>> Announcer: From Boston, Massachusetts it's The Cube. Covering AWS re:Inforce 2019. Brought to you by Amazon Web Services and it's ecosystem partners. >> Hey, welcome back everyone. This is The Cube's live coverage of AWS re:Inforce in Boston, Massachusetts. I'm John Furrier with Dave Vallante. This is re:Inforce. This is the inaugural conference for AWS on the security and Cloud security market. A new category being formed from an events standpoint around Cloud security. Our next guest is Cube alumni guest analyst Corey Quinn, and Cloud Economist with the Duckbill Group. Good to see you again. Great to have you on. Love to have you come back, because you're out in the hallways. You're out getting all the data and bringing it back and reporting. But this event, unlike the other ones, you had great commentary and analysis on. You were mentioned onstage during the Keynote from Stephen Smith. Congratulations. >> Thank you. I'm still not quite sure who is getting fired over that one, but somehow it happened, and I didn't know it was coming. It was incredibly flattering to have that happen, but it was first "Huh, awesome, he knows who I am." Followed quickly by "Oh dear, he knows who I am." And it, at this point, I'm not quite sure what to make of that. We'll see. >> It's good news, it's good business. All press is good press as they say, but let's get down to it. Obviously, it's a security conference. This is the inaugural event. We always love to go to inaugural events because, in case there's no second event, we were there - >> Corey: Oh yes >> for one event. So, that's always the case. >> Corey: Been there since the beginning is often great bragging rights. And if there isn't a second one, well, you don't need to bring it up ever again. So, they've already announced there's another one coming to Houston next year. So that'll be entertaining. >> So a lot of people were saying to us re:Inforce security event, some skepticism, some bullish on the sector. obviously, Cloud is hot. But the commentary was, oh, no one's really going to be there. It's going to be more of an educational event. So, yeah, it's more of an educational event for sure. That they're talking about stuff that they can't have time to do and reinvent. But there's a lot of investment going on there. There are players here from the companies. McAfee, you name the big name companies here, they're sending real people. A lot of biz dev folks trying to understand how to build up the sector. A lot of technical technologists here, as well. Digging in to some of the deep conversations. Do you agree? What's your thoughts of the event? >> I'm surprised, I was expecting this to be a whole bunch of people trying to sell things to other people, who were trying to sell them things in return, and it's not. There are, there are people who are using the Cloud for interesting things walking around. And that's fantastic. One thing that's always struck me as being sort of strange, and why I guess I feel sort of spiritually aligned here if nothing else. Is cost and security are always going to be trailing functions. No company is excited to invest in those things, until immediately after they really should have been investing in those things and weren't. So with time to market, velocity are always going to be something much valuable and important to any company strategically. But, we're seeing people start to get ahead of the curve in some ways. And that's, it's refreshing and frankly surprising. >> What is the top story in your mind? Top three stories coming out of re:Inforce. From industry standpoint, or from a product standpoint, that you think need to be told or amplified, or not being told, be told? >> Well there's been the stuff that we've seen on the stage and that's terrific. And, I think that you've probably rehashed those a fair bit with other guests. For me, what I'm seeing, the story that resonates as I walk around the Expo Hall here. Is we're seeing a bunch of companies that have deep roots in data centered environments. And now they're trying to come up with stories that resonate with Cloud. And if they don't, this is a transformational moment. They're going to effectively, likely find themselves in decline. But, they're not differentiating themselves from one another particularly well. There are a few very key things that we're seeing people operate within. Such as, with the new port mirroring stuff coming out of NVPC Traffics. You're right. You have a bunch of companies that are able to consume those, or flow logs. If you want to go back in time a little bit, and spit out analysis on this. But you're not seeing a lot of differentiation around this. Or, Hey we'll take all your security events and spit out the useful things. Okay, that is valuable, and you need to be able to do that. How many vendors do you need in one company doing the exact same thing? >> You know, we had a lot of sites CSO's on here and practitioners. And one of the comments on that point is Yeah, he's like, "Look I don't need more alerts." "I need things fixed." "Don't just tell me what's going on, fix it." So the automation story is also a pretty big one. The VCP traffic mirror, I think, is going to be just great for analytics. Great for just for getting that data out. But what does it actually impact In the automation piece? And the, okay there's an alert. Pay attention to it or ignore it. Or fix it. Seems to be kind of the next level conversation. Your thoughts around that piece. >> I think that as we take a look at the space and we see companies continuing to look at things like auto remediation. Automation's