>> Narrator: From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, connecting with thought leaders all around the world, this is a CUBE conversation. >> Hello everyone, welcome to this special CUBE interview. We are here at theCUBE Virtual covering AWS Summit Virtual Online. This is Amazon's Summits that they normally do all around the world. They're doing them now virtually. We are here in the Palo Alto COVID-19 quarantine crew getting all the interviews here with a special guest, Vice President of Machine Learning, we have Swami, CUBE Alumni, who's been involved in not only the machine learning, but all of the major activity around AWS around how machine learning's evolved, and all the services around machine learning workflows from transcribe, recognition, you name it. Swami, you've been at the helm for many years, and we've also chatted about that before. Welcome to the virtual CUBE covering AWS Summit. >> Hey, pleasure to be here, John. >> Great to see you. I know times are tough. Everything okay at Amazon? You guys are certainly cloud scaled, not too unfamiliar of working remotely. You do a lot of travel, but what's it like now for you guys right now? >> We're actually doing well. We have been I mean, this many of, we are working hard to make sure we continue to serve our customers. Even from their site, we have done, yeah, we had taken measures to prepare, and we are confident that we will be able to meet customer demands per capacity during this time. So we're also helping customers to react quickly and nimbly, current challenges, yeah. Various examples from amazing startups working in this area to reorganize themselves to serve customer. We can talk about that common layer. >> Large scale, you guys have done a great job and fun watching and chronicling the journey of AWS, as it now goes to a whole 'nother level with the post pandemic were expecting even more surge in everything from VPNs, workspaces, you name it, and all these workloads are going to be under a lot of pressure to do more and more value. You've been at the heart of one of the key areas, which is the tooling, and the scale around machine learning workflows. And this is where customers are really trying to figure out what are the adequate tools? How do my teams effectively deploy machine learning? Because now, more than ever, the data is going to start flowing in as virtualization, if you will, of life, is happening. We're going to be in a hybrid world with life. We're going to be online most of the time. And I think COVID-19 has proven that this new trajectory of virtualization, virtual work, applications are going to have to flex, and adjust, and scale, and be reinvented. This is a key thing. What's going on with machine learning, what's new? Tell us what are you guys doing right now. >> Yeah, I see now, in AWS, we offer broadest-- (poor audio capture obscures speech) All the way from like expert practitioners, we offer our frameworks and infrastructure layer support for all popular frameworks from like TensorFlow, Apache MXNet, and PyTorch, PowerShell, (poor audio capture obscures speech) custom chips like inference share. And then, for aspiring ML developers, who want to build their own custom machine learning models, we're actually building, we offer SageMaker, which is our end-to-end machine learning service that makes it easy for customers to be able to build, train, tune, and debug machine learning models, and it is one of our fastest growing machine learning services, and many startups and enterprises are starting to standardize their machine learning building on it. And then, the final tier is geared towards actually application developers, who did not want to go into model-building, just want an easy API to build capabilities to transcribe, run voice recognition, and so forth. And I wanted to talk about one of the new capabilities we are about to launch, enterprise search called Kendra, and-- >> So actually, so just from a news standpoint, that's GA now, that's being announced at the Summit. >> Yeah. >> That was a big hit at re:Invent, Kendra. >> Yeah. >> A lot of buzz! It's available. >> Yep, so I'm excited to say that Kendra is our new machine learning powered, highly accurate enterprise search service that has been made generally available. And if you look at what Kendra is, we have actually reimagined the traditional enterprise search service, which has historically been an underserved market segment, so to speak. If you look at it, on the public search, on the web search front, it is a relatively well-served area, whereas the enterprise search has been an area where data in enterprise, there are a huge amount of data silos, that is spread in file systems, SharePoint, or Salesforce, or various other areas. And deploying a traditional search index has always that even simple persons like when there's an ID desk open or when what is the security policy, or so forth. These kind of things have been historically, people have to find within an enterprise, let alone if I'm actually in a material science company or so forth like what 3M was trying to do. Enable collaboration of researchers spread across the world, to search their experiment archives and so forth. It has been super hard for them to be able to things, and this is one of those areas where Kendra has enabled the new, of course, where Kendra is a deep learning powered search service for enterprises, which breaks down data silos, and collects actually data across various things all the way from S3, or file system, or SharePoint, and various other data sources, and uses state-of-art NLP techniques to be able to actually index them, and then, you can query using natural language queries such as like when there's my ID desk-scoping, and the answer, it won't just give you a bunch of random, right? It'll tell you it opens at 8:30 a.m. in the morning. >> Yeah. >> Or what is the credit card cashback returns for my corporate credit card? It won't give you like a long list of links related to it. Instead it'll give you answer to be 2%. So it's that much highly accurate. (poor audio capture obscures speech) >> People who have been in the enterprise search or data business know how hard this is. And it is super, it's been a super hard problem, the old in the old guard models because databases were limiting to schemas and whatnot. Now, you have a data-driven world, and this becomes interesting. I think the big takeaway I took away from Kendra was not only the new kind of discovery navigation that's possible, in terms of low latency, getting relevant content, but it's really the under-the-covers impact, and I think I'd like to get your perspective on this because this has been an active conversation inside the community, in cloud scale, which is data silos have been a problem. People have had built these data silos, and they really talk about breaking them down but it's really again hard, there's legacy problems, and well, applications that are tied to them. How do I break my silos down? Or how do I leverage either silos? So I think you guys really solve a problem here around data silos and scale. >> Yeah. >> So talk about the data silos. And then, I'm going to follow up and get your take on the kind of size of of data, megabytes, petabytes, I mean, talk about data silos, and the scale behind it. >> Perfect, so if you look at actually how to set up something like a Kendra search cluster, even as simple as from your Management Console in the AWS, you'll be able to point Kendra to various data sources, such as Amazon S3, or SharePoint, and Salesforce, and various others. And say, these are kind of data I want to index. And Kendra automatically pulls in this data, index these using its deep learning and NLP models, and then, automatically builds a corpus. Then, I, as in user of the search index, can actually start querying it using natural language, and don't have to worry where it comes from, and Kendra takes care of things like access control, and it uses finely-tuned machine learning algorithms under the hood to understand the context of natural language query and return the most relevant. I'll give a real-world example of some of the field customers who are using Kendra. For instance, if you take a look at 3M, 3M is using Kendra to support search, support its material science R&D by enabling natural language search of their expansive repositories of past research documents that may be relevant to a new product. Imagine what this does to a company like 3M. Instead of researchers who are spread around the world, repeating the same experiments on material research over and over again, now, their engineers and researchers will allow everybody to quickly search through documents. And they can innovate faster instead of trying to literally reinvent the wheel all the time. So it is better acceleration to the market. Even we are in this situation, one of the interesting work that you might be interested in is the Semantic Scholar team at Allen Institute for AI, recently opened up what is a repository of scientific research called COVID-19 Open Research Dataset. These are expert research articles. (poor audio capture obscures speech) And now, the index is using Kendra, and it helps scientists, academics, and technologists to quickly find information in a sea of scientific literature. So you can even ask questions like, "Hey, how different is convalescent plasma "treatment compared to a vaccine?" And various in that question and Kendra automatically understand the context, and gets the summary answer to these questions for the customers, so. And this is one of the things where when we talk about breaking the data silos, it takes care of getting back the data, and putting it in a central location. Understanding the context behind each of these documents, and then, being able to also then, quickly answer the queries of customers using simple query natural language as well. >> So what's the scale? Talk about the scale behind this. What's the scale numbers? What are you guys seeing? I see you guys always do a good job, I've run a great announcement, and then following up with general availability, which means I know you've got some customers using it. What are we talking about in terms of scales? Petabytes, can you give some insight into the kind of data scale you're talking about here? >> So the nice thing about Kendra is it is easily linearly scalable. So I, as a developer, I can keep adding more and more data, and that is it linearly scales to whatever scale our customers want. So and that is one of the underpinnings of Kendra search engine. So this is where even if you see like customers like PricewaterhouseCoopers is using Kendra to power its regulatory application to help customers search through regulatory information quickly and easily. So instead of sifting through hundreds of pages of documents manually to answer certain questions, now, Kendra allows them to answer natural language question. I'll give another example, which is speaks to the scale. One is Baker Tilly, a leading advisory, tax, and assurance firm, is using Kendra to index documents. Compared to a traditional SharePoint-based full-text search, now, they are using Kendra to quickly search product manuals and so forth. And they're able to get answers up to 10x faster. Look at that kind of impact what Kendra has, being able to index vast amount of data, with in a linearly scalable fashion, keep adding in the order of terabytes, and keep going, and being able to search 10x faster than traditional, I mean traditional keyword search based algorithm is actually a big deal for these customers. They're very excited. >> So what is the main problem that you're solving with Kendra? What's the use case? If I'm the customer, what's my problem that you're solving? Is it just response to data, whether it's a call center, or support, or is it an app? I mean, what's the main focus that you guys came out? What was the vector of problem that you're solving here? >> So when we talked to customers before we started building Kendra, one of the things that constantly came back for us was that they wanted the same ease of use and the ability to search the world wide web, and customers like us to search within an enterprise. So it can be in the form of like an internal search to search within like the HR documents or internal wiki pages and so forth, or it can be to search like internal technical documentation or the public documentation to help the contact centers or is it the external search in terms of customer support and so forth, or to enable collaboration by sharing knowledge base and so forth. So each of these is really dissected. Why is this a problem? Why is it not being solved by traditional search techniques? One of the things that became obvious was that unlike the external world where the web pages are linked that easily with very well-defined structure, internal world is very messy within an enterprise. The documents are put in a SharePoint, or in a file system, or in a storage service like S3, or on naturally, tell-stores or Box, or various other things. And what really customers wanted was a system which knows how to actually pull the data from various these data silos, still understand the access control behind this, and enforce them in the search. And then, understand the real data behind it, and not just do simple keyword search, so that we can build remarkable search service that really answers queries in a natural language. And this has been the theme, premise of Kendra, and this is what had started to resonate with our customers. I talked with some of the other examples even in areas like contact centers. For instance, Magellan Health is using Kendra for its contact centers. So they are able to seamlessly tie like member, provider, or client specific information with other inside information about health care to its agents so that they can quickly resolve the call. Or it can be on internally to do things like external search as well. So very satisfied client. >> So you guys took the basic concept of discovery navigation, which is the consumer web, find what you're looking for as fast as possible, but also took advantage of building intelligence around understanding all the nuances and configuration, schemas, access, under the covers and allowing things to be discovered in a new way. So you basically makes data be discoverable, and then, provide an interface. >> Yeah. >> For discovery and navigation. So it's a broad use cat, then. >> Right, yeah that's sounds somewhat right except we did one thing more. We actually understood not just, we didn't just do discovery and also made it easy for people