>> Announcer: theCUBE's live coverage is made possible by funding from Dell Technologies creating technologies that drive human progress. (upbeat music) >> Hey everyone, welcome back to theCube's first day of coverage of MWC 23 from Barcelona, Spain. Lisa Martin here with Dave Vellante and Dave Nicholson. I'm literally in between two Daves. We've had a great first day of coverage of the event. There's been lots of conversations, Dave, on disaggregation, on the change of mobility. I want to be able to get your perspectives from both of you on what you saw on the show floor, what you saw and heard from our guests today. So we'll start with you, Dave V. What were some of the things that were our takeaways from day one for you? >> Well, the big takeaway is the event itself. On day one, you get a feel for what this show is like. Now that we're back, face-to-face kind of pretty much full face-to-face. A lot of excitement here. 2000 plus exhibitors, I mean, planes, trains, automobiles, VR, AI, servers, software, I mean everything. I mean, everybody is here. So it's a really comprehensive show. It's not just about mobile. That's why they changed the name from Mobile World Congress. I think the other thing is from the keynotes this morning, I mean, you heard, there's a lot of, you know, action around the telcos and the transformation, but in a lot of ways they're sort of protecting their existing past from the future. And so they have to be careful about how fast they move. But at the same time if they don't move fast, they're going to get disrupted. We heard some complaints, essentially, you know, veiled complaints that the over the top guys aren't paying their fair share and Telco should be able to charge them more. We heard the chairman of Ericsson talk about how we can't let the OTTs do that again. We're going to charge directly for access through APIs to our network, to our data. We heard from Chris Lewis. Yeah. They've only got, or maybe it was San Ji Choha, how they've only got eight APIs. So, you know the developers are the ones who are going to actually build out the innovation at the edge. The telcos are going to provide the connectivity and the infrastructure companies like Dell as well. But it's really to me all about the developers. And that's where the action's going to be. And it's going to be interesting to see how the developers respond to, you know, the gun to the head. If you want access, you're going to have to pay for it. Now maybe there's so much money to be made that they'll go for it, but I feel like there's maybe a different model. And I think some of the emerging telcos are going to say, you know what, here developers, here's a platform, have at it. We're not going to charge you for all the data until you succeed. Then we're going to figure out a monetization model. >> Right. A lot of opportunity for the developer. That skillset is certainly one that's in demand here. And certainly the transformation of the telecom industry is, there's a lot of conundrums that I was hearing going on today, kind of chicken and egg scenarios. But Dave, you had a chance to walk around the show floor. We were here interviewing all day. What were some of the things that you saw that really stuck out to you? >> I think I was struck by how much attention was being paid to private 5G networks. You sort of read between the lines and it appears as though people kind of accept that the big incumbent telecom players are going to be slower to move. And this idea of things like open RAN where you're leveraging open protocols in a stack to deliver more agility and more value. So it sort of goes back to the generalized IT discussion of moving to cloud for agility. It appears as though a lot of players realize that the wild wild west, the real opportunity, is in the private sphere. So it's really interesting to see how that works, how 5G implemented into an environment with wifi how that actually works. It's really interesting. >> So it's, obviously when you talk to companies like Dell, I haven't hit HPE yet. I'm going to go over there and check out their booth. They got an analyst thing going on but it's really early days for them. I mean, they started in this business by taking an X86 box, putting a name on it, you know, that sounded like it was edged, throwing it over, you know, the wall. That's sort of how they all started in this business. And now they're, you know, but they knew they had to form partnerships. They had to build purpose-built systems. Now with 16 G out, you're seeing that. And so it's still really early days, talking about O RAN, open RAN, the open RAN alliance. You know, it's just, I mean, not even, the game hasn't even barely started yet but we heard from Dish today. They're trying to roll out a massive 5G network. Rakuten is really focused on sort of open RAN that's more reliable, you know, or as reliable as the existing networks but not as nearly as huge a scale as Dish. So it's going to take a decade for this to evolve. >> Which is surprising to the average consumer to hear that. Because as far as we know 5G has been around for a long time. We've been talking about 5G, implementing 5G, you sort of assume it's ubiquitous but the reality is it is just the beginning. >> Yeah. And you know, it's got a fake 5G too, right? I mean you see it on your phone and you're like, what's the difference here? And it's, you know, just, >> Dave N.: What does it really mean? >> Right. And so I think your point about private is interesting, the conversation Dave that we had earlier, I had throughout, hey I don't think it's a replacement for wifi. And you said, "well, why not?" I guess it comes down to economics. I mean if you can get the private network priced close enough then you're right. Why wouldn't it replace wifi? Now you got wifi six coming in. So that's a, you know, and WiFi's flexible, it's cheap, it's good for homes, good for offices, but these private networks are going to be like kickass, right? They're going to be designed to run whatever, warehouses and robots, and energy drilling facilities. And so, you know the economics I don't think are there today but maybe they can be at volume. >> Maybe at some point you sort of think of today's science experiment becoming the enterprise-grade solution in the future. I had a chance to have some conversations with folks around the show. And I think, and what I was surprised by was I was reminded, frankly, I wasn't surprised. I was reminded that when we start talking about 5G, we're talking about spectrum that is managed by government entities. Of course all broadcast, all spectrum, is managed in one way or another. But in particular, you can't simply put a SIM in every device now because there are a lot of regulatory hurdles that have to take place. So typically what these things look like today is 5G backhaul to the network, communication from that box to wifi. That's a huge improvement already. So yeah, my question about whether, you know, why not put a SIM in everything? Maybe eventually, but I think, but there are other things that I was not aware of that are standing in the way. >> Your point about spectrum's an interesting one though because private networks, you're going to be able to leverage that spectrum in different ways, and tune it essentially, use different parts of the spectrum, make it programmable so that you can apply it to that specific use case, right? So it's going to be a lot more flexible, you know, because I presume the needs spectrum needs of a hospital are going to be different than, you know, an agribusiness are going to be different than a drilling, you know, unit, offshore drilling unit. And so the ability to have the flexibility to use the spectrum in different ways and apply it to that use case, I think is going to be powerful. But I suspect it's going to be expensive initially. I think the other thing we talked about is public policy and regulation, and it's San Ji Choha brought up the point, is telcos have been highly regulated. They don't just do something and ask for permission, you know, they have to work within the confines of that regulated environment. And there's a lot of these greenfield companies and private networks that don't necessarily have to follow those rules. So that's a potential disruptive force. So at the same time, the telcos are spending what'd we hear, a billion, a trillion and a half over the next seven years? Building out 5G networks. So they got to figure out, you know how to get a payback on that. They'll get it I think on connectivity, 'cause they have a monopoly but they want more. They're greedy. They see the over, they see the Netflixes of the world and the Googles and the Amazons mopping up services and they want a piece of that action but they've never really been good at it. >> Well, I've got a question for both of you. I mean, what do you think the odds are that by the time the Shangri La of fully deployed 5G happens that we have so much data going through it that effectively it feels exactly the same as 3G? What are the odds? >> That's a good point. Well, the thing that gets me about 5G is there's so much of it on, if I go to the consumer side when we're all consumers in our daily lives so much of it's marketing hype. And, you know all the messaging about that, when it's really early innings yet they're talking about 6G. What does actual fully deployed 5G look like? What is that going to enable a hospital to achieve or an oil refinery out in the middle of the ocean? That's something that interests me is what's next for that? Are we going to hear that at this event? >> I mean, walking around, you see a fair amount of discussion of, you know, the internet of things. Edge devices, the increase in connectivity. And again, what I was surprised by was that there's very little talk about a sim card in every one of those devices at this point. It's like, no, no, no, we got wifi to handle all that but aggregating it back into a central network that's leveraging 5G. That's really interesting. That's really interesting. >> I think you, the odds of your, to go back to your question, I think the odds are even money, that by the time it's all built out there's going to be so much data and so much new capability it's going to work similarly at similar speeds as we see in the networks today. You're just going to be able to do so many more things. You know, and your video's going to look better, the graphics are going to look better. But I think over the course of history, this is what's happening. I mean, even when you go back to dial up, if you were in an AOL chat room in 1996, it was, you know, yeah it took a while. You're like, (screeches) (Lisa laughs) the modem and everything else, but once you were in there- >> Once you're there, 2400 baud. >> It was basically real time. And so you could talk to your friends and, you know, little chat room but that's all you could do. You know, if you wanted to watch a video, forget it, right? And then, you know, early days of streaming video, stop, start, stop, start, you know, look at Amazon Prime when it first started, Prime Video was not that great. It's sort of catching up to Netflix. But, so I think your point, that question is really prescient because more data, more capability, more apps means same speed. >> Well, you know, you've used the phrase over the top. And so just just so we're clear so we're talking about the same thing. Typically we're talking about, you've got, you have network providers. Outside of that, you know, Netflix, internet connection, I don't need Comcast, right? Perfect example. Well, what about the over the top that's coming from direct satellite communications with devices. There are times when I don't have a signal on my, happens to be an Apple iPhone, when I get a little SOS satellite logo because I can communicate under very limited circumstances now directly to the satellite for very limited text messaging purposes. Here at the show, I think it might be a Motorola device. It's a dongle that allows any mobile device to leverage direct satellite communication. Again, for texting back to the 2,400 baud modem, you know, days, 1200 even, 300 even, go back far enough. What's that going to look like? Is that too far in the future to think that eventually it's all going to be over the top? It's all going to be handset to satellite and we don't need these RANs anymore. It's all going to be satellite networks. >> Dave V.: I think you're going to see- >> Little too science fiction-y? (laughs) >> No, I, no, I think it's a good question and I think you're going to see fragments. I think you're going to see fragmentation of private networks. I think you're going to see fragmentation of satellites. I think you're going to see legacy incumbents kind of hanging on, you know, the cable companies. I think that's coming. I think by 2030 it'll, the picture will be much more clear. The question is, and I think it's come down to the innovation on top, which platform is going to be the most developer friendly? Right, and you know, I've not heard anything from the big carriers that they're going to be developer friendly. I've heard "we have proprietary data that we're going to charge access for and developers are going to have to pay for that." But I haven't heard them saying "Developers, developers, developers!" You know, Steve Bomber running around, like bend over backwards for developers, they're asking the developers to bend over. And so if a network can, let's say the satellite network is more developer friendly, you know, you're going to see more innovation there potentially. You know, or if a dish network says, "You know what? We're going after developers, we're going after innovation. We're not going to gouge them for all this network data. Rather we're going to make the platform open or maybe we're going to do an app store-like model where we take a piece of the action after they succeed." You know, take it out of the backend, like a Silicon Valley VC as opposed to an East Coast VC. They're not going to get you in the front end. (Lisa laughs) >> Well, you can see the sort of disruptive forces at play between open RAN and the legacy, call it proprietary stack, right? But what is the, you know, if that's sort of a horizontal disruptive model, what's the vertically disruptive model? Is it private networks coming in? Is it a private 5G network that comes in that says, "We're starting from the ground up, everything is containerized. We're going to go find people at KubeCon who are, who understand how to orchestrate with Kubernetes and use containers in microservices, and we're going to have this little 5G network that's going to deliver capabilities that you can't get from the big boys." Is there a way to monetize that? Is there a way for them to be disrupted, be disruptive, or are these private 5G networks that everybody's talking about just relegated to industrial use cases where you're just squeezing better economics out of wireless communication amongst all your devices in your factory? >> That's an interesting question. I mean, there are a lot of those smart factory industrial use cases. I mean, it's basically industry 4.0 use cases. But yeah, I don't count the cloud guys out. You know, everybody says, "oh, the narrative is, well, the latency of the cloud." Well, not if the cloud is at the edge. If you take a local zone and put storage, compute, and data right next to each other and the cloud model with the cloud APIs, and then you got an asynchronous, you know, connection back. I think that's a reasonable model. I think the cloud guys figured out developers, right? Pretty well. Certainly Microsoft and, and Amazon and Google, they know developers. I don't see any reason why they can't bring their model to the edge. So, and that's really disruptive to the legacy telco guys, you know? So they have to be careful. >> One step closer to my dream of eliminating the word "cloud" from IT lexicon. (Lisa laughs) I contend that it has always been IT, and it will always be IT. And this whole idea of cloud, what is cloud? If AWS, for example, is delivering hardware to the edge where it needs to be, is that cloud? Do we go back to the idea that cloud is an operational model and not a question of physical location? I hope we get to that point. >> Well, what's Apex and GreenLake? Apex is, you know, Dell's as a service. GreenLake is- >> HPE. >> HPE's as a service. That's outposts. >> Dave N.: Right. >> Yeah. >> That's their outpost. >> Yeah. >> Well AWS's position used to be, you know, to use them as a proxy for hyperscale cloud. We'll just, we'll grow in a very straight trajectory forever on the back of net new stuff. Forget about the old stuff. As James T. Kirk said of the Klingons, "let them die." (Lisa laughs) As far as the cloud providers were concerned just, yeah, let, let that old stuff go away. Well then they found out, there came a point in time where they realized there's a lot of friction and stickiness associated with that. So they had to deal with the reality of hybridity, if that's the word, the hybrid nature of things. So what are they doing? They're pushing stuff out to the edge, so... >> With the same operating model. >> With the same operating model. >> Similar. I mean, it's limited, right? >> So you see- >> You can't run a lot of database on outpost, you can run RES- >> You see this clash of Titans where some may have written off traditional IT infrastructure vendors, might have been written off as part of the past. Whereas hyperscale cloud providers represent the future. It seems here at this show they're coming head to head and competing evenly. >> And this is where I think a company like Dell or HPE or Cisco has some advantages in that they're not going to compete with the telcos, but the hyperscalers will. >> Lisa: Right. >> Right. You know, and they're already, Google's, how much undersea cable does Google own? A lot. Probably more than anybody. >> Well, we heard from Google and Microsoft this morning in the keynote. It'd be interesting to see if we hear from AWS and then over the next couple of days. But guys, clearly there is, this is a great wrap of day one. And the crazy thing is this is only day one. We've got three more days of coverage, more news, more information to break down and unpack on theCUBE. Look forward to doing that with you guys over the next three days. Thank you for sharing what you saw on the show floor, what you heard from our guests today as we had about 10 interviews. Appreciate your insights and your perspectives and can't wait for tomorrow. >> Right on. >> All right. For Dave Vellante and Dave Nicholson, I'm Lisa Martin. You're watching theCUBE's day one wrap from MWC 23. We'll see you tomorrow. (relaxing music)

(bright upbeat music) >> Hello, welcome to theCUBE, "Unstoppable Domains Showcase." I'm John Furrier, your host of theCUBE. We got a great discussion here called the influencers around what's going on Web 3.0. And also this new sea change, cultural change around this next generation, internet, web, cloud, all happening, Jeremiah Owyang, Industry Analyst and Founding Part of Kaleido Insights. Jeremiah, great to see you thanks for coming on I appreciate it. Ren Besnard, Vice President of Marketing and Unstoppable Domains in the middle of all the action. Gentlemen, thanks for coming on on theCUBE for this showcase. >> Wow, my pleasure. >> Thanks for having us, John. >> Jeremiah, I want to start with you. You've seen many ways refer in all of your work for over a decade now. You've seen the Web 2.0 wave now the Web 3.0 is here. And it's not, I wouldn't say hyped up it's really just ramping up. And you're seeing real practical examples. You're in the middle of all the action. What is this Web 3.0, can you frame for us? I mean, you've seen many webs. What is Web 3.0 mean, what is it all about? >> Well John, you and I worked in the Web 2.0 space and essentially that enabled peer-to-peer media where people could upload their thoughts and ideas and videos without having to rely on centralized media. Unfortunately, that distributed and decentralized movement actually became centralized on the platform which are the big social networks and big tech companies. And this has caused an uproar because the people who are creating the content did not have control, could not control their identities, and could not really monetize or make decisions. So Web 3.0 which is a moniker of a lot of different trends, including crypto, blockchain and sometimes the metaverse. Is to undo the controlling that has become centralized. And the power is now shifting back into the hands of the participants again. And in this movement, they want to have more control over their identities, their governance, the content that they're creating, how they're actually building it, and then how they're monetizing it. So in many ways it's changing the power and it's a new economic model. So that's Web 3.0. Without really even mentioning the technologies. Is that helpful? >> Yeah, it's great. And Ren, we're talking about on theCUBE many times and one notable stat I don't think it's been reported, but it's been more kind of a rumor. I hear that 30% of the Berkeley computer science students are dropping out and going into to crypto or blockchain or decentralized startups. Which means that there's a big wave coming in of talent. You're seeing startups, you're seeing a lot more formation, you're seeing a lot more, I would say it's kind of ramping up of real people, not just people with dream is actual builders out here doing stuff. What's your take on the Web 3.0 movement with all this kind of change happening from people and also the new ideas being refactored? >> I think that the competition for talent is extremely real. And we start looking at the stats, we see that there is an enormous draft of people that are moving into this space. People that are fascinated by technology and are embracing the ethos of Web 3.0. And at this stage I think it's not only engineers and developers, but we have moved into a second phase where we see that a lot of supporting functions, you know, marketing being one of them, sales, business development are being built up quite rapidly. It's not without actually reminding me of the mid 2000s, you know. When I started working with Google, at that point in time the walled gardens rightly absorbing vast, vast cohorts of young graduates and more experienced professionals that were passionate and moving into the web environment. And I think we are seeing a movement right now, which is not entirely similar except faster. >> Yeah, Jeremiah, you've seen the conversations of the cloud, I call the cloud kind of revolution. You had mobile in 2007. But you got Amazon Web Services changed the application space on how people developed in the cloud. And again, that created a lot of value. Now you're seeing the role of data as a huge part of how people are scaling and the decentralized movements. So you've got cloud which is kind of classic today, state of the art enterprise and or app developers. And you've got now decentralized wave coming, okay. You're seeing apps being developed on that architecture. Data is central in all this, right. So how, how do you view this as someone who's watching the landscape, you know, these walled gardens are hoarding all the data I mean, LinkedIn, Facebook. They're not sharing that data with anyone they're using it for themselves. So as- >> That's right. >> They can control back comes to the forefront. How do you see this market with the applications and what comes out of that? >> So the thing that we seen out of the five things that I had mentioned that are decentralizing. (Jeremiah coughing) Are the ones that have been easier to move across. Have been the ability to monetize and to build. But the data aspect has actually stayed pretty much central, frankly. What has decentralized is that the contracts, the blockchain ledgers, those have decentralized. But the funny thing is often a big portion of these blockchain networks are on Amazon 63 to 70%, same thing with (indistinct). So they're still using the Web 2.0 architectures. However, we're also seeing other forms like IPFS where the data could be spread across a wider range of folks. But right now we're still dependent on what Web 2.0. So the vision and the promise Web 3.0 when it to full decentralization is not here by any means. I'd say we're at a Web 2.25. >> Pre-Web 3.0 no, but actions there. How do you guys see the dangers, 'cause there's a lot of negative press but also there's a lot of positive press. You're seeing a lot of fraud, we've seen a lot of the crypto fraud over the past years. You've seen a lot of now positive. It's almost a self-governance thing and environment, the way the culture is. But what are the dangers, how do you guys educate people, what should people pay attention to, what should people look for to understand, you know, where to position themselves? >> Yes, so we've learned a lot from Web 1.0, Web 2.0, the sharing economy. And we are walking into Web 3.0 with eyes wide open. So people have rightfully put forth a number of challenges, the sustainability issues with excess using of computing and mining the excessive amount of scams that are happening in part due to unknown identities. Also the architecture breaks DAOn in some periods and there's a lack of regulation. This is something different though. In the last periods that we've gone through, we didn't really know what was going to happen. And we walked and think this is going to be great. The sharing economy, the gig economy, the social media's going to change the world around. It's very different now. People are a little bit jaded. So I think that's a change. And so I think we're going to see that sorted out in suss out just like we've seen with other trends. It's still very much in the early years. >> Ren, I got to get your take on this whole should influencers and should people be anonymous or should they be docs out there? You saw the board, eight guys that did that were kind of docs a little bit there. And that went viral. This is an issue, right? Because we just had a problem of fake news, fake people, fake information. And now you have a much more secure environment imutability is a wonderful thing. It's a feature, not a bug, right? So how is this all coming down? And I know you guys are in the middle of it with NFTs as authentication. Take us, what's your take on this because this is a big issue. >> Look, I think first I am extremely optimistic about technology in general. So I'm super, super bullish about this. And yet, you know, I think that while crypto has so many upsides, it's important to be super conscious and aware of the downsides that come with it to, you know. If you think about every Fortune 500 company there is always training required by all employees on internet safety, reporting of potential attacks and so on. In Web 3.0, we don't have that kind of standard reporting mechanisms yet for bad actors in that space. And so when you think about influencers in particular, they do have a responsibility to educate people about the potential, but also the dangers of the technology of Web 3.0 of crypto basically. Whether you're talking about hacks or online safety, the need for hardware, wallet, impersonators on discord, you know, security storing your seed phrase. So every actor influencer or else has got a role to play. I think that in that context to your point, it's very hard to tell whether influencers should be anonymous, oxydemous or fully docked. The decentralized nature of Web 3.0 will probably lead us to see a combination of those anonymity levels so to speak. And the movements that we've seen around some influencers identities become public are particularly interesting. I think there's probably a convergence of Web 2.O and Web 3.0 at play here, you know. Maybe occurring on the notion of 2.5. But for now I think in Web 2.0, all business founders and employees are known and they held accountable for their public comments and their actions. If Web 3.0 enables us to be anonymous, if DAOs have voting control, you know. What happens if people make comments and there is no way to know who they are, basically. What if the DAO doesn't take appropriate action? I think eventually there will be an element of community self-regulation where influencers will be acting in the best interest of their reputation. And I believe that the communities will self-regulate themselves and will create natural boundaries around what can be said or not said. >> I think that's a really good point about influencers and reputation because. Jeremiah, does it matter that you're anonymous have an icon that could be a NFT or a picture. But if I have an ongoing reputation I have trust, to this trust there. It's not like just a bot that was created just to spam someone. You know I'm starting to getting into this new way. >> You're right, and that word you said trust, that's what really this is about. But we've seen that public docs, people with their full identities have made mistakes. They have pulled the hood over people's faces and really scammed them out of a lot of money. We've seen that in the, that doesn't change anything in human behavior. So I think over time that we will see a new form of a reputation system emerge even for pseudonym and perhaps for people that are just anonymous that only show their potential wallet, address a series of numbers and letters. That form might take a new form of a Web 3.0 FICO Score. And you could look at their behaviors. Did they transact, you know, how did they behave? Were they involved in projects that were not healthy? And because all of that information is public on the chain and you can go back in time and see that. We might see a new form of a scoring emerge, of course. Who controls that scoring? That's a whole nother topic gone on controling and trust. So right now, John we do see that there's a number of projects, new NFT projects, where the founders will claim and use this as a point of differentiation that they are fully docs. So you know who they are and in their names. Secondly, we're seeing a number of products or platforms that require KYC, you know, your customers. So that's self-identification often with a government ID or credit card in order to bridge out your coins and turn that into fiat. In some cases that's required in some of these marketplaces. So we're seeing a collision here between our full names and pseudonyms and being anonymous. >> That's awesome. And I think this is the new, again, a whole new form of governance. Ren, you mentioned some comments about DAO. I want to get your thoughts again. You know, Jeremiah we've become historians over the years. We're getting old I'm a little bit older than you. (Jeremiah laughs) But we've seen the- >> You're young men. You know, I remember breaking in the business when the computer standards bodies were built to be more organic and then they became much more of a, kind of an anti-innovation environment where people, the companies would get involved, the standards organization just to slow things DAO and mark things up a little bit. So, you know, you look at DAOs like, hmm, is DAO a good thing or a bad thing. The answer is from people I talk to is, it depends. So I'd love to get your thoughts on getting momentum and becoming defacto with value, a value proposition, vis-a-vis just a DAO for the sake of having a DAO. This has been a conversation that's been kind of in the inside the baseball here, inside the ropes of the industry, but there's trade offs. Can you guys share your thoughts on when to do a DAO and when not to do a DAO and the benefits and trade offs of that? >> Sure, maybe I'll start off with a definition and then we'll go to, Ren. So a DAO, a decentralized autonomous organization, the best way to think about this It's a digital cooperative. and we've heard of worker cooperatives before. The difference is that they're using blockchain technologies in order to do three things, identity, governance, and rewards and mechanisms. They're relying on Web 2.0 tools and technologies like discord and Telegram and social networks to communicate. And as a cooperative they're trying to come up with a common goal. Ren, what's your take, that's the setup. >> So, you know for me when I started my journey into crypto and Web 3.0, I had no idea about what DAO actually meant. And an easy way for me to think of it and to grasp the nature of it was about the comparison between a DAO and perhaps a more traditional company structure, you know. In the traditional company structure, you have (indistinct), the company's led by a CEO and other executives. The DAO is a flat structure, and it's very much led by a group of core contributors. So to Jeremiah's point, you know, you get that notion of a cooperative type of structure. The decision making is very different, you know. We're talking about a super high level of transparency proposals getting submitted and voting systems using (indistinct) as opposed to, you know, management, making decisions behind closed doors. I think that speaks to a totally new form of governance. And I think we have hardly, hardly scratched the surface. We have seen recently very interesting moments in Web 3.0 culture. And we have seen how DAO suddenly have to make certain decisions and come to moments of claiming responsibility in order to police behavior of some of the members. I think that's important. I think it's going to redefine how we're thinking about that particularly new governance models. And I think it's going to pave the way for a lot of super interesting structure in the near future. >> Yeah and that's a great point. >> Go ahead, Jeremiah. >> That's a great point, Ren. Around the transparency for governance. So, John you post the question, does this make things faster or slower? And right now in the most doubts are actually pretty slow because they're set up as a flat organization. So as a response to that they're actually shifting to become representative democracies. Does that sound familiar? Or you can appoint delegates and use tokens to vote for them and they have a decision power. Almost like a committee and they can function. And so we've seen actually there sometimes are hierarchy except the person at the top is voted by those that have the tokens. In some cases, the people at the top had the most tokens. But that's a whole nother topic. So we're seeing a wide variety of governance structures. >> You know, Ren I was talking with Matt G, the Founder of Unstoppable. And I was telling him about the Domain Name System. And one little trivia note that many people don't know about is that the US government 'cause the internet was started by the US. The Department of Commerce kept that on tight leash because the international telecommunications wanted to get their hands on it because of ccTLDs and other things. So at that time, 'cause the innovation yet was isn't yet baked out. It was organically growing the governance, the rules of the road, keeping it very stable versus melding with it. So there's certain technologies that require, Jeremiah that let's keep an eye on as a community let's not formalize anything. Like the government did with the Domain Name System. Let's keep it tight and then finally released it. I think multiple years after 2004, I think it went over to the ITU. But this is a big point. I mean, if you get too structured, organic innovation can't go. What's you guys reaction to that? >> So I think, you know to take the stab at it. We have as a business, you know, thinking of Unstoppable Domains, a strong incentive to innovate. And this is what is going to be determining long-term value growth for the organization, for partners, for users, for customers. So you know the degree of formalization actually gives us a sense of purpose and a sense of action. And if you compare that to DAO, for instance, you can see how some of the upsides and downsides can pan out either way. It's not to say that there is a perfect solution. I think one of the advantages of the DAO is that you can let more people contribute. You can probably remove buyers quite effectively and you can have a high level of participation and involvement in decisions and own the upside in many ways. You know as a company, it's a slightly different setup. We have the opportunity to coordinate a very diverse and part-time workforce in a very you a different way. And we do not have to deal with the inefficiencies that might be inherent to some form of extreme decentralization. So there is a balance from an organizational structure that comes either side. >> Awesome. Jeremiah, I want to get your thoughts on a trend that you've been involved in, we've both been involved in. And you're seeing it now with the kind of social media world, the world of the role of an influencer. It's kind of moved from what was open source and influencer was a connect to someone who shared, created content enabled things to much more of a vanity. You update the photo on Instagram and having a large audience. So is there a new influencer model with Web 3.0 or is it, I control the audience I'm making money that way. Is there a shift in the influencer role or ideas that you see that should be in place for what is the role of an influencer? 'Cause as Web 3.0 comes you're going to see that role become instrumental. We've seen it in open source projects. Influencers, you know, the people who write code or ship code. So what's your take on that? Because this has been a conversation. People have been having the word influencer and redefining and reframing it. >> Sure, the influence model really hasn't changed that much, but the way that they're behaving has when it comes to Web 3.0. In this market, I mean there's a couple of things. Some of the influencers are investors. And so when you see their name on a project or a new startup, that's an indicator there's a higher level of success. You might want to pay more attention to it or not. Secondly, influencers themselves are launching their own NFT projects. So, Gary Vaynerchuk, a number of celebrities, Paris Hilton is involved. They are also doing theirs as well. Steve Aok, famous DJ launched his as well. So they're going head first and participating in building in this model. And their communities are coming around them and they're building economy. Now the difference is it's not I speak as an influencer to the fans. The difference is that the fans are now part of the community and they literally hold and own some of the economic value, whether it's tokens or the NFTs. So it's a collaborative economy, if you will, where they're all benefiting together. And that's a big difference as well. >> Can you see- >> Lastly, there's one little tactic we're seeing where marketers are air dropping NFTs, branded NFTs influencers wallet. So you can see it in there. So there's new tactics that are forming as well. Back to you. >> That's super exciting. Ren, what's your reaction to that? Because he just hit on a whole new way of how engagement's happening, how people are closed looping their votes, their votes of confidence or votes with their wallet. And the brands which are artists now influencers. I mean, this is a whole game changing instrumentation level. >> I think that what we are seeing right now is super reinvigorating as a marketeer who's been around for a few years, basically. I think that the shift in the way brands are going to communicate and engage with their audiences is profound. It's probably as revolutionary and even more revolutionary than the movement for brands in getting into digital. And you have that sentiment of a gold rush right now with a lot of brands that are trying to understand NFTs and how to actually engage with those communities and those audiences. There are many levels in which brands and influencers are going to engage. There are many influencers that actually advance the message and the mission because the explosion of content on Web 3.0 has been crazy. Part of that is due to the network effect nature of crypto. Because as Jaremiah mentioned, people are incentivized to promote projects. Holders of an NFT are also incentivized to promote it. So you end up with a fly wheel which is pretty unique of people that are hyping their project and that are educating other people about it and commenting on the ecosystem with IP right being given to NFT holders. You're going to see people promote brands instead of the brands actually having to. And so the notion of brands are gaining and delivering elements of the value to their fans is something that's super attractive, extremely interesting. And I think again, we have hardly scratched the surface of all that is possible in that particular space. >> That's interesting. You guys are bringing some great insight here. Jeremiah, the old days the word authentic was a kind of a cliche and brands like tried to be authentic. And they didn't really know what to do they called it organic, right? And now you have the trust concept with authenticity and environment like Web 3.0 where you can actually measure it and monetize it and capture it if you're actually authentic and trustworthy. >> That's right, and be because it's on blockchain, you can see how somebody's behaved with their economic behavior in the past. Of course, big corporations aren't going to have that type of trail on blockchain just yet. But individuals and executives who participate in this market might be. And we'll also see new types of affinity. Do executives do they participate in these NFT communities, do they purchase them or numerous brands like Adidas to acquire, you know, different NFT projects to participate. And of course the big brands are grabbing their domains. Of course you could talk to, Ren about that because it's owning your own name is a part of this trust and being found. >> That's awesome. Great insight guys. Closing comments, takeaways for the audience here. Each of you take a minute to share your thoughts on what you think is happening now where it goes, all right, where's it going to go? Jeremiah, we'll start with you. >> Sure, I think the vision of Web 3.0 where full decentralization happens, where the power is completely shifted to the edges. I don't think it's going to happen. I think we will reach Web 2.5. And I've been through so many tech trends where we said that the power's going to shift completely to of the end, it just doesn't. In part there's two reasons. One is the venture capital are the ones who tend to own the programs in the first place. And secondly, the startups themselves end up becoming the one-percenter. We see Airbnb and Uber are one-percenter now. So that trend happens over and over and over. Now with that said, the world will be in a better place. We will have more transparency. We will see economic power shifted to the people, the participants. And so they will have more control over the internet that they are building. >> Awesome, Ren final comments. >> I'm fully aligned with Jeremiah on the notion of control being returned to users, the notion of ownership and the notion of redistribution of the economic value that is created across all the different chains that we are going to see and all those ecosystems. I believe that we are going to witness two parallel movements of expansion. One that is going to be very lateral. When you think of crypto and Web 3.0 essentially you think of a few 100 tribes. And I think that more projects are going to be a more coalitions of individuals and entities, and those are going to exist around those projects. So you're going to see, you know, an increase in the number of tribes that one might join. And I also think that we're going to progress rapidly from the low 100 millions of crypto and NFT holders into the big hands basically. And that's going to be extreme interesting. I think that the next waves of crypto users, NFT fans are going to look very different from the early adopters that we had witnessed in the very early days. So it's not going to be your traditional model of technology adoption curves. I think the demographics are going to shift and the motivations are going to be different as well, which is going to be a wonderful time to educate and engage with new community members. >> All right, Ren and Jeremiah, thank you both for that great insight great segment breaking down Web 3.0 or Web 2.5 as Jeremiah says but we're in a better place. This is a segment with the influencers. As part of theCUBE and the Unstoppable Domain Showcase. I'm John Furrie, your host. Thanks for watching. (bright upbeat music)