terrific, until the first time it does something you didn't want it to do and takes something down. At which point no one trusts it ever again. And that becomes something hard to tend to. I also think we're starting to see a bit of a new chapter as alliance with this from AWS and it's relationship with partners. I mean historically you would look at re:Invent, and you're sitting in the Expo Hall and watching the keynote. And it feels like it's AWS Red Wedding. Where, you're trying to see who's about to get killed by a feature that just comes out. And now were seeing that they've largely left aspects of the security space alone. They've had VPC flow logs for a long time, but sorting through those yourself was always like straining raw sewage with your teeth. You had to find a partner solution or build something yourself out of open source tooling from spit and duct tape. There's never been a great tool there. And it almost feels like they're leaving that area, for example, alone. And leaving that as an area rife for partners. Now how do you partner with something like AWS? That's a hard question to answer. >> So one of the other things we've heard from practitioners is they don't want incrementalism. They're kind of sick of that. They want step functions, that do as John said, remediate. >> Corey: Yeah. So, like you say, you called it the Red Wedding at the main stage. What does a partner have to do to stay viable in this ecosystem? >> Historically, the answer to that has always been to continue innovating ahead of the bow wave of AWS's own innovation. The problem is you see that slide that they put on in every event, that everyone who doesn't work at AWS sees. That shows the geometric increase in number of feature and service releases. And we all feel this sinking sensation of not even the partner side. But, they're releasing so much that I know some of that is going to fix things for my company, but I'll never hear it. Because it's drowned in the sheer volume of what they're releasing. AWS is rapidly increasing their pace of innovation to the point where companies that are not able to at least match that are going to be in for a bad time. As they find themselves outpaced by the vendor they're partnering with. >> And you heard Liberty Mutual say their number one challenge was actually the pace of Cloud. Being able to absorb all these new features >> Yes. >> And so, you mentioned the partner ecosystem. I mean, so it's not just the partners. It's the customers as well. That bow is coming faster than they can move. >> Absolutely. I can sit here now and talk very convincingly about services that don't exist. And not get called out on them by an AWS employee who happens to be sitting here. Because no one person can have all of this in their head anymore. It's outpaced most people's ability to wrap their heads around that and contextualize it. So people specialize, people focus. And, I think, to some extent that might be an aspect of why we're seeing re:Inforce as its own conference. >> So we talked a lot of CSO's this trip. >> Yeah. >> John: A lot of one on ones. We had some interviews. Some private meetings. I'm going to read you a list of key areas that they brought up as concern. I want to get you're reaction to. >> Sure. >> You pick the ones out you think are very relevant. >> Sure. >> Speedily, very fast. Vendor lock in. Spend. >> Not concerned. Yep. Security Native. >> Yeah. >> Service provider supplier relationship. Metrics, cloud securities, different integration, identity, automation, work force talent, coding security, and the human equation. There were all kind of key areas that seemed to glob and be categorically formed. Your thoughts to those. Which ones do you think jump out as criticalities on the market? >> Sure. I think right now people talking about lock in are basically wasting their time and spinning their wheels. If you, for example, you go with two cloud providers because you don't want to be locked into one. Well now there's a rife partner ecosystem. Because translating things like IAM into another provider's environment is completely foreign. You have to build an entire new security model on top of things in order to do that effectively. That's great. In security we're seeing less of an aversion to lock in than we are in other aspects of the business. And I think that is probably the right answer. Again, I'm not partisan in this battle. If someone wants to go with a different Cloud provider than AWS, great! Awesome! Make them pick the one that makes sense for your business. I don't think that it necessarily matters. But pick one. And go all in on that. >> Well this came up to in a couple of ways. One was, the general consensus was, who doesn't like multi Cloud? If you can seamlessly move stuff between Clouds. Without having to do the modification on all this code that has to be developed. >> Who wouldn't love that? But the reality is, doesn't exist. >> Corey : Well. To your point, this came up again, is that workplace, workforce talent is on CSO said "I'm with AWS." "I have a little bit of Google. I could probably go Azure." "Maybe I bought a company with dealing some stuff over there." "But for the most part all of my talent is peaked on AWS." "Why would I want to have three separate security teams peaking on different things? When I want everyone on our stack." They're building their own stacks. Then outsourcing or using suppliers where it supports it. >> Sure. >> But the focus of building their own stacks. Their own security. Coding up was critical. And having a split competency on code bases just to make it multi, was a non