>> Narrator: From Miami Beach, Florida, it's theCUBE, covering Acronis Global Cyber Summit 2019. Brought to you by Acronis. >> Okay, welcome back everyone. It's theCUBE's two day coverage of Acronis' Global Cyber Summit 2019, here in Miami Beach, at the Fontainebleau Hotel. I'm John Furrier, host of theCUBE. We're with Katya Fisher, Partner Chief and Chief Privacy Officer at Greenspoon Marder. Legal advice is right here on theCUBE, ask her anything. We're going to do a session here. Thanks for coming on, appreciate it. >> Thank you very much, I'm going to have to do the little disclaimer that all lawyers do, which is, nothing here is to be construed as advice. It's just opinions and information only. >> I didn't mean to set you up like that. All kidding aside, you closed for the panel here for Acronis' conference. Obviously, cyber protection's their gig. Data protection, cyber protection. Makes sense, I think that category is evolving from a niche, typical enterprise niche, to a much more holistic view as data becomes you know, critical in the security piece of it. What was on the, what were you guys talking about in the panel? >> Well, so, the first issue that you have to understand is that cyber protection is something that has now become critical for pretty much every individual on the planet, as well as governments. So something that we talked about on the panel today was how governments are actually dealing with incoming cyber threats. Because now, they have to take a look at it from the perspective of, first of all, how they themselves are going to become technologically savvy enough to protect themselves, and to protect their data, but also, in terms of regulation and how to protect citizens. So, that was what the panel discussion was about today. >> On the regulatory front, we've been covering on SiliconANGLE, our journalism site, the innovation balance, is regulatory action helpful or hurtful to innovation? Where is the balance? What is the education needed? What's your thoughts on this, where are we? I mean early stages, where's the progress? What needs to get done? What's your view on the current situation? >> So, I'm an attorney, so my views are perhaps a bit more conservative than some of the technologists you might speak with and some of my clients as well. I think that regulation is, as a general matter, it can be a good thing. And it can be quite necessary. The issues that we see right now, with regard to regulation, I think one of the hottest issues today is with respect to data laws and data privacy laws. And that's obviously something that I think everyone is familiar with. I mean take a look at, in the United States alone. We've seen the city of Baltimore dealing with breaches. We've seen other parts of the government, from the Federal level all the way down to municipalities, dealing with breaches in cyber attacks. We've seen data breaches from banks, Capital One, right? I believe Dunkin' Donuts suffered a breach. Equifax, and then at the same time we've also seen individuals up in arms over companies like 23andMe and Facebook, and how data is used and processed. So data seems to be a very very hot button issue today across the board. So something that we're really thinking about now is, first of all, with respect to the regulatory climate, how to deal with it, not only in the United States, but on a global level, because, when we talk about technology and the internet right, we're in an era of globalization. We're in an era where a lot of these things go across boarders and therefore we have to be mindful of the regulatory regimes in other places. So, I'll give you an example. You might be familiar with the GDPR. So the GDPR is in the European Union. It's been in effect now for the last year and a half, but it affects all my U.S. clients. We still have to take a look at the GDPR because at the end of the day my clients, my firm, might be dealing with foreign companies, foreign individuals, companies that have some sort of nexus in the European Union, et cetera. So because of that, even though the GDPR is a set of regulations specific to the European Union, it becomes extremely important in the context of the United States and globally. At the same time, the GDPR has certain issues that then end up conflicting often times with some of the regulations that we have here in the United States. So, for example, the right to be forgotten is perhaps the most famous clause or part of the GDPR and the right to be forgotten is this concept in the GDPR that an individual can have information erased about him or her in order to protect his or her privacy. The problem is that from a technical's perspective, first of all, it's an issue because it becomes very very difficult to figure out where data is stored, if you're using third-party processors, et cetera. But from a regulatory perspective, the conflict comes in when you take a look at certain U.S. laws. So take a look for example at banking regulations in the United States. Banks have to hold some types of data for seven years and other types of data they can never delete. Right? Lawyers. I am licensed by the New York State Bar Association. Lawyers have their own rules and regulations with regard to how they store data and how they store information. HIPAA, medical records. So, you see these conflicts