EBR2012 ex -Film de campagne

Hello all. My name is Pierre Cardonnel, I am not a politician, I'm just a citizen; and as I see no answer relevant on the part of politicians, from any party whatsoever, what I believe to be the fundamental issues of our time; and since here in France, there will be a presidential election in 2012, election should normally lead us to the debate on our common future; I stand in these elections, by offering an alternative to our system of operation, alternative that may be called resource-based economy. I will of course return in this video explaining the concept; but first we must make the diagnosis as accurate as possible the system in which we live. If we try to make a diagnosis, we can all agree on the fact that there are serious problems: the economic crisis affects more or less everyone; shows that many countries have collapsed, others are in the process of collapse; no one feels safe from impact, and even the wealthiest of us know people around them who are affected. Jobs are becoming harder to find, and relocation to distant places are daily. There is all that is in a world that is not peaceful; conflicts of land, resources, cultures abound. We also know that a very large number of people suffering from poverty, misery and extreme poverty. There daily dramas ecological climate that is in phase go haywire; of plant and animal species disappear, and just as important as water and air that seem to be as threatening. All this, we see daily. And we also see that there is a big policy failure, which seem powerless to these problems; and whose choices seem guided by the multinationals, major economic groups. All this, it gives us a large package of issues that seem quite distinct. "Hey, man ... what now? ... It 'DIY session'? - Yeah, but my computer, which crashed ... - ***! And it is where Mark there? - Well it is in the kitchen He tries to repair the mixer which broke down too. - Oh, *** ... At the same time, you should enlighten you a little more, because then you see nothing. - Well, no, I can not, because the lights broke down too ... - Oh, *** ... - Yeah, I see that slab ... - And ... you thought to look at the meter? (Sound mixer) Aaaaargh! And if in fact our general problems were ultimately the consequences of a well-defined problem, What could be causing this? It is watered daily in the information in this so-called debt debt that prevents us from raising the funds to do this or that; debt for which we are told that it is the poisoned chalice that is made to future generations, etc.. If the political parties and various information continually tell us that debt; it is on the internet that explain a little more relevant began to emerge, including the so-called money creation. I am not an economist, I am like many people: I am confused by any jargon highly specialized by a series of numbers and formulas that keep my brain to understand this abstraction. That said, when one looks at the concepts of money creation, and the idea of ??debt; without going into numbers and percentages, we can grasp the principle of the thing broadly. I will try a little simplified explanation; and I urge you not to take my word, but then go do your research for yourself. In this drawing, the little man symbolizes the people, you, me; there is the bank, which represents all commercial banks; and finally the central bank, whose mission is to stabilize the system, and to ensure proper operation. The top rectangle represents what is in the coffers of the bank: left the bank accounts of people; in the middle, the operations performed by the bank itself; and on the right bank account dedicated to a special operation that we will see. We will say that there is initially of money: it is distributed among the inhabitants of the country, in proportion to their material wealth to start. People will keep a game with them, it is cash that can make small daily transactions; and they will put the other party to a bank account. When the money arrives in the bank, people actually lose property. The bank exchange money against an IOU, which is the balance of our own. Through this exchange, the bank acquires ownership of the money and can do what he pleases. Although this aspect does not clearly be explained, we trust our bank, because money is deposited in security, and presentation of our recognition of debt, the bank we will. Now that the bank has the money, how can she do to lend in the form of credit and at the same time the leave available to depositors? The central bank, which is there to ensure the proper functioning of the system will propose a process called fractional reserve. A small fraction of the money will be deposited into a special account dedicated to the Central Bank, will issue an acknowledgment of debt equivalent to the bank, with an annual interest to pay. This small fraction will be sufficient to ensure the withdrawal we do, because of experience, the bank knows that we will not come to claim all our money all at once. Once this is done, the remaining money can be paid in the form of credits, which said credit recognition of said debt from us with, of course, of interest. Now that we have the money, it will be used to purchase various operations, and it will anyway end up in the bank. When he arrives in the bank, no longer belongs to us, IOUs and then fractional reserve forward; we are paid in the form of credit, recognition of debt with interest; it returns by the bank fractional reserve, etc.. etc.. What is money ? That money governs everything, and is seen as made up a large proportion of debt? It is difficult to disentangle existing money and debt because money is already starting a symbol of wealth, of resources. But if we replace the money by just one resource, say, hazelnuts, for example, we know the difference between hazelnuts, and vouchers for a hazelnut. And a basket where you will find three hazelnuts and ninety seven vouchers will never be a basket of one hundred nuts. But the madness does not stop there: as we have seen, all money starting now distributed among the people, and dedicated account to fractional reserve. How will we do to inject new money to continue the momentum? There will be a new deal between the commercial bank and central bank. The central bank will create new money, accepting as collateral in return our IOUs with interest. And now, new money has been created, and the cycle will be able to start over. It's pretty crazy when you start to see how things work. And the plot thickens when we add to all this the idea of ??interest, because we saw that there was interest payable during the entire operation of this cycle. Suppose I am the central bank, that is to say, the exclusive right to create money; and I will lend you the money with interest. How can you make me an interest that I have not created? I have established that the principal, not interest ... What can be said of this system is that the fractional reserve do not create money they simply reflect the velocity of money. If all holders of certificates of indebtedness of the bank were to demand their money in cash, it does exist physically in the system enough to satisfy everyone; and more importantly: there is simply not enough money so that we can one day pay off our debts, and we are therefore, as part of our life choices, prisoners of our debts, non-refundable. We can not reimburse ninety seven nuts when there are only three. On every dollar bill, there used to be written on the amount of gold held in reserve to which the ticket matched. Then there was the new international playing field: In 1971, President Nixon adopted dematerialisation total dollar convertibility into gold. In January 1973, the law Pompidou / Giscard d'Estaing is adopted: the Bank of France abandoned its public service role. The French state will now have to reckon with the interests, and funding requests will be considered in terms of profitability, no more in terms of public services. In March 1973, comes into force on international floating exchange rate regime: there is no counterpart to the metallic currency issued only debt. Then little by little, the European treaties, U.S. ... In short! the global economy no longer plays the game well being of people, but of the opportunity to get rich by speculating on everything and nothing. And the global economic crisis in which we are currently is not a slight cold in a healthy body have to heal; but it is the beginning of the end of this system based on fictitious numbers, which, multiplying exponentially, and no longer corresponds to the real wealth of our resources, is trying to crack around before exploding. As I said, I