>>The cube at IBM. Impact 2014 is brought to you by headline sponsor. IBM. Here are your hosts, John furrier and Paul Gillin. >>Hey, welcome back everyone. This is Silicon angle's the cube. It's our flagship program. We go out to the events district as soon from the noise. We're ending out day two of two days of wall to wall coverage with myself and Paul Galen. Uh, 10 to six 30 every day. I'm just, we'll take as much as we can just to get the data. Share that with you. Restrict the signal from the noise. I'm John furrier the bonus look at angle Miko is Paul Gilliam and our special guests, Holger Mueller, Mueller from constellation research analyst covering the space. Ray Wang was here earlier. You've been here for the duration. Um, we're going to break down the event. We'll do a wrap up here. Uh, we have huge impact event for 9,000 people. Uh, Paul, I want to go to you first and get your take on just the past two days. And we've got a lot of Kool-Aid injection attempts for Kool-Aid injection, but IBM people were very, very candid. I mean, I didn't find it, uh, very forceful at all from IBM. They're pragmatic. What's your thoughts on it? >>I think pragmatism is, is what I take away, John, if it gets a good, that's a good word for it. Uh, what I saw was a, uh, not a blockbuster. Uh, there was not a lot of, of, uh, of hype and overstatement about what the company was doing. I was impressed with Steve mills, but our interview with him yesterday, we asked about blockbuster acquisitions and he said basically, why, why, I mean, why should we take on a big acquisition that is going to create a headache, uh, for us in integrating into your organization? Let's focus on the spots where we have gaps and let's fill those. And that's really what they've, you know, they really have put their money where their mouth is and doing these 150 or more acquisitions over the last, uh, three or four years. Um, I think that the, the one question that I would have, I don't think there's any doubt about IBM's commitment to cloud as the future about their investment in big data analytics. They certainly have put their money where their mouth is. They're over $25 billion invested in big data analytics. One question I have coming out of this conference is about power and about the decision to exit the x86 market and really create confusion in a part of their business partners, their customers about about how they're going to fill that gap and where are they going to go for their actually needs and the power. Clearly power eight clearly is the future. It's the will fill that role in the IBM portfolio, but they've got to act fast. >>Do you think there's a ripple effect then so that that move I'll see cause a ripple effect in their ecosystem? >>Well, I was talking to a, I've talked to two IBM partners today, fairly large IBM partners and both of them have expressed that their customers are suffering some whiplash right now because all of a sudden the x86 option from IBM has gone away. And so it's frozen there. Their purchasing process and some of them are going to HP, some of them are looking at other providers. Um, I don't think IBM really has has told a coherent story to the markets yet about how >>and power's new. So they've got to prop that up. So you, so you're saying is okay, HP is going to get some new sales out of this, so frozen the for IBM and yet the power story's probably not clear. Is that what you're hearing? >>I don't think the power story is clear. I mean certainly it was news to me that IBM is taking on Intel at the, at this event and I was surprised that, that, >>that that was a surprise. Hold on, I've got to go to you because we've been sitting here the Cuban, we've been having all the execs come here and we've been getting briefed here in the cube. Shared that with the audience. You've been out on the ground, we've bumped into you guys, all, all the other analysts and all the briefings you've been in, the private sessions you've been in the rooms you've been, you've been, you've been out, out in the trenches there. What have you, what are you finding, what have you been hearing and what are the, some of the soundbites that you could share with the audience? It's not the classic God, Yemen, what are the differences? >>The Austin executives in cloud pedal, can you give me your body language? He had impact one year ago because they didn't have self layer at a time, didn't want to immediately actionable to do something involving what? A difference things. What in itself is fine, but I agree with what you said before is the messaging is they don't tell the customers, here's where we are right now. Take you by the hand. It's going to be from your door. And there's something called VMs. >>So it's very interesting. I mean I would consider IBM finalized the acquisition only last July. It's only been nine months since was acquired. Everything is software now. It leads me to think of who acquired who IBM acquired a software or did soflar actually acquire IBM because it seems to, SoftLayer is so strategic. IBM's cloud strategy going forward. >>Very strategic. I