and there are ways to deal with them appropriately, but it becomes some food for thought. >> So it's complicated. >> It's really complicated >> There's a lot of conflicts. >> Yeah. >> First of all, I talked to a storage guy. He's like data? I don't even know which drive that's on. Storage is not elevated up to the level of state-of-the-art, from a tracking standpoint. So, it's just on the business logic is complicated. I can't imagine that. So, I guess my question to you is that, are you finding that the jurisdictional issue, is it the biggest problem, in terms of crossport and the business side or is the technical underpinnings, that with GDPR's the problem or both? What's your-- >> I mean it's both, right? They're a lot of issues. You're right, it's very complicated. I mean, in the United States we don't have some sort of overarching federal law. There's no cyber protection law in the United States. There's no overarching data protection law. So, even in the U.S. alone, because of federalism, we have HIPAA and we have COPPA which protects children and we have other types of acts, but then we also have state regulations. So, in California you have the California Privacy Act. In New York you have certain regulations with regard to cyber security and you have to deal with this patchwork. So, that becomes something that adds a new layer of complexity and a new layer of issues, as we take a look, even within the U.S. alone, as to how to deal with all of this. And then we start looking at the GDPR and all of this. From a technical perspective. I'm not a technologist, but. >> Katya, let me ask you a question on the (mumbles) and business front. (mumbles) I think one of the things. I'm saying it might or may not be an issue, but I want to get your legal weigh-in on this. >> Katya: Sure. >> It used to be when you started a company, you go to Delaware, very friendly, domicile in Delaware, do some formation there, whether you're a C corp or whatever, that's where we tend to go, raise some money, get some preferred stock, you're in business. >> Is there a shift in where companies with domicile, their entity, or restructure their companies around this complexity? Because, there's two schools of thought. This brute force act, everything coming at you, or you restructure your corporate formation to handle some of the nuances, whether it's I have a Cayman or a Bermuda... whatever's going on in the regulatory regime, whether it's innovative or not. Are people thinking like that? Or, what's your take on it? What's some of the data you're seeing from the field around, restructuring around the problem? >> So, with respect to restructuring, specifically around data laws and data protection laws, I'm not seeing too much of that, simple because of the fact that regulations like the GDPR are just so all-encompassing. With respect to companies setting up in Delaware as opposed to other jurisdictions, those are usually based on two issues, right, two core ones, if I can condense it. One has to do with the court system and how favorable a court system is to the corporation, and the second is taxes. So, a lot of times when you see companies that are doing all of this restructuring, where they're setting up in offshore zones, or et cetera, it's usually because of some sort of a tax benefit. It might be because of the fact that, I don't know, for example, intellectual property. If you have a company that's been licensing IP to the United States, there's a 30% withholding tax when royalties are paid back overseas. So a lot of times when you're looking at an international structuring, you're trying to figure out a jurisdiction that might have a tax treaty with the United States, that will create some sort of an opportunity to get rid of that 30% withholding. So, that's where things usually come into play with regard to taxes and IP. I haven't seen yet, on the side of looking for courts that are more favorable to companies, with respect to data privacy and data protection. I just haven't seen that happen yet because I think that it's too soon. >> How do companies defend themselves against claims that come out of these new relations? I mean GDPR, I've called it the shitstorm when it came out. I never was a big fan of it. It just didn't. I mean, I get the concept, but I kind of understood the technical issues, but let's just say that you're a small growing business and you don't have the army of lawyers or if someone makes a claim on you, I have to defend it. How are companies defending themselves? Do they just shut down? Do they hire you guys? I mean, obviously lawyers need to be involved. But, at some point there's a line of where having a U.S. company and someone consumes my media in Germany and it says, hey I'm a German citizen. You American company, delete my records. How does that work? Do I have to be responsible for that? I mean, what's? >> So, it's really case-by-case basis. First of all, obviously, with regard to what I was talking about earlier, with respect to the fact that there are certain regulations in the U.S. that conflict with GDPR and the right to be forgotten. If you can actually assert a defense and sort of a good reason for why you have to maintain that information, that's step one. Step two is, if it's some complaint that you received, is to delete the person's information. There's