>> Narrator: From San Jose, California, in the heart of Silicon Valley, it's theCUBE. Covering Hadoop Summit 2016. Brought to you by Hortonworks. Here's your host, John Furrier. >> Welcome back everyone. We are here live in Silicon Valley at Hadoop Summit 2016, actually San Jose. This is theCUBE, our flagship program. We go out to the events and extract the signal to the noise. Our next guest, David Richards, CEO of WANdisco. And Joel Horowitz, strategy and business development, IBM analyst. Guys, welcome back to theCUBE. Good to see you guys. >> Thank you for having us. >> It's great to be here, John. >> Give us the update on WANdisco. What's the relationship with IBM and WANdisco? 'Cause, you know. I can just almost see it, but I'm not going to predict. Just tell us. >> Okay, so, I think the last time we were on theCUBE, I was sitting with Re-ti-co who works very closely with Joe. And we began to talk about how our partnership was evolving. And of course, we were negotiating an OEM deal back then, so we really couldn't talk about it very much. But this week, I'm delighted to say that we announced, I think it's called IBM Big Replicate? >> Joel: Big Replicate, yeah. We have a big everything and Replicate's the latest edition. >> So it's going really well. It's OEM'd into IBM's analytics, big data products, and cloud products. >> Yeah, I'm smiling and smirking because we've had so many conversations, David, on theCUBE with you on and following your business through the bumpy road or the wild seas of big data. And it's been a really interesting tossing and turning of the industry. I mean, Joel, we've talked about it too. The innovation around Hadoop and then the massive slowdown and realization that cloud is now on top of it. The consumerization of the enterprise created a little shift in the value proposition, and then a massive rush to build enterprise grade, right? And you guys had that enterprise grade piece of it. IBM, certainly you're enterprise grade. You have enterprise everywhere. But the ecosystem had to evolve really fast. What happened? Share with the audience this shift. >> So, it's classic product adoption lifecycle and the buying audience has changed over that time continuum. In the very early days when we first started talking more at these events, when we were talking about Hadoop, we all really cared about whether it was Pig and Hive. >> You once had a distribution. That's a throwback. Today's Thursday, we'll do that tomorrow. >> And the buying audience has changed, and consequently, the companies involved in the ecosystem have changed. So where we once used to really care about all of those different components, we don't really care about the machinations below the application layer anymore. Some people do, yes, but by and large, we don't. And that's why cloud for example is so successful because you press a button, and it's there. And that, I think, is where the market is going to very, very quickly. So, it makes perfect sense for a company like WANdisco who've got 20, 30, 40, 50 sales people to move to a company like IBM that have 4 or 5,000 people selling our analytics products. >> Yeah, and so this is an OEM deal. Let's just get that news on the table. So, you're an OEM. IBM's going to OEM their product and brand it IBM, Big Replication? >> Yeah, it's part of our Big Insights Portfolio. We've done a great job at growing this product line over the last few years, with last year talking about how we decoupled all the value-as from the core distribution. So I'm happy to say that we're both part of the ODPI. It's an ODPI-certified distribution. That is Hadoop that we offer today for free. But then we've been adding not just in terms of the data management capabilities, but the partnership here that we're announcing with WANdisco and how we branded it as Big Replicate is squarely aimed at the data management market today. But where we're headed, as David points out, is really much bigger, right? We're talking about support for not only distributed storage and data, but we're also talking about a hybrid offering that will get you to the cloud faster. So not only does Big Replicate work with HDFS, it also works with the Swift objects store, which as you know, kind of the underlying storage for our cloud offering. So what we're hoping to see from this great partnership is as you see around you, Hadoop is a great market. But there's a lot more here when you talk about managing data that you need to consider. And I think hybrid is becoming a lot larger of a story than simply distributing your processing and your storage. It's becoming a lot more about okay, how do you offset different regions? How do you think through that there are multiple, I think there's this idea that there's one Hadoop cluster in an enterprise. I think that's factually wrong. I think what we're observing is that there's actually people who are spinning up, you know, multiple Hadoop distributions at the line of business for maybe a campaign or for maybe doing fraud detection, or maybe doing log file, whatever. And managing all those clusters, and they'll have Cloud Arrow. They'll have Hortonworks. They'll have IBM. They'll have all of these different distributions that they're having to deal with. And what we're offering is sanity. It's like give me sanity for how I can actually replicate that data. >> I love the name Big Replicate, fantastic. Big Insights, Big Replicate. And so go to market, you guys are going to have bigger sales force. It's a nice pop for you guys. I mean, it's good deal. >> We were just talking before we came on air about sort of a deal flow coming through. It's coming through, this potential deal flow coming through, which has been off the charts. I mean, obviously when you turn on the tap, and then suddenly you enable thousands and thousands of sales people to start selling your products. I mean, IBM, are doing a great job. And I think IBM are in a unique position where they own both cloud and on-prem. There are very few companies that own both the on-prem-- >> They're going to need to have that connection for the companies that are going hybrid. So hybrid cloud becomes interesting right now. >> Well, actually, it's, there's a theory that says okay, so, and we were just discussing this, the value of data lies in analytics, not in the data itself. It lies in you've been able to pull out information from that data. Most CIOs-- >> If you can get the data. >> If you can get the data. Let's assume that you've got the data. So then it becomes a question of, >> That's a big assumption. Yes, it is. (laughs) I just had Nancy Handling on about metadata. No, that's an issue. People have data they store they can't do anything with it. >> Exactly. And that's part of the problem because what you actually have to have is CPU slash processing power for an unknown amount of data any one moment in time. Now, that sounds like an elastic use case, and you can't do elastic on-prem. You can only do elastic in cloud. That means that virtually every distribution will have to be a hybrid distribution. IBM realized this years ago and began to build this hybrid infrastructure. We're going to help them to move data, completely consistent data, between on-prem and cloud, so when you query things in the cloud, it's exactly the same results and the correct results you get. >> And also the stability too on that. There's so many potential, as we've discussed in the past, that sounds simple and logical. To do an enterprise grade is pretty complex. And so it just gives a nice, stable enterprise grade component. >> I mean, the volumes of data that we're talking about here are just off the charts. >> Give me a use case of a customer that you guys are working with, or has there been any go-to-market activity or an ideal scenario that you guys see as a use case for this partnership? >> We're already seeing a whole bunch of things come through. >> What's the number one pattern that bubbles up to the top? Use case-wise. >> As Joel pointed out, that he doesn't believe that any one company just has one version of Hadoop behind their firewall. They have multiple vendors. >> 100% agree with that. >> So how do you create one, single cluster from all of those? >> John: That's one problem you solved. >> That's of course a very large problem. Second problem that we're seeing in spades is I have to move data to cloud to run analytics applications against it. That's huge. That required completely guaranteed consistent data between on-prem and cloud. And I think those two use cases alone account for pretty much every single company. >> I think there's even a third here. I think the third is actually, I think frankly there's a lot of inefficiencies in managing just HDFS and how many times you have to actually copy data. If I looked across, I think the standard right now is having like three copies. And actually, working with Big Replicate and WANdisco, you can actually have more assurances and actually have to make less copies across the cluster and actually across multiple clusters. If you think about that, you have three copies of the data sitting in this cluster. Likely, an analysts have a dragged a bunch of the same data in other clusters, so that's another multiple of three. So there's amount of waste in terms of the same data living across your enterprise. That I think there's a huge cost-savings component to this as well. >> Does this involve anything with Project Atlas at all? You guys are working with, >> Not yet, no. >> That project? It's interesting. We're seeing a lot of opening up the data, but all they're doing is creating versions of it. And so then it becomes version control of the data. You see a master or a centralization of data? Actually, not centralize, pull all the data in one spot, but why replicate it? Do you see that going on? I guess I'm not following the trend here. I can't see the mega trend going on. >> It's cloud. >> What's the big trend? >> The big trend is I need an elastic infrastructure. I can't build an elastic infrastructure on-premise. It doesn't make economic sense to build massive redundancy maybe three or four times the infrastructure I need on premise when I'm only going to use it maybe 10, 20% of the time. So the mega trend is cloud provides me with a completely economic, elastic infrastructure. In order to take advantage of that, I have to be able to move data, transactional data, data that changes all the time, into that cloud infrastructure and query it. That's the mega trend. It's as simple as that. >> So moving data around at the right time? >> And that's transaction. Anybody can say okay, press pause. Move the data, press play. >> So if I understand this correctly, and just, sorry, I'm a little slow. End of the day today. So instead of staging the data, you're moving data via the analytics engines. Is that what you're getting at? >> You use data that's being transformed. >> I think you're accessing data differently. I think today with Hadoop, you're accessing it maybe through like Flume or through Oozy, where you're building all these data pipelines that you have to manage. And I think that's obnoxious. I think really what you want is to use something like Apache Spark. Obviously, we've made a large investment in that earlier, actually, last year. To me, what I think I'm seeing is people who have very specific use cases. So, they want to do analysis for a particular campaign, and so they may just pull a bunch of data into memory from across their data environment. And that may be on the cloud. It may be from a third-party. It may be from a transactional system. It may be from anywhere. And that may be done in Hadoop. It may not, frankly. >> Yeah, this is the great point, and again, one of the themes on the show is, this is a question that's kind of been talked about in the hallways. And I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. Is there are some people saying that there's really no traction for Hadoop in the cloud. And that customers are saying, you know, it's not about just Hadoop in the cloud. I'm going to put in S3 or object store. >> You're right. I think-- >> Yeah, I'm right as in what? >> Every single-- >> There's no traction for Hadoop in the cloud? >> I'll tell you what customers tell us. Customers look at what they actually need from storage, and they compare whatever it is, Hadoop or any on-premise proprietor storage array and then look at what S3 and Swift and so on offer to them. And if you do a side-by-side comparison, there isn't really a difference between those two things. So I would argue that it's a fact that functionally, storage in cloud gives you all the functionality that any customer would need. And therefore, the relevance of Hadoop in cloud probably isn't there. >> I would add to that. So it really depends on how you define Hadoop. If you define Hadoop by the storage layer, then I would say for sure. Like HDFS versus an objects store, that's going to be a difficult one to find some sort of benefit there. But if you look at Hadoop, like I was talking to my friend Blake from Netflix, and I was asking him so I hear you guys are kind of like replatforming on Spark now. And he was basically telling me, well, sort of. I mean, they've invested a lot in Pig and Hive. So if you think it now about Hadoop as this broader ecosystem which you brought up Atlas, we talk about Ranger and Knox and all the stuff that keeps coming out, there's a lot of people who are still invested in the peripheral ecosystem around Hadoop as that central point. My argument would be that I think there's still going to be a place for distributed computing kind of projects. And now whether those will continue to interface through Yarn via and then down to HDFS, or whether that'll be Yarn on say an objects store or something and those projects will persist on their own. To me that's kind of more of how I think about the larger discussion around Hadoop. I think people have made a lot of investments in terms of that ecosystem around Hadoop, and that's something that they're going to have to think through. >> Yeah. And Hadoop wasn't really designed for cloud. It was designed for commodity servers, deployment with ease and at low cost. It wasn't designed for cloud-based applications. Storage in cloud was designed for storage in cloud. Right, that's with S3. That's what Swift and so on were designed specifically to do, and they fulfill most of those functions. But Joel's right, there will be companies that continue to use-- >> What's my whole argument? My whole argument is that why would you want to use Hadoop in the cloud when you can just do that? >> Correct. >> There's object store out. There's plenty of great storage opportunities in the cloud. They're mostly shoe-horning Hadoop, and I think that's, anyway. >> There are two classes of customers. There were customers that were born in the cloud, and they're not going to suddenly say, oh you know what, we need to build our own server infrastructure behind our own firewall 'cause they were born in the cloud. >> I'm going to ask you guys this question. You can choose to answer or not. Joel may not want to answer it 'cause he's from IBM and gets his wrist slapped. This is a question I got on DM. Hadoop ecosystem consolidation question. People are mailing in the questions. Now, keep sending me your questions if you don't want your name on it. Hold on, Hadoop system ecosystem. When will this start to happen? What is holding back the M and A? >> So, that's a great question. First of all, consolidation happens when you sort of reach that tipping point or leveling off, that inflection point where the market levels off, and we've reached market saturation. So there's no more market to go after. And the big guys like IBM and so on come in-- >> Or there was never a market to begin with. (laughs) >> I don't think that's the case, but yes, I see the point. Now, what's stopping that from happening today, and you're a naughty boy by the way for asking this question, is a lot of these companies are still very well funded. So while they still have cash on the balance sheet, of course, it's very, very hard for that to take place. >> You picked up my next question. But that's a good point. The VCs held back in 2009 after the crash of 2008. Sequoia's memo, you know, the good times role, or RIP good times. They stopped funding companies. Companies are getting funded, continually getting funding. Joel. >> So I don't think you can look at this market as like an isolated market like there's the Hadoop market and then there's a Spark market. And then even there's like an AI or cognitive market. I actually think this is all the same market. Machine learning would not be possible if you didn't have Hadoop, right? I wouldn't say it. It wouldn't have a resurgence that it has had. Mahout was one of the first machine learning languages that caught fire from Ted Dunning and others. And that kind of brought it back to life. And then Spark, I mean if you talk to-- >> John: I wouldn't say it creates it. Incubated. >> Incubated, right. >> And created that Renaissance-like experience. >> Yeah, deep learning, Some of those machine learning algorithms require you to have a distributed kind of framework to work in. And so I would argue that it's less of a consolidation, but it's more of an evolution of people going okay, there's distributed computing. Do I need to do that on-premise in this Hadoop ecosystem, or can I do that in the cloud, or in a growing Spark ecosystem? But I would argue there's other things happening. >> I would agree with you. I love both areas. My snarky comment there was never a market to begin with, what I'm saying there is that the monetization of commanding the hill that everyone's fighting for was just one of many hills in a bigger field of hills. And so, you could be in a cul-de-sac of being your own champion of no paying customers. >> What you have-- >> John: Or a free open-source product. >> Unlike the dotcom era where most of those companies were in the public markets, and you could actually see proper valuations, most of the companies, the unicorns now, most are not public. So the valuations are really difficult to, and the valuation metrics are hard to come by. There are only few of those companies that are in the public market. >> The cash story's right on. I think to Joel' point, it's easy to pivot in a market that's big and growing. Just 'cause you're in the wrong corner of the market pivoting or vectoring into the value is easier now than it was 10 years ago. Because, one, if you have a unicorn situation, you have cash on the bank. So they have a good flush cash. Your runway's so far out, you can still do your thing. If you're a startup, you can get time to value pretty quickly with the cloud. So again, I still think it's very healthy. In my opinion, I kind of think you guys have good analysis on that point. >> I think we're going to see some really cool stuff happen working together, and especially from what I'm seeing from IBM, in the fact that in the IT crowd, there is a behavioral change that's happening that Hadoop opened the door to. That we're starting to see more and more It professionals walk through. In the sense that, Hadoop has opened the door to not thinking of data as a liability, but actually thinking about data differently as an asset. And I think this is where this market does have an opportunity to continue to grow as long as we don't get carried away with trying to solve all of the old problems that we solved for on-premise data management. Like if we do that, then we're just, then there will be a consolidation. >> Metadata is a huge issue. I think that's going to be a big deal. And on the M and A, my feeling on the M and A is that, you got to buy something of value, so you either have revenue, which means customers, and or initial property. So, in a market of open source, it comes back down to the valuation question. If you're IBM or Oracle or HP, they can pivot too. And they can be agile. Now slower agile, but you know, they can literally throw some engineers at it. So if there's no customers in I and P, they can replicate, >> Exactly. >> That product. >> And we're seeing IBM do that. >> They don't know what they're buying. My whole point is if there's nothing to buy. >> I think it depends on, ultimately it depends on where we see people deriving value, and clearly in WANdisco, there's a huge amount of value that we're seeing our customers derive. So I think it comes down to that, and there is a lot of IP there, and there's a lot of IP in a lot of these companies. I think it's just a matter of widening their view, and I think WANdisco is probably the earliest to do this frankly. Was to recognize that for them to succeed, it couldn't just be about Hadoop. It actually had to expand to talk about cloud and talk about other data environments, right? >> Well, congratulations on the OEM deal. IBM, great name, Big Replicate. Love it, fantastic name. >> We're excited. >> It's a great product, and we've been following you guys for a long time, David. Great product, great energy. So I'm sure there's going to be a lot more deals coming on your. Good strategy is OEM strategy thing, huh? >> Oh yeah. >> It reduces sales cost. >> Gives us tremendous operational leverage. Getting 4,000, 5,000-- >> You get a great partner in IBM. They know the enterprise, great stuff. This is theCUBE bringing all the action here at Hadoop. IBM OEM deal with WANdisco all happening right here on theCUBE. Be back with more live coverage after this short break.

Zay California in the heart of Silicon Valley. It's the cube covering Hadoop summit 2016 brought to you by Hortonworks. Here's your host, John furrier. >>Okay, we'll come back here and we are here live in Silicon Valley for the cube. This is our flagship program. We go out to the events and extract the cylinders. Of course. We're here at the big data event. Hadoop summit 2016 have a special guest celebrity now, author of the bestselling book magical at Virginia Heffernan magic and loss rising on the bestseller lists. Welcome to the cube. Thanks in our show, you are my internet friend and now you're my real life friend. You're my favorite Facebook friend that I just now met for the first time. Great to meet you. We had never met and now we, but we know each other of course intimately through the interwebs. So I've been following your writing your time. Send you do some stuff on medium and then you, you kind of advertise. You're doing this book. I saw you do the Google glasses experiment in. >>It was Brooklyn and it might, it was so into Google glass and I will admit it, I fought for everything. I fell for VR and all its incarnations and um, and the Google last year, it was like that thing that was supposed to put the internet all voice activated, just put the internet always in front of your face. So I started to wear it around in Brooklyn, my prototype. I thought everyone would stop me and say how cool it was. In fact they didn't think it was pull it off new Yorkers. That's how you would, how they really feel. Got a problem with that. Um, your book magic and loss is fantastic and I think it really is good because uh, Dan Lyons wrote, disrupted, loved, which was fantastic. Dan lies big fan of him and his work, but it really, it wasn't a parody of civil rights for Silicon Valley. >>The show that's kinda taken that culture and made it mainstream. I had people call me up and say, Hey, you live in Callow Alto. My God, do you live near the house? Something like it's on Newell, which is one of my cross streets. But the point is tech culture now is kind of in a native, my youngest is 13 and you know, we're in an iPad generation for the youth and we're from the generation where there was no cell phones. And Mike, I remember when pages were the big innovation and internet. But I think, I think when I'm telling you, I think, I know I'm talking to a fellow traveler when I say that there was digital culture before the advent of the worldwide web in the early nineties you know, I, I'm sure you did too. Got electronic games like crazy. I would get any Merlin or Simon or whatever that they, they introduced. >>And then I also dialed into a mainframe in the late seventies and the early eighties to play the computer as we call it. We didn't even call it the internet. And the thing about the culture too was email was very, you know, monochrome screens, but again, clunky but still connected. Right? So we were that generation of, you know, putting that first training wheels on and now exposed to you. So in the book, your premise is, um, there's magical things happening in the internet and art countering the whole trolling. Uh, yeah, the Internet's bad. And we know recently someone asked me, how can the internet be art when Twitter is so angry? What do you think art is? You know, this is an art. Art is emotional. Artists know powerful >>emotions represented in tranquility and this is, you know, what you see on the internet all the time. Of course the aid of course are human. It needs a place to live and call it Twitter. For now it used to be YouTube comments. So, but we are always taking the measure of something we've lost. Um, I get the word loss from lossy compression, you know, the engineering term that, how does, how MP3 takes that big broad music signal and flattens it out. And something about listening to music on MP3, at least for me, made me feel a sense that I was grieving for something. It was missing something from my analog life. On the other hand, more than counterbalanced by the magic that I think we all experienced on the internet. We wouldn't have a friendship if it weren't for social media and all kinds of other things. And strange serendipity happens not to mention artistic expression in the form of photography, film, design of poetry and music, which are the five chapters of the book. >>So the book is fantastic. The convergence and connection of people, concepts, life with the internet digitally is interesting, right? So there's some laws with the MP3. Great example, but have you found post book new examples? I'm sure the internet culture, geese like Mia, like wow, this is so awesome. There's a cultural aspect of it is the digital experience and we see it on dating sites. Obviously you see, you know Snapchat, you know, dating sites like Tinder and other hookups apps and the real estate, everything being Uberized. What's the new things that you've, that's coming out and you must have some >>well this may be controversial, but one thing I see happening is anti digital culture. Partly as an epi phenomenon of side effect of digitization. We have a whole world of people who really want to immerse themselves in things like live music maker culture, things made by hand, vinyl records, vinyl records, which are selling more than ever in the days of the rolling stones. Gimme shelter less they sold less than than they do now. The rolling stones makes $1 billion touring a year. Would we ever have thought that in the, in the, you know, at the Genesis of the iPod when it seemed like, you know, recorded music represented music in that MP3 thing that floated through our, our phones was all we needed. No, we want to look in the faces of the rolling stones, get as close as we can to the way the music is actually made and you know, almost defiantly, and this is how the culture works. This is how youth culture works. Um, reject, create experiences that cannot be digitized. >>This is really more of a counter culture movement on the overt saturation of digital. >>Yes. Yes. You see the first people to scale down from, you know, high powered iPhones, um, when we're youth going to flip phones. You know, it's like the greatest like greatest punk, punk, punk tech. Exactly. It's like, yeah, I'm going to use these instruments, but like if I break a string, who cares on a PDs? The simplest one, right? >>My mom made me use my iPhone. Are we going to, how are we going to have that? it'd >>be like, Oh, look at you with your basic iPhone over there. And I've got my just like hack down, downscale, whatever. And you know what, I don't spend the weekends, don't pick up my phone on the weekends. But you know, there are interesting markets there. And interesting. I mean, for instance, the, you know, the live phenomenon, I know that, you know, there's this new company by one of the founders of Netflix movie pass, which um, for a $30 subscription you've seen movies in the theater as much as you want and the theaters are beautiful. And what instead of Netflix and chill, you know, the, the, the contemporary, you know, standard date, it's dinner and movie. You're out again. You're eating food, which can't be digitized with in-company, which can't be digitized. And then sitting in a theater, you know, a public experience, which is, um, a pretty extraordinary way that the culture and business pushes back on digital. >>Remember I was a comma on my undergraduate days in computer science in the 80s. And before when it was nerdy and eh, and there was a sociology class at Hubba computers and social change. And the big thing was we're going to lose social interactions because of email. And if you think about what you're talking about here is that the face to face presence, commitment of being with somebody right now is a scarce resource. You have an abundance of connections. >>I mean, take the fact what has happened is digital culture has jacked up the value of undigital culture. So for instance, you know, I've, I've met on Facebook, we talk on Facebook messenger, we notice that we're, you know, like kindred spirits in a certain way and we like each other's posts and so forth. Then we have an, a more extensive talk in messenger when we meet in person for the first time. Both of us are East coast people, but we hugged tele because it's like, Oh wow, like you in the flesh. You know it's something exciting. >>Connection virtually. That's right. There's a synchronous connection presence, but we're not really, we haven't met face to face. >>Yeah, there's this great as a great little experiment going on, set group of kids and Silicon Valley have decided they're too addicted to their phones and Facebook. Now I am not recommending for your viewers and listeners that anybody do what these kids sounds good, are ready. Go. Hey, all right, so what they do is take an LSD breakfast. Now I don't take drugs. I think you can do this without the LSD, but they put a little bit of a hallucinogen under their skin in the morning and what they find is they lost interest in the boring interface in their phones because people on the bus suddenly looked so fascinating to them. The human face is an ratable interface. It can't be reproduced anywhere, Steve. You know, Johnny ive can't make it. They can't make it at Google. And that I think is something we will see young markets doing, which is this renewed appreciation for nature and analog for humans and for analog culture. >>That's right. The Navy is going to sextants and compasses. You may have seen training, they're training sailors on those devices because of the fear that GPS might be hacked. So you know, the young kids probably don't even know what a cup is is, well, I bought myself a compass recently because I suddenly was like, you know, we talk a lot about digital technology, but what the heck, this thing you can point toward the poles, right in my hands. You know, I was suddenly like, we are this floating ball with these poles with different magnetic charges. And I think it's time. I appreciate it. >>Okay, so I've got to ask the, um, the, the feedback that you've gotten from the book, um, again, we hear that every Geneva magic and loss, great, great book. Go by. It's fantastic and open your mind up. It's a, it's a thought provoking, but really specific good use cases. I got a think that, you know, when you talk at Google and when you talk to some of the groups that you're talking to, certainly book clubs and other online that there must be like, Oh my God, you hit the cultural nerve. What have you heard from some of these, um, folks from my age 50 down to the 20 something year olds? Have you had any aha moments where you said, Oh my God, I hit a nerve here. >>Did not want to, I mean, I didn't want to write one of those books. That's like the one thing you need to know to get your startup to succeed or whatever. You know, I was at the airport and every single one of them is like, pop the only thing you need to do to save this or whatever. And they, they do take a very short view. Now if you're thinking about, you know, whether if you're thinking about your quarterly return or your, you know, what you're going to do this quarter and when you're going to be profitable or user acquisition, those books are good manuals. But if you're going to buy a hardcover book and you're going to really invest in reading every page, not just the bolded part, not just the put, you know, the two points that you have to know. I really wanted readers and at what I had found on the internet, people like you, we have an interest in a long view. You know what, I need a really long view >>in a prose that's not for listicle or you know, shorts. It's like it's just a thought provoker but somebody can go, Hey, you know, at the beach on the weekend say, Hey wow, this is really cool. What F you know, we went analog for awhile or what if, what's best for my kids to let my kids play multiplayer games more Zika simulate life. That was my, so these are the kinds of questions that the digital parents are asked. >>Yeah. So you know, like let's take the parents question, which is, is, you know, a, surprisingly to me it's a surprisingly pressing question. I am a parent, but my kids' digital habits are not, you know, of obsessive interest to me. Sometimes I think the worry about our kids is a proxy for how we worry about ourselves. You know, it's funny because they're the, you know, the model of the parent saying my kid has attention deficit order, zero order. My kid has attention deficit disorder. The kids over here, the parents here, you know, who has the attention deficit disorder. But in any case I have realized that parents are talking about uh, computers on the internet as though something kids have to have a very ambivalent relationship with and a very wary relationship with. So limit the time, and it sounds a little bit like the abstinence movement around sexuality that like, you know, you only dip in, it's very, you know, they're only date, right, right, right. >>Instead of joining sides with their kids and helping to create a durable, powerful, interesting online avatar, which is what kids want to do. And it's also what we want to do. So like in your Facebook profile, there are all kinds of strategic groups you can make as a creator of that profile. We know it as adults. Like, do you, some people put up pictures of their kids, some people don't vacation pictures. Some people promote the heck out of themselves. Some people don't do so much of that. Um, do you put up a lot of photographs? Do whatever. Those are the decisions we started to make when went on Facebook at kitchen making the two small armor to have on their gaming profile. That's kind of how they want to play, you know, play for you, going to wear feathers. These are important things. Um, but the uh, you know, small questions like talking to your kids and I don't mean a touchy feely conversation, but literally during the write in all lower case commit, you know, Brighton, all lower case, you're cute and you're this and that means a certain thing and you should get it and you're going to write in all caps and you're going to talk about white nationalist ideology. >>Well that also has a set of consequences. What have you learned in terms of the virtual space? Actually augmented reality, virtual reality, these promise to be virtual spaces. What, what is one of them? They always hope to replicate the real world. The mean, yes. Will there be any parallels of the kind of commitment in the moment? Gives you one thing. I say kids that, you know, the subtitle of the book is the internet as art, magic and loss. The internet is art and the kind of art, the internet is, is what I think of as real estate art. It purports to be reality. You know, every technology pick a photography film says or think of even the introduction of a third dimension in painting, you know, in Renaissance painting perspective for ports to represent reality better than it's been represented before. And if you're right in sync with the technology, you're typically fooled by it. >>I mean, this is a seductive representation of reality. You know, people watching us now believe they're seeing us flush of let us talk. You know, they don't think they're seeing pixels that are designed in certain ways and certainly it's your ways. So trying to sort out the incredibly interesting immersive, artful experience of being online that has some dangers and has some emotions to do it from real life is a really important thing. And you know, for us to learn first and then a model for our kids. So I had a horrible day on Twitter one day, eight 2012 213 worst day ever on Twitter. It was a great day for me. I spent the day at the beach, my Twitter avatar took sniper fire for me all day. People called her an idiot separated amount. I separated them out. And anyone who like likes roleplay and games knows that like I'm not a high priestess in Dentons and dragons. >>You know, I'm a much smaller person than that. And in, in, you know, in the case of this Twitter battle, I'm a less embattled person than the one that takes your armor from me on Twitter. That's my art. Your armor. So let's talk about poetry. Twitter, you mentioned poetry, Twitter, 140 characters. I did 40 characters is a lot. If like a lot of internet users your to have pictographic language like Chinese. So 140 characters is a novel by, well not a novel, but it's a short story for, you know, a writer of short form, short form Chinese aphorisms like Confucius. So one of the things I wanted to say is there's nothing about it being short that makes it low culture. You know, there's, I mean it takes a second to take, to take an a sculpture or to take an a painting and yet like the amount of craft that went into that might be much more good tweeting and you're excellent at it, um, is not easy. You know, I know that times I've been like, I tagged the wrong person and then I have to delete it. Like, because the name didn't come up or you know, I get the hashtags wrong and then I'm like, Oh, it would have been better this other way or I don't have a smart enough interject >>it's like playing sports. Twitter's like, you know, firing under the tennis ball baseline rallies with people. I mean, it's like, it's like there's a cultural thing. And this is the thing that I love about your book is you really bring in the metaphors around art and the cultural aspect. Have you had any, have you found that there's one art period that we represent right now? That it could be a comparison? >>I mean, you know, it's always tempting to care everything to the Renaissance. But you know, obviously in the Italian Renaissance there was so much technological innovation and so much, um, and so much, uh, so much artistic innovation. But, um, you know, the other thing are the Dawn of it's might be bigger than that, which it sounds grounds grandiose, but we're talking about something that nearly 6 billion people use and have access to. So we're talking about something bigger than we've ever seen is the Donovan civilization. So like, we pay a lot of attention to the Aqua docks and Rome and, and you know, later pay to touch it to the frescoes. I attend in this book to the frescoes, to the sculpture, to the music, to the art. So instead of talking about frescoes as an art historian, might I talk about Instagram? Yeah. >>And you, and this thing's all weave together cause we can back to the global fabric. If you look at the civilization as you know you're not to use the world is flat kind of metaphor. But that book kind of brings out that notion of okay if you just say a one global fabric, yes you have poetry, you have photography of soiling with a Johnny Susana ad in London. He says, you know, cricket is a sport in England, a bug and a delicacy depending on where in the world you are. >>Love that is that, I wonder if that's the HSBC had time to actually a beautiful HSBC job has done a beautiful campaign. I should find out who did it about perspective. And that is also a wonderful way to think about the internet because you know, I know a lot of people who don't like Twitter, who don't like YouTube comments. I do like them because I am perpetually surprised at what people bring to their interpretation. Insights in the comments can be revealing. You know, you know, you don't wanna get your feelings hurt. Sometimes you don't want that much exposure to the micro flora and fauna of ideas that could be frightening. But you know, when you're up for it, it's a really nice test of your immune system, you know. All right. So what's next for you? Virginia Heffernan magic and last great book. I think I will continue to write the tech criticism, which is just this growing field. I at Sarah Watson had a wonderful piece today in the Columbia journalism review about how we really need to bring all our faculties to treat, treating to tech criticism meant and treating tech with, um, with Karen, with proper off. Um, and the next book is on anti digital culture. Um, I will continue writing journalism and you'll see little previews of that book in the next work. >>Super inspirational. And I think the culture needs this kind of rallying cry because you know, there is art and science and all this beautiful beauty in the internet and it's not about mutually exclusive analog world. You can look and take, can come offline. So it's interesting case study of this, this revolution I think, and I think the counter culture, if you'd go back and Southern John Markoff about this, when he wrote his first book, the Dormouse wander about the counter culture in Silicon Valley is what's your grade book? And counter cultures usually create a another wave of innovation. So the question that comes out of this one is there could, this could be a seminal moment in history. I mean, I think it absolutely is. You know, in some ways, every moment is a great moment if you know what to make of it. But I am just tired of people telling us that we're ruining our brands and that this is the end of innovation and that we're at some low period. >>I think we will look back and think of this as an incredibly fertile time for our imaginations. If we don't lose hope, if we keep our creativity fired and if we commit to this incredible period we're in Virginia. Thanks for spending the time here in the queue. Really appreciate where you're live at. Silicon Valley is the cube with author Virginia Heffernan magic. And loss. Great book. Get it. If you don't have it, hard copies still available, get it. We'll be right back with more live coverage here. This is the cube. I'm John furry right back with more if the short break.

>> Narrator: Live from Dublin, Ireland. It's theCUBE, covering Hadoop Summit Europe 2016. Brought to you by Hortonworks. Now your host, John Furrier and Dave Vellante. >> Okay, welcome back here, we are here live in Dublin, Ireland, it's theCUBE SiliconANGLEs flagship program where we go out to the events and extract the signal from the noise, I'm John Furrier, my cohost Dave Vellante, our next guest is Emer Coleman who's with Disruption Limited, Open Data Governance Board in Ireland and Transport API, a growing startup built self-sustainable, growing business, open data, love that keynote here at Hadoop Summit, very compelling discussion around digital goods, digital future. Emer, welcome to theCUBE. >> It's great to be here. >> So what was your keynote? Let's just quickly talk about what you talked about, and then we can get in some awesome conversation. >> Sure. So the topic yesterday was we need to talk about techno ethics. So basically, over the last couple of months, I've been doing quite a lot of research on ethics and technology, and many people have different interpretations of that, but yesterday I said it's basically about three things. It's about people, it's about privacy, and it's about profits. So it's asking questions about how do we look at holistic technology development that moves away from a pure technocratic play and looks at the deep societal impacts that technology has. >> One of the things that we're super excited about and passionate about is this new era of openness going to a whole another level. Obviously, open source tier one software development environment, cloud computing allows for instant access to resources, almost limitless at this point, as you can project it forward with Moore's Law and whatnot. But the notion that digital assets are not just content, it's data, it's people, it's the things you mentioned about, create a whole new operating environment or user experience, user expectations with mobile phones and Internet of Things and Transport API which you have, if it moves, you capture it, and you're providing value there. So a whole new economy is developing around digital capital. Share your thoughts around this, because this is an area that you're passionate about, you've just done work here, what's your thoughts on this new digital economy, digital capital, digital asset opportunity? >> I think there's huge excitement about the digital economy, isn't there? And I think one of the things I'm concerned about is that that excitement will lead us to the same place that we are now, where we're not really thinking through what are the equitable distribution in that economy, because it seems to me that the spoils are going to a very tiny elite at the tops. So if you look at Instagram, 13 employees when it was purchased by Facebook for a billion dollars, but that's all our stuff, so I'm not getting any shares in the billion, those 13 people are. That's fantastic that you can build a business, build it to that stage and sell, but you have to think about two things, really: what are we looking at in terms of sustainable businesses into the future that create ethical products, and also the demands from citizens to get some value for their data back, because we're becoming shadow employees, we're shadow employees of Google, so when we email, we're not just corresponding, we're creating value for that company. >> And Facebook is a great example. >> And Facebook, and the thing is, when we were at the beginning of that digital journey, it was quite naive. So we were very seduced by free, and we thought, "This is great," and so we're happy with the service. And then the next stage of that, we realize what if we're not paying for the service, we're the product? >> John: Yeah. >> But we were too embedded in the platform to extricate ourselves. But now, I think, when we look at the future of work and great uncertainty that people are facing, when their labor's not going to be required to the same degree, are we going to slavishly keep producing capital and value for companies like Google, and ask for nothing more than the service in return? I don't think so. >> And certainly, the future will be impacted, and one of the things we see now in our business of online media and online open data, is that the data's very valuable. We see that, I'll say data is the new capital, new oil, whatever phrases of the day is used, and the brand marketers are the first ones to react to it, 'cause they're very data driven. Who are you, how do I sell stuff to you? And so what we're seeing is, brand marketers are saying, "Hey, I'm going to money to try to reach out to people, "and I'm going to activate that base and connect with, "engage with them on Facebook or other platform. "I'm going to add value to your Facebook or Google platform, "but yet I'm parasitic to your platform for the data. "Why just don't I get it directly?" So again, you're starting to see that thinking where I don't want to be a parasite or parasitic to a network that the value's coming from. The users have not yet gotten there, and you're teasing that out. What's your thoughts there, progression, where we're at, have people realized this? Have you seen any movement in the industry around this topic? >> No, I think there's a silence around... Technology companies want to get all the data they can. They're not going to really declare as much as they should, because it bends their service model a bit. Also, the data is emergent. Zuckerberg didn't start Facebook as something that was going to be a utility for a billion people, he started it as a social network for a university. And what grew out of that, we learned as we went along. So I'm thinking, now that we have that experience, we know that happens, so let's start the thinking now. And also, this notion of just taking data because you can, almost speculatively getting data at the point of source, without even knowing what you want it for but thinking, "I'm going to monetize this in the end." Jaron Lanier in his book Who Owns The Future talks about micro licensing back content. And I think that's what we need to do. We start, at the very beginning, we need to start baking in two things: privacy by design and different business models where it's not a winner takes all. It's a dialog between the user and the service, and that's iterated together. >> This idea that it's not a zero sum game is very important, and I want to go back to your Instagram and Facebook example. At its peak, I think Eastman Kodak had hundreds of thousands of employees, maybe four or five hundred, 450,000 employees, huge. Facebook has many many more photos, but maybe a few thousand employees? Wow, so all the jobs are gone, but at the same time, we don't want to be protecting the past from the future, so how do you square that circle? >> Correct, but I think what we know is that the rise of robotics and software is going to eat jobs, and basically, there's going to be a hollowing out of the middle class. You know, for sure, whether it's medicine, journalism, retail, exactly. >> Dave: It's not future, it's now. (laughs) >> Exactly. So we maybe come into a point where large swaths of people don't have work. Now, what do you do in a world where your labor is no longer required? Think about the public policy implications of that. Do we say you either fit in this economy or you die? Are we going to look at ideas which they are looking at in Europe, which is like a universal wage? And all of these things are a challenge to government, because they're going to have a citizenry who are not included in this brave new world. So some public policy thinking has to go into what happens when our kids can't get jobs. When the jobs that used to be done by people like us are done by machines. I'm not against the movement of technology, what I'm saying is there are deep societal implications that need some thinking, because if we get to a point where we suddenly realize, if all of these people who are unemployed and can't get work, this isn't a future we envisioned where robots would take all the crap jobs and we would go off to do wonderful things, like how are we going to bring the bacon home? >> It seems like in a digital world that the gap is creativity to combine technologies and knowledge. I find that it's scary when you talk about maybe micromanaging wages and things like that, education is the answer, but that's... How do you just transfer that knowledge? That's sort of the discussion that we're having in the United States anyway. >> I think some of the issue is that the technology is so, we're kind of seduced by simplicity. So we don't see the complexity underneath, and that's the ultimate aim of a technology, is to make something so simple, that complexity is masked. That's what the iPhone did wonderfully. But that's actually how society is looking now. So we're seduced by this simplicity, we're not seeing the complexity underneath, and that complexity would be about what do we do in a world where our labor is no longer required? >> And one of the things that's interesting about the hollowing of the middle class is the assumption is there's no replacements, so one of the things that could be counter argued is that, okay, as the digital natives, my daughter, she's a freshman in high school, my youngest son's eighth grade, they're natives now, so they're going to commit. So what is the replacement capital and value for companies that can be sustained in the new economy versus the decay and the darwinism of the old? So the digital darwinism aspect's interesting, that's one dilemma. The other one is business models, and I want to get your thoughts on this 'cause this is something we were teasing out with this whole value extraction and company platform issue. A company like Twitter. Highly valuable company, it's a global network of people tweeting and sharing, but yet is under constant pressure from Wall Street and investors that they basically suck. And they don't, they're good, people love Twitter, so they're being forced to behave differently against their mission because their profit motive doesn't really match maybe something like Facebook, so therefore they're instantly devalued, yet the future of someone connecting on Twitter is significantly high. That being said, I want to get your thoughts on that and your advice to Twitter management, given the fact it is a global network. What should they do? >> It's the same old capitalism, just it's digital, it's a digital company, it's a digital asset. It's the same approach, right? Twitter has been a wonderful thing. I've been a Twitter user for years. How amazing, it's played a role in the Arab Spring, all sorts of things. So they're really good, but I think you need as a company, so for example, in our company, in Transport API, we're not really looking to build to this massive IPO, we're trying to build a sustainable company in a traditional way using digital. So I think if you let yourself be seduced by the idea of phenomenal IPO, you kind of take your eye off the ball. >> Or in case this, in case you got IPOed, now you're under pressure to produce-- >> Emer: Absolutely, yeah. >> Which changes your behavior. But in Twitter's management defense, they see the value of their product. Now, they got there by accident and everyone loves it, but now they're not taking the bait to try to craft a short term solution to essentially what is already a valuable product, but not on the books. >> Yes, and also I think where the danger is, we know that their generation shifts across channel. So teenagers probably look at Facebook, I think one of them said, like an awkward family dinner they can't quite leave. But for next gen, they're just not going to go there, 'cause that's where your grandmother is. So the same is true of Twitter and Snapchat, these platforms come and go. It's an interesting phenomenon then to see Wall Street putting that much money into something which is essentially quite ephemeral. I'm not saying that Twitter won't be around for years, it may be, but that's the thing about digital, isn't it? Something else comes in and it's well, that becomes the platform of choice. >> Well, it's interesting, right? Everybody, us included, we criticize the... Michael Dell calls it the 90 day shock clock. But it's actually worked out pretty well, I mean, economically, for the United States companies. Maybe it doesn't in the future. What are your thoughts on that, particularly from a European perspective? Where you're reporting maybe twice a year, there's not as much pressure, but yet from a technology industry standpoint, companies outside the Silicon Valley in particular seem to be less competitive, why? >> For example, in our company, in Transport API, we've got some pretty heavyweight clients, we have a wonderful angel investor who has given us two rounds of investment. And it isn't that kind of avaricious absolutely built this super price. And that's allowed us to build from starting off with 2, now to a team of 10, and we're just about coming into break even, so it's doable. But I think it's a philosophy. We didn't want necessarily to build something huge, although we want to go global, but it was let's do this in a sustainable way with reasonable wages, and we've all put our own soul and money into it, but it's a different cultural proposition, I think. >> Well, the valuations always drive the markets. It's interesting too, to your point about things come and go channels, kind of reminds me, Dave and I used to joke about social networks like nightclubs, they're hot and then it's just too crowded and nobody goes there, as Yogi Bear would say. And then they shift and they go out of business, some don't open with fanfare, no one goes 'cause it's got different context. You have a contextual challenge in the world now. Technology can change things, so I want to ask you about identity 'cause there was a great article posted by the founder of the company called Secret which is one of these anonymous apps like Yik Yak and whatnot, and he shut it down. And he wrote a post, kind of a postmortem, saying, "These things come and go, they don't work, "they're not sustainable because there's no identity." So the role of identity in a social global virtual world, virtual being not just virtual reality, is interesting. You live in a world, and your company, Transport API, provides data which enables stuff and the role of identity. So anonymous versus identity, thoughts there, and that impact to the future of work? If you know who you're dealing with, and if they're present, these are concepts that are now important, presence, identity, attention. >> And that's the interesting thing, isn't it? Who controls that identity? Mark Zuckerberg said, "You only have one identity," which is what he said when he set up Facebook. You think, really? No, that's what a young person thinks. When we're older, we know. >> He also said that young people are smarter than older people. >> Yeah, right, okay. (John laughs) He could be right there, he could be right there, but we all have different identities in different parts of our lives. Who we are here, the Hadoop summit is different from what we're at home to when we're with friends. So identity is a multifaceted thing. But also, who gets to determine your identity? So I have 16 years of my search life and Google. Now, who am I in that server, compared to who I am? I am the sum total of my searches. But I'm not just the sum total of my searches, am I? Or even that contextualized, so I'll give you an example. A number of years ago I was searching for a large, very large waterproof plastic bag. And I typed it in, and I thought, "Oh my god, that sounds like I'm going to murder my husband "and try to bury him." (John and Dave laugh) It was actually-- >> John: Into the compost. >> Right, right. And I thought, "Oh my god, what does this look like "on the other side?" Now, it was actually for my summer garden furniture. But the point is, if you looked at that in an analytic way, who would I be? And so I think identity is very, you know-- >> John: Mistaken. >> Yeah, and also this idea of what Frank Pasquale calls the black box society. These secret algorithms that are controlling flows of money and information. How do they decide what my identity is? What are the moral decisions that they make around that? What does it say if I search for one thing over another? If I search constantly for expensive shoes, does that make me shallow? What do these things say? If I search for certain things around health. >> And there's a value judgment now associated with that that you're talking about, that you do not control. >> Absolutely, and which is probably linked to other things which will determine things like whether I get credit or not, but these can almost be arbitrary decisions, 'cause I have no oversight of the logic that's creating that decision making algorithm. So I think it's not just about identity, it's about who's deciding what that identity is. >> And it's also the reality that you're in, context, situations. Dark side, bright side of technology in this future where this new digital asset economy, digital capital. There's going to be good and bad, education can be consumed non-linear, new forms of consumptions, metadata, as you're pointing out, with the algorithms. Where do you see some bright spots and where do you see the danger areas? >> I think the great thing is, when you were saying software is the future. It's our present, but it's going to be even more so in our future. Some of the brightest brains in the world are involved in the creation of new technology. I just think they need to be focusing a bit more of that intellectual rigor towards the impact they're having on society and how they could do it better. 'Cause I think it's too much of a technocratic solution. Technologists say, "We can do this." The questions is, should they? So I think what we need to do is to loop them back into the more social and philosophical side of the discussion. And of course it's a wonderful thing, hopefully technology is going to do amazing things around health. We can't even predict how amazing it's going to be. But all I'm saying is that, if we don't ask the hard questions now about the downsides, we're going to be in a difficult societal position. But I'm hoping that we will, and I'm hoping that raising issues like techno ethics will get more of that discussion going. >> Well, transparency and open data make a big difference. >> Emer: Absolutely. >> Well, and public policy, as you said earlier, can play a huge role here. I wonder if you could give us your perspective on... Public policy, we're in the US most of the time, but it's interesting when we talk to customers here. To hear about the emphasis, obviously, on privacy, data location and so forth, so in the digital world, do you see Europe's emphasis and, I think, leading on those types of topics as an advantage in a digital world, or does it create friction from an economic standpoint? >> Yeah, but it's not all about economics. Friction is a good thing. There are some times when friction is a good thing. Most technologists think all friction is bad. >> Sure, and I'm not implying that it's necessarily good or bad, I'm curious though, is it potentially an economic advantage to have thought through and have policy on some of those issues? >> Well, what we're seeing here-- >> Because I feel like the US is a ticking time bomb on a lot of these issues. >> I was talking to VCs, some VC friends of mine here in the UK, and what they said they're seeing more and more, VCs asking what we call SMEs, small to medium enterprises, about their data policies, and SMEs not being able to answer those questions, and VCs getting nervous. So I think over time it's going to be a competitive advantage that we've done that homework, that we're basically not just rushing to get more users, but that we're looking at it across the piece. Because, fundamentally, that's more sustainable in the longer term. People will not be dumb too forever. They will not, and so doing that thinking now, where we work with people as we create our technology products, I think it's more sustainable in the long term. When you look at economics, sustainability is really important. >> I want to ask you about the Transport API business, 'cause in the US, same thing, we've seen some great openness of data and amazing innovations that have come out of nowhere. In some cases, unheard of entrepreneurs and/or organizations that better society for the betterment of people, from delivering healthcare to poor areas and whatnot. What has been the coolest thing, or of things you've seen come out of your enablement of the transport data. Use cases, have you seen any things that surprised you? >> It's quite interesting, because when I worked for the mayor of London as his director of digital projects, my job was to set up the London data store, which was to open all of London's public sector data. So I was kind of there from the beginning as a lobbyist, and when I was asking agencies to open up their data, they'd go, "What's the ROI?" And I'd just say, "I don't know." Because government's one and oh, I'm saying that was a chicken and egg, you got to put it out there. And we had a funny incident where some of the IT staff in transport for London accidentally let out this link, which is to the tracker net feed, and that powers the tube notice boards that says, "Your next tube is in a minute," whatever. And so the developer community went, "Ooh, this is interesting." >> John: Candy! >> Yeah, and of course, we had no documentation with it because it kind of went out under the radar. And one developer called Mathew Somerville made this map which showed the tubes on a map in real time. And it was like surfacing the underground. And people just thought, "Oh my god, that is amazing." >> John: It's illuminating. >> Yeah. It didn't do anything, but it showed the possibility. The newspapers picked it up, it was absolutely brilliant example, and the guy made it in half a day. And that was the first time people saw their transport system kind of differently. So that was amazing, and then we've seen hundreds of different applications that are being built all the time. And what we're also seeing is integration of transport data with other things, so one of our clients in Transport API is called Toothpick, and they're an online dental booking agency. And so you can go online, you can book your dental appointment with your NHS dentist, and then they bake in transport information to tell you how to get there. So we have pubs using them, and screens so people can order their dinner, and then they say, "You've got 10 minutes till the next bus." So all sorts of cross-platform applications. >> That you never could've envisioned. >> Emer: Never. >> And it's just your point earlier about it's not a zero sum game, you're giving so many ways to create value. >> Emer: Right, right. >> Again, I come back to this notion of education and creativity in the United States education system, so unattainable for so many people, and that's a real concern, and you're seeing the middle class get hollowed out. I think the stat is, the average wage in the United States was 55,000 in 1999, it's 50,000 today. The political campaigns are obviously picking at that scab. What's the climate like in Europe from that standpoint? >> In terms of education? >> No, just in terms of, yes, the education, middle class getting hollowed out, the sentiment around that. >> I don't think people are up to speed with that yet, I really don't think that they're aware of the scale. I think when they think robots or automation, they don't really think software. They think robots like there were in the movies, that would come, as I say, and do those jobs nobody wanted. But not like software. So when I say to them, look, E-discovery software, when it's applied retrospectively, what it shows is that human lawyers are only 60% accurate compared to it. Now, that's a no-brainer, right? If software is 100% accurate, I'm going to use the software. And the ratio difference is 1 to 500. Where you needed 500 lawyers before you need 1. So I don't think people are across the scale of change. >> But it's interesting, you're flying to Heathrow, you fly in and out, you're dealing with a kiosk. You drive out, the billboards are all electronic. There aren't guys doing this anymore. So it's tangible. >> And I think, to your point about education, I'm not as familiar with the education system in the US, but I certainly think, in Europe and in the UK, the education system is not capable of dealing even with the latest digital natives. They're still structuring their classrooms in the same way. These kids, you know-- >> John: They have missed the line with the technology. >> Absolutely. >> So reading, writing and arithmetic, fine. And the cost of education is maybe acceptable. But they may be teaching the wrong thing. >> Asynchronous non-linear, is the thing. >> There's a wonderful example of an Indian academic called Sugata Mitra, who has a fabulous project called a Hole in the Wall. And he goes to non-English speaking little Indian villages, and he builds a computer, and he puts a roof over it so only the children can do it. They don't speak English. And he came back, and he leaves a little bit of stuff they have to get around before they can play a game. And he came back six months later, and he said to them, "What did you think?" And one of the children said, "We need a faster CPU and a better mouse." Now, his point is self-learning, once you have access to technology, is amazing, and I think we have to start-- >> Same thing with the non-linear consumption, asynchronous, all this, the API economy enabling new kinds of expectation and opportunities. >> And it was interesting because the example, some UK schools tried to follow his example. And six months later, they rang him up and they said, "It's not working," and he said, "What did you do?" And they said, "Well, we got every kid a laptop." He said, "That's not the point." The point was putting a scarce resource that the children had to collaborate over. So in order to get to the game, they had figure out certain things. >> I think you're right on some of these (mumbles) that no one's talking about. And Dave and I are very passionate on this, and we're actually investing in a whole new e-learning concept. But it's not about doing that laptop thing or putting courseware online. That's old workflow in a new model. Come on, old wine in a new bottle. So that's interesting. I want to get your thoughts, so a personal question to end this segment. What are you passionate about now, what are you working, outside of the venture, which is exciting. You have a lot of background going back to technology entrepreneurship, public policy, and you're in the front lines now, thought leading on this whole new wide open sea of opportunity, confusion, enabling it. What are you passionate about, what are you working on? Share with the folks that are watching. >> So one of the main things we're trying to do. I work as an associate with Ernst & Young in London. And we've been having discussions over the past couple of months around techno ethics, and I've basically said, "Look, let's see if we can get EY "to build to build an EY good governance index." Like, what does good governance look like in this space, a massively complex area, but what I would love is if people would collaborate with us on that. If we could help to draw up an ethical framework that would convene the technology industry around some ethical good governance issues. So that's what I'm going to be working on as hard as I can over the next while, to try and get as much collaboration from the community, because I think we'd be so much more powerful if the technology industry was to say, "Yeah, let's try and do this better "rather than waiting for regulation," which will come, but will be too clunky and not fit for purpose. >> And which new technology that's emerging do you get most excited about? >> Hmm. Drones. (laughter) >> How about anything with bitcoin, block chains? >> Absolutely, absolutely, block chain. Yeah, block chain, you have to say, yeah. I think, 'cause bitcoin, you know, it's worth 20 p today, it's worth 200,000 tomorrow. >> Dave: Yeah, but block chain. >> Right, right. I mean, that is incredible potentiality. >> New terms like federated, that's not a new term, but federation, universal, unification. These are the themes right now. >> Emer: Well, it's like the road's been coated, isn't it? And we don't know where it's going to go. What a time we live in, right? >> Emer Coleman, thank you so much for spending your time and joining us on theCUBE here, we really appreciate the conversation. Thanks for sharing that great insight here on theCUBE, thank you. It's theCUBE, we are live here in Dublin, Ireland. I'm John Furrier with Dave Vellante. We'll we right back with more SiliconANGLEs, theCUBE and extracting the signal from the noise after this short break. (bright music)