>>Hello, and welcome to the cube unstoppable Doneen showcase. I'm John furrier, host of the cube. We got a great discussion here called the influencers around what's going on in web three and also this new sea change cultural change around this next generation, internet web cloud, all happening, Jeremiah yang industry analyst, and founding part of the cleaner insights. Share my great to see you. Thanks for coming on. Appreciate it. Uh, registered vice-president of marketing at unstoppable domains in the middle of all the actions. Gentlemen, thanks for coming on on the cube for this showcase. >>My pleasure. So I think it was done >>At Jeremy. I want to start with you. You've seen many ways, but fallen all of your work for over a decade now. Um, you've seen the web 2.0 wave. Now the web three's here. Um, and it's not, I wouldn't say hyped up. It's really just ramping up and you're seeing real practical examples. Uh, you're in the middle of all the action. What is this web three? Can you frame for us that mean you've seen many waves? What is web three mean? What is it? What is it all about? >>Well, John, you and I worked in the web to space and essentially that enabled peer to peer media where people could, could upload their thoughts and ideas and videos, um, without having to rely on centralized media. And unfortunately that distributed and decentralized movement actually became centralized on the platforms or the big social networks and big tech companies. And this has caused an uproar because the people who are creating the content did not have control, could not control their identities and could not really monetize or make decisions. So web three is what is, which is a moniker of a lot of different trends, including crypto blockchain. And sometimes the metaverse is to undo the controlling that has become centralized. And the power is now shifting back into the hands of the participants again, and then this movement, they want to have more control over their identities, their governance, the content that they're creating, how they're actually building it and then how they're monetizing it. So in many ways, it's, it's changing the power and it's a new economic model. So that's web three without really even mentioning the technologies. Is that helpful? >>Yeah, that's great. And ran. We were talking about, on the cute many times and one notable stat, I don't think it's been reported, but it's been more kind of a rumor. I hear that 30% of the, um, Berkeley computer science students are dropping out and going into crypto or blockchain or decentralized startups, which means that this there's a big wave coming in of talent. You seeing startups, you're seeing a lot more formation. You're seeing a lot more, I would say, kind of ramping up of real people, not just, you know, people with a dream it's actual builders out here doing stuff. What's your take on the web three, moving with all this kind of change happening, uh, from people and also the new ideas being refactored. >>I think that the competition for talent is extremely real. And we start looking at the stats. We see that there is an draft of people that are moving into this space. People that are fascinated by technology and are embracing the ethos of web three. And at this stage, I think it's not only engineers and developers, but we have moved into a second phase where we see that a lot of supporting functions know marketing, being one of them, sales, business development, uh, are being built up quite rapidly. It's not without actually reminding me of the mid two thousands. You know, when I started, uh, working with Google at that point in time, the walled gardens rightly absorbing vast, vast cohorts of young graduates and more experienced professionals that are passionate and moving into the web environment. And I think we are seeing a movement right now, which is not entirely dissimilar, except >>Yeah, Jeremiah. You've seen the conversations over the cloud. I call the cloud kind of revolution. You had mobile in 2007, but then you got Amazon web services changed the application space on how people developed in the cloud. And again, that created a lot of value. Now you're seeing the role of data as a huge part of how people are scaling and the decentralized movement. So you've got cloud, which is kind of classic today. State-of-the-art, you know, enterprise and or app developers and you've got now decentralized wave coming. Okay. You're seeing apps being developed on that, that architecture data is central in all of this, right. So how do you view this? As, as someone who's watching the landscape, you know, these walled gardens are hoarding all the data. I mean, LinkedIn Facebook, they're not sharing that data with anyone they're using it for themselves. So as they can control back, comes to the forefront, how do you see this market with the applications and what comes out of that? >>So the thing that we've seen and out of the five things that I had mentioned that are decentralizing, the ones that have been easier to move across have been the ability to monetize and to build. But the data aspect has actually stayed pretty much central. Frankly. What has decentralized is that the contracts to block blockchain ledgers to those of decentralized. But the funny thing is often a big portion of these blockchain networks are on Amazon 63 to 70%, same thing with Stelara. So they're still using the web 2.0 architectures. However, we're also seeing other farms like IPFS, where the data could be to spread it across a wider range of folks. But right now we're still dependent on what we're to point out. So the vision and the problem with 3.0, when it comes to full de-centralization is not here by any means. I'd say we're at a web 2.2, five, >>Pre-web 3m, no actions there. What do you guys, how do you guys see the, um, the dangers? Cause there's a lot of negative press, but also is a lot of positive press. You seeing, you know, a lot of fraud, we've seen a lot of the crypto fraud over the past years. You've seen a lot of now positives, it's almost a self-governance thing and environment, the way the culture is, but what are the dangers? How do you guys educate people? What should people pay attention to? What should people look for to understand, you know, where to position themselves? >>Yes. So we've learned a lot from web one, we to the sharing economy and we are walking into two and three with eyes wide open. So people have rightfully put forth a number of challenges, the sustainability issues with excess using of computing and mining, the, um, the excessive amount of scams that are happening in part due to unknown identities. Um, also the architecture breaks down in certain periods and there's a lack of regulation. Um, this, this is something different though in the last, uh, uh, periods that we've gone through, we didn't really know what was gonna happen. And we walked in big, this is going to be great. The sharing economy, the gig economy, the social media is going to change the world. Hurrah is very different. Now people are a little bit jaded. So I think that's the big change. And so I think we're going to see that, uh, you know, soar it out and suss out just like we've seen with other prints. It's still very much in the early years, >>Right. I got to get your take on this whole, uh, should influencers and should people be anonymous or should they be doxed out there? You saw the board eight guys that did, that were kind of docs a little bit there and that went, went viral. Um, this is an issue, right? Because we, we just had a problem of fake news, uh, fake people, fake information, and now you have a much more secure environment. Immutability is a wonderful thing. It's, it's a feature, not a bug, right. So how is this all coming down? And I know you guys are in the middle of it with, uh, NFTs as, as authentication tickets. What's your take on this because this is a big issue. >>Look, I think first I am extremely optimistic about technology in general. Uh, so I'm super, super bullish about this. And yet, you know, I think that while crypto has so many upsides, it's important to be super conscious and aware of the downsides that come with it too. You know, if you think about every fortune 500 company, there is always training required by all employees on internet safety reporting of potential attacks. And so on in web three, we don't have that kind of standard reporting mechanisms yet, uh, for bad actors in that space. And so when you think about influencers in particular, they do have a responsibility to educate people about, uh, the potential, but also the dangers of the technology of web three, uh, of crypto basically, uh, whether you're talking about hacks online safety, the need for hardware impersonators on discord, uh, security, uh, storing your, your seed phrase. >>So every actor in France or ELs has got a role to play. I think that, uh, in that context, to your point, it's very hard to tell whether influencers should be, uh, anonymous, opposite inverse or footy dogs. The decentralized nature of web three will probably lead us to see a combination of those anonymity levels, um, so to speak, um, and the, uh, movements that we've seen around some influencers, identities becoming public are particularly interesting. I think there's probably a convergence of web two and web three at play here. You know, maybe a on the notion of 2.5 for, I think in way to all business founders and employees are known and they're held accountable for their public comments and actions. Um, if web three enables us to be anonymous, if dials have 14 control, you know, what happens if people make comments and there is no way to know who they are basically, uh, what if the dowel doesn't take appropriate action? I think eventually there will be an element of community self-regulation where influencers will be, uh, acting in the best interest of their reputation. And I believe that the communities will self regulate themselves and we'll create natural boundaries around what can be said or not. >>I think that's a really good point about, um, influencers and reputation because Jeremiah doesn't matter that you're anonymous. I have an icon that could be a NFT or a picture, but if I have an ongoing reputation, I have trust there's trust there. It's not like a, you know, just a bot that was created just to spam someone. It was just, you know what I'm saying? They getting into you getting into this new way. >>You're right. And that, that word you said, trust, that's what really, this is about. But we've seen that public docks people with their full identities have made mistakes. They have pulled the hood over people's faces in and really scammed them out of a lot of money. We've seen that in it that doesn't change anything in human behavior. So I think over time that we will see a new form of a reputation system emerged even for pseudonyms and perhaps for people that are just anonymous that only show their a potential, a wallet address, a series of numbers and letters. Um, that form might take a new form of a web 3.0 FICO score, and you can look at their behaviors. Did they transact? You know, how do they behave? Do they, were they involved in projects that were not healthy? And because all of that information is public on the chain and you can go back in time and see that we might see a new form of, of, of a scoring emerge. >>Of course, who controls that scoring that's a whole nother topic, gong on control and trust. So right now, John, we do see that there's a number of projects, new NFG projects, where the founders will claim and use this as a point of differentiation that they are fully docs. So you know who they are and their names. Secondly, we're seeing a number of, um, uh, products or platforms that require KYC, know your customer so that self-identification often with a government ID or a credit card in order to bridge out your, your coins and turn that into a Fiat. In some cases that's required in some of these marketplaces. So we're seeing a coalition here between, uh, full names and pseudonyms and being anonymous. >>That's awesome. And that, and I think this is the new, again, a whole new form of governance ran. You mentioned some comments about Dow. So I want to get your thoughts again, you know, Jeremiah, we become historians over the years. We're getting old, I'm a little bit older than you, but we've seen the movie war. You know, I remember breaking in the business when the computer standards bodies were built to be more organic, and then they became much more of a kind of an anti-innovation environment where people, the companies would get involved the standards organization just to slow things down and muck things up a little bit. Um, so you know, you look at Dallas like, Hmm, is a Dal, a good thing, or a bad thing that the answer is from people I talked to, is it depends. So I'd love to get your thoughts on getting momentum and becoming defacto with value, a value proposition. Vis-a-vis just adapt for the sake of having a doubt. This has been a conversation that's been kind of in the inside the baseball here, inside the ropes of the industry, but there's trade-offs, can you guys share your thoughts on when to do a Dow and when not to do a Dow and the benefits and trade-offs of that? >>Sure. Maybe I'll start off with a definition and then we'll go to rent. So a Dao, a decentralized autonomous organization, the best way to think about this. It's a digital cooperative and we've heard of worker cooperatives before the differences that they're using blockchain technologies in order to do the three things, identity governance, and rewards and mechanisms. They're relying on web 2.0 tools and technologies like discord and telegram and social networks to communicate. And there's a cooperative they're trying to come up with a common goal, um, Ren, but what's your take, that's the setup? >>So, you know, for me, when I started my journey into crypto and web tree, I had no idea about, you know, what that actually meant and, uh, an easy way for me to think of it and to grasp the nature of it was about the comparison between a dowel and perhaps a more traditional company structure. Um, you know, in a traditional company structure, you have a Yorkie, the company is led by a CEO and other executives, uh, that that was a flat structure. And it's very much led by a group of core contributors. So, uh, to Jeremiah's point, you know, you get that notion of a co-operative, uh, type of structure. The decision-making is very different. You know, we're talking about a hot, super high level of transparency proposals getting submitted and, and voting systems, using applications, as opposed to, you know, management, making decisions behind closed doors. >>I think that speaks to a totally new form of governance. And I think we have hardly, hardly scratched the surface. We have seen recently, uh, very interesting moments in web tree culture. And we have seen how that was suddenly have to make certain decisions and then come to moments of claiming responsibility, uh, in order to, uh, put his behavior, uh, of some of the members. I think that's important. I think it's going to redefine how we're thinking about that, particularly new governance models. And I think he's going to pave the way for a lot of super interesting structure in the near future. >>That's a great point, ran around the transparency for governance. So John, you posed the question, does this make things faster or slower? And right now most dowels are actually pretty slow because they're set up as a flat organization. So as a response to that, they're actually shifting to become representative democracies. Does that sound familiar where you can appoint a delegates and use tokens to vote for them? And they have a decision power, almost like a committee and they can function. And so we've seen actually there are some times our hierarchies, except the person at the top is voted by those that have the tokens. In some cases, the people at the top had the most tokens, but that's a whole nother topic. So we're seeing a wide variety of governance structures, >>You know, rent. I was talking with Matt G the founder of, and I was telling him about the domain name system. And one little trivia note that many people don't know about is that the U S government cause unit it was started by the U S the department of commerce kept that on tight leash because the international telecommunications union wanted to get their hands on it because of ccTLDs and other things. So at that time, because the innovation yet wasn't yet baked out. It was organically growing the governance, the rules of the road, keeping it very stable versus meddling with it. So there's certain technologies that require Jeremiah that let's keep an eye on as a community. Let's not formalize anything like the government did with the domain name system. Let's keep it tight. And then finally released it, I think multiple years after 2004, I think it went over to the, to the ITU, but this is a big point. I mean, if you get too structured, organic innovation, can't go, what you guys' reaction to that. >>So I think to take a stab at it, um, we have as a business, you know, thinking of unstoppable domains, a strong incentive to innovate, uh, and this is what is going to be determining longterm value growth for the organization for, uh, partners, for users, for customers. So, you know, that degree of formalization actually gives us a sense of purpose and a sense of action. And if you compare that to Dows, for instance, you can see how some of the upsides and downsides can pan out either way. It's not to say that there is a perfect solution. I think one of the advantages of the Dow is that you can let more people contribute. You can probably remove bias quite effectively, and you can have a high level of participation and involvement in decisions and all the upside in many ways. Um, you know, as a company, it's a slightly different setup. We have the opportunity to coordinate a very, uh, diverse and part-time workforce in a very, uh, you know, different way. Um, and we do not have to deal with the inefficiencies that might be, you never run to some form of extreme decentralization so that those are balanced from an organizational structure, uh, that comes, uh, either side >>Sharon. I want to get your thoughts on, on, on a trend that you've been involved in. We both been involved in, and you're seeing it now with the kind of social media world, the world of a role of an influencer it's kind of moved from what was open source and influencer was a connect to someone who shared graded content, um, enabled things to much more of a vanity that the photo on Instagram and having a large audience. Um, so is there a new influencer model with web three or is it, is it the, I control the audience I'm making money that way. Is there a shift in the influencer role or, or ideas that you see that should be in place for what is the role of an influencer? Because as web three comes, you're going to see that role become instrumental. We've seen it in open source projects, influences, you know, the people who write code or ship code. So what's your take on that because there's been a conversation with people who have been having the word influencer and redefining and reframing it. >>Sure. The influence model really hasn't changed that much, but the way that they're behaving has when it comes to at three, this market, I mean, there's a couple of things. Some of the influencers are in investors. And so when you see their name on a project or a new startup, that's an indicator, there's a higher level of success. You might want to pay more attention to it or not. Secondly, influencers themselves are launching their own NFC projects. Gary Vaynerchuk, a number of celebrities, Paris Hilton is involved and they are also doing this as well. Steve Aoki, a famous DJ launched his as well. So they're going head first and participating in building in this model. And there are communities are coming around them and they're building economies. Now the difference is it's not, I speak as an influencer to the fans. The difference is that the fans are now part of the community and they hold, they literally holding own some of the economic value, whether it's tokens or the NFTs. So it's a collaborative economy, if you will, where they're all benefiting together. And that's a, that's a big difference as well. Lastly, there's, there's one little tactic we're seeing where marketers are airdropping in FTS, branded NFTs influencers with wallet. So you can see it in there. So there's new tactics that are forming as well. Yes. >>Super exciting. Ren, what's your reaction to that? Because he just hit on a whole new way of, of how engagement's happening, how people are closed, looping their, their votes, their, their votes of confidence or votes with their wallet. Um, and some brands which are artists now, influencers. I mean, this is a whole game-changing instrumentation level. >>I think that's what we are seeing right now is super re invigorating as a marketeer who has been around for a few years, basically. Um, I think that the shift in the web brands are going to communicate and engage with our audiences is profound. It's probably as revolutionary and even more revolutionary than the movement for, uh, brands in getting into digital. And you have that sentiment of a gold rush right now with a lot of brands that are trying to understand NFTs and, and how to actually engage with those communities and those audiences, um, dominate levels in which brands and influencers are going to engage. There are many influencers that actually advanced the message and the mission because the explosion of content on web tree has been crazy. Part of that is due to the network effect nature of crypto, because as Jeremiah mentioned, people are incentivized to promote projects, holders of an NFTA, also incentivized to promote it. So you end up with a flywheel, which is pretty unique of people that are hyping the project, and that are educating other people about it and commenting on the ecosystem, uh, with IP rights, being given to NFT holders, you're going to see people pull a brand since then of the brands actually having to. And so the notion of brands, again, judging and delivering, you know, elements of the value to their fans is something that's super attractive, extremely interesting. And I think, again, we've hardly scratched the surface of all that is possible in that. >>It's interesting. You guys are bringing some great insight here, Jeremiah, the old days, the word authentic was a kind of a cliche and brands like tried to be authentic and they didn't really know what to do. They called it organic, right? And now you have the trust concept with aura authenticity and environment like web three, where you can actually measure it and monetize it and capture it if you're actually authentic and trustworthy. >>That's right. And because it's on blockchain, you can see how somebody is behave with their economic behavior. In the past, of course, big corporations. Aren't going to have that type of trail on blockchain just yet. But the individuals and executives who participate in this market might be, and we'll also see a new types of affinity. Do you executives, do they participate in these NFT communities? Do they purchase them? We're seeing numerous brands like Adidas to acquire, uh, you know, different MTV projects to participate. And of course the big brands are grabbing their domains. Of course, you can talk to rant about that because it's owning your own name as a part of this trust and being >>That's awesome. Great insight guys. Closing comments, takeaways for the audience here. Each of you take a minute to give, share your thoughts on what you think is happening now, where it goes. All right, where's it going to go, Jeremy, we'll start with you. >>Sure. Um, I think the vision of web three, where full decentralization happens, where the power is completely shifted to the edges. I don't think it's going to happen. I think we will reach web 2.5 and I've been through so many tech trends where we said that the power is going to shift completely to the end. It just doesn't, there's two reasons. One is the venture capital are the ones who tend to own the pro programs in the first place. And secondly, the, the startups themselves end up becoming the one percenters. We see Airbnb and Uber are one-percenters now. So that trend happens over and over and over. Now with that said, the world will be in a better place. We will have more transparency. We will see economic power shifted to the people, the participants. And so they will have more control over the internet that they are building. >>Right. And final, final comments, >>Um, fully aligned with Jeremiah on the notions of control, being returned to users, the notion of ownership and the notion of redistribution of the economic value that is created across all the different chains, uh, uh, that we are going to see. And, and all those ecosystems. I believe that we are going to witness to palliate movements of expansion, one that is going to be very lateral. When you think of crypto and web three, essentially you think of a few hundred tribes. Uh, and I think that more projects are going to appear more, uh, coalitions of individuals and entities, and those are going to exist around those projects. So you're going to see an increase in the number of tribes that one might join. And I also think that we're going to progress rapidly from the low hundred millions of people and an FTE holders into the billions perfectly. Uh, and that's going to be extremely interesting. I think that the next wave of crypto users and Ft fans are going to look very different from the early adopters that we had witnessed in the very early days. So it's not going to be your traditional model of technology, adoption curves. I think the demographics going to shift and the motivations are going to be different as well, which is going to be a wonderful time to educate and engage with new community members. >>All right, Ron, Jeremy, thank you both for that great insight, great segment, uh, breaking down web three or web 2.5 as Jeremiah says, but we're in a better place. This is a segment with the influencers as part of the cubes and the unstoppable domain showcase. Um, John for your hosts. Thanks for watching.

(upbeat music) >> Welcome everyone to theCUBE's presentation of the AWS Startup Showcase Open Cloud Innovations. This is season two of the ongoing series. We're covering exciting start startups in the AWS ecosystem to talk about open source community stuff. I'm your host, Dave Nicholson. And I'm delighted today to have two guests from Weaveworks. Steve George, COO of Weaveworks, and Steve Waterworth, technical marketing engineer from Weaveworks. Welcome, gentlemen, how are you? >> Very well, thanks. >> Very well, thanks very much. >> So, Steve G., what's the relationship with AWS? This is the AWS Startup Showcase. How do Weaveworks and AWS interact? >> Yeah sure. So, AWS is a investor in Weaveworks. And we, actually, collaborate really closely around EKS and some specific EKS tooling. So, in the early days of Kubernetes when AWS was working on EKS, the Elastic Kubernetes Service, we started working on the command line interface for EKS itself. And due to that partnership, we've been working closely with the EKS team for a long period of time, helping them to build the CLI and make sure that users in the community find EKS really easy to use. And so that brought us together with the AWS team, working on GitOps and thinking about how to deploy applications and clusters using this GitOps approach. And we've built that into the EKS CLI, which is an open source tool, is a project on GitHub. So, everybody can get involved with that, use it, contribute to it. We love hearing user feedback about how to help teams take advantage of the elastic nature of Kubernetes as simply and easily as possible. >> Well, it's great to have you. Before we get into the specifics around what Weaveworks is doing in this area that we're about to discuss, let's talk about this concept of GitOps. Some of us may have gotten too deep into a Netflix series, and we didn't realize that we've moved on from the world of DevOps or DevSecOps and the like. Explain where GitOps fits into this evolution. >> Yeah, sure. So, really GitOps is an instantiation, a version of DevOps. And it fits within the idea that, particularly in the Kubernetes world, we have a model in Kubernetes, which tells us exactly what we want to deploy. And so what we're talking about is using Git as a way of recording what we want to be in the runtime environment, and then telling Kubernetes from the configuration that is stored in Git exactly what we want to deploy. So, in a sense, it's very much aligned with DevOps, because we know we want to bring teams together, help them to deploy their applications, their clusters, their environments. And really with GitOps, we have a specific set of tools that we can use. And obviously what's nice about Git is it's a very developer tool, or lots and lots of developers use it, the vast majority. And so what we're trying to do is bring those operational processes into the way that developers work. So, really bringing DevOps to that generation through that specific tooling. >> So Steve G., let's continue down this thread a little bit. Why is it necessary then this sort of added wrinkle? If right now in my organization we have developers, who consider themselves to be DevOps folks, and we give them Amazon gift cards each month. And we say, "Hey, it's a world of serverless, "no code, low code lights out data centers. "Go out and deploy your code. "Everything should be fine." What's the problem with that model, and how does GitOps come in and address that? >> Right. I think there's a couple of things. So, for individual developers, one of the big challenges is that, when you watch development teams, like deploying applications and running them, you watch them switching between all those different tabs, and services, and systems that they're using. So, GitOps has a real advantage to developers, because they're already sat in Git, they're already using their familiar tooling. And so by bringing operations within that developer tooling, you're giving them that familiarity. So, it's one advantage for developers. And then for operations staff, one of the things that it does is it centralizes where all of this configuration is kept. And then you can use things like templating and some other things that we're going to be talking about today to make sure that you automate and go quickly, but you also do that in a way which is reliable, and secure, and stable. So, it's really helping to bring that run fast, but don't break things kind of ethos to how we can deploy and run applications in the cloud. >> So, Steve W., let's start talking about where Weaveworks comes into the picture, and what's your perspective. >> So, yeah, Weaveworks has an engine, a set of software, that enables this to happen. So, think of it as a constant reconciliation engine. So, you've got your declared state, your desired state is declared in Git. So, this is where all your YAML for all your Kubernetes hangs out. And then you have an agent that's running inside Kubernetes, that's the Weaveworks GitOps agent. And it's constantly comparing the desired state in Git with the actual state, which is what's running in Kubernetes. So, then as a developer, you want to make a change, or an operator, you want to make a change. You push a change into Git. The reconciliation loop runs and says, "All right, what we've got in Git does not match "what we've got in Kubernetes. "Therefore, I will create story resource, whatever." But it also works the other way. So, if someone does directly access Kubernetes and make a change, then the next time that reconciliation loop runs, it's automatically reverted back to that single source of truth in Git. So, your Kubernetes cluster, you don't get any configuration drift. It's always configured as you desire it to be configured. And as Steve George has already said, from a developer or engineer point of view, it's easy to use. They're just using Git just as they always have done and continue to do. There's nothing new to learn. No change to working practices. I just push code into Git, magic happens. >> So, Steve W., little deeper dive on that. When we hear Ops, a lot of us start thinking about, specifically in terms of infrastructure, and especially since infrastructure when deployed and left out there, even though it's really idle, you're paying for it. So, anytime there's an Ops component to the discussion, cost and resource management come into play. You mentioned this idea of not letting things drift from a template. What are those templates based on? Are they based on... Is this primarily an infrastructure discussion, or are we talking about the code itself that is outside of the infrastructure discussion? >> It's predominantly around the infrastructure. So, what you're managing in Git, as far as Kubernetes is concerned, is always deployment files, and services, and horizontal pod autoscalers, all those Kubernetes entities. Typically, the source code for your application, be it in Java, Node.js, whatever it is you happen to be writing it in, that's, typically, in a separate repository. You, typically, don't combine the two. So, you've got one set of repository, basically, for building your containers, and your CLI will run off that, and ultimately push a container into a registry somewhere. Then you have a separate repo, which is your config. repo, which declares what version of the containers you're going to run, how many you're going to run, how the services are bound to those containers, et cetera. >> Yeah, that makes sense. Steve G., talk to us about this concept of trusted application delivery with GitOps, and frankly, it's what led to the sort of prior question. When you think about trusted application delivery, where is that intertwinement between what we think of as the application code versus the code that is creating the infrastructure? So, what is trusted application delivery? >> Sure, so, with GitOps, we have the ability to deploy the infrastructure components. And then we also define what the application containers are, that would go to be deployed into that environment. And so, this is a really interesting question, because some teams will associate all of the services that an application needs within an application team. And sometimes teams will deploy sort of horizontal infrastructure, which then all application teams services take advantage of. Either way, you can define that within your configuration, within your GitOps configuration. Now, when you start deploying speed, particularly when you have multiple different teams doing these sorts of deployments, one of the questions that starts to come up will be from the security team, or someone who's thinking about, well, what happens if we make a deployment, which is accidentally incorrect, or if there is a security issue in one of those dependencies, and we need to get a new version deployed as quickly as possible? And so, in the GitOps pipeline, one of the things that we can do is to put in various checkpoints to check that the policy is being followed correctly. So, are we deploying the right number of applications, the right configuration of an application? Does that application follow certain standards that the enterprise has set down? And that's what we talk about when we talk about trusted policy and trusted delivery. Because really what we're thinking about here is enabling the development teams to go as quickly as possible with their new deployments, but protecting them with automated guard rails. So, making sure that they can go fast, but they are not going to do anything which destroys the reliability of the application platform. >> Yeah, you've mentioned reliability and kind of alluded to scalability in the application environment. What about looking at this from the security perspective? There've been some recently, pretty well publicized breaches. Not a lot of senior executives in enterprises understand that a very high percentage of code that their businesses are running on is coming out of the open source community, where developers and maintainers are, to a certain degree, what they would consider to be volunteers. That can be a scary thing. So, talk about why an enterprise struggles today with security, policy, and governance. And I toss this out to Steve W. Or Steve George. Answer appropriately. >> I'll try that in a high level, and Steve W. can give more of the technical detail. I mean, I'll say that when I talk to enterprise customers, there's two areas of concern. One area of concern is that, we're in an environment with DevOps where we started this conversation of trying to help teams to go as quickly as possible. But there's many instances where teams accidentally do things, but, nonetheless, that is a security issue. They deploy something manually into an environment, they forget about it, and that's something which is wrong. So, helping with this kind of policy as code pipeline, ensuring that everything goes through a set of standards could really help teams. And that's why we call it developer guard rails, because this is about helping the development team by providing automation around the outside, that helps them to go faster and relieves them from that mental concern of have they made any mistakes or errors. So, that's one form. And then the other form is the form, where you are going, David, which is really around security dependencies within software, a whole supply chain of concern. And what we can do there, by, again, having a set of standard scanners and policy checking, which ensures that everything is checked before it goes into the environment. That really helps to make sure that there are no security issues in the runtime deployment. Steve W., anything that I missed there? >> Yeah, well, I'll just say, I'll just go a little deeper on the technology bit. So, essentially, we have a library of policies, which get you started. Of course, you can modify those policies, write your own. The library is there just to get you going. So, as a change is made, typically, via, say, a GitHub action, the policy engine then kicks in and checks all those deployment files, all those YAML for Kubernetes, and looks for things that then are outside of policy. And if that's the case, then the action will fail, and that'll show up on the pull request. So, things like, are your containers coming from trusted sources? You're not just pulling in some random container from a public registry. You're actually using a trusted registry. Things like, are containers running as route, or are they running in privileged mode, which, again, it could be a security? But it's not just about security, it can also be about coding standards. Are the containers correctly annotated? Is the deployment correctly annotated? Does it have the annotation fields that we require for our coding standards? And it can also be about reliability. Does the deployment script have the health checks defined? Does it have a suitable replica account? So, a rolling update. We'll actually do a rolling update. You can't do a rolling update with only one replica. So, you can have all these sorts of checks and guards in there. And then finally, there's an admission controller that runs inside Kubernetes. So, if someone does try and squeeze through, and do something a little naughty, and go directly to the cluster, it's not going to happen, 'cause that admission controller is going to say, "Hey, no, that's a policy violation. "I'm not letting that in." So, it really just stops. It stops developers making mistakes. I know, I know, I've done development, and I've deployed things into Kubernetes, and haven't got the conflict quite right, and then it falls flat on its face. And you're sitting there scratching your head. And with the policy checks, then that wouldn't happen. 