an easier way to do it. >> Yeah, just do what they want. >> Just comply with what they want. If somebody wants to be off of a mailing list, take them off the mailing list. The third is, putting in best practices. So, I'm sure a lot of things that people see online, it's always great to go ahead and obtain legal counsel, even if you're consulting with a lawyer just for an hour or two, just to really understand your particular situation. But, take a look at privacy policies online. Take a look at the fact that cookies now have a pop-up whenever you go to a website. I'm sure you've noticed this, right? >> John: Yeah. So, there are little things like this. Think about the fact that there are, what is known as clickwrap agreements. So, usually you have to consent. You have to check a box or uncheck a box with respect to reading privacy policies, being approved for having your email address and contact information somewhere. So, use some common sense. >> So, basically don't ignore the prompt. >> Don't ignore the problem. >> Don't ignore it. Don't stick your head in the sand. It'll bite you. >> Correct. And the thing is, to be honest, for most people, for most small companies, it's not that difficult to comply. When we start talking about mid-size and large businesses, the next level, the next step, obviously beyond hiring attorneys and the like, is try to comply with standards and certifications. For example, there's what is known as ISO standards. Your company can go through the ISO 27001 certification process. I think it costs around approximately $20,000. But, it's an opportunity to go ahead, go through that process, understand how compliant you are, and because you have the certification, you're then able to go to your customers and say, hey, we've been through this, we're certified. >> Yeah. Well, I want to get, Katya, your thoughts, as we wrap up on this segment, around Crypto and Blockchain. Obviously, we're bullish on Blockchain. We think this is a supply chain. (mumbles) Blockchain can be a good force, although some think there's some work needs to be done on the whole energy side of it, which is, we would agree. But, still. I'm not going to make that be a wet blanket of excitement. But cryptocurrency has been fraudulent. It's been. The SCC's been cracking down in the U.S., in the news. Lieber's falling apart, although, I called that separately, but, (laughing) it had nothing to do with that Lieber. It was more of Facebook, but. Telegram. We were talking about that, others. People are getting handcuffed on this stuff. They're really kind of clamping down. But, overseas in Asia, it's still an unregulated, seems to be (mumbles) kind of market. Your advice to clients was to shy away, be careful? >> My advice to clients is as follows. First of all, Blockchain and cryptocurrency are not the same thing. Right? Cryptocurrency is a use case coming out of Blockchain technology. I think that in the United States, the best way to think about it is to understand that the term cryptocurrency, from a regulatory perspective, is actually a misnomer. It's not a currency. It's property. Right? It's an asset. It's digital assets. So, if you think about it the same way that we think of shares in a company, it's actually much easier to become compliant, because, then you can understand that it's going to be subject to U.S. securities laws, just like other securities. It's going to be taxed, just like securities are taxed, which means that it's going to be subject to long and short-term capitol gain, and it's also going to be subject to the other regulatory restrictions that are adherent to securities, both on the federal and state level. >> It's interesting that you mentioned security. The word security. If you look back at the ICO craze, internet coin offerings, crypto offerings, whatever you call it, The people who got whacked the most were the ones that went out as a utility tokens. Not to get nerdy on this, but utility and security are two types of tokens. The ones that went out and raised money as the utility token had no product, raised money using the utility that doesn't exist. That's essentially a security. And, so, no wonder why they're getting slapped. >> They're securities. Look, Bitcoin, different story, because Bitcoin is the closest to being I guess, what we could consider to be truly decentralized, right? And the regulatory climate around Bitcoin is a little bit different from what I'm talking about, with respects to securities laws. Although, from a tax perspective, it's the same. It's taxed as property. It's not taxed the way that foreign currency is taxed. But ultimately, yeah. You had a lot of cowboys who went out, and made a lot of money, and were just breaking the law, and now everyone is shocked when they see what's going on with this cease-and-desist order from the SCC against Telegram, and these other issues. But, none of it is particularly surprising because at the end of the day we have regulations in place, we have a regulatory regime, and most people just chose to ignore it. >> It's interesting how fast the SCC modernized their thinking around this. They really. From a speed standpoint, all government agencies tend to be glacier speed kind of movement. They were pretty fast. I mean, they kind of huddled on this for a couple months and came out