starter. >> And I think multi Cloud has been a symptom. I mean, it's more than a strategy. I think it's in a large part a somewhat desperate attempt by a number of vendors who don't have their own Cloud. To say Hey, you need to have a multi Cloud strategy. But, multi Cloud has been really an outcome of multiple projects. As you say, MNA. Horses for courses. Lines of business. So my question is, I think you just answered it. Multi Cloud is more complex, less secure, and probably more costly. But is it a viable strategy for things other than lock in? >> To a point. There are stories about durability. There's business reasons. If you have a customer who does not want their data living one one particular Cloud provider. Those are strategic reasons to get away from it. And to be clear, I would love the exact same thing that you just mentioned. Where I could take what I've built and run that seamlessly on other providers. But I don't just want that to be a pile of VM's and maybe some disc. I want those to be the higher level services that take care of massive amounts of my business for me. And I want to flow those seamlessly between providers. And there's just no story around that for anything reasonable or modern. >> And history would say there won't really ever be. Without some kind of open source movement to - >> Oh yes. A more honest reading of some of the other cloud providers that are talking about multi cloud extensively translates that through a slight filter. To, we believe you should look into Multi Cloud. Because if you're going all in on a single provider there is no way in the world it's going to be us. And that's sort of a challenge. If you take a look at a number of companies out here. If someone goes all in on one provider they will not have much, if anything, to sell them of differentiated value. And that becomes the larger fixture challenge for an awful lot of companies. And I empathize with that, I really do. >> Amazon started to do a lot of channel development. Obviously their emphasis on helping people make some cash. Obviously their vendors are, ecosystems a fray. Always a fray. So sheer responsibility at one level is, well we only have one security model. We do stuff and you do stuff. So obviously it's inherently shared. So I think that's really not a surprise for me. The issue is how to get successful monetization in the ecosystem. Clearly defining lines of, rules of engagement, around where the white spaces are. And where the differentiation can occur. Your thoughts on how that plays out. >> Yeah. And that's a great question. Because I don't think you're ever going to get someone from Amazon sitting in a room. And saying Okay, if you build a tool that does this, we're never, ever, ever going to build a thing that does that. They just launched a service at re:Invent that talks to satellites in orbit. If they're going to build that, I don't, there's nothing that I will say they're never going to get involved with. Their product strategy, from the outside, feels like it's a post it note that says Yes on it. And how do you wind up successfully building and scaling a business around that? I don't have a clue. >> Eddie Jafse's on the record here in The Cube and privately with me on my reporting. Saying never say never. >> Never say never. >> We'll never say never. So that is actually an explicit >> Take him at his word on that one. >> Right. And I'm an independent consultant. Where my first language is sarcasm. So, I basically make fun of AWS in the newsletter and podcast. And that seems to go reasonably well. But, I'm never going to say that they're not going to move into self deprecation as a business model. Look at some of their service names. They're clearly starting to make inroads in that space. So, I have to keep innovating ahead of that bow wave. And for now, okay. I can't fathom trying to build a business model with a 300 person company and being able to continue to innovate at that pace. And avoid the rapid shifts as AWS explores on new offers. >> And I what I like about why, well, we were always kind of goofing on AWS. But we're fanboys as well, as you know. But what I love about AWS is that they give the opportunity for their partners. They give them plenty of head's up. It's pretty much the rules of engagement is never say never. But if they're not differentiating, that's their job. >> Corey: Yeah. >> Their job is to be better. Now one thing Amazon does say is Hey we might have a competing service, but we're always going to favor the customer. So, the partner. If a customer wants an Amazon Cloud trail. They want Cloud trail for a great example. There's been requests for that. So why wouldn't they do it? But they also recognize it's bus - people in the ecosystem that do similar things. >> Corey: Yeah. >> And they are not going to actively try to put them out of business, per se. >> Oh yeah! One company that's done fantastically well partnering with everyone is PagerDuty. And even if AWS were to announce a service that wakes you up in the middle of the night when something breaks. It's great. Awesome. How about you update your status page in a timely fashion first? Then talk about me depending on the infrastructure that you run to tell me when the infrastructure that you run is now degraded? The idea of being able to take some function like that and outsource worked well enough for them to go public. >> So where are the safe points in the ecosystem? So obviously a partner that has a strong on-prem presence that Amazon wants to get access to. >> That's a short term, or maybe even a mid term strategy. Okay. Professional