'Cause you would try and put something in that has a slightly iffy configuration, and it would spit it straight back out at you. >> So, obviously you have some sort of policy engine that you're you're relying on. But what is the user experience like? I mean, is this a screen that is reminiscent of the matrix with non-readable characters streaming down that only another machine can understand? What does this look like to the operator? >> Yeah, sure, so, we have a console, a web console, where developers and operators can use a set of predefined policies. And so that's the starting point. And we have a set of recommendations there and policies that you can just attach to your deployments. So, set of recommendations about different AWS resources, deployment types, EKS deployment types, different sets of standards that your enterprise might be following along with. So, that's one way of doing it. And then you can take those policies and start customizing them to your needs. And by using GitOps, what we're aiming for here is to bring both the application configuration, the environment configuration. We talked about this earlier, all of this being within Git. We're adding these policies within Git as well. So, for advanced users, they'll have everything that they need together in a single unit of change, your application, your definitions of how you want to run this application service, and the policies that you want it to follow, all together in Git. And then when there is some sort of policy violation on the other end of the pipeline, people can see where this policy is being violated, how it was violated. And then for a set of those, we try and automate by showing a pull request for the user about how they can fix this policy violation. So, try and make it as simple as possible. Because in many of these sorts of violations, if you're a busy developer, there'll be minor configuration details going against the configuration, and you just want to fix those really quickly. >> So Steve W., is that what the Mega Leaks policy engine is? >> Yes, that's the Mega Leaks policy engine. So, yes, it's a SaaS-based service that holds the actual policy engine and your library of policies. So, when your GitHub action runs, it goes and essentially makes a call across with the configuration and does the check and spits out any violation errors, if there are any. >> So, folks in this community really like to try things before they deploy them. Is there an opportunity for people to get a demo of this, get their hands on it? what's the best way to do that? >> The best way to do it is have a play with it. As an engineer, I just love getting my hands dirty with these sorts of things. So, yeah, you can go to the Mega Leaks website and get a 30-day free trial. You can spin yourself up a little, test cluster, and have a play. >> So, what's coming next? We had DevOps, and then DevSecOps, and now GitOps. What's next? Are we going to go back to all infrastructure on premises all the time, back to waterfall? Back to waterfall, "Hot Tub Time Machine?" What's the prediction? >> Well, I think the thing that you set out right at the start, actually, is the prediction. The difference between infrastructure and applications is steadily going away, as we try and be more dynamic in the way that we deploy. And for us with GitOps, I think we're... When we talk about operations, there's a lots of depth to what we mean about operations. So, I think there's lots of areas to explore how to bring operations into developer tooling with GitOps. So, that's, I think, certainly where Weaveworks will be focusing. >> Well, as an old infrastructure guy myself, I see this as vindication. Because infrastructure still matters, kids. And we need sophisticated ways to make sure that the proper infrastructure is applied. People are shocked to learn that even serverless application environments involve servers. So, I tell my 14-year-old son this regularly, he doesn't believe it, but it is what it is. Steve W., any final thoughts on this whole move towards GitOps and, specifically, the Weaveworks secret sauce and superpower. >> Yeah. It's all about (indistinct)... It's all about going as quickly as possible, but without tripping up. Being able to run fast, but without tripping over your shoe laces, which you forgot to tie up. And that's what the automation brings. It allows you to go quickly, does lots of things for you, and yeah, we try and stop you shooting yourself in the foot as you're going. >> Well, it's been fantastic talking to both of you today. For the audience's sake, I'm in California, and we have a gentleman in France, and a gentlemen in the UK. It's just the wonders of modern technology never cease. Thanks, again, Steve Waterworth, Steve George from Weaveworks. Thanks for coming on theCUBE for the AWS Startup Showcase. And to the rest of us, keep it right here for more action on theCUBE, your leader in tech coverage. (upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> Okay, Chloe, thank you very much. Hey folks, in here in the Cloud City We with Danielle Royston. Great to see you. Watching you up on stage, I got to say, as the CEO of TelcoDR, leader and chief executive of that company. As well as a great visionary, you laid out the vision. It's hard to debate that. I mean, I think there's people who will say that vision, is like freedom, no one can debate it. It's not going to happen. >> Yeah, there's still a lot of debate in our industry about it. There's a lot of articles being written about it. I've referenced one about, you know, should we let the dragons into the castle? For me, I think it's super obvious. I think other industries are like "Duh, we've made the move." And Telco is still like, "Hmm, we're not sure." And so, am I a visionary, I don't know. I'm just sort of just Babe Ruth-ing it a little bit. I think that's where we're going. >> You know you do, you have a lot of content, podcasts, you write blogs, you do a lot of speaking. You brought it all together on stage, right? That has got to feel good. >> Yeah. >> You've got a body of work and it came together very nicely. How did you feel up there? >> Oh my God, it's absolutely nerve wrecking. I sort of feel like, you know, could you tell if my hands were shaking? Right, could you tell that my heart was racing? >> It's a good feeling. >> I don't know. >> Come on! >> I'll be honest, I'm happy it's over, I'm happy. I think I did a really great job and I'm really happy >> Yeah, you did a great job, I love the dragon reference-- >> Have it in the can. >> Fantastic, loved the Game of Thrones vibe there. It was cool-- >> Totally. >> One of the things I wanted pick up on, I thought it was very interesting and unique was the iPhone reference 14 years ago, because that really, to me, was a similar moment because that shifted the smartphone. A computer that happened to make phone calls. And then we all knew who was the leader at that time, Nokia, Blackberry with the phones, and they became toast. That ushered in a whole another era of change, wealth creation, innovation, new things. >> Yeah. Well, up until that moment, carriers had been designing the phones themselves. They were branded with their logos. And so Steve Jobs fought for the design of the iPhone. He designed it with the consumer, with the user in mind. But I think what it really, I mean, it's such a big pivotal moment in our industry because it singled the end of voice revenue and ushered in the era of data. But it also introduced the OTT players, right? That came in through the apps and started a siphon approved from the carriers. And this is like, it's a pivotal moment in the industry, like, changed the industry forever. >> It's a step function, it was a step function change, it's obvious, everyone knew it. But what's interesting is that we were riffing yesterday about O-RAN and Android. So you have iPhone, but Android became a very successful open source project that changed the landscape of the handset. Some are saying that that kind of phenomenon is coming here. Into Telco with software, kind of like an Android model where that'll come in. What's your thoughts on that, reaction to that? >> Yeah, well the dis-aggregation of the hardware, right? We're in the iconic Erickson booth, right? They get most of their revenue from RAN, from Radio Access Networks. And now with the introduction of Open RAN, right? With 50% less CapEx, 40% less OPEX, you know, I think it's easiest for Greenfield operators like Dish, that are building a brand new network. But just this month, Vodafone announced they're going to build the world's largest Open RAN network. Change is happening and the big operators are starting to adopt Open RAN in a real big way. >> So to me, riding the dragon means taking the advantage of new opportunities on top of that dragon. Developing apps like the iPhone did. And you mentioned Android, they got it right. Remember the Windows Phone, right? They tried to take Windows and shove it to the phone-- >> Barely. >> It was a kin phone too. >> I try to delete it from my, look here, beep! >> I'm going to take this old world app and I'm going to shove it into the new world, and guess what, it failed. So if the Telco is trying to do the same thing here, it will fail, but if they start building 5G apps in the cloud and pick the cloud native and think about the consumer, isn't really that the opportunity that you're talking about? >> Well, I think it is, absolutely. And I think it's a wake up call for the vendors in our space, right? And I'm certainly trying to become a vendor with Totogi. I'm really pushing my idea. But you can't take, using your Windows example on the Windows Phone, you can't take a Windows app and stuff it onto a phone and you can't take these old school applications that were written 20 years ago and just stuff them into the cloud, right? Cloud is not a place, it's a way to design applications and it all needs to be rewritten and let's go write, rewrite it. >> It's not a destination as we always say. Let's take a step back on the keynote 'cause I know we just did a couple of highlights there, wasn't the whole thing. We were watching it, by the way, we thought you did a great job, you were very cool and calm under pressure. But take us through the core ideas in the keynote. Break down the core elements of what the talk was about. >> Yeah, I think the headline really is, you know, just like there were good and bad things about the iPhone, right? It killed voice, but introduced data and all these other things. There's good and bad things about the public cloud, right? It's not going to be smooth sailing, no downsides. And so I acknowledge that, even though I'm the self appointed queen, you know? This self appointed evangelist. And so, I think that if you completely ignore the public cloud, try to stick your head in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist, I think there's nothing but downsides for Telcos. And so I think you need to learn how to maximize the advantage there, ride he dragon, like spew some fire and, you know, get some speed and height, and then you can double your ARPU. But I think, going from there, so the next three, I was trying to give examples of what I meant by that, of why it's a double-edged sword, why it's two sides of the coin. And I think there's three areas, which is the enterprise, the network, and a relationship with subscribers. And so that really what the talk, that's what the talk is about >> The three main pillars. >> Yeah, yeah! >> Future, work, enterprise, transition, Open RAN. >> The network and then the relationship with the subscribers. >> Those are the structural elements you see. >> Yeah, yeah, yeah. >> What's the most important one you think, right now, that people are focused on? >> I mean, I think the first one, with work, that's an easy one to do, because there's not too much downside, right? I think we all learned that we could work productively from home. The reason public cloud matter there is because we had tools like Zoom and G Suite and we didn't need to be, I mean, imagine if that this had happened even 20 years ago, right? Broadband at the home wasn't ready, the tools weren't ready. I mean, it would have been, I mean a bigger disaster than it was, right? And so this is an opportunity to sort of ride this work from home wave that a lot of CEOs are saying, we're not coming back or we're going to have smaller offices. And all of those employees need fiber to their home. They need 5G at their home. I mean, if I'm a head of enterprise in a Telco, I am shifting my 5G message from like random applications or whatever, to be like, how are you getting big pipes to the home so your workers can be productive there? And that, I don't hear Telco's talking about that and that's a really big idea. >> You know, you say it's a no brainer, but it's interesting you had your buildings crumbling, which was great, very nice effect in the talk. I heard a executive, Wall Street executive the other day, talking about how, "My people will be back in the office. "I'm going to mandate vaccinations, they're going to be back "in the office, you work for me. "Even though it's an employee friendly environment "right now, I don't care". And I was shocked. I go, okay, this is just an old guy. But, and it's not just the fact that it's an old guy, old guard doing that because I take two examples of old guys, Michael Dell and Frank Slootman. >> Yeah. >> Right, Michael Dell, you know, hundred billion dollar company, Frank Slootman, hottest, you know, software company. Both of them, sort of agree. It's a no brainer. >> Yeah. >> Why should I spend all this money on buildings? And my people are going to be more productive. They love it, so. Why fight the fashion? >> Well, I think the office and I can talk about this for a long time and I know we don't have that much time, but on offices, it's a way to see when did you come in and when did you leave, and look over your shoulder and what we're working on. And that's what offices are for. Now, we tell ourselves it's about collaboration and all this other stuff. And you know, these guys are saying, "come back to the office." It's because they don't have an answer on how to manage productivity. What are you working on? Are you off, are you authentically working 40 hours a week? I want to see, I know if at least you're here, you're here. Now, you might be playing, you know, Minesweeper. You might be playing Minesweeper on your computer, but at least you were, your butt was at your computer. So yeah, I think this is a pivotal moment in work. I think Telcos could push it, to work from home. We'll get you the pipes, we'll get you the cloud-based tools to help manage productivity, to change in work style. >> Yeah, and we've covered this in theCube many times, about how software is going to enable this virtual first model, no one's actually built software for virtual first. I think that's going to happen. Again, back to your team software, but I want to ask you about software defined infrastructure. You mentioned O-RAN, and as software eats the world and eats infrastructure, you still need infrastructure. So, talk about the relationship of how you see O-RAN competing and winning with the balance of software versus the commodity argument. >> Yeah, and I think this is really where people get scared in Telco. I mean, authentically nervous, right. Where you're like, okay, really the public cloud is at that network edge, right? We're really going to like, who are we? It's an identity crisis. We're not the towers anymore. We're renting space, right? We're now dis-aggregating the network, putting the edge cloud right there and it's AWS or Google. Who are we, what do we do, are we networks? Are we a tech company? Right, and so I'm like, guys, you are your subscribers and you don't focus on that. I mean, it's kind of like a last thought. >> So you're like a therapist then too, not just an evangelist. >> I'm a little bit of a therapist. >> Okay, lay down on the couch, Telco. >> Let's talk about what your problems are. (laughs) >> They have tower issues. >> All seriousness, no but, the tower is changing is backhauling. Look at direct connects for instance. The rise of direct and killed the exchanges. I mean, broadband, backhaul, last mile, >> Yeah. >> Completely, still issues, >> Yeah. >> But it's going to software and so that's there. The other thing I want to get to quickly, I know we don't have a lot of time, is the love relationship you talk about with subscribers. We had Peter Adderton on, from a Boost Mobile, formerly Boost Mobile, earlier. He was saying, if you don't have a focus on the customer, then you're just selling minutes and that's it. >> Yeah. >> And his point was, they don't really care. >> Yeah. Let's talk about organizational energy, right? How much energy is contained within any organization, not just Telco, but any organization. To some of your people time is the hours they work per week. And then you think of that as a sack on how you're allocating your time and spending your time, right? And so I think they spend 50% of their time, maybe more, fighting servers, machines, the network, right? And having all these battles. How much of that organizational energy is dedicated to driving great subscriber experiences? And it just shrunk, right? And I think that's where the public cloud can really help them. Like ride the dragon. Let the dragon deal with some of this underlying stuff. So that you can ride a dragon, survey the land, focus on your subscriber and back to the software. Use software, just like the OTT players are doing. They are taking away your ARPU. They're siphoning your ARPU, 'cause they're providing a better customer experience. You need to compete on that dimension. Not the network, not the three Telcos in the country. You're competing again, WhatsApp, Apple, Amazon, Facebook. And you spent how much of your organizational energy to focus on that? Very small. >> And that's where digital platforms roll by, it uses the word platform, why? Because everybody wants to be a platform. Why do you want to be a platform? Because I want to be like Amazon, they're a platform. And you think about Netflix, right? It's not, you know, you don't think about Netflix UK or Netflix Spain, right? >> It's global. >> There's one Netflix >> Yeah, yeah. >> You don't think about their marketing department or their sales department or their customer service, you think about the app. >> Yeah. >> You know. One interface. And that's what digital platforms allow you to do. And granted, there's a lot of public policy to deal with, but if you're shooting satellites up in space, >> Yeah. >> You know, now, you own that space, right, global network. >> And what makes Netflix so good, I think, is that it knows you, right? It knows what you're watching and recommends things, and you're like, "Oh, I would like that, that's great." Who knows more about you than your mobile phone? Carry it everywhere you go, right? What you're watching, what you're doing, who you're calling, what time did you wake up? And right now all of that data we talked about a couple of days ago, it's trapped in siloed old systems. And like why do people think Google knows so much about you? Telco knows about you. And to start to use that to drive a great experience. >> And you've got a great relationship with Netflix. The relationship we have with our our carrier is to your admin, "can you call these guys? "I don't know, I lost the password, I can't get in". >> Right. >> It's like-- >> Or you get SIM hacked-- >> I don't have an hour and a half to call your call center 'cause you don't have a chat bot, right. >> I don't have time. >> Chat bot, right. I can't even do the chat bot because my problem is, you're like, I got to talk to someone. All of their systems are built with the intention of a human being on the other side, and there's all this awesome chat bot AI that works. >> Yeah. >> Set it free. >> Yeah, yeah, right. You almost rather go to the dentist, then calling your carrier. >> Well, we're going to wrap things up here on the keynote review. Did you achieve what you wanted to achieve? I mean, controversy, bold vision, leadership, also that came across, but people they know who you are now. You're out there and that's great news. >> Yeah. I think I rocked the Telco universe and I'm really, that was my goal, and I think I accomplish it so, very excited. >> Well, we love having you on theCUBE. It's great to have great conversations, not only are you dynamic and smart, you're causing a lot of controversy, in a good way and getting, waking people up. >> Making people talk, that's a start. >> And I think, the conversations are there. People are talking and having relationships on the ecosystem open, it's all there. Danielle Royston, you are a digital revolution, DR. Telco DR, thanks for coming to theCube. >> Thank you so much, always fun. >> Good to see you. >> Thanks. >> Of course, back to the Cloud City studios. Adam is going to take it from here and continue on day three of theCube. Adam in studio, thanks for having us and take it from here.

>>Welcome back to HPD discovered 2021. My name is Dave Volonte and you're watching the cubes virtual coverage of discovering we're super excited to have Jason Newton back in the cube. He's part of the HPV mastermind alliance behind its messaging and marketing and he's been instrumental and up leveling the conversation over the last several years from ports and lungs and gigahertz, two topics that resonate with business technology executives, which is basically every executive on the planet. Jason. Great to see you welcome back to the program. >>Hey, I'm thrilled to be here. >>Okay, We're gonna talk about the future of enterprise tech and the evolution of cloud hybrid cloud, its expansion to the edge where we are today, where we're headed and how we're going to get there. And I'm excited to start this off. We're living in an era where value and competition. We talk about this all the time is defined by data and the insights that organizations can extract from that data, the products and services that >>they can build, >>that our data centric, What do you think this means to HP and what does it mean for your customers? >>Well, I think we're at the right moment at the right time and I think for the customer it just what's happening now, what's possible to create value from data, it's just a tremendous opportunity to accelerate the transformation they were already driving for their business. Um, we're seeing our customers do amazing things with data, not just monetizing data, but like world changing types of things around uh healthcare and finance, transforming experiences for their customers and all of this is being driven by data. >>Well, I'm, I'm excited to see how you guys approach that. I mean you're talking about this, you know, the cloud to edge strategy and I've been having discussions with various execs at discover obviously remotely about how far hp egos and certainly you're gonna have compute everywhere. And Aruba seems to me to be a really interesting part of that platform. You're gonna go to the deep edge, so you got a lot of assets in the arsenal. How are you thinking about that? >>Well, it really needs to come together into one experience and you mentioned Aruba, I mean that's where it all starts with secure connectivity. The more that we connect things up in a secure way, the more data that we're going to be able to create, analyze and act upon. So it really plays a critical world. But if you look at h p e, we really have an embarrassment of riches of assets and expertise and partnerships at global scale and there's not a part of our business that isn't focused on some part of the data challenges that customers have, from edge computing to supercomputing to storage. What we're doing with the Admiral software, it's all focused on helping customers take in that data and then create insights from it, create new innovations from it. >>Talk a little bit more about the customer challenges that you're specifically solving at H. P. E. What what do you see there? How are you thinking about that? >>And I think one of the biggest ones where the conversation always starts with is you know I have a lot of data but it's all in silos. Um even within my organization or in some cases I know there's data out there but it's in another silo. How do I get access to it? How do I hear that word a lot When we talk to customers, you need to get access for my teams to that data. So first step is just how do I bring it all together? How do I Federated all of that data in one place? That's one area that we're helping customers solve. Um The second is in order to bring those those pieces together, the different data owners have to have a trust right to share the data because often there's not an incentive for them to do that. Like I own the data, I don't want to share it. So we have to establish different parameters or capabilities in order to enable that type of of trust and sharing. And there has to be some mutual benefit right as part of that. And we see that with inside of companies and we see it with multiple different organizations. Once you can overcome those, those are really hard challenges. Once you overcome those things, everything becomes astronomically more easy to deal with and everything starts to go faster. And that's kind of where we're trying to get people on that modern day to maturity curve up to that point where they do have federation. They do have curation, they are able to share. They know what they're going to benefit from it. And then we can get on to the task of enabling the teams to do analytics. It's at speed and scale. >>You talk you talk about federation. So there's an interesting challenge that you're describing and you and I have had some good conversations about this because you want to kind of you to obtain that data if you will and put it in a place that you can actually get to it, share it, make it discoverable. And of course at the same time it's all over the place. So you've kind of got these these pods that are that can talk to each other uh and facilitate that, that kind of data sharing and then what I call, you know, building data products, building data services and technology is at the point now, it's evolving to enable us to do that. It's a look back at the last 10 years, it's just far too complex. >>Yeah, we heard Antonio earlier today talk about, you know, building not private clouds, but private data spaces. And it's really that idea of how do I, how do I bring an experience to the data? Right. That is agile and fast and cloud, like or cloud. And in the case of what we're actually doing now building a cloud platform um if that's exactly where customers are trying to get to um and we look at these data spaces as the advantage by going bringing that to the data. Obviously there's the, you know, the physics of it, the performance and that kind of thing. But you know, we can pay more attention to like data sovereignty laws, um, you know, we can dress things like data ownership within these spaces so that teams can come together and freely collaborate and and act on that data together. >>You know, I've been watching you guys for now several years and you've you've taken this messaging and marketing thing pretty seriously. Even a lot of times, you know, we see it all a lot of times is this gimmicks and I don't mean that necessarily a bad way. There's actually some really good gimmicky marketing that gets a lot of attention, but your approach is different. Um it's very thoughtful. Uh it's cultural, I'll say you're trying to cultural sort of what you say with what you do. And so I want to ask you how you're going about, you know, changing the way in which you provide solutions. I sort of alluded that uh, to that at the top versus how you've done it in the past and how you're helping customers redefine their business for success. >>Well, the way that we're thinking about that is um and I think you heard it very clearly and consistently from Antonio earlier today, we're transforming into an edge to cloud company. Okay, We are building an edge to cloud platform. That is Green Lake. That platform is the way that will deliver cloud services to our customers for their workloads to their datasets wherever that needs to be. We're committed to a truly hybrid model, right edge on prem cloud together. So those elements, it starts to crystallize. I think a lot more about who this company is. The type of challenges that we need to solve. Talking about the things is not, is not interesting to customers. They want to know what problems can you help me solve? How fast can you do it right? What outcome can you help me achieve? And that's the way that you know, we, we talked about this a lot dave that we continue to transform and have those, those more meaningful conversations and like I said, every time we get to the data challenges, they know the opportunities there. They have a dream and a vision of what they want to go do. They just need a partner like HP to help them get there. >>So we talk a lot about Green Lake and as a service, you guys were threw the gauntlet down first. I gotta give you props because you're kind of all in on it. You're not a halfway house. I'll give you that much. But now we've seen at least I can count at least four other large competitors follow suit. How should we think about your strategy and specifically your advantage relative to the competitors? Let's let's talk first in terms of as a service in Green Lake and then maybe >>overall. Yeah, I mean, I think you see a lot of people following Green Lakes lead, we've been out in front for a while. We were the first to say the world will be hybrid and it is, we were the first to make the big bet at the edge. We were the first to see that not all the data is going to go into one unified location, it's going to continue to be distributed and therefore a cloud experience has to travel to that data. We created the Green Lake brand years before anybody else did. And now, while they're just now trying to figure out how do I do hardware is a service or a better way to sell my products. We're moving on, we're focused on the workloads and the workflows and the data sets. Um, Green Lake is much, much more mature and now that we have everybody on board across the company, we're moving much faster as well. Right? And that's more of a statement for the traditional competitors. Right? The traditional spaces, you know, they're still just stuck on like hardware, service infrastructure as a service were at the workload level and much higher. And I think what you're seeing from the public cloud players is, wow, data center an on prem and edges hard. Um, a lot harder than, than I think they really anticipated. And uh, you know, they're, they're reassessing. So I feel like we're in the place where the world is moving to, right? And we're really writing, you know, the first chapter of the new hp? Um Not the last >>has it, has it changed the way this as a service mentality, has it changed the way or how has it changed the way in which your product groups >>are behaving? Um quite a bit um you know, it is a mindset shift and you know it's and uh I think we have the culture that will successfully enabled because we've always been so customer centric, I think as you move two and as a service it becomes much more about how do I ensure customer success? Right? How do I, how do I put an environment in place and then use that as an opportunity to solve more problems across our customers environments? So I think that aspect is what you know really is driving our thinking now is what new services can I can I land on the green Lake edge to cloud platform to solve different data centric challenges? >>Yeah. You talked about, you know, lead and where you are in the majority model. What do you what do you what was the hardest part about making that change? Was it the, was it the leadership was that the sales compensation, was it to get the product guys out of the widgets? What was the hardest thing? >>Yeah, I think, I think go to market is as big a challenge as anything. Um You know, I I think in marketing it's our job to show the art of the possible in the future um even if it's uncomfortable for the organization. Um and I think that helps articulate Antonio's vision and give him a true north and he's a fabulous leader in a culture that you know, they believe and trust in him and so they're following. Um, but, you know, the challenges are, um, not so much, you know, the technology, uh, in many cases it is the people and the skills and uh, you know, building those new relationships within accounts and uh, those aspects, those intangible things. Um, so, you know, we're doing a lot around um enablement, sales, enablement. And of course with our uh, and most importantly with our our partners who are out there selling for us. It is a it is a new approach, but it's a good approach because it's so customer centric, it's not product centric. >>So what are the, so how are the customers and partners reacting? Of course you're gonna say great, but how do you know, like, what what kind of metrics do you look at, what kind of things that are important to you to track, that gives you confidence that you're you're on the right track. >>They're buying more stuff. >>Okay, rhetoric. >>Yeah. No, I mean um like I think there was some skepticism, you know, at first because we have been doing some of that infrastructure as a service type of thing for a while before we ever had a Green Lake brand. And they're like, well, is this just the same thing? Like No, we're truly cloud defying this platform. We're building a cloud native platform. You saw it in the announcements today, right? With cloud native security, just like you get in the public cloud that you can deploy and run these these workloads um in your choice of location and the more that we can show evidence of our messaging in the experience that we actually deliver. That's when customers start to lean. And so we look at a ton of metrics. I mean, you know, it's not one data point. We listen to Gardner. Um you know, we have our own internal research that we do, we're constantly getting feedback from our field. In fact, last week was two weeks ago, we had a board of advisors meeting brought in, you know, some of our top top customers just to hear from them, you know, um you know, what are we doing? Good, What we're not doing good. So it's it's a lot of different pieces that go into, how are we doing with the customer and how are they into this? But this is we're only doing what they told us they wanted. Bring me bring the cloud to me and my data. I can't move at all. But I don't want different operating models. I want a consistent experience. I want to be able to focus and innovate. I don't want to deal with, you know, the underlying pieces of the infrastructure. >>Right? And >>so yeah, we're doing what they ask. >>So they okay, but that sounds good. But then it's hard to do that. I mean, you got to put real is, that's a lot of elbow grease, a lot of investment, a lot of innovation. Uh, like you say, you got to line the organizations. That's, that's not a trivial task. I mean, I tell you, Jason, I've been, I've been hearing this, you know, early days, even 10 years ago, I think we're finally at the point now where the industry is responding to what those customers really want. And of course, you know, it's like Steve jobs with the iPhone, ask them what they want, they're not going to tell you an iPhone, right? They maybe they didn't know 10 years ago, but I think it really came into focus in the last several years and investment is a key there. >>Yeah. I mean I think the last decade was the digital transformation was all about, you know, how do I bring speed to code and take advantage of public cloud and and I think that took us further. It took us, but now, okay, the next chapter is a very data century. How do I bring speed agility to data and data analytics and especially at the edge and where things are, you know, need to live. How do I make a consistent experience that's gonna be our focus for the next 10 years. And like I said, I feel like we're at the right moment in history as a company with the right assets, expertise partnerships to go and help customers take advantage of that. >>Well it's interesting the last decade we talked about big data. We don't use that term much anymore, but like many things like the internet for example, it's over something or maybe it's overhyped at the beginning, but it's always under hyped when you actually see the force that can be. I I feel like we actually are now entering the true data era. So, so you're excited about a lot of things obviously as a service, but I gotta, I got a sense there's more that you're not sharing with us. So what are you most excited about for HP in the future? >>Well, like I said, becoming that edge to cloud company watching Green Lake blossom as it is. I mean tremendous innovations that we announced today and yes, there's things I can't share that I know are coming later this year. I have seen the roadmaps. It's it's it's really compelling, very compelling and impressive the things that we're doing with asthma role combined that together with with Green Lake and that experience the types of data analytic platform environments that we can build to unify those data silos to accelerate the machine learning and analytics teams. Um it's really all coming together and those are the things that I'm excited about. Um you know, changing that perception of H. P. E. Is infrastructure as a service and hardware is a service and that kind of thing. It's not about as a service is the experience, right? The value is in the data and watching us be able to help customers solve those data challenges and seize those those data opportunities is what I'm most excited about. >>Well the other thing too is the world has some big challenges, population and energy. You know, we could just make the huge list and and I feel like tech companies not only are in a position to help but I think they have a they have a responsibility and I gotta say I think most tech companies big large tech companies are stepping up and have great leadership around that. And what are your thoughts on that? >>Well yeah we talked about value from data. It's all about the insights is where the value comes from but values not always about profit and monetization data truly does have the opportunity to solve some of the world's biggest challenges. Um I was just reading this morning about C. G. A. I. R. And the things that they're doing in agriculture with these, they've got a big data set platform that um I think could be literally the thing that ends up helping solve world hunger. The thing that everyone sort of jokes about. I'm like no seriously now with the data that could be possible. >>Yeah, I think you're right, I think we are going to solve world hunger, world nutrition maybe a different story, but we'll tackle that next. Um last question, you know, what else should we be focused on at discover how can folks learn more >>well? You know, this is a three day event, so today was really about the news and excitement and clarifying our position as an edge to cloud company and the Green Lake is our edge to cloud platform. The way that we deliver the cloud to you. Um Tomorrow is really about how all of that vision strategy manifests itself into the experience and the products and solutions that you can consume. Um There'll also be a lot of sharing of uh the keynote is when I'm looking forward to with Dr England Go, he's ahead of ai and he's gonna be sharing all the lessons and learnings from hundreds of engagements that he's been driving with customers, showing exactly how to overcome the data silo problem, the trust problem, how to bring agility to analytics and then thursday is kind of the geek out day, right? We get to talk to Hewlett Packard labs, we get to go and touch the technology, meet the technologists, interact with them. Um and and understand what are those technologies that are gonna be crucial You know, for the next 10 years of data driven transformation. >>Some really exciting stuff there. Jason, thank you so much for spending some time on the cube again. Really great to see you. >>I appreciate the invite every time is a pleasure. Thank you. >>Thanks for being with us for our ongoing coverage of HPD discovered 21 this is Dave Volonte, you're watching the cube. The leader in digital check coverage will be right back. >>Mhm. Mhm.