with direction. They've been proactive. I got to say. I was usually skeptical of most government organization. I don't think they well inform. In this case, I think the SCC did a good job. >> So, I think that the issue is as follows. You know, Crypto is a very very very small portion of what the SCC deals with, so, they actually paid an inordinate amount of attention to this, and, I think that they did it for a couple of reasons. One is because, you asked me in the beginning of this interview about regulations versus innovation. And, I don't think anyone wants to stifle innovation in America. It's a very interesting technology. It's very interesting ideas, right? No one wants that to go away and no one wants people to stop experimenting and stop dreaming bigger. At the same time, the other issue that we've seen now, especially, not only with the SCC, but with the IRS now getting involved, is the fact that even though this is something very very small, they are very concerned about where the technology could go in the future. The IRS is extremely concerned about erosion of the tax space. So, because of that, it makes a lot of sense for them to pay attention to this very very early on, nip this in the bud, and help guide it back into the right direction. >> I think that's a good balance. Great point. Innovation doesn't want to be stifled at all, absolutely. What's new and exciting for you? Share some personal or business updates in your world. What's going on? What's getting you excited these days, in the field? >> What's getting me excited these days? Well, I have to tell you that one thing that actually has gotten me excited these days is the fact that the Blockchain and cryptocurrency industries have grown up, substantially. And, now we're able to take a look at those industries in tandem with the tech industry at large, because they seem to sort of be going off in a different direction, and now we're taking a look at it, and now you can really see sort of where the areas that things are going to get exciting. I look at my clients and I see the things that they're doing and I'm always excited for them, and I'm always interested to see what new things that they'll innovate, because, again, I'm not a technologist. So, for me, that's a lot of fun. And, in addition to that, I think that other areas are extremely exciting as well. I'm a big fan of Acronis. I'm a big fan of cyber protection issues, data protection, data regulation. I think something that's really interesting in the world of data regulation, that actually has come out of the Blockchain community, in a way, is the notion of data as a personal right, as personal property. So, one of the big things is the idea that now that we've seen these massive data breaches with Facebook and 23andME, and the way that big government, big companies, are using individuals' datas, the idea that if data were to be personal property, it would be used very very differently. And technologists who are using Blockchain technology say that Blockchain technology might actually be able to make that happen. Because if you could have a decentralized Facebook, let's say, people could own their own data and then use that data as they want to and be compensated for it. So, that's really interesting, right-- Yeah, but, if you're just going to use the product, they might as well own their data, right? >> Katya: Exactly. >> Katya, thanks for coming on theCUBE. Thanks for the insight. Great, compelling narrative. Thanks for sharing. >> Sure, thank you very much. >> Appreciate it. I'm John Furrier here on theCUBE, Miami Beach, at the Fontainebleau hotel for Acronis' Global Cyber Summit 2019. We'll be back with more coverage after this short break.

(upbeat music) >> Hello and welcome to theCUBE Conversation. I'm John Furrier here in the Palo Alto Studios, with two great guests, Tara Chklovski, who's the founder and CEO of Iridescent, and Anar Simpson, Global Ambassador of Technovation. Thanks for coming in today. Appreciate moving your schedules around to come in. Thanks for coming to our studio. >> You bet, yeah. >> So Sundar Pichai was at your event. That's the big story this past week. There's has been a Google memo from a low level employee who wrote some things that got the whole world sharking around gender biases, role of women in tech. We do a lot of women in tech as you know in theCUBE, hundreds and hundreds of women over the years, friends, and also smart people. This seem a pretty big moment for you guys. You had an event at Google. Sundar canceled his on-hands meeting to address this, under fear of retaliation and safety, but came to your event on Google Campus, surprising to many. It's written up on Recode and The Verge. Pretty notable. So tell us about what happened. >> So, yeah, this was the 2017 Technovation World Pitch Competition and the awards ceremony. And Sundar came and he talked to a lot of the girls who were presenting their ideas to solve problems in their community, and then he had a little bit of a one-on-one conversation to learn a little bit more about the kinds of problems, their interest in technology entrepreneurship, and then he addressed the crowd of 900 plus supporters, and really emphasized that there's a place for women in technology, and more importantly, for him and Google, that there's a place for these girls at Google. >> Great timing for you guys too. And I want to drill more into what happened but I want to just point out this was a scheduled stop for Sundar in terms of it. You guys have a program called Technovation which was a 2017 World Pitch, folks around, you're the Global Ambassador, take a minute to talk about what Technovation is. Why was it on Google's Campuses? What was it all about? What does Global Ambassador mean? Talk about your mission. >> Right, so Technovation's mission is to empower girls to become technology entrepreneurs and it's much more than just learning how to code. It's really about seeing girls and telling girls that if there's a problem in their community, technology can help them have a very powerful voice. We've been running for eight years and Anar is our Global Ambassador who's helped us grow to more than a hundred countries. Technovation's relationship with Google is eight years long. Google has supported Technovation, was the very first technology company to support Technovation way before any other company saw the potential. And since then, since 2010, Google has provided funding, mentors, spaces, not just across the US but globally. And so this year, it was a year long worth of relationship made with code which is their arm focusing on gender equality. They basically provided funding but made this event possible at Google headquarters. >> Anar talk about the Global Ambassador role you have, and kind of comes down to the question for Tara as well, is it beyond entrepreneurship and beyond coding? I mean talk about specifically what you guys are bringing to folks outside the Silicon Valley. >> Oh sure, so my role as the Global Ambassador for Technovation is really getting to girls all over the world and saying to them you need to be engaged in technology. And what we found, as Tara mentioned, we've been doing this now, I've been doing this now for five years, is that we're building a movement. We're bringing in girls, we're bringing in mentors, we're bringing in companies and governments together to make this a reality for girls in tech careers in their own countries. And I want to go back and address Google's relationship with Technovation a little bit more because this is more of an anecdote. I got into Technovation not willingly. Six years ago I had a start-up, it was called Parallel Earth, and I was working hard at it. And I was using the offices at Mozilla because they allow people to do that, you know people like me to work there. And one day somebody sent me a note, it just came on the internal email system, and they said, "You're a woman, you're in tech, "there's an event going on at Andreessen Horowitz "where the luminaries of the Valley are going to be talking." And so the luminaries were Mary Samayo who was at Google at that time, Freada Kapor Klein, Padma Ashriwurier , and I think that there was two other people. And so we went to this event and we sat in a packed room at Andreessen Horowitz. And these women, the luminaries at the Valley at that time, each one of them stood up and told us their story, and afterwards they fed us hors d'oeuvres and offered us wine. And then they said before you go, we have one to ask of you which is could you sign up to be a mentor for Technovation. And I thought to myself, no, I am like over my head in my own company. I don't even have time for myself. And they asked, be a mentor, it's just two hours a week for 12 weeks. And I thought to myself, oh God, man, I drank their wine, I ate their hors d'oeuvres, I listened to them and now how can I say no? And so I signed up. And it was a stretch for me because what happened at that time, the curriculum was still being delivered by a person. And so I've been assigned to the Google Campus in Mountainview. And somebody in engineering at Google had been able to get a room, a very small conference room. And so for 12 weeks I met this team of girls from Mountainview, and there were other mentors like me, and then there was a whole bunch of girls from Sequoia High School. And John, in that 12 weeks, I was a changed woman. Those five girls, they blossomed under me. When I met them, I said to them, "I'm here, I am a type A, this is a competition." >> "I signed up for the Andreessen Horowitz--" >> Exactly, exactly. "Listen, I got my own star, "but we're going to win, this is a competition." So they just rolled their eyes at me, like, who the heck she is, we don't even want to be here. >> John: They draw the short straw on this one. >> Exactly. But those 12 weeks changed my life. >> John: In what way, what way did it change your life? >> I have a degree in Computer Science. I have a Master's in Communication. I went to Stanford for innovation and entrepreneurship. So I've been in the field for a very long time. And what I saw in terms of the curriculum, what I saw in terms of the mentorship, what I learned about design thinking and being able to create an app, I never had that. When people like me, we go in to a university, and doing computer, we never had that kind of stuff. And I thought, oh my God, if I'd had that, I would be, like, soaring the skies right now. And to have girls who really came to this table with nothing, and you see them becoming graphic designers because they had a little bit of access to Microsoft Paint, someone who has the ability to do PowerPoint, one girl, in my team of five, almost never showed up, she was late, she never came, and then two sessions before the Pitch, she showed up and she realized, have we've gone so far without her. So here's what she did, she took that little graphic that that woman who'd done it in Paint, and she got her mom and they went to some t-shirt shop, and they got that graphic printed. And the next time she came, there were five t-shirts that said the name of our team which was Intoxication Station, and one for me. And then it turns out she's a really good speaker. Who knew? So she almost never came, brought these shirts, was the speaker for the group, and we won the local competition and then the next one, then we placed second in the finals. >> She came in, contributed with a t-shirt, and graced you the back end, won the trust of the group, ended up being the speaker and winning the award. >> Yes, they grew, they literally, you know if you take a time lapse and you see a flower blossom, that's exactly what happened. >> Tara talk about your credentials 'coz you have a Ph.D. >> So I have a, yeah, Bachelor's in Physics, and Master's in Aerospace, and I was in the Ph.D. program in Aerospace but I dropped out because I wanted to start Iridescent. >> That's good. Dropping out of Ph.D. has a good track record. A lot of folks who dropped out of Stanford includes some of the big names we now know. What's some examples during your life when you had those kind of changed moments? >> I think, Iridescent, we are now in our 12th year. Every couple of months it's a changed moment because it's a test of grit. And just believing in yourself because I mean, I started with just an idea and grew it to be an organization that's all over the world. And it doesn't come with just full-hearted focus. A lot of courage is what I've seen. I have also seen how much you are passionate about an idea really swings how the other person is thinking. And so the idea only matters so much, I think, of course, I mean, the track record and everything has to be there, but I think a lot of it depends on your own passion for it, and I've come to realize that passion is maybe proportional to the complexity and the impact of the problem you're trying to solve. So if you're only trying to solve a small problem, you lose interest in two years, right, and maybe that's why, I'm always curious, why do so many start-ups fail after two or three years? It's because maybe you came in not thinking that you're going to change the world, maybe you came in because you wanted to make quick money, or et cetera, whatever. And so I think for me this is my life's work. And if you want to bring more and to represent the communities into innovation. And so it's not something that's going to be solved easily. >> Start-up success and then people working on teams, really is about inclusion and letting things bloom and being ready for anything. That's the greatest feat. Let's get back to the Sundar event that you guys were having. Now this is a good conversation to have because one of the things that came out of the aha that became that memo, really was a conversation publicly. And now it's been polarizing. There's just some kind of a hate, hate kind of mindset with it most of the time. Plenty of stuff in the internet to go read there, but what actually are some good conversations in the industry? What was the conversation like during the event? Because this was in full conversation mode while you guys were having your 2017 World Pitch competition of which he presided over and had a speech to the entrepreneurs. What was it like? What are some of the conversations that were taking place? >> I think the most powerful piece of the whole evening was really the girls walking in and seeing the incredible diversity that we have in this world, right. So we had girls, and mentors, and supporters, from over 30 countries and just them coming and waving the flags, and different faces, and different cultures, all trying to make the world a better place. I mean, it's rare that you see that, using technology. And I think it's very fitting that Silicon Valley is the center of this. But I think there was not one dry eye in the group because you realized the conversation is so much bigger than one company, one country. It is something that affects us as all human beings, and you believing in human potential. So I think seeing these young girls, some of them 10 years old, there was this, I think, maybe the crowd's favorite was these 10-year-old girls from Cambodia who want to improve sort of the lives of these people working in cottage industries, right. And they created an app, like, say, Etsy or something, but focused on Cambodian products, and the courage of these little girls, I think everybody walks away feeling okay there's hope even in the midst of all of this discussion. >> It creates a lightning rod in some ways that hopefully will move on to the substantive conversations. How do you guys feel about what happened as you take this mission forward? You guys are doing some amazing work. And we'll do a segment on that in a minute, but given the landscape now, how do you view this? How are you talking with friends and colleagues and family members around it? Because I certainly had conversations with my friends certainly in the east coast, like, "No, no, that's not the way Silicon Valley is." Google actually is a very cool company. It's not what you think it is. They're very open. They support a lot of great initiatives. And they're candid. And then I go on and explain. It's like a university. So me and Larry have this little ecosystem that they've kind of built the university culture if you will. But it's open and there's things that happened that get misrepresented. That was my take for the folks who don't know Silicon Valley. But what's your take? What do you think about what's happened? >> So this is really, really good that you brought up the university campus, environment of it. So I have two girls, they're both millennials, and they're both in a tech world. And we had this discussion. And here is the perfect answer, right. So one of my daughters, Kat, she said that when she read that, she thought it was basically a gathering of his thoughts. And it was a gathering of his thoughts because he was probably asked to adhere to I&D stuff that's going on, in every company right now, right. And so he was like a little bit of a, wait a second, he wants to sort of, respond to his being asked to go to I&D stuff. And then Katya said, "But you know mom, "it was just a gathering of his thoughts. "And if this is an essay, and it was a poorly written one, "and if I was grading it, I would give him a C minus." Then my older daughter said-- >> John: Oh, she'll give him an F on that one. >> Right. >> John: C minus, she's generous. >> No, because he did. He tried to make it very professional and very academic. And she said but it was a first draft. He didn't proceed to toughen it up, solidify it, find more evidence, have it critic. It was just a gathering of his thoughts and he hasn't gone through the process. Both these girls graduated from Berkeley and so I think they would know what a C paper look like versus an A paper. And then my older daughter said, "And the other thing is, "it's not like "I&D efforts "are actually bad, "but what we're trying to do is "we're trying to condense the time "in which we're trying to get women "at equal peering in the tech world." Now women have never been at equal peering in many professions. There were not enough doctors, lawyers, accountants, you name it, right? Main street, Wall Street has never had equality. And now we're looking at technology and the reason everything just flares up in technology is because we live in today's world, where news and information is available all the time. So there's two things going on. Information is readily available. People can come in to the conversation very quickly. And whenever anything happens in Silicon Valley, the effect is massive because all eyes are on Silicon Valley all the time. So it's a bit of a distorted view. But we have gone through this. It took a long time for women to become astronauts. It took a long time for women to become neurosurgeons. It took a long time for women to become lawyers and dentists. It will take a little bit of time for women to become top technologists. But we're hoping that it'll shorten and things happen quickly in the Valley and we're trying to get that quicker. And so we're seeing a little bit of friction. This is responses from millennials. So for me it was like-- >> John: Interesting perspective. >> Yes, great perspective. And when Sundar said these things at the World Pitch, I was sitting in the second row and every time he said something I would clap really loud. And Todd said, "Why are you being so good?" And I said, "I need to hear that. "I need to her him say that because--" >> John: What did he say that moved you? >> Oh, he just said you have a place in technology. And I said yes. We needed to hear you say that right away, all the time, and especially to these girls, these two 18-year-old girls, and all of the ones that come from a hundred countries that weren't at Google but were listening to the live pitch. And I needed to hear it. I'm a veteran but I needed to hear it because-- >> It's interesting too the narrative that the millennials and certainly the younger kids hear is an echo of what comes down. And, interesting, my son who is 15, at dinner last night said, "Dad, I'm a white male. "What does that mean?" >> Poor guy. >> Then I'm like, oh my God, he's a kid. So, again, things are shifting, they're out of context. Tara your thoughts on how this all evolves and the positive things that folks can do. What's your perspective? >> Yeah, I mean, I think, I had a lot of discussion with my husband yesterday on this because he's a white male, right? And, but also we have two daughters, right. And so there's this whole he for she campaign, right. And that I think like our conversation earlier, the discussion has to be very inclusive and you cannot polarize. And I think I have to be careful because, I mean, my passion is what drives the work because the work is hard, but I have to also remind that, okay, there's a whole another segment of the population that cares, right, and, so I think it's just constantly remembering these kinds of things. I think in terms of what the industry can do, I think the normal thing is that people are doing which is really well, investing lower in the pipeline, investing in young girls, and all of that kind of stuff, and also sort of the inclusion and