am not an economist, and the explanation is made here is simplified. However, when we seek explanations more refined, it would seem that the details I could never go omitted in the interests of the people. So it would be good economists, banks, but also all political parties, and journalists talk about this, and explain why this system is there. Here, abstracted money worse than that, money purely fictitious. This reminds me a little tale of Andersen. In a kingdom, there are very, very, very long time, there lived a king who was very elegant. He was so 'fashion', he had an outfit for every hour of the day. Two crooks who felt 'good plan' demanded audience of the king, who received them. They said they were able to make him the most expensive costume, is a very rare stuff. It was magical: Only smart people can see it, not fools. That said, it would be the most beautiful dress ever worn. The king said, 'mud!' Con artists began to work quietly, and one day the king came to see where they were. Obviously, the scammers pretending to sew clothing, and the king saw nothing. For fear of being taken for a fool, he complimented their work. Then a few days later, he sent his ministers. They too saw nothing, and not to pass for fools, They also gave compliments. - Oh dear, how beautiful it is this costume! - Beautiful! In the kingdom, everyone was impatient to see the magnificent costume magic of the King. And that day came. The two swindlers pretended to dress the king. Outside, the crowd was waiting when suddenly ... (Royal trumpets) For fear of being taken for idiots, people applauded. (Cheers) When in the middle of the crowd, a boy cried Eh! Look, the king is naked! We can see his ****! Laughter from the crowd Like many stories, it can tell us about our current situation. Yes, the money, as we have seen, became a fiction, it exists only in the framework of an agreement that we all accept. We accept because it is something that we're used to, despite the reality of what we can see. Yet women and men the richest of the world have the power to say things they own, and it works as we are willing to see through clothing of the king. But the emperor has no clothes, the mountains of money than to have large powerful think do not exist. Our own savings to all of us either, for that matter. All this is a virtual video game score. Numbers meaningless, disconnected because of real earthly riches. But to return to the source of our global problems, is that money is the key? No. Again, this money disconnected from real wealth is only a symptom, a consequence. If one pushes the research towards a causal we must look at human society beyond what we used to do: generally look at things in the short term, wide election, for example. It is estimated that the human being, living our species, *** sapiens, there for about 2 to 100,000 years. First, like many other species, we were hunter-gatherers opportunistic; then, by refining our knowledge and our tools, we became there a little over ten thousand years ranchers and farmers: making ourselves grow vegetables and fruits that we found so far, and keeping and raising animals at home we hunted before. We have built cities, established systems of organizations of the common life of increasingly complex and if the techniques and tools of thought are more refined, it is nevertheless true that the requirement to produce our goods and services through our work since our inception has been provided in order to survive. Then a very recent phenomenon began to change that. Since the beginning of humanity, and until the 1800s, the greatest power vested in the production work was the human being itself as a tool an overwhelming proportion of the order of 98%. The two percent is animal traction, and tools such as water mills and windmills. We can say that since time immemorial, people have lived in a society of low energy. It was around the 1800s, therefore, that something amazing happened. This is exactly in 1781 that James Watt invented the steam engine. And if this invention may seem trivial, Yet it would change our system of operation. Because it was the birth of a whole series of tools for high-energy that would grow during the two hundred years. And with these tools work in energy conversion, that the human has been gradually replaced in its own right to convert its low energy work. If we take a look at the distribution of the French working population in the primary sector, that is to say, the agriculture and livestock, during these two hundred years, we find that we have gone from 74% of the population working in this sector in 1800 to 3% today. This is very logical when you think that where we had about fifty men to harvest grain in a field, for example, one man with a combine just today, and again, with an automatic GPS navigation, this man can no longer be necessary. The growth of the tools that we replace also affected the secondary sector, that of the industry. If in 1800, 16% of French workers working in this growing sector, with the decline of agriculture in terms of jobs, industry took over, using up to 39% of assets in the mid 60s. But again, we know, the automation of production has replaced the man gradually so that today in France 22% of workers earn their living in the factory, and of course, that number is bound to fall. What then remains as jobs that the French can make a living every day? The services sector, the tertiary sector. Since 1800, when only 10% of French people working in these service jobs, the percentage has grown steadily since it is a sector that employs 75% of workers. Yes, our ability to make a living being is essentially dependent on the service sector. Now the real question: Will this service sector is immune against the progression of the tools against the automation? Can a supermarket cashier may be concerned by the ticket machines where you scan yourself products? Is a cashier at a station may fear being replaced by a kiosk where you pay with her credit card? Is a subway driver may think that eventually, all lines will be dedicated to automated since those who are already working very well? If you think about it, we have our answer. So yes, it can be a problem in our current way of working, because from what level of unemployment will go you one account, the increase in automation of production of goods and services is inevitable? As for the percentages we have seen in France, they are very similar in the countries that followed the same pattern of development. So it begs the question: 'Yes, but there are particular jobs that are disappearing because they are relocating to countries emerging' ... It is also true, but it does not change the problem here. If the jobs go elsewhere because wages are much cheaper to pay, in any case, these jobs will not return here. As for the country they arrive, they are countries that have not had the financial means to equip the same time as us, but progress will be similar to ours: automation of agriculture, and industrial and service sectors to finish. And what is it after the third sector to enable us to make a living? Nothing. We must then ask ourselves this question: what is really relevant in a job? Is it possible to hold someone, and allow it to earn money to support themselves; or is it the value, quantity and quality of its output working? Is it absurd or appropriate to store the combine in the barn, and recruit instead fifty people to produce the same amount of grain, and allow them to earn money to live? Is that what is important to us, in fact, it's not just that grains are produced? Is that at all levels of production of goods and services, the point is that these goods and services are produced, even if they are no longer by the people, for us? The key node of our global problems can be found here. In this equation is that to access to goods and services that are necessary for survival, we must make money, money which is obtained by working. This equation works very well in a world of low-energy but at a time when the tools are replacing men in the production of goods and services, it is no longer valid. If labor is scarce, while the tap is allowing us to get money to survive, and the valve closes, then one is faced with serious problems. With this data we create unnecessary jobs, that are just there to justify a salary. With this data we create an economy of cyclic type, first as a tool with the massive consumption of goods destined to be obsolete very quickly. If a Swedish brand of cheap furniture for example, tried to sale a table that can last one hundred years, as our elders have always done, what would happen? We would buy much less in terms