>>from around the globe. It's the Cube with digital coverage of AWS reinvent 2020. Special coverage sponsored by AWS Worldwide Public sector. >>Welcome to the Cube. Virtual. This is our coverage of aws reinvent 2020. Specialized programming for worldwide public sector. I'm Lisa Martin. Got a couple of guests here from No. Veta, please welcome Steven Adelman, principal computer scientists, and Kevin Healed, vice president of Information Exploitation. Gentlemen, welcome to the Cube. >>Thank you. >>Thank you for having us. >>Alright, guys. So? So, Kevin, we're going to start with you. Give our audience an introduction to Nevada. What do you What do you guys do? Who are you? How do you play in the public sector Government space, >>right? Yeah. Thank you, Lisa. Eso, Nevada Nevada is a technology services company focused on government solutions. So primarily national security solutions. Eso think customers such as Doody, the intelligence community, FBI, law enforcement and things like that about 13 1300 employees worldwide, primarily in our in our field. Clear resource is, um, that really focused on cloud for solutions for our customers. So solving the tough mission challenges our customers have, so that could be in technology solutions such as Data Analytics A I M L i O T. Secure Workloads, full spectrum cyber Cobb video processing. Really anything that's a high end technology solution or something we do for the government. We have been a privilege. We have. It's a privilege to be a partner with AWS for for some time now. In fact, I think the first reinvent we may have been to Stephen was six years ago. Five years ago, two >>1012 or 13 >>s So we've we've we've been around for a while, really kind of enjoying it and certainly sad that we're missing an in person reinvent this year, but looking forward to doing it virtually so, we're actually advanced your partner with AWS with a machine learning and government competency. Andi really kind of thio pump the m l side of that. That was one of our first companies with compasses with AWS and led by a center of excellence that I have in my division that really focuses on machine learning and how we applied for the Michigan. And so, um, really, we focus on protecting the nation and protecting our activities in the country >>and on behalf of the country. We thank you, Steven. Give me a little bit of information from a double click perspective as computer scientists. What are some of the key challenges that no, that helps its customers to solve. And how do you do that with a W s? >>Yeah, Thank you. So really as, ah, company, that is is data first. So our initial love and and still are kind of strongest competency is in applying solutions to large data sets. And as you can imagine, uh, the bigger the data set them or compute you need the the more resource is you need and the flexibility from those resource is is truly important, which led us very early, as especially in the government space and public sector space to be in early. A doctor of cloud resource is because of the fact that, you know, rather than standing up a 200 node cluster at at many millions of dollars, we could we could spend up a W s resource is process a big data set, and then and then get the answers an analyst or on operator needed and then spin down. Those resource is when When when that kind of compute wasn't needed. And that is really, uh, kind of informed how we do our work Azaz Nevadans that that cloud infrastructure and now pushing into the edge compute space. Still kind of keeping those cloud best practices in play to get access to more data. That the two, the two biggest, I think revolutions that we've seen with regards to using data to inform business processes and missions has been that that cloud resource that allows us to do so much with so less and so much more flexibly and then the idea of cheap compute making it to the edge and the ability to apply sensors thio places where you know it would been a would have been, you know, operational cost prohibitive to do that and then, ironically, those air to things that aren't necessarily data analytics or machine learning focused but man, did they make it easier to collect that data and process that data and then get the answers back out. So that really has has has kind of, uh, shaped a lot of the way Nevada has grown as a company and how we serve our customers. >>So coming back over to you lets. One of the things that we've been talking about almost all year is just the acceleration in digital transformation and how much faster organizations, private sector, public sector need to innovate to stay relevant, to stay competitive. How do you are you working with government customers to help them innovate so quickly? >>You know, we're very fortunate that a set of customers that focuses actually innovation it's focuses. I rad on. Do you know we can't do the cool things we do without those customer relationships that really encourage us to, um, to try new things out and, quite frankly, fail quickly when we need Thio. And so, by establishing that relationship, what we've been able to do is to blend agile development. Actual acquisition with government requirements process, right? If if you know the typical stereotype of government work is it's this very stovepiped hard core acquisition process, right? And so we have been fortunate to instead try quick win kind of projects. And so one of the biggest things we do is partner with our government customers and try to find it difficult, um, challenged to solve over 6 to 12 month time, right? So instead of making this long four or five year acquisition cycles like show me, right. How can we solve this problem? And then we partner with the mission partner show success in six months show that we can do it with a smaller part of money, and then as we're able to actually make that happen, it expands in something bigger, broader, and then we kind of bringing together a coalition of the willing, if you will in the government and saying, Okay, are there other stakeholders to care about this problem, bring them on, bring their problems and bringing together? You know, we can't do that with some of the passionate people we have, like Stevens. A perfect example. When we talk about a car in the projects we're doing here, Stevens passion for this technology partner with our customers having these challenges and try to enhance what they're doing is a powerful combination. And then the last thing that we're able to is a company is we actually spend a decent amount of our own dollar dollars on I rad S O. R and D that we fund ourselves. And so, while finding those problems and spending government dollars in doing that. We also have spent our own dollars on machine learning Coyote sensor next Gen five g and things like that and how those compartment together partner together to go back to the government. >>Yeah, yeah, So I would even say, You know, there's this. There's a conventional wisdom that government is slow in plotting and a little bit behind commercial best practices. But there are There are pockets in growing pockets across the government, Um, where they're really they're really jumping ahead of, ah, lot of processes and getting in front of this curve and actually are quite innovative. And and because they kind of started off from behind, they could jump over a lot of kind of middle ground legacy technologies. And they're really innovating. As Kevin said with With With the card platform, we're partnering with um P E O Digital in the Air Force in South C, D. M and Air Force security forces as that kind of trifecta of stakeholders who all want toe kind of saw a mission problem and wanted to move forward quickly and leave the legacy behind and and really take a quantum leap forward. And if anything, they're they're driving us Thio, Innovate Mawr Thio Introduce more of those kind of modern back practices on bond. Nevada as a company loves to find those spots in the government sector where we've got those great partners who love what we're doing. And it's this great feedback loop where, um, where we can solve hard technical problems but then see them deployed to some really important and really cool and impactful missions. And we tend to recruit that that set that kind of nexus of people who want to both solve a really difficult problem but want to see it executed in a really impactful way as well. I mean, that really grates a great bond for us, and and I'm really excited to say that that a lot of the government it is really taking a move forward in this this this realm. And I think it's it's just good for our country and good for the missions that they support. >>Absolutely. And it's also surprising because, as you both said, you know, there is this expectation that government processes or lengthy, you know, laborious, um, not able to be turned around quickly. But as Kevin, you just said, you know helping customers. Government agencies get impact within 6 to 12 months versus 4 to 5 years. So you talked about Picard? Interesting name. Kevin. Tell me a little bit more about that technology and what it is that you guys deliver. That's unique. >>Well, honestly, it's probably best to start with Stephen. I can give you the high level. This is Stevens vision. I have to give him credit for that. And I will say way have lots of fun. Acronym. So it isn't Actually, it isn't backward. Um, right. Stephen doesn't actually stand for something. >>It stands for Platform for Integrated, a C three and Responsive for defense on >>Guy. You know >>that the Star Trek theme is the leg up from the last set of programs I had, >>which were >>my little ponies. So >>Oh, wow. That's a definite stuff in a different direction. Like >>it? Part of the great thing about working in the government is you get to name things, cool things, so but t get to your question eso So Picard really sprung out of this idea that I had a few years ago that the world but for our spaces, the Department of defense and the federal government was going to see a massive influx of the desire to consume sensors from from areas of responsibility, from installations and, frankly, from battlefields. Um, but they were gonna have to do it. In a way, um, uh, that presented some real challenges that you couldn't just kind of throw compute editor, throw traditional I t processes at it. You know, we have legacy sensors that are 40 years old sitting on installations. You know, old program, a logical controllers or facilities control systems that were written in cobalt in the seventies, right in the world are not even I, p based, most of them bond. Then on the other end of the spectrum, you have seven figure sensors that air, you know, throwing out megabits of second of data that are mounted to the back of jeeps. Right, That that air bouncing through the desert today. But we'll be bouncing through the jungle tomorrow, and you have to find all of those kind of in combined all of those together, um, and kind of create a cohesive data center for data set set for you know, the mission for, um, you know what we call a user to find common operating picture for a person. Thio kind of combine all of those different resource is and make it work for them. And so we found a great partner with security forces. Um, they realized that they wanted Thio to make a quantum leap forward. They had this idea that the next defender So there are there, like a military police outfit that the next defender was going to be a data driven defender and they were gonna have to win the information war war as much as they had to kind of dominate physical space. And they immediately got what we were trying to achieve, and it was just just great synergy. And then we've piled on some other elements, and we're really moving that platform forward to to kind of take every little bit of information we can get from the areas of responsibility and get it into a you know, your modern Data Lake, where they can extract information from all that data. >>Kevin, as the VP of information exploitation, that's a very interesting title. How are you helping government organizations to win the war on information? Leverage that information to make a big impact fast. >>Yeah. I mean, I think a lot of it is is that we try to break down the barriers between systems on data so that we can actually enable that data to fuse together to find and get insights into it. You know, as ML and I have become trendy topics, you know, they're very data hungry operations. And I think what Steven has done with the card and his team is really we want to be able to make those sensors seamless from a plug and play perspective that Aiken plug in a new sensor. It's a standards based, uh, interface that sends that data back so that we can and take it back to the user to find Operation Picture and make some decisions based off of that data. Um, you know, what's more is that data could even refused with more than the data that Stevens collecting off the sensors. It could be commercial data, other government data and I think is Davis. As Stephen said earlier, you have to get it back. And as long as you've gotten back in Labour's share with some of our mission partners, then you can do amazing things with it. And, you know, Stephen, I know you have some pretty cool ideas and what we're gonna do on the edge, right? How do we do some of this work of the edge where a sensor doesn't allow us to pull out that data back? >>Yeah, and and Thio follow on to what you were kind of referring to with regards to thio handling heterogeneous data from different sensors. Um, one of the main things that our government customers and we have seen is that there are a lot of historically there are a lot of vertical solutions where you know, the sensor, the platform, and then the data Laker kind of all part of this proprietary stack. And we quickly realized that that just doesn't work. And so one of the major thrust of that card platform was to make sure that we had ah, platform by which we could consume data through adapters from essentially any sensor speaking. Any protocol with any style data object, Whether that was an industry standard or a proprietary protocol, we could quickly interested and bring it into our Data lake. And then to pile on to what Kevin was talking about with compute. Right? So you have, uh, like, almost like a mass locks hierarchy of needs when it comes to cyber data or thio this coyote data or kind of unified data, Um, you know, you wanna turn it into basic information, alerts alarms, then you want to do reporting on it, or analytics or some some higher level workflow function. And then finally, you probably want to perform some analytics or some trending or sort of anomaly detection on it. And and that gets more computational e intensive each step of the way. And so you gotta You gotta build a platform that allows you to to both take some of that high level compute down to the edge, but also then bring some of that data up into the clouds where you could do that processing, and you have to have kind of fun jubilate e between that and so that hard platform allows you to kind of bring GP use and high processing units down to the edge and and make that work. Um, but then also and then as maybe even a first passive to rule out some of the most you know, some of the boring gated in the video Analytics platform. We call it Blue Sky and Blue Ocean. Right, so you're recording lots of video. That's not that interesting. How do you filter that out? So you're only sending the information The interesting video up eso You're not wasting bandwidth on stuff that just doesn't matter on DSO. It's It's a lot of kind of tuning these knobs and having a flexible enough platform that you could bring Compute down when you need it. And you could bring data up to compute on Big Cloud while you need it, and just kind of finding a way to tune that that that really does. I mean it. You know, that's a lot of words about how you do that. But what that comes to is flexible hardware and being able to apply those dev ops and C I. C D platform characteristics to that edge hardware and having a unified platform that allows you to kind of orchestrate your applications in your services all the way up and down your stack, from micro controllers to a big cloud instant creation. >>You make it sound so easy. Steven Kevin. Let's wrap it up with you in terms of like making impacts and going forward. We know the edge has exploded, even mawr, during this very interesting year. And that's going to be something that's probably going to stay, um, stay as a permanent impact or effect. What are some of the things that we can expect in 2021 in terms of how you're able to help government organizations capitalize on that, find things faster, make impact faster? >>Yeah. I mean, I think the cool thing we're seeing is that there's a lot more commoditization of sensors. There's a lot more censored information. And so let's use lighters. Example. We you know, things were getting cheaper, and so we can all of a sudden doom or or more things at the edge, and we ever would have expected. Right when you know Steven's team is integrating camera data and fence data from 40 years ago, you know, it's just saying on off it's not do anything fancy. But now we you know, you know, Stephen, I camera whether Metro you gave him before was, but the cost of light are has dropped so significantly that we can now then deploy that we can actually roll it out there and not being locked in their proprietary, uh, system. Um, so I see that being very powerful, you know? Also, I can see where you start having sensors interact with each other, right? So one sensor finds one thing and then a good example that we've started thio experiment with. And I think Steve, you could touch on it is using triggering a sensor, triggers a drone to actually investigate what's going on and then therefore, hybrid video back and then automatically can investigate instead of having to deploy a defender to actually see what happened at that. At that end, Points dio e don't know. There's it's amore detail you can provide there. >>Yeah, No. So exactly that Kevin. So So the power of the sensor is is something something old that that gives you very uninteresting Data like a one or a zero on on or off can detect something very specific and then do something kind of high speed, like task a drone to give you a visual assessment and then run object detection or facial recognition on, you know, do object detection to find a person and do facial recognition on that person to find out if that's a patrol walking through a field or a bad guy trying Thio invade your space. Um and so it's really the confluence and the gestalt of all of these sensors in the analytics working together, Um, that really creates the power from very simple, simple delivery. I think, um, there's this, You know, this idea that you know, ah 100 bytes of data is not that important. But when you put a million sensors giving you 100 bytes of data, you can truly find something extremely powerful. And then when you kind of and you make those interactions sing, um, it's amazing. Tow us the productivity that we can produce and the kind of fidelity of response that we can give thio actors in the space whether that's a defender trying to defend the base or a maintenance person trying thio proactively replace the fan or clean the fan on an H vac system. So So you know, you know, there isn't a fire at a base or for, uh, interesting enough. One of the things that we we've been able to achieve is we've taken maintenance data for helicopter engines and And we've been able to proactively say, Hey, you need to You need to take care of this part of the helicopter engine. Um and it saves money. It saves downtimes. It keeps the birds in the air. And it's a relatively simple algorithm that we were able to achieve. And we were able to do that with the maintenance people, bring them along in this endeavor and create analytics that they understood and could trust on DSO. I think that's really the power of this base. >>Tremendous power. I wish we had more time to to dig into it. Guys, thank you so much for sharing. Not just your insights, what nobody is doing but your passion for what you're doing and how you're making such an impact. Your passion is definitely palpable. Steven. Kevin, Thank you for joining me today. >>Thank you >>for my guests. I'm Lisa Martin. You're watching the Cube? Virtual. Yeah,

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> As we reported last week, we believe that in the next decade, there will be changes in public policy that are going to restrict the way in which big internet companies are able to appropriate user data. Big tech came under fire again this week with the CEOs of Facebook, Twitter, and Google going toe to toe with several U.S. senators. Microsoft CEO Satya Nadella, however, was not one of those CEOs in the firing line. Microsoft doesn't heavily rely on ad revenues, rather, the company's momentum is steadily building around Azure, which by my estimates is now roughly 19% of Microsoft's overall revenues. It's surpassed, maybe nearly got to $7 billion for the first time on a quarterly basis. I'll come back to you on that. Hello everyone, and welcome to this week's Wikibon CUBE insights powered by ETR. In this Breaking Analysis, we'll respond to the many requests we've had to dig into the business of Microsoft a little bit deeper and provide a snapshot of how the company is faring in the ETR dataset. Let's take a quick look at Microsoft's financials, and the scope of Microsoft's business is actually mind-boggling. The company has roughly $150 billion in revenue, and it grew its top line 12% last quarter. It has more than $136 billion in cash on the balance sheet. Microsoft generates over $60 billion annually in operating cashflow. And last quarter alone threw off more than 19 billion in operating cash. Its gross margins are expanding across virtually all of its major business lines. So let's look at those business sectors. Microsoft, it doesn't suffer from the nagging problems that we've talked about with a lot of older tech companies. Companies like IBM and Dell and Cisco and Oracle and SAP, they struggle with growth sometimes because their growth businesses are not yet large enough to offset the declines in their traditional on-premises business segments. Now at the highest level, Microsoft breaks its business into three broad categories, and they're all growing quite nicely. Let me add some color here. Let's start with the productivity and business process line of business. LinkedIn, which is growing at 16%, is in this category as is Office. This business is shifting from one of on-prem licenses, which are really headwinds right now from Microsoft, to the cloud, in the form of SaaS with Office 365, which is growing at a 20% clip within its commercial market base. Even the consumer side of O365 is growing in the double digits. Dynamics is Microsoft's ERP and CRM business, and that falls into this slice of the pie, that's growing at 18%. And then the newer Dynamics 365, that's growing at 37%. So you can see, Microsoft is easily able to show growth despite the transitions from its legacy business. Intelligent cloud is the next segment. It's kind of the kitchen sink category, meaning there's stuff in there that includes a bit of cloud washing in my opinion, but Microsoft is not nearly as egregious as IBM with the liberties that it takes around its cloud categorization. For Microsoft it's a $13 billion quarterly business. And it's growing at 19%, as we show in the pie chart. Azure is an increasingly large portion of this segment. Azure is the most direct comparison with AWS. And I have said in the past quarter, I'd say it's around 50% of the intelligent cloud, and that it's approaching by my estimates around $7 billion a quarter. Azure grew at 47% annually this past quarter, the same growth rate as last quarter. Ironically, both AWS and Google Cloud grew at the same year over year rate this quarter as they did last quarter. AWS is 29% GCP in the high 50s by at my estimates. AWS revenue was 11.6 billion this past quarter, and I have GCP still well under 2 billion. We'll be updating our cloud numbers and digging deeper next week into this topic. So consider these estimates preliminary for Azure and GCP, which the respective companies don't break out for as Amazon, as you know, breaks out AWS explicitly. Now, back to Microsoft's intelligent cloud business. It includes on-prem server software, which is a managed decline business from Microsoft. They also include enterprise services in this category. So as you can see, it's not a clean cloud number for comparison purposes. Now finally, the third big slice of the pie is more personal computing. I know, it's kind of a dorky name, but nonetheless it's nearly a $12 billion business that's growing at 6% annually. The Windows OEM business is in here, as is Windows 10 and some security offerings. Surface is also in here as well and it's growing in the mid-thirties. Search revenue is in this category as well. It's declining per my earlier statements that it's not a main piece of Microsoft's business. Now, one of the most interesting areas of this sector is gaming. Microsoft's gaming business is growing at 21% and they just acquired ZeniMax Media for seven and a half billion dollars. Let me land on gaming for a minute. The gaming experts at theCUBE are really excited about Microsoft's XBox content services, which grew at about 30% this past quarter. Game Pass is essentially Microsoft's Netflix, or you can think of it as maybe like a Spotify model. You can get in for as low as $5 a month. I think you can pay as much as $15 a month and get access to a huge catalog of games that you can download. In November of last year, Microsoft launched its xCloud beta service, which allows you to download to a PC or a game box. Now eventually with 5G, the box goes away. All you'll need is a screen and you know, controller with the joysticks, no download. In fact, this is how it works today for Android. Now, interestingly, Apple is blocking Microsoft and some others like Google's Stadia, saying that they don't allow streaming game apps like Microsoft's xCloud service, because they don't follow the company's guidelines. What Apple's not telling you is that its adjacent offering, Apple Arcade, is considered subpar by hardcore gamers. And while Apple allows the streaming of movies and music from any service on the iPhone, it's decided not to allow streaming games. Now, the last thing I want to stress about Microsoft is its leverage point around developers. Developers is a big one here, we all remember the sweaty Steve Ballmer running around the stage like a mad man, screaming, "Developers, developers, developers!" Well, despite his obsession with Windows, he sure got that one right. The GitHub acquisition was Microsoft's way of buying more developer love. It does concentrate power with a tech giant, but you know what, if it wasn't Microsoft that bought GitHub, it would have been Facebook or Amazon or Google or one of the other tech giants. Now, despite some angst in the developer community over this, GitHub, it really is a linchpin for Microsoft to more tightly integrate GitHub with its pretty vast developer tool set. All right. Let's look deeper into the Microsoft data and focus on the enterprise. We'll bring in the ETR as we always do. We said last week that Google needed to look to the cloud and edge and get its head out of its ads. Well, Microsoft recovered from its Windows myopia after Satya Nadella took over in 2014, and by all accounts from the ETR survey data, Microsoft is killing it across the board. Let me start by putting Microsoft in context with some of the most prominent companies that both compete with, and sometimes partner with Microsoft. So this xy graph, it's one of our favorites. I show it all the time and it shows net score on the vertical axis, which is a measure of spending momentum from ETR, and the horizontal axis shows what we call market share, which is a measure of pervasiveness in the survey. Now in the upper right hand table, you can see the data for each of the companies. There's an ETR survey taken in October and it had more than 1400 completes. Several points stand out here. Microsoft is by far the most pervasive in the dataset, and yet its net score or spending velocity is right there with AWS, ServiceNow, Salesforce, and Workday. Only Snowflake, which I put in there for context, because of its consistently strong net scores, shows a meaningfully higher net score, of course from a much smaller base. Now what makes this so impressive is it represents a pan-Microsoft view across its entire portfolio. And you can see where companies like IBM and Oracle struggle from a momentum standpoint compared to Microsoft, which is a much, much larger company. It's that problem that I referred to earlier regarding the smaller size of their respective growth businesses. Also called Cisco and SAP, which despite some earnings challenges lately, are able to maintain net scores that while not in the green, they're not in the red, either. Green essentially means your overall install base is expanding. Red indicates contraction. Now let's look at the spending patterns for Microsoft customers. This chart shows the granularity of ETR's net score for Microsoft. The green represents increased spend and the red decreased spend. What's impressive is that Microsoft's red zone, I mean it's essentially negligible at 6%, when you add two reds up, the pink and the bright red. Their customers, they're all spending more, or the same, and very few are leaving the platform. Now I made the case last week that Google should double or triple its efforts and focus on cloud and the edge. Microsoft has already made that transition in its business and is the, that's the premise really of my discussion today. Specifically, Microsoft Azure is powering the company across all of its products and services. It's giving Microsoft tremendous operating leverage and steadily improving marginal economics. You can see that in the gross margin lines this quarter, across all of its businesses. And here's a graphic showing its position within cloud computing in terms of net score. Microsoft Azure functions, which is the first bar on this chart, and Azure overall, which is the third set of bars, shows momentum that's as strong as any cloud category, including AWS Lambda, which as we've talked about many times is killing it. Now five over from the left, count them over, one, two, three, four, five, you can see AWS overall. So that's a really important reference point. And while its levels are still elevated, Azure overall, which again is number three from the left, has meaningfully more momentum with 65% net score versus 52% for AWS overall. Now reasonable people can debate the quality of these respective clouds and you could argue over feature sets, who's got the most features, who's got the most regions, which regions are most reliable, who's got the most data centers and all that stuff, but it's really hard to argue against Microsoft's "Good enough" strategy. It's working in the cloud, and it has been working for the company for decades. Now another Microsoft strategy has been to be a late comer to a category and then bundle multiple capabilities into one suite. We saw this at first, really in the late 1980s with Office, and it's continued in a number of areas. The latest example, Microsoft Teams. Teams combines features like meetings, phone, chat, collaboration, as well as business process workflows that leverage tools like SharePoint and PowerPoint. I mean, it's a killer strategy, and you can see the results in this chart. I mean, it's essentially competing with Zoom, it's competing with Slack and all the sort of productivity plays there in that space. And this graphic compares net scores from the year ago October survey for reference, the July survey from this year, and the most recent October survey, as I said, 1400 respondents. Look at the lead that Teams has relative to the competition. There's a story across Microsoft's portfolio. Look at Microsoft's products in the ETR taxonomy. Video conferencing with Teams, productivity apps, RPA, cloud, cloud functions, machine learning, artificial intelligence, containers, security, end point, analytics, mobile, even database. The only signs of softness are really seen in the company's legacy businesses like Skype or on-prem licenses business, which I said were a headwind for them. And while PCs and tablets are weaker, that's what you'd expect from this mature industry relative to some of these other categories. Now, again, the premise here today is that by pivoting to the cloud and going all in competing with infrastructure as a service, Microsoft has created a platform for innovation for its business, and its developer chops are really credible, so it's evolving its install base very successfully to Azure. It's got a very solid hybrid and multi-cloud strategy and story with Microsoft Arc, which eventually it can take to the edge. You know, we think its edge strategy needs some work, but nonetheless, the company is really, really well positioned. Microsoft has a huge partner ecosystem, heck, it even partners with Oracle and database, as well as using Azure to enter new markets, including vertical clouds like healthcare, which it talked about on its earnings call. I mean, there's really not much on which you can criticize Microsoft. You know, sure, they've had some high profile failures in the past. The Nokia acquisition, the Windows phone, you remember Zune? Mixer, you know, Bing. Is Bing a fail? I don't know. Maybe not really. I guess the fail is, you know, what I was talking about last week with antitrust, Microsoft was distracted by the DOJ and maybe that caused it to miss search, give it to Google, and in that sense, maybe it was a failure, but overall, pretty good track record from Microsoft. Yeah, maybe you can say Microsoft is somewhat of a copycat, you know, the graphical user interface that they copied from the Mac, but hey, even Steve Jobs stole that. Surface, okay. The cloud? But so what, ideas, they're plentiful, execution is the key, really. No matter how you slice it, the data doesn't lie. Microsoft's financial performance, its pivot to the cloud, and the success of its adjacent businesses, make it one of the most remarkable rebirths in the history of technology industry. Now I didn't use the word turnaround because the company was never really in trouble. It just became irrelevant and kind of boring. Today, Microsoft is far from immaterial. Okay. That's it for this week. Remember all these episodes are available as podcasts wherever you listen. So please subscribe. I publish weekly on Wikibon.com and Siliconangle.com. And don't forget to check out ETR.plus for all the survey data and analytics. I appreciate always the comments on my LinkedIn posts or you can DM me @DVellante, or email me at David.Vellante@SiliconAngle.com. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching everybody, be well, and we'll see you next time. (calm music)

>>don't talk mhm, >>Okay, thing is my presentation on coherent nonlinear dynamics and combinatorial optimization. This is going to be a talk to introduce an approach we're taking to the analysis of the performance of coherent using machines. So let me start with a brief introduction to easing optimization. The easing model represents a set of interacting magnetic moments or spins the total energy given by the expression shown at the bottom left of this slide. Here, the signal variables are meditate binary values. The Matrix element J. I. J. Represents the interaction, strength and signed between any pair of spins. I. J and A Chive represents a possible local magnetic field acting on each thing. The easing ground state problem is to find an assignment of binary spin values that achieves the lowest possible value of total energy. And an instance of the easing problem is specified by giving numerical values for the Matrix J in Vector H. Although the easy model originates in physics, we understand the ground state problem to correspond to what would be called quadratic binary optimization in the field of operations research and in fact, in terms of computational complexity theory, it could be established that the easing ground state problem is np complete. Qualitatively speaking, this makes the easing problem a representative sort of hard optimization problem, for which it is expected that the runtime required by any computational algorithm to find exact solutions should, as anatomically scale exponentially with the number of spends and for worst case instances at each end. Of course, there's no reason to believe that the problem instances that actually arrives in practical optimization scenarios are going to be worst case instances. And it's also not generally the case in practical optimization scenarios that we demand absolute optimum solutions. Usually we're more interested in just getting the best solution we can within an affordable cost, where costs may be measured in terms of time, service fees and or energy required for a computation. This focuses great interest on so called heuristic algorithms for the easing problem in other NP complete problems which generally get very good but not guaranteed optimum solutions and run much faster than algorithms that are designed to find absolute Optima. To get some feeling for present day numbers, we can consider the famous traveling salesman problem for which extensive compilations of benchmarking data may be found online. A recent study found that the best known TSP solver required median run times across the Library of Problem instances That scaled is a very steep route exponential for end up to approximately 4500. This gives some indication of the change in runtime scaling for generic as opposed the worst case problem instances. Some of the instances considered in this study were taken from a public library of T SPS derived from real world Veil aside design data. This feels I TSP Library includes instances within ranging from 131 to 744,710 instances from this library with end between 6880 13,584 were first solved just a few years ago in 2017 requiring days of run time and a 48 core to King hurts cluster, while instances with and greater than or equal to 14,233 remain unsolved exactly by any means. Approximate solutions, however, have been found by heuristic methods for all instances in the VLS i TSP library with, for example, a solution within 0.14% of a no lower bound, having been discovered, for instance, with an equal 19,289 requiring approximately two days of run time on a single core of 2.4 gigahertz. Now, if we simple mindedly extrapolate the root exponential scaling from the study up to an equal 4500, we might expect that an exact solver would require something more like a year of run time on the 48 core cluster used for the N equals 13,580 for instance, which shows how much a very small concession on the quality of the solution makes it possible to tackle much larger instances with much lower cost. At the extreme end, the largest TSP ever solved exactly has an equal 85,900. This is an instance derived from 19 eighties VLSI design, and it's required 136 CPU. Years of computation normalized to a single cord, 2.4 gigahertz. But the 24 larger so called world TSP benchmark instance within equals 1,904,711 has been solved approximately within ophthalmology. Gap bounded below 0.474%. Coming back to the general. Practical concerns have applied optimization. We may note that a recent meta study analyzed the performance of no fewer than 37 heuristic algorithms for Max cut and quadratic pioneer optimization problems and found the performance sort and found that different heuristics work best for different problem instances selected from a large scale heterogeneous test bed with some evidence but cryptic structure in terms of what types of problem instances were best solved by any given heuristic. Indeed, their their reasons to believe that these results from Mexico and quadratic binary optimization reflected general principle of performance complementarity among heuristic optimization algorithms in the practice of solving heart optimization problems there. The cerise is a critical pre processing issue of trying to guess which of a number of available good heuristic algorithms should be chosen to tackle a given problem. Instance, assuming that any one of them would incur high costs to run on a large problem, instances incidence, making an astute choice of heuristic is a crucial part of maximizing overall performance. Unfortunately, we still have very little conceptual insight about what makes a specific problem instance, good or bad for any given heuristic optimization algorithm. This has certainly been pinpointed by researchers in the field is a circumstance that must be addressed. So adding this all up, we see that a critical frontier for cutting edge academic research involves both the development of novel heuristic algorithms that deliver better performance, with lower cost on classes of problem instances that are underserved by existing approaches, as well as fundamental research to provide deep conceptual insight into what makes a given problem in, since easy or hard for such algorithms. In fact, these days, as we talk about the end of Moore's law and speculate about a so called second quantum revolution, it's natural to talk not only about novel algorithms for conventional CPUs but also about highly customized special purpose hardware architectures on which we may run entirely unconventional algorithms for combinatorial optimization such as easing problem. So against that backdrop, I'd like to use my remaining time to introduce our work on analysis of coherent using machine architectures and associate ID optimization algorithms. These machines, in general, are a novel class of information processing architectures for solving combinatorial optimization problems by embedding them in the dynamics of analog, physical or cyber physical systems, in contrast to both MAWR traditional engineering approaches that build using machines using conventional electron ICS and more radical proposals that would require large scale quantum entanglement. The emerging paradigm of coherent easing machines leverages coherent nonlinear dynamics in photonic or Opto electronic platforms to enable near term construction of large scale prototypes that leverage post Simoes information dynamics, the general structure of of current CM systems has shown in the figure on the right. The role of the easing spins is played by a train of optical pulses circulating around a fiber optical storage ring. A beam splitter inserted in the ring is used to periodically sample the amplitude of every optical pulse, and the measurement results are continually read into a refugee A, which uses them to compute perturbations to be applied to each pulse by a synchronized optical injections. These perturbations, air engineered to implement the spin, spin coupling and local magnetic field terms of the easing Hamiltonian, corresponding to a linear part of the CME Dynamics, a synchronously pumped parametric amplifier denoted here as PPL and Wave Guide adds a crucial nonlinear component to the CIA and Dynamics as well. In the basic CM algorithm, the pump power starts very low and has gradually increased at low pump powers. The amplitude of the easing spin pulses behaviors continuous, complex variables. Who Israel parts which can be positive or negative, play the role of play the role of soft or perhaps mean field spins once the pump, our crosses the threshold for parametric self oscillation. In the optical fiber ring, however, the attitudes of the easing spin pulses become effectively Qantas ized into binary values while the pump power is being ramped up. The F P J subsystem continuously applies its measurement based feedback. Implementation of the using Hamiltonian terms, the interplay of the linear rised using dynamics implemented by the F P G A and the threshold conversation dynamics provided by the sink pumped Parametric amplifier result in the final state of the optical optical pulse amplitude at the end of the pump ramp that could be read as a binary strain, giving a proposed solution of the easing ground state problem. This method of solving easing problem seems quite different from a conventional algorithm that runs entirely on a digital computer as a crucial