services. If you're Accenture, and Ernie Young, and Deloitte, PWC, you're probably okay. Because that's not a business that Amazon really wants to be in. Now they might want to, they might want to automate as much to that as possible. But the world's going to do that anyway. But, what's your take where it's safe? >> I would also add cost optimization to that. Not from a basis of technical capability. And I think that their current tooling is disappointing. I'd argue that cost explorer and the rest of their billing situation is the asterisk next to customer obsession if we're being perfectly honest. But there's always going to be some value in an external party coming in from that space. And what form that takes is going to change. But, it is not very defensible internally to say our Cloud spend is optimized, because the vendor we're writing those large checks to tells us it is. There's always going to be a need for some third-party validation. And whether that can come through software? >> How big is that business? >> It's a great question. Right now, we're seeing that people are spending over 30 billion dollars a year on AWS and climbing. One thing we can say with a certainty in almost every case is that people's Cloud bills are not getting smaller month over month. >> Yep. >> So, it's a growing market. It's one that people feel incredibly acutely. And when you get a few drinks into people and they start complaining about various aspects of Cloud, one of the first most common points that comes up is the bill. Not that it's too high, but that it is inscrutable. >> And so, just to do a back of napkin tam, how much optimization potential is there? Is it a ten percent factor? More? >> It depends on the level of effort you're willing to invest. I mean, there's a story for almost environments where you can save 70% on your Cloud bill. All you have to do is spend 18 months of rewriting everything to use serverless primitives. Six of those months you'll be hard down across the board. And then, wait where did everyone go? Because no one's going to do that. >> Dave: You might be out of business. So it's always a question of effort spent doing optimization, versus improving features, speeding time to market and delivering something that will generate for more revenue. The theoretical upside of cost optimization is 100% of your Cloud bill. Launching the right service or product can bring in multiples of that in revenue. >> I think my theory on differentiation, Dave, is that I think Amazon is basically saying in so many words, not directly. But it's my interpretation. Hold on to the rocket ship of AWS as long as you can. And if you can get stable, hold on. If you fall off that's just your fault, right? So, what that means is, to me, move up the stack. So Amazon is clearly going to continue to grow and create scale. So the benefits to the companies create a value proposition that can extract rents out of the marketplace from value that they create on the Amazon growth. Which means, they got to lock step with Amazon on growth. And cost leap, pivot up to where there's space. And Amazon is just a steam roller that will come in. The rocket ship that's going so fast. Whatever metaphor. And so people who just say We made a deal with Amazon, we're in. And then kind of sit idle. Will probably end up getting spun off. I mean, cause it's like they fall off and Amazon will be like All right so we did that. You differentiate enough, you didn't innovate enough. But, they're going to give everyone the opportunity to take a place with the growth. So the strategy, management wise, is just constantly push the envelope. >> So that's implicit in the Amazon posture. What's explicit in Amazon's posture is build applications on our platform. And you should be okay. You know? For a while. >> Yeah. And again, I think that a lot of engineers get stuck in a trap of building something and spending all their time making their code quality as best as possible. But, that's not going to lead to a business outcome one way or another. We see stories of companies hitting success with a tire fire of an infrastructure all the time. Twitter used to display massive downtime until they were large enough to justify the time and expense of a massive rewrite. And now Twitter is effectively up all the time. Whether that's good or not is a separate argument. But, they're there. So there's always going to be time to fix things. >> Well the Twitter example is a great example. Because they built it on rails. >> Yes. >> And they put it on Amazon Cloud. It was just kind of a hack, and then all of the sudden Boom, people loved it. And then, that's to me, the benefit of Cloud. One you get the scape velocity, the investment to start Twitter was fairly low, given what the success was. And then they had to rewrite, because the scale was bursting up. That's called prototyping. >> Oh yeah. >> That's what enterprises have to do. This is the theme of, agile. Get started as a theme, just dig in. Do a hack up font. But don't get confuse that with scale. That's where the rubber meets the road. >> Right and the, Oh Cloud isn't for us because we're an exception case. There are very few companies for whom that statement is true in the modern era. And, do an honest analysis first, before deciding we're going to build our own data centers because we can do it for cheaper. If you're Dropbox, putting storage in, great. Otherwise you're going to end up in this story where Oh, well, we have 20 instances now, so we can do this cheaper in Iraq somewhere. I will bet you a house you're wrong. But okay. >> Yeah. People are telling