of tables produced. So, to return, they would have to be much more expensive. But as people have less and less money, since jobs are disappearing; it is not this strategy is used. The brand will therefore try to minimize production costs, creating the passage of sub-jobs, or rather sub-wages; it will explore how the table will meet our needs for a time, but also to sink fast enough that we can buy him a new table, and thus enable it to continue its profitable financially. We could do that last table on the very long term, then what happened? We lost in technical know-how? This is serious, because you can say that there is a real retention efficiency, effective as the real table is one that is solid and is built to last; but even worse is that multiplying the number of tables that a person may have throughout his life, we are in a terrible looting of resources. And when we understand that all products are designed for this purpose to be quickly renewed, and all materials needed to produce them are taken without any consideration of environmental impact; you soon realize that the pollution of our world is not due to the small sort that we will do in the trash to be recycled somehow; it is not because we cut off the tap while brushing teeth; all that, these are small things end of the chain. The terrible pollution of our world is that our society has a vital need to maintain a fashion jobs, and make as much money as possible; our society can not survive without this excessive consumer discretionary, made of inefficient products, thought to be obsolete very quickly; products multiplied because in competition with each other from one brand to another; all without the slightest glance at the actual amount of stock of land resources; the impact that the looting of a given element can have on the ecosystem of a place. We waste a lot, without living standards are high so far to live up to our true knowledge. It is also because of the equation of survival by money earned by work that we are witnessing the disasters of poverty and misery: according to UN figures, 18,000 people die every day from hunger on Earth. Not because the food does not exist, but because they did not have the financial means to access food exists. I worked at one point to the shelf in a supermarket, and I found astounding waste of food that were thrown for a yes or a no. We have all seen the information on waste ground, pools of spilled milk in the fields to avoid distorting the market ... U.S. studies estimate that we throw away 40% of our food produced in our Western way of life. If we make the link with the 18,000 people who die of hunger every day ... moreover, this number mean anything, it hides its mass the fact that all these people are people, they had a name, a history, a family life. And this we are not unbearable, a fact as arbitrary as they are people we have not had the opportunity to meet and know personally. How would we react if a child that we knew would die of hunger? What would our cries to wake up the world? As for the massive poverty that people live everywhere on earth, when we know the stress it generates, humiliation, the requirement of survival it asks, whatever the moral or legal rules that surround us ... Is this not the right ingredients to the recipe of delinquent and criminogenic behavior? Is financial misery is not related to social deprivation? If human labor was not replaced gradually by sophisticated tools, Well no matter how many people we are, there should always have, since the supply of and demand for goods and services would be proportional. Alas, we know: job vacancies fall, again and again and to create artificial, all ideas are good. See you all in competition, willing to accept a gainful not for its relevance in terms of a production of something, but simply because that's the key that will allow us to have a roof, eating, and to settle our bills. This competition there is between us, it exists at all levels: companies are competing with each other; and countries, because they are intimately dependent on the health of the jobs at home, so companies; countries are also competing with each other, and each pulls the covers, without the impact that can have its activity is a concern of interest. An anarchic world, now we saw him. A multitude of structures that are fighting each other, regardless of their impact or that of others, the only rule is to win, to become bigger. Considering that the Earth is a whole, an organization where all elements are interdependent; then it is very damaging to us all that the institutions, countries, companies, trying to capture the most possible for them. If in a human, the most powerful body, say the brain, sought to monopolize all of the oxygen and nutrients to the detriment of other organs, would result in death for the entire organization, brain included. I think we should really think we got serious on the issue of livelihood of the people with money, obtained by working so the work is scarce in a world of high energy where human labor is only a small percentage of the workforce of our automated tools. Because it seems to be the source of all evil. Including that of money that could not help but be separated from what he symbolized, land resources, with the current economy has a vital need for the loot. An economy based on waste, then an anti-economy; since the verb thereto, economize, is the opposite of the verb to waste. An anti-economy that wants to pass for pragmatic with suit and ties, big words and complex numbers that require; true when the pragmatic math tells us that it is impossible in the rules of the universe to eat something faster than it is renewed forever. The term can not survive consumption faster than the rate of renewal of something. Unfortunately, our current system is based almost exclusively on human exploitation, waste of resources and production unnecessary. We need to have jobs at all costs, to prolong the system, based on inefficiency. "Good! So I'm glad that we have been able to find any arrangements, Well, then, if you mow the lawn, I have prepared everything necessary, rags, oil, gasoline, etc.. all these things. And so the mower ... - Wait ... the mower?! - Yeah, the mower ... - But ... You've said that you was paying me on time, right? ... - But you kidding?! ... " If we stick to the idea that an economic system functions to regulate supply and demand for goods and services, can be the analysis of 'levels' that humanity had to borrow. Level 1 is the stage shared by all animals: we use what nature produces, are gathered, hunted; but the limits are quickly reached: it produces very little is used, that's all. It is not yet fully in the exchange. When we begin to produce and that a real exchange happens it comes in two: barter. It transfers ownership of property or service against another good or service there are units of account that can navigate and, for example, in the ancient Mediterranean, livestock (often oxen), was used to quantify the value of these goods and services. Again, the limits coming very soon: the chances of matching supply and demand are very tiny: I want to exchange my sheep against tools, but my partner does not need sheep, he has already. Our exchange will not do. This is where the money system, Level 3, old system a little over two thousand years. This is the level where we still are. This system is based on rare units, and easier to transport than the oxen, for example; this system uses as a reference precious metals, including gold and silver. This is particularly with this system we were able to increase exchanges at a phenomenal rate, and thus benefit today of tools and techniques to a very advanced race of beings. However, we must not have a moral on the currency, which is after all a tool having a regulatory function of supply and demand for goods and services. We need to step back and try to be as pragmatic as possible. As we have seen that levels 1 and 2 reached the limits and need to move to a higher level, we must do the same job with the level 3, that of money. First term: the scarcity of goods or services. Setting a price, one must analyze the degree of scarcity of goods, the difficulty of its extraction, processing and manufacture; the number of people needed for this. More than one object is composed of rare materials, more complex and technical knowledge are necessary for its creation, over the object in question will be expensive. It's very logical. Now our industrial capacity has pushed productivity limits of scarcity, and if we reflect, we realize that reality is often denied. For example, we want to think now that water is an issue of