aspect of the computation is performed physically by the analog, continuous, coherent, nonlinear dynamics of the optical degrees of freedom. In our efforts to analyze CIA and performance, we have therefore turned to the tools of dynamical systems theory, namely, a study of modifications, the evolution of critical points and apologies of hetero clinic orbits and basins of attraction. We conjecture that such analysis can provide fundamental insight into what makes certain optimization instances hard or easy for coherent using machines and hope that our approach can lead to both improvements of the course, the AM algorithm and a pre processing rubric for rapidly assessing the CME suitability of new instances. Okay, to provide a bit of intuition about how this all works, it may help to consider the threshold dynamics of just one or two optical parametric oscillators in the CME architecture just described. We can think of each of the pulse time slots circulating around the fiber ring, as are presenting an independent Opio. We can think of a single Opio degree of freedom as a single, resonant optical node that experiences linear dissipation, do toe out coupling loss and gain in a pump. Nonlinear crystal has shown in the diagram on the upper left of this slide as the pump power is increased from zero. As in the CME algorithm, the non linear game is initially to low toe overcome linear dissipation, and the Opio field remains in a near vacuum state at a critical threshold. Value gain. Equal participation in the Popeo undergoes a sort of lazing transition, and the study states of the OPIO above this threshold are essentially coherent states. There are actually two possible values of the Opio career in amplitude and any given above threshold pump power which are equal in magnitude but opposite in phase when the OPI across the special diet basically chooses one of the two possible phases randomly, resulting in the generation of a single bit of information. If we consider to uncoupled, Opio has shown in the upper right diagram pumped it exactly the same power at all times. Then, as the pump power has increased through threshold, each Opio will independently choose the phase and thus to random bits are generated for any number of uncoupled. Oppose the threshold power per opio is unchanged from the single Opio case. Now, however, consider a scenario in which the two appeals air, coupled to each other by a mutual injection of their out coupled fields has shown in the diagram on the lower right. One can imagine that depending on the sign of the coupling parameter Alfa, when one Opio is lazing, it will inject a perturbation into the other that may interfere either constructively or destructively, with the feel that it is trying to generate by its own lazing process. As a result, when came easily showed that for Alfa positive, there's an effective ferro magnetic coupling between the two Opio fields and their collective oscillation threshold is lowered from that of the independent Opio case. But on Lee for the two collective oscillation modes in which the two Opio phases are the same for Alfa Negative, the collective oscillation threshold is lowered on Lee for the configurations in which the Opio phases air opposite. So then, looking at how Alfa is related to the J. I. J matrix of the easing spin coupling Hamiltonian, it follows that we could use this simplistic to a p o. C. I am to solve the ground state problem of a fair magnetic or anti ferro magnetic ankles to easing model simply by increasing the pump power from zero and observing what phase relation occurs as the two appeals first start delays. Clearly, we can imagine generalizing this story toe larger, and however the story doesn't stay is clean and simple for all larger problem instances. And to find a more complicated example, we only need to go to n equals four for some choices of J J for n equals, for the story remains simple. Like the n equals two case. The figure on the upper left of this slide shows the energy of various critical points for a non frustrated and equals, for instance, in which the first bifurcated critical point that is the one that I forget to the lowest pump value a. Uh, this first bifurcated critical point flows as symptomatically into the lowest energy easing solution and the figure on the upper right. However, the first bifurcated critical point flows to a very good but sub optimal minimum at large pump power. The global minimum is actually given by a distinct critical critical point that first appears at a higher pump power and is not automatically connected to the origin. The basic C am algorithm is thus not able to find this global minimum. Such non ideal behaviors needs to become more confident. Larger end for the n equals 20 instance, showing the lower plots where the lower right plot is just a zoom into a region of the lower left lot. It can be seen that the global minimum corresponds to a critical point that first appears out of pump parameter, a around 0.16 at some distance from the idiomatic trajectory of the origin. That's curious to note that in both of these small and examples, however, the critical point corresponding to the global minimum appears relatively close to the idiomatic projector of the origin as compared to the most of the other local minima that appear. We're currently working to characterize the face portrait topology between the global minimum in the antibiotic trajectory of the origin, taking clues as to how the basic C am algorithm could be generalized to search for non idiomatic trajectories that jump to the global minimum during the pump ramp. Of course, n equals 20 is still too small to be of interest for practical optimization applications. But the advantage of beginning with the study of small instances is that we're able reliably to determine their global minima and to see how they relate to the 80 about trajectory of the origin in the basic C am algorithm. In the smaller and limit, we can also analyze fully quantum mechanical models of Syrian dynamics. But that's a topic for future talks. Um, existing large scale prototypes are pushing into the range of in equals 10 to the 4 10 to 5 to six. So our ultimate objective in theoretical analysis really has to be to try to say something about CIA and dynamics and regime of much larger in our initial approach to characterizing CIA and behavior in the large in regime relies on the use of random matrix theory, and this connects to prior research on spin classes, SK models and the tap equations etcetera. At present, we're focusing on statistical characterization of the CIA ingredient descent landscape, including the evolution of critical points in their Eigen value spectra. As the pump power is gradually increased. We're investigating, for example, whether there could be some way to exploit differences in the relative stability of the global minimum versus other local minima. We're also working to understand the deleterious or potentially beneficial effects of non ideologies, such as a symmetry in the implemented these and couplings. Looking one step ahead, we plan to move next in the direction of considering more realistic classes of problem instances such as quadratic, binary optimization with constraints. Eso In closing, I should acknowledge people who did the hard work on these things that I've shown eso. My group, including graduate students Ed winning, Daniel Wennberg, Tatsuya Nagamoto and Atsushi Yamamura, have been working in close collaboration with Syria Ganguly, Marty Fair and Amir Safarini Nini, all of us within the Department of Applied Physics at Stanford University. On also in collaboration with the Oshima Moto over at NTT 55 research labs, Onda should acknowledge funding support from the NSF by the Coherent Easing Machines Expedition in computing, also from NTT five research labs, Army Research Office and Exxon Mobil. Uh, that's it. Thanks very much. >>Mhm e >>t research and the Oshie for putting together this program and also the opportunity to speak here. My name is Al Gore ism or Andy and I'm from Caltech, and today I'm going to tell you about the work that we have been doing on networks off optical parametric oscillators and how we have been using them for icing machines and how we're pushing them toward Cornum photonics to acknowledge my team at Caltech, which is now eight graduate students and five researcher and postdocs as well as collaborators from all over the world, including entity research and also the funding from different places, including entity. So this talk is primarily about networks of resonate er's, and these networks are everywhere from nature. For instance, the brain, which is a network of oscillators all the way to optics and photonics and some of the biggest examples or metal materials, which is an array of small resonate er's. And we're recently the field of technological photonics, which is trying thio implement a lot of the technological behaviors of models in the condensed matter, physics in photonics and if you want to extend it even further, some of the implementations off quantum computing are technically networks of quantum oscillators. So we started thinking about these things in the context of icing machines, which is based on the icing problem, which is based on the icing model, which is the simple summation over the spins and spins can be their upward down and the couplings is given by the JJ. And the icing problem is, if you know J I J. What is the spin configuration that gives you the ground state? And this problem is shown to be an MP high problem. So it's computational e important because it's a representative of the MP problems on NPR. Problems are important because first, their heart and standard computers if you use a brute force algorithm and they're everywhere on the application side. That's why there is this demand for making a machine that can target these problems, and hopefully it can provide some meaningful computational benefit compared to the standard digital computers. So I've been building these icing machines based on this building block, which is a degenerate optical parametric. Oscillator on what it is is resonator with non linearity in it, and we pump these resonate er's and we generate the signal at half the frequency of the pump. One vote on a pump splits into two identical photons of signal, and they have some very interesting phase of frequency locking behaviors. And if you look at the phase locking behavior, you realize that you can actually have two possible phase states as the escalation result of these Opio which are off by pie, and that's one of the important characteristics of them. So I want to emphasize a little more on that and I have this mechanical analogy which are basically two simple pendulum. But there are parametric oscillators because I'm going to modulate the parameter of them in this video, which is the length of the string on by that modulation, which is that will make a pump. I'm gonna make a muscular. That'll make a signal which is half the frequency of the pump. And I have two of them to show you that they can acquire these face states so they're still facing frequency lock to the pump. But it can also lead in either the zero pie face states on. The idea is to use this binary phase to represent the binary icing spin. So each opio is going to represent spin, which can be either is your pie or up or down. And to implement the network of these resonate er's, we use the time off blood scheme, and the idea is that we put impulses in the cavity. These pulses air separated by the repetition period that you put in or t r. And you can think about these pulses in one resonator, xaz and temporarily separated synthetic resonate Er's if you want a couple of these resonator is to each other, and now you can introduce these delays, each of which is a multiple of TR. If you look at the shortest delay it couples resonator wanted to 2 to 3 and so on. If you look at the second delay, which is two times a rotation period, the couple's 123 and so on. And if you have and minus one delay lines, then you can have any potential couplings among these synthetic resonate er's. And if I can introduce these modulators in those delay lines so that I can strength, I can control the strength and the phase of these couplings at the right time. Then I can have a program will all toe all connected network in this time off like scheme, and the whole physical size of the system scales linearly with the number of pulses. So the idea of opium based icing machine is didn't having these o pos, each of them can be either zero pie and I can arbitrarily connect them to each other. And then I start with programming this machine to a given icing problem by just setting the couplings and setting the controllers in each of those delight lines. So now I have a network which represents an icing problem. Then the icing problem maps to finding the face state that satisfy maximum number of coupling constraints. And the way it happens is that the icing Hamiltonian maps to the linear loss of the network. And if I start adding gain by just putting pump into the network, then the OPI ohs are expected to oscillate in the lowest, lowest lost state. And, uh and we have been doing these in the past, uh, six or seven years and I'm just going to quickly show you the transition, especially what happened in the first implementation, which was using a free space optical system and then the guided wave implementation in 2016 and the measurement feedback idea which led to increasing the size and doing actual computation with these machines. So I just want to make this distinction here that, um, the first implementation was an all optical interaction. We also had an unequal 16 implementation. And then we transition to this measurement feedback idea, which I'll tell you quickly what it iss on. There's still a lot of ongoing work, especially on the entity side, to make larger machines using the measurement feedback. But I'm gonna mostly focused on the all optical networks and how we're using all optical networks to go beyond simulation of icing Hamiltonian both in the linear and non linear side and also how we're working on miniaturization of these Opio networks. So the first experiment, which was the four opium machine, it was a free space implementation and this is the actual picture off the machine and we implemented a small and it calls for Mexico problem on the machine. So one problem for one experiment and we ran the machine 1000 times, we looked at the state and we always saw it oscillate in one of these, um, ground states of the icing laboratoria. So then the measurement feedback idea was to replace those couplings and the controller with the simulator. So we basically simulated all those coherent interactions on on FB g. A. And we replicated the coherent pulse with respect to all those measurements. And then we injected it back into the cavity and on the near to you still remain. So it still is a non. They're dynamical system, but the linear side is all simulated. So there are lots of questions about if this system is preserving important information or not, or if it's gonna behave better. Computational wars. And that's still ah, lot of ongoing studies. But nevertheless, the reason that this implementation was very interesting is that you don't need the end minus one delight lines so you can just use one. Then you can implement a large machine, and then you can run several thousands of problems in the machine, and then you can compare the performance from the computational perspective Looks so I'm gonna split this idea of opium based icing machine into two parts. One is the linear part, which is if you take out the non linearity out of the resonator and just think about the connections. You can think about this as a simple matrix multiplication scheme. And that's basically what gives you the icing Hambletonian modeling. So the optical laws of this network corresponds to the icing Hamiltonian. And if I just want to show you the example of the n equals for experiment on all those face states and the history Graham that we saw, you can actually calculate the laws of each of those states because all those interferences in the beam splitters and the delay lines are going to give you a different losses. And then you will see that the ground states corresponds to the lowest laws of the actual optical network. If you add the non linearity, the simple way of thinking about what the non linearity does is that it provides to gain, and then you start bringing up the gain so that it hits the loss. Then you go through the game saturation or the threshold which is going to give you this phase bifurcation. So you go either to zero the pie face state. And the expectation is that Theis, the network oscillates in the lowest possible state, the lowest possible loss state. There are some challenges associated with this intensity Durban face transition, which I'm going to briefly talk about. I'm also going to tell you about other types of non aerodynamics that we're looking at on the non air side of these networks. So if you just think about the linear network, we're actually interested in looking at some technological behaviors in these networks. And the difference between looking at the technological behaviors and the icing uh, machine is that now, First of all, we're looking at the type of Hamilton Ian's that are a little different than the icing Hamilton. And one of the biggest difference is is that most of these technological Hamilton Ian's that require breaking the time reversal symmetry, meaning that you go from one spin to in the one side to another side and you get one phase. And if you go back where you get a different phase, and the other thing is that we're not just interested in finding the ground state, we're actually now interesting and looking at all sorts of states and looking at the dynamics and the behaviors of all these states in the network. So we started with the simplest implementation, of course, which is a one d chain of thes resonate, er's, which corresponds to a so called ssh model. In the technological work, we get the similar energy to los mapping and now we can actually look at the band structure on. This is an actual measurement that we get with this associate model and you see how it reasonably how How? Well, it actually follows the prediction and the theory. One of the interesting things about the time multiplexing implementation is that now you have the flexibility of changing the network as you are running the machine. And that's something unique about this time multiplex implementation so that we can actually look at the dynamics. And one example that we have looked at is we can actually go through the transition off going from top A logical to the to the standard nontrivial. I'm sorry to the trivial behavior of the network. You can then look at the edge states and you can also see the trivial and states and the technological at states actually showing up in this network. We have just recently implement on a two D, uh, network with Harper Hofstadter model and when you don't have the results here. But we're one of the other important characteristic of time multiplexing is that you can go to higher and higher dimensions and keeping that flexibility and dynamics, and we can also think about adding non linearity both in a classical and quantum regimes, which is going to give us a lot of exotic, no classical and quantum, non innate behaviors in these networks. Yeah, So I told you about the linear side. Mostly let me just switch gears and talk about the nonlinear side of the network. And the biggest thing that I talked about so far in the icing machine is this face transition that threshold. So the low threshold we have squeezed state in these. Oh, pios, if you increase the pump, we go through this intensity driven phase transition and then we got the face stays above threshold. And this is basically the mechanism off the computation in these O pos, which is through this phase transition below to above threshold. So one of the characteristics of this phase transition is that below threshold, you expect to see quantum states above threshold. You expect to see more classical states or coherent states, and that's basically corresponding to the intensity off the driving pump. So it's really hard to imagine that it can go above threshold. Or you can have this friends transition happen in the all in the quantum regime. And there are also some challenges associated with the intensity homogeneity off the network, which, for example, is if one opioid starts oscillating and then its intensity goes really high. Then it's going to ruin this collective decision making off the network because of the intensity driven face transition nature. So So the question is, can we look at other phase transitions? Can we utilize them for both computing? And also can we bring them to the quantum regime on? I'm going to specifically talk about the face transition in the spectral domain, which is the transition from the so called degenerate regime, which is what I mostly talked about to the non degenerate regime, which happens by just tuning the phase of the cavity. And what is interesting is that this phase transition corresponds to a distinct phase noise behavior. So in the degenerate regime, which we call it the order state, you're gonna have the phase being locked to the phase of the pump. As I talked about non degenerate regime. However, the phase is the phase is mostly dominated by the quantum diffusion. Off the off the phase, which is limited by the so called shallow towns limit, and you can see that transition from the general to non degenerate, which also has distinct symmetry differences. And this transition corresponds to a symmetry breaking in the non degenerate case. The signal can acquire any of those phases on the circle, so it has a you one symmetry. Okay, and if you go to the degenerate case, then that symmetry is broken and you only have zero pie face days I will look at. So now the question is can utilize this phase transition, which is a face driven phase transition, and can we use it for similar computational scheme? So that's one of the questions that were also thinking about. And it's not just this face transition is not just important for computing. It's also interesting from the sensing potentials and this face transition, you can easily bring it below threshold and just operated in the quantum regime. Either Gaussian or non Gaussian. If you make a network of Opio is now, we can see all sorts off more complicated and more interesting phase transitions in the spectral domain. One of them is the first order phase transition, which you get by just coupling to Opio, and that's a very abrupt face transition and compared to the to the single Opio phase transition. And if you do the couplings right, you can actually get a lot of non her mission dynamics and exceptional points, which are actually very interesting to explore both in the classical and quantum regime. And I should also mention that you can think about the cup links to be also nonlinear couplings. And that's another behavior that you can see, especially in the nonlinear in the non degenerate regime. So with that, I basically told you about these Opio networks, how we can think about the linear scheme and the linear behaviors and how we can think about the rich, nonlinear dynamics and non linear behaviors both in the classical and quantum regime. I want to switch gear and tell you a little bit about the miniaturization of these Opio networks. And of course, the motivation is if you look at the electron ICS and what we had 60 or 70 years ago with vacuum tube and how we transition from relatively small scale computers in the order of thousands of nonlinear elements to billions of non elements where we are now with the optics is probably very similar to 70 years ago, which is a table talk implementation. And the question is, how can we utilize nano photonics? I'm gonna just briefly show you the two directions on that which we're working on. One is based on lithium Diabate, and the other is based on even a smaller resonate er's could you? So the work on Nana Photonic lithium naive. It was started in collaboration with Harvard Marko Loncar, and also might affair at Stanford. And, uh, we could show that you can do the periodic polling in the phenomenon of it and get all sorts of very highly nonlinear processes happening in this net. Photonic periodically polls if, um Diabate. And now we're working on building. Opio was based on that kind of photonic the film Diabate. And these air some some examples of the devices that we have been building in the past few months, which I'm not gonna tell you more about. But the O. P. O. S. And the Opio Networks are in the works. And that's not the only way of making large networks. Um, but also I want to point out that The reason that these Nana photonic goblins are actually exciting is not just because you can make a large networks and it can make him compact in a in a small footprint. They also provide some opportunities in terms of the operation regime. On one of them is about making cat states and Opio, which is, can we have the quantum superposition of the zero pie states that I talked about and the Net a photonic within? I've It provides some opportunities to actually get closer to that regime because of the spatial temporal confinement that you can get in these wave guides. So we're doing some theory on that. We're confident that the type of non linearity two losses that it can get with these platforms are actually much higher than what you can get with other platform their existing platforms and to go even smaller. We have been asking the question off. What is the smallest possible Opio that you can make? Then you can think about really wavelength scale type, resonate er's and adding the chi to non linearity and see how and when you can get the Opio to operate. And recently, in collaboration with us see, we have been actually USC and Creole. We have demonstrated that you can use nano lasers and get some spin Hamilton and implementations on those networks. So if you can build the a P. O s, we know that there is a path for implementing Opio Networks on on such a nano scale. So we have looked at these calculations and we try to estimate the threshold of a pos. Let's say for me resonator and it turns out that it can actually be even lower than the type of bulk Pip Llano Pos that we have been building in the past 50 years or so. So we're working on the experiments and we're hoping that we can actually make even larger and larger scale Opio networks. So let me summarize the talk I told you about the opium networks and our work that has been going on on icing machines and the measurement feedback. And I told you about the ongoing work on the all optical implementations both on the linear side and also on the nonlinear behaviors. And I also told you a little bit about the efforts on miniaturization and going to the to the Nano scale. So with that, I would like Thio >>three from the University of Tokyo. Before I thought that would like to thank you showing all the stuff of entity for the invitation and the organization of this online meeting and also would like to say that it has been very exciting to see the growth of this new film lab. And I'm happy to share with you today of some of the recent works that have been done either by me or by character of Hong Kong. Honest Group indicates the title of my talk is a neuro more fic in silica simulator for the communities in machine. And here is the outline I would like to make the case that the simulation in digital Tektronix of the CME can be useful for the better understanding or improving its function principles by new job introducing some ideas from neural networks. This is what I will discuss in the first part and then it will show some proof of concept of the game and performance that can be obtained using dissimulation in the second part and the protection of the performance that can be achieved using a very large chaos simulator in the third part and finally talk about future plans. So first, let me start by comparing recently proposed izing machines using this table there is elected from recent natural tronics paper from the village Park hard people, and this comparison shows that there's always a trade off between energy efficiency, speed and scalability that depends on the physical implementation. So in red, here are the limitation of each of the servers hardware on, interestingly, the F p G, a based systems such as a producer, digital, another uh Toshiba beautification machine or a recently proposed restricted Bozeman machine, FPD A by a group in Berkeley. They offer a good compromise between speed and scalability. And this is why, despite the unique advantage that some of these older hardware have trust as the currency proposition in Fox, CBS or the energy efficiency off memory Sisters uh P. J. O are still an attractive platform for building large organizing machines in the near future. The reason for the good performance of Refugee A is not so much that they operate at the high frequency. No, there are particular in use, efficient, but rather that the physical wiring off its elements can be reconfigured in a way that limits the funding human bottleneck, larger, funny and phenols and the long propagation video information within the system. In this respect, the LPGA is They are interesting from the perspective off the physics off complex systems, but then the physics of the actions on the photos. So to put the performance of these various hardware and perspective, we can look at the competition of bringing the brain the brain complete, using billions of neurons using only 20 watts of power and operates. It's a very theoretically slow, if we can see and so this impressive characteristic, they motivate us to try to investigate. What kind of new inspired principles be useful for designing better izing machines? The idea of this research project in the future collaboration it's to temporary alleviates the limitations that are intrinsic to the realization of an optical cortex in machine shown in the top panel here. By designing a large care simulator in silicone in the bottom here that can be used for digesting the better organization principles of the CIA and this talk, I will talk about three neuro inspired principles that are the symmetry of connections, neural dynamics orphan chaotic because of symmetry, is interconnectivity the infrastructure? No. Next talks are not composed of the reputation of always the same types of non environments of the neurons, but there is a local structure that is repeated. So here's the schematic of the micro column in the cortex. And lastly, the Iraqi co organization of connectivity connectivity is organizing a tree structure in the brain. So here you see a representation of the Iraqi and organization of the monkey cerebral cortex. So how can these principles we used to improve the performance of the icing machines? And it's in sequence stimulation. So, first about the two of principles of the estimate Trian Rico structure. We know that the classical approximation of the car testing machine, which is the ground toe, the rate based on your networks. So in the case of the icing machines, uh, the okay, Scott approximation can be obtained using the trump active in your position, for example, so the times of both of the system they are, they can be described by the following ordinary differential equations on in which, in case of see, I am the X, I represent the in phase component of one GOP Oh, Theo f represents the monitor optical parts, the district optical Parametric amplification and some of the good I JoJo extra represent the coupling, which is done in the case of the measure of feedback coupling cm using oh, more than detection and refugee A and then injection off the cooking time and eso this dynamics in both cases of CNN in your networks, they can be written as the grand set of a potential function V, and this written here, and this potential functionally includes the rising Maccagnan. So this is why it's natural to use this type of, uh, dynamics to solve the icing problem in which the Omega I J or the eyes in coping and the H is the extension of the icing and attorney in India and expect so. Not that this potential function can only be defined if the Omega I j. R. A. Symmetric. So the well known problem of this approach is that this potential function V that we obtain is very non convicts at low temperature, and also one strategy is to gradually deformed this landscape, using so many in process. But there is no theorem. Unfortunately, that granted conventions to the global minimum of There's even Tony and using this approach. And so this is why we propose, uh, to introduce a macro structures of the system where one analog spin or one D O. P. O is replaced by a pair off one another spin and one error, according viable. And the addition of this chemical structure introduces a symmetry in the system, which in terms induces chaotic dynamics, a chaotic search rather than a learning process for searching for the ground state of the icing. Every 20 within this massacre structure the role of the er variable eyes to control the amplitude off the analog spins toe force. The amplitude of the expense toe become equal to certain target amplitude a uh and, uh, and this is done by modulating the strength off the icing complaints or see the the error variable E I multiply the icing complaint here in the dynamics off air d o p. O. On then the dynamics. The whole dynamics described by this coupled equations because the e I do not necessarily take away the same value for the different. I thesis introduces a symmetry in the system, which in turn creates security dynamics, which I'm sure here for solving certain current size off, um, escape problem, Uh, in which the X I are shown here and the i r from here and the value of the icing energy showing the bottom plots. You see this Celtics search that visit various local minima of the as Newtonian and eventually finds the global minimum? Um, it can be shown that this modulation off the target opportunity can be used to destabilize all the local minima off the icing evertonians so that we're gonna do not get stuck in any of them. On more over the other types of attractors I can eventually appear, such as limits I contractors, Okot contractors. They can also be destabilized using the motivation of the target and Batuta. And so we have proposed in the past two different moderation of the target amateur. The first one is a modulation that ensure the uh 100 reproduction rate of the system to become positive on this forbids the creation off any nontrivial tractors. And but in this work, I will talk about another moderation or arrested moderation which is given here. That works, uh, as well as this first uh, moderation, but is easy to be implemented on refugee. So this couple of the question that represent becoming the stimulation of the cortex in machine with some error correction they can be implemented especially efficiently on an F B. G. And here I show the time that it takes to simulate three system and also in red. You see, at the time that it takes to simulate the X I term the EI term, the dot product and the rising Hamiltonian for a system with 500 spins and Iraq Spain's equivalent to 500 g. O. P. S. So >>in >>f b d a. The nonlinear dynamics which, according to the digital optical Parametric amplification that the Opa off the CME can be computed in only 13 clock cycles at 300 yards. So which corresponds to about 0.1 microseconds. And this is Toby, uh, compared to what can be achieved in the measurements back O C. M. In which, if we want to get 500 timer chip Xia Pios with the one she got repetition rate through the obstacle nine narrative. Uh, then way would require 0.5 microseconds toe do this so the submission in F B J can be at least as fast as ah one g repression. Uh, replicate pulsed laser CIA Um, then the DOT product that appears in this differential equation can be completed in 43 clock cycles. That's to say, one microseconds at 15 years. So I pieced for pouring sizes that are larger than 500 speeds. The dot product becomes clearly the bottleneck, and this can be seen by looking at the the skating off the time the numbers of clock cycles a text to compute either the non in your optical parts or the dog products, respect to the problem size. And And if we had infinite amount of resources and PGA to simulate the dynamics, then the non illogical post can could be done in the old one. On the mattress Vector product could be done in the low carrot off, located off scales as a look at it off and and while the guide off end. Because computing the dot product involves assuming all the terms in the product, which is done by a nephew, GE by another tree, which heights scarce logarithmic any with the size of the system. But This is in the case if we had an infinite amount of resources on the LPGA food, but for dealing for larger problems off more than 100 spins. Usually we need to decompose the metrics into ah, smaller blocks with the block side that are not you here. And then the scaling becomes funny, non inner parts linear in the end, over you and for the products in the end of EU square eso typically for low NF pdf cheap PGA you the block size off this matrix is typically about 100. So clearly way want to make you as large as possible in order to maintain this scanning in a log event for the numbers of clock cycles needed to compute the product rather than this and square that occurs if we decompose the metrics into smaller blocks. But the difficulty in, uh, having this larger blocks eyes that having another tree very large Haider tree introduces a large finding and finance and long distance start a path within the refugee. So the solution to get higher performance for a simulator of the contest in machine eyes to get rid of this bottleneck for the dot product by increasing the size of this at the tree. And this can be done by organizing your critique the electrical components within the LPGA in order which is shown here in this, uh, right panel here in order to minimize the finding finance of the system and to minimize the long distance that a path in the in the fpt So I'm not going to the details of how this is implemented LPGA. But just to give you a idea off why the Iraqi Yahiko organization off the system becomes the extremely important toe get good performance for similar organizing machine. So instead of instead of getting into the details of the mpg implementation, I would like to give some few benchmark results off this simulator, uh, off the that that was used as a proof of concept for this idea which is can be found in this archive paper here and here. I should results for solving escape problems. Free connected person, randomly person minus one spring last problems and we sure, as we use as a metric the numbers of the mattress Victor products since it's the bottleneck of the computation, uh, to get the optimal solution of this escape problem with the Nina successful BT against the problem size here and and in red here, this propose FDJ implementation and in ah blue is the numbers of retrospective product that are necessary for the C. I am without error correction to solve this escape programs and in green here for noisy means in an evening which is, uh, behavior with similar to the Cartesian mission. Uh, and so clearly you see that the scaring off the numbers of matrix vector product necessary to solve this problem scales with a better exponents than this other approaches. So So So that's interesting feature of the system and next we can see what is the real time to solution to solve this SK instances eso in the last six years, the time institution in seconds to find a grand state of risk. Instances remain answers probability for different state of the art hardware. So in red is the F B g. A presentation proposing this paper and then the other curve represent Ah, brick a local search in in orange and silver lining in purple, for example. And so you see that the scaring off this purpose simulator is is rather good, and that for larger plant sizes we can get orders of magnitude faster than the state of the art approaches. Moreover, the relatively good scanning off the time to search in respect to problem size uh, they indicate that the FPD implementation would be faster than risk. Other recently proposed izing machine, such as the hope you know, natural complimented on memories distance that is very fast for small problem size in blue here, which is very fast for small problem size. But which scanning is not good on the same thing for the restricted Bosman machine. Implementing a PGA proposed by some group in Broken Recently Again, which is very fast for small parliament sizes but which canning is bad so that a dis worse than the proposed approach so that we can expect that for programs size is larger than 1000 spins. The proposed, of course, would be the faster one. Let me jump toe this other slide and another confirmation that the scheme scales well that you can find the maximum cut values off benchmark sets. The G sets better candidates that have been previously found by any other algorithms, so they are the best known could values to best of our knowledge. And, um or so which is shown in this paper table here in particular, the instances, uh, 14 and 15 of this G set can be We can find better converse than previously known, and we can find this can vary is 100 times faster than the state of the art algorithm and CP to do this which is a very common Kasich. It s not that getting this a good result on the G sets, they do not require ah, particular hard tuning of the parameters. So the tuning issuing here is very simple. It it just depends on the degree off connectivity within each graph. And so this good results on the set indicate that the proposed approach would be a good not only at solving escape problems in this problems, but all the types off graph sizing problems on Mexican province in communities. So given that the performance off the design depends on the height of this other tree, we can try to maximize the height of this other tree on a large F p g a onda and carefully routing the components within the P G A and and we can draw some projections of what type of performance we can achieve in the near future based on the, uh, implementation that we are currently working. So here you see projection for the time to solution way, then next property for solving this escape programs respect to the prime assize. And here, compared to different with such publicizing machines, particularly the digital. And, you know, 42 is shown in the green here, the green line without that's and, uh and we should two different, uh, hypothesis for this productions either that the time to solution scales as exponential off n or that the time of social skills as expression of square root off. So it seems, according to the data, that time solution scares more as an expression of square root of and also we can be sure on this and this production show that we probably can solve prime escape problem of science 2000 spins, uh, to find the rial ground state of this problem with 99 success ability in about 10 seconds, which is much faster than all the other proposed approaches. So one of the future plans for this current is in machine simulator. So the first thing is that we would like to make dissimulation closer to the rial, uh, GOP oh, optical system in particular for a first step to get closer to the system of a measurement back. See, I am. And to do this what is, uh, simulate Herbal on the p a is this quantum, uh, condoms Goshen model that is proposed described in this paper and proposed by people in the in the Entity group. And so the idea of this model is that instead of having the very simple or these and have shown previously, it includes paired all these that take into account on me the mean off the awesome leverage off the, uh, European face component, but also their violence s so that we can take into account more quantum effects off the g o p. O, such as the squeezing. And then we plan toe, make the simulator open access for the members to run their instances on the system. There will be a first version in September that will be just based on the simple common line access for the simulator and in which will have just a classic or approximation of the system. We don't know Sturm, binary