diversity stuff in the workforce. But I think there are some other segments, other industries that we can learn from, and I think one very unique place is actually the aviation industry. But the experimental aircraft, so we're just aviation enthusiasts, right. And so they have this gathering, yearly annual gathering, and 600,000 people come from all over the world, the thing that makes it unique and there's almost equal representation, there are two things that make it very unique. First is the family affair. And I think the tech industry has done a very good job, sort of convening these developer conferences but they are closed and most of them are 100% male, right? I think there could be something there where the, again much more than a company, that the industry has to do. And to make it maybe not commercial but do it as a fun family gathering and not in Silicon Valley. And then I think the second would be to actually lean on the veterans of the industry to share their passion with the young ones. And I think one of the problems of technology is that it's moved so fast that it has become very abstract. And nothing is very hands on. If you open up something, you will not understand anything. And so what the aviation industry had done really well is to showcase the core fundamental principles of how these things work using the old airplanes, old engines, combustion engines. But you can see how things work, right, and so-- >> John: It's like kindergarten. >> Exactly, exactly, start that way and then you can go into the more complex. But I think there's a role for the veterans of the tech world to play here. And I think it's not just sort of gender but it's also maybe age and making it much more about the family, rather than just the developer in the family. >> Tara and Anar, you guys are inspiration. Thanks for taking the time. And I've had the, my age, luxury of spending nine years at Hewlett Packard company before, maybe these early 90s when Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard were around. And one of the things that really influenced me, and I think this is something that I see a positive light coming in this industry, to your point, about so much changes, is that we seem to be going back to a crowd that wants to see respect for the individuals, citizenship. These were company values at Hewlett Packard when I was there that I always remembered was unique. Hey, you can have differences but if you have respect for the individual, and you have the citizenship mindset, that seems to have been lost in tech, and with this whole movement you're seeing, win at all cost, being an asshole, what you going to do to be a CEO, or flip it fast, or programs. So it became a very selfish environment. It seems to be shifting that way with this conversation. Your thoughts? >> So I have to say doing a start-up is not easy. Getting successful in this word is not easy. Shaking the status quo is not easy. So I have to say that the same people and we're not going to name names, but the same people who are very arrogant and have little respect for the laws and rules, they have given us products that are changing people's lives. There is no question about it. With that, they're a provider. With that, they're sort of "I don't care, I'm just going to go over you "if you don't comply with me." A lot of ride sharing, wouldn't even have happened. And to me when you provide employment, when you provide alternative services, when you provide something that takes away the way things were, I see that as a plus, okay. I think what we're seeing is that's needed to a certain extent, and then you realized, okay, now we have to get back to growing it and working it. And if you keep going in that mode, you probably won't succeed. >> So being tough and determined and having grit is what you need to breakthrough those walls as a start-up. You don't need to be necessarily a jerk. But your point is if you're creating value. >> If you're creating value, and that sometimes you actually have to be a jerk because there are a very few brave, non-jerk people who have gone against big unions and big monopolies, right. I would not be able to go against the taxi commission. You need somebody who's a complete a-hole to do that. And he did that and it made a difference. He doesn't have to continue to do that and that's-- >> There was a meme going around the internet, "If you want to make friends, sell ice cream." >> Exactly. >> So you can't always win friends when you're pioneering. >> Right, right. There is a balance and maybe we've fostered the fact that you need to be that attitude for everything and that's not true. The pendulum shifted a bit too much. But I think that we shouldn't scorn them because really they have made a difference. Let everybody get back to-- >> It's a tough world out there to survive. And you have to have that kind of sharp elbows to make things happen. But it's the value your providing, it's how you do it. >> Exactly. >> Well thanks so much guys for coming up. Appreciate to spend the time to talk about your awesome event at 2017 World Pitch as part of Technovation where Sundar represented Google in your great program with young girls go over some tech books. Thanks for sharing. This is CUBE conversation here at Palo Alto. I'm John Furrier. Thanks for watching. (upbeat music)