scarcity. Here! on the blue planet! where it is estimated the amount of water to one billion 360 million cubic kilometers. The problem is it a question of lack of creativity on how we have to collect and reprocess this water or the problem is it that the supposed rarity of the natural and abundant makes large profits for those who own it? The water is just one example of all goods and services, and as we have been able to deduct our technical capacity to create real abundance is limited by what has become the currency. As we have seen is the currency that generates the denial of the consumer discretionary cannibal; it is she who does not want that wage labor is dead. The money that has nothing to do with physical assets, and which no longer corresponds to itself; that currency is no longer a fiction of numbers stored in computers, it, and there. So yes, when the economic system has shown its limits, despite the habits, had to change is what our ancestors made. Use in nature is no longer relevant, it is passed to the barter barter no longer relevant, it is passed to the currency; and the currency is no longer relevant Well, despite the idea that it is done is as natural as the air we breathe or the race of the Earth around the sun; that is to say that it is the only reference we know we; Well we have to change. Objectively. Sure, there's bad news, if we do not want the world to collapse because of an abstraction, we have to change. However, there is good news we can easily change, we have the tools and we have all to gain. For this, we need to move to Level 4 an economy based on resources. Imagine a business. It tries to operate without having the slightest idea of ??the reality of its stock: no inventory of raw materials useful for the manufacture of its production, and no accounting of products suitable objects for sale. In addition, the company does not value its assets, technical tools, but also different skills and creativity of the teams within it. No flow is permitted for cooperation between the trades, however, each pulls the covers, not allowing the necessary coordination to develop an optimal product. No inventory management, no census of its assets, no common goal of all of the members of the company. Who among us would bet on the success of this structure? During the two hundred years when our world rocked by a low energy society, that of a high energy; There were several proposals in an attempt to meet this new situation. Capitalism, communism, socialism, and even fascism, were attempts to adjust to these organizational constraints and new challenges. That said, all these attempts have not sought out the scope of Level 3 that of money and paid work; because some concepts were not part of the equation starting from these theories: that land resources are finite, and have a special renewal rate; the fact that the technology would grow exponentially, tools gradually taking the place of man in production; and the fact that electricity, causing electronics and computers, and therefore very powerful software tools would streamline the management of our stocks of materials and energy; as well as our strengths, our tools: our know-how and technology. These intelligent tools that put the blind tip-off management supply and demand for goods and services that is the money. The example of leaving the company doomed to failure due to Mismanagement however, is the image of the operating mode of our global society today. What we need to do to put things in the right direction with these data we have taken into account? To begin, we all need to agree on a common goal. That should probably seem reasonable that this goal is to survive as the most prosperous, healthiest and most sustainable way possible. If we want this, we will have to try to be optimal in our choices, and avoid any action that could harm us in the long run. Humanity now has the most powerful tools that the world could know: robotics, computer science; software, which are tools for handling tasks automatically by a computerized device; and a system of global computer communication network called internet. All these tools very new in the history of mankind are intended to help us in this process. What do we need to survive in a healthy and prosperous? We need the earth's resources: water, food, energy to run our tools; raw materials to manufacture these tools, and to build our habitats. So we need this to start with the basis for any management: quantify and locate the best of all these resources, which are scattered all over the world. But this is not enough. We also need to follow up on the turnover of each of the resources that make up our land stock; and understand the ecological interaction of each of them in their natural element, to avoid long-term nuisance. Our human know-how must be helped in this process by software So that would a comprehensive resource management. Preservation and strategic use of resources will be essential for us to consider a production of durable goods and services. For this, we will explore the relevance of the performance of each resource, and to avoid using those harmful those with negative feedback. For example, the fact still use a resource that is being depleted as oil for energy is a disgrace. We know that it creates devastating consequences in terms of pollution; but it is also a scarce resource we need in other areas: manufacture of plastics, composites, etc.. the list is very long; while we literally burn to create energy, Energy also available everywhere. As well as being purveyors of the most massive pollution; and the majority of which are land conflicts, it is a secret, the oil wars; it is the oil companies are the largest capital assets' of technology. I invite you to search the internet documentary 'Who Killed the Electric Car?' which takes stock of the oil lobby who have pushed policy decisions to stop an electric car from General Motors in 90 years, vehicle fast, efficient, with functional autonomy. I knew also that the first car in the world to have exceeded 100 km hour in 1899, the 'Jamais Contente' was an electric car; but I was very surprised to learn that in 1900, about 4192 cars built in the United States, 1681 were steam; 1575 were electric and only 936 were gasoline. When you know this, and look at the date on our calendar, can quickly understand that there is an incredible lie. And the hostage-taking of progress continues, when we know that the greatest scientific universities such as MIT in Boston, for example, these universities invite us to turn our research into the high potential energy that are tidal wind, solar and especially combined with nanotechnology, and geothermal. We know that on Earth, energy is everywhere. But we also know that funding for effective searches have to compete on very unequal with the oil lobby, or nuclear. For them, the people of Fukushima would appreciate the clean look we are continually praised. So back to our logic, we need to investigate the performance, relevance and the degree of negative feedback of each resource. We must then maximize efficiency in everything we produce. Requires that the product design is primarily geared towards the highest quality of our know-how; the goal is sustainability and excellence of the product, material economy, and is thought recyclable and able to update since its conception. This is obviously the opposite of what we are doing now, wasting valuable resources by creating objects ineffective thought to be renewed soon. If we consider a computer, for example: the material basis that is the screen, keyboard and mouse do not need to leave entirely in the trash when there is a small component to change it. Especially if the design of the base material was thinking with our best expertise in terms of sustainability, Design and ergonomics. Now, ask yourself this question: do we need money to obtain goods and services, or do we need to get just the goods and services? Is a computing tool offering a super-supply management and demand may be more relevant than the blind management that is currently proposing the money? We have the means to create this intelligent system management. There are already almost in every company, we just need to apply it to the global management of our resources and our needs. Management that avoids unnecessary duplication of products of poor quality; to look back up the local production; to avoid waste of objects produced in the very distant places, multiplying the pollution required for such unnecessary transport. We will need also to ask ourselves what we really need. We need the basic necessities such as housing, food; We need tools to