(gentle music) >> Narrator: "TheCUBE's" live coverage is made possible by funding from Dell Technologies, creating technologies that drive human progress. (upbeat music) >> Hello everybody, welcome back to day four of "theCUBE's" coverage of MWC '23. We're here live at the Fira in Barcelona. Wall-to-wall coverage, John Furrier is in our Palo Alto studio, banging out all the news. Really, the whole week we've been talking about the disaggregation of the telco network, the new opportunities in telco. We're really excited to have AT&T and Snowflake here. Dave Whittington is the AVP, at the Chief Data Office at AT&T. Roddy Tranum is the Assistant Vice President, for Channel Performance Data and Tools at AT&T. And Phil Kippen, the Global Head Of Industry-Telecom at Snowflake, Snowflake's new telecom business. Snowflake just announced earnings last night. Typical Scarpelli, they beat earnings, very conservative guidance, stocks down today, but we like Snowflake long term, they're on that path to 10 billion. Guys, welcome to "theCUBE." Thanks so much >> Phil: Thank you. >> for coming on. >> Dave and Roddy: Thanks Dave. >> Dave, let's start with you. The data culture inside of telco, We've had this, we've been talking all week about this monolithic system. Super reliable. You guys did a great job during the pandemic. Everything shifting to landlines. We didn't even notice, you guys didn't miss a beat. Saved us. But the data culture's changing inside telco. Explain that. >> Well, absolutely. So, first of all IoT and edge processing is bringing forth new and exciting opportunities all the time. So, we're bridging the world between a lot of the OSS stuff that we can do with edge processing. But bringing that back, and now we're talking about working, and I would say traditionally, we talk data warehouse. Data warehouse and big data are now becoming a single mesh, all right? And the use cases and the way you can use those, especially I'm taking that edge data and bringing it back over, now I'm running AI and ML models on it, and I'm pushing back to the edge, and I'm combining that with my relational data. So that mesh there is making all the difference. We're getting new use cases that we can do with that. And it's just, and the volume of data is immense. >> Now, I love ChatGPT, but I'm hoping your data models are more accurate than ChatGPT. I never know. Sometimes it's really good, sometimes it's really bad. But enterprise, you got to be clean with your AI, don't you? >> Not only you have to be clean, you have to monitor it for bias and be ethical about it. We're really good about that. First of all with AT&T, our brand is Platinum. We take care of that. So, we may not be as cutting-edge risk takers as others, but when we go to market with an AI or an ML or a product, it's solid. >> Well hey, as telcos go, you guys are leaning into the Cloud. So I mean, that's a good starting point. Roddy, explain your role. You got an interesting title, Channel Performance Data and Tools, what's that all about? >> So literally anything with our consumer, retail, concenters' channels, all of our channels, from a data perspective and metrics perspective, what it takes to run reps, agents, all the way to leadership levels, scorecards, how you rank in the business, how you're driving the business, from sales, service, customer experience, all that data infrastructure with our great partners on the CDO side, as well as Snowflake, that comes from my team. >> And that's traditionally been done in a, I don't mean the pejorative, but we're talking about legacy, monolithic, sort of data warehouse technologies. >> Absolutely. >> We have a love-hate relationship with them. It's what we had. It's what we used, right? And now that's evolving. And you guys are leaning into the Cloud. >> Dramatic evolution. And what Snowflake's enabled for us is impeccable. We've talked about having, people have dreamed of one data warehouse for the longest time and everything in one system. Really, this is the only way that becomes a reality. The more you get in Snowflake, we can have golden source data, and instead of duplicating that 50 times across AT&T, it's in one place, we just share it, everybody leverages it, and now it's not duplicated, and the process efficiency is just incredible. >> But it really hinges on that separation of storage and compute. And we talk about the monolithic warehouse, and one of the nightmares I've lived with, is having a monolithic warehouse. And let's just go with some of my primary, traditional customers, sales, marketing and finance. They are leveraging BSS OSS data all the time. For me to coordinate a deployment, I have to make sure that each one of these units can take an outage, if it's going to be a long deployment. With the separation of storage, compute, they own their own compute cluster. So I can move faster for these people. 'Cause if finance, I can implement his code without impacting finance or marketing. This brings in CI/CD to more reality. It brings us faster to market with more features. So if he wants to implement a new comp plan for the field reps, or we're reacting to the marketplace, where one of our competitors has done something, we can do that in days, versus waiting weeks or months. >> And we've reported on this a lot. This is the brilliance of Snowflake's founders, that whole separation >> Yep. >> from compute and data. I like Dave, that you're starting with sort of the business flexibility, 'cause there's a cost element of this too. You can dial down, you can turn off compute, and then of course the whole world said, "Hey, that's a good idea." And a VC started throwing money at Amazon, but Redshift said, "Oh, we can do that too, sort of, can't turn off the compute." But I want to ask you Phil, so, >> Sure. >> it looks from my vantage point, like you're taking your Data Cloud message which was originally separate compute from storage simplification, now data sharing, automated governance, security, ultimately the marketplace. >> Phil: Right. >> Taking that same model, break down the silos into telecom, right? It's that same, >> Mm-hmm. >> sorry to use the term playbook, Frank Slootman tells me he doesn't use playbooks, but he's not a pattern matcher, but he's a situational CEO, he says. But the situation in telco calls for that type of strategy. So explain what you guys are doing in telco. >> I think there's, so, what we're launching, we launched last week, and it really was three components, right? So we had our platform as you mentioned, >> Dave: Mm-hmm. >> and that platform is being utilized by a number of different companies today. We also are adding, for telecom very specifically, we're adding capabilities in marketplace, so that service providers can not only use some of the data and apps that are in marketplace, but as well service providers can go and