to find the information but they are sifting through like terabytes or hundreds of terabytes of internal documentation. Sometimes, one other things that happens is throwing a bunch of hundreds of links to these documents is not good enough. For instance, if I'm actually trying to find out for instance, what is the ALS marker in an health care setting, and for a particular research project, then, I don't want to actually sift through like thousands of links. Instead, I want to be able to correctly pinpoint which document contains answer to it. So that is the final element, which is to really understand the context behind each and every document using natural language processing techniques so that you not only find discover the information that is relevant but you also get like highly accurate possible precise answers to some of your questions. >> Well, that's great stuff, big fan. I was really liking the announcement of Kendra. Congratulations on the GA of that. We'll make some room on our CUBE Virtual site for your team to put more Kendra information up. I think it's fascinating. I think that's going to be the beginning of how the world changes, where this, this certainly with the voice activation and API-based applications integrating this in. I just see a ton of activity that this is going to have a lot of headroom. So appreciate that. The other thing I want to get to while I have you here is the news around the augmented artificial intelligence has been brought out as well. >> Yeah. >> So the GA of that is out. You guys are GA-ing everything, which is right on track with your cadence of AWS laws, I'd say. What is this about? Give us the headline story. What's the main thing to pay attention to of the GA? What have you learned? What's the learning curve, what's the results? >> So augmented artificial intelligence service, I called it A2I but Amazon A2I service, we made it generally available. And it is a very unique service that makes it easy for developers to augment human intelligence with machine learning predictions. And this is historically, has been a very challenging problem. We look at, so let me take a step back and explain the general idea behind it. You look at any developer building a machine learning application, there are use cases where even actually in 99% accuracy in machine learning is not going to be good enough to directly use that result as the response to back to the customer. Instead, you want to be able to augment that with human intelligence to make sure, hey, if my machine learning model is returning, saying hey, my confidence interval for this prediction is less than 70%, I would like it to be augmented with human intelligence. Then, A2I makes it super easy for customers to be, developers to use actually, a human reviewer workflow that comes in between. So then, I can actually send it either to the public pool using Mechanical Turk, where we have more than 500,000 Turkers, or I can use a private workflow as a vendor workflow. So now, A2I seamlessly integrates with our Textract, Rekognition, or SageMaker custom models. So now, for instance, NHS is integrated A2I with Textract, so that, and they are building these document processing workflows. The areas where the machine learning model confidence load is not as high, they will be able augment that with their human reviewer workflows so that they can actually build in highly accurate document processing workflow as well. So this, we think is a powerful capability. >> So this really kind of gets to what I've been feeling in some of the stuff we worked with you guys on our machine learning piece. It's hard for companies to hire machine learning people. This has been a real challenge. So I like this idea of human augmentation because humans and machines have to have that relationship, and if you build good abstraction layers, and you abstract away the complexity, which is what you guys do, and that's the vision of cloud, then, you're going to need to have that relationship solidified. So at what point do you think we're going to be ready for theCUBE team, or any customer that doesn't have the or can't find a machine learning person? Or may not want to pay the wages that's required? I mean it's hard to find a machine learning engineer, and when does the data science piece come in with visualization, the spectrum of pure computer science, math, machine learning guru to full end user productivity? Machine learning is where you guys are doing a lot of work. Can you just share your opinion on that evolution of where we are on that? Because people want to get to the point where they don't have to hire machine learning folks. >> Yeah. >> And have that kind support too. >> If you look at the history of technology, I actually always believe that many of these highly disruptive technology started as a way that it is available only to experts, and then, they quickly go through the cycles, where it becomes almost common place. I'll give an example with something totally outside the IT space. Let's take photography. I think more than probably 150 years ago, the first professional camera was invented, and built like three to four years still actually take a really good picture. And there were only very few expert photographers in the world. And then, fast forward to time where we are now, now, even my five-year-old daughter takes actually very good portraits, and actually gives it as a gift to her mom for Mother's Day. So now, if you look at Instagram, everyone is a professional photographer. I kind of think the same thing is about to, it will happen in machine learning too. Compared to 2012, where there were very few deep learning experts, who can really build these amazing applications, now, we are starting to see like tens of thousands of actually customers using machine learning in production in AWS, not just proof of concepts but in production. And this number is rapidly growing. I'll give one example. Internally, if you see Amazon, to aid our entire company to transform and make machine learning as a natural part of the business, six years ago, we started a Machine Learning University. And since then, we have been training all our engineers to take machine learning courses in this ML University, and a year ago, we actually made these coursework available through our Training and Certification platform in AWS, and within 48 hours, more than 100,000 people registered. Think about it, that's like a big all-time record. That's why I always like to believe that developers are always eager to learn, they're very hungry to pick up new technology, and I wouldn't be surprised if four or five years from now, machine learning is kind of becomes a normal feature of the app, the same with databases are, and that becomes less special. If that day happens, then, I would see it as my job is done, so. >> Well, you've got a lot more work to do because I know from the conversations I've been having around this COVID-19 pandemic is it's that there's general consensus and validation that the future got pulled forward, and what used to be an inside industry conversation that we used to have around machine learning and some of the visions that you're talking about has been accelerated on the pace of the new cloud scale, but now that people now recognize that virtual and experiencing it firsthand globally, everyone, there are now going to be an acceleration of applications. So we believe there's going to be a Cambrian explosion of new applications that got to reimagine and reinvent some of the plumbing or abstractions in cloud to deliver new experiences, because the expectations have changed. And I think one of the things we're seeing is that machine learning combined with cloud scale will create a whole new trajectory of a Cambrian explosion of applications. So this has kind of been validated. What's your reaction to that? I mean do you see something similar? What are some of the things that you're seeing as we come into this world, this virtualization of our lives, it's every vertical, it's not one vertical anymore that's maybe moving faster. I think everyone sees the impact. They see where the gaps are in this new reality here. What's your thoughts? >> Yeah, if you see the history from machine learning specifically around deep learning, while the technology is really not new, especially because the early deep learning paper was probably written like almost 30 years ago. And why didn't we see deep learning take us sooner? It is because historically, deep learning technologies have been hungry for computer resources, and hungry for like huge amount of data. And then, the abstractions were not easy enough. As you rightfully pointed out that cloud has come in made it super easy to get like access to huge amount of compute and huge amount of data, and you can literally pay by the hour or by the minute. And with new tools being made available to developers like SageMaker and all the AI services, we are talking about now, there is an explosion of options available that are easy to use for developers that we are starting to see, almost like a huge amount of like innovations starting to pop up. And unlike traditional disruptive technologies, which you usually see crashing in like one or two industry segments, and then, it crosses the chasm, and then goes mainstream, but machine learning, we are starting to see traction almost in like every industry segment, all the way from like in financial sector, where fintech companies like Intuit is using it to forecast its call center volume and then, personalization. In the health care sector, companies like Aidoc are using computer vision to assist radiologists. And then, we are seeing in areas like public sector. NASA has partnered with AWS to use machine learning to do anomaly detection, algorithms to detect solar flares in the space. And yeah, examples are plenty. It is because now, machine learning has become such common place that and almost every industry segment and every CIO is actually already looking at how can they reimagine, and reinvent, and make their customer experience better covered by machine learning. In the same way, Amazon actually asked itself, like eight or 10 years ago, so very exciting. >> Well, you guys continue to do the work, and I agree it's not just machine learning by itself, it's the integration and the perfect storm of elements that have come together at this time. Although pretty disastrous, but I think ultimately, it's going to come out, we're going to come out of this on a whole 'nother trajectory. It's going to be creativity will be emerged. You're going to start seeing really those builders thinking, "Okay hey, I got to get out there. "I can deliver, solve the gaps we are exposed. "Solve the problems, "pre-create new expectations, new experience." I think it's going to be great for software developers. I think it's going to change the computer science field, and it's really bringing the lifestyle aspect of things. Applications have to have a recognition of this convergence, this virtualization of life. >> Yeah. >> The applications are going to have to have that. So and remember virtualization helped Amazon formed the cloud. Maybe, we'll get some new kinds of virtualization, Swami. (laughs) Thanks for coming on, really appreciate it. Always great to see you. Thanks for taking the time. >> Okay, great to see you, John, also. Thank you, thanks again. >> We're with Swami, the Vice President of Machine Learning at AWS. Been on before theCUBE Alumni. Really sharing his insights around what we see around this virtualization, this online event at the Amazon Summit, we're covering with the Virtual CUBE. But as we go forward, more important than ever, the data is going to be important, searching it, finding it, and more importantly, having the humans use it building an application. So theCUBE coverage continues, for AWS Summit Virtual Online, I'm John Furrier, thanks for watching. (enlightening music)

>> Live from San Francisco, California, it's theCUBE covering the IBM Chief Data Officers Summit, brought to you by IBM. >> Welcome back to San Francisco everybody. I'm Dave Vellante and you're watching theCUBE, the leader in live tech coverage. This is the end of the day panel at the IBM Chief Data Officer Summit. This is the 10th CDO event that IBM has held and we love to to gather these panels. This is a data all-star panel and I've recruited Seth Dobrin who is the CDO of the analytics group at IBM. Seth, thank you for agreeing to chip in and be my co-host in this segment. >> Yeah, thanks Dave. Like I said before we started, I don't know if this is a promotion or a demotion. (Dave laughing) >> We'll let you know after the segment. So, the data all-star panel and the data all-star awards that you guys are giving out a little later in the event here, what's that all about? >> Yeah so this is our 10th CDU Summit. So two a year, so we've been doing this for 5 years. The data all-stars are those people that have been to four at least of the ten. And so these are five of the 16 people that got the award. And so thank you all for participating and I attended these like I said earlier, before I joined IBM they were immensely valuable to me and I was glad to see 16 other people that think it's valuable too. >> That is awesome. Thank you guys for coming on. So, here's the format. I'm going to introduce each of you individually and then ask you to talk about your role in your organization. What role you play, how you're using data, however you want to frame that. And the first question I want to ask is, what's a good day in the life of a data person? Or if you want to answer what's a bad day, that's fine too, you choose. So let's start with Lucia Mendoza-Ronquillo. Welcome, she's the Senior Vice President and the Head of BI and Data Governance at Wells Fargo. You told us that you work within the line of business group, right? So introduce your role and what's a good day for a data person? >> Okay, so my role basically is again business intelligence so I support what's called cards and retail services within Wells Fargo. And I also am responsible for data governance within the business. We roll up into what's called a data governance enterprise. So we comply with all the enterprise policies and my role is to make sure our line of business complies with data governance policies for enterprise. >> Okay, good day? What's a good day for you? >> A good day for me is really when I don't get a call that the regulators are knocking on our doors. (group laughs) Asking for additional reports or have questions on the data and so that would be a good day. >> Yeah, especially in your business. Okay, great. Parag