facilitate our lives; and we need objects recreational leisure. We also know that these needs are highly variable, according to our personality, our region, our culture and even our generation. It goes so we have to do surveys on our global needs. That said, we must reflect on the need for an object, or function of an object. For example, do we need a highly polluting detergents to clean a surface; or is it that we can give the surface hydrophobic properties, found in nature such as the lotus leaf, and prevent dirt from settling there? Do you need an air conditioner to regulate the temperature at home or is it that can mimic the structure of passive cooling of termite mounds, ducts and shafts made of the diameter specified, and to maintain a temperature between 26.5 ° C and 28.5 ° C when the African environment in which they are a variation ranging from 4 ° C overnight at 45 ° C during the day? We have already taken the step to dematerialize quotes certain needs, because we understood that the function was more relevant than the object. Many of us have a real music collection to mp3; and no longer need the hardware support that is the CD. Should be just that the quality of music are similar to the original; but we already did that great step of dematerialization. Also, who wants to find a mobile phone weighing 1 kg, measuring 20 cm, when we appreciate the lower volume equipment? In fact, we are ready to understand that the function is what we need, much more than the object. And that's good, because the software world is much more efficient than a multitude of heterogeneous objects, while performing hands down the features we need. We need our sense of material comfort is focused on excellence and maximum economy of resources. Rather than having all of his house lit; it would seem more appropriate to have a sensor system that makes the light is only where we stand. Well, this logic must be the same for all of our goods and services. We have everything we need, but only when we need it. For this abundant production, but also rational and efficient; we must give up as soon as possible working operations, and let the computer and robotics to do it for us. First, because these tools are designed to be very precise, much more than humans, they do not tire and do not distracting; and capabilities in complex procedures and actions are amazing, as we can see here; but secondly, and very importantly: because we are not robots, we are human beings, we are worth far more than any robot; and is currently indecent to do tasks very difficult for a human being when a machine can do. It takes considerable courage to work in the factory; a supermarket cashier needs very courageous to do the work it does; it's very long, very repetitive, unrewarding; and it prevents the person performing the task of making up for what it would feel good: his passions, his contribution. Use a human being to do this kind of work is to use a computer to type on a nail. As we have seen that money no longer corresponded to real wealth; the old equation for survival money by the work did not work, and was a producer of waste suicidal then we must switch to this new type of economy based on resources; managed by computer systems; allowing us free access to goods and services the extent of our actual resource stocks, and thoughtful of our needs. Of course, all this raises a series of questions. First, if the work is not paid, since we are replaced by automation in the production of goods, we will have no motivation to do anything? "In your opinion, what they would do, people, if they no longer need to work to get money? - That is to say? - If they had everything they need, they were perfectly happy materially, do you think they would do what? - Ah, well you know what they would do, buddy? ... Nothing. That is, any motivation would fall, and you find yourself with a civilization slumped on sofas, Is that what you want? - You see things like that, you? - Well yeah buddy ... Like many! - Damn ... you see, it's a shame, because it was a test ... You see, I just won 200 million euros in lottery and I'm looking for friends with creative ideas to share with them ... - Aaaah! ... Ah, okay! No, actually, I had not understood ... ... the question is: unconstrained job / money what we could do creatively? ... it is a something like that? - Exactly. - No, OK, OK, I understand ... Well, I have full, full, full of ideas on this, you see, for example, I love ... (The character's creative ideas drown in the sound of music) Indeed, it is a very important question: what is the motivation to contribute to our world if the obligation to work no more, and if the activity was carried out by paid more money? Do astronomers would stop scrutinizing the mysteries of the Universe because there would be no check at month end? And knowing that their comfortable life would be provided independently of their activity and that it would benefit the most advanced tools for their comments, their research ... they really lose their motivation? Computer enthusiasts, the geniuses of robotics they cease to work for their passion to stay slumped on sofas? The musicians they definitely would stop the music? If each of us had the means to access the training done by enthusiasts, teachers, to learn, to be effective in his own passion, this is why we feel gifted, what we are willing to give to the world, regardless of the field; do this would be more rewarding for us, much more pleasant; compared to what we request at this time all of us? ... For more than one lives by pulling the devil by the tail? If you ask to yourself we are even willing to lose money, to pay, to our passions: dance classes, cooking, language learning, etc.. etc.. ... In addition, each company now aims to make money, and has its activity as a means to achieve its goal: the pharmaceutical industry does not aim to make drugs: to drugs was his means of action to profitability; an album of music is no longer produced for making music; but this music production is the means of action for the recording industry to profitability. What would the motivation of people if their activity was again the goal? As for the idea of ??not being financially compensated for what we do, do we imagine for a moment the real wage that would have? If the company gives me the opportunity to give the best of myself, that in any case I like to give to others, this means that in return I will have the best of all, in all areas making up the society. I will be freed from the constraint of being always stuck in my life choices, because I have to survive day to my needs and those of my own. Unlike the current binding immediacy: I would have time to do what is good for me to be relaxed in my life and contribute up to what I want to give the World. Because today, in all honesty, who is really happy to get up on Monday morning? How many of us live with their real passion, real expertise? As for the richest people in the world today, despite the flood of virtual money do they have the best of human knowledge so far? The richest people of the eighteenth century, Despite their financial power, had no chance to benefit from the progress of centuries. Would they have left their fortune if in return they had received free current technology: medical advances, the ability to travel so fast in the sky to access all our entertainment? A world where talent will no longer be held back, but pushed ahead will be a good world for all. We have all to gain, even those who currently feel very privileged. Again, if we streamline our production in the most pragmatic and effective, and that we reflect on the specific functions of our needs: then we will have access to all this, where we are, who we are. Of course, another question arises: that of merit. Why do some have the same access to goods contributing less? First, if we speak of merit, we need to review the concept now. Some work harder than others, it's true. But is that he who has a golden parachute worth millions allocated to it? Is the child who dies of hunger deserves his fate? Do you think that the little you have the right to have in your life now is really what you deserve? Yes, in life, some make more than others. But if one puts in perspective what we give is what will be a pleasure for us to give and that the goal is nothing less that everyone enjoys the best of the collective contribution, Is that jealousy and resentment are really our concern, in a world where everyone will be relaxed? Do we really have to envy his neighbor when a priori, our needs will be met? If we consider: is today's society that seeks to make us fickle people, to turn the consumer