sell applications or sell data that they had built. And then as well, we're adding our ecosystem, it's telecom-specific. So, we're bringing partners in, technology partners, and consulting and services partners, that are very much focused on telecoms and what they do internally, but also helping them monetize new services. >> Okay, so it's not just sort of generic Snowflake into telco? You have specific value there. >> We're purposing the platform specifically for- >> Are you a telco guy? >> I am. You are, okay. >> Total telco guy absolutely. >> So there you go. You see that Snowflake is actually an interesting organizational structure, 'cause you're going after verticals, which is kind of rare for a company of your sort of inventory, I'll say, >> Absolutely. >> I don't mean that as a negative. (Dave laughs) So Dave, take us through the data journey at AT&T. It's a long history. You don't have to go back to the 1800s, but- (Dave laughs) >> Thank you for pointing out, we're a 149-year-old company. So, Jesse James was one of the original customers, (Dave laughs) and we have no longer got his data. So, I'll go back. I've been 17 years singular AT&T, and I've watched it through the whole journey of, where the monolithics were growing, when the consolidation of small, wireless carriers, and we went through that boom. And then we've gone through mergers and acquisitions. But, Hadoop came out, and it was going to solve all world hunger. And we had all the aspects of, we're going to monetize and do AI and ML, and some of the things we learned with Hadoop was, we had this monolithic warehouse, we had this file-based-structured Hadoop, but we really didn't know how to bring this all together. And we were bringing items over to the relational, and we were taking the relational and bringing it over to the warehouse, and trying to, and it was a struggle. Let's just go there. And I don't think we were the only company to struggle with that, but we learned a lot. And so now as tech is finally emerging, with the cloud, companies like Snowflake, and others that can handle that, where we can create, we were discussing earlier, but it becomes more of a conducive mesh that's interoperable. So now we're able to simplify that environment. And the cloud is a big thing on that. 'Cause you could not do this on-prem with on-prem technologies. It would be just too cost prohibitive, and too heavy of lifting, going back and forth, and managing the data. The simplicity the cloud brings with a smaller set of tools, and I'll say in the data space specifically, really allows us, maybe not a single instance of data for all use cases, but a greatly reduced ecosystem. And when you simplify your ecosystem, you simplify speed to market and data management. >> So I'm going to ask you, I know it's kind of internal organizational plumbing, but it'll inform my next question. So, Dave, you're with the Chief Data Office, and Roddy, you're kind of, you all serve in the business, but you're really serving the, you're closer to those guys, they're banging on your door for- >> Absolutely. I try to keep the 130,000 users who may or may not have issues sometimes with our data and metrics, away from Dave. And he just gets a call from me. >> And he only calls when he has a problem. He's never wished me happy birthday. (Dave and Phil laugh) >> So the reason I asked that is because, you describe Dave, some of the Hadoop days, and again love-hate with that, but we had hyper-specialized roles. We still do. You've got data engineers, data scientists, data analysts, and you've got this sort of this pipeline, and it had to be this sequential pipeline. I know Snowflake and others have come to simplify that. My question to you is, how is that those roles, how are those roles changing? How is data getting closer to the business? Everybody talks about democratizing business. Are you doing that? What's a real use example? >> From our perspective, those roles, a lot of those roles on my team for years, because we're all about efficiency, >> Dave: Mm-hmm. >> we cut across those areas, and always have cut across those areas. So now we're into a space where things have been simplified, data processes and copying, we've gone from 40 data processes down to five steps now. We've gone from five steps to one step. We've gone from days, now take hours, hours to minutes, minutes to seconds. Literally we're seeing that time in and time out with Snowflake. So these resources that have spent all their time on data engineering and moving data around, are now freed up more on what they have skills for and always have, the data analytics area of the business, and driving the business forward, and new metrics and new analysis. That's some of the great operational value that we've seen here. As this simplification happens, it frees up brain power. >> So, you're pumping data from the OSS, the BSS, the OKRs everywhere >> Everywhere. >> into Snowflake? >> Scheduling systems, you name it. If you can think of what drives our retail and centers and online, all that data, scheduling system, chat data, call center data, call detail data, all of that enters into this common infrastructure to manage the business on a day in and day out basis. >> How are the roles and the skill sets changing? 'Cause you're doing a lot less ETL, you're doing a lot less moving of data around. There were guys that were probably really good at that. I used to joke in the, when I was in the storage world, like if your job is bandaging lungs, you need to look for a new job, right? So, and they did and people move on. So, are you able to sort of redeploy those assets, and those people, those human resources? >> These folks are highly skilled. And we were talking about earlier, SQL hasn't gone away. Relational databases are not going away. And that's one thing that's made this migration excellent, they're just transitioning their skills. Experts in legacy systems are now rapidly becoming experts on the Snowflake side. And it has not been that hard a transition. There are certainly nuances, things that don't operate as well in the cloud environment that we have to learn and optimize. But we're making that transition. >> Dave: So just, >> Please. >> within the Chief Data Office we have a couple of missions, and Roddy is a great partner and an example of how it works. We try to bring the data for democratization, so that we have one interface, now hopefully know we just have a logical connection back to these Snowflake instances that we connect. But we're providing that governance and cleansing, and if there's a business rule at the enterprise level, we provide it. But the goal at CDO is to make sure that business units like Roddy or marketing or finance, that they can come to a platform that's reliable, robust, and self-service. I don't want to be in his way. So I feel like I'm