>> from Cambridge, Massachusetts. It's the Cube covering M I T. Chief data officer and information quality Symposium 2019. Brought to you by Silicon Angle Media. >> Welcome back to M I. T. In Cambridge, Massachusetts. Everybody. You're watching the cube. The leader in live tech coverage. This is M I t CDO I Q the chief data officer and information quality conference. Someday Volonte with my co host, Paul Galen. Professor Dr Stewart, Mad Nick is here. Longtime Cube alum. Ah, long time professor at M i. T soon to be retired, but we're really grateful that you're taking your time toe. Come on. The Cube is great to see you again. >> It's great to see you again. It's been a long time. She worked together and I really appreciate the opportunity to share our spirits. Hear our mighty with your audience. Well, it's really been fun >> to watch this conference evolved were full and it's really amazing. We have to move to a new venue >> next year. I >> understand. And data we talk about the date explosion all the time, But one of the areas that you're focused on and you're gonna talk about today is his ethics and privacy and data causes so many concerns in those two areas. But so give us the highlight of what you're gonna discuss with the audience today. We'll get into >> one of things that makes it so challenging. It is. Data has so many implications. Tow it. And that's why the issue of ethics is so hard to get people to reach agreement on it. We're talking people regarding medicine and the idea big data and a I so know, to be able to really identify causes you need mass amounts of data. That means more data has to be made available as long as it's Elsa data, not mine. Well, not my backyard. If he really So you have this issue where on the one hand, people are concerned about sharing the data. On the other hand, there's so many valuable things would gain by sharing data and getting people to reach agreement is a challenge. Well, one of things >> I wanted to explore with you is how things have changed you back in the day very familiar with Paul you as well with Microsoft, Department of Justice, justice, FTC issues regarding Microsoft. And it wasn't so much around data was really around browsers and bundling things today. But today you see Facebook and Google Amazon coming under fire, and it's largely data related. Listen, Liz Warren, last night again break up big tech your thoughts on similarities and differences between sort of the monopolies of yesterday and the data monopolies of today Should they be broken up? What do you thought? So >> let me broaden the issue a little bit more from Maryland, and I don't know how the demographics of the audience. But I often refer to the characteristics that millennials the millennials in general. I ask my students this question here. Now, how many of you have a Facebook account in almost every class? Facebook. You realize you've given away a lot of nation about yourself. It it doesn't really occurred to them. That may be an issue. I was told by someone that in some countries, Facebook is very popular. That's how they cordoned the kidnappings of teenagers from rich families. They track them. They know they're going to go to this basketball game of the soccer match. You know exactly what I'm going after it. That's the perfect spot to kidnap them, so I don't know whether students think about the fact that when they're putting things on Facebook than making so much of their life at risk. On the other hand, it makes their life richer, more enjoyable. And so that's why these things are so challenging now, getting back to the issue of the break up of the big tech companies. One of the big challenges there is that in order to do the great things that big data has been doing and the things that a I promises do you need lots of data. Having organizations that can gather it all together in a relatively systematic and consistent manner is so valuable breaking up the tech companies. And there's some reasons why people want to do that, but also interferes with that benefit. And that's why I think it's gonna be looked at real Kim, please, to see not only what game maybe maybe breaking up also what losses of disadvantages we're creating >> for ourselves so example might be, perhaps it makes United States less competitive. Visa VI China, in the area of machine intelligence, is one example. The flip side of that is, you know Facebook has every incentive to appropriate our data to sell ads. So it's not an easy, you know, equation. >> Well, even ads are a funny situation for some people having a product called to your attention that something actually really want. But you never knew it before could be viewed as a feature, right? So, you know, in some case of the ads, could be viewed as a feature by some people. And, of course, a bit of intrusion by other people. Well, sometimes we use the search. Google, right? Looking >> for the ad on the side. No longer. It's all ads. You know >> it. I wonder if you see public public sentiment changing in this respect. There's a lot of concerns, certainly at the legislative level now about misuse of data. But Facebook user ship is not going down. Instagram membership is not going down. Uh, indication is that that ordinary citizens don't really care. >> I know that. That's been my I don't have all the data. Maybe you may have seen, but just anecdotally and talking to people in the work we're doing, I agree with you. I think most people maybe a bit dramatic, but at a conference