cyclicals. We are very capricious collectively, but in fact we rarely enjoy goods that society asks us to buy. It's a carrot at the end of the stick: we see, we think we're going to have, but we almost never eat it. If we are not in the immediacy, but the assurance that we will receive what we need, it will not be pushed to the whim unmet. If in my canteen, then I want chips, I am told that there will be tomorrow, and that offers me potato croquettes instead will I do a scandal? The problem of the scarcity of certain products, we will have to think. There is not enough as vintage wine for everyone, for sure. That said, perhaps we could use scientific methods used in the production of great wines for products of greater consumption. And maybe that whosoever will actually get a vintage example will participate in the harvest of this wine. I have no ready-made solution, however, at all, we will find solutions. On the issue of the daily violence that inhabits our world Is what you may think it is closely related to living conditions today? Is that a thief will always be when there is nothing left to steal more money, and that everyone will benefit as a true wealth of life? What part of the conditions of poverty, exclusion, humiliation into violence today? I am convinced that today's society flatters our bad instincts, it individualizes us completely, while denying the individual and trying to melt into a shapeless mass. It puts us in competition with each other, and our ability to survive is often made by crushing others. We are all suspicious of others, and we always feel ripped off, stolen. We know that people that are mounted high, and that direct our destinies are the most competitive, those who have less empathy, who are willing to corrupt or be corrupted, those with the most sharp teeth. But is it necessary that the tip of the finger, or is it that we would rather tell us that if the currently earn less ethical play, Perhaps it's the current rule of this game to be challenged. An economy based on resources will not solve all problems, because we are very complex. That said, if I have cancer and acne, do I not treat my cancer since in any case, it will not solve my acne problem? And once my cancer treated, perhaps I could concentrate on my acne, and perhaps stress that I had with my disease had a heavy impact on inflammation of my skin? On the question of utopia that would represent such a society, let us ask the question of meaning can have utopia now. Is it not simply a synonym for the project, in a world that has an absolute absence of a project? I understand that a society totally different from ours may seem unrealistic, since we are fully accustomed to the values ??of our society. Especially if the company is moving towards the well-being. It's too easy. It is the world of Care Bears ... However, which company may be unrealistic, magical, utopian; and how can society be pragmatic? Is that where you do not want to see the real causes of our problems; one based on the idea that we can ever eat things faster than they are renewed, one where the rationing of our needs is done with numbers that do more than themselves, one where the whole structure, everyone is competing systematic one where we plunder resources, causing carnage environmental, geopolitical and social and where it is believed that magically bring peace and prosperity of a sudden, do this type of society is pragmatic? The other type of society: one who cares to understand the causes of our problems to stop the consequences, which aims to ensure that people in the world can live better than less, one that uses the skills and tools currently available to achieve his ends, do this type of society is unrealistic, magical, utopian? This idea of ??resource-based economy is already in the minds of tens of thousands of people around the world. Reflections of individuals or movements of thought are already in the air. We need the debate on these ideas even more magnification. Now the most important question: how to get to a certain type of society, when financial institutions or political block the game? When our world is ossified by a multitude of different financial arrangements or policies? How to start a transition? If we said that the competitive mode is good in sports and games, we must understand that no place in the management of our World. Because the competitive model subtracts a set to keep only the best, when a contributory model retains all the world, all brains, all the creativity possible. Including those of the best. We need to find a tool that facilitates the contribution. This is my first proposal, and it is not political, but practical, technical, and beyond the borders of France. Since we have new and powerful computing tools, we can create a system of universal contribution. We know there are now essential issues that are simply not even considered by companies, and states that are closely linked, because they do not meet the criteria of profitability. We do not wait until these institutions do things for us: we must resume the hand. Since very little time, a new tool has emerged in the Internet: social networks. Until then, we had a mail box that put us in contact with each other, there were tools like chat Messenger, but there was still no centralized tool that can help facilitate communication and sharing of documents and various media like Facebook, for example. There are a multitude of online tools that allow different types of contributions. That said, there is still no centralized tool that allows an effective contribution, multidisciplinary. The social networking system seems ideal for us to meet our expectations. How Kontributo will work? Everyone can create a profile, personal space, where he can tag all of its fields of competence: scientific, linguistic, artistic, creative ... Everyone was multiple strings to our bows, take advantage of it. In a dedicated, each issue, each issue will be published by each by tagging what we think are the areas of expertise required to answer our question. We will have to reflect on the true extent of our needs, basic needs such as energy, housing, food, needs to facilitate our lives as tools, transportation, needs for our well being such as recreation, access to culture, entertainment. Each question will be designed not to be forgotten, it will be dispatched specialists to achieve the fields that have been tagged. If the question, the proposal is not in the field of possibilities, for reasons as diverse as scientific impossibility, or negative feedback, then this will be an opportunity for us to find an alternative function to meet the need that has been expressed. We are all generalists, and even when one is an expert in one area, There is general in others. It is important to think about it, because often the specialist is so in the close-up of what he knows, that some things can escape in the views more expanded, more distant. For example, experts at NASA have demonstrated high intelligence and humility when they found themselves in difficulty in landing a robot on Mars. Despite their highly specialized knowledge, they could not find solutions on a set of problems: each layer of Martian atmosphere was very specific constraints, which threatened the entire fall of the robot. To move forward, they called someone who was not an a priori science. They appealed to James Cameron, director of Terminator, Titanic and Avatar. They have benefited from his creativity. And found solutions through his imagination, his proposed ideas: 'And if we do this, or that?' and specialists, with their technical knowledge said, 'yes, we can do this, that too, it can be done'. This example is really a model of all our needs, our concerns. We must combine our creativity and know-how very sharp. For the knowledge of mankind at present, is immense. Together, we own all of the fields of skills required to advance. And it is not our business that brought us progress. They have only surf on it, opening or closing the valve of Finance according to the possible profitability of a project but the brains and know-how aren't their creations. This is also why we often have a great distrust for some innovations and know-how: robotization, nanoscience, the understanding of complex systems such as genetics or climate we are often afraid when they are held by institutions that do not care about consequences of their actions such as multinational or when they have the purpose to harm when they are created and funded by the military for example, in a world where we are taught from very young that does not solve his problems by typing in the face of others. It