providing a sub-level of platform, that he can come to and anybody can come to, and utilize, that they're not having to go back and undo what's in Salesforce, or ServiceNow, or in our billers. So, I'm sort of that layer. And then making sure that that ecosystem is robust enough for him to use. >> And that self-service infrastructure is predominantly through the Azure Cloud, correct? >> Dave: Absolutely. >> And you work on other clouds, but it's predominantly through Azure? >> We're predominantly in Azure, yeah. >> Dave: That's the first-party citizen? >> Yeah. >> Okay, I like to think in terms sometimes of data products, and I know you've mentioned upfront, you're Gold standard or Platinum standard, you're very careful about personal information. >> Dave: Yeah. >> So you're not trying to sell, I'm an AT&T customer, you're not trying to sell my data, and make money off of my data. So the value prop and the business case for Snowflake is it's simpler. You do things faster, you're in the cloud, lower cost, et cetera. But I presume you're also in the business, AT&T, of making offers and creating packages for customers. I look at those as data products, 'cause it's not a, I mean, yeah, there's a physical phone, but there's data products behind it. So- >> It ultimately is, but not everybody always sees it that way. Data reporting often can be an afterthought. And we're making it more on the forefront now. >> Yeah, so I like to think in terms of data products, I mean even if the financial services business, it's a data business. So, if we can think about that sort of metaphor, do you see yourselves as data product builders? Do you have that, do you think about building products in that regard? >> Within the Chief Data Office, we have a data product team, >> Mm-hmm. >> and by the way, I wouldn't be disingenuous if I said, oh, we're very mature in this, but no, it's where we're going, and it's somewhat of a journey, but I've got a peer, and their whole job is to go from, especially as we migrate from cloud, if Roddy or some other group was using tables three, four and five and joining them together, it's like, "Well look, this is an offer for data product, so let's combine these and put it up in the cloud, and here's the offer data set product, or here's the opportunity data product," and it's a journey. We're on the way, but we have dedicated staff and time to do this. >> I think one of the hardest parts about that is the organizational aspects of it. Like who owns the data now, right? It used to be owned by the techies, and increasingly the business lines want to have access, you're providing self-service. So there's a discussion about, "Okay, what is a data product? Who's responsible for that data product? Is it in my P&L or your P&L? Somebody's got to sign up for that number." So, it sounds like those discussions are taking place. >> They are. And, we feel like we're more the, and CDO at least, we feel more, we're like the guardians, and the shepherds, but not the owners. I mean, we have a role in it all, but he owns his metrics. >> Yeah, and even from our perspective, we see ourselves as an enabler of making whatever AT&T wants to make happen in terms of the key products and officers' trade-in offers, trade-in programs, all that requires this data infrastructure, and managing reps and agents, and what they do from a channel performance perspective. We still ourselves see ourselves as key enablers of that. And we've got to be flexible, and respond quickly to the business. >> I always had empathy for the data engineer, and he or she had to service all these different lines of business with no business context. >> Yeah. >> Like the business knows good data from bad data, and then they just pound that poor individual, and they're like, "Okay, I'm doing my best. It's just ones and zeros to me." So, it sounds like that's, you're on that path. >> Yeah absolutely, and I think, we do have refined, getting more and more refined owners of, since Snowflake enables these golden source data, everybody sees me and my organization, channel performance data, go to Roddy's team, we have a great team, and we go to Dave in terms of making it all happen from a data infrastructure perspective. So we, do have a lot more refined, "This is where you go for the golden source, this is where it is, this is who owns it. If you want to launch this product and services, and you want to manage reps with it, that's the place you-" >> It's a strong story. So Chief Data Office doesn't own the data per se, but it's your responsibility to provide the self-service infrastructure, and make sure it's governed properly, and in as automated way as possible. >> Well, yeah, absolutely. And let me tell you more, everybody talks about single version of the truth, one instance of the data, but there's context to that, that we are taking, trying to take advantage of that as we do data products is, what's the use case here? So we may have an entity of Roddy as a prospective customer, and we may have a entity of Roddy as a customer, high-value customer over here, which may have a different set of mix of data and all, but as a data product, we can then create those for those specific use cases. Still point to the same data, but build it in different constructs. One for marketing, one for sales, one for finance. By the way, that's where your data engineers are struggling. >> Yeah, yeah, of course. So how do I serve all these folks, and really have the context-common story in telco, >> Absolutely. >> or are these guys ahead of the curve a little bit? Or where would you put them? >> I think they're definitely moving a lot faster than the industry is generally. I think the enabling technologies, like for instance, having that single copy of data that everybody sees, a single pane of glass, right, that's definitely something that everybody wants to get to. Not many people are there. I think, what AT&T's doing, is most definitely a little bit further ahead than the industry generally. And I think the successes that are coming out of that, and the learning experiences are starting to generate momentum within AT&T. So I think, it's not just about the product, and having a product now that gives you a single copy of data. It's about the experiences, right? And now, how the teams are getting trained, domains like network engineering for instance. They typically haven't been a part of data discussions, because they've got a lot of data, but they're focused on the infrastructure. >> Mm. >> So, by going ahead and deploying this platform, for platform's purpose, right, and the business value, that's one thing, but also to start bringing, getting that experience, and bringing new experience in to help other groups that traditionally hadn't been data-centric, that's also a huge step ahead, right? So you need to enable those