once and someone made a comment that there has not been the digital Pearl Harbor yet. No, there's not been some event that was just so onerous. Is so all by the people. Remember the day it happened kind of thing. And so these things happen and maybe a little bit of press coverage and you're back on your Facebook. How their instagram account the next day. Nothing is really dramatic. Individuals may change now and then, but I don't see massive changes. But >> you had the Equifax hack two years ago. 145,000,000 records. Capital one. Just this week. 100,000,000 records. I mean, that seems pretty Pearl Harbor ish to me. >> Well, it's funny way we're talking about that earlier today regarding different parts of the world. I think in Europe, the general, they really seem to care about privacy. United States that kind of care about privacy in China. They know they have no privacy. But even in us where they care about privacy, exactly how much they care about it is really an issue. And in general it's not enough to move the needle. If it does, it moves it a little bit about the time when they show that smart TVs could be broken into smart. See, TV sales did not Dutch an inch. Not much help people even remember that big scandal a year ago. >> Well, now, to your point about expects, I mean, just this week, I think Equifax came out with a website. Well, you could check whether or not your credentials were. >> It's a new product. We're where we're compromised. And enough in what has been >> as head mind, I said, My wife says it's too. So you had a choice, you know, free monitoring or $125. So that way went okay. Now what? You know, life goes >> on. It doesn't seem like anything really changes. And we were talking earlier about your 1972 book about cyber security, that many of the principles and you outlined in that book are still valid today. Why are we not making more progress against cybercriminals? >> Well, two things. One thing is you gotta realize, as I said before, the Cave man had no privacy problems and no break in problems. But I'm not sure any of us want to go back to caveman era because you've got to realize that for all these bad things. There's so many good things that are happening, things you could now do, which a smartphone you couldn't even visualize doing a decade or two ago. So there's so much excitement, so much for momentum, autonomous cars and so on and so on that these minor bumps in the road are easy to ignore in the enthusiasm and excitement. >> Well and now, as we head into 2020 affection it was. It was fake news in 2016. Now we've got deep fakes. Get the ability to really use video in new ways. Do you see a way out of that problem? A lot of people looking a Blockchain You wrote an article recently, and Blockchain you think it's on hackable? Well, think again. >> What are you seeing? I think one of things we always talk about when we talk about improving privacy and security and organizations, the first thing is awareness. Most people are really small moment of time, aware that there's an issue and it quickly pass in the mind. The analogy I use regarding industrial safety. You go into almost any factory. You'll see a sign over the door every day that says 520 days, his last industrial accident and then a sub line. Please do not be the one to reset it this year. And I often say, When's the last time you went to a data center? And so assign is at 50 milliseconds his last cyber data breach. And so it needs to be something that is really front, the mind and people. And we talk about how to make awareness activities over companies and host household. And that's one of our major movements here is trying to be more aware because we're not aware that you're putting things at risk. You're not gonna do anything about it. >> Last year we contacted Silicon Angle, 22 leading security experts best in one simple question. Are we winning or losing the war against cybercriminals? Unanimously, they said, we're losing. What is your opinion of that question? >> I have a great quote I like to use. The good news is the good guys are getting better than a firewall of cryptographic codes. But the bad guys are getting batter faster, and there's a lot of reasons for that well on all of them. But we came out with a nautical talking about the docking Web, and the reason why it's fascinating is if you go to most companies if they've suffered a data breach or a cyber attack, they'll be very reluctant to say much about unless they really compelled to do so on the dock, where they love to Brent and reputation. I'm the one who broke in the Capital One. And so there's much more information sharing that much more organized, a much more disciplined. I mean, the criminal ecosystem is so much more superior than the chaotic mess we have here on the good guys side of the table. >> Do you see any hope for that? There are service's. IBM has one, and there are others in a sort of anonymous eyes. Security data enable organizations to share sensitive information without risk to their company. You see any hope on the collaboration, Front >> said before the good guys are getting better. The trouble is, at first I thought there was an issue that was enough sharing going on. It turns out we identified over 120 sharing organizations. That's the good news. And the bad news is 120. So IBM is one and another 119 more to go. So it's not a very well coordinated sharing. It's going just one example. The challenges Do I see any hope in the future? Well, in