weights and museum in term, but then will propose a second version that would extend the current arising machine to Iraq off F p g. A, in which we will add the more refined models truncated, ignoring the bottom Goshen model they just talked about on the support in which he valued waits for the rising problems and support the cement. So we will announce later when this is available and and far right is working >>hard comes from Universal down today in physics department, and I'd like to thank the organizers for their kind invitation to participate in this very interesting and promising workshop. Also like to say that I look forward to collaborations with with a file lab and Yoshi and collaborators on the topics of this world. So today I'll briefly talk about our attempt to understand the fundamental limits off another continues time computing, at least from the point off you off bullion satisfy ability, problem solving, using ordinary differential equations. But I think the issues that we raise, um, during this occasion actually apply to other other approaches on a log approaches as well and into other problems as well. I think everyone here knows what Dorien satisfy ability. Problems are, um, you have boolean variables. You have em clauses. Each of disjunction of collaterals literally is a variable, or it's, uh, negation. And the goal is to find an assignment to the variable, such that order clauses are true. This is a decision type problem from the MP class, which means you can checking polynomial time for satisfy ability off any assignment. And the three set is empty, complete with K three a larger, which means an efficient trees. That's over, uh, implies an efficient source for all the problems in the empty class, because all the problems in the empty class can be reduced in Polian on real time to reset. As a matter of fact, you can reduce the NP complete problems into each other. You can go from three set to set backing or two maximum dependent set, which is a set packing in graph theoretic notions or terms toe the icing graphs. A problem decision version. This is useful, and you're comparing different approaches, working on different kinds of problems when not all the closest can be satisfied. You're looking at the accusation version offset, uh called Max Set. And the goal here is to find assignment that satisfies the maximum number of clauses. And this is from the NPR class. In terms of applications. If we had inefficient sets over or np complete problems over, it was literally, positively influenced. Thousands off problems and applications in industry and and science. I'm not going to read this, but this this, of course, gives a strong motivation toe work on this kind of problems. Now our approach to set solving involves embedding the problem in a continuous space, and you use all the east to do that. So instead of working zeros and ones, we work with minus one across once, and we allow the corresponding variables toe change continuously between the two bounds. We formulate the problem with the help of a close metrics. If if a if a close, uh, does not contain a variable or its negation. The corresponding matrix element is zero. If it contains the variable in positive, for which one contains the variable in a gated for Mitt's negative one, and then we use this to formulate this products caused quote, close violation functions one for every clause, Uh, which really, continuously between zero and one. And they're zero if and only if the clause itself is true. Uh, then we form the define in order to define a dynamic such dynamics in this and dimensional hyper cube where the search happens and if they exist, solutions. They're sitting in some of the corners of this hyper cube. So we define this, uh, energy potential or landscape function shown here in a way that this is zero if and only if all the clauses all the kmc zero or the clauses off satisfied keeping these auxiliary variables a EMS always positive. And therefore, what you do here is a dynamics that is a essentially ingredient descend on this potential energy landscape. If you were to keep all the M's constant that it would get stuck in some local minimum. However, what we do here is we couple it with the dynamics we cooperated the clothes violation functions as shown here. And if he didn't have this am here just just the chaos. For example, you have essentially what case you have positive feedback. You have increasing variable. Uh, but in that case, you still get stuck would still behave will still find. So she is better than the constant version but still would get stuck only when you put here this a m which makes the dynamics in in this variable exponential like uh, only then it keeps searching until he finds a solution on deer is a reason for that. I'm not going toe talk about here, but essentially boils down toe performing a Grady and descend on a globally time barren landscape. And this is what works. Now I'm gonna talk about good or bad and maybe the ugly. Uh, this is, uh, this is What's good is that it's a hyperbolic dynamical system, which means that if you take any domain in the search space that doesn't have a solution in it or any socially than the number of trajectories in it decays exponentially quickly. And the decay rate is a characteristic in variant characteristic off the dynamics itself. Dynamical systems called the escape right the inverse off that is the time scale in which you find solutions by this by this dynamical system, and you can see here some song trajectories that are Kelty because it's it's no linear, but it's transient, chaotic. Give their sources, of course, because eventually knowledge to the solution. Now, in terms of performance here, what you show for a bunch off, um, constraint densities defined by M overran the ratio between closes toe variables for random, said Problems is random. Chris had problems, and they as its function off n And we look at money toward the wartime, the wall clock time and it behaves quite value behaves Azat party nominally until you actually he to reach the set on set transition where the hardest problems are found. But what's more interesting is if you monitor the continuous time t the performance in terms off the A narrow, continuous Time t because that seems to be a polynomial. And the way we show that is, we consider, uh, random case that random three set for a fixed constraint density Onda. We hear what you show here. Is that the right of the trash hold that it's really hard and, uh, the money through the fraction of problems that we have not been able to solve it. We select thousands of problems at that constraint ratio and resolve them without algorithm, and we monitor the fractional problems that have not yet been solved by continuous 90. And this, as you see these decays exponentially different. Educate rates for different system sizes, and in this spot shows that is dedicated behaves polynomial, or actually as a power law. So if you combine these two, you find that the time needed to solve all problems except maybe appear traction off them scales foreign or merely with the problem size. So you have paranormal, continuous time complexity. And this is also true for other types of very hard constraints and sexual problems such as exact cover, because you can always transform them into three set as we discussed before, Ramsey coloring and and on these problems, even algorithms like survey propagation will will fail. But this doesn't mean that P equals NP because what you have first of all, if you were toe implement these equations in a device whose behavior is described by these, uh, the keys. Then, of course, T the continue style variable becomes a physical work off. Time on that will be polynomial is scaling, but you have another other variables. Oxidative variables, which structured in an exponential manner. So if they represent currents or voltages in your realization and it would be an exponential cost Al Qaeda. But this is some kind of trade between time and energy, while I know how toe generate energy or I don't know how to generate time. But I know how to generate energy so it could use for it. But there's other issues as well, especially if you're trying toe do this son and digital machine but also happens. Problems happen appear. Other problems appear on in physical devices as well as we discuss later. So if you implement this in GPU, you can. Then you can get in order off to magnitude. Speed up. And you can also modify this to solve Max sad problems. Uh, quite efficiently. You are competitive with the best heuristic solvers. This is a weather problems. In 2016 Max set competition eso so this this is this is definitely this seems like a good approach, but there's off course interesting limitations, I would say interesting, because it kind of makes you think about what it means and how you can exploit this thes observations in understanding better on a low continues time complexity. If you monitored the discrete number the number of discrete steps. Don't buy the room, Dakota integrator. When you solve this on a digital machine, you're using some kind of integrator. Um and you're using the same approach. But now you measure the number off problems you haven't sold by given number of this kid, uh, steps taken by the integrator. You find out you have exponential, discrete time, complexity and, of course, thistles. A problem. And if you look closely, what happens even though the analog mathematical trajectory, that's the record here. If you monitor what happens in discrete time, uh, the integrator frustrates very little. So this is like, you know, third or for the disposition, but fluctuates like crazy. So it really is like the intervention frees us out. And this is because of the phenomenon of stiffness that are I'll talk a little bit a more about little bit layer eso. >>You know, it might look >>like an integration issue on digital machines that you could improve and could definitely improve. But actually issues bigger than that. It's It's deeper than that, because on a digital machine there is no time energy conversion. So the outside variables are efficiently representing a digital machine. So there's no exponential fluctuating current of wattage in your computer when you do this. Eso If it is not equal NP then the exponential time, complexity or exponential costs complexity has to hit you somewhere. And this is how um, but, you know, one would be tempted to think maybe this wouldn't be an issue in a analog device, and to some extent is true on our devices can be ordered to maintain faster, but they also suffer from their own problems because he not gonna be affect. That classes soldiers as well. So, indeed, if you look at other systems like Mirandizing machine measurement feedback, probably talk on the grass or selected networks. They're all hinge on some kind off our ability to control your variables in arbitrary, high precision and a certain networks you want toe read out across frequencies in case off CM's. You required identical and program because which is hard to keep, and they kind of fluctuate away from one another, shift away from one another. And if you control that, of course that you can control the performance. So actually one can ask if whether or not this is a universal bottleneck and it seems so aside, I will argue next. Um, we can recall a fundamental result by by showing harder in reaction Target from 1978. Who says that it's a purely computer science proof that if you are able toe, compute the addition multiplication division off riel variables with infinite precision, then you could solve any complete problems in polynomial time. It doesn't actually proposals all where he just chose mathematically that this would be the case. Now, of course, in Real warned, you have also precision. So the next question is, how does that affect the competition about problems? This is what you're after. Lots of precision means information also, or entropy production. Eso what you're really looking at the relationship between hardness and cost of computing off a problem. Uh, and according to Sean Hagar, there's this left branch which in principle could be polynomial time. But the question whether or not this is achievable that is not achievable, but something more cheerful. That's on the right hand side. There's always going to be some information loss, so mental degeneration that could keep you away from possibly from point normal time. So this is what we like to understand, and this information laws the source off. This is not just always I will argue, uh, in any physical system, but it's also off algorithm nature, so that is a questionable area or approach. But China gets results. Security theoretical. No, actual solar is proposed. So we can ask, you know, just theoretically get out off. Curiosity would in principle be such soldiers because it is not proposing a soldier with such properties. In principle, if if you want to look mathematically precisely what the solar does would have the right properties on, I argue. Yes, I don't have a mathematical proof, but I have some arguments that that would be the case. And this is the case for actually our city there solver that if you could calculate its trajectory in a loss this way, then it would be, uh, would solve epic complete problems in polynomial continuous time. Now, as a matter of fact, this a bit more difficult question, because time in all these can be re scared however you want. So what? Burns says that you actually have to measure the length of the trajectory, which is a new variant off the dynamical system or property dynamical system, not off its parameters ization. And we did that. So Suba Corral, my student did that first, improving on the stiffness off the problem off the integrations, using implicit solvers and some smart tricks such that you actually are closer to the actual trajectory and using the same approach. You know what fraction off problems you can solve? We did not give the length of the trajectory. You find that it is putting on nearly scaling the problem sites we have putting on your skin complexity. That means that our solar is both Polly length and, as it is, defined it also poorly time analog solver. But if you look at as a discreet algorithm, if you measure the discrete steps on a digital machine, it is an exponential solver. And the reason is because off all these stiffness, every integrator has tow truck it digitizing truncate the equations, and what it has to do is to keep the integration between the so called stability region for for that scheme, and you have to keep this product within a grimace of Jacoby in and the step size read in this region. If you use explicit methods. You want to stay within this region? Uh, but what happens that some off the Eigen values grow fast for Steve problems, and then you're you're forced to reduce that t so the product stays in this bonded domain, which means that now you have to you're forced to take smaller and smaller times, So you're you're freezing out the integration and what I will show you. That's the case. Now you can move to increase its soldiers, which is which is a tree. In this case, you have to make domain is actually on the outside. But what happens in this case is some of the Eigen values of the Jacobean, also, for six systems, start to move to zero. As they're moving to zero, they're going to enter this instability region, so your soul is going to try to keep it out, so it's going to increase the data T. But if you increase that to increase the truncation hours, so you get randomized, uh, in the large search space, so it's it's really not, uh, not going to work out. Now, one can sort off introduce a theory or language to discuss computational and are computational complexity, using the language from dynamical systems theory. But basically I I don't have time to go into this, but you have for heart problems. Security object the chaotic satellite Ouch! In the middle of the search space somewhere, and that dictates how the dynamics happens and variant properties off the dynamics. Of course, off that saddle is what the targets performance and many things, so a new, important measure that we find that it's also helpful in describing thesis. Another complexity is the so called called Makarov, or metric entropy and basically what this does in an intuitive A eyes, uh, to describe the rate at which the uncertainty containing the insignificant digits off a trajectory in the back, the flow towards the significant ones as you lose information because off arrows being, uh grown or are developed in tow. Larger errors in an exponential at an exponential rate because you have positively up north spawning. But this is an in variant property. It's the property of the set of all. This is not how you compute them, and it's really the interesting create off accuracy philosopher dynamical system. A zay said that you have in such a high dimensional that I'm consistent were positive and negatively upon of exponents. Aziz Many The total is the dimension of space and user dimension, the number off unstable manifold dimensions and as Saddam was stable, manifold direction. And there's an interesting and I think, important passion, equality, equality called the passion, equality that connect the information theoretic aspect the rate off information loss with the geometric rate of which trajectory separate minus kappa, which is the escape rate that I already talked about. Now one can actually prove a simple theorems like back off the envelope calculation. The idea here is that you know the rate at which the largest rated, which closely started trajectory separate from one another. So now you can say that, uh, that is fine, as long as my trajectory finds the solution before the projective separate too quickly. In that case, I can have the hope that if I start from some region off the face base, several close early started trajectories, they kind of go into the same solution orphaned and and that's that's That's this upper bound of this limit, and it is really showing that it has to be. It's an exponentially small number. What? It depends on the end dependence off the exponents right here, which combines information loss rate and the social time performance. So these, if this exponents here or that has a large independence or river linear independence, then you then you really have to start, uh, trajectories exponentially closer to one another in orderto end up in the same order. So this is sort off like the direction that you're going in tow, and this formulation is applicable toe all dynamical systems, uh, deterministic dynamical systems. And I think we can We can expand this further because, uh, there is, ah, way off getting the expression for the escaped rate in terms off n the number of variables from cycle expansions that I don't have time to talk about. What? It's kind of like a program that you can try toe pursuit, and this is it. So the conclusions I think of self explanatory I think there is a lot of future in in, uh, in an allo. Continue start computing. Um, they can be efficient by orders of magnitude and digital ones in solving empty heart problems because, first of all, many of the systems you like the phone line and bottleneck. There's parallelism involved, and and you can also have a large spectrum or continues time, time dynamical algorithms than discrete ones. And you know. But we also have to be mindful off. What are the possibility of what are the limits? And 11 open question is very important. Open question is, you know, what are these limits? Is there some kind off no go theory? And that tells you that you can never perform better than this limit or that limit? And I think that's that's the exciting part toe to derive thes thes this levian 10.

(upbeat music) >> Hello, and welcome to The Great Cloud Debate. I'm your moderator Rachel Dines. I'm joined by two debaters today Corey Quinn, Cloud Economist at the Duckbill Group and Stu Miniman, Senior Analyst and Host of theCube. Welcome Corey and Stu, this when you can say hello. >> Hey Rachel, great to talk to you. >> And it's better to talk to me. It's always a pleasure to talk to the fine folks over at CloudHealth at by VMware and less of the pleasure to talk to Stu. >> Smack talk is scheduled for later in the agenda gentlemen, so please keep it to a minimum now to keep us on schedule. So here's how today is going to work. I'm going to introduce a debate topic and assign Corey and Stu each to a side. Remember, their assignments are what I decide and they might not actually match their true feelings about a topic, and it definitely does not represent the feelings of their employer or my employer, importantly. Each debater is going to have two minutes to state their opening arguments, then we'll have rebuttals. And each round you the audience gets to vote of who you think is winning. And at the end of the debate, I'll announce the winner. The prize is bragging rights of course, but then also we're having each debater play to win lunch for their local hospital, which is really exciting. So Stu, which hospital are you playing for? >> Yeah, so Rachel, I'm choosing Brigham Women's Hospital. I get a little bit of a home vote for the Boston audience here and was actually my wife's first job out of school. >> Great hospital. Very, very good. All right, Corey, what about you? >> My neighbor winds up being as specialist in infectious diseases as a doctor, and that was always one of those weird things you learn over a cocktail party until this year became incredibly relevant. So I will absolutely be sending the lunch to his department. >> Wonderful! All right. Well, is everyone ready? Any last words? This is your moment for smack talk. >> I think I'll say that for once we can apply it to a specific technology area. Otherwise, it was insulting his appearance and that's too easy. >> All right, let's get going. The first topic is multicloud. Corey, you'll be arguing that companies are better off standardizing on a single cloud. While Stu, you're going to argue the companies are better off with a multicloud strategy. Corey, you're up first, two minutes on the clock and go. >> All right. As a general rule, picking a single provider and going all in leads to the better outcome. Otherwise, you're trying to build every workload to run seamlessly on other providers on a moment's notice. You don't ever actually do it and all you're giving up in return is the ability to leverage whatever your primary cloud provider is letting you build. Now you're suddenly trying to make two differently behaving load balancers work together in the same way, you're using terraform or as I like to call it multicloud formation in the worst of all possible ways. Because now you're having to only really build on one provider, but all the work you're putting in to make that scale to other providers, you might theoretically want to go to at some point, it slows you down, you're never going to be able to move as quickly trying to build for everyone as you are for one particular provider. And I don't care which provider you pick, you probably care which one you pick, I don't care which one. The point is, you've got to pick what's right for your business. And in almost every case, that means start on a single platform. And if you need to migrate down the road years from now, great, that means A you've survived that long, and B you now have the longevity as a business to understand what migrating looks like. Otherwise you're not able to take care of any of the higher level offerings these providers offer that are even slightly differentiated from each other. And even managed database services behave differently. You've got to become a master of all the different ways these things can fail and unfortunate and displeasing ways. It just leaves you in a position where you're not able to specialize, and of course, makes hiring that much harder. Stu, fight me! >> Tough words there. All right, Stu, your turn. Why are companies better off if they go with a multicloud strategy? Got two minutes? >> Yeah, well first of all Corey, I'm really glad that I didn't have to whip out the AWS guidelines, you were not sticking strictly to it and saying that you could not use the words multicloud, cross-cloud, any cloud or every cloud so thank you for saving me that argument. But I want you to kind of come into the real world a little bit. We want access to innovation, we want flexibility, and well, we used to say I would have loved to have a single provider, in the real world we understand that people end up using multiple solutions. If you look at the AI world today, there's not a provider that is a clear leader in every environment that I have. So there's a reason why I might want to use a lot of clouds. Most companies I talked to, Corey, they still have some of their own servers. They're working in a data center, we've seen huge explosion in the service provider world connecting to multiple clouds. So well, a couple of years ago, multicloud was a complete mess. Now, it's only a little bit of a mess, Corey. So absolutely, there's work that we need to do as an industry to make these solutions better. I've been pining for a couple years to say that multicloud needs to be stronger than the sum of its pieces. And we might not yet be there but limiting yourself to a single cloud is reducing your access to innovation, it's reducing your flexibility. And when you start looking at things like edge computing and AI, I'm going to need to access services from multiple providers. So single cloud is a lovely ideal, but in the real world, we understand that teams come with certain skill sets. We end up in many industries, we have mergers and acquisitions. And it's not as easy to just rip out all of your cloud, like you would have 20 years ago, if you said, "Oh, well, they have a phone system or a router "that didn't match what our corporate guidelines is." Cloud is what we're doing. There's lots of solutions out there. And therefore, multicloud is the reality today, and will be the reality going forward for many years to come. >> Strong words from you, Stu. Corey, you've got 60 seconds for rebuttal. I mostly agree with what you just said. I think that having different workloads in different clouds makes an awful lot of sense. Data gravity becomes a bit of a bear. But if you acquire a company that's running on a different cloud than the one that you've picked, you'd be ridiculous to view migrating as anything approaching a strategic priority. Now, this also gets into the question of what is cloud? Our G Suite stuff counts as cloud, but no one really views it in that way. Similarly, when you have an AI specific workload, that's great. As long as it isn't you seriously expensive to move data between providers. That workload doesn't need to live in the same place as your marketing website does. I think that the idea of having a specific cloud provider that you go all in on for every use case, well, at some point that leads to ridiculous things like pretending that Amazon WorkDocs has customers, it does not. But for things that matter to your business and looking at specific workloads, I think that you're going to find a primary provider with secondary workloads here and they're scattered elsewhere to be the strategy that people are getting at when they use the word multicloud badly. >> Time's up for you Corey, Stu we've got time for rebuttal and remember, for those of you in the audience, you can vote at any time and who you think is winning this round. Stu, 60 seconds for a rebuttal. >> Yeah, absolutely Corey. Look, you just gave the Andy Jassy of what multicloud should be 70 to 80% goes to a single provider. And it does make sense we know nobody ever said multicloud equals the same amount in multiple environments but you made a clear case as to why multicloud leveraging multi providers is likely what most companies are going to do. So thank you so much for making a clear case as to why multicloud not equal cloud, across multiple providers is the way to go. So thank you for conceding the victory. >> Last Words, Corey. >> If that's what you took from it Stu, I can't get any closer to it than you have. >> All right, let's move on to the next topic then. The next topic is serverless versus containers which technology is going to be used in, let's say, five to 10 years time? And as a reminder, I'm going to assign each of the debaters these topics, their assignments may or may not match their true feelings about this topic, and they definitely don't represent the topics of my employer, CloudHealth by VMware. Stu, you're going to argue for containers. Corey you're going to argue for start serverless. Stu, you're up first. Two minutes on the clock and go. >> All right, so with all respect to my friends in the serverless community, We need to have a reality check as to how things work. We all know that serverless is a ridiculous name because underneath we do need to worry about all of the infrastructure underneath. So containers today are the de facto building block for cloud native architectures, just as the VM defined the ecosystem for an entire generation of solutions. Containers are the way we build things today. It is the way Google has architected their entire solution and underneath it is often something that's used with serverless. So yes, if you're, building an Alexa service, serverless make what's good for you. But for the vast majority of solutions, I need to have flexibility, I need to understand how things work underneath it. We know in IT that it's great when things work, but we need to understand how to fix them when they break. So containerization gets us to that atomic level, really close to having the same thing as the application. And therefore, we saw the millions of users that deploy Docker, we saw the huge wave of container orchestration led by Kubernetes. And the entire ecosystem and millions of customers are now on board with this way of designing and architecting and breaking down the silos between the infrastructure world and the application developer world. So containers, here to stay growing fast. >> All right, Corey, what do you think? Why is serverless the future? >> I think that you're right in that containers are the way you get from where you were to something that runs effectively in a cloud environment. That is why Google is so strongly behind Kubernetes it helps get the entire industry to write code the way that Google might write code. And that's great. But if you're looking at effectively rewriting something from scratch, or building something that new, the idea of not having to think about infrastructure in the traditional sense of being able to just here, take this code and run it in a given provider that takes whatever it is that you need to do and could loose all these other services together, saves an awful lot of time. As that continues to move up the stack towards the idea of no code or low code. And suddenly, you're now able to build these applications in ways that require just a little bit of code that tie together everything else. We're closer than ever to that old trope of the only code you write is business logic. Serverless gives a much clearer shot of getting there, if you can divorce yourself from the past of legacy workloads. Legacy, of course meaning older than 18 months and makes money. >> Stu, do you have a rebuttal, 60 seconds? >> Yeah. So Corey, we've been talking about this Nirvana in many ways. It's the discussion that we had for paths for over a decade now. I want to be able to write my code once not worry about where it lives, and do all this. But sometimes, there's a reason why we keep trying the same thing over and over again, but never reaching it. So serverless is great for some application If you talked about, okay, if you're some brand new webby thing there and I don't want to have to do this team, that's awesome. I've talked to some wonderful people that don't know anything about coding that have built some cool stuff with serverless. But cool stuff isn't what most business runs on, and therefore containerization is, as you said, it's a bridge to where I need to go, it lives in these cloud environments, and it is the present and it is the future. >> Corey, your response. >> I agree that it's the present, I doubt that it's the future in quite the same way. Right now Kubernetes is really scratching a major itch, which is how all of these companies who are moving to public cloud still I can have their infrastructure teams be able to cosplay as cloud providers themselves. And over time, that becomes simpler and I think on some level, you might even see a convergence of things that are container workloads begin to look a lot more like serverless workloads. Remember, we're aiming at something that is five years away in the context of this question. I think that the serverless and container landscape will look very different. The serverless landscape will be bright and exciting and new, whereas unfortunately the container landscape is going to be represented by people like you Stu. >> Hoarse words from Corey. Stu, any last words or rebuttals? >> Yeah, and look Corey absolutely just like we don't really think about the underlying server or VM, we won't think about the containers you won't think about Kubernetes in the future, but, the question is, which technology will be used in five to 10 years, it'll still be there. It will be the fabric of our lives underneath there for containerization. So, that is what we were talking about. Serverless I think will be useful in pockets of places but will not be the predominant technology, five years from now. >> All right, tough to say who won that one? I'm glad I don't have to decide. I hope everyone out there is voting, last chance to vote on this question before we move on to the next. Next topic is cloud wars. I'm going to give a statement and then I'm going to assign each of you a pro or a con, Google will never be an actual contender in the cloud wars always a far third, we're going to have Corey arguing that Google is never going to be an actual contender. And Stu, you're going to argue that Google is eventually going to overtake the top two AWS and Azure. As a constant reminder, I'm assigning these topics, it's my decision and also they don't match the opinions of me, my employer, or likely Stu or Corey. This is all just for fun and games. But I really want to hear what everyone has to say. So Corey, you're up first two minutes. Why is Google never going to be an actual contender and go. >> The biggest problem Google has in the time of cloud is their ability to forecast longer term on anything that isn't their advertising business, and their ability to talk to human beings long enough to meet people where they are. We're replacing their entire culture is what it's going to take to succeed in the time of cloud and with respect, Thomas Kurian is a spectacular leader internally but look at where he's come from. He spent 22 years at Oracle and now has been transplanted into Google. If we take a look at Satya Nadella's cloud transformation at Microsoft, he was able to pull that off as an insider, after having known intimately every aspect of that company, and he grew organically with it and was perfectly positioned to make that change. You can't instill that kind of culture change by dropping someone externally, on top of an organization and expecting anything to go with this magic one day wake up and everything's going to work out super well. Google has a tremendous amount of strengths, and I don't see that providing common denominator cloud computing services to a number of workloads that from a Google perspective are horrifying, is necessarily in their wheelhouse. It feels like their entire focus on this is well, there's money over there. We should go get some of that too. It comes down to the traditional Google lack of focus. >> Stu, rebuttal? Why do you think Google has a shaft? >> Yeah, so first of all, Corey, I think we'd agree Google is a powerhouse in the world today. My background is networking, when they first came out with with Google Cloud, I said, Google has the best network, second to none in the world. They are ubiquitous today. If you talk about the impact they have on the world, Android phones, you mentioned Kubernetes, everybody uses G Suite maps, YouTube, and the like. That does not mean that they are necessarily going to become the clear leader in cloud but, Corey, they've got really, really smart people. If you're not familiar with that talk to them. They'll tell you how smart they are. And they have built phenomenal solutions, who's going to be able to solve, the challenge every day of, true distributed systems, that a global database that can handle the clock down to the atomic level, Google's the one that does that we've all read the white papers on that. They've set the tone for Hadoop, and various solutions that are all over the place, and their secret weapon is not the advertising, of course, that is a big concern for them, but is that if you talk about, the consumer adoption, everyone uses Google. My kids have all had Chromebooks growing up. It isn't their favorite thing, but they get, indoctrinated with Google technology. And as they go out and leverage technologies in the world, Google is one that is known. Google has the strength of technology and a lot of positioning and partnerships to move them forward. Everybody wants a strong ecosystem in cloud, we don't want a single provider. We already discussed this before, but just from a competitive nature standpoint, if there is a clear counterbalance to AWS, I would say that it is Google, not Microsoft, that is positioned to be that clear and opportune. >> Interesting, very interesting Stu. So your argument is the Gen Zers will of ultimately when they come of age become the big Google proponents. Some strong words that as well but they're the better foil to AWS, Corey rebuttal? >> I think that Stu is one t-shirt change away from a pitch perfect reenactment of Charlie Brown. In this case with Google playing the part of Lucy yanking the football away every time. We've seen it with inbox, Google Reader, Google Maps, API pricing, GKE's pricing for control plane. And when your argument comes down to a suddenly Google is going to change their entire nature and become something that it is as proven as constitutionally incapable of being, namely supporting something that its customers want that it doesn't itself enjoy working on. And to the exclusion of being able to get distracted and focused on other things. Even their own conferences called Next because Google is more interested in what they're shipping than what they're building, than what they're currently shipping. I think that it is a fantasy to pretend that that is somehow going to change without a complete cultural transformation, which again, I don't see the seeds being planted for. >> Some sick burns in there Stu, rebuttal? >> Yeah. So the final word that I'll give you on this is, one of the most important pieces of what we need today. And we need to tomorrow is our data. Now, there are some concerns when we talk about Google and data, but Google also has strong strength in data, understanding data, helping customers leverage data. So while I agree to your points about the cultural shift, they have the opportunity to take the services that they have, and enable customers to be able to take their data to move forward to the wonderful world of AI, cloud, edge computing, and all of those pieces and solve the solution with data. >> Strong words there. All right, that's a tough one. Again, I hope you're all out there voting for who you think won that round. Let's move on to the last round before we start hitting the lightning questions. I put a call out on several channels and social media for people to have questions that they want you to debate. And this one comes from Og-AWS Slack member, Angelo. Angelo asks, "What about IBM Cloud?" Stu you're pro, Corey you're con. Let's have Stu you're up first. The question is, what about IBM Cloud? >> All right, so great question, Angelo. I think when you look at the cloud providers, first of all, you have to understand that they're not all playing the same game. We talked about AWS and they are the elephant in the room that moves nimbly as a cheetah. Every other provider plays a little bit of a different game. Google has strength in data. Microsoft, of course, has their, business productivity applications. IBM has a strong legacy. Now, Corey is going to say that they are just legacy and you need to think about them but IBM has strong innovation. They are a player in really what we call chapter two of the cloud. So when we start talking about multicloud, when we start talking about living in many environments, IBM was the first one to partner with VMware for VMware cloud before the mega VMware AWS announcement, there was IBM up on stage and if I remember right, they actually have more VMware customers on IBM Cloud than they do in the AWS cloud. So over my shoulder here, there's of course, the Red Hat $34 billion to bet on that multicloud solution. So as we talk about containerization, and Kubernetes, Red Hat is strongly positioned in open-source, and flexibility. So you really need a company that understands both the infrastructure side and the application side. IBM has database, IBM has infrastructure, IBM has long been the leader in middleware, and therefore IBM has a real chance to be a strong player in this next generation of platforms. Doesn't mean that they're necessarily going to go attack Amazon, they're partnering across the board. So I think you will see a kinder, gentler IBM and they are leveraging open source and Red Hat and I think we've let the dogs out on the IBM solution. >> Indeed. >> So before Corey goes, I feel the need to remind everyone that the views expressed here are not the views of my employer nor myself, nor necessarily of Corey or Stu. I have Corey. >> I haven't even said anything yet. And you're disclaiming what I'm about to say. >> I'm just warning the audience, 'cause I can't wait to hear what you're going to say next. >> Sounds like I have to go for the high score. All right. IBM's best days are behind it. And that is pretty clear. They like to get angry when people talk about how making the jokes about a homogenous looking group of guys in blue suits as being all IBM has to offer. They say that hasn't been true since the '80s. But that was the last time people cared about IBM in any meaningful sense and no one has bothered to update the relevance since then. Now, credit where due, I am seeing an awful lot of promoted tweets from IBM into my timeline, all talking about how amazing their IBM blockchain technology is. And yes, that is absolutely the phrasing of someone who's about to turn it all around and win the game. I don't see it happening. >> Stu, rebuttal? >> Look, Corey, IBM was the company that brought us the UPC code. They understand Mac manufacturing and blockchain actually shows strong presence in supply chain management. So maybe you're not quite aware of some of the industries that IBM is an expert in. So that is one of the big strengths of IBM, they really understand verticals quite well. And, at the IBM things show, I saw a lot in the healthcare world, had very large customers that were leveraging those solutions. So while you might dismiss things when they say, Oh, well, one of the largest telecom providers in India are leveraging OpenStack and you kind of go with them, well, they've got 300 million customers, and they're thrilled with the solution that they're doing with IBM, so it is easy to scoff at them, but IBM is a reliable, trusted provider out there and still very strong financially and by the way, really excited with the new leadership in place there, Arvind Krishna knows product, Jim Whitehurst came from the Red Hat side. So don't be sleeping on IBM. >> Corey, any last words? >> I think that they're subject to massive disruption as soon as they release the AWS 400 mainframe in the cloud. And I think that before we, it's easy to forget this, but before Google was turning off Reader, IBM stopped making the model M buckling spring keyboards. Those things were masterpieces and that was one of the original disappointments that we learned that we can't fall in love with companies, because companies in turn will not love us back. IBM has demonstrated that. Lastly, I think I'm thrilled to be working with IBM is exactly the kind of