groups. >> A big complaint of course we hear at MWC from carriers is, "The over-the-top guys are killing us. They're riding on our networks, et cetera, et cetera. They have all the data, they have all the client relationships." Do you see your client relationships changing as a result of sort of your data culture evolving? >> Yes, I'm not sure I can- >> It's a loaded question, I know. >> Yeah, and then I, so, we want to start embedding as much into our network on the proprietary value that we have, so we can start getting into that OTT play, us as any other carrier, we have distinct advantages of what we can do at the edge, and we just need to start exploiting those. But you know, 'cause whether it's location or whatnot, so we got to eat into that. Historically, the network is where we make our money in, and we stack the services on top of it. It used to be *69. >> Dave: Yeah. >> If anybody remembers that. >> Dave: Yeah, of course. (Dave laughs) >> But you know, it was stacked on top of our network. Then we stack another product on top of it. It'll be in the edge where we start providing distinct values to other partners as we- >> I mean, it's a great business that you're in. I mean, if they're really good at connectivity. >> Dave: Yeah. >> And so, it sounds like it's still to be determined >> Dave: Yeah. >> where you can go with this. You have to be super careful with private and for personal information. >> Dave: Yep. >> Yeah, but the opportunities are enormous. >> There's a lot. >> Yeah, particularly at the edge, looking at, private networks are just an amazing opportunity. Factories and name it, hospital, remote hospitals, remote locations. I mean- >> Dave: Connected cars. >> Connected cars are really interesting, right? I mean, if you start communicating car to car, and actually drive that, (Dave laughs) I mean that's, now we're getting to visit Xen Fault Tolerance people. This is it. >> Dave: That's not, let's hold the traffic. >> Doesn't scare me as much as we actually learn. (all laugh) >> So how's the show been for you guys? >> Dave: Awesome. >> What're your big takeaways from- >> Tremendous experience. I mean, someone who doesn't go outside the United States much, I'm a homebody. The whole experience, the whole trip, city, Mobile World Congress, the technologies that are out here, it's been a blast. >> Anything, top two things you learned, advice you'd give to others, your colleagues out in general? >> In general, we talked a lot about technologies today, and we talked a lot about data, but I'm going to tell you what, the accelerator that you cannot change, is the relationship that we have. So when the tech and the business can work together toward a common goal, and it's a partnership, you get things done. So, I don't know how many CDOs or CIOs or CEOs are out there, but this connection is what accelerates and makes it work. >> And that is our audience Dave. I mean, it's all about that alignment. So guys, I really appreciate you coming in and sharing your story in "theCUBE." Great stuff. >> Thank you. >> Thanks a lot. >> All right, thanks everybody. Thank you for watching. I'll be right back with Dave Nicholson. Day four SiliconANGLE's coverage of MWC '23. You're watching "theCUBE." (gentle music)

>> Live from San Francisco, California, it's theCUBE, covering the IBM Chief Data Officer Summit. Brought to you by IBM. >> We're back at San Francisco. We're here at Fisherman's Wharf covering the IBM Chief Data Officer event #IBMCDO. This is the tenth year of this event. They tend to bookend them both in San Francisco and in Boston, and you're watching theCUBE, the leader in live tech coverage. My name is Dave Valante. John Thomas is here, Cube alum and distinguished engineer, Director of Analytics at IBM, and somebody who provides technical direction to the data science elite team. John, good to see you again. Steve Aliouk is back. He is the Vice President of Deep Learning in the Global Chief Data Office, thanks for comin' on again. >> No problem. >> Let's get into it. So John, you and I have talked over the years at this event. What's new these days, what are you working on? >> So Dave, still working with clients on implementing data science and AI data use cases, mostly enterprise clients, and seeing a variety of different things developing in that space. Things have moved into broader discussions around AI and how to actually get value out of that. >> Okay, so I know one of the things that you've talked about is operationalizing machine intelligence and AI and cognitive and that's always a challenge, right. Sounds good, we see this potential but unless you change the operating model, you're not going to get the type of business value, so how do you operationalize AI? >> Yeah, this is a good question Dave. So, enterprises, many of them, are beginning to realize that it is not enough to focus on just the coding and development of the models, right. So they can hire super-talented Python TensorFlow programmers and get the model building done, but there's no value in it until these models actually are operationalized in the context of the business. So one aspect of this is, actually we know, we are thinking of this in a very systematic way and talking about this in a prescriptive way. So, you've got to scope your use cases out. You got to understand what is involved in implementing the use case. Then the steps are build, run, manage, and each of these have technical aspects and business aspects around, right. So most people jump right into the build aspect, which is writing the code. Yeah, that's great, but once you build the code, build the models by writing code, how do you actually deploy these models? Whether that is for online invocation or back storing or whatever, how do you manage the performance of these models over time, how do you retrain these models, and most importantly, when these models are in production, how do I actually understand the business metrics around them? 