the more distant future, because the challenge we have is that there'll be a cyber attack next week of some form or shape that we've never seen before and therefore what? Probably not well prepared for it. At some point, I'll no longer be able to say that, but I think the cyber attackers and creatures and so on are so creative. They've got another decade of more to go before they run out of >> Steve. We've got from hacktivists to organized crime now nation states, and you start thinking about the future of war. I was talking to Robert Gates, aboutthe former defense secretary, and my question was, Why don't we have the best cyber? Can't we go in the oven? It goes, Yeah, but we also have the most to lose our critical infrastructure, and the value of that to our society is much greater than some of our adversaries. So we have to be very careful. It's kind of mind boggling to think autonomous vehicles is another one. I know that you have some visibility on that. And you were saying that technical challenges of actually achieving quality autonomous vehicles are so daunting that security is getting pushed to the back burner. >> And if the irony is, I had a conversation. I was a visiting professor, sir, at the University of Niece about a 12 14 years ago. And that's before time of vehicles are not what they were doing. Big automotive tele metrics. And I realized at that time that security wasn't really our top priority. I happen to visit organization, doing really Thomas vehicles now, 14 years later, and this conversation is almost identical now. The problems we're trying to solve. A hider problem that 40 years ago, much more challenging problems. And as a result, those problems dominate their mindset and security issues kind of, you know, we'll get around him if we can't get the cot a ride correctly. Why worry about security? >> Well, what about the ethics of autonomous vehicles? Way talking about your programming? You know, if you're gonna hit a baby or a woman or kill your passengers and yourself, what do you tell the machine to Dio, that is, it seems like an unsolvable problem. >> Well, I'm an engineer by training, and possibly many people in the audience are, too. I'm the kind of person likes nice, clear, clean answers. Two plus two is four, not 3.94 point one. That's the school up the street. They deal with that. The trouble with ethic issues is they don't tend to have a nice, clean answer. Almost every study we've done that has these kind of issues on it. And we have people vote almost always have spread across the board because you know any one of these is a bad decision. So which the bad decision is least bad. Like, what's an example that you used the example I use in my class, and we've been using that for well over a year now in class, I teach on ethics. Is you out of the design of an autonomous vehicle, so you must program it to do everything and particular case you have is your in the vehicle. It's driving around the mountain and Swiss Alps. You go around a corner and the vehicle, using all of senses, realize that straight ahead on the right? Ian Lane is a woman in a baby carriage pushing on to this onto the left, just entering the garage way a three gentlemen, both sides a road have concrete barriers so you can stay on your path. Hit the woman the baby carriage via to the left. Hit the three men. Take a shop, right or shot left. Hit the concrete wall and kill yourself. And trouble is, every one of those is unappealing. Imagine the headline kills woman and baby. That's not a very good thing. There actually is a theory of ethics called utility theory that says, better to say three people than to one. So definitely doing on Kim on a kill three men, that's the worst. And then the idea of hitting the concrete wall may feel magnanimous. I'm just killing myself. But as a design of the car, shouldn't your number one duty be to protect the owner of the car? And so people basically do. They close their eyes and flip a coin because they don't want anyone. Those hands, >> not an algorithmic >> response, doesn't leave. >> I want to come back for weeks before we close here to the subject of this conference. Exactly. You've been involved with this conference since the very beginning. How have you seen the conversation changed since that time? >> I think I think it's changing to Wei first. As you know, this record breaking a group of people are expecting here. Close to 500 I think have registered s o much Clea grown kind of over the years, but also the extent to which, whether it was called big data or call a I now whatever is something that was kind of not quite on the radar when we started, I think it's all 15 years ago. He first started the conference series so clearly has become something that is not just something We talk about it in the academic world but is becoming main stay business for corporations Maur and Maur. And I think it's just gonna keep increasing. I think so much of our society so much of business is so dependent on the data in any way, shape or form that we use it and have >> it well, it's come full circle. It's policy and I were talking at are open. This conference kind of emerged from the ashes of the back office information quality and you say the big date and now a I guess what? It's all coming back to information. >> Lots of data. That's no good. Or that you don't understand what they do with this. Not very healthy. >> Well, doctor Magic. Thank you so much. It's a >> relief for all these years. Really Wanna thank you. Thank you, guys, for joining us and helping to spread the word. Thank you. Pleasure. All right, keep it right, everybody. Paul and >> I will be back at M I t cdo right after this short break. You're watching the cue.

>> live from Boston, Massachusetts. It's the queue covering your red. Have some twenty nineteen brought to you by bread. >> Welcome back to the Cube and our continuing coverage here. The Red had summit. This is six time around for us. Fifth time for stew minimum. So he still gets almost the perfect attendance. Goldmark. First time for me. So still have a lot of catching up to do. Stewed minimum. John Walls and Steve Spiker now joins us. He is the senior principal product manager. Developer tools, Red Hat and Steve. Good afternoon to you. Thanks for joining us. Thanks for having me. Let's just talk about first off development in general. I mean, there's a lot of give and take there, right? You're tryingto listen. What air? The needs. Where the deficiencies, Where can the improvements be made? But how much do you drive that on your side and how much do listen and respond to do what? You're here for. The community. >> Yeah, we do a little bit of both. And so a lot of it is responding to the community, and that's one of the areas that Red has really excelled. Is taking what's popular, what's working upstream and helping moving along make it a stable pot product or stable solution that developers can use. But we also have a certain agenda or certain platforms that we want to present. So we start from, like, various run times to actually contain our platforms. And so we want to have to kind of drive some of that initiatives on our own to help Dr Phil that because we hear it from customers a lot, it's like things you're doing are great. But like there's all these projects that need to come together sort of a product or unified experience. And so we spent a lot of our time China bring those things together as a way to help developers do those different task and also focus across like not just a job run times which we have a lot of job. >> So you might have it. You might have an in product in mind, right? And you realize that there might be a gap in terms of development, so you encourage or you try to bridged that gap a little bit. To get to that in product is that you're saying Yeah, >> so we do a lot of things to help build the pieces so that people can sometimes build their own experiences. They want. In the end, developers control kind of their own destiny, their own set of tools and a lot of customers have their own unique requirements, even like some tools they develop in house for loans, kind of regulatory reasons and other things. And so we have two, one build the pieces but also stitched the pieces together to help them have that kind of out of the box experience. Because some some customers really don't want to do that. They just want to say one kind of a turnkey solution. But then we may need to make some adjustments here and there. >> Yeah, but by Steve, you know, it's it's funny. It rhymes for me with what I saw, you know, fifteen, twenty years ago with Lennox. A lot of changes, a lot of pieces. I want to take advantage of it. But you know, a boy can somebody help me with this and you know that that's of course. Red hat rode that way pretty well right Today, cupidity is even more sprawling. There's so many different projects. There's so many pieces boy. It is complicated on DH. Therefore, how do we take advantage of that? What do I need to know? What can my platform a vendor do for me so that I don't have to manage that? Yeah, I love you. Spanned on that gives us a little bit of comparing trash. You know what's the same? What's different? Yeah, and so >> there's different aspects. I think the developer experience one thing that we talked about. It's like it just works sometimes. So, like it's if it's Cooper days. We've spent a lot time making sure it's hardened and works well. So you're not like debugging it, spending time on things that waist development time. Instead, That way, folks let on that. We also look at how we can build abstraction layers on top of that. So we built a Seelye tool called Rodeo, which is a developed, streamlined developer experience for open shift, and it's really focused on open ship. That way, that developer really just can focus on their application. They could deploy it, taken quickly, work on the changes before they commit to get, and then they can then also have a similar experience in the browser with things like Eclipse Jr Code or Dick workspaces are I got commercial offering behind that and that takes actually using the platform itself to do development, which is really, really super cool so that you can have an idea and the browser. You can also have the workspace like you're all your dependencies, like everything you would normally have on your laptop now don't need to worry about. It's now containerized and quickly spun up as a way to do development. And it's really a thing that enterprises really enjoy because they get like, quick satisfaction, like they get the stuff off the proprietary code off the death up there using their container platform, and it's building the same way they would build when they >> deployed my backgrounds on the infrastructure side. And the whole reason we have infrastructure to be able to run our abs and the Holy Grail we've wanted is you know, not not my developers. I shouldn't need to think about the stuff