me that. Okay final question for you. As you've wandered around and been in the sessions, been in the analyst thing. What are some slice of life commentary stories you've bumped into that you found either funny, clever, insulting, or humorous? What's out on the floor? What are some of the conversations? >> One of the best ones was a company I'm not going to name, but the story they told was fantastic. They have, they're primarily on Azure. But they also have a strong secondary presence with AWS, and that's fascinating to me. How does that work internally? It turns out their cloud of choice is Azure. And they have to mandate that with guardrails in place. Because if you give developers a choice they will all go and build on AWS instead. Which is fascinating. And there are business reasons behind why they're doing what they're doing. But that story was just very humorous. I can't confirm or deny whether it was true or not. Because it was someone with way too much to drink telling an awesome story. But the idea of having to forcibly drag your developers away from a thing in a favor of another thing? >> That's like being at a bad party. It's like Oh, the better party is over there. All my friends are over there. >> But they have a commitment to Microsoft software estate. So, that's likely why they're. >> They just deal with Microsoft. >> And I'm not saying this is necessarily the wrong approach. I just find it funny. >> Might be the right business decision, but when you ask the developers, we see that all the time, John. >> All the time. I mean I had a developer one time come to me and start, he like "Look, we thought it would be great to build on Azure. We were actually being paid. They were writing checks to incent us. And I had a revolt. Engineers were revolting. Because the reverse proxies as there was cobbled together services. And they weren't clean native services and primitives. So the engineers were revolting. So they, we had to turn down the cash from Microsoft and go back to Amazon." >> Azure is much better now, but they have to outrun that legacy shadow of at first, it wasn't great. And people try something once, "That was terrible!" Well would you like to try it again now? "Why would I do that? It was terrible!" And it takes time to overcome that knee-jerk reaction. >> Well, but to your point about the business decision. It might make business sense to do that with Microsoft. It's maybe a little bit more predictable than Amazon is as a partner. >> Oh the way to optimize your bill on another Cloud provider that isn't AWS these days is to call up your account rep and yell at them. They're willing to buy business in most cases. That's not specific to any one provider. That's most of them. It's challenging to optimize free, so we don't see the same level of expensive bill problems in most companies there as well. >> Well the good news is on Microsoft, and I was a really big critic of Azure going back a few years ago. Is that they absolutely have changed their philosophy going back, I'd say two, three years ago. In the past two years, particular 24 months, they really have been cranking. They've been pedaling as fast as they can. They're serious. There's commitment from the top. And then they tell us, so there's no doubt. They're doing it also with the Kubernetes. What they're seeing, as they're doing is phenomenal. So... >> Great developer jobs at Microsoft. >> They're in for the long game. They're not going to be a fad. No doubt about it. >> No. And we're not going to see for example the Verizon public Cloud the HP public Cloud. Both of which were turned off. The ones that we're seeing today are largely going to be to stay of the big three. Big four if we include Alibaba. And it's, I'm not worried about the long term viability of any of them. It's just finding their niche, finding their market. >> Yeah, finding their lanes. Cory. Great to have you on. Good to hear some of those stories. Thanks for the commentary. >> Thank you. >> As always great guest analyst Cube alumni, friend, analyst, Cory Quinn here in the Cube. Bringing all the top action from AWS re:Inforce. Their first inaugural security conference around Cloud security. And Cube's initiation of security coverage continues, after this break. (upbeat electronic music)

>> live from Washington D. C. It's the Cube covering aws public sector summit DC brought to you by Amazon Web services. >> Welcome back, everyone to the cubes Live >> coverage of a ws public sector summit here in Washington D. C. I'm your >> host Rebecca Night, along with my co host, John >> Furrier. We're here with Cory Quinn, Cloud Economist The Duck Billed group and a cube host at large. Welcome. Welcome to our show. A medium >> at best, most days. But we'll see what happens when ever expanding. Someday I'll be a 10 x engineer, but not today. >> Right? Right. Exactly. >> Next host. Exactly. >> There we go, >> Cloud. Stand up on the side. We need to mention that >> Yes, generally more cloud improv. But no one believes that. It's off the cuff. So we smile, we nod, we roll with Tio. Yeah, no one wants to hear me sing in any form. >> I promise. Strapping So, Cory, you have been here. You are on the ground having great conversations with people here. 18,000 people at this summit Give us give our viewers a low down on the vibe. The energy What? What do you hear? Very different >> feeling in the commercial summits you're seeing. People are focusing on different parts of the story, and one thing I find amusing is talking to people who work in the public sector. Show up in their first response is, Oh, I'm so behind and