'Cause this goes back to that first step of scoping. What are the business KPI's that the line of business cares about? The data scientist talks about data science metrics, position and recall and Area Under the ROC Curve and accuracy and so on. But how do these relate to business KPI's. >> All right, so we're going to get into each of those steps in a moment, but Steve I want to ask you, so part of your charter, Inderpal, Global Chief Data Officer, you guys have to do this for IBM, right, drink your own champagne, dog footing, whatever you call it. But there's real business reasons for you to do that. So how is IBM operationalizing AI? What kind of learnings can you share? >> Well, the beauty is I got a wide portfolio of products that I can pull from, so that's nice. Like things like AI open to Watson, some of the hardware components, all that stuffs kind of being baked in. But part of the reason that John and I want to do this interview together, is because what he's producing, what his thoughts are kind of resonates very well for our own practices internally. We've got so many enterprise use cases, how are we deciding, you know, which ones to work on, which ones have the data, potentially which ones have the biggest business impact, all those KPI's etcetera, also, in addition to, for the practitioners, once we decide on a specific enterprise use case to work on, when have they reached the level where the enterprise is having a return on investment? They don't need to keep refining and refining and refining, or maybe they do, but they don't know these practitioners. So we have to clearly justify it, and scope it accordingly, or these practitioners are left in this kind of limbo, where they're producing things, but not able to iterate effectively for the business, right? So that process is a big problem I'm facing internally. We got hundreds of internal use cases, and we're trying to iterate through them. There's an immense amount of scoping, understanding, etcetera, but at the same time, we're building more and more technical debt, as the process evolves, being able to move from project to project, my team is ballooning, we can't do this, we can't keep growing, they're not going to give me another hundred head count, another hundred head count, so we're definitely need to manage it more appropriately. And that's where this mentality comes in there's-- >> All right, so I got a lot of questions. I want to start unpacking this stuff. So the scope piece, that's we're setting goals, identifying the metrics, success metrics, KPI's, and the like, okay, reasonable starting point. But then you go into this, I think you call it, the explore or understanding phase. What's that all about, is that where governance comes in? >> That's exactly where governance comes in. Right, so because it is, you know, we all know the expression, garbage in, garbage out, if you don't know what data you're working with for your machine learning and deep learning enterprise projects, you will not have the resource that you want. And you might think this is obvious, but in an enterprise setting, understanding where the data comes from, who owns the data, who work on the data, the lineage of that data, who is allowed access to the data, policies and rules around that, it's all important. Because without all of these things in place, the models will be questioned later on, and the value of the models will not realized, right? So that part of exploration or understanding, whatever you want to call it, is about understanding data that has to be used by the ML process, but then at a point in time, the models themselves need to be cataloged, need to be published, because the business as a whole needs to understand what models have been produced out of this data. So who built these models? Just as you have lineage of data, you need lineage of models. You need to understand what API's are associated with the models that are being produced. What are the business KPI's that are linked to model metrics? So all of that is part of this understand and explore path. >> Okay, and then you go to build. I think people understand that, everybody wants to start there, just start the dessert, and then you get into the sort of run and manage piece. Run, you want a time to value, and then when you get to the management phase, you really want to be efficient, cost-effective, and then iterative. Okay, so here's the hard question here is. What you just described, some of the folks, particularly the builders are going to say, "Aw, such a waterfall approach. Just start coding." Remember 15 years ago, it was like, "Okay, how do we "write better software, just start building! "Forget about the requirements, "Just start writing code." Okay, but then what happens, is you have to bolt on governance and security and everything else so, talk about how you are able to maintain agility in this model. >> Yeah, I was going to use the word agile, right? So even in each of these phases, it is an agile approach. So the mindset is about agile sprints and our two week long sprints, with very specific metrics at the end of each sprint that is validated against the line of business requirements. So although it might sound waterfall, you're actually taking an agile approach to each of these steps. And if you are going through this, you have also the option to course correct as it goes along, because think of this, the first step was scoping. The line of business gave you a bunch of business metrics or business KPI's they care about, but somewhere in the build phase, past sprint one or sprint 2, you realize, oh well, you know what, that business KPI is not directly achievable or it needs to be refined or tweaked. And there is that circle back with the line of business and a course correction as it was. So it's a very agile approach that you have to take. >> Are they, are they, That's I think right on, because again, if you go and bolt on compliance and governance and security after the fact, we know from years of experience, that it really doesn't work well. You build up technical debt faster. But are these quasi-parallel? I mean there's somethings that you can do in build as the scoping is going on. Is there collaboration so you can describe, can you describe that a little bit? >> Absolutely, so for example, if I know the domain of the problem, I can actually get started with templates that help me accelerate the build process. So I think in your group, for example, IBM internally, there are many, many templates these guys are using. Want to talk a little bit about that? >> Well, we can't just start building up every single time. You know, that's again, I'm going to use this word and really resonate it, you know it's not extensible. Each project, we have to get to the point of using templates, so we had to look at those initiatives and invest in those initiatives, 'cause initially it's harder. But at least once we have some of those cookie-cutter templates and some of them, they might have to have abstractions around certain parts of them, but that's the only way we're ever able to kind of tackle so many problems. So no, without a doubt, it's an important consideration, but at the same time, you have to appreciate there's a lot of projects that are fundamentally different. And that's when you have to have very senior people kind of looking at how to abstract those templates to make them reusable and consumable by others. >> But the team structure, it's not a single amoeba going through all these steps right? These are smaller teams that are, and then there's some threading between each step? >> This is important. >> Yeah, that's tough. We were just talking about that concept. >> Just talking about skills and >> The bind between those groups is something that we're trying to figure out how to break down. 