underneath, right? We looked at virtual ization. We look a container ization. You know, the nirvana of server lists, as they call it, is that I shouldn't have to think about that you know how we doing? Because at the end of the day, and I talked to users like Oh, jeez, well, I need to worry. What if something breaks? I need to understand the security for my environment. You know what you're seeing and talking to customers about it from there. Stop development. Yes, so they're able >> tto. It's like here's different stories, like Tool, Factor act. So it's like if you stay in certain parameters, you can have a lot of success, and that's still kind of true today. Survivalist kind of takes that to the next level, where you can really just have a predefined either a function spectacle o two and then things are really easy, and you don't have to worry about various aspects. But even though you look at the various vendors when you're working with different functions, it's even complex like, Oh, I need to provide the security on you. Make sure he sees a wire together. How do I log these things? How do I debugged when things across this mesh go wrong? And so it's like it's getting getting better. But there's still a lot of work to do to continue to improve that, and you will see a lot of innovation happening in that area, especially the work that we're working on. >> What kind of given take do you have in terms of what? Not only what is that community learning from you and the tools that you're providing them? But what are you getting back from that other than, you know, advancing a project or whatever, in terms of expertise, in terms of understanding, maybe a new wayto to build a different mouse trap. You know that someone comes up with an interesting idea. You're like, >> Wow, I >> didn't take that. Yeah, I think that's >> where, like the partnerships we've had with various companies before you go off starting out with Cooper Netease Anything in the Cave Native project last year. And that really took a different way of looking at serve elicit, moving it forward to say, Yeah, this is this is a different way. We thought about how we would do this on Cooper nowadays, even kind of like you abstract that ap I away. And it's like it's just to keep native of survivalists and then Karina use this kind of implementation detail behind that even and So that's really interesting to see things like that. And then also the recent work announcements with Microsoft and the azure functions where people like they maybe, you know, into the event sources there they would make sure that were close. That they're doing the functions are building, are running on Cooper Netease and our communities is is open shift. So it's really kind of completing the life cycle. >> So what if we could just step act, you know, if you talk about communities and open ships specifically, you've got you know, you've got partnership with Google and they've got the geeky and Antos stuff. You've got partnership for the Amazon, you know, they've got a ks, these things, they're not fully seamless and interoperable. It's, you know, I usually hear some confusion in the marketplace as to, you know, communities can run lots of places, but all the various you know, if you choose an implementation well, that your implementation and you should run that everywhere. Not I can't take all the various implementations and they're not inter swappable. So maybe you could help expand on that A little bit is toe, you know what's the goal? Where are we with this maturity here and you know, where do we need it to get? Because, you know, boy, it definitely is a little bit complicated. Least, you know, from the seat that I sit in Yeah. So it's >> somewhat complex, I think, goes back to your early days talking about letting she's like you would say you have an application that could run anywhere. They have Lenox this kind of truth. You know, there's always like certain security settings or packages you have enabled. That just holds true for elected Kuban aged world as well. You can lock it down a certain way. You could open it up a certain way. And so you see a lot of content that's delivered, assuming certain like privileges I have on the system and other systems that don't allow it. And so I think, more and more we see through the standardization something we could study in conformance testing. It really helps people like No, we want our getting in their hands. On an instance. It's really, you know, a full fledged communities or the part that they care about the most is working out well. And so I see that gave me the evil by also see tools that kind of abstract, even more so like a native, is a mentioned sort of survivalist workloads or functions themselves and then even house tool in kind of works. On top of that, like Natively understands the platform, that platform and those requirements to move those applications across the different systems because we have a lot of customers who run open ship communities as well as like many other good bearnaise kind of instances that so they have. We have this requirement to make sure we stay conforming, allow them to make sure the were closer portable, and it's an important part to move forward. So I still think there's a lot of work to be done toe to make these things a smoother processes. It's a lot of interesting things going on, though, >> So any interesting tens with workloads that's one of things we always look at is, you know, um, I just taking the old