then you go to the commercial summit. You talk to people who are doing bleeding edge things, and their response is, Oh, I'm so behind and everyone thinks that they're falling behind the curve and I'm >> not sure how >> much of that is a part of people just watching a technology. Events outpace them versus the ever increasing feature velocity. If they show on slide year over year over year, consistent growth and people feel like they're being left in the dust, it's it's overwhelming. It's drinking from a fire hose. And I don't think that that gets any easier when you're talking to someone in public sector where things generally move in longer planning cycles because they definitional have to, and I'd argue should, >> but you should help them, make them feel better and say, Don't worry. The private sector feels the same way. Not just everyone >> has these problems. That's that's the poor little challenge of this is everyone believes that if you go to the one magic company, their environment is going to be wonderful. They're adopting everything. It doesn't exist. I've gone into all of the typical tech companies you would expect and talk to people. And everyone wants you for three or four drinks into them, gets very honest and starts crying. What would its higher fire their own environment is? It says a lot of conference. We're going around. Here's how we built this amazing thing as a proof of concept is what the part they don't say or for this one small, constrained application. People are trying to solve business problems, not build perfect architecture. And that's okay. >> Yeah, process. They're not. They're not businesses, their agencies. As you said, they're like, slow as molasses when it comes to moving speed. And you could even see Andy Jazzy during his fireside Shep. He's already studying, laying the groundwork. Well, >> once you're in the >> cloud, here's how you know the adoption level so you can see that it's land not landing expand like the enterprise, which is still slow. It's land, get the adoption and then expand, So the public sector clearly has a lot of red tape. I mean, no doubt about it. >> That means anyone who'd argue that point >> chairman's like 1985. It's like, you know, hot tub time machine, you know, nightmare. But Andy Jazz, he also says on differently to heavy lifting is what they want to automate away. That's the dream. That's the That's the goal. Absolute. It's hard. This is the real challenge. Is getting the public sector adopted getting the adoption, your thoughts when what you're hearing people are they jumping in? They put a toe in the water, kicking the tires. As Andy said, >> all of the above and more. I think it's a very broad spectrum and they mentioned there. I think they were 28,000 or 12,000 non profit organizations that they wind up working with as customers and they all tend to have different velocities across the board as they go down that path. I think that the idea that there's one speed or you can even draw a quick to line summary of all the public sector is a bit of a Basile explanation. I see customers are sometimes constrained by planning cycles. There's always the policies and political aspects of things where if you wind up trying to speed things up, you're talking to some people who will not have a job. If you remove the undifferentiated heavy lifting because that's been their entire career, we're going to help you cut waste out of your budget. Well, that's a hard sell to someone who is incentivized based upon the size of the budget that they control it. You wind up with misaligned incentives, and it's a strange environment. But the same thing that I'm seeing across the corporate space is also happening in public sector. We're seeing people who are relatively concerned about where they're going to hire people from what those people look like, how they're going to transform their own organizations. Digital transformations, attired term. >> And it's like you have rosy colored glasses on too much. You're gonna miss the big picture. You gotta have a little bit of skepticism. I think to me governments always had that problem where I'm just gonna give up. I'm telling different. I can't get the outcome I want, because why even try? Right? I think now, with cloud what I hear Jazzy and Amazon saying is. Hey, at least you get some clear visibility on the first position of value, so there's some hope there, right? So I think that's why I'm seeing this adoption focus, because it's like they're getting the customers. For instance, like I'm a university. I could be a professor, but my credit card down my university customer, I got a couple instances of PC to so ding and another one to the 28,000 >> exactly number of customers is always a strange >> skeptical there. But now, for the first time, you, Khun got should go to a team saying, Hey, you know all that B s about not get the job done, you can get it with clouds. So it's gettable. Now it's attainable. It's not just aspirations. >> Movers really will make the difference. In the end, with the university customer's question, the people who were in that swing >> the tide can that be a generational shift, a deb ops mindset in government? That's a big question. >> Well, they have some advantages. For example, we took a look at all the Gulf cloud announcements and the keynote yesterday, and that must have been a super easy keynote to put together because they're just using the traditional Kino slides and reinvent 2014 because it takes time to get things certified as they moved through the entire pipeline process. And there's nothing inherently wrong with that. But the services that are going into come cloud or things that are tried and tested in a lot of other environments. There's an entire community out there. There's an established body of knowledge. So a lot of the path that government is walking down has already been from a technical perspective paid for them. >> I want to riff on an idea on to make a proposal with you here in real time. You're I think what we should do is make a proposal to the U. S. Government that we basically take equity in the agencies and then take them public. >> That's not a bad idea, absolutely not about commercialized. >> The entities create a stock option program, Cory, because listen, if I'm if I'm a talent, why would I gotta work for an agency when I could make three times Mohr get public and be rich, and that's the problem with talent. You walk around the expo for here. The booths are much smaller, and I didn't understand that at first, and then it clicked for me. If you want to sell services to government, you don't buy a bigger booth. You buy a Congress person and it turns out those air less expensive. That's how acquisitions tend to work in this space. So folks walking around or not, generally going to be the customers that buy things. People walking around in many cases are the talent and looking for more talent. And it does become extremely compelling to have those people leave public sector and go into private sector. In some cases where we'll pay you three times more and added bonus most days, this is America. After all, no one's shooting at you, so that does your >> cloud. Economists were kind of joking about your title, but if you think about it, there are economics involved. It's lower cost, faster, time to value. But what we're getting at is an incentive system. So you think fiscal monetary policy of incentives. So you know, Rebecca, this this This is the challenge that the policy guys gotta figure because the mechanisms to get stuff done is by the politicians or do this or do that. We're getting at something, really, to the heart of human beings, that mission of the mission of the agency or objective they're doing for the labor of love or money? Yes, Reed, why not create an incentive system that compensate? >> You think That's incentive system for taxpayers, though, too, in the sense of >> if I can see the trillions of dollars on the >> budget, a lot of what >> governments do shouldn't necessarily be for sale. I think the idea of citizen versus customer tends to be a very wide divergence, and I generally pushback on issues to attempt, I guess, convinced those into the same thing. It's you wind up with a very striated, almost an aristocracy Socratic society. >> I don't think that tends >> to lead anywhere. Good way. Everyone is getting political today for some reason. >> Well, I >> mean fireside chat to digital >> transformations. People process technology. You can superimpose that onto any environment where those public policy or whatever or national governments, the people, his issues there, processes, issues, technologies is each of one of them have their own challenge. Your thoughts on public sectors challenges opportunities. Four people process technology. >> You have to be mission driven for starters in order to get the people involved. As far as the processes go, there are inherently going to be limitations sometimes and easily observable in the form of different regulatory regimes that apply to these different workloads. And when we talk about the technology well, we're already seeing that that is becoming less of a gap over time. What used to be that o on ly we can secure a data center well enough from a physical security standpoint, there's a quote from the CIA that said on its worst day that cloud was cloud. Security was better than any on premises environment that they could build. And there's something to be said for that. Their economies of scale of like by >> the tech gaps going away. Almost zero yes. So if that OK, text, good check training fault of the people side. Absolute awareness competency processes a red tape automation opportunity. That could be. >> But this is also not to assume that the commercial world has unlock either. Where does the next generation come from? You talk to most senior cloud folks these days and most of us tend to have come up from working help desks being grumpy, you nexus in men's or you nexus movement because it's not like there's a second kind of those and we go up through a certain progression. Well, those jobs aren't there anymore. They've been automated away. The road that we walked is largely closed. Where does the next generation come from? I don't have a great answer. >> Talent question is a huge one. This is going to be the difference. Rebecca. We were riffing on this on our opening. >> It's the only one. >> Your thoughts. I mean, were you even hearing all this stuff and you've been researching this? What? Your thoughts. >> I think that we need to think more. I think tech companies need to think more broadly about where they're going to get this next generation of people, and they don't need to necessarily be people who have studied CS in school. Although, of course we need those people too. >> But the people with the bright, the creative, the expansive world views who are thinking about these problems and can learn >> the tech, I mean the tough guy, you know why >> block change you into a nice CEO and everyone gets >> rich, but I think when Jessie was saying today during his fireside, in the sense of we need to make sure that we're building tools, that >> you don't need to be a machine learning