think it's probably why most transformative seemed like the Nexans agenda. And you've heard me say assault on a single thing. who makes it seven or eight weeks ago? It's moving very far. >>What do you think about the social business? Is that hanging together, that story? Hang on. It's obviously relevant direction. It's kind of a smarter planet positioning. Certainly businesses will be social. Are you seeing any meat on the bone there? On the collaboration side, >>one of the weakest parts, they have to be built again. Those again, they also have an additional for HR, which was this position, this stuff. It's definitely something which gives different change. >>I have to say, John, I was struck by the lack of discussion of social business in the opening keynote in particular a mobile mobile, big data. I mean that that came across very clear, but I've been accustomed to hearing that the social business rugby, they didn't, it didn't come out of this conference. >>Yeah. I mean my take on that was, is that >>I think it's pretty late. I don't think there's a lot of meat in the bone with the social, and I'll tell you why. I think it's like it's like the destination everyone wants to go to, but there's no really engine yet. Right. I think there's a lot of bicycle riding when they need a car. Right? So the infrastructure is just not is too embryonic, if you will. A lot of manual stuff going on. Even the analytics and you know you're seeing in the leaderboard here in the social media side and big data analytics. Certainly there are some core engine parts around IBM, but that social engine, I just don't see it happening. You risk requires a new kind of automation. It's got some real times, but I think that this is some, some nice bright spots. I love the streams. I love this zone's concept that we heard from Watson foundations. >>I think that is something that they need to pull out the war chest there and bring that front and center. I think the thinking about data as zones is really compelling and then I'll see mobile, they've got all the messaging on that and to give IBM to the benefit of the doubt. I mean they have a story now that they have a revenue generating story with cloud and with big data and social was never a revenue generating story. That's a software story. It's not big. It's not big dollars. And they've got something now that really they're really can drive. >>I'll tell you Chris Kristin from mobile first. She was very impressive and, and I'll tell you that social is being worked on. So I put the people are getting it. I mean IBM 100% gets social. I think the, the, it's not a gimmick to them. It's not like, Oh, we got some social media stuff. I think in the DNA of their soul, they, they come from that background of social. So I give them high marks on that. I just don't see the engine yet. I'm looking for analytics. I'm looking for a couple of eight cylinders. I just don't see it yet. You know, the engine, the engines, lupus and she wants to build the next generation of education. Big data, tons of mobile as the shoulder equivalent to social. I'm skeptical. I'm skeptical on Bloomix. I'll tell you why. I'm not skeptical. I shouldn't say that. >>It's going to get some plane mail for that. Okay. I'll say I'll see what's out there. I'll say it. I'm skeptical of Blumix because it could be a Wright brothers situation. Okay, look, I'm wrong guys building the wrong airplane. So the question is they might be on the wrong side of history if they don't watch the open source foundations because here's the problem. I have a blue mix, gets rushed to the market. Certainly IBM has got muscle solutions together. No doubt debting on cloud Foundry is really a risk and although people are pumping it up and it's got some momentum, they don't have a big community, they have a lot of marketing behind it and I know Jane's Wars over there is doing a great job and I'm Josh McKinsey over there with piston cloud. It'll behind it. It has all the elements of open collaboration and architecture or collaboration. However, if it's not a done deal yet in my mind, so that's a, that is a risk factor in my my mind. >>We've met a number of amazing, maybe you can help to do, to put these in order, a number of new concepts out there. We've got Bloomex the soft player, and we've got the marketplace, and these are all three concepts that approval, which is a subset of which, what's the hierarchy of these different platforms? >>That's hopefully, that's definitely at the bottom. The gives >>us visibility. You talk about the CIO and CSI all the time. Something you securities on every stupid LCO one on OCS and the marketplace. Basically naming the applications. Who would folded? IBM. IBM would have to meet opensource platform as a service. >>Well, it's not, even though it's not even open source and doing a deal with about foundries, so, so they've got, I think they're going in the middle. Where's their angle on that? But again, I like, again, the developer story's good, the people are solid. So I think it's not a fail of my, in my mind that all the messaging is great. But you