'Cause that's something he recognizes, I recognize internally, but understanding that those peoples tasks, they're never going to be able to iterate through different enterprise problems, unless they break down those borders and really invest in the communication and building those tools. >> Exactly, you talk about full stack teams. So you, it is not enough to have coding skills obviously. >> Right. What is the skill needed to get this into a run environment, right? What is the skill needed to take metrics like not metrics, but explainability, fairness in the moderates, and map that to business metrics. That's a very different skill from Python coding skills. So full stack teams are important, and at the beginning of this process where someone, line of business throws 100 different ideas at you, and you have to go through the scoping exercise, that is a very specific skill that is needed, working together with your coders and runtime administrators. Because how do you define the business KPI's and how do you refine them later on in the life cycle? And how do you translate between line of business lingo and what the coders are going to call it? So it's a full stack team concept. It may not necessarily all be in one group, it may be, but they have to work together across these different side loads to make it successful. >> All right guys, we got to leave it there, the trains are backing up here at IBM CDO conference. Thanks so much for sharing the perspectives on this. All right, keep it right there everybody. You're watchin' "theCUBE" from San Francisco, we're here at Fisherman's Wharf. The IBM Chief Data Officer event. Right back. (bubbly electronic music)

(music playing) >> Narrator: Live, from downtown San Francisco It's the Cube. Covering IBM Chief Data Officer Startegy Summit 2018. Brought to you by: IBM >> Welcome back to San Francisco everybody we're at the Parc 55 in Union Square. My name is Dave Vellante, and you're watching the Cube. The leader in live tech coverage and this is our exclusive coverage of IBM's Chief Data Officer Strategy Summit. They hold these both in San Francisco and in Boston. It's an intimate event, about 150 Chief Data Officers really absorbing what IBM has done internally and IBM transferring knowledge to its clients. Steven Eluk is here. He is one of those internal practitioners at IBM. He's the Vice President of Deep Learning and the Global Chief Data Office at IBM. We just heard from him and some of his strategies and used cases. He's joined by Sumit Gupta, a Cube alum. Who is the Vice President of Machine Learning and deep learning within IBM's cognitive systems group. Sumit. >> Thank you. >> Good to see you, welcome back Steven, lets get into it. So, I was um paying close attention when Bob Picciano took over the cognitive systems group. I said, "Hmm, that's interesting". Recently a software guy, of course I know he's got some hardware expertise. But bringing in someone who's deep into software and machine learning, and deep learning, and AI, and cognitive systems into a systems organization. So you guys specifically set out to develop solutions to solve problems like Steven's trying to solve. Right, explain that. >> Yeah, so I think ugh there's a revolution going on in the market the computing market where we have all these new machine learning, and deep learning technologies that are having meaningful impact or promise of having meaningful impact. But these new technologies, are actually significantly I would say complex and they require very complex and high performance computing systems. You know I think Bob and I think in particular IBM saw the opportunity and realized that we really need to architect a new class of infrastructure. Both software and hardware to address what data scientist like Steve are trying to do in the space, right? The open source software that's out there: Denzoflo, Cafe, Torch - These things are truly game changing. But they also require GPU accelerators. They also require multiple systems like... In fact interestingly enough you know some of the super computers that we've been building for the scientific computing world, those same technologies are now coming into the AI world and the enterprise. >> So, the infrastructure for AI, if I can use that term? It's got to be flexible, Steven we were sort of talking about that elastic versus I'm even extending it to plastic. As Sumit you just said, it's got to have that tooling, got to have that modern tooling, you've got to accommodate alternative processor capabilities um, and so, that forms what you've used Steven to sort of create new capabilities new business capabilities within IBM. I wanted to, we didn't touch upon this before, but we touched upon your data strategy before but tie it back to the line of business. You essentially are a presume a liaison between the line of business and the chief data office >> Steven: Yeah. >> Officer office. How did that all work out, and shake out? Did you defining the business outcomes, the requirements, how did you go about that? >> Well, actually, surprisingly, we have very little new use cases that we're generating internally from my organization. Because there's so many to pick from already throughout the organization, right? There's all these business units coming to us and saying, "Hey, now the data is in the data lake and now we know there's more data, now we want to do this. How do we do it?" You know, so that's where we come in, that's where we start touching and massaging and enabling them. And that's the main efforts that we have. We do have some derivative works that have come out, that have been like new offerings that you'll see here. But mostly we already have so many use cases that from those businesses units that we're really trying to heighten and bring extra value to those domains first. >> So, a lot of organizations sounds like IBM was similar you created the data lake you know, things like "a doop" made a lower cost to just put stuff in the data lake. But then, it's like "okay, now what?" >> Steven: Yeah. >> So is that right? So you've got the data and this bog of data and you're trying to make more sense out of it but get more value out of it? >> Steven: Absolutely. >> That's what they were pushing you to do? >> Yeah, absolutely. And with that, with more data you need more computational power. And actually Sumit and I go pretty far back and I can tell you from my previous roles I heightened to him many years ago some of the deficiencies in the current architecture in X86 etc and I said, "If you hit these points, I will buy these products." And what they went back and they did is they, they addressed all of the issues that I had. Like there's certain issues... >> That's when you were, sorry to