statement one makes only at gunpoint. >> Hey, Corey, by the way, I think you're spending too much time looking at all titles of AWS services, 'cause you don't know the difference between your mainframe Z series and the AS/400 which of course is heavily pending. >> Also the i series. Oh yes. >> The i series. So you're conflating your system, which still do billions of dollars a year, by the way. >> Oh, absolutely. But that's not we're not seeing new banks launching and then building on top of IBM mainframe technology. I'm not disputing that mainframes were phenomenal. They were, I just don't see them as the future and I don't see a cloud story. >> Only a cloud live your mainframe related smack talk. That's the important thing that we're getting to here. All right, we move-- >> I'm hoping there's an announcement from CloudHealth by VMware that they also will now support mainframe analytics as well as traditional cloud. >> I'll look into that. >> Excellent. >> We're moving on to the lightning rounds. Each debater in this round is only going to get 60 seconds for their opening argument and then 30 seconds for a rebuttal. We're going to hit some really, really big important questions here like this first one, which is who deserves to sit on the Iron Throne at the end of "Game of Thrones?" I've been told that Corey has never seen this TV show so I'm very interested to hear him argue for Sansa. But let's Sansa Stark, let's hear Stu go first with his argument for Jon Snow. Stu one minute on the clock, go. >> All right audience let's hear it from the king of the north first of all. Nothing better than Jon Snow. He made the ultimate sacrifice. He killed his love to save Westeros from clear destruction because Khaleesi had gone mad. So Corey is going to say something like it's time for the women to do this but it was a woman she went mad. She started burning the place down and Jon Snow saved it so it only makes sense that he should have done it. Everyone knows it was a travesty that he was sent back to the Wall, and to just wander the wild. So absolutely Jon Snow vote for King of the North. >> Compelling arguments. Corey, why should Sansa Stark sit on the throne? Never having seen the show I've just heard bits and pieces about it and all involves things like bloody slaughters, for example, the AWS partner Expo right before the keynote is best known as AWS red wedding. We take a look at that across the board and not having seen it, I don't know the answer to this question, but how many of the folks who are in positions of power we're in fact mediocre white dudes and here we have Stu advocating for yet another one. Sure, this is a lightning round of a fun event but yes, we should continue to wind up selecting this mediocre white person has many parallels in terms of power, et cetera, politics, current tech industry as a whole. I think she's right we absolutely should give someone with a look like this a potential opportunity to see what they can do instead. >> Ouch, Stu 30 seconds rebuttal. >> Look, I would just give a call out to the women in the audience and say, don't you want Jon Snow to be king? >> I also think it's quite bold of Corey to say that he looks like Kit Harington. Corey, any last words? >> I think that it sad you think Stu was running for office at this point because he's become everyone's least favorite animal, a panda bear. >> Fire. All right, so on to the next question. This one also very important near and dear to my heart personally, is a hot dog a sandwich. Corey you'll be arguing no, Stu will be arguing yes. I must also add this important disclaimer that these assignments are made by me and might not reflect the actual views of the debaters here so Corey, you're up first. Why is a hot dog not a sandwich? >> Because you'll get punched in the face if you go to a deli of any renown and order a hot dog. That is not what they serve there. They wind up having these famous delicatessen in New York they have different sandwiches named after different celebrities. I shudder to think of the deadly insult that naming a hot dog after a celebrity would be to that not only celebrity in some cases also the hot dog too. If you take a look and you want to get sandwiches for lunch? Sure. What are we having catered for this event? Sandwiches. You show up and you see a hot dog, you're looking around the hot dog to find the rest of the sandwich. Now while it may check all of the boxes for a technical definition of what a sandwich is, as I'm sure Stu will boringly get into, it's not what people expect, there's a matter of checking the actual boxes, and then delivering what customers actually want. It's why you can let your product roadmap be guided by cart by customers or by Gartner but rarely both. >> Wow, that one hurts. Stu, why is the hot dog a sandwich? >> Yeah so like Corey, I'm sorry that you must not have done some decent traveling 'cause I'm glad you brought up the definition because I'm not going to bore you with yes, there's bread and there's meat and there's toppings and everything else like that but there are some phenomenal hot dogs out there. I traveled to Iceland a few years ago, and there's a little hot dog stand out there that's been there for over 40 or 50 years. And it's one of the top 10 culinary experience I put in. And I've been to Michelin star restaurants. You go to Chicago and any local will be absolutely have to try our creation. There are regional hot dogs. There are lots of solutions there and so yeah, of course you don't go to a deli. Of course if you're going to the deli for takeout and you're buying meats, they do sell hot dogs, Corey, it's just not the first thing that you're going to order on the menu. So I think you're underselling the hot dog. Whether you are a child and grew up and like eating nothing more than the mustard or ketchup, wherever you ate on it, or if you're a world traveler, and have tried some of the worst options out there. There are a lot of options for hot dogs so hot dog, sandwich, culinary delight. >> Stu, don't think we didn't hear that pun. I'm not sure if that counts for or against you, but Corey 30 seconds rebuttal. >> In the last question, you were agitating for putting a white guy back in power. Now you're sitting here arguing that, "Oh some of my best friend slash meals or hot dogs." Yeah, I think we see what you're putting down Stu and it's not pretty, it's really not pretty and I think people are just going to start having to ask some very pointed, delicate questions. >> Tough words to hear Stu. Close this out or rebuttal. >> I'm going to take the high road, Rachel and leave that where it stands. >> I think that is smart. All right, next question. Tabs versus spaces. Stu, you're going to argue for tabs, Corey, you're going to argue for spaces just to make this fun. Stu, 60 seconds on the clock, you're up first. Why are tabs the correct approach? >> First of all, my competitor here really isn't into pop culture. So he's probably not familiar with the epic Silicon Valley argument over this discussion. So, Corey, if you could explain the middle of algorithm, we will be quite impressed but since you don't, we'll just have to go with some of the technology first. Looks, developers, we want to make things simple on you. Tabs, they're faster to do they take up less memory. Yes, they aren't quite as particular as using spaces but absolutely, they get the job done and it is important to just, focus on productivity, I believe that the conversation as always, the less code you can write, the better and therefore, if you don't have to focus on exactly how many spaces and you can just simplify with the tabs, you're gona get close enough for most of the job. And it is easier to move forward and focus on the real work rather than some pedantic discussion as to whether one thing is slightly more efficient than the other. >> Great points Stu. Corey, why is your pedantic approach better? >> No one is suggesting you sit there and whack the spacebar four times or eight times you hit the Tab key, but your editor should be reasonably intelligent enough to expand that. At that point, you have now set up a precedent where in other cases, other parts of your codebase you're using spaces because everyone always does. And that winds up in turn, causing a weird dissonance you'll see a bunch of linters throwing issues if you use tabs as a direct result. Now the wrong answer is, of course, and I think Steve will agree with me both in the same line. No one is ever in favor of that. But I also want to argue with Stu over his argument about "Oh, it saves a little bit of space "is the reason one should go with tabs instead." Sorry, that argument said bye bye a long time ago, and that time was the introduction of JavaScript, where it takes many hundreds of Meg's of data to wind up building hello world. Yeah, at that point optimization around small character changes are completely irrelevant. >> Stu, rebuttal? >> Yeah, I didn't know that Corey did not try to defend that he had any idea what Silicon Valley was, or any of the references in there. So Rachel, we might have to avoid any other pop culture references. We know Corey just looks at very specific cloud services and can't have fun with some of the broader themes there. >> You're right my mistake Stu. Corey, any last words? >> It's been suggested that whole middle out seen on the whiteboard was came from a number of conversations I used to have with my co-workers as in people who were sitting in the room with me watching that episode said, Oh my God, I've been in the room while you had this debate with your friend and I will not name here because they at least still strive to remain employable. Yeah, it's, I understand the value in the picking these fights, we could have gone just as easily with vi versus Emacs, AWS versus Azure, or anything else that you really care to pick a fight with. But yeah, this is exactly the kind of pedantic fight that everyone loves to get involved with, which is why I walked a different path and pick other ridiculous arguments. >> Speaking of those ridiculous arguments that brings us to our last debate topic of the day, Corey you are probably best known for your strong feelings about the pronunciation of the acronym for Amazon Machine Image. I will not be saying how I think it is pronounced. We're going to have you argue each. Stu, you're going to argue that the acronym Amazon Machine Image should be pronounced to rhyme with butterfly. Corey, you'll be arguing that it rhymes with mommy. Stu, rhymes with butterfly. Let's hear it, 60 seconds on the clock. >> All right, well, Rachel, first of all, I wish I could go to the videotape because I have clear video evidence from a certain Corey Quinn many times arguing why AMI is the proper way to pronounce this, but it is one of these pedantic arguments, is it GIF or GIF? Sometimes you go back and you say, Okay, well, there's the way that the community did it. And the way that oh wait, the founder said it was a certain way. So the only argument against AMI, Jeff Barr, when he wrote about the history of all of the blogging that he's done from AWS said, I wish when I had launched the service that I pointed out the correct pronunciation, which I won't even deem to talk it because the community has agreed by and large that AMI is the proper way to pronounce it. And boy, the tech industry is rific on this kind of thing. Is it SQL and no SQL and you there's various ways that we butcher these constantly. So AMI, almost everyone agrees and the lead champion for this argument, of course is none other than Corey Quinn. >> Well, unfortunately today Corey needs to argue the opposite. So Corey, why does Amazon Machine Image when pronounce as an acronym rhyme with mommy? >> Because the people who built it at Amazon say that it is and an appeal to authorities generally correct when the folks built this. AWS has said repeatedly that they're willing to be misunderstood for long periods of time. And this is one of those areas in which they have been misunderstood by virtually the entire industry, but they are sticking to their guns and continuing to wind up advocating for AMI as the correct pronunciation. But I'll take it a step further. Let's take a look at the ecosystem companies. Whenever Erica Brescia, who is now the COO and GitHub, but before she wound up there, she was the founder of Bitnami. And whenever I call it Bitn AMI she looks like she is barely successfully restraining herself from punching me right in the mouth for that pronunciation of the company. Clearly, it's Bitnami named after the original source AMI, which is what the proper term pronunciation of the three letter acronym becomes. Fight me Stu. >> Interesting. Interesting argument, Stu 30 seconds, rebuttal. >> Oh, the only thing he can come up with is that, you take the word Bitnami and because it has that we know that things sound very different if you put a prefix or a suffix, if you talk to the Kubernetes founders, Kubernetes should be coop con but the people that run the conference, say it cube con so there are lots of debates between the people that create it and the community. I in general, I'm going to vote with the community most of the time. Corey, last words on this topic 'cause I know you have very strong feelings about it. >> I'm sorry, did Stu just say Kubernetes and its community as bastions of truth when it comes to pronouncing anything correctly? Half of that entire conference is correcting people's pronunciation of Kubernetes, Kubernetes, Kubernetes, Kubernetes and 15 other mispronunciations that they will of course yell at you for but somehow they're right on this one. All right. >> All right, everyone, I hope you've been voting all along for who you think is winning each round, 'cause this has been a tough call. But I would like to say that's a wrap for today. big thank you to our debaters. You've been very good sports, even when I've made you argue for against things that clearly are hurting you deep down inside, we're going to take a quick break and tally all the votes. And we're going to announce a winner up on the Zoom Q and A. So go to the top of your screen, Click on Zoom Q and A to join us and hear the winner announced and also get a couple minutes to chat live with Corey and Stu. Thanks again for attending this session. And thank you again, Corey and Stu. It's been The Great Cloud Debate. All right, so each round I will announce the winner and then we're going to announce the overall winner. Remember that Corey and Stu are playing not just for bragging rights and ownership of all of the internet for the next 24 hours, but also for lunch to be donated to their local hospital. Corey is having lunch donated to the California Pacific Medical Centre. And Stu is having lunch donated to Boston Medical Centre. All right, first up round one multicloud versus monocloud. Stu, you were arguing for multicloud, Corey, you were arguing for one cloud. Stu won that one by 64% of the vote. >> The vendor fix was in. >> Yeah, well, look, CloudHealth started all in AWS by supporting customers across those environments. So and Corey you basically conceded it because we said multicloud does not mean we evenly split things up. So you got to work on those two skills, buddy, 'cause, absolutely you just handed the victory my way. So thank you so much and thank you to the audience for understanding multicloud is where we are today, and unfortunately, it's where we're gonnao be in the future. So as a whole, we're going to try to make it better 'cause it is, as Corey and I both agree, a bit of a mess right now. >> Don't get too cocky. >> One of those days the world is going to catch up with me and realize that ad hominem is not a logical fallacy so much as it is an excellent debating skill. >> Well, yeah, I was going to say, Stu, don't get too cocky because round two serverless versus containers. Stu you argued for containers, Corey you argued for serverless. Corey you won that one with 65, 66 or most percent of the vote. >> You can't fight the future. >> Yeah, and as you know Rachel I'm a big fan of serverless. I've been to the serverless comp, I actually just published an excellent interview with Liberty Mutual and what they're doing with serverless. So love the future, it's got a lot of maturity to deliver on the promise that it has today but containers isn't going anyway or either so. >> So, you're not sad that you lost that one. Got it, good concession speech. Next one up was cloud wars specifically Google. is Google a real contender in the clouds? Stu, you were arguing yes they are. Corey, you were arguing no they aren't. Corey also won this round was 72% of the votes. >> Yeah, it's one of those things where at some point, it's sort of embarrassing if you miss a six inch pot. So it's nice that that didn't happen in this case. >> Yeah, so Corey, is this the last week that we have any competitors to AWS? Is that what we're saying? And we all accept our new overlords. Thank you so much, Corey. >> Well I hope not, my God, I don't know what to be an Amazonian monoculture anymore than I do anyone else. Competition makes all of us better. But again, we're seeing a lot of anti competitive behaviour. For example, took until this year for Microsoft to finally make calculator uninstallable and I trust concerned took a long time to work its way of course. >> Yeah, and Corey, I think everyone is listening to what you've been saying about what Google's doing with Google Meet and forcing that us when we make our pieces there. So definitely there's some things that Google culture, we'd love them to clean up. And that's one of the things that's really held back Google's enterprise budget is that advertised advertising driven culture. So we will see. We are working hand-- >> That was already opted out of Hangouts, how do we fix it? We call it something else that they haven't opted out of yet. >> Hey, but Corey, I know you're looking forward to at least two months of weekly Google live stuff starting this summer. So we'll have a lot of time to talk about google. >> Let's not kid ourselves they're going to cancel it halfway through. (Stu laughs) >> Boys, I thought we didn't have any more smack talk left in you but clearly you do. So, all right, moving on. Next slide. This is the last question that we did in the main part of the debate. IBM Cloud. What about IBM Cloud was the question, Stu, you were pro, Corey you were con. Corey, you won this one again with 62% of the vote and for the main. >> It wasn't just me, IBM Cloud also won. The problem is that competition was oxymoron of the day. >> I don't know Rachel, I thought this one had a real shot as to putting where IBM fits. I thought we had a good discussion there. It seemed like some of the early voting was going my way but it just went otherwise. >> It did. We had some last minute swings in these polls. They were going one direction they rapidly swung another it's a fickle crowd today. So right now we've got Corey with three points Stu with one but really the lightning round anyone's game. They got very close here. The next question, lightning round question one, was "Game of Thrones" who deserves to sit on the Iron Throne? Stu was arguing for Jon Snow, Corey was arguing for Sansa Stark also Corey has never seen Game of Thrones. This was shockingly close with Stu at 51.5% of the vote took the crown on this King of the North Stu. >> Well, I'm thrilled and excited that King of the North pulled things out because it would have been just a complete embarrassment if I lost to Corey on this question. >> It would. >> It was the right answer, and as you said, he had no idea what he's talking about, which, unfortunately is how he is on most of the rest of it. You just don't realize that he doesn't know what he's talking about. 'Cause he uses all those fast words and discussion points. >> Well, thank you for saying the quiet part out loud. Now, I am completely crestfallen as to the results of this question about a thing I've never seen and could not possibly care less about not going in my favor. I will someday managed to get over this. >> I'm glad you can really pull yourself together and keep on going with life, Corey it's inspiring. All right, next question. Was the lightning round question two is a hot dog a sandwich? Stu, you were arguing yes. Corey, you were arguing no. Corey landslide, you won this 75% of the vote. >> It all comes down to customer expectations. >> Yeah. >> Just disappointment. Disappointment. >> All right, next question tabs versus spaces. Another very close one. Stu, what were you arguing for Stu? >> I was voting tabs. >> Tabs, yeah. And Corey, you were arguing spaces. This did not turn out the way I expected. So Stu you lost this by slim margin Corey 53% of the vote. You won with spaces. >> Yep. And I use spaces in my day to day life. So that's a position I can actually believe in. >> See, I thought I was giving you the opposite point of view there. I mistook you for the correct answer, in my opinion, which is tabs. >> Well, it is funnier to stalk me on Twitter and look what I have to there than on GitHub where I just completely commit different kinds of atrocities. So I don't blame you. >> Caught that pun there. All right, the last rounds. Speaking of atrocities, AMI, Amazon Machine Image is it pronounced AMI or AMI? >> I better not have won this one. >> So Stu you were arguing that this is pronounced AMI rhymes with butterfly. Corey, you were arguing that it's pronounced AMI like mommy. Any guesses under who won this? >> It better be Stu. >> It was a 50, 50 split complete tie. So no points to anyone. >> For your complete and utterly failed on this because I should have won in a landslide. My entire argument was based on every discussion you've had on this. So, Corey I think they're just voting for you. So I'm really surprised-- >> I think at this point it shows I'm such a skilled debater that I could have also probably brought you to a standstill taking the position that gravity doesn't exist. >> You're a master of few things, Corey. Usually it's when you were dressed up nicely and I think they like the t-shirt. It's a nice t-shirt but not how we're usually hiding behind the attire. >> Truly >> Well. >> Clothes don't always make a demand. >> Gentlemen, I would like to say overall our winner today with five points is Corey. Congratulations, Corey. >> Thank you very much. It's always a pleasure to mop the floor with you Stu. >> Actually I was going to ask Stu to give the acceptance speech for you, Corey and, Corey, if you could give a few words of concession, >> Oh, that's a different direction. Stu, we'll start with you, I suppose. >> Yeah, well, thank you to the audience. Obviously, you voted for me without really understanding that I don't know what I'm talking about. I'm a loudmouth on Twitter. I just create a bunch of arguments out there. I'm influential for reasons I don't really understand. But once again, thank you for your votes so much. >> Yeah, it's always unfortunate to wind up losing a discussion with someone and you wouldn't consider it losing 'cause most of the time, my entire shtick is that I sit around and talk to people who know what they're talking about. And I look smart just by osmosis sitting next to them. Video has been rough on me. So I was sort of hoping that I'd be able to parlay that into something approaching a victory. But sadly, that hasn't worked out quite so well. This is just yet another production brought to you by theCube which shut down my original idea of calling it a bunch of squares. (Rachael laughs) >> All right, well, on that note, I would like to say thank you both Stu and Corey. I think we can close out officially the debate, but we can all stick around for a couple more minutes in case any fans have questions for either of them or want to get them-- >> Find us a real life? Yeah. >> Yeah, have a quick Zoom fight. So thanks, everyone, for attending. And thank you Stu, thank you Corey. This has been The Great Cloud Debate.

>> Announcer: From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto and Boston, it's theCUBE! Covering IBM Think, brought to you by IBM. >> Hi everybody, welcome back to theCUBE's coverage of IBM 2020, it's the digital IBM 2020, the Think Event Experience. My name is Dave Vellante, and you are watching theCUBE. Steve Canepa is here, he's the global GM of Communications, of the Communications sector for IBM. Steve, how ya doing, good to have you on. >> Doing great Dave, thanks for having me. >> Yeah, you're very welcome. I mean, communications is sort of a broad term for the stuff you covered. Telco, Cable, Entertainment, Broadcast, Publishing, Satellite, Sports, Music, Games, I mean, Social, wow. You run the gamut. >> It's exciting times. >> Pretty big role, yeah, I'll say you've got exciting times. With so much going on in your space, and of course this pandemic is really, you know, hit the communications industry in so many different ways. Some tailwinds, some headwinds, and it's just crazy out there. What are you seeing and what are you guys doing to support clients? >> Well, first and importantly, our thoughts go out to everyone. As we're all dealing with this around the world. I have the opportunity to work with clients, in every geography, around the globe and each and everyone of them is busily dealing with how they make sure their employees are safe, how they're providing services to their customers. And, we're right there alongside them, helping them do that as well. For us in the telecommunication space, as you know, it's actually essential, it's an essential industry that's helping the world deal with this as we are all going virtual like this session we're having today. So we're working with clients to help them get their resources in place so that they can support their businesses, their network platforms, their media services in a way that they can keep the business running. Our telecommunications customers all around the globe had to get their resources and work at home environments, we work with many of them, in deploying real-time services. We also work with them in deploying call center chatbot capabilities so that they could answer questions from their customers, from other members of the community as they were coming in. So tremendous opportunity for us to help them respond to what's happening. >> It's actually quite amazing the response, when you think about telco, you think about telco infrastructure, what comes to mind is, it's hard and it's reliable, it works and all of a sudden you've got all these remote workers. The pace of the pivot has been actually quite astounding. I mean your thoughts on that. >> Yeah and it actually goes hand in glove in what way we've been preparing the industry for generally. I mean there's been this evolution that digital service providers that's been happening in the industry now for a number of years and in fact the center point of what we're doing now to help telcos virtualize and abstract those networks so that they're software based services platforms that can respond to these kinds of peak load demand issues. Not that anyone anticipated COVID, but the ability to have a platform, that can scale your business. And allow you to respond, move services where they need to be moved, be much more agile in the way you work. These are all playing in the ability to respond to it. >> Steve I want to ask you about something you said in a recent article in Forbes, you said, winners in the 5G and edge era will be those who embrace a hybrid multicloud approach." Well, first of all, I want to ask you, I mean five G can't get here fast enough, but still you're kind of predicting, my inference a five g and edge era coming this decade, like I said it can't happen soon enough. What are your thoughts on this coming era? >> In my view there's three fundamental things that are happening simultaneously. So first obviously, five g is emerging. It's showing up now. Most service providers around the world are starting to already deploy their private five g capabilities. We're seeing it show up in evolution form, in consumer marketplace. So five g is here and will continue to scale. The second key transformation that's happening is the telco network itself is becoming a hybrid cloud platform. What I mean by that is that just as when video abstracted as a service and it could be deployed over the top service platforms, enabling things like our interview that we're doing today to happen, that got loaded on top of now open IP platform. The same exact thing is happening in the network domain where the network services, data services, voice service, multimedia services are being put on an open platform architecture that allows you to respond. And then the third key thing that's happening in the market is this edge phenomenon. And this is all about the ability to move workloads, to move services out closer to where things happen and take advantage of those key five g features like ultra low latency, increased bandwidth, and of course the ability to slice the network down to dedicated to a specific application. This opens up a whole new set of services. >> Yeah I mean as I was sort of eluding to before, the reliability of telco networks has been the hallmark of that infrastructure. As we move to this more open sort of standardized environments Steve, I would imagine that one of the technical challenges is maintaining that level of reliability and predictability while at the same time being able to support remote workers, etc low latency workloads. Can you comment on that? >> Yeah so a couple of key points there. One is as you may know, IBM acquired Red Hat a little over a year ago. Red Hat has created an open platform for the telco's to modernize their core infrastructure. And the power of that is we can see is this enormous upstream community now and that community can help accelerate the rate pace of transformation is happening, bring innovation in. That's really powerful. The second is, once we go through an open platform, software based platform, we can infuse automation. Extreme levels of automation, and AI for intelligent predictive capability. And now think about the network becoming a living, breathing, responding platform where it's based on software. So we can deploy services and functions and we can automate those services and functions. That level of intelligence serves as the ability to then get out these services. >> So Steve, definitely we had I think a decent understanding of the Red Hat and the strategy around Open Shift and the container approach, hybrid multicloud. What I didn't realize is that there was specificity around the telco industry. Can you talk more specifically about what IBM is doing in that regard? >> Yeah, it's a great question. Red Hat has a very significant presence in 120 telcos around the globe. And so not only they're Red Hat Linux which is kind of a defacto standard in the marketplace, but their open stack architecture now we're moving after the Open Shift architecture. And as part of that the relationship with an enormous upstream community of talent, it's building on those platforms. And so we're able to really infuse into Red Hat the kind of requirements that are necessary for their software platform to serve as the platform, the open platform for the telcos as we go forward. It has been an incredible synergy. I think of it as kind of two puzzle pieces that fit together incredibly well. At IBM we've had the long standing relationship with all the service providers around the world and helping them transform their business and now with Red Hat we have the opportunity to really integrate what we're doing with automation and AI standpoint with all the power of that Red Hat Platform. >> So where do you see the edge fitting into this hybrid multicloud approach? Is it sort of an extension of cloud? Is it a new cloud? We know we are envisioning this seamless experience between on-prem, cloud, multicloud, and edge. >> Yeah I think of it in a kind of simple venn diagram where you have kind of this virtualized open software based telco network on one side and you have the edge on the other and in the middle you have this kind of combination where you do edge in partnership with the telco. And the idea here is that all industries are going to want to provide a next generation of insights to their customers and to their partners. The ability to move those workloads, so think about a manufacturing shop for an example. You know we've already had IoT centers, hundreds if not thousands of them. Now we can infuse video cameras and take a huge amount of data through the enhanced bandwidth of five g and bring that down to an edge platform and analyze that video data in real time, whether employees are in safe zones, maybe with COVID now even, whether or not they're taking the proper social distancing, and looking at actually everything that's coming off of that platform or manufacturing line, looking at the equipment itself and adding AI to that so that we can analyze it in real time. Edge allows us to take advantage of those five g attributes and to put it wherever that workload should run. Whether it's on the plant floor itself, in proximity to where that equipment is, or back at a central office location within the network of a telco. >> Well this is huge for the telcos because for years, I keep talking about their hardened network, but their cost per bit has been coming down. They're responsible for putting in that infrastructure, maintaining that infrastructure and then you got the over the top providers laying out content growing like crazy, has really disrupted that industry. This is going to change the way in which telcos are able to compete, is it not? >> It's a great point. Yes. If you think about the last generation of evolution you know when we went to four g and smartphones came out, think about the Apple App Store as an example. Folks started not going to the telcos anymore for those services, they went to that OTP capability to get those applications. Now think about about in this edge world as we essentially are creating platforms for innovation for businesses and all industries. And they can now innovate on those platforms and create incredible value in their business and the telcos now can add beyond just the transport capability, but artificial intelligence, automation, they can expose certain data capabilities, they can make those applications smarter, understanding proximity data, that could be applied to things like logistics or pricing or as I said operations like in manufacturing. So a tremendous new set of value in fact most analysts say a trillion dollars in value is going to be created here. And the opportunity I see is that the open network platform becomes a way for the service providers to not only capture value for themselves, but to accelerate the value for businesses in all industries. >> Well I think we're going to see some huge moves in the chess board. More M and A. I mean it's going to be a very exciting time and of course five g's at the heart of it, but Steve I wonder if you could give us IBM's point of view in terms of where we are with five g, I mean sometimes I see it pop up on my phone and I'm like come on, that's not real five g quite yet. We heard recently that Apple might somewhat delay it's new phones that maybe five g's involved in that, but it's going to take some time for that infrastructure to roll out but what's your point of view on sort of that time frame and the business impact that we can all expect? >> Yeah I know, it's a good question. And we will see it roll out over time. Some things are starting to roll out now. Think about stadiums or other venues where you have a manufacturing shop floor as an example, oil rig off the coast. I mean you have environments where you could create five g infrastructure in a private model today and then of course consumer models are going to roll out as cities continue to get deployed by the various service providers. But I think the important point which is what we've spoken about so far, is that as we start to create this platform capability around the edge and we start to transform those network themself to coincide telcos platform, we can start to capture those values today in a four g world and as five g comes along you just essentially evolve into the capabilities that that brings especially with regards to latency and bandwidth. Now some applications where slicing will be really important. Think about a medical operation where a doctor is consulting on a surgery in a remote location. Now if I know for sure that bandwidths going to be there, that doctor no longer has to be in the same location as that robotic equipment as an example. So the ability to have dedicated bandwidth which will come with five g, will be an important attribute that gets added. >> I mean the possibilities are really mind boggling. You mentioned stadiums. Now of course hopefully at some point we'll be able to go to football games again. But I mean the last decade was all about how big can you make the screen in the stadium versus this screen. This is where a lot of the action is going to be now. Replays and just the whole experience, ordering goods and services. And then of course hardened environments like oil rigs etc so really we're not just going to return to the last decade we've been talking about that a lot here. Go ahead please. >> An example that I like to mention just 'cause it kind of brings us all together, think about first responders. Now we're in the midst of the COVID thing but soon in California again unfortunately we'll probably get close to fire season. Think in a five g edge world what that might look like. So the minute that fire starts in some location in California, drones are in the air sending video down to an edge platform that's being analyzed to understand where that fire's going and importantly everything that's in it's path and how to best battle it. Sensors coming in from IoT centers in the area feeding in data. Our weather company app feeding in real time weather statistics, wind path, temperature changes, that are going to influence the way that that that fire performs. And now with the announcement we made Samsung just recently with our edge platform, the ability to have those first responders have sensors on them, Samsung devices that are measuring their vital signs and with the predictive models that are being built, we'll know whether that first responders' in distress or about to be in distress. The ability to scale our inbound communications capability digitally so that chat bots can handle this enormous increase in the amount of folks calling in to get information on what's happening in real time. And of course with the AI in that edge platform. Moving all of that physical equipment, the asset, humans, the first responders, in the optimal position at all times in order to get that fire out as soon as possible. I think it's a good example of how we can see these capabilities come together in a five g and edge world and allow us to get enormous value, saving lives, saving property, responding to an incident like that. >> I mean that's a great example of how you're going to put innovation into action 'cause you touched all points. Imagine the amount of data now that's being created and that example that you just gave, I mean it's just going exponential. Applying artificial intelligence, machine intelligence, and then the other phrase you used is real time. And we're talking about real time or near real time decisions actually being made potentially often times by the machines or in combination with humans so that these actions can be taken of course it's all occurring on an infrastructure that's sort of an expanding definition of cloud, not just on prem, not just hybrid, not just multicloud but now the edge. It's really going to be an exciting 10 years. >> You got it exactly right. And importantly, using that example, once that fire's put out, that edge platform can wind back down to where it was before the incident occurred. But all the intelligence that was gained during that, can be taken to the next incident has it happens. So this agility becomes really powerful 'cause we get the cumulative learning that happens in these models going forward. >> Amazing. So where can people go to get some more information on sort of IBM's edge approach? >> If you go to IBM.com, you'll see information on both on IBM edge solutions that we're putting forward into marketplace and what we're doing specifically with the telecommunication service providers to help them transform their networks to take advantage of this incredible opportunity. >> Well Steve, thanks so much for your time. Really great discussion. I appreciate you comin on and sharing with our community. >> My pleasure. Thank you. >> And thank you everybody. This is theCUBE's continuous coverage of IBM Think 2020, the Digital Event Experience. My name's Dave Vellante. Keep it right there, I'll be right back right after this short break. (relaxing music)