know, we went to red hat summit, you know, they have a very active community, multiple generations in the data center, in the Indiana prize with Linux and, and open, you know, they're open, open shift is interesting. It's got traction and it's got legit traction. So that's one area. The other area I liked with Steve mills was he's very candid about this turf. They're staking out. Clearly the cloud game is up, is there is hardcore for them and in the IBM flavor enterprise cloud, they want to win the enterprise cloud. They clearly see Amazon, they see Amazon and its rhetoric and Grant's narrative and rhetoric against Amazon was interesting saying that there's more links on SoftLayer and Amazon. Now if you count links, then I think that number is skewed. So it's, you know, there's still a little bit of gamification going to have to dig into that. I didn't want to call him out on that, but know there's also a hosting business versus, you know, cloud parse the numbers. But what's your take on Amazon soft layer kind of comparison. >>It's, it's fundamentally different, right? Mustn't all shows everything. Why did see retailers moves is what to entirely use this software, gives them that visibility machine, this accommodation more conservatively knowing that I buy them, I can see that I can even go and physically touch that machine and I can only did the slowly into any cloud virtualization shed everything. >>Oh, Paul, I gotta say my favorite interview and I want to get your take on this. It was a Grady food. She was sat down with us and talk with us earlier today. IBM fell up, walks on water with an IBM Aussie legend in the computer industry. Just riveting conversation. I mean, it was really just getting started. I mean, it felt like we were like, you know, going into cruising altitude and then he just walked away. So they w what's your take on that conversation? >>Well, I mean, certainly he, uh, the gritty boujee interview, he gave us the best story of, of the two days, which is, uh, they're being in the hospital for open heart surgery, looking up, seeing the equipment, and it's going to be used to go into his chest and open his heart and knowing that he knows the people who program that, that equipment and they programmed it using a methodology that he invented. Uh, that, that, that's a remarkable story. But I think, uh, uh, the fact that that a great igloo can have a job at a company like IBM is a tribute to IBM. The fact that they can employ people like that who don't have a hard revenue responsibility. He's not a P. and. L, he's just, he's just a genius and he's a legend and he's an IBM to its crude, finds a place for people like that all throughout his organization. >>And that's why they never lost their soul in my opinion. You look at what HP and IBM, you know, IBM had a lot of reorganizations, a lot of pivots, so to speak, a lot of battleship that's turned this in way. But you know, for the most part they kept their R and D culture. >>But there's an interesting analogy too. Do you remember the case methodology was mutual support of them within the finance language that you mailed something because it was all about images, right? You would use this, this methodology, different vendors that were prior to the transport itself. Then I've yet to that credit, bring it together. bring and did a great service to all for software engineering. And maybe it's the same thing at the end, can play around diversity. >>You've got to give IBM process a great point. Earlier we, Steve mills made a similar reference around, it wasn't animosity, it was more of Hey, we've helped make Intel a big business, but the PC revolution, you know, where, what's in it for us? Right? You know, where's our, you know, help us out, throw us a bone. Or you know, you say you yell to Microsoft to go of course with the licensing fee with Gates, but this is the point, the unification story and with grays here, you know IBM has some real good cultural, you know industry Goodwill, you agree >>true North for IBM is the Antal quest customer. They'll do what's right where the money and the budget of the enterprise customers and press most want compatibility. They don't want to have staff, of course they want to have investment protection >>guys. I'd be able to do a good job of defining that as their cloud strategy that clearly are not going head to head with Amazon. It's a hybrid cloud strategy. They want to, they see the enterprise customers that legacy as as an asset and it's something they want to build on. Of course the risk of that is that Amazon right now is the pure play. It has all the momentum. It has all the buzz and and being tied to a legacy is not always the greatest thing in this industry, but from a practical revenue generating standpoint, it's pretty good. >>Hey guys, let's go down and wrap up here and get your final thoughts on the event. Um, and let's just go by the numbers, kind of the key things that IBM was promoting and then our kind of scorecard on kind of where they, where they kind of played out and new things that popped out of the woodwork that got your attention. You see the PO, the power systems thing was big on their messaging. Um, the big data story continues to be part of it. Blue mix central to the operations and the openness. You had a lot of open, open openness in their messaging and for the most part that's pretty much it. Um, well Watson, yeah, continue. Agents got up to Watson. >>Wow. A lot of news still to come out of Watson I think in many ways that is their, is their ACE in the hole and then that is their diamond. Any other thoughts? >>Well, what I missed is, which I think sets IBM apart from this vision, which is the idea of the API. Everybody else at that pure name stops the platform or says, I'm going to build like the org, I'm going to build you. That's a clear differentiator on the IBM side, which you still have to build part. They still have to figure out granularity surface that sets them apart that they have to give one. >>Yeah, and I think I give him an a plus on messaging. I think they're on all the right fault lines on the tectonic shifts that we're seeing. Everyone, I asked every every guest interview, what's the game changing moment? Why is it so important? And almost consistently the answers were, you know, we're living in a time of fast change data, you know, efficiency spare or you're going to be left behind. This is the confluence of all these trends, these fall lines. So I think IBM is sitting on these fall lines. Now the question is how fast can they cobbled together the tooling from the machineries that they have built over the years. Going back to the mainframe anniversary, it's out there. A lot of acquisitions, but, but so far the story and the story >>take the customer by the hand. That's the main challenge. I see. This wasn't often we do in Mexico, they want zero due to two times or they're chilling their conferences. It's the customer event and you know, and it's 9,000 people somehow have to do something to just show, right? So why is my wave from like distinguished so forth and so and so into? Well Lou mentioned, sure for the cloud, but how do we get there, right? What can we use, what am I SS and leverage? How do I call >>guys, really appreciate the commentary. Uh, this is going to be a wrap for us when just do a shout out to Matt, Greg and Patrick here doing a great job with the production here in the cube team and we have another cube team actually doing a simultaneous cube up in San Francisco service. Now you guys have done a great job here. And also shout out to Bert Latta Moore who's been doing a great job of live tweeting and help moderate the proud show, which was really a huge success and a great crowd chat this time. Hopefully we'll get some more influencers thought leaders in there for the next event and of course want to thank Paul Gillen for being an amazing cohost on this trip. Uh, I thought the questions and the and the cadence was fantastic. The guests were happy and hold there. Thank you for coming in on our wrap up. >>Really appreciate it. Constellation research. Uh, this is the cube. We are wrapping it up here at the IBM impact event here live in Las Vegas. It's the cube John furrier with Paul Gillen saying goodbye and see it. Our next event and stay tuned if it's look at angel dot DV cause we have continuous coverage of service now and tomorrow we will be broadcasting and commentating on the Facebook developer conference in San Francisco. We're running here, Mark Zuckerberg and all Facebook's developers and all their developer programs rolling out. So watch SiliconANGLE TV for that as well. Again, the cube is growing with thanks to you watching and thanks to all of our friends in the industry. Thanks for watching..

>>The cube at IBM. Impact 2014 is brought to you by headline sponsor. IBM. Here are your hosts, John furrier and Paul Gillin. Okay, welcome back. Everyone live in Las Vegas at IBM impact. This is the cube, our flagship program. We go out to the events, instruct us to live in the noise. I'm John Ferrari, the founder of SiliconANGLE Joe, my close Paul Gillen. And our next special guest is great bushes as a legend in the software development community. And then she went to st this school in Santa Barbara. My son goes there, he's a freshman, but there's a whole nother conversation. Um, welcome to the cube. Thank you. Uh, one of the things we really exciting about when we get all the IBM guys get the messaging out, you know, the IBM talk, but the groundbreaking work around, um, computer software where hardware is now exploding and capability, big data's instrumentation of data. >>Um, take us to a conversation around cognitive computing, the future of humanity, society, the societal changes that are happening. There's a huge, uh, intersection between computer science and social science. Something that's our tagline for Silicon angle. And so we are passionate about. So I want to, I just want to get your take on that and, and tell about some of the work you're doing at IBM. Um, what does all this, where's all this leading to? Where is this unlimited compute capacity, the mainframe in the cloud, big data instrumentation, indexing, human thought, um, fit, Fitbit's wearable computers, um, the sensors, internet of things. This all taking us in the direction. What's your vision? There are three things that I think are inevitable and they're irreversible, that have unintended consequences, consequences that, you know, we can't, we have to attend to and they will be in our face eventually. >>The first of these is the growth of computational power in ways we've only begun to see. The second is the development of systems that never forget with storage beyond even our expectations now. And the third is a pervasive connectivity such that we see the foundations for not just millions of devices, but billions upon billions of devices. Those three trends appear to be where technology is heading. And yet if you follow those trends out, one has to ask. The question is you begin to, what are the implications for us as humans? Um, I think that the net of those is an interesting question indeed to put in a personal blog. My wife and I are developing a documentary or the computer history with the computer history museum for public television on that very topic, looking at how computing intersects with the human experience. So we're seeing those changes in every aspect of it too, that I'll dwell upon here, which I think are germane to this particular conference are some of the ethical and moral implications. >>And second, what the implications are for cognitive systems. On the latter case we saw on the news, I guess it was today or yesterday, there's a foundation led by the Gates foundation. It's been looking at collecting data for kids in various schools. A number of States set up for it. But as they begin to realize what the implications of aggregating that information were for the privacy of that child, the parents became, became cognizant of the fact that, wow, we're disclosing things for which there can be identification of the kid in ways that maybe we wouldn't want to do that. So I think the explosion of big data and explosion of computational power has a lot of us as a society to begin asking those questions, what are the limits of ownership and the rights of that kind of information. And that's a dialogue that will continue on in the cognitive space. >>It kind of follows on because one of the problems of big data, and it's not just you know, big, big data, but like you see in at CERN and the like, but also these problems of aggregation of data, there are, there are such an accumulation information at such a speed in ways that an individual human cannot begin to reason about it in reasonable ways. Thus was born. What we did with Watson a few years ago, Watson jeopardy. I think the most important thing that the Watson jeopardy experience led us to realize is that theory is an architectural framework upon which we can do many interesting reasoning things. And now that Watson has moved from research into the Watson group, we're seeing that expand out in so many domains. So the journey is really just beginning as we take what we can know to do in reason with automated systems and apply it to these large data systems. >>It's going to be a conversation we're going to have for a few generations. You were beginning to see, I mean computing has moved beyond the, the, the role of automate or of automating rote manual tasks. We're seeing, uh, it's been, uh, I've seen forecast of these. Most of the jobs that will be automated out of existence in the next 20 years will be, will be, uh, knowledge jobs and uh, even one journalism professor of forecasting, the 80% of journalism jobs will go away and be replaced by computer, uh, over the next couple of decades. Is this something for people to fear? I'm not certain fear will do us any good, especially if the change like that is inevitable. Fear doesn't help. But I think that what will help is an understanding as to where those kinds of software systems will impact various jobs and how we as individuals should relate to them. >>We as a society, we as individuals in many ways are slowly surrendering ourselves to computing technology. And what describe is one particular domain for that. There's been tremendous debate in the economic and business community as to whether or not computing has impacted the jobs market. I'm not an economist, I'm a computer scientist, but I can certainly say from my input inside perspective, I see that transformational shift and I see that what we're doing is radically going to change the job market. There was, you know, if you'd go back to the Victorian age where people were, were looking for a future in which they had more leisure time because we'd have these devices to give us, you know, free us up for the mundane. We're there. And yet the reality is that we now have so many things that required our time before. It means yours in a way, not enough work to go around. >>And that's a very different shift than I think what anyone anticipated back to the beginnings of the industrial age. We're coming to grips with that. Therefore, I say this, don't fear it, but begin to understand those areas where we as humans provide unique value that the automated systems never will. And then ask ourselves the question, where can we as individuals continue to add that creativity and value because there and then we can view these machines as our companions in that journey. Great. You want to, I want to ask you about, um, the role, I mean the humans is great message. I mean that's the, they're driving the car here, but I want to talk about something around the humanization piece. You mentioned, um, there's a lot of conversations around computer science does a discipline which, um, the old generation when a hundred computer science school was, it was code architecture. >>But now computer science is literally mainstreams. There's general interest, hence why we built this cube operation to share signal from the noise around computer science. So there's also been a discussion around women in tech tolerance and different opinions and views, freedom of speech, if you will, and sensors if everything's measured, politically correctness. All of this is now kind of being fully transparent, so, so let's say the women in tech issue and also kids growing up who have an affinity towards computer science but may not know us. I want to ask you the question. With all that kind of as backdrop, computer science as a discipline, how is it going to evolve in this space? What are some of those things for the future generation? For the, my son who's in sixth grade, my son's a freshman in college and then in between. Is it just traditional sciences? >>What are some of the things that you see and it's not just so much coding and running Java or objective C? I wish you'd asked me some questions about some really deep topics. I mean, gosh, these are, these are, I'm sorry. It's about the kids. In the early days of the telephone, phone, telephones were a very special thing. Not everybody had them and it was predicted that as the telephone networks grew, we were going to need to have many, many more telephone operators. What happened is that we all became, so the very nature of telephony changed so that now I as an individual have the power to reach out and do the connection that had to be done by a human. A similar phenomenon I think is happening in computing that it is moved itself into the interstitial spaces of our world such that it's no longer a special thing out there. We used to speak of the programming priesthood in the 60s where I lost my thing here. Hang on. >>Here we go. I think we're good. We're good. I'm a software guy. I don't do hardware so my body rejects hardware. So we're moving in a place where computing very much is, is part of the interstitial spaces of our world. This has led to where I think the generation after us, cause our, our median age is, let me check. It's probably above 20, just guessing here. Uh, a seven. I think you're still seven. Uh, we're moving to a stage where the notion of computational thinking becomes an important skill that everyone must have. My wife loves to take pictures of people along the beach, beautiful sunset, whales jumping and the family's sitting there and it did it again. My body's rejecting this device. Clearly I have the wrong shape. i-Ready got it. Yeah. There we go. Uh, taking pictures of families who are seeing all these things and they're, they're very, with their heads in their iPhones and their tablets and they're so wedded to that technology. >>We often see, you know, kids going by and in strollers and they've got an iPad in front of them looking at something. So we have a generation that's growing up, uh, knowing how to swipe and knowing how to use these devices. It's part of their very world. It's, it's difficult for me to relate to that cause I didn't grow up in that kind of environment. But that's the environment after us. So the question I think you're generally asking is what does one need to know to live in that kind of world? And I think it says notions of computational thinking. It's an idea that's come out of uh, the folks at Carnegie Mellon university, which asks the question, what are some of the basic skills we need to know? Well, you need to know some things about what an algorithm is and a little bit behind, you know, behind the screen itself. >>One of the things we're trying to do with the documentary is opening the curtain behind just the windows you say and ask the question, how do these things actually work because some degree of understanding to that will be essential for anyone moving into, into, into life. Um, you talked about women in tech in particular. It is an important question and I think that, uh, I worked with many women side by side in the things that I do. And you know, frankly it saddens me to see the way our educational system in a way back to middle school produces a bias that pushes young women out of this society. So I'm not certain that it's a bias, it's built into computing, but it's a bias built in to culture. It's bias built into our educational system. And that obviously has to change because computing, you know, knows no gender or religious or sexual orientation boundaries. >>It's just part of our society. Now. I do want to, everyone needs to contribute. I'm sorry. I do want to ask you about software development since you're devoted your career to a couple of things about to defining, uh, architectures and disciplines and software development. We're seeing software development now as epitomized by Facebook, perhaps moving to much more of a fail fast mentality. Uh, try it. Put it out there. If it breaks, it's okay. No lives were lost. Uh, pull it back in and we'll try it again. Is this, is there a risk in, in this new approach to software? So many things here are first, is it a new approach? No, it's part of the agile process that we've been talking about for well over a decade, if not 15 years or so. You must remember that it's dangerous to generalize upon a particular development paradigm that's applied in one space that apply to all others. >>With Facebook in general, nobody, no one's life depends upon it. And so there are things that one can do that are simplifying assumptions. If I apply that same technique to the dialysis machine, to the avionics of a triple seven, a simple fly, you know, so one must be careful to generalize those kinds of approaches to every place. It depends upon the domain, depends upon the development culture. Ultimately depends upon the risk profile that would lead you to high ceremony or low ceremony approaches. Do you have greater confidence in the software that you see being developed for mission critical applications today than you did 10 years ago? Absolutely. In fact, I'll tell you a quick story and I to know we need to wind down. I had an elective open heart surgery or a few years ago elective because every male in my family died of an aneurysm. They are an aneurism. >>So I went in and got checked and indeed I had an aneurysm developing as well. So we had, you know, hi my heart ripped open and then dealt with before it would burst on me. I remember laying there in the, in the, uh, in the CT scan machine looking up and saying, this looks familiar. Oh my God, I know the people that wrote the software where this thing and they use the UML and I realized, Oh this is a good thing. Which is your creation. Yes. Yes. So it's a good thing because I felt confidence in the software that was there because I knew it was intentionally engineered. Great. I want to ask you some society questions around it. And computing. I see green as key and data centers take up a lot of space, right? So obviously we want to get to a smarter data center environment. >>And how do you see the role of software? I see with the cognitive all things you talked about helping businesses build a physical plant, if you will. And is it a shared plan is a Terminus, you seeing open power systems here from IBM, you hear him about the open sources source. Um, what, what does that future look like from your standpoint? May I borrow that cup of tea or coffee? I want to use it as a aid. Let's presume, Oh, it's still warm. Let's say that this is some tea and roughly the energy costs to boil water for a cup of tea is roughly equivalent to the energy costs needed to do a single Google search. Now imagine if I multiply that by a few billion times and you can begin to see the energy costs of some of the infrastructure, which for many are largely invisible. >>Some studies suggest that computing is grown to the place releasing the United States. It's consuming about 10% of our electrical energy production. So by no means is it something we can sweep under the rug. Um, you address I think a fundamental question, which is the hidden costs of computing, which believe people are becoming aware of the meaning. Ask the question also. Where can cognitive systems help us in that regard? Um, we live in, in Maui and there's an interesting phenomenon coming on where there are so many people using solar power, putting into the power grid that the electrical grid companies are losing money because we're generating so much power there. And yet you realize if you begin to instrument the way that people are actually using power down to the level of the homes themselves, then power generation companies can start making much more intelligent decisions about day to day, almost minute to minute power production. >>And that's something that black box analytics would help. But also cognitive systems, which are not really black box analytic systems, they're more learn systems, learning systems can then predict what that might mean for the energy production company. So we're seeing even in those places, the potential of using cognitive systems for, for uh, attending to energy costs in that regard. The future is a lot of possibilities. I know you've got to go, we're getting the hook here big time cause you gotta well we really appreciate it. These are important future decisions that are, we're on track to, to help solve and I really appreciate it. Looking for the documentary anytime table on that, uh, sometime before I die. Great. Thanks for coming on the, we really appreciate this. This SiliconANGLE's we'll be right back with our next guest at to nature. I break.