is feared these techniques when they are thinking wrongly. We need to reclaim, and finally use it wisely. With Kontributo, it will be possible to communicate the disciplines with each other, and move towards multidisciplinary approaches such as biomimicry, for example, better known as the bionic, which is to reproduce the mechanisms of nature for application in various technological fields. Ideas or proposals may cover a very wide range of disciplines a priori very different. For example, we have used and abused so much of our fertile lands that are saturated by intensive farming with very negative feedback, that the idea of ??making a kind of building in each city, a sort of garden on several levels could be a proposal not to throw in the trash. And it would require the reflection of disciplines as diverse as farmer know-how, agronomy, entomology, botany, climatology, as well as robotics, computer programming, design, architecture, the various specialties within the energy, Plumbing, distribution, etc.. etc.. Each of us, because of its specialty can help to find technical solutions to our basic problems. But things will not be limited to the scientific aspects: We are social beings, we are players. We need recreation, art, entertainment. On this side there are also ideas fuser, and the panel of diverse skills is enormous. If we let our creativity grow, we'll probably enjoy it so amazing. And we will find alternative solutions also for the needs that are now spearheading the consumption such as fashion, clothing, for example. We see, with all those TV programs dedicated to the makeover that there is a great skill and high demand. Just imagine the possibilities for direct contact between the needs of everyone and various specialty styling, design; with a specification-oriented excellence and material economy, the opportunity perhaps for everyone to benefit, not a meaningless accumulation, but rather focused on made to measure. Again, we will have some surprises on the earnings that we will all get. It will be a great tool to bring out our creativity, everywhere there are kinds of MacGyver, of Bear Grylls, people who have a great capacity for creativity, resourcefulness, creation of tools to adapt to stress. Humanity has a lot of inventors, their talent must not be locked, but it benefits everyone. There is a tendency today to think that we have a huge problem, there are seven billion mouths to feed. And if we understand that we have a tremendous asset: we have seven billion brain, each with a life experience, ideas, creativity, know-how. With the tools of today, about how the social network, we have the opportunity to generate the largest brainstorming that has ever existed. We are going to benefit from the analysis of each, place your finger on our problems and needs, bring out the most creative of every culture, every lifestyle, every alternative. If we understand that humanity does not have to fight in a competitive model absurd but can think in terms of team, enjoying the best of each, so we'll soon see that all we can understand our problems and needs, and that all we have the solutions, all solutions. If each tool has been refined by passing from hand to hand, in a very long process of history, we now have the means to accelerate this process, each idea by passing a set of broad areas of expertise. This tool will seem so obvious, once established, one wonders how we could function without it before. It will really allow us to take stock of essential scientific concepts, to sort between truth and falsehood. For example, Nikola Tesla, the great engineer, said in 1891: 'In a few generations, our machines will be powered by the energy available anywhere in the universe. [...] In space there is a form of energy. Is it static or kinetic? If it is static, all of our research have been unsuccessful. If kinetic - and we know it is - it is a matter of time, and humanity will be brought into harmony with its large energy technologies workings of nature. ' Is Tesla plot? Was it a myth? If so, we must take into account and stop the speculation. But if his thinking is facing the reality that while we will go for this. And the institutions that hold back progress can only take note of the fact that more strategic solutions, effective and sustainable found. This world that blocks will have to follow. So I'm not computer expert, and I am limited in the creation of Kontributo. Design must be based on the contributory immediately. With a friend, we have laid the foundations of the site, a pilot project, we will have to start with a forge, the bases are operational. To continue, I appeal to all computer nerds: the geeks, hackers, programmers, webmasters, web designers, graphic designers, but also that will allow multilingual communication in various languages, I appeal to all those people to prepare the tool most fluid, most convenient, most intuitive, in the frame that I just explained. With a tool like this, we can create and reflect on the construction of a new world. It is a tool that will allow us to free ourselves of the fact that today, our lives holding us hostage, as the most powerful to the poorest, we all want, and in the end, we function poorly, and we are not happy. In any case, much too far from what we all deserve to have as part of happiness, of freedom, and equality before finally being recognized for who we really are, all of us. Give us the opportunity not to have been the 'spoilers' of humanity. "... Well, me, I do. I have a joke. You know what was the project of 2000 people to get by? - Uh ... I do not know ... - No? ... - So they didn't know too! - Ah! ah! ah! Not bad! Eh! That reminds me: it's ten guys from the 2000s, who walk in the forest and meet a rabid mutt, rrrrh! What is the strategy to defend themselves? - There are ten? - Ten dogs ... uh! Ten guys, a dog (laughs) - Uh ... I do not know? - They fight each other, between them, to determine which is most strong to face the mutt! - Hmm ... until there is only one? - Is that it? - Yes! ... what? ... yes ... would have a worry!, you have one yourself? - This is stupid! No but I will point out that it's stupid! Yeah, me I have one, yeah. Yeah, I'm better, I would: how many guys we had in the year 2000, how many guys we had to produce a tomato? - A lot! - 2000? - No! 202. One for production, the growing, 100 to carry and store, 100 into advertising, and one for *** in the trash to avoid ... ... ***! What's the term? ... ... to distort ... distort the current ... ... distort the market! - Wow! Too funny ... - What? - Learn to tell jokes! - I have one: you know why people of the 2000s they would die of hunger? - They would starve ... - Yeah, yeah, you know why? - No ... - Because they had no more trees to make paper money! - Yeah, yeah ... I knew it with oil. Better, much better ... Hey, guys, Fortunately, we have abandoned the system work against wages because in recent times, they thought of putting the vacuum in the closet, and pay people to eat dirt! ... ah! ah! Bzzzz, Bzzzz ... - Anything! Well, let see, it's nice to joke about the people of my generation, but I would remind you that at that time, it was really ***, that nothing worked, and that to get up to speed, it has not been easy, and anyway, well we did, we changed the situation, and that through us, you live like little pashas, band of little ***! So young comic I would ask you to show gratitude to your lordship! I tell you, uh ... hasta la vista! - What?! (Laughs) Yes, future generations will judge ours, and not too badly, I hope. I think we can be on track if you really stop to be frozen by fear, is unproductive we must show some composure, as in any difficult situation that can happen in our lives. We need to stop being afraid; a deep breath and take our minds: analyze the danger happens and see what we can, our strengths, to deal with. And we have plenty to deal with this. We have seen my proposal from the point of view, the social network Kontributo, I hope it will be up soon. As for my political proposal, one for French citizens: it is very simple. I have no ready-made solutions, so I have a promise to do: I agree, if elected, to set up the political system more functional and more accurate than we have found together on Kontributo. We will have therefore reflect collectively ask whether the current mode of operation is the right policy. The model that we finally asked our opinion that every two or three years, view as small and large, we have the freedom to choose between Coke and Pepsi. This is not the same brand, not necessarily the same ingredients, but the same type of drink. Does the fact that we are represented by