interrupt, that's when you were a customer, right? >> Steven: That's when I was... >> An external customer >> Outside. I'm still an internal customer, so I've always been a customer I guess in that role right? >> Yep, yep. >> But, I need to get data to the computational device as quickly as possible. And with certain older gen technologies, like PTI Gen3 and certain issues around um x86. I couldn't get that data there for like high fidelity imaging for autonomous vehicles for ya know, high fidelity image analysis. But, with certain technologies in power we have like envy link and directly to the CPU. And we also have PTI Gen4, right? So, so these are big enablers for me so that I can really keep the utilization of those very expensive compute devices higher. Because they're not starved for data. >> And you've also put a lot of emphasis on IO, right? I mean that's... >> Yeah, you know if I may break it down right there's actually I would say three different pieces to the puzzle here right? The highest level from Steve's perspective, from Steven's teams perspective or any data scientist perspective is they need to just do their data science and not worry about the infrastructure, right? They actually don't want to know that there's an infrastructure. They want to say, "launch job" - right? That's the level of grand clarity we want, right? In the background, they want our schedulers, our software, our hardware to just seamlessly use either one system or scale to 100 systems, right? To use one GPU or to use 1,000 GPUs, right? So that's where our offerings come in, right. We went and built this offering called Powder and Powder essentially is open source software like TensorFlow, like Efi, like Torch. But performace and capabilities add it to make it much easier to use. So for example, we have an extremely terrific scheduling software that manages jobs called Spectrum Conductor for Spark. So as the name suggests, it uses Apache Spark. But again the data scientist doesn't know that. They say, "launch job". And the software actually goes and scales that job across tens of servers or hundreds of servers. The IT team can determine how many servers their going to allocate for data scientist. They can have all kinds of user management, data management, model management software. We take the open source software, we package it. You know surprisingly ugh most people don't realize this, the open source software like TensorFlow has primarily been built on a (mumbles). And most of our enterprise clients, including Steven, are on Redhat. So we, we engineered Redhat to be able to manage TensorFlow. And you know I chose those words carefully, there was a little bit of engineering both on Redhat and on TensorFlow to make that whole thing work together. Sounds trivial, took several months and huge value proposition to the enterprise clients. And then the last piece I think that Steven was referencing too, is we also trying to go and make the eye more accessible for non data scientist or I would say even data engineers. So we for example, have a software called Powder Vision. This takes images and videos, and automatically creates a trained deep learning model for them, right. So we analyze the images, you of course have to tell us in these images, for these hundred images here are the most important things. For example, you've identified: here are people, here are cars, here are traffic signs. But if you give us some of that labeled data, we automatically do the work that a data scientist would have done, and create this pre trained AI model for you. This really enables many rapid prototyping for a lot of clients who either kind of fought to have data scientists or don't want to have data scientists. >> So just to summarize that, the three pieces: It's making it simpler for the data scientists, just run the job - Um, the backend piece which is the schedulers, the hardware, the software doing its thing - and then its making that data science capability more accessible. >> Right, right, right. >> Those are the three layers. >> So you know, I'll resay it in my words maybe >> Yeah please. >> Ease of use right, hardware software optimized for performance and capability, and point and click AI, right. AI for non data scientists, right. It's like the three levels that I think of when I'm engaging with data scientists and clients. >> And essentially it's embedded AI right? I've been making the point today that a lot of the AI is going to be purchased from companies like IBM, and I'm just going to apply it. I'm not going to try to go build my own, own AI right? I mean, is that... >> No absolutely. >> Is that the right way to think about it as a practitioner >> I think, I think we talked about it a little bit about it on the panel earlier but if we can, if we can leverage these pre built models and just apply a little bit of training data it makes it so much easier for the organizations and so much cheaper. They don't have to invest in a crazy amount of infrastructure, all the labeling of data, they don't have to do that. So, I think it's definitely steering that way. It's going to take a little bit of time, we have some of them there. But as we as we iterate, we are going to get more and more of these types of you know, commodity type models that people could utilize. >> I'll give you an example, so we have a software called Intelligent Analytics at IBM. It's very good at taking any surveillance data and for example recognizing anomalies or you know if people aren't suppose to be in a zone. Ugh and we had a client who wanted to do worker safety compliance. So they want to make sure workers are wearing their safety jackets and their helmets when they're in a construction site. So we use surveillance data created a new AI model using Powder AI vision. We were then able to plug into this IVA - Intelligence Analytic Software. So they have the nice gooey base software for the dashboards and the alerts, yet we were able to do incremental training on their specific use case, which by the way, with their specific you know equipment and jackets and stuff like that. And create a new AI model, very quickly. For them to be able to apply and make sure their workers are actually complaint to all of the safety requirements they have on the construction site. >> Hmm interesting. So when I, Sometimes it's like a new form of capture says identify "all the pictures with bridges", right that's the kind of thing you're capable to do with these video analytics. >> That's exactly right. You, every, clients will have all kinds of uses I was at a, talking to a client, who's a major car manufacturer in the world and he was saying it would be great if I could identify the make and model of what cars people are driving into my dealership. Because I bet I can draw a ugh corelation between what they drive into and what they going to drive out of, right. Marketing insights, right. And, ugh, so there's a lot of things that people want to do with which would really be spoke in their use cases. And build on top of existing AI models that we have already. >> And you mentioned, X86 before. And not to start a food fight but um >> Steven: And we use both internally too, right. >> So lets talk about that a little bit, I mean where do you use X86 where do you use IBM Cognitive and Power Systems? >> I have a mix of both, >> Why, how do you decide? >> There's certain of work loads. I will delegate that over to Power, just because ya know they're data starved and we are noticing a complication is being impacted by it. Um, but because we deal with so many different organizations certain organizations optimize for X86 and some of them optimize for power and I can't pick, I have to have everything. Just like I mentioned earlier, I also have to support cloud on prim, I can't pick just to be on prim right, it so. >> I imagine the big cloud providers are in the same boat which I know some are your customers. You're betting on data, you're betting on digital and it's a good bet. >> Steven: Yeah, 100 percent. >> We're betting on data and AI, right. So I think data, you got to do something with the data, right? And analytics and AI is what people are doing with that data we have an advantage both at the hardware level and at the software level in these two I would say workloads or segments - which is data and AI, right. And we fundamentally have invested in the processor architecture to improve the performance and capabilities, right. You could offer a much larger AI models on a power system that you use than you can on an X86 system that you use. Right, that's one advantage. You can train and AI model four times faster on a power system than you can on an Intel Based System. So the clients who have a lot of data, who care about how fast their training runs, are the ones who are committing to power systems today. >> Mmm.Hmm. >> Latency requirements, things like that, really really big deal. >> So what that means for you as a practitioner is you can do more with less or is it I mean >> I can definitely do more with less, but the real value is that I'm able to get an outcome quicker. Everyone says, "Okay, you can just roll our more GPU's more GPU's, but run more experiments run more experiments". No no that's not actually it. I want to reduce the time for a an experiment Get it done as quickly as possible so I get that insight. 'Cause then what I can do I can get possibly cancel out a bunch of those jobs that are already running cause I already have the insight, knowing that that model is not doing anything. Alright, so it's very important to get the time down. Jeff Dean said it a few years ago, he uses the same slide often. But, you know, when things are taking months you know that's what happened basically from the 80's up until you know 2010. >> Right >> We didn't have the computation we didn't have the data. Once we were able to get that experimentation time down, we're able to iterate very very quickly on this. >> And throwing GPU's at the problem doesn't solve it because it's too much complexity or? >> It it helps the problem, there's no question. But when my GPU utilization goes from 95% down to 60% ya know I'm getting only a two-thirds return on investment there. It's a really really big deal, yeah. >> Sumit: I mean the key here I think Steven, and I'll draw it out again is this time to insight. Because time to insight actually is time to dollars, right. People are using AI either to make more money, right by providing better customer products, better products to the customers, giving better recommendations. Or they're saving on their operational costs right, they're improving their efficiencies. Maybe their routing their trucks in the right way, their routing their inventory in the right place, they're reducing the amount of inventory that they need. So in all cases you can actually coordinate AI to a revenue outcome or a dollar outcome. So the faster you can do that, you know, I tell most people that I engage with the hardware and software they get from us pays for itself very quickly. Because they make that much more money or they save that much more money, using power systems. >> We, we even see this internally I've heard stories and all that, Sumit kind of commented on this but - There's actually sales people that take this software & hardware out and they're able to get an outcome sometimes in certain situations where they just take the clients data and they're sales people they're not data scientists they train it it's so simple to use then they present the client with the outcomes the next day and the client is just like blown away. This isn't just a one time occurrence, like sales people are actually using this right. So it's getting to the area that it's so simple to use you're able to get those outcomes that we're even seeing it you know deals close quicker. >> Yeah, that's powerful. And Sumit to your point, the business case is actually really easy to make. You can say, "Okay, this initiative that you're driving what's your forecast for how much revenue?" Now lets make an assumption for how much faster we're going to be able to deliver it. And if I can show them a one day turn around, on a corpus of data, okay lets say two months times whatever, my time to break. I can run the business case very easily and communicate to the CFO or whomever the line of business head so. >> That's right. I mean just, I was at a retailer, at a grocery store a local grocery store in the bay area recently and he was telling me how In California we've passed legislation that does not allow plastic bags anymore. You have to pay for it. So people are bringing their own bags. But that's actually increased theft for them. Because people bring their own bag, put stuff in it and walk out. And he didn't want to have an analytic system that can detect if someone puts something in a bag and then did not buy it at purchase. So it's, in many ways they want to use the existing camera systems they have but automatically be able to detect fraudulent behavior or you know anomalies. And it's actually quite easy to do with a lot of the software we have around Power AI Vision, around video analytics from IBM right. And that's what we were talking about right? Take existing trained AI models on vision and enhance them for your specific use case and the scenarios you're looking for. >> Excellent. Guys we got to go. Thanks Steven, thanks Sumit for coming back on and appreciate the insights. >> Thank you >> Glad to be here >> You're welcome. Alright, keep it right there buddy we'll be back with our next guest. You're watching "The Cube" at IBM's CDO Strategy Summit from San Francisco. We'll be right back. (music playing)