workloads. Am I doing them in a new place Or, you know, are there new new workloads and anything jumping out at you from customers that you talk to? >> Yes. So the way talk I know I mentioned several See multiple times a whole idea around this auto scaling. And Lou only losing your uplink your resources when you need to is a big deal. So we see a lot more and more of those kind of small function, single purpose things that are occurring up until, like, machine learning. Big data. It just continues. A GPU resource is we talked about running a V EMS and cos when I first heard this, like four years ago, I laughed out loud, and I really don't know. Their seriousness is something that happens. And, yeah, it's becoming mainstream now. So now kind of everything kind of fits within the current. You know, orchestrator of those workloads. >> You're not laughing anymore, right? No. No, because there's someone areas in which your concerns are certainly understandable securities. One of those a lot of attention being paid automation these days, right? And a lot of opportunity there. Is there one, or are there a couple areas where you say this is kind of where we have maybe greener pastures in terms of providing developers with really unusual tools are really more sophisticated, more complex or effective tools than than in any other area where you could use that kind of a boost. >> Yeah, I think there's a lot of things, but one thing that I see in this area is still a lot of fragmentation, like I'm not sure if I see you like this kind of a single way that things work, seeing a lot of great work, like with the Microsoft GS code tooling pieces. And I'm just saying that from an abstraction way to bring certain things together. Nice work going with Microsoft, the committee's plugging for there, and we were collaborating with them on that to extend it for some of the open shift use cases. But that just kind of moves, I think Mohr to beat the developers where they're at and will continue to invest across the different set of tools like I do, the more you keep up with these list of all these tools in the ecosystem. Everytime I present it, someone says, I don't know about those, but here's Maura that I didn't know about it, so this is just continues to grow and people continue to innovate, and I think it just think it's exciting because we continue Teo to evolve it. So I know think there's much in the way of kind of narrowing down on a smaller set of things. I think it's going to continue to expand in the sense. >> Speaking of expansion at Microsoft build yesterday, there was announcement of beloved Taquito K d a. A ce your functions with open shift. Help us parts a little bit. What, what that is. >> Yeah. So what that's about is really taking Thea's your functions and allowing those workloads to Warren on open ship because they're targeted towards Cuba. Netease and, of course, open ship those grenades distribution. So it allows that to happen. There's also that it's a unique auto scaler that kind of allows workload to be more surveillance run. So then also it's it ties into some of the azure event sorts of soul like thee. The message Cuba and bus Kafka that's there. And so now you can wire in yours your pieces, you can run it across here. Either hosted is your or on open shift with those of your function. >> Okay, just to clarify this is today separate from the K Native Initiative that you were talking about earlier. >> Yes, that's right. So this is touching on some of those points and the idea behind this project. This liken early preview announcer was like showing some progress, but they're looking in wiring in some of the chips. Start the kidney of serving pieces to allow running in those applications on open ship, but also the need of events sources. So you can take combination events and triggers your functions and do some of these exciting things. >> Can I ask you, you're doing sessions here at this show? You know how many of the people here you know, talking about survivalists and looking at that bleeding edge or there? There are other technologies that you find them spending a little bit more time in the tooling. It's >> a wide range. I'm really shocked by what some of the customers are like. Bleeding edge Kate made. It was like, Oh, you know, we saw whatever zero dot three release out there with this, and we'd really like this auto scaling capability because we're spending a lot of money running these applications that are not doing anything, So we like the better auto scaler that's out there. The others are really just like trying to understand more about container technology. I was just talking to Jen one early after a session. He's like, This is what we're trying to do. We need to contain your eyes applications. How do I build a CIA pipeline around it? So it's a It's a wide range of things you see here. Well, >> you certainly at the center of this inspiration, the innovation of the industry. I know you're an exciting place, and it's kind of something new every day for you. Probably right. >> Oh, it is. Yeah. Especially when these big conference and announcements come >> out. Gear up, right? Yeah, Exactly. Good job, Steve. Thank you for joining us here. We appreciate the time and wish you well down the road. >> Take me much. Enjoyed being on >> you, Steve Spiker from Red Hat. Joining this here for the first time on the Q. Good to have you, Steve. Good Have you with us as we continue our coverage from Boston. But the Red Hat Summit