Shrivastava is the Director of Data Architecture at McKesson, welcome. Thanks so much for coming on. So we got a healthcare, couple of healthcare examples here. But, Parag, introduce yourself, your role, and then what's a good day or if you want to choose a bad day, be fun the mix that up. >> Yeah, sounds good. Yeah, so mainly I'm responsible for the leader strategy and architecture at McKesson. What that means is McKesson has a lot of data around the pharmaceutical supply chain, around one-third of the world's pharmaceutical supply chain, clinical data, also around pharmacy automation data, and we want to leverage it for the better engagement of the patients and better engagement of our customers. And my team, which includes the data product owners, and data architects, we are all responsible for looking at the data holistically and creating the data foundation layer. So I lead the team across North America. So that's my current role. And going back to the question around what's a good day, I think I would say the good day, I'll start at the good day. Is really looking at when the data improves the business. And the first thing that comes to my mind is sort of like an example, of McKesson did an acquisition of an eight billion dollar pharmaceutical company in Europe and we were creating the synergy solution which was based around the analytics and data. And actually IBM was one of the partners in implementing that solution. When the solution got really implemented, I mean that was a big deal for me to see that all the effort that we did in plumbing the data, making sure doing some analytics, is really helping improve the business. I think that is really a good day I would say. I mean I wouldn't say a bad day is such, there are challenges, constant challenges, but I think one of the top priorities that we are having right now is to deal with the demand. As we look at the demand around the data, the role of data has got multiple facets to it now. For example, some of the very foundational, evidentiary, and compliance type of needs as you just talked about and then also profitability and the cost avoidance and those kind of aspects. So how to balance between that demand is the other aspect. >> All right good. And we'll get into a lot of that. So Carl Gold is the Chief Data Scientist at Zuora. Carl, tell us a little bit about Zuora. People might not be as familiar with how you guys do software for billing et cetera. Tell us about your role and what's a good day for a data scientist? >> Okay, sure, I'll start by a little bit about Zuora. Zuora is a subscription management platform. So any company who wants to offer a product or service as subscription and you don't want to build your billing and subscription management, revenue recognition, from scratch, you can use a product like ours. I say it lets anyone build a telco with a complicated plan, with tiers and stuff like that. I don't know if that's a good thing or not. You guys'll have to make up your own mind. My role is an interesting one. It's split, so I said I'm a chief data scientist and we work about 50% on product features based on data science. Things like churn prediction, or predictive payment retries are product areas where we offer AI-based solutions. And then but because Zuora is a subscription platform, we have an amazing set of data on the actual performance of companies using our product. So a really interesting part of my role has been leading what we call the subscription economy index and subscription economy benchmarks which are reports around best practices for subscription companies. And it's all based off this amazing dataset created from an anonymized data of our customers. So that's a really exciting part of my role. And for me, maybe this speaks to our level of data governance, I might be able to get some tips from some of my co-panelists, but for me a good day is when all the data for me and everyone on my team is where we left it the night before. And no schema changes, no data, you know records that you were depending on finding removed >> Pipeline failures. >> Yeah pipeline failures. And on a bad day is a schema change, some crucial data just went missing and someone on my team is like, "The code's broken." >> And everybody's stressed >> Yeah, so those are bad days. But, data governance issues maybe. >> Great, okay thank you. Jung Park is the COO of Latitude Food Allergy Care. Jung welcome. >> Yeah hi, thanks for having me and the rest of us here. So, I guess my role I like to put it as I'm really the support team. I'm part of the support team really for the medical practice so, Latitude Food Allergy Care is a specialty practice that treats patients with food allergies. So, I don't know if any of you guys have food allergies or maybe have friends, kids, who have food allergies, but, food allergies unfortunately have become a lot more prevalent. And what we've been able to do is take research and data really from clinical trials and other research institutions and really use that from the clinical trial setting, back to the clinical care model so that we can now treat patients who have food allergies by using a process called oral immunotherapy. It's fascinating and this is really personal to me because my son as food allergies and he's been to the ER four times. >> Wow. >> And one of the scariest events was when he went to an ER out of the country and as a parent, you know you prepare your child right? With the food, he takes the food. He was 13 years old and you had the chaperones, everyone all set up, but you get this call because accidentally he ate some peanut, right. And so I saw this unfold and it scared me so much that this is something I believe we just have to get people treated. So this process allows people to really eat a little bit of the food at a time and then you eat the food at the clinic and then you go home and eat it. Then you come back two weeks later and then you eat a little bit more until your body desensitizes. >> So you build up that immunity >> Exactly. >> and then you watch the data obviously. >> Yeah. So what's a good day for me? When our patients are done for the day and they have a smile on their face because they were able to progress to that next level. >> Now do you have a chief data officer or are you the de facto CFO? >> I'm the de facto. So, my career has been pretty varied. So I've been essentially chief data officer, CIO, at companies small and big. And what's unique about I guess in this role is that I'm able to really think about the data holistically through every component of the practice. So I like to think of it as a patient journey and I'm sure you guys all think of it similarly when you talk about your customers, but from a patient's perspective, before they even come in, you have to make sure the data behind the science of whatever you're treating is proper, right? Once that's there, then you have to have the acquisition part. How do you actually work with the community to make sure people are aware of really the services that you're providing? And when they're with you, how do you engage them? How do you make sure that they are compliant with the process? So in healthcare especially, oftentimes patients don't actually succeed all the way through because they don't continue all the way through. So it's that compliance. And then finally, it's really long-term care. And when you get the long-term care, you know that the patient that you've treated is able to really continue on six months, a year from now, and be able to eat the food. >> Great, thank you for that description. Awesome mission. Rolland Ho is the Vice President of Data and Analytics at Clover Health. Tell us a little bit about Clover Health and then your role. >> Yeah, sure. So Clover is a startup Medicare Advantage plan. So we provide Medicare, private Medicare to seniors. And what we do is we're because of the way we run our health plan, we're able to really lower a lot of the copay costs and protect seniors against out of pocket. If you're on regular Medicare, you get cancer, you have some horrible accident, your out of pocket is infinite potentially. Whereas with Medicare Advantage Plan it's limited to like five, $6,000 and you're always protected. One of the things I'm excited about being at Clover is our ability to really look at how can we bring the value of data analytics to healthcare? Something I've been in this industry for close to 20 years at this point and there's a lot of waste in healthcare. And there's also a lot of very poor application of preventive measures to the right populations. So one of the things that I'm excited about is that with today's models, if you're able to better identify with precision, the right patients to intervene with, then you fundamentally transform the economics of what can be done. Like if you had to pa $1,000 to intervene, but you were only 20% of the chance right, that's very expensive for each success. But, now if your model is 60, 70% right, then now it opens up a whole new world of what you can do. And that's what excites me. In terms of my best day? I'll give you two different angles. One as an MBA, one of my best days was, client calls me up, says, "Hey Rolland, you know, "your analytics brought us over $100 million "in new revenue last year." and I was like, cha-ching! Excellent! >> Which is my half? >> Yeah right. And then on the data geek side the best day was really, run a model, you train a model, you get ridiculous AUC score, so area under the curve, and then you expect that to just disintegrate as you go into validation testing and actual live production. But the 98 AUC score held up through production. And it's like holy cow, the model actually works! And literally we could cut out half of the workload because of how good that model was. >> Great, excellent, thank you. Seth, anything you'd add to the good day, bad day, as a CDO? >> So for me, well as a CDO or as CDO at IBM? 'Cause at IBM I spend most of my time traveling. So a good day is a day I'm home. >> Yeah, when you're not in an (group laughing) aluminum tube. >> Yeah. Hurdling through space (laughs). No, but a good day is when a GDPR compliance just happened, a good day for me was May 20th of last year when IBM was done and we were, or as done as we needed to be for GDPR so that was a good day for me last year. This year is really a good day is when we start implementing some new models to help IBM become a more effective company and increase our bottom line or increase our margins. >> Great, all right so I got a lot of questions as you know and so I want to give you a chance to jump in. >> All right. >> But, I can get it started or have you got something? >> I'll go ahead and get started. So this is a the 10th CDO Summit. So five years. I know personally I've had three jobs at two different companies. So over the course of the last five years, how many jobs, how many companies? Lucia? >> One job with one company. >> Oh my gosh you're boring. (group laughing) >> No, but actually, because I support basically the head of the business, we go into various areas. So, we're not just from an analytics perspective and business intelligence perspective and of course data governance, right? It's been a real journey. I mean there's a lot of work to be done. A lot of work has been accomplished and constantly improving the business, which is the first goal, right? Increasing market share through insights and business intelligence, tracking product performance to really helping us respond to regulators (laughs). So it's a variety of areas I've had to be involved in. >> So one company, 50 jobs. >> Exactly. So right now I wear different hats depending on the day. So that's really what's happening. >> So it's a good question, have you guys been jumping around? Sure, I mean I think of same company, one company, but two jobs. And I think those two jobs have two different layers. When I started at McKesson I was a solution leader or solution director for business intelligence and I think that's how I started. And over the five years I've seen the complete shift towards machine learning and my new role is actually focused around machine learning and AI. That's why we created this layer, so our own data product owners who understand the data science side of things and the ongoing and business architecture. So, same company but has seen a very different shift of data over the last five years. >> Anybody else? >> Sure, I'll say two companies. I'm going on four years at Zuora. I was at a different company for a year before that, although it was kind of the same job, first at the first company, and then at Zuora I was really focused on subscriber analytics and churn for my first couple a years. And then actually I kind of got a new job at Zuora by becoming the subscription economy expert. I become like an economist, even though I don't honestly have a background. My PhD's in biology, but now I'm a subscription economy guru. And a book author, I'm writing a book about my experiences in the area. >> Awesome. That's great. >> All right, I'll give a bit of a riddle. Four, how do you have four jobs, five companies? >> In five years. >> In five years. (group laughing) >> Through a series of acquisition, acquisition, acquisition, acquisition. Exactly, so yeah, I have to really, really count on that one (laughs). >> I've been with three companies over the past five years and I would say I've had seven jobs. But what's interesting is I think it kind of mirrors and kind of mimics what's been going on in the data world. So I started my career in data analytics and business intelligence. But then along with that I had the fortune to work with the IT team. So the IT came under me. And then after that, the opportunity came about in which I was presented to work with compliance. So I became a compliance officer. So in healthcare, it's very interesting because these things are tied together. When you look about the data, and then the IT, and then the regulations as it relates to healthcare, you have to have the proper compliance, both internal compliance, as well as external regulatory compliance. And then from there I became CIO and then ultimately the chief operating officer. But what's interesting is as I go through this it's all still the same common themes. It's how do you use the data? And if anything it just gets to a level in which you become closer with the business and that is the most important part. If you stand alone as a data scientist, or a data analyst, or the data officer, and you don't incorporate the business, you alienate the folks. There's a math I like to do. It's different from your basic math, right? I believe one plus one is equal to three because when you get the data and the business together, you create that synergy and then that's where the value is created. >> Yeah, I mean if you think about it, data's the only commodity that increases value when you use it correctly. >> Yeah. >> Yeah so then that kind of leads to a question that I had. There's this mantra, the more data the better. Or is it more of an Einstein derivative? Collect as much data as possible but not too much. What are your thoughts? Is more data better? >> I'll take it. So, I would say the curve has shifted over the years. Before it used to be data was the bottleneck. But now especially over the last five to 10 years, I feel like data is no longer oftentimes the bottleneck as much as the use case. The definition of what exactly we're going to apply to, how we're going to apply it to. Oftentimes once you have that clear, you can go get the data. And then in the case where there is not data, like in Mechanical Turk, you can all set up experiments, gather data, the cost of that is now so cheap to experiment that I think the bottleneck's really around the business understanding the use case. >> Mm-hmm. >> Mm-hmm. >> And I think the wave that we are seeing, I'm seeing this as there are, in some cases, more data is good, in some cases more data is not good. And I think I'll start it where it is not good. I think where quality is more required is the area where more data is not good. For example like regulation and compliance. So for example in McKesson's case, we have to report on opioid compliance for different states. How much opioid drugs we are giving to states and making sure we have very, very tight reporting and compliance regulations. There, highest quality of data is important. In our data organization, we have very, very dedicated focus around maintaining that quality. So, quality is most important, quantity is not if you will, in that case. Having the right data. Now on the other side of things, where we are doing some kind of exploratory analysis. Like what could be a right category management for our stores? Or where the product pricing could be the right ones. Product has around 140 attributes. We would like to look at all of them and see what patterns are we finding in our models. So there you could say more data is good. >> Well you could definitely see a lot of cases. But certainly in financial services and a lot of healthcare, particularly in pharmaceutical where you don't want work in process hanging around. >> Yeah. >> Some lawyer could find a smoking gun and say, "Ooh see." And then if that data doesn't get deleted. So, let's see, I would imagine it's a challenge in your business, I've heard people say, "Oh keep all the, now we can keep all the data, "it's so inexpensive to store." But that's not necessarily such a good thing is it? >> Well, we're required to store data. >> For N number of years, right? >> Yeah, N number of years. But, sometimes they go beyond those number of years when there's a legal requirements to comply or to answer questions. So we do keep more than, >> Like a legal hold for example. >> Yeah. So we keep more than seven years for example and seven years is the regulatory requirement. But in the case of more data, I'm a data junkie, so I like more data (laughs). Whenever I'm asked, "Is the data available?" I always say, "Give me time I'll find it for you." so that's really how we operate because again, we're the go-to team, we need to be able to respond to regulators to the business and make sure we understand the data. So that's the other key. I mean more data, but make sure you understand what that means. >> But has that perspective changed? Maybe go back 10 years, maybe 15 years ago, when you didn't have the tooling to be able to say, "Give me more data." "I'll get you the answer." Maybe, "Give me more data." "I'll get you the answer in three years." Whereas today, you're able to, >> I'm going to go get it off the backup tapes (laughs). >> (laughs) Yeah, right, exactly. (group laughing) >> That's fortunately for us, Wells Fargo has implemented data warehouse for so many number of years, I think more than 10 years. So we do have that capability. There's certainly a lot of platforms you have to navigate through, but if you are able to navigate, you can get to the data >> Yeah. >> within the required timeline. So I have, astonished you have the technology, team behind you. Jung, you want to add something? >> Yeah, so that's an interesting question. So, clearly in healthcare, there is a lot of data and as I've kind of come closer to the business, I also realize that there's a fine line between collecting the data and actually asking our folks, our clinicians, to generate the data. Because if you are focused only on generating data, the electronic medical records systems for example. There's burnout, you don't want the clinicians to be working to make sure you capture every element because if you do so, yes on the back end you have all kinds of great data, but on the other side, on the business side, it may not be necessarily a productive thing. And so we have to make a fine line judgment as to the data that's generated and who's generating that data and then ultimately how you end up using it. >> And I think there's a bit of a paradox here too, right? The geneticist in me says, "Don't ever throw anything away." >> Right. >> Right? I want to keep everything. But, the most interesting insights often come from small data which are a subset of that larger, keep everything inclination that we as data geeks have. I think also, as we're moving in to kind of the next phase of AI when you can start doing really, really doing things like transfer learning. That small data becomes even more valuable because you can take a model trained on one thing or a different domain and move it over to yours to have a starting point where you don't need as much data to get the insight. So, I think in my perspective, the answer is yes. >> Yeah (laughs). >> Okay, go. >> I'll go with that just to run with that question. I think it's a little bit of both 'cause people touched on different definitions of more data. In general, more observations can never hurt you. But, more features, or more types of things associated with those observations actually can if you bring in irrelevant stuff. So going back to Rolland's answer, the first thing that's good is like a good mental model. My PhD is actually in physical science, so I think about physical science, where you actually have a theory of how the thing works and you collect data around that theory. I think the approach of just, oh let's put in 2,000 features and see what sticks, you know you're leaving yourself open to all kinds of problems. >> That's why data science is not democratized, >> Yeah (laughing). >> because (laughing). >> Right, but first Carl, in your world, you don't have to guess anymore right, 'cause you have real data. >> Well yeah, of course, we have real data, but the collection, I mean for example, I've worked on a lot of customer churn problems. It's very easy to predict customer churn if you capture data that pertains to the value customers are receiving. If you don't capture that data, then you'll never predict churn by counting how many times they login or more crude measures of engagement. >> Right. >> All right guys, we got to go. The keynotes are spilling out. Seth thank you so much. >> That's it? >> Folks, thank you. I know, I'd love to carry on, right? >> Yeah. >> It goes fast. >> Great. >> Yeah. >> Guys, great, great content. >> Yeah, thanks. And congratulations on participating and being data all-stars. >> We'd love to do this again sometime. All right and thank you for watching everybody, it's a wrap from IBM CDOs, Dave Vellante from theCUBE. We'll see you next time. (light music)

>> Narrator: Live, from Munich, Germany, it's the CUBE. Covering IBM, Fast Track Your Data. Brought to you by IBM. >> Welcome to Munich everybody. This is a special presentation of the CUBE, Fast Track Your Data, brought to you by IBM. My name is Dave Vellante. And I'm here with my cohost, Jim Kobielus. Jim, good to see you. Really good to see you in Munich. >> Jim: I'm glad I made it. >> Thanks for being here. So last year Jim and I hosted a panel at New York City on the CUBE. And it was quite an experience. We had, I think it was nine or 10 data scientists and we felt like that was a lot of people to organize and talk about data science. Well today, we're going to do a repeat of that. With a little bit of twist on topics. And we've got five data scientists. We're here live, in Munich. And we're going to kick off the Fast Track Your Data event with this data science panel. So I'm going to now introduce some of the panelists, or all of the panelists. Then we'll get into the discussions. I'm going to start with Lillian Pierson. Lillian thanks very much for being on the panel. You are in data science. You focus on training executives, students, and you're really a coach but with a lot of data science expertise based in Thailand, so welcome. >> Thank you, thank you so much for having me. >> Dave: You're very welcome. And so, I want to start with sort of when you focus on training people, data science, where do you start? >> Well it depends on the course that I'm teaching. But I try and start at the beginning so for my Big Data course, I actually start back at the fundamental concepts and definitions they would even need to understand in order to understand the basics of what Big Data is, data engineering. So, terms like data governance. Going into the vocabulary that makes up the very introduction of the course, so that later on the students can really grasp the concepts I present to them. You know I'm teaching a deep learning course as well, so in that case I start at a lot more advanced concepts. So it just really depends on the level of the course. >> Great, and we're going to come back to this topic of women in tech. But you know, we looked at some CUBE data the other day. About 17% of the technology industry comprises women. And so we're a little bit over that on our data science panel, we're about 20% today. So we'll come back to that topic. But I don't know if there's anything you would add? >> I'm really passionate about women in tech and women who code, in particular. And I'm connected with a lot of female programmers through Instagram. And we're supporting each other. So I'd love to take any questions you have on what we're doing in that space. At least as far as what's happening across the Instagram platform. >> Great, we'll circle back to that. All right, let me introduce Chris Penn. Chris, Boston based, all right, SMI. Chris is a marketing expert. Really trying to help people understand how to get, turn data into value from a marketing perspective. It's a very important topic. Not only because we get people to buy stuff but also understanding some of the risks associated with things like GDPR, which is coming up. So Chris, tell us a little bit about your background and your practice. >> So I actually started in IT and worked at a start up. And that's where I made the transition to marketing. Because marketing has much better parties. But what's really interesting about the way data science is infiltrating marketing is the technology came in first. You know, everything went digital. And now we're at a point where there's so much data. And most marketers, they kind of got into marketing as sort of the arts and crafts field. And are realizing now, they need a very strong, mathematical, statistical background. So one of the things, Adam, the reason why we're here and IBM is helping out tremendously is, making a lot of the data more accessible to people who do not have a data science background and probably never will. >> Great, okay thank you. I'm going to introduce Ronald Van Loon. Ronald, your practice is really all about helping people extract value out of data, driving competitive advantage, business advantage, or organizational excellence. Tell us a little bit about yourself, your background, and your practice. >> Basically, I've three different backgrounds. On one hand, I'm a director at a data consultancy firm called Adversitement. Where we help companies to become data driven. Mainly large companies. I'm an advisory board member at Simply Learn, which is an e-learning platform, especially also for big data analytics. And on the other hand I'm a blogger and I host a series of webinars. >> Okay, great, now Dez, Dez Blanchfield, I met you on Twitter, you know, probably a couple of years ago. We first really started to collaborate last year. We've spend a fair amount of time together. You are a data scientist, but you're also a jack of all trades. You've got a technology background. You sit on a number of boards. You work very active with public policy. So tell us a little bit more about what you're doing these days, a little bit more about your background. >> Sure, I think my primary challenge these days is communication. Trying to join the dots between my technical background and deeply technical pedigree, to just plain English, every day language, and business speak. So bridging that technical world with what's happening in the boardroom. Toe to toe with the geeks to plain English to execs in boards. And just hand hold them and steward them through the journey of the challenges they're facing. Whether it's the enormous rapid of change and the pace of change, that's just almost exhaustive and causing them to sprint. But not just sprint in one race but in multiple lanes at the same time. As well as some of the really big things that are coming up, that we've seen like GDPR. So it's that communication challenge and just hand holding people through that journey and that mix of technical and commercial experience. >> Great, thank you, and finally Joe Caserta. Founder and president of Caserta Concepts. Joe you're a practitioner. You're in the front lines, helping organizations, similar to Ronald. Extracting value from data. Translate that into competitive advantage. Tell us a little bit about what you're doing these days in Caserta Concepts. >> Thanks Dave, thanks for having me. Yeah, so Caserta's been around. I've been doing this for 30 years now. And natural progressions have been just getting more from application development, to data warehousing, to big data analytics, to data science. Very, very organically, that's just because it's where businesses need the help the most, over the years. And right now, the big focus is governance. At least in my world. Trying to govern when you have a bunch of disparate data coming from a bunch of systems that you have no control over, right? Like social media, and third party data systems. Bringing it in and how to you organize it? How do you ingest it? How do you govern it? How do you keep it safe? And also help to define ownership of the data within an organization within an enterprise? That's also a very hot topic. Which ties back into GDPR. >> Great, okay, so we're going to be unpacking a lot of topics associated with the expertise that these individuals have. I'm going to bring in Jim Kobielus, to the conversation. Jim, the newest Wikibon analyst. And newest member of the SiliconANGLE Media Team. Jim, get us started off. >> Yeah, so we're at an event, at an IBM event where machine learning and data science are at the heart of it. There are really three core themes here. Machine learning and data science, on the one hand. Unified governance on the other. And hybrid data management. I want to circle back or focus on machine learning. Machine learning is the coin of the realm, right now in all things data. Machine learning is the heart of AI. Machine learning, everybody is going, hiring, data scientists to do machine learning. I want to get a sense from our panel, who are experts in this area, what are the chief innovations and trends right now on machine learning. Not deep learning, the core of machine learning. What's super hot? What's in terms of new techniques, new technologies, new ways of organizing teams to build and to train machine learning models? I'd like to open it up. Let's just start with Lillian. What are your thoughts about trends in machine learning? What's really hot? >> It's funny that you excluded deep learning from the response for this, because I think the hottest space in machine learning is deep learning. And deep learning is machine learning. I see a lot of collaborative platforms coming out, where people, data scientists are able to work together with other sorts of data professionals to reduce redundancies in workflows. And create more efficient data science systems. >> Is there much uptake of these crowd sourcing environments for training machine learning wells. Like CrowdFlower, or Amazon Mechanical Turk, or Mighty AI? Is that a huge trend in terms of the workflow of data science or machine learning, a lot of that? >> I don't see that crowdsourcing is like, okay maybe I've been out of the crowdsourcing space for a while. But I was working with Standby Task Force back in 2013. And we were doing a lot of crowdsourcing. And I haven't seen the industry has been increasing, but I could be wrong. I mean, because there's no, if you're building automation models, most of the, a lot of the work that's being crowdsourced could actually be automated if someone took the time to just build the scripts and build the models. And so I don't imagine that, that's going to be a trend that's increasing. >> Well, automation machine learning pipeline is fairly hot, in terms of I'm seeing more and more research. Google's doing a fair amount of automated machine learning. The panel, what do you think about automation, in terms of the core modeling tasks involved in machine learning. Is that coming along? Are data scientists in danger of automating themselves out of a job? >> I don't think there's a risk of data scientist's being put out of a job. Let's just put that on the thing. I do think we need to get a bit clearer about this meme of the mythical unicorn. But to your call point about machine learning, I think what you'll see, we saw the cloud become baked into products, just as a given. I think machine learning is already crossed this threshold. We just haven't necessarily noticed or caught up. And if we look at, we're at an IBM event, so let's just do a call out for them. The data science experience platform, for example. Machine learning's built into a whole range of things around algorithm and data classification. And there's an assisted, guided model for how you get to certain steps, where you don't actually have to understand how machine learning works. You don't have to understand how the algorithms work. It shows you the different options you've got and you can choose them. So you might choose regression. And it'll give you different options on how to do that. So I think we've already crossed this threshold of baking in machine learning and baking in the data science tools. And we've seen that with Cloud and other technologies where, you know, the Office 365 is not, you can't get a non Cloud Office 365 account, right? I think that's already happened in machine learning. What we're seeing though, is organizations even as large as the Googles still in catch up mode, in my view, on some of the shift that's taken place. So we've seen them write little games and apps where people do doodles and then it runs through the ML library and says, "Well that's a cow, or a unicorn, or a duck." And you get awards, and gold coins, and whatnot. But you know, as far as 12 years ago I was working on a project, where we had full size airplanes acting as drones. And we mapped with two and 3-D imagery. With 2-D high res imagery and LiDAR for 3-D point Clouds. We were finding poles and wires for utility companies, using ML before it even became a trend. And baking it right into the tools. And used to store on our web page and clicked and pointed on. >> To counter Lillian's point, it's not crowdsourcing but crowd sharing that's really powering a lot of the rapid leaps forward. If you look at, you know, DSX from IBM. Or you look at Node-RED, huge number of free workflows that someone has probably already done the thing that you are trying to do. Go out and find in the libraries, through Jupyter and R Notebooks, there's an ability-- >> Chris can you define before you go-- >> Chris: Sure. >> This is great, crowdsourcing versus crowd sharing. What's the distinction? >> Well, so crowdsourcing, kind of, where in the context of the question you ask is like I'm looking for stuff that other people, getting people to do stuff that, for me. It's like asking people to mine classifieds. Whereas crowd sharing, someone has done the thing already, it already exists. You're not purpose built, saying, "Jim, help me build this thing." It's like, "Oh Jim, you already "built this thing, cool. "So can I fork it and make my own from it?" >> Okay, I see what you mean, keep going. >> And then, again, going back to earlier. In terms of the advancements. Really deep learning, it probably is a good idea to just sort of define these things. Machine learning is how machines do things without being explicitly programmed to do them. Deep learning's like if you can imagine a stack of pancakes, right? Each pancake is a type of machine learning algorithm. And your data is the syrup. You pour the data on it. It goes from layer, to layer, to layer, to layer, and what you end up with at the end is breakfast. That's the easiest analogy for what deep learning is. Now imagine a stack of pancakes, 500 or 1,000 high, that's where deep learning's going now. >> Sure, multi layered machine learning models, essentially, that have the ability to do higher levels of abstraction. Like image analysis, Lillian? >> I had a comment to add about automation and data science. Because there are a lot of tools that are able to, or applications that are able to use data science algorithms and output results. But the reason that data scientists aren't in risk of losing their jobs, is because just because you can get the result, you also have to be able to interpret it. Which means you have to understand it. And that involves deep math and statistical understanding. Plus domain expertise. So, okay, great, you took out the coding element but that doesn't mean you can codify a person's ability to understand and apply that insight. >> Dave: Joe, you have something to add? >> I could just add that I see the trend. Really, the reason we're talking about it today is machine learning is not necessarily, it's not new, like Dez was saying. But what's different is the accessibility of it now. It's just so easily accessible. All of the tools that are coming out, for data, have machine learning built into it. So the machine learning algorithms, which used to be a black art, you know, years ago, now is just very easily accessible. That you can get, it's part of everyone's toolbox. And the other reason that we're talking about it more, is that data science is starting to become a core curriculum in higher education. Which is something that's new, right? That didn't exist 10 years ago? But over the past five years, I'd say, you know, it's becoming more and more easily accessible for education. So now, people understand it. And now we have it accessible in our tool sets. So now we can apply it. And I think that's, those two things coming together is really making it becoming part of the standard of doing analytics. And I guess the last part is, once we can train the machines to start doing the analytics, right? And get smarter as it ingests more data. And then we can actually take that and embed it in our applications. That's the part that you still need data scientists to create that. But once we can have standalone appliances that are intelligent, that's when we're going to start seeing, really, machine learning and artificial intelligence really start to take off even more. >> Dave: So I'd like to switch gears a little bit and bring Ronald on. >> Okay, yes. >> Here you go, there. >> Ronald, the bromide in this sort of big data world we live in is, the data is the new oil. You got to be a data driven company and many other cliches. But when you talk to organizations and you start to peel the onion. You find that most companies really don't have a good way to connect data with business impact and business value. What are you seeing with your clients and just generally in the community, with how companies are doing that? How should they do that? I mean, is that something that is a viable approach? You don't see accountants, for example, quantifying the value of data on a balance sheet. There's no standards for doing that. And so it's sort of this fuzzy concept. How are and how should organizations take advantage of data and turn it into value. >> So, I think in general, if you look how companies look at data. They have departments and within the departments they have tools specific for this department. And what you see is that there's no central, let's say, data collection. There's no central management of governance. There's no central management of quality. There's no central management of security. Each department is manages their data on their own. So if you didn't ask, on one hand, "Okay, how should they do it?" It's basically go back to the drawing table and say, "Okay, how should we do it?" We should collect centrally, the data. And we should take care for central governance. We should take care for central data quality. We should take care for centrally managing this data. And look from a company perspective and not from a department perspective what the value of data is. So, look at the perspective from your whole company. And this means that it has to be brought on one end to, whether it's from C level, where most of them still fail to understand what it really means. And what the impact can be for that company. >> It's a hard problem. Because data by its' very nature is now so decentralized. But Chris you have a-- >> The thing I want to add to that is, think about in terms of valuing data. Look at what it would cost you for data breach. Like what is the expensive of having your data compromised. If you don't have governance. If you don't have policy in place. Look at the major breaches of the last couple years. And how many billions of dollars those companies lost in market value, and trust, and all that stuff. That's one way you can value data very easily. "What will it cost us if we mess this up?" >> So a lot of CEOs will hear that and say, "Okay, I get it. "I have to spend to protect myself, "but I'd like to make a little money off of this data thing. "How do I do that?" >> Well, I like to think of it, you know, I think data's definitely an asset within an organization. And is becoming more and more of an asset as the years go by. But data is still a raw material. And that's the way I think about it. In order to actually get the value, just like if you're creating any product, you start with raw materials and then you refine it. And then it becomes a product. For data, data is a raw material. You need to refine it. And then the insight is the product. And that's really where the value is. And the insight is absolutely, you can monetize your insight. >> So data is, abundant insights are scarce. >> Well, you know, actually you could say that intermediate between insights and the data are the models themselves. The statistical, predictive, machine learning models. That are a crystallization of insights that have been gained by people called data scientists. What are your thoughts on that? Are statistical, predictive, machine learning models something, an asset, that companies, organizations, should manage governance of on a centralized basis or not? >> Well the models are essentially the refinery system, right? So as you're refining your data, you need to have process around how you exactly do that. Just like refining anything else. It needs to be controlled and it needs to be governed. And I think that data is no different from that. And I think that it's very undisciplined right now, in the market or in the industry. And I think maturing that discipline around data science, I think is something that's going to be a very high focus in this year and next. >> You were mentioning, "How do you make money from data?" Because there's all this risk associated with security breaches. But at the risk of sounding simplistic, you can generate revenue from system optimization, or from developing products and services. Using data to develop products and services that better meet the demands and requirements of your markets. So that you can sell more. So either you are using data to earn more money. Or you're using data to optimize your system so you have less cost. And that's a simple answer for how you're going to be making money from the data. But yes, there is always the counter to that, which is the security risks. >> Well, and my question really relates to, you know, when you think of talking to C level executives, they kind of think about running the business, growing the business, and transforming the business. And a lot of times they can't fund these transformations. And so I would agree, there's many, many opportunities to monetize data, cut costs, increase revenue. But organizations seem to struggle to either make a business case. And actually implement that transformation. >> Dave, I'd love to have a crack at that. I think this conversation epitomizes the type of things that are happening in board rooms and C suites already. So we've really quickly dived into the detail of data. And the detail of machine learning. And the detail of data science, without actually stopping and taking a breath and saying, "Well, we've "got lots of it, but what have we got? "Where is it? "What's the value of it? "Is there any value in it at all?" And, "How much time and money should we invest in it?" For example, we talk of being about a resource. I look at data as a utility. When I turn the tap on to get a drink of water, it's there as a utility. I counted it being there but I don't always sample the quality of the water and I probably should. It could have Giardia in it, right? But what's interesting is I trust the water at home, in Sydney. Because we have a fairly good experience with good quality water. If I were to go to some other nation. I probably wouldn't trust that water. And I think, when you think about it, what's happening in organizations. It's almost the same as what we're seeing here today. We're having a lot of fun, diving into the detail. But what we've forgotten to do is ask the question, "Well why is data even important? "What's the reasoning to the business? "Why are we in business? "What are we doing as an organization? "And where does data fit into that?" As opposed to becoming so fixated on data because it's a media hyped topic. I think once you can wind that back a bit and say, "Well, we have lot's of data, "but is it good data? "Is it quality data? "Where's it coming from? "Is it ours? "Are we allowed to have it? "What treatment are we allowed to give that data?" As you said, "Are we controlling it? "And where are we controlling it? "Who owns it?" There's so many questions to be asked. But the first question I like to ask people in plain English is, "Well is there any value "in data in the first place? "What decisions are you making that data can help drive? "What things are in your organizations, "KPIs and milestones you're trying to meet "that data might be a support?" So then instead of becoming fixated with data as a thing in itself, it becomes part of your DNA. Does that make sense? >> Think about what money means. The Economists' Rhyme, "Money is a measure for, "a systems for, a medium, a measure, and exchange." So it's a medium of exchange. A measure of value, a way to exchange something. And a way to store value. Data, good clean data, well governed, fits all four of those. So if you're trying to figure out, "How do we make money out of stuff." Figure out how money works. And then figure out how you map data to it. >> So if we approach and we start with a company, we always start with business case, which is quite clear. And defined use case, basically, start with a team on one hand, marketing people, sales people, operational people, and also the whole data science team. So start with this case. It's like, defining, basically a movie. If you want to create the movie, You know where you're going to. You know what you want to achieve to create the customer experience. And this is basically the same with a business case. Where you define, "This is the case. "And this is how we're going to derive value, "start with it and deliver value within a month." And after the month, you check, "Okay, where are we and how can we move forward? "And what's the value that we've brought?" >> Now I as well, start with business case. I've done thousands of business cases in my life, with organizations. And unless that organization was kind of a data broker, the business case rarely has a discreet component around data. Is that changing, in your experience? >> Yes, so we guide companies into be data driven. So initially, indeed, they don't like to use the data. They don't like to use the analysis. So that's why, how we help. And is it changing? Yes, they understand that they need to change. But changing people is not always easy. So, you see, it's hard if you're not involved and you're not guiding it, they fall back in doing the daily tasks. So it's changing, but it's a hard change. >> Well and that's where this common parlance comes in. And Lillian, you, sort of, this is what you do for a living, is helping people understand these things, as you've been sort of evangelizing that common parlance. But do you have anything to add? >> I wanted to add that for organizational implementations, another key component to success is to start small. Start in one small line of business. And then when you've mastered that area and made it successful, then try and deploy it in more areas of the business. And as far as initializing big data implementation, that's generally how to do it successfully. >> There's the whole issue of putting a value on data as a discreet asset. Then there's the issue, how do you put a value on a data lake? Because a data lake, is essentially an asset you build on spec. It's an exploratory archive, essentially, of all kinds of data that might yield some insights, but you have to have a team of data scientists doing exploration and modeling. But it's all on spec. How do you put a value on a data lake? And at what point does the data lake itself become a burden? Because you got to store that data and manage it. At what point do you drain that lake? At what point, do the costs of maintaining that lake outweigh the opportunity costs of not holding onto it? >> So each Hadoop note is approximately $20,000 per year cost for storage. So I think that there needs to be a test and a diagnostic, before even inputting, ingesting the data and storing it. "Is this actually going to be useful? "What value do we plan to create from this?" Because really, you can't store all the data. And it's a lot cheaper to store data in Hadoop then it was in traditional systems but it's definitely not free. So people need to be applying this test before even ingesting the data. Why do we need this? What business value? >> I think the question we need to also ask around this is, "Why are we building data lakes "in the first place? "So what's the function it's going to perform for you?" There's been a huge drive to this idea. "We need a data lake. "We need to put it all somewhere." But invariably they become data swamps. And we only half jokingly say that because I've seen 90 day projects turn from a great idea, to a really bad nightmare. And as Lillian said, it is cheaper in some ways to put it into a HDFS platform, in a technical sense. But when we look at all the fully burdened components, it's actually more expensive to find Hadoop specialists and Spark specialists to maintain that cluster. And invariably I'm finding that big data, quote unquote, is not actually so much lots of data, it's complex data. And as Lillian said, "You don't always "need to store it all." So I think if we go back to the question of, "What's the function of a data lake in the first place? "Why are we building one?" And then start to build some fully burdened cost components around that. We'll quickly find that we don't actually need a data lake, per se. We just need an interim data store. So we might take last years' data and tokenize it, and analyze it, and do some analytics on it, and just keep the meta data. So I think there is this rush, for a whole range of reasons, particularly vendor driven. To build data lakes because we think they're a necessity, when in reality they may just be an interim requirement and we don't need to keep them for a long term. >> I'm going to attempt to, the last few questions, put them all together. And I think, they all belong together because one of the reasons why there's such hesitation about progress within the data world is because there's just so much accumulated tech debt already. Where there's a new idea. We go out and we build it. And six months, three years, it really depends on how big the idea is, millions of dollars is spent. And then by the time things are built the idea is pretty much obsolete, no one really cares anymore. And I think what's exciting now is that the speed to value is just so much faster than it's ever been before. And I think that, you know, what makes that possible is this concept of, I don't think of a data lake as a thing. I think of a data lake as an ecosystem. And that ecosystem has evolved so much more, probably in the last three years than it has in the past 30 years. And it's exciting times, because now once we have this ecosystem in place, if we have a new idea, we can actually do it in minutes not years. And that's really the exciting part. And I think, you know, data lake versus a data swamp, comes back to just traditional data architecture. And if you architect your data lake right, you're going to have something that's substantial, that's you're going to be able to harness and grow. If you don't do it right. If you just throw data. If you buy Hadoop cluster or a Cloud platform and just throw your data out there and say, "We have a lake now." yeah, you're going to create a mess. And I think taking the time to really understand, you know, the new paradigm of data architecture and modern data engineering, and actually doing it in a very disciplined way. If you think about it, what we're doing is we're building laboratories. And if you have a shabby, poorly built laboratory, the best scientist in the world isn't going to be able to prove his theories. So if you have a well built laboratory and a clean room, then, you know a scientist can get what he needs done very, very, very efficiently. And that's the goal, I think, of data management today. >> I'd like to just quickly add that I totally agree with the challenge between on premise and Cloud mode. And I think one of the strong themes of today is going to be the hybrid data management challenge. And I think organizations, some organizations, have rushed to adopt Cloud. And thinking it's a really good place to dump the data and someone else has to manage the problem. And then they've ended up with a very expensive death by 1,000 cuts in some senses. And then others have been very reluctant as a result of not gotten access to rapid moving and disruptive technology. So I think there's a really big challenge to get a basic conversation going around what's the value using Cloud technology as in adopting it, versus what are the risks? And when's the right time to move? For example, should we Cloud Burst for workloads? Do we move whole data sets in there? You know, moving half a petabyte of data into a Cloud platform back is a non-trivial exercise. But moving a terabyte isn't actually that big a deal anymore. So, you know, should we keep stuff behind the firewalls? I'd be interested in seeing this week where 80% of the data, supposedly is. And just push out for Cloud tools, machine learning, data science tools, whatever they might be, cognitive analytics, et cetera. And keep the bulk of the data on premise. Or should we just move whole spools into the Cloud? There is no one size fits all. There's no silver bullet. Every organization has it's own quirks and own nuances they need to think through and make a decision themselves. >> Very often, Dez, organizations have zonal architectures so you'll have a data lake that consists of a no sequel platform that might be used for say, mobile applications. A Hadoop platform that might be used for unstructured data refinement, so forth. A streaming platform, so forth and so on. And then you'll have machine learning models that are built and optimized for those different platforms. So, you know, think of it in terms of then, your data lake, is a set of zones that-- >> It gets even more complex just playing on that theme, when you think about what Cisco started, called Folk Computing. I don't really like that term. But edge analytics, or computing at the edge. We've seen with the internet coming along where we couldn't deliver everything with a central data center. So we started creating this concept of content delivery networks, right? I think the same thing, I know the same thing has happened in data analysis and data processing. Where we've been pulling social media out of the Cloud, per se, and bringing it back to a central source. And doing analytics on it. But when you think of something like, say for example, when the Dreamliner 787 from Boeing came out, this airplane created 1/2 a terabyte of data per flight. Now let's just do some quick, back of the envelope math. There's 87,400 fights a day, just in the domestic airspace in the USA alone, per day. Now 87,400 by 1/2 a terabyte, that's 43 point five petabytes a day. You physically can't copy that from quote unquote in the Cloud, if you'll pardon the pun, back to the data center. So now we've got the challenge, a lot of our Enterprise data's behind a firewall, supposedly 80% of it. But what's out at the edge of the network. Where's the value in that data? So there are zonal challenges. Now what do I do with my Enterprise versus the open data, the mobile data, the machine data. >> Yeah, we've seen some recent data from IDC that says, "About 43% of the data "is going to stay at the edge." We think that, that's way understated, just given the examples. We think it's closer to 90% is going to stay at the edge. >> Just on the airplane topic, right? So Airbus wasn't going to be outdone. Boeing put 4,000 sensors or something in their 787 Dreamliner six years ago. Airbus just announced an 83, 81,000 with 10,000 sensors in it. Do the same math. Now the FAA in the US said that all aircraft and all carriers have to be, by early next year, I think it's like March or April next year, have to be at the same level of BIOS. Or the same capability of data collection and so forth. It's kind of like a mini GDPR for airlines. So with the 83, 81,000 with 10,000 sensors, that becomes two point five terabytes per flight. If you do the math, it's 220 petabytes of data just in one day's traffic, domestically in the US. Now, it's just so mind boggling that we're going to have to completely turn our thinking on its' head, on what do we do behind the firewall? What do we do in the Cloud versus what we might have to do in the airplane? I mean, think about edge analytics in the airplane processing data, as you said, Jim, streaming analytics in flight. >> Yeah that's a big topic within Wikibon, so, within the team. Me and David Floyer, and my other colleagues. They're talking about the whole notion of edge architecture. Not only will most of the data be persisted at the edge, most of the deep learning models like TensorFlow will be executed at the edge. To some degree, the training of those models will happen in the Cloud. But much of that will be pushed in a federated fashion to the edge, or at least I'm predicting. We're already seeing some industry moves in that direction, in terms of architectures. Google has a federated training, project or initiative. >> Chris: Look at TensorFlow Lite. >> Which is really fascinating for it's geared to IOT, I'm sorry, go ahead. >> Look at TensorFlow Lite. I mean in the announcement of having every Android device having ML capabilities, is Google's essential acknowledgment, "We can't do it all." So we need to essentially, sort of like a setting at home. Everyone's smartphone top TV box just to help with the processing. >> Now we're talking about this, this sort of leads to this IOT discussion but I want to underscore the operating model. As you were saying, "You can't just "lift and shift to the Cloud." You're not going to, CEOs aren't going to get the billion dollar hit by just doing that. So you got to change the operating model. And that leads to, this discussion of IOT. And an entirely new operating model. >> Well, there are companies that are like Sisense who have worked with Intel. And they've taken this concept. They've taken the business logic and not just putting it in the chip, but actually putting it in memory, in the chip. So as data's going through the chip it's not just actually being processed but it's actually being baked in memory. So level one, two, and three cache. Now this is a game changer. Because as Chris was saying, even if we were to get the data back to a central location, the compute load, I saw a real interesting thing from I think it was Google the other day, one of the guys was doing a talk. And he spoke about what it meant to add cognitive and voice processing into just the Android platform. And they used some number, like that had, double the amount of compute they had, just to add voice for free, to the Android platform. Now even for Google, that's a nontrivial exercise. So as Chris was saying, I think we have to again, flip it on its' head and say, "How much can we put "at the edge of the network?" Because think about these phones. I mean, even your fridge and microwave, right? We put a man on the moon with something that these days, we make for $89 at home, on the Raspberry Pie computer, right? And even that was 1,000 times more powerful. When we start looking at what's going into the chips, we've seen people build new, not even GPUs, but deep learning and stream analytics capable chips. Like Google, for example. That's going to make its' way into consumer products. So that, now the compute capacity in phones, is going to, I think transmogrify in some ways because there is some magic in there. To the point where, as Chris was saying, "We're going to have the smarts in our phone." And a lot of that workload is going to move closer to us. And only the metadata that we need to move is going to go centrally. >> Well here's the thing. The edge isn't the technology. The edge is actually the people. When you look at, for example, the MIT language Scratch. This is kids programming language. It's drag and drop. You know, kids can assemble really fun animations and make little movies. We're training them to build for IOT. Because if you look at a system like Node-RED, it's an IBM interface that is drag and drop. Your workflow is for IOT. And you can push that to a device. Scratch has a converter for doing those. So the edge is what those thousands and millions of kids who are learning how to code, learning how to think architecturally and algorithmically. What they're going to create that is beyond what any of us can possibly imagine. >> I'd like to add one other thing, as well. I think there's a topic we've got to start tabling. And that is what I refer to as the gravity of data. So when you think about how planets are formed, right? Particles of dust accrete. They form into planets. Planets develop gravity. And the reason we're not flying into space right now is that there's gravitational force. Even though it's one of the weakest forces, it keeps us on our feet. Oftentimes in organizations, I ask them to start thinking about, "Where is the center "of your universe with regard to the gravity of data." Because if you can follow the center of your universe and the gravity of your data, you can often, as Chris is saying, find where the business logic needs to be. And it could be that you got to think about a storage problem. You can think about a compute problem. You can think about a streaming analytics problem. But if you can find where the center of your universe and the center of your gravity for your data is, often you can get a really good insight into where you can start focusing on where the workloads are going to be where the smarts are going to be. Whether it's small, medium, or large. >> So this brings up the topic of data governance. One of the themes here at Fast Track Your Data is GDPR. What it means. It's one of the reasons, I think IBM selected Europe, generally, Munich specifically. So let's talk about GDPR. We had a really interesting discussion last night. So let's kind of recreate some of that. I'd like somebody in the panel to start with, what is GDPR? And why does it matter, Ronald? >> Yeah, maybe I can start. Maybe a little bit more in general unified governance. So if i talk to companies and I need to explain to them what's governance, I basically compare it with a crime scene. So in a crime scene if something happens, they start with securing all the evidence. So they start sealing the environment. And take care that all the evidence is collected. And on the other hand, you see that they need to protect this evidence. There are all kinds of policies. There are all kinds of procedures. There are all kinds of rules, that need to be followed. To take care that the whole evidence is secured well. And once you start, basically, investigating. So you have the crime scene investigators. You have the research lab. You have all different kind of people. They need to have consent before they can use all this evidence. And the whole reason why they're doing this is in order to collect the villain, the crook. To catch him and on the other hand, once he's there, to convict him. And we do this to have trust in the materials. Or trust in basically, the analytics. And on the other hand to, the public have trust in everything what's happened with the data. So if you look to a company, where data is basically the evidence, this is the value of your data. It's similar to like the evidence within a crime scene. But most companies don't treat it like this. So if we then look to GDPR, GDPR basically shifts the power and the ownership of the data from the company to the person that created it. Which is often, let's say the consumer. And there's a lot of paradox in this. Because all the companies say, "We need to have this customer data. "Because we need to improve the customer experience." So if you make it concrete and let's say it's 1st of June, so GDPR is active. And it's first of June 2018. And I go to iTunes, so I use iTunes. Let's go to iTunes said, "Okay, Apple please "give me access to my data." I want to see which kind of personal information you have stored for me. On the other end, I want to have the right to rectify all this data. I want to be able to change it and give them a different level of how they can use my data. So I ask this to iTunes. And then I say to them, okay, "I basically don't like you anymore. "I want to go to Spotify. "So please transfer all my personal data to Spotify." So that's possible once it's June 18. Then I go back to iTunes and say, "Okay, I don't like it anymore. "Please reduce my consent. "I withdraw my consent. "And I want you to remove all my "personal data for everything that you use." And I go to Spotify and I give them, let's say, consent for using my data. So this is a shift where you can, as a person be the owner of the data. And this has a lot of consequences, of course, for organizations, how to manage this. So it's quite simple for the consumer. They get the power, it's maturing the whole law system. But it's a big consequence of course for organizations. >> This is going to be a nightmare for marketers. But fill in some of the gaps there. >> Let's go back, so GDPR, the General Data Protection Regulation, was passed by the EU in 2016, in May of 2016. It is, as Ronald was saying, it's four basic things. The right to privacy. The right to be forgotten. Privacy built into systems by default. And the right to data transfer. >> Joe: It takes effect next year. >> It is already in effect. GDPR took effect in May of 2016. The enforcement penalties take place the 25th of May 2018. Now here's where, there's two things on the penalty side that are important for everyone to know. Now number one, GDPR is extra territorial. Which means that an EU citizen, anywhere on the planet has GDPR, goes with them. So say you're a pizza shop in Nebraska. And an EU citizen walks in, orders a pizza. Gives her the credit card and stuff like that. If you for some reason, store that data, GDPR now applies to you, Mr. Pizza shop, whether or not you do business in the EU. Because an EU citizen's data is with you. Two, the penalties are much stiffer then they ever have been. In the old days companies could simply write off penalties as saying, "That's the cost of doing business." With GDPR the penalties are up to 4% of your annual revenue or 20 million Euros, whichever is greater. And there may be criminal sanctions, charges, against key company executives. So there's a lot of questions about how this is going to be implemented. But one of the first impacts you'll see from a marketing perspective is all the advertising we do, targeting people by their age, by their personally identifiable information, by their demographics. Between now and May 25th 2018, a good chunk of that may have to go away because there's no way for you to say, "Well this person's an EU citizen, this person's not." People give false information all the time online. So how do you differentiate it? Every company, regardless of whether they're in the EU or not will have to adapt to it, or deal with the penalties. >> So Lillian, as a consumer this is designed to protect you. But you had a very negative perception of this regulation. >> I've looked over the GDPR and to me it actually looks like a socialist agenda. It looks like (panel laughs) no, it looks like a full assault on free enterprise and capitalism. And on its' face from a legal perspective, its' completely and wholly unenforceable. Because they're assigning jurisdictional rights to the citizen. But what are they going to do? They're going to go to Nebraska and they're going to call in the guy from the pizza shop? And call him into what court? The EU court? It's unenforceable from a legal perspective. And if you write a law that's unenforceable, you know, it's got to be enforceable in every element. It can't be just, "Oh, we're only "going to enforce it for Facebook and for Google. "But it's not enforceable for," it needs to be written so that it's a complete and actionable law. And it's not written in that way. And from a technological perspective it's not implementable. I think you said something like 652 EU regulators or political people voted for this and 10 voted against it. But what do they know about actually implementing it? Is it possible? There's all sorts of regulations out there that aren't possible to implement. I come from an environmental engineering background. And it's absolutely ridiculous because these agencies will pass laws that actually, it's not possible to implement those in practice. The cost would be too great. And it's not even needed. So I don't know, I just saw this and I thought, "You know, if the EU wants to," what they're essentially trying to do is regulate what the rest of the world does on the internet. And if they want to build their own internet like China has and police it the way that they want to. But Ronald here, made an analogy between data, and free enterprise, and a crime scene. Now to me, that's absolutely ridiculous. What does data and someone signing up for an email list have to do with a crime scene? And if EU wants to make it that way they can police their own internet. But they can't go across the world. They can't go to Singapore and tell Singapore, or go to the pizza shop in Nebraska and tell them how to run their business. >> You know, EU overreach in the post Brexit era, of what you're saying has a lot of validity. How far can the tentacles of the EU reach into other sovereign nations. >> What court are they going to call them into? >> Yeah. >> I'd like to weigh in on this. There are lots of unknowns, right? So I'd like us to focus on the things we do know. We've already dealt with similar situations before. In Australia, we introduced a goods and sales tax. Completely foreign concept. Everything you bought had 10% on it. No one knew how to deal with this. It was a completely new practice in accounting. There's a whole bunch of new software that had to be written. MYRB had to have new capability, but we coped. No one actually went to jail yet. It's decades later, for not complying with GST. So what it was, was a framework on how to shift from non sales tax related revenue collection. To sales tax related revenue collection. I agree that there are some egregious things built into this. I don't disagree with that at all. But I think if I put my slightly broader view of the world hat on, we have well and truly gone past the point in my mind, where data was respected, data was treated in a sensible way. I mean I get emails from companies I've never done business with. And when I follow it up, it's because I did business with a credit card company, that gave it to a service provider, that thought that I was going to, when I bought a holiday to come to Europe, that I might want travel insurance. Now some might say there's value in that. And other's say there's not, there's the debate. But let's just focus on what we're talking about. We're talking about a framework for governance of the treatment of data. If we remove all the emotive component, what we are talking about is a series of guidelines, backed by laws, that say, "We would like you to do this," in an ideal world. But I don't think anyone's going to go to jail, on day one. They may go to jail on day 180. If they continue to do nothing about it. So they're asking you to sort of sit up and pay attention. Do something about it. There's a whole bunch of relief around how you approach it. The big thing for me, is there's no get out of jail card, right? There is no get out of jail card for not complying. But there's plenty of support. I mean, we're going to have ambulance chasers everywhere. We're going to have class actions. We're going to have individual suits. The greatest thing to do right now is get into GDPR law. Because you seem to think data scientists are unicorn? >> What kind of life is that if there's ambulance chasers everywhere? You want to live like that? >> Well I think we've seen ad blocking. I use ad blocking as an example, right? A lot of organizations with advertising broke the internet by just throwing too much content on pages, to the point where they're just unusable. And so we had this response with ad blocking. I think in many ways, GDPR is a regional response to a situation where I don't think it's the exact right answer. But it's the next evolutional step. We'll see things evolve over time. >> It's funny you mentioned it because in the United States one of the things that has happened, is that with the change in political administrations, the regulations on what companies can do with your data have actually been laxened, to the point where, for example, your internet service provider can resell your browsing history, with or without your consent. Or your consent's probably buried in there, on page 47. And so, GDPR is kind of a response to saying, "You know what? "You guys over there across the Atlantic "are kind of doing some fairly "irresponsible things with what you allow companies to do." Now, to Lillian's point, no one's probably going to go after the pizza shop in Nebraska because they don't do business in the EU. They don't have an EU presence. And it's unlikely that an EU regulator's going to get on a plane from Brussels and fly to Topeka and say, or Omaha, sorry, "Come on Joe, let's get the pizza shop in order here." But for companies, particularly Cloud companies, that have offices and operations within the EU, they have to sit up and pay attention. So if you have any kind of EU operations, or any kind of fiscal presence in the EU, you need to get on board. >> But to Lillian's point it becomes a boondoggle for lawyers in the EU who want to go after deep pocketed companies like Facebook and Google. >> What's the value in that? It seems like regulators are just trying to create work for themselves. >> What about the things that say advertisers can do, not so much with the data that they have? With the data that they don't have. In other words, they have people called data scientists who build models that can do inferences on sparse data. And do amazing things in terms of personalization. What do you do about all those gray areas? Where you got machine learning models and so forth? >> But it applies-- >> It applies to personally identifiable information. But if you have a talented enough data scientist, you don't need the PII or even the inferred characteristics. If a certain type of behavior happens on your website, for example. And this path of 17 pages almost always leads to a conversion, it doesn't matter who you are or where you're coming from. If you're a good enough data scientist, you can build a model that will track that. >> Like you know, target, infer some young woman was pregnant. And they inferred correctly even though that was never divulged. I mean, there's all those gray areas that, how can you stop that slippery slope? >> Well I'm going to weigh in really quickly. A really interesting experiment for people to do. When people get very emotional about it I say to them, "Go to Google.com, "view source, put it in seven point Courier "font in Word and count how many pages it is." I guess you can't guess how many pages? It's 52 pages of seven point Courier font, HTML to render one logo, and a search field, and a click button. Now why do we need 52 pages of HTML source code and Java script just to take a search query. Think about what's being done in that. It's effectively a mini operating system, to figure out who you are, and what you're doing, and where you been. Now is that a good or bad thing? I don't know, I'm not going to make a judgment call. But what I'm saying is we need to stop and take a deep breath and say, "Does anybody need a 52 page, "home page to take a search query?" Because that's just the tip of the iceberg. >> To that point, I like the results that Google gives me. That's why I use Google and not Bing. Because I get better search results. So, yeah, I don't mind if you mine my personal data and give me, our Facebook ads, those are the only ads, I saw in your article that GDPR is going to take out targeted advertising. The only ads in the entire world, that I like are Facebook ads. Because I actually see products I'm interested in. And I'm happy to learn about that. I think, "Oh I want to research that. "I want to see this new line of products "and what are their competitors?" And I like the targeted advertising. I like the targeted search results because it's giving me more of the information that I'm actually interested in. >> And that's exactly what it's about. You can still decide, yourself, if you want to have this targeted advertising. If not, then you don't give consent. If you like it, you give consent. So if a company gives you value, you give consent back. So it's not that it's restricting everything. It's giving consent. And I think it's similar to what happened and the same type of response, what happened, we had the Mad Cow Disease here in Europe, where you had the whole food chain that needed to be tracked. And everybody said, "No, it's not required." But now it's implemented. Everybody in Europe does it. So it's the same, what probably going to happen over here as well. >> So what does GDPR mean for data scientists? >> I think GDPR is, I think it is needed. I think one of the things that may be slowing data science down is fear. People are afraid to share their data. Because they don't know what's going to be done with it. If there are some guidelines around it that should be enforced and I think, you know, I think it's been said but as long as a company could prove that it's doing due diligence to protect your data, I think no one is going to go to jail. I think when there's, you know, we reference a crime scene, if there's a heinous crime being committed, all right, then it's going to become obvious. And then you do go directly to jail. But I think having guidelines and even laws around privacy and protection of data is not necessarily a bad thing. You can do a lot of data, really meaningful data science, without understanding that it's Joe Caserta. All of the demographics about me. All of the characteristics about me as a human being, I think are still on the table. All that they're saying is that you can't go after Joe, himself, directly. And I think that's okay. You know, there's still a lot of things. We could still cure diseases without knowing that I'm Joe Caserta, right? As long as you know everything else about me. And I think that's really at the core, that's what we're trying to do. We're trying to protect the individual and the individual's data about themselves. But I think as far as how it affects data science, you know, a lot of our clients, they're afraid to implement things because they don't exactly understand what the guideline is. And they don't want to go to jail. So they wind up doing nothing. So now that we have something in writing that, at least, it's something that we can work towards, I think is a good thing. >> In many ways, organizations are suffering from the deer in the headlight problem. They don't understand it. And so they just end up frozen in the headlights. But I just want to go back one step if I could. We could get really excited about what it is and is not. But for me, the most critical thing there is to remember though, data breaches are happening. There are over 1,400 data breaches, on average, per day. And most of them are not trivial. And when we saw 1/2 a billion from Yahoo. And then one point one billion and then one point five billion. I mean, think about what that actually means. There were 47,500 Mongodbs breached in an 18 hour window, after an automated upgrade. And they were airlines, they were banks, they were police stations. They were hospitals. So when I think about frameworks like GDPR, I'm less worried about whether I'm going to see ads and be sold stuff. I'm more worried about, and I'll give you one example. My 12 year old son has an account at a platform called Edmodo. Now I'm not going to pick on that brand for any reason but it's a current issue. Something like, I think it was like 19 million children in the world had their username, password, email address, home address, and all this social interaction on this Facebook for kids platform called Edmodo, breached in one night. Now I got my hands on a copy. And everything about my son is there. Now I have a major issue with that. Because I can't do anything to undo that, nothing. The fact that I was able to get a copy, within hours on a dark website, for free. The fact that his first name, last name, email, mobile phone number, all these personal messages from friends. Nobody has the right to allow that to breach on my son. Or your children, or our children. For me, GDPR, is a framework for us to try and behave better about really big issues. Whether it's a socialist issue. Whether someone's got an issue with advertising. I'm actually not interested in that at all. What I'm interested in is companies need to behave much better about the treatment of data when it's the type of data that's being breached. And I get really emotional when it's my son, or someone else's child. Because I don't care if my bank account gets hacked. Because they hedge that. They underwrite and insure themselves and the money arrives back to my bank. But when it's my wife who donated blood and a blood donor website got breached and her details got lost. Even things like sexual preferences. That they ask questions on, is out there. My 12 year old son is out there. Nobody has the right to allow that to happen. For me, GDPR is the framework for us to focus on that. >> Dave: Lillian, is there a comment you have? >> Yeah, I think that, I think that security concerns are 100% and definitely a serious issue. Security needs to be addressed. And I think a lot of the stuff that's happening is due to, I think we need better security personnel. I think we need better people working in the security area where they're actually looking and securing. Because I don't think you can regulate I was just, I wanted to take the microphone back when you were talking about taking someone to jail. Okay, I have a background in law. And if you look at this, you guys are calling it a framework. But it's not a framework. What they're trying to do is take 4% of your business revenues per infraction. They want to say, "If a person signs up "on your email list and you didn't "like, necessarily give whatever "disclaimer that the EU said you need to give. "Per infraction, we're going to take "4% of your business revenue." That's a law, that they're trying to put into place. And you guys are talking about taking people to jail. What jail are you? EU is not a country. What jurisdiction do they have? Like, you're going to take pizza man Joe and put him in the EU jail? Is there an EU jail? Are you going to take them to a UN jail? I mean, it's just on its' face it doesn't hold up to legal tests. I don't understand how they could enforce this. >> I'd like to just answer the question on-- >> Security is a serious issue. I would be extremely upset if I were you. >> I personally know, people who work for companies who've had data breaches. And I respect them all. They're really smart people. They've got 25 plus years in security. And they are shocked that they've allowed a breach to take place. What they've invariably all agreed on is that a whole range of drivers have caused them to get to a bad practice. So then, for example, the donate blood website. The young person who was assist admin with all the right skills and all the right experience just made a basic mistake. They took a db dump of a mysql database before they upgraded their Wordpress website for the business. And they happened to leave it in a folder that was indexable by Google. And so somebody wrote a radio expression to search in Google to find sql backups. Now this person, I personally respect them. I think they're an amazing practitioner. They just made a mistake. So what does that bring us back to? It brings us back to the point that we need a safety net or a framework or whatever you want to call it. Where organizations have checks and balances no matter what they do. Whether it's an upgrade, a backup, a modification, you know. And they all think they do, but invariably we've seen from the hundreds of thousands of breaches, they don't. Now on the point of law, we could debate that all day. I mean the EU does have a remit. If I was caught speeding in Germany, as an Australian, I would be thrown into a German jail. If I got caught as an organization in France, breaching GDPR, I would be held accountable to the law in that region, by the organization pursuing me. So I think it's a bit of a misnomer saying I can't go to an EU jail. I don't disagree with you, totally, but I think it's regional. If I get a speeding fine and break the law of driving fast in EU, it's in the country, in the region, that I'm caught. And I think GDPR's going to be enforced in that same approach. >> All right folks, unfortunately the 60 minutes flew right by. And it does when you have great guests like yourselves. So thank you very much for joining this panel today. And we have an action packed day here. So we're going to cut over. The CUBE is going to have its' interview format starting in about 1/2 hour. And then we cut over to the main tent. Who's on the main tent? Dez, you're doing a main stage presentation today. Data Science is a Team Sport. Hillary Mason, has a breakout session. We also have a breakout session on GDPR and what it means for you. Are you ready for GDPR? Check out ibmgo.com. It's all free content, it's all open. You do have to sign in to see the Hillary Mason and the GDPR sessions. And we'll be back in about 1/2 hour with the CUBE. We'll be running replays all day on SiliconAngle.tv and also ibmgo.com. So thanks for watching everybody. Keep it right there, we'll be back in about 1/2 hour with the CUBE interviews. We're live from Munich, Germany, at Fast Track Your Data. This is Dave Vellante with Jim Kobielus, we'll see you shortly. (electronic music)