someone is the right solution? Is this not an unfortunate tendency to hinder our progress in life together? Do we lack the technical means at present to be able to represent ourselves, everyone? Are most of the problems that we are not technical, in the end? Is the lighting experts on these issues would not allow us to have more accurate advice, more informed, more reliable than the ignorance of our problems, maintained by all levels of our institutions, primarily political? Do we ever dreamed of a council of wise men, humanists, that would be the guarantors of the proper functioning of a system where our real role is to never bury our good ideas, initiatives, our contributions to the World; which would be much more democratic, if we consider that having to choose between a few people pre-selected, supposed to represent us, but to the dismay of our final opinion? Again, I have no easy answers, I think a general brainstorming fuseront great ideas and surprising a new way to design policies and institutions. I repeat: I pledge to build the best system we have commonly conceived. But the political side of this project, for now, long way to go. The rules of the game is very biased. I had learned in civics when I was in college only to run for president, you had to be French, 23 years old aged and have no criminal record. But there was no mention that it takes to be rich financially to be able to do so, or it would go to 500 sponsorships elected in at least 30 different departments, including three overseas. These famous 500 signatures, we should ask people who are your competitors a priori, and have no incentive to give them to you. Supposedly to avoid a multiplicity of candidates, and candidates say 'fantastic' It could have been much fairer ways than one, where there is a real conflict of interest. Elected officials who attribute the judges and sponsors are part of what is really serious. I therefore appeal to their citizenship: the major parties will have no trouble getting referrals from their own, and there are sufficient elected so they do not block the game: let the French people the opportunity to choose another model, although not one that guarantees your current status. But I also appeal to the woman or the man are those elected, I appeal to their conscience, their ethics, and I invite them to analyze point by point the arguments I have advanced throughout this video. If the world of the future began here in this place I love, I would be extremely proud. And it would be a huge symbol that one of the most powerful countries of the world take the course of something great, just, new. I have no financial means, as you may have noticed with this video that is made with the means at hand, I left my job last winter to prepare for the campaign, t I stop my unemployment now because I'm not looking for a job. I do not drive, there are two years ago, I made a walking tour of France from 5000 kms, for six months. So for now, I will use my means: referrals to get my feet and I appeal to all of you to help me in this task, put me up when going about your municipality. This is an opportunity to discuss among ourselves, enrich our ideas, and I'm sure it will be something strong. About whether to introduce myself, my private citizen, I do it because it's my right and my conscience screams. I do not see anywhere the arguments I have advanced, especially not from those who are supposed to be the wisest, the most discerning, those who open the way for us all, and on which our destiny. I have no appetite for power, in fact, I find it sad and vain. Power is not my goal, I know that happiness lies elsewhere. Also, I find it really pathetic that race to be the master of a ship that is so poorly designed that it can not go on the water. I am well aware of that I will be a kitten in the territory of tigers. I am not someone special courage. I have many flaws, and limitations just like everyone else. I am certainly not the best to defend this project, I do not pretend to believe, but I repeat, my conscience screams not to remain passive in this period that our choices will be crucial. My body is the tool of my thoughts when I go. And I'm tired ... I'm sick of being sick and tired of living in this world gray, I'm sick to complain. I know we have the means to escape, to live in a moral and material comfort never experienced before. I just dream of being a man free and happy among people free and happy. I know it is very difficult to imagine an absolute change our way of life, but we have little choice: sit with eyes closed until we are gone, or stop to swim in the opposite direction, we stop suffocating and give us a society that is equal to what our lives are worth. They are precious our lives, we must never forget. We say that the freedom of one ends where begins that of others, Today, freedom to exist ends where that of trade. We need to kind of madness. This is also Einstein who said of the madness that is constantly repeating the same thing and expecting different results. This is what we do now, however, trying to settle more or less our system without taking into account the fact that we should change it completely, if you really want to get out. If we gave a scale of 1 to 100 that tells the story of humanity as a whole, the heart of the Middle Ages would be 99.5, and the beginnings of the industrial age would be 99.8. Everything is going very quickly, more quickly. We already have all the tools of the future we have just come out of our institutions and our habits are old and slow us. As for the vision of some of humanity parasite, which finally deserves to die, who deserves his fate, I find this attitude very negative, it appears no good. We still looking, and he would not have been possible to consider our world today without an equivalent of the Middle Ages. He had to go through it. Well the same for our terrible time, you had to go through it, to go to something much better. And then we have no right to bet against ourselves ... And if you think the struggle is common to all living beings on this planet is the struggle against fate, If a gazelle breaks leg, it's over for her, Well we're living species we most equipped against fate: we can see less: glasses, one is limited to an average of 5 km / h you can go to 900 km / h in the sky we can only live on Earth, we went into space, our complex language allows us to understand something very abstract, we can communicate at the speed of light across the planet ... We are wonderfully equipped to deal with things. We are in a way the older brothers and sisters of other species. It asks us a huge responsibility vis-à-vis the entire living kingdom, let us not forget. We need to live up to future generations, but we must also be worthy of our ancestors, who hardly test things for us, so that we can inherit their tools, know-how. We have no right to squander this legacy like that, kids to behave in capricious we have no right not to share our knowledge, our tools, with the rest of humanity. This is the common heritage, it is for everyone. This is our generation alive today that will have to make choices, it will not be the next. We must be brave, stop being in denial. Humanity has revised since its appearance, and it is up to us to take the exam. Thus, we must succeed. Are we ready to change? No. No and yes, as in all life events: one is never ready for a birth, death, disruption of our habits, and in fact, though. We are the species that has adapted to all land constraints: hot deserts, cold, jungle, cities ... We are ready to change is the major characteristic of human beings. So let's go, it will be the most exciting period that humanity could know! Finally, I invite you up to debate the points: with friends, family, to have the advice of our old that society believes respect by calling them 'senior' or 'people of the third age', but they forgot that they have a long experience of life, and that their opinion makes sense. That all the people that influence artistic, scientific, media, may allow this vital debate to take place. You all know the harsh law of the buzz: share, redivision, and again this video. We are no longer children, we are responsible adults. Our fate is ours. This planet floating in a desert space is ours. It belongs to us all! I encourage other countries to have similar political initiatives. Once Kontributo will be active: create your profile, and contribute to building up the world of the future. Finally: might want a better world: me, I really want there. If we all want, we'll get it, do not doubt for a moment. Thank you very much, for having the patience to see the video so far, see you soon!