expert to deploy, you know we need to make simpler, more intuitive tools, and then that's really important here. >> Amazon does well in that environment about incentives. >> I think that >> one thing that the public sector offers that you don't often see in the venture start of world or corporate America or corporate anywhere, for that matter, is the ability to move beyond next quarter, planning the ability to look at long term projects like What >> does >> it take to wind up causing significant change across the world? Where is it take to build international space Station? You're not gonna be able to ship those things 180 days, no matter how efficiently you build things. And I think that the incentives and as you build them, have to start aligning with that. Otherwise you wind up with government trying to compete on compensation with the private sector. I don't think that works. I think you may have an opportunity to structure alignments around sentence in a very different life. >> It's an open item on the compensation. Until they agree, we'll watch. It was ideas. We'll see what tracks. But to me, in my opinion, what I think's gonna be killer for game game one here. This of this revolution is the people that come out of the woodwork because cloud attracts attract smart people and smart people are leaning into the government with cloud. It was the other way around before the cloud people, I don't want to get involved in government, and that was a big ding on government attracting qualified people. So I think Cloud is going to attract some smart people that want to help for the purpose and mission of whatever the outcome of that political or agency or government initiative with a cyber security there. People will care about this stuff who want the social equity not so much, >> Yeah, I think that's >> going to be a wild card. I think we're going to see like a new might in migration of talented people coming into quote assist government. That's a work for government to figure out how to be better at whatever the competition is and that is going to be I think the first lever of you start to see new names emerge. This person who just changed the organization over here become a hero Dev Ops mindset being applied to new environments. >> And we've seen that to some extent with the U. S. Digital service with 18 half where you have industry leaders from the commercial side moving into public sector and working in government for a time and then matriculating back into the public sector and the private sector, I think that there winds up being a lot of opportunity for more programs like that of scaling this stuff out >> and career change and career passer tissue. And there is this more fluid iti. As you're saying, >> I think that money isn't everything. You know. There's a lot of research that shows up to a certain threshold of income. You >> don't get that much happier. I don't know if Jeff >> basis is that much happier than us. I mean, >> we live in a little more bank and say, you know, >> you see the other side of it, too, is you build all these things together where you have okay. What? >> What is it >> that moves people? What do they care about. It's not just money, and I think that the old styled the old are very strict hierarchy within organizations where things are decided by tenure. Service is a bit of a problem if you have someone who works for. The EPA has been doing a deep dive cloud work for 10 years. There's nothing specific to the EPA about what that person has mastered. They shouldn't be able to laterally transition into the FDA, for example, >> Jackson Fireside Chat, Those interesting point about the fire phone that they talked about. And this is the transfer ability of skill sets and you getting at the thing that I will notice is that with Cloud attracts this interdisciplinary skill sets so you don't have to be just a coder. You khun, note how code works and be an architect, or you could be a change agent some somewhere else in an organization. So that's >> going to >> be interesting. That's not necessarily what how governments have always been siloed right? So can can these silos can these old ways of doing things. This is the question. This is why it's fun to cover this market. >> We're already >> seeing that in the public sector were being able to write code is rapidly transitioning into a very being very similar to I can speak French. Great. That's not a career in and of itself. That's a skill sad that unlocks of different right. A different career paths forward, but it doesn't wind up saving anything. It doesn't want a preserving its own modern aristocracy path forward or >> use the building an example. I don't have to learn how to pour concrete organ, right? The blueprints. Yes. So as we start getting into these systems conversations, you're going to start to see these different skill sets involved. Huge opportunity. If >> you're in >> school today and you're studying computer science, great learned something else, too, because the intersection between that and other spaces are where the knish opportunities are. That's the skill set of the future. That's where you're going to start seeing opportunities. Do not just succeed personally, but start to change the world. >> But Cory Great. Thanks for coming on and make an appearance and sharing what you found on the hallways. Good to see you. Coop con in Europe. Thanks for holding down the fort there. >> Of course I appreciate it. It was an absolute Bonner. >> Excellent. Great. Well, thank you so much. Thank >> you. I'm Rebecca Knight for John Furrier. Stay tuned. You are watching the Cube.