>> Announcer: From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto and Boston connecting with thought leaders all around the world. This is a CUBE conversation. >> Hello everybody, welcome to this special CUBE conversation. My name is Dave Vellante and you're watching theCUBE. We're here with Sanjay Poonen who's the COO of VMware and a good friend of theCUBE. Sanjay great to see you. Thanks for coming on. >> Dave it's a pleasure. In these new circumstances, shelter at home and remote working. I hope you and your family are doing well. >> Yeah, and back at you Sanjay. Of course I saw you on Kramer Mad Money the other night. I was jealous. I said, "I need Sanjay on to get an optimism injection." You're a great leader And I think, a role model for all of us. And of course the "Go Niners" in the background really incented me to get-- I got my Red Sox cap and we have a lack of sports, but, and we miss it, But hey, we're making the best. >> Okay Red Sox is better than the Patriots. Although I love the Patriots. If i was in the east coast, especially now that Brady's gone. I guess you guys are probably ruing a little bit that Jimmy G came to us. >> I am a huge Tampa Bay fan all of a sudden. I be honest with you. Tom Brady can become a Yankee and I would root for them. I tell you that's how much I love the guy. But anyway, I'm really excited to have you on. It's obviously as you mentioned, these times are tough, but we're making the best do and it's great to see you. You are a huge optimist, but I want to ask you, I want to start with Narendra Modi just announced, basically a lockdown for 21 days. 1.3 billion people in your native country. I wonder if you could give us some, some thoughts on that. >> I'm, my parents live half their time in Bangalore and half here. They happen to be right now in the US, and they're doing well. My dad's 80 and my mom's 77. I go to India a lot. I spent about 18 years of my life there, and the last 32 odd years here and I still go there a lot. Have a lots friends and my family there. And , it's I'm glad that the situation is kind of , as best as they can serve it. It's weird, I was watching some of the social media photos of Bangalore. I tweeted this out last night. The roads look so clean and beautiful. I mean, it looks like 40 years ago when I was growing up. When I would take a bicycle to school. I mean Bangalore's one of the most beautiful cities in India, very green and you can kind of see it all again. And I think, as I've been watching some of the satellite photos of the various big cities to just watch sort of Mother Nature. Obviously, we're in a tough time and, I open my empathy and thoughts and prayers go to every family that's affected by this. And certainly ones who have lost loved ones, but it's sort of, I think it's neat, that we're starting to see some of the beautiful aspects of nature. Even as we deal with the tough aspects of sheltered home. And the incredible tough impacts of this pandemic across the world. >> Yeah, I think you're right. There is a silver lining as much as, our hearts go out to those that are that are suffering. You're seeing the canals in Venice run clear. As you mentioned, the nitrous oxide levels over China. what's going on in Bangalore. So, there is a little bit of light in the end of the tunnel for the environment, I hope. and at least there's an indication that we maybe, need to be more sensitized to this. Okay, let's get into it. I want to ask you, so last week in our breaking analysis. We worked with a data company called ETR down in New York City. They do constant surveys of CIO's. I want to read you something that they came out with just on Monday and get your reaction. Basically, their annual growth and IT spend they're saying, is showing a slight decline for 2020. As a significant number of organizations plan to cut and/or delay IT expenditures due to the coronavirus. Though the current climate may suggest worse many organizations are accelerating spending for 2020 as they ramp up their work-from-home infrastructure. These organizations are offsetting what would otherwise be a notable decline in global IT spend versus last year. Now we've gone from the 4% consensus at the beginning of the year. ETR brought it down to zero percent and then just on Monday, they went to slight negative. But, what's not been reported widely is the somewhat offsetting factor of work-from-home infrastructure. VMware obviously plays there. So I wonder if you could comment on what you're seeing. >> Yeah, Dave, I think , we'll have to see . I'm not an economic pundit. So we're going to have to see what the, IT landscape looks like in the overall sense and we'll probably play off GDP. Certain industries: travel, hospitality, I mean, it's brutal for them. I mean, and I hope that, what I really hope, that's going to happen to that industry, especially there's an infusion through recovery type of bill. Is that no real big company goes under, and goes bankrupt. I mean kind of the situation in 2008. I mean, people wondering what will happen to the Airlines. Boeing, hospital-- these are ic-- some of them like Boeing are iconic brands of the United States and of the world. There's only two real companies that make planes. So we've got to make sure that those industries stay afloat and stay good for the health of the world. Health of the US economy, jobs, and so on. That's always one end. Listen, health and safety of our employees always comes first. Before we even think about that. I always tell people the profits of VMware will wait if you are not well, if your loved ones not well, if your going to take care of people, take care of that first. We will be fine. This too shall pass. But if you're healthy, let's turn our attention because we're not going to just sit at home and play games. We're going to serve our customers. How do we do that? A lot of our customers are adjusting to this new normal. As a result, they have to either order devices with a laptop, screens, things of those kinds, to allow a work-from-home environment to be as close to productive as they work environment. So I expect that there will be a surge in the, sort of, end points that people need. I will have to see how Dell and HP and Lenovo, but I expect that they will probably see some surge in their laptops. As people, kind of, want those in the home and hopefully their supply chains are able to respond. But then with every one of those endpoints and screens that we need now for these types of organizations. You need to manage them, end point management. Often, you need virtual desktops on them. You need to end point security and then in some cases you will probably need, if it's a remote office, branch office, and into the home office, network security and app acceleration. So those Solutions, end point management, Workspace ONE, inclusive of a full-fledged virtual desktop capability That's our product Workspace ONE. Endpoint Securities, Carbon Black and the Network Platform NSX being software-defined was relegated for things like, load balancers and SDWAN capabilities and it's kind of almost feels like good, that we got those solutions, the last three, four years through acquisitions, in many cases. I mean, of course, Airwatch and Nicira were six, seven, eight years ago. But even SD-WAN, we acquired Velocloud three and a half years ago, Carbon Black just four months ago, and Avi in the last year. Those are all parts of that kind of portfolio now, and I feel we were able to, as customers come to us we're not going in ambulance-chasing. But as customers come to us and say, "What do you have as a work-at-home "for business continuity?" We're able to offer them a solution. So we did a webcast earlier this week. Where we talked about, we're calling it work in home with business continuity. It's led with our EUC offerings Workspace ONE. Accompanied by Carbon Black to secure that, and then underneath it, will obviously be the cloud foundation and our Network capabilities of NSX. >> Yeah, so I want to double down on that because it was not, the survey results, showed it was not just collaboration tools. Like Zoom and WebEx and gotomeeting Etc. It was, as you're pointing out, it was other infrastructure that was of VPN's. It was Network bandwidth. It was virtualization, security because they need to secure that work-from-home infrastructure. So a lot of sort of, ancillary activity. It was surprising to me, when I saw the data, that 21% of the CIO's that we surveyed, said that they actually plan on spending more in 2020 because of these factors. And so now we're tracking that daily. And the sentiment changes daily. I showed some other data that showed the CIO sentiment through March. Every day of the survey it dropped. Okay, so it's prudent to be cautious. But nonetheless, people to your point aren't just sitting on their hands. They're not standing still. They're moving to support this new work-from-home normal. >> Yeah, I mean listen, I forgot to say that, Yeah, we are using the video collaboration tools. Zoom a lot. We use Slack. We'll use Teams. So we are, those are accompanied. We were actually one of the first customers to use Zoom. I'm a big fan of my friend Eric Yuan and what they're doing there in modernizing, making it available on a mobile device. Just really fast. They've been very responsive and they reciprocated by using Workspace ONE there. We've been doing ads joined to VMware and zoom in the market for the last several years. So we're a big fan of their technology. So far be it from me to proclaim that the only thing you need here's VMware. There's a lot of other things on the stack. I think the best way, Dave, for us that we've sought to do this is again, I'm very sensitive to not ambulance-chase, which is, kind of go after this. To do it authentically, and the way that authentically is to be, I think Satya Nadella put this pretty well in an interview he did yesterday. Be a first responder to the first responder. A digital first responder, if I could. So when the, our biggest customers are hospital and school and universities and retailers and pharmacies. These are some of our biggest customers. They are looking, in some cases, actually hire more people to serve their communities and customers. And every one of them, as they , hire new people and so and so on, will I just naturally coming to us and when they come to us, serve them. And it's been really gratifying Dave. If I could read you the emails I've been getting the last few days. I got one from a very prominent City, the United States, the mayor's office, the CTO, just thanking us and our people. For being available who are being careful not to, we're being very sensitive to the pricing. To making sure customers don't feel like, in any way, that we're looking at the economics of it will always come just serve your customer. I got an email yesterday from a very large pharmacy. Routinely we were talking to folks in the, in the healthcare industry. University, a president of a school. In fact, Southern New Hampshire University, who I mentioned Jim Cramer. Sent me a note saying, "hey, we're really grateful you even mentioned our name." and I'm not doing this because, Southern New Hampshire University is doing an incredible job of moving a lot of their platform to online to help tens of thousands. And they were one of the early customers to adopt virtual desktops, and the cloud desktops, and the services. So, as we call. So in any of these use cases, I just tell our employees, "Be authentic. "First off take care of your families. "It's really important to take care of your own health and safety. But once you've done that, be authentic in serving our customers." That's what VR has always done. From the days of dying green, to bombers, to Pat, and all of us here now. Take care of our customers and we'll be fine. >> Yeah, and I perfectly understand your sensitivity to that notion of ambulance-chasing and I'm by no means trying to bait you into doing that. But I would stress, the industry needs you and the tech it-- many in the tech industry, like VMware, have very strong balance sheets. They're extremely viable companies and we as a community, as an industry, need companies like VMware to step up, be flexible on pricing, and terms, and payment, and things like that nature. Which it sounds like you're doing. Because the heroes that are on the front lines, they're fighting a battle every day, every hour, every minute and they need infrastructure to be able to work remotely with the stay-at-home mandates. >> I think that's right. And listen, let me talk a little bit of one of the things you talked about. Which is financing and we moved a lot of our business to increasingly, to the cloud. And SaaS and subscription services are a lot more radical than offer license and maintenance. We make that choice available to customers, in many cases we lead with cloud-first solutions. And then we also have financing services from our partners like Dell financial services that really allow a more gradual, radibal payment. Do people want financing? And , I think if there are other scenarios. Jim asked me on his show, "What will you do if one of your companies go bankrupt?" I don't know, that's an unprecedented, we didn't have, we had obviously, the financial crisis. I wasn't here at VMware during the dot-com blow up where companies just went bankrupt in 2000. I was at Informatica at the time. So, I'm sure we will see some unprecedented-- but I will tell you, we have a very fortunate to be profitable, have a good balance sheet. Whatever scenario, if we take care of our customers, I mean, we have been very fortunate to be one of the highest NPS, Net promoter scorer, companies in the industry. And , I've been reaching out to many of our top customers. Just a courtesy, without any agenda other than, we're just checking in. A friend in need is a friend indeed. It's a line that I remembered. And just reach out your customers. Hey listen. Checking in. No, other than can we help you, if there's anything and thank you, especially for ones who are retailers, pharmacies, hospitals, first responders. Thank them for what they're doing to serve many of their people. Especially people in retail. Think about the people who have to go into warehouses to service us, to deliver the stuff that comes to our home. I mean, these people are potentially at risk, but they do it. Put on masks. Braving health situations. That often need the paycheck. We're very grateful for that, and our hope is that this world situation, listen, I mentioned it on on TV as a kind of a little bit of a traffic jam. I love to ski and when I go off and to Tahoe, I tell my family, "I don't know how long it's going to take." with check up on Waze or Google Maps and usually takes four hours, no traffic. Every now and then it'll take five, six, seven. Worst case eight. I had some situation, never happen to me but some of my friends would just got stuck there and had to sleep in their car. But it's pretty much the case, you will eventually get there. I was talking to my dad, who is 80, and he's doing well. And he said, this feels a little bit like World War Two because you're kind of, in many places there. They had a bunker, shelter. Not just shelter in place, but bunker shelter in that time. But that lasted, whatever five, six years. I don't think this is going to last five, six years. It may be five, six months. It might be a whole year. I don't know. I can guarantee it's not going to be six years. So it won't be as bad as World War two. It certainly won't be as bad as the Spanish Flu. Which took 39 people and two percent of the world. Including five percent of my country, India in the 1918 to 1920 period, a hundred years ago. So we will get through this. I like, we shall overcome. I'm not going to sing it for you. It's one of my favorite Louis Armstrong songs, but find ways by which you encourage, uplift people. Making sure, it is tough, it is very tough times and we have to make sure that we get through this. That jobs are preserved as best as we can because that's the part I'm really, really concerned about. The loss of jobs and how we're going to recover as US economy, but we will make it through this. >> Yeah, and I want to sort of second what you're saying. That look, I know there are a lot of people at home that going a little bit stir crazy and this, the maybe a little bit of depression setting in. But to your point, we have to be empathic for those that are suffering. The elderly, who are in intensive care and also those frontline workers. And then I love your optimism. We will get through this. This is not the Spanish Flu. We have, it's a different world, a different technology world. Our focus, like many other small businesses is, we obviously want to survive. We want to maintain our full employment. We want to serve our customers and we, as you, believe that that is the recipe for getting through this. And so, I love the optimism. >> And listen, and we can help be a part of my the moment you texted me and said, "Hey, can I be in your show?" If it helps you drive, whatever you need, sponsorship revenue, advertising. I'm here and the same thing for all of our friends who have to adjust the way in which the wo-- we want to be there to help them. And I've chosen as best as I can, in terms of how I can support my family, the sort of five, five of us at home now. All fighting over bandwidth, the three kids, and my wife, and I. To be positive with them, to be in my social media presence, as best as possible. Every day to be positive in what I tweet out to the world And point people to a hope of what's going to come. I don't know how long this is going to last. But I can tell you. I mean, just the fact that you and I are talking over video interview. High fidelity, reasonably high fidelity, high bandwidth. The ability to connect. I mean it is a whole lot better than a lot of what happened in World War 2 or the Spanish flu. And I hope at the end of it, some of us, some of this will forever change our life. I hope for for example in a lot of our profession. We have to travel to visit customers. And now that I'm building some of these relationships virtually. I hope that maybe my travel percentage will drop. It's actually good for the environment, good for my family life. But if we can lower that percentage, still get things done through Zoom calls, and Workspace ONE, and things of those kinds, that would be awesome. So that's how I think about the way in which I'm adapting my life. And then I set certain personal goals. This year, for example, we're expanding a lot of our focus in security. We have a billion dollar security business and we're looking to grow that NSX, Common Black, Workspace ONE, and accompanying tools and I made it a goal to try and meet at all my sales teams. A thousand C-ISOs. I mean off I know a lot of CIO's in the 25 years, I've had, maybe five, six thousand of them in the world. And blessed to build that relationship over the years of my SAP and VMware experience, but I don't know. I mean, I knew probably 50 or 100. Maybe a few hundred CISO's. And now that we have a portfolio it's relevant to grant them and I think very compelling across network security and End Point security. We own the companies with such a strong portfolio in both those areas. I'm reaching out to them and I'm happy to tell you, I connected, I've got the names of 1,000 of the top CISO's in the Fortune 1000, Global 2000, and connecting with many of them through LinkedIn and other mixers. I hope I talked to many of them through the course of the year. And many of them will be virtual conversations. Again, just to talk to them about being a trusted advisor to us. Seeing if we can help them. And then of course, there will be a product pitch for NSX and Carbon Black and how we're different from whoever it is, Palo Alto and F5 and Netscaler and the SD line players or semantic McAfee Crowdstrike. We're differentiated so I want to certainly earn some of the business. But these are ways in which you adjust to a virtual kind of economy. Where I'm not having to physically go and meet them. >> Yeah, and we share your optimism and those CISO's are, they're heroes, superheroes on the front line. I'll tell ya a quick aside. So John Furrier and I, we're in Barcelona. When really, the coronavirus came to our heightened awareness and John looked at me and said, "Dave we've been doing digital for 10 years. "We have to take all of the software that we've developed, "all these assets and help our customers pivot." So we share that optimism and we're actually lucky to be able to have the studios and be able to have these conversations with you guys. So again, we share that, that optimism. I want to ask you, just on guidance. A lot of companies have come out and said we're not giving guidance anymore. I didn't see anything relative to VMware. Have you guys announced anything on guidance in terms of how you're going to communicate? Where are you at with that? >> No, I think we're just, I mean listen, we take this very carefully because of reg FD and the regulations of public company. So we just allow the normal quarterly ins. And of outside of that, if our CFO decides they may. But right now we're just continuing business as usual. We're in the middle of our, kind of, whatever, middle of our quarter. Quarter ends April. So work hard do the best we can in all the regions, be available for all of our teams. Pat, myself, and others we're, to the extent that we're healthy and we're doing well, but thank God, is reach out to CISO's and CIO's and CTO's and CEOs and help them. And I believe people will spend money. The questions we have to go over. And I think the stronger will survive. The companies with better balance sheet and unfortunately, some of the weaker companies won't. And I think quite frankly, if you do your job well. I don't mean this in any negative sense. The stronger companies will take share in these environments. I was watching a segment for John Chambers. He has been through a number of different, when I know him, so an I have, I've talked to him about some of the stuff. He will tell you that he, advises is a lot of his companies now. From the experiences he saw in 2008, 2001, in many of the crisis and supply chain issues. This is a time where leadership counts. The strong get stronger. Never waste a good crisis, as Winston Churchill said. And as you do that, the strong will come strong because you figure out ways by which, if you're going to make changes that were planned for one or two years from now. Maybe a good time to make them is now. And as you do that you communicate a vision for where you're going. Very clearly to your employees. Again incessantly over and over again. They, hopefully, are able to repeat it in their own words in a simple fashion, and then you get all of your employees in our case 30,000 plus employees of VMware lined up. So one of the things that we've been doing a lot of these days is communicate, communicate, communicate, internally. I've talked a lot about our communication with customer. But inside, our employees, we do calls with our top leaders over Zoom. Calls, intimate calls, and many, often we're adjusting to where I'll say a few words. I have a mandatory every two week goal with all of my senior most leaders. I'll speak for about five minutes and then for the next 25 minutes, the top 12, 15 of them I listen. To things, I want all of them to speak up. There's nobody who should stay silent, because I want to hear what's going on in that corner of the world. >> But fantastic Sanjay. Well, I mean, Boeing, I heard this morning's going to get some support from the government. And strategically that's very important for our country. Congress finally passed, looks like they're passing that bill, and support which is awesome. It's been, especially for all these small businesses that are struggling and want to maintain full employment. I heard Steve Mnuchin the other day saying, "Look, we're talking about two months of payroll "for people if they agree to keep people employed. "or hire them back." I mean the Fed. people say, oh the FED is out of arrows. The Feds, not out of arrows. I mean, I'm not an economist either. But the Fed. has a lot of bullets in their gun, as they say. So Sanjay, thanks so much. You're an awesome leader and really an inspirational executive and a good friend so thank you so much for coming on theCUBE. >> Dave, always a pleasure. Please say hi to all of my friends, your co-anchors, and the staff at CUBE. Thank them for all their hard work. It's a pleasure to talk to you this morning. I wish you, your family, and your friends and all of our community, stay safe and be well. >> Thank you Sanjay and thank you for watching everybody. This is Dave Vellante for the cube and we'll see you next time. (soft music)

>>from Las Vegas. It's the Q covering a ws re invent 2019. Brought to you by Amazon Web service is and in along with its ecosystem partners. >>Hey, welcome back to the Cubes. Live coverage in Las Vegas for eight of his re invent 2019 R Seventh year out of the eight years I've had it, we've seen the rise and dominance of Amazon continued to thunder away at the competition span. Their lead printing money stew minimum in my coz right here next to me. I'm John, very extracting from noise. Our next guest, steam A lady who's the presidency of Aviatrix Cube alone was on Tuesdays part of our editorial segment. Who his company or one of his employees going to term. You take the tea at a cloud native cloud naive, which has been going viral. Welcome back to the Cube. Thank you. All right, so let's get into the aviatrix value. Probably wanna get digging more, but first explain what you guys do and what market you're targeting. >>So we do. I would say cloud native, not naive. Cloud native networking that embraces and extends the basic constructs the native constructs of the public clouds, not just a W s, but all the public clouds and builds a multi cloud architecture, networking in security architecture for enterprise customers that that delivers the simplicity and the automation that people want from cloud. That's why they want a cloud native but yet brings along the functionality, the performance and the visibility and control that they had on on Prem. So that kind of taste great less filling, not one of the other. Both. I want the simplicity and automation of anything that expect from the cloud. But I need that enterprise functionality that control the security, the performance that he used to have on Prem because I wasn't doing that for my own health. I need to bring that along. That's what we do. >>What main problem you solving for customers? What's the big pain point? So what are you enabling? >>The big pain point is the center of gravity, as Andy Joshi's talked is moving from on Prem into the cloud. So it's so it's no longer. I mean, data centers aren't going away. They're going to still be there. But the investment architecture is in the cloud and you're going to see the clouds start moving out with their their announcements. You see everything that outposts and on everything else they're doing is taking the architecture moving out. The problem we solve is A W S says to every enterprise customer. We will give you anything and everything you ever need from networking and security. You don't need anybody else. And so so what ends up happening is as enterprises. So for an SNB, that's great. If you've got a few, VP sees life is good. Use all the native stuff from AWS. What happens, though, is your Qualcomm or your USA or your new name it big 50 year old 100 year old enterprise. You have complex networking and security demands. You go to the cloud. There's so many limitations of what the native constructs of all the clouds could do. You start realizing, okay, I need Maur. And so we're very complimentary to AWS. We sit on top of that. We leverage those basic constructs. We program those contracts and then we extend that functionality to deliver the functionality that they need. >>That's awesome, stupid when I want to dig into that, but I want to first get to the hard news you guys have news here at reinvent? What's the big news story that you guys were putting out there? Two >>announcements and actually goes perfectly with the way the world's going and also with the embrace and extend of a W s. So the first is we introduced what we call aviatrix Cloud win. So they announced Transit Gateway Network manager with accelerated VPN leveraging global accelerator as just a way to bring in basically embraced branch offices into the cloud. So if you think of SD win in that market, if your if your center of gravity is on Prem in a data center on pls is horrible, you needed a better way to do branch office connectivity. SC wait is fantastic, and it's a great, optimal way to get back to that data center. Well, as the center of gravity moves into the cloud, their data centers in the cloud. I just need to get better optimal access performance in late and see into a W s because that's the center of gravity. So AWS with the global accelerator allows youto get on one of their 250 pops around the world as quickly as possible. So if you're in Singapore, get on that pop VPN in, and then you go across the global backbone of AWS all the way out to that BBC in Virginia. It's beautiful, because guess what? That is the most optimal way to get there instead of vpc to vpc across the Internet right on the AWS backbone. Well, Steve, it's fascinating stuff because if you look at the traditional network, it was I knew the knobs and how I need to get everything to work. But the big challenge for most network people is most of the network that they're responsible for. They can't touch it. That's right. They can adjust it. So are we recreating some of the environment? Or how? Because clubs supposed to be simple? Well, that's easy, but it needs to meet the enterprise requirements. Help that network administrator there there, sometimes going away to the cloud administrator. You still networkings tough and therefore, how do we make that? That's part of what we do is that's the other thing that we solve is people think they go to the cloud and they think, Oh, go build. I don't want to build anything. I want to consume. It's still difficult. We come in and abstract away a lot of the details for them such that we deliver that service on the cloud win. The other thing that we do again, back to embracing and extending. What do you What? What router is out in that branch office 87% of the time. Sisko, right? I mean, course it is. So the S D wearing guys will go in and say, We'll rip that box out and put in another little box like a 20,000 branches. I'm not ripping out anything, right? That's very painful. So with our cloud win, we can orchestrate and reconfigure the Sisko. All of our engineers came from Cisco. So any Cisco IOS router out there, we can orchestrate and reconfigure to set up the VPN automatically through our orchestrator so that when you don't rip and replace out that Roger that's existing there. So now AWS loves it because that's the last piece of friction. They want no friction, and it's always in that physical to cloud transition There. All the complexity is, and by enabling their network manager and an accelerated VPN and global accelerated to use the existing Cisco. Roger, that's out there. No one else does that Cisco doesn't do that. We're the only ones. So when you embrace a native construct, what's the native construct in the branch office? B, G P. And Cisco IOS. We embrace it and then and then enhance it and make it better. >>Are you only on Cisco about June 1st? >>Wait. Now it's just go. Francisco's 87% >>of every bridge your software abstraction software across. And you you basically change the game with SD. Win a little bit, you modernize >>It s t win is great for the old way of doing networking. When you look for the next five years, you're still gonna need SD went. It's a bubble market. It's like when optimization us riverbed. If when optimization is a great market, it was for a while, just like SC win. But that's kind of the old way. But Maur Maura, what you're gonna find is what Where my branches need to connect to is in the cloud. And if you do that, you don't need esti win. You just need better connectivity. Tate of us provide. >>I gotta ask you the question about the cloud naive because there's a lot of old school I t people who still think there's food in the data center. Still, action there on box makers are all in the vendor side supplying boxes. They're still want to supply boxes, right? So as those old guys and gals do their thing, they're stuck in their ways, right? That's friction. Total gas. He talks about the transformation as new leadership. What has to change in that old world? What should those C I ose and CEOs tell their their staff? And what should the staff do themselves? >>I actually think the customers air there. I think the vendors are that the vendors are the one that aren't They're the ones who are cloud naive. They actually don't even know what they don't know. The customers are the ones they say, Oh, no, And this is the whole shift that Josh was talking about business transformation. They understand. And they are bringing along all their people and they have some people that are probably further along and experts in AWS. But they absolutely number one requirement for them is we've got to bring along the people they don't want to leave them behind and say, You get to work on the old data center and these guys are gonna work in Cloud. They're bringing them all in. >>Talk about your customers who's buying from you? What's it look like? What kind of scope do you have? A customer base? >>It's funny. It's It's It's all the old networking guys. It is not. It's not developers signing that. It's it's It's old. I t. Now they don't want to do it the old way. They want to do it the new cloud way. But these guys understand BDP. They understand networking, and they're in charge now. And so it's like because it's gotten so serious for enterprises. This the networking team, the security team it is. It is I t that is running this, so that's a big company. Small companies, we get him. All right, Steve, I want to make sure I understand this because when I hear cod Native, I really think a lot about that application. Mind shift. Yeah, Micro Service is our protector, and that's on it for sure. Networking. Unfortunately, for the most part, it's nothing. Bites are going through the pipes, and I haven't really thought about that. So you know, it's not just because it's cloud but cloud native and therefore things like your container and doctors Dr. Rise thing. This is what this world is built for that your solution is solving for yes. So I'll give you a perfect example. So So we help. We actually helped a dhobi us come out with T g. W. Last year, Cheri, I found, was on stage with Day Brown and the networking keynote launching T g w whenever Great. Of course, before that, you were just doing bpc the vpc peering It was a horrible mess. So you need a transit architecture. So they came out with T g w Fantastic. So we embrace and extend T g w. So the problem is, they come out with T g. W. But guess what a Doris doesn't do. Don't propagate routes to spoke VP sees. Okay, so how did the routes get propagated? Well, you have a person. They need manual. If there's an update on the on from you manually update the routes. Well, that might work. If you've got three. VP sees again. You're an SNB. But I'm an enterprise. I got 3000 vpc That is not gonna work. So cloud native we are We are not just sitting on top of AWS. We are in the matrix we are in. We understand natively. So our central control, it will actually like we're not. There's no b g p running at that layer, but our central control it will push routes an update, routing tables everywhere. It needs to be learned. The routes from Amman Prem push it where it needs to be, and then everything automatically works. Yeah, it reminds me, you know, we had more than a decade ago. We went from all the north south traffic to the East west, propagated by VM. Yes, is an order of magnitude 8 12 and know that this cloud environment people can't do it. There's not enough people. I don't have enough man hours because the machine learning So here's devices need to be here. Another thing that's happened in guys is there is there is 100% of people in there in the universe that that that no cloud, that number's growing, but there's a fixed set. Everybody's going after all those people. You've got the big clock. They're all hiring like crazy. The vendors are probably hiring. You've got customers they're stealing from each other. It's very difficult to keep a staff. And so they look and they say I probably could figure this out, but there's no way I'm going to be able to operationalize it. There's just zero chance I could do that And there's just so much change. And honestly, they say it's a full time job just keeping up with what Amazon is announcing their get implementing. And so that's where they look and they come to Austin. They say there's zero chance that I can deploy networking architecturally without aviatrix >>on the network and guys because you and I always say the neighboring guys have the keys to the kingdom. They always have. I mean, people have tried to move the center of power away from the networking guys, But now, as the cloud gets the center of gravity, some of the power networking guys got to step up their game. But they don't want to rip and replace anything is as you went out earlier. It's complex, even pull one or two out. So the concern that I might have put the question to you is Steve. Great, great energy. But I'm really nervous that these routes are not gonna be. There's gonna be some coherency issues around updating routes because that's my number one concern. How do you guys solve that? >>Well, the one thing I've always seen, who's the worst? When? When? When most things happen, Who's the culprit? Human, right? It's always a human. Does something wrong. And so I would much rather trust some sort of automated software because at least if you program it correctly, it's going to do the right thing so way have not had. I mean, it's so >>you know what I'm sure is no issue there. >>Yeah, no, there's no issue, I mean, and what we do see, sometimes our people say, because there's a lot of people that are that are very smart, they get into the cloud and they are do it yourselfers and they love to go build, and they love the complexity, and they want all that they feel they feel like this job security and what we sometimes have to do is say you. But think about day to think about handing off the operations. You might get hit by a bus, and then your company is screwed, and you gotta almost get them enlightened to realize that they should be working on higher level things other than low level things. I'd say that's something that we kind of educate. People, >>houses Amazon there, one cloud of many 34 maybe one or two jazz. He said to me. You know, mostly primaries will be picked, probably Amazon. But in some cases, as you will be a primary less than that eight arrests. So multi cloud is the word that it was Something about an Amazon sees me loosening up a bit what it is, so they recognize it. What is multi cloud? I mean, what is really going on? I think >>I think if you're a small company, absolutely pick one cloud like for sure, right, like that doesn't make sense to go multiple clouds in your small medium business. If you're not that, if your needs are not that complex, pick one cloud right? And if it's a Toby asses the later stay with them. If it just happens to be, well, I got a bunch of credits and azure. Okay, maybe do them. I think. To date most people are picking eight of us There, there, there, there, The killer here. But when you talk to the enterprise, the real enterprise right that are just now moving into the cloud, they're all multi cloud Just had one today. Super large chip company down L a San Diego area. Guess what. Use it. All three clouds. I asked him why. Well, because we started in AWS. We got some things there we've got. We've got a bunch of stuff that runs and an azure with offers 3 65 other things that they dio and Google for ml and that kind of stuff. It runs better their enterprises. They're gonna pick where the workload run best, and they're big. And so they're gonna look and they're gonna They're gonna They're gonna elevate up building architecture that works across all of them. I don't think multi cloud means I'm gonna move this workload from here to here. That's never gonna happen. Maybe in 20 years. But I doubt it. It's just that the workloads heir destined, they run better on that and they're gonna focus on >>different park loads for the cloud that picked the right guy for the right workload. >>Yeah, and I'm so big and I require different companies and I get acquired. And and and And you got to think of the on Prem data centers eyes another cloud that's a multi. And then I go into Europe, and I have GDP are and I need another cloud. I mean, they're gonna have 45 clouds, and I don't think it's gonna be 20% across all >>that could be a power lot. They'll be more than 13 closets. Be specialty clouds a riff on this all the time. Well, Steve, I want to thank you for coming on the Q. Appreciate it. Give a quick blood for the company. How many employees you're gonna hire, some of your objectives >>growing fast. We've got over 400 customers and you ask one of our customers we've got customers spending millions of dollars a year with us all the way down the customer spending $5 a month. Why? Because of the wonderful thing of cloud they can consume. We've got 400 customers all over the world and even know who probably 300 of them are right. Why they go on the market place they go like this, they download. Maybe they come on drift. Ask one question. They launch and they spent $5 a month. I don't even know what they're doing. And eventually we watched their Amar are it just grows and grows and grows and grows. And eventually like, Whoa, Now you're spending 50 grand a year. We should talk. So it's kind of like how some companies used open source that ends up being our funnel a low friction zero friction High velocity Landon expand model. And then we have the traditional enterprises that you'd imagine every so everything in between >>your hiring, >>we're hiring like crazy, hiring a whole bunch of sales organization around the world. We just raised $40 million Siri see a month ago and we're going for >>fresh financing. Aviatrix see Mulaney, CEO of aviatrix here on the Cuba Reinvent 2019 Stay with us for more coverage. Day three of our three days of World War coverage Two sets here, thanks to Intel for the being our headline sponsor without their supporting our mission, which is bringing you the best confident possible. We want to thank Intel on. All of our sponsors were right back with more coverage after this short break

>> live from San Francisco, celebrating 10 years of high tech coverage. It's the Cube covering Veum World 2019. Brought to you by IBM Wear and its ecosystem partners. >> Welcome back to the cubes Live coverage Of'em World 2019 in San Francisco, California We're here at Mosconi North Lobby. Two sets. Jumper of my Coast. David wanted Dave 10 years. Our 10th season of the cue coming up on our 10 year anniversary May of 2020. But this corner are 10 years of the Cube. Our next guest is Sanjay Putting Chief Operating Officer Of'em where who took the time out of his busy schedule to help us do a commemorative look back. Thanks for coming to our studio. Hello, John. That was great. Fans of yours was really regulations on the 10 year mark with the, um well, we really appreciate your partnership. We really appreciate one. Things we love doing is covering as we call that thing. David, I coined the term tech athletes, you know, kind of the whole joke of ESPN effect that we've been called and they're really tech athlete is just someone who's a strong in tech always fighting for that extra inch. Always putting in the hard work discipline, smart, competitive. You get all that above. Plus, you interviewed athletes today on state real athletes. Real athletes, Tech show. So I guess they would qualify as Tech athlete Steve Young. That's pretty funny. It was a >> great time. We've been trying to, you know, Veum World is now the first time was 2004. So it's 1/16 season here, and traditionally many of these tech conference is a really boring because it's just PowerPoint dead by power point lots of Tec Tec Tec Tec breakout sessions. And we're like, You know, last year we thought, Why don't we mix it up and have something that's inspirational education We had Malala was a huge hit. People are crying at the end of the session. Well, let's try something different this year, and we thought the combination of Steve Young and Lyndsey one would be great. Uh, you know, Listen, just like you guys prepped for these interviews, I did a lot of prep. I mean, I'm not I'm a skier, but I'm nowhere close to an avid skier that watch in the Olympics huge fan of Steve Young so that part was easy, but preparing for Lindsay was tough. There were many dynamics of that interview that I had to really think through. You want to get both of them to converse, you know, he's She's 34 he's 55. You want to get them to really feel like it's a good and I think it kind of played out well. >> You were watching videos. A great prep. Congratulations >> trying t o show. It's the culture of bringing the humanization aspect of your team about tech for good. Also, you believe in culture, too, and I don't get your thoughts on that. You recently promoted one of your person that she has a chief communications Johnstone Johnstone about stars you promote from within. This >> is the >> culture you believe it. Talk about the ethos. Jones is a rock star. We love her. She's just >> hardworking, credible, well respected. Inside VM where and when we had a opening in that area a few months ago, I remember going to the her team meeting and announcing, and the team erupted in cheers. I mean that to me tells me that somebody was well liked from within, respected within and pure level and you know the organization's support for a promotion of that kind of battlefield promotion. It's great big fan of hers, and this is obviously her first show at Vienna. Well, along with Robin, Matt, look. So we kind of both of them as the chief marketing officer, Robin and Jones >> and Robinson story. Low Crawl made her interim first, but they then she became Steve Made it Permanent way. >> Want them to both do well. They have different disciplines. Susan, uh, national does our alliances, you know, if you include my chief of staff for the six of my direct reports are women, and I'm a big believer in more women. And take why? Because I want my Sophia, who's 13 year old do not feel like the tech industry is something that is not welcome to women in tech. So, you know, we really want to see more of them. And I hope that the folks who are reporting to me in senior positions senior vice president is an example can be a role model to other women who are aspiring, say, one day I wanna be like a Jones Stone or Robin. Madam Local Susan Nash, >> John and I both have daughters, so we're passionate about this. Tech is everywhere, so virtually whatever industry they go into. But I've asked this question Sanjay of women before on the Cube. I've never asked him in. And because you have a track record of hiring women, how do you succeed in hiring women? Sometimes way have challenges because way go into our little network. Convenient. What? What's your approach? Gotta >> blow off that network and basically say First off, if that network is only male or sometimes unfortunately white male or just Indian male, which is sometimes the nature of tech I mean, if you're looking for a new position, tