 So, hello everybody, thank you for coming and I would like to do some time travel with you. We will stay here in Paris, but we will go back with, let's see if the time travel device works. Well, we go back a few years to the French Revolution here in Paris. So Paris looked a little bit different at that time. We had lots of small narrow winding alleys in Paris. So it was very easy at that time for the revolutionaries to block those alleys and prevent the military from moving to one place to the other. Several years later, Napoleon III realized that this was one factor which might make the likelihood higher that something like this will happen again. So what he did was he reassembled some parts of Paris. So he got rid of some houses and built this broad boulevards and passages next to each other like we know it from today. With this architecture, it's very difficult to use some barrels and prevent the military to move from one place to another place in the city. So Napoleon changed the architecture of Paris in order to control the power. And through history, humans had a lot of technologies or introduced a lot of technologies which shifted power from people to other people or changed distribution between different people around the world. Like we had reading and writing which changed who is in power and who is not in power for a longer time. Just think about how long women were not allowed to read or write. Mathematics changed the way how power is distributed. You were able to do commerce and science. We had agriculture which allowed some groups to stay in one place and also to gather more property. Shipping changed the way how we deal with products around the world. So we could ship things which grow in one area of the world to other places. But it also enabled things like colonialization or slavery. And nowadays, more and more of our life is influenced by computers, by software. So this is something which people out there might still recognize as a computer, the laptops and desktops machines out there. You also know that the internet is run in such places like this on servers, a lot of software is running which is influencing our lives. A lot of people don't still recognize that you also have routers in your home which influence on who gets access to the internet and who from the internet gets access to your private network at home. People are running around with mobile phones without maybe realizing that software is running on them and that the software is influencing how you can communicate and who decides who is able to communicate. And there are cars out there and other devices which have lots of computers on them and those machines depending on what software is running on them might allow their users to do certain things or restrict them to do certain things and in future probably more. The same for planes, television, washing machines, all those devices which before were not running software at all. So we are surrounded by machines, by devices which are running software which is influencing what we can do and what we cannot do and sometimes not even outside of us but inside of our bodies like with pacemakers or hearing aids. So those are all around us, I mean you know all this that we are surrounded by software. Lot of people in our society they don't realize that yet how influential software is and how much those rules implemented in the software might restrict their lives. We also have not just devices but more and more processes which are dominated or influenced by software. For example here from France there is a software which decides who will be allowed to go to which university. And in the old times that was something where there were procedures written down like how this is going. Now this software was giving an output like okay you are now allowed to go to this university but it was not clear under why these decisions were made like this, why some people were allowed to go to one university but some were not allowed to go to this university. And the pupil association here in France they made a freedom of information request for this software and said we want to find out how is it happening that one person gets into this university and another doesn't. We would like to see like what are those rules implemented in this software. And first the authorities argued that they cannot publish the source code because then hackers might attack the system but after some more back and forth they were given right that the authorities have to publish the source code. That was the time when people could then understand what are those actual rules in this and could argue if this is something which is fair. For example it turned out that the software was giving a higher chance for pupils who live close to a university than to those who live further away from a university. Something which maybe if you think about it as a developer yeah it makes sense people don't have to travel as far. The other result was that a lot of the high profile universities they are located in districts where you have to pay a very high rent. So if you give a higher priority to pupils who live in those areas where you have to pay a higher rent might also influence the distribution in a way that pupils from high income families will be able to go to these high profile universities and afterwards get a higher pay job and that some distribution in the society will not change. So that was something which was possible after the publication of the source code to have this discussion before that you always just had to guess what might be in there or not. In the UK and the US nowadays around 60% of the jobs they are before screened by software from I think around three software providers and this software already sorts out some people. So 30% of the applications they will never be seen by humans. The source code of this is secret the companies don't publish that. So this raises a lot of questions for the society like why do some people not get some jobs? Why is it that those people often look different than others or that they are from some poorer areas that they are not allowed to get those higher paid jobs? So through some court cases they found out some of the aspects which are considered there like the income of the area you come from then also some things like spelling but then in the end it also turned out that because of some of those factors it appears that there is huge discrimination against black people. But you don't know how exactly this is happening. Just that a large amount of companies is using the software and this decides on the decision who will get a job and who will never be invited for a job interview. That's something which can turn out quite problematic for society if you cannot have any discussion about that and think about if this is a fair procedure. It's also for people, lawyers who want or trade unions when they would like to argue about this. It's very difficult to argue about such procedures when the companies say well that's a business secret we will not tell you how we are doing this. And as a final example from this category there is a software which is used in almost every US state which predicts how likely it is that you will become a criminal offender again after you were offending once. So the software says the likelihood that you will do this crime again is 60% or 80%. And this number is then used in some states even to decide about the sentence length of that person. And the lawyer of the person who was offending, was violating a law couldn't even argue about why is this number 80% and not 40 because it's secret. And it's a huge problem for society if you think about like if people they will be sent to prison for five years wrong or because the software says so and there can be no argumentation, no discussion if those are factors which are fair and good and if those are things we would like to have in our society that we predict the likelihood higher because someone is from a poor area or because they have relatives who take drugs, things like this. And there's a huge difference between law and norms on one side and architecture or software. So when we look at this street and I tell you that there will be no police, no cameras, no other human being or living being around here, who of you would drive a little bit faster than 100? Some will risk it. Okay, so some of you would break the law by driving faster than 100. Now who of you would drive faster than 100 on this street also it's not forbidden. I thought you're French. So the difference here is that in this situation when you drive faster you don't need a police officer to punish that person. There are some laws of physics who will punish you. And even if you don't know about those laws of physics and you took a break in school at that time and played a little bit around with another device or played with your classmates, it doesn't matter. You don't need to know about this Newton thing. You will still fall down there with your car when you're driving 150 kilometers an hour there. With laws you need someone, first of all you need to have seen the sign there that it's 100 kilometers per hour is the speed limit. If you haven't seen it, it's difficult for you to adhere to it. Then afterwards you need someone who actually makes sure that this law is then fulfilled. So that they say, okay you broke this law so now we will punish you. And the punishment also doesn't come directly. So you might have to be able to argue around like I was faster than 100 because my wife was sitting next to me and she was bleeding and I wanted to be faster at the hospital. I think that a judge might then argue okay, would be fine. Later there is not much arguing with the laws of physics. And while some of those laws like cavitation and so on, they are things where it's easier for us to think about what will happen. When I take this class here and open my hands, I think most people here in the room you will be able to predict what will happen. Well when we are in let's say virtual room where these laws are influenced by software and written down in software, anything can happen. I could open my hands and the glass will go up to the ceiling. I might open my hands and the glass will stay here or I open my hands and you are gone or I am gone or whatever. We don't know. If we don't know what is written down in the software, we have no clue what will come next. What will be the consequences for us when we do certain things and what are the rules which influence what we can do in this environment and what not. Who knows this Frenchman? Anyone here? Okay, that's Montesquieu and Montesquieu is famous for the concept of the distribution or the separation of power. So in a democracy you separate the powers by the legislative, the executive and the judiciary and you also have several levels in democratic state apparatus or also different institutions and you make sure that you distribute power amongst those different levels so that there is not one person who can rule everybody. So to make that a bit clearer, when you think about Ciccer stone and paper, it would not be fun if the stone always wins. I think most people will stop after playing it at least for a few minutes. They will not continue. Well in a democracy or in a state it's not about fun. This distribution of power will influence if you might go to jail or if you or relatives might die because they have opinions which some people don't like or someone has some other interests in this. So this is a very crucial component of our democracy that you make sure that the institutions are set up in a way that you could give every position in there to your worst opponent without influencing your well-being. So when we take this and think about the theory, like we have those institutions. Now we have, we elected in a society, we elected a president and that president then has a lot of power. This case here then about parts of the military. The question is, this does not consider technology. Is it like this or might it be more like this? Who will decide about that, what will happen when you press this red button? And are those people where there is a democratic control or will it be just a few companies who can decide what will happen and what not? So free software is one way to distribute power in