9QQ

Dan Lok is a Chinese-Canadian business magnate and global educator known for being the founder and chairman of Closers.com - the world’s #1 virtual-closers network, Copywriters.com, and SalesCalls.com. Beyond his businesses, Mr. Lok has led several global movements to redefine modern education where he has taught individuals from 150+ countries to develop high income skills and financial confidence.

Beyond his success in business, he was also a two time TEDx opening speaker. An international best-selling author of 12+ books. A member of Young Presidents Organization (YPO) - a private group of global chief executives whose companies employ 22 million people and generate 9-trillion USD in annual revenues. He also hosts The Dan Lok Show - a series on elite business tycoons and world-leading entrepreneurs.

Today, Mr. Lok continues to be featured in thousands of media channels and publications every year and is widely seen as one of the top business leaders by millions around the world.

If you want the no b.s. way to master your financial destiny, then learn from Dan. Subscribe to his channel now.

★☆★ CONNECT WITH DAN ON SOCIAL MEDIA ★☆★
YouTube: http://youtube.danlok.link
Dan Lok Blog: http://blog.danlok.link
Facebook: http://facebook.danlok.link
Instagram: http://instagram.danlok.link
Linkedin: http://mylinkedin.danlok.link
Podcast: http://thedanlokshow.danlok.link

#DanLok #PublicSpeaking #Master

Please understand that by watching Dan’s videos or enrolling in his programs does not mean you’ll get results close to what he’s been able to do (or do anything for that matter).

He’s been in business for over 20 years and his results are not typical.

Most people who watch his videos or enroll in his programs get the “how to” but never take action with the information. Dan is only sharing what has worked for him and his students.

Your results are dependent on many factors… including but not limited to your ability to work hard, commit yourself, and do whatever it takes.

Entering any business is going to involve a level of risk as well as massive commitment and action. If you're not willing to accept that, please DO NOT WATCH DAN’S VIDEOS OR SIGN UP FOR ONE OF HIS PROGRAMS.

This video is about How I Mastered The Art Of Public Speaking
https://youtu.be/EQNpMYKNk1A
https://youtu.be/EQNpMYKNk1A