technology. So we make sure that there is no discrimination who is allowed to use the software. So it's not just a few people who can use this and take it for their advantages to increase power. People are allowed to study how that works and tell others about how the software works. So you can understand the rules implemented in these devices and those procedures surrounding us and we can have a debate about that in our society. You can share that again with others and you can then also adopt, adapt the software to your needs as an individual, as a company, organization or as the government. So you can make sure that the rules are implemented the way you decided and not that someone else decides about the rules and you have no other way than to adhere to them too. So of course free software, software freedom is just one puzzle in this picture of how to preserve and our democracy in a world where there is more and more digital technologies. But we think that it's an important puzzle piece because as mentioned before there are so many, it's in so many areas of our life nowadays. The way for software freedom and for making sure that we can preserve those other freedoms in our society as well, that's a very long-term path. We will take a lot of time to bring that forward so when you think about it how long it took societies to introduce some other freedoms like the freedom of the press, how long that took that people got that in countries, that's a very long-term achievement. So but still on this way we believe that there are a few things which are crucial where we are working on for the FSFE. So one part is that we believe it's crucial that people out there understand that free software grants them those four freedoms, that there is no discrimination in the usage, that you can study the source code, understand how that works, make sure that people who understand that can talk with others about how this works and there could be a discussion about if things are right or might be wrong and if it would be good to change things, that they can share the software with others and that you can make those improvements or changes to software. So it's not you who have to change because of the software but that you are able to change software to fit your needs, especially on levels like the governments. And this is something where you explain that to people, you explain it again and again and again and then again and sometimes people get frustrated with this where it's very important to remember that it's most of the time other people. So I mean as a school teacher you also teach some things every year but it's two different pupils and the same thing is true for software freedom when we talk about those issues to others we have to repeat ourselves again and again because it's more people we are talking to a lot of times different people. We should not become impatient about that or stop doing this. We want to make sure that political decision makers that they understand how this whole part about technology and software freedom influences other freedoms like freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, transparency, privacy, economic well-being that they understand this better and that they also consider this when they take decisions. We think it's important to provide resources and support to people who are actually promoting the idea of software freedom who are developing software, free software or somehow else being involved in this. So this is something which on one side is for people already involved in free software that they have materials that they have information material to promote this but it's not just for organizations in the area of technology or in the area of free software. It's also for organizations like unions in the case of this, in the case of those job applications they also have to understand this technology and how this is influencing their work or people organization with this case from different universities or lawyers who are defending clients who might go on death penalty because some computer says 90%. And so there's environmental organizations because of some software running on cars trying to circumvent environmental laws. So this is something where we have to work more and more with organizations who are active in other parts of our society who we have to help to understand those questions about technology. And we have to remove barriers, legal barriers, regulations which prevent us to further use or develop free software. So I will mention also one or two examples later but those are things that it should not be prevented by laws to use and develop free software and it should not be made difficult by governments for people to understand how software is working and how all those decisions around us are happening. This should be something which should be encouraged by government. They should not be punished when they want to talk with others about how certain things work in our society. And finally when people, organizations, governments want to use or develop software, free software should be the preferred choice. That's one goal we want to achieve that whenever they have a decision they will pick free software. So yeah, those were the more long term goals we think which is important on this long journey to help to support those other freedoms in our democracy. Want to mention a few examples now from Ephesus of Eastburg. So one example of what we recently did was we had a small project it's called Reuse. It's available under Reuse.software. The idea is that we would like to make it easier for humans and for machines to understand license information and for this we boiled it down to three points which from the feedback we got turned out to be the most important ones to achieve this. So first one is to make sure that you provide the exact text of each license which you use so that you don't just add a link to this license or say it's this license but that you actually provide the full license text, that you include a copyright notice and a license in each file and that you provide an inventory for the included software. So those are those three three points which we would like to promote more that especially people who start programming and who write software who are new to free software and not that deep involved like most of you probably are that they also notice this and think about those issues that is afterwards easier for others to reuse software to build up on the software and you don't end up in the end with producing software which others cannot use because it was not clear how you meant something with the license information. So yeah if you want to find out more about that have a look at this website reuse.software. Beside that during the last during this month you might have read some media reports that the internet died and that the European Union was responsible for that. So that was probably then about the EU copyright reform and in this process you might not think about that free software is somehow most people might not think that free software is influenced by EU copyright reform and most of the lawmakers also didn't think about free software when they were drafting those laws but yeah we when we looked at this reform we figured out that there might be some bad influences for free software because those platforms which are which are also regulated in this copyright reform they might also be code hosting platforms code software development platforms so we raised this issue with a safe code share website where we had a petition people could sign an open letter and we were informing politicians about this that they might have missed what influences might have on on software development in Europe. So that's what we did in the past there at the moment we are in a situation that the European Parliament now decided on a version for them where there is an exclusion for free software development platforms in there the European Council they still have a version which also says that free software development platforms are excluded but they added something in before that it's for non-profit parts and I mean all of you know that it doesn't make sense to say that non-profit open source development platforms are excluded because every free software development can also be commercial so that's one of the things which we will now follow up there this whole process is now going in the so-called trial lock so the Commission the Council European Council and the European Parliament will go into negotiations and try to find a compromise version and if they will be successful that will happen probably before the European Parliament election and then afterwards that will be a directive and this will then be implemented by member states so this whole process will will still continue a little bit so the internet is not yet dead so that's the good news and the last example I want to give from recent work is is our public money public code campaign so our goal with this campaign is that software finance with public money should be published under a free software license and because we made a really good video from my perspective which explains that way faster than I could explain it now and I would like to have also discussion with you I will show you this video and yes I hope that it works with the sound because I cannot increase the volume here imagine for a moment our government would treat our public infrastructure like our streets and public buildings the same way it treats our digital infrastructure our members of parliament would work in a rented space where they weren't allowed to vote in favor of stricter environmental laws because the owner a multinational corporation didn't allow that kind of voting in its buildings nor will it allow a long overdue upgrade to more than 500 seats this means some members of parliament have to stay outside in the street and a couple of blocks away a brand new gym is already being torn down just six months after it was built it's being replaced with an exact replica at great expense and the only difference the new manufacturer also provides streetball as an added feature meanwhile every night through a hidden backdoor in the city hall documents that contain sensitive information on citizens from bank data to health care records are being stolen but no one is allowed to do anything about it because searching for backdoors and locking them would infringe the signed user agreement and as absurd as this sounds when it comes to our digital infrastructure things like the software and programs that our governments are using every day this comparison is pretty accurate because mostly our administrations procure proprietary software this means a lot of money goes into licenses that last for a limited amount of time and restrict our rights we aren't allowed to use our infrastructure in a reasonable way and because the source code of proprietary software is usually a business secret finding security holes or deliberately installed backdoors is extremely difficult and even illegal but our public administrations can do better if all publicly financed software were to be free and open source we could use and share our infrastructure for anything and for as long as we wanted we could upgrade it repair it and remodel it in any way to fit our needs and because the open source in free software means that the blueprint is openly readable for everyone this makes it much easier to find and close security holes and if something practical and reliable was created digitally not only can you reuse the blueprint all over your country the actual thing itself can be deployed anywhere even internationally a great example of this is fix my street originally developed in Great Britain as a free software app to report view and discuss local problems like potholes it's now being used all over the world everyone benefits because new features and improvements are shared by everyone if all our software would develop like this we could stop struggling with restrictive licenses and could start thinking about where and how software could help us we could concentrate on creating a better society for everyone so if you think that tomorrow's infrastructure should be in our own hands help us now by sharing this video and visiting our website public it's time to make our demand public money public code so yes that was the short explanation of our campaign we have now around 1800 18,000 signatures for this around 155 organizations which are also supporting this I hope that after this we might have 50 more signatures on this and there are also cities who sign up for this like the city of Barcelona also signed the open letter there and during the next months in preparation for the European Parliament election we will again contact politicians about this demand and hope that they will that they will be open to some arguments there that we can make changes there so yeah that's that will be ahead us up there and all those activities I just mentioned the three examples that's something which would not be possible without contributors and financial supporters of the FSFE so I would like to thank people who donated to us and who are contributing to us here but I will choose one of the quotes by one of the Colonel developers so she would like to support support us that's very much appreciated beside that my first teacher wrote this down in a book for me and it's an American African saying many small people and many small blazes do many small things that can alter the face of the world and so I would like to thank you for developing free software for testing free software for packaging free software documenting free software translating free software telling others about free soft explaining it to them so thank you very much for this all of this work sometimes it it might feel a bit insignificant for the long-term development of of humankind but if you combine all those different actions by all of us individually I think we can we can change the world there and that's an important thing because when we think about the situation in the world it's there are still many many people who don't who don't benefit from fundamental freedoms in ours which we often take for granted in our society like freedom of the press freedom of assembly freedom of speech it's it's something they have to fight for every day and once you have those freedoms it doesn't stop there you constantly have to defend them and to lift them so that's why it's important that we also constantly fight for and defend software freedom the right to control our technology to support all those other freedoms and that we by this democratize software so thank you very much and I'm looking forward to the discussion with you any questions I have a comment on on your point regarding the stupid decisions which are taken by software I sort of disagree with this in fact it's not the software which takes stupid decisions it's that developers initially think about a single decision for a single case it is hard-coded in software and the software replicates the same decision for any case and in my opinion it's a fundamental difference because there is no way to argue with something which is already written but in fact this problem exists also out of software in France we have administration you don't need to have the computers to have people who are still born and say I was told to do it this way we'll do it this way so in my opinion the problem is not limited to software it's a matter of people applying rules without even thinking about them people getting increasingly stupid developers being increasingly lazy and in addition software becoming increasingly complex which will ultimately result in software which contains tons of stupid decisions which have been hard-coded by people who don't even understand why they were supposed to put them and the people who have access to the code will not even understand what the code was supposed to do so while I'm all for free software and I do use and contribute free software myself I don't think that all the solution is there I mean education is much more important and even access to write the code is should be earned and not just granted to anyone and we really need to educate developers to think and to take their time to produce good code and to really try to to think about the consequences of their code and that's where I think that in some aspects free software tends to degrade this for a stupid reason which is that today it is possible to say I'm starting this project for now it does almost nothing but it will grow into something big because a lot of people will help me and you will release the first version which is 100 lines of code completely stupid code hoping that someone else will fix it for you and that's a big problem and for me it's really a proof that we need to educate people please do not write stupid code which does nothing or which is which is broken by design you should not publish your code if it is completely broken if you don't trust it or you should openly ask for some help I'm trying to do this I need some help to do it correctly because right now it is broken but distributing both can code is a big problem in my opinion so you're right I was not that clear about it's not software taking decisions but it's actually people who developed the software who took those decisions that's something which which is important because else it feels like you cannot change much there but all this when there are these discussions about artificial intelligence or algorithm are changing our our rules it's not it's not just those algorithms it's people who develop them but generally the people who develop algorithms are much smarter than those who implement them and that's something to think about and I'm pretty sure that's right now a lot of software which runs at various places like cars or whatever are already smarter than the people who are allowed to code other components in the car just just just very quickly so there was one one point there which I also wanted to clarify that's it's one piece of this puzzle free software but the I mean you you portrayed a little bit also the okay there are stupid developers who don't think about certain things I think that it's it's quite normal that as a developer you develop software without always questioning your own the whole norms and laws how you were brought up which you will take into consideration when you write code you might not think about someone in some very far other country who might have been brought up completely differently and where there are other laws which apply so that's why I think it will it will not be possible for every developer to think about all those cases and that's why it's important that when you pass on your software to others that you give them the possibility to make those changes and also to understand what actual rules implemented in this and have a discussion about that and that's the point where where free software comes in which enables you to do this yeah yeah if you had every newcomer developer have to ask for permission to publish something you would effectively limit his freedom which I don't think is what you want to I don't particularly want to limit I want that people think before publishing we we probably all have dirty stupid code that we write for ourselves and that somewhat sometimes we share with other people and we forget to warn them about the impacts of this code being used in the wrong context we probably all do have such code no that's why I prefer to use education that precisely the point instead of babysitting we should educate people think twice before publishing your stupid code that's the point I don't agree I think we should publish what we have it works for my use case today I know I have no error handling but it's working people should look at that when they decide to use it and they should see that you know I shouldn't pretend that this is fully featured bug-free code but if I'm going to throw together and I do it frequently throw together a hundred lines of crap that just does the job and yes I won't sleep at night if I tried to use that for you know something that matters but it does the job for me why shouldn't I put that out there and somebody can use that as the basis for something sensible it but I think you're putting the focus on the wrong place it's not I'm publishing it it's on using somebody else's code right then I would say publish with a warning it was designed it was written for my use case which is this use case yeah exact actually as long as you as long as you document that this code is crap I do that all the time I said this code is crap but it gets the job done if you want to find a better way go ahead but hey and I've actually had a lot of people still use that crap but I think that I mean in such cases it's it's not always the developers obligation to document exactly why you did something or how good the quality of that is I mean if you if you write something you have your hobby raspberry pi project and do something with your washing machine at home or so and then someone you publish the code and others who are using this for this purpose they are all happy with that and make some smaller changes that's all fine but I mean if you want to run that in a nuclear power plant and you take some code from somewhere you should think about what responsibility you have when using code from I don't know in 1991 there's a there's this guy who posted some code that said it's not going to be very good it just works for me it works on a few other things but hey if you want to play with it go ahead look where we are today I think if I may I think it misses the point because of course it's called education of developers it is important and code quality is of course important but I think your original point was that in order to have democracy you have to have an open an open rulebook so the rules will be wrong like we have bugs in software but at least we can look at them and understand them and modify them maybe maybe that's that's what you wanted to convey I don't know was a very good summary of that thank you my timer we still have one minute left but you should democracy is the right analogy you're looking for I mean we don't want to be voting on which patches get accepted you get straight to mediocrity that way you know I am there's a reason why maintainers have some authority you know there for a reason so I'm not I'm not talking about the decision-making processes in free software projects what I'm talking about is how software which is surrounding us is influencing democratic societies I think in general it's very difficult to to take the principle of democracy and apply that for organizations or for for software development projects that's something where I mean who's the demos for that can some user come and tell you like oh yeah your crypto library here that really sucks and I now get in 10,000 votes of some other people I know and they tell you do this differently I think that's not something you have to accept so you can take your own decisions how you're running your free software projects you can decide that you are developing this completely on your own and you're not accepting any patches and ignore everybody else that's fine what I was talking about in what I wanted to highlight here is when this software becomes an important part about other people's lives that you should not be the only person who can decide what changes you can make to the software you should not be the only person who knows what exactly the software is doing that's the point where the democracy perspective comes in I think it's it's something in for software it's actually also something about education that people understand that if something is free software or proprietary software it's different if you are developing something openly and in a wider group or if you are developing something completely on your own without accepting feedback by users other developers and so on because you might have to adhere to some deadlines for your commercial products which where you use this free software for so I think that's something which is absolutely fine the history might show which approaches might be better for which cases I think that that's not the point where I'm arguing about open development models versus close development models but how this fits in in a democratic society okay thank you very much so to complete this day if you have ever attended the kind of recipes you know why I'm in front of you right now in fact I only want your money so I will let this for a couple of minutes to infuse in your brain so here we are for a charity auction we do think it's really important to support the FSFE so every year you know we are choosing a project that we think it deserves to be supported matters this for my opinion a very good presentation of what is the goal in who our digital life also life about free software so we are very proud here to support him and to support him we have a couple of items that will put on auction we will have to sign t-shirt t-shirts even if the French have won the World Cup the football is not really my game and in fact my heroes are more likely in this room so we will ask just after this short introduction all the speakers present in this room to sign this t-shirt to give the value to this blank t-shirts we will have also one book Michael writes a very nice book about the Linux programming interface and he will sign it for you so that will make a great value and to be honest it's a little bit more like this so this very nice book will be on the auction too and thank you Michael for offering this book for the assembly I also know well you very much so I know you have beer so three years ago I've been brewing some beers for you so they stay in my cave for all this long time some of you already tested it so you're before and enjoyed it so what does three years old means I know you are a software developer so you have different scale in mind so what was the camera release three years ago does anyone have a guess 4.5 314 38 and 4 0 0 it was in April 2015 so I will write this numbers into the bottles and I will also ask all the speakers to sign these bottles that will be with this numbering on this whether we for the winner keep in mind that this bottle have been brewed at 4 0 0 time so let's sign right now all the bottles and all the stuff so it will take a couple of minutes please stay in the room during this signing and just after we will start the auction for FSFE thank you so please all the speakers come on stage I will sign so t-shirts what are we supposed to be selling t-shirts it's not the PSD double it's my own little signature I something I actually drew first drew on first grade way before PSD even existed not before Unix I signed off my Steve Ross t-shirt T-shirt. What's over there? So let's start guys. So I hope I've been able to hypnotize you with all this money. So I propose that we start the auction with the first shirt. So you know the game, the one which is providing the more money wins the high-tem. Feel free about it. We are taking everything. We are taking cash. We are taking credit cards. We are taking bitcoins. We are taking RSA keys. We are taking everything that have value. So feel free to put an action on it. So let's start with the third T-shirt. So we are starting for five euros. Five euros please. Thank you. Who for ten? Ten Anis. Thank you. Who for fifteen? Okay. Let's try with the kitten. So fifteen. It works. Thank you. Who for twenty now? Please. Twenty. Thank you Michael. Who for twenty-five? Thank you. Thirty. Thirty euros maybe. It's a beautiful kitten. I'm praying for you please. Four thirty. Twenty-five. One time. Two time. Three time. Thank you. I'm gonna take the Excel for you. So let's take for the second one. So let's restart the auction. So who for five? Five please. Thank you. Ten. Michael. Fifteen. Let's try another cat. Fifteen. Fifteen. Thank you. Twenty maybe. Twenty. Twenty. Twenty-five maybe. Twenty-five. Thank you. Who for thirty? Please. Thirty please. It's a much better cat. Yeah. This one is better. He's praying literally. Thirty. Thank you David. Anyone else? Thirty. One time. Two time. Three time. Thank you. Let's start now for the book maybe. Oops. So the wonderful bull for Michael. Which is a little bit seen as unexpected. So you can make it. So we start for this one and twenty. Who for twenty euros? Twenty. Twenty-five maybe. Twenty-five. Thirty. Who for thirty-five? Thirty-five. Forty maybe. Thank you. Forty-five. Fifty. Fifty. Fifty-five. Fifty-five. Fifty-five. Fifty-five. Fifty-five. Fifty-five. The book has a value of sixty euros on the market. Without the hand signing of Michael. Fifty-five to my right. Sixty. Sixty-five. Sixty-five. Sixty-five. Sixty-five. Sixty-five. Sixty-five. Sixty-five. Thank you. Patrick. Seventy. Seventy-five. It's a very beautiful book. You will learn a lot of things. On minutes to sell. So it's not really fair. Eighty. Yes? Yes. Thank you Anis. Eighty-five. Yes? Thank you Patrick. Ninety. Ninety. Many years. You can do it please. I don't have cash. Maybe you can get some more efficient books. I don't have cash. Maybe cash is more efficient. So let's back to the cash. Let's put the cash back. Ninety someone? Eighty-five. Yes. So one time. Two times. Three times. Thank you. Thank you. All right. So now let's start for the 31438 release. Which is a 1.5 liter. Brand beer that I brewed three years ago for you. Maybe some of you tested it on another release. So I think we will start at 10. Twenty. Twenty. Thank you. Twenty directly. Twenty-five. Thirty. Thirty-five. Thirty-five. Thank you. Forty. Forty. Thank you. Forty-five. Yes. I have to open my scope. Fifty. Let's step back. Fifty euros. Please. So we are at 50, right? Am I right? No. Forty-five. Forty-five. Who for 50? Sorry. I lose my brain. Fifty euros? No. No one? Yes. Michael, thank you. It took me years to make it also. So now 55, please. It's 50. It's not for me. Thank you. Sixty. Sixty. They are doing it together. They are cheating. Over 60. Someone? One time? No regrets? Three times? Three times. Thank you. Thank you. So maybe the 4.0 will have more success. So let's start at maybe 30. It's an option. You said we have to share it? So do we start the traditional auction? Okay, let's restart it. Let's praise them. So let's restart at 30. 35. Forty. Forty-five. Fifty. Fifty. Please. Fifty. Thank you. Fifty-five. It's two liter. Thank you. A little bit more than the first one. And it's 4.0. It's even better. Oh, sorry. It's still supported, right? It's LTS. And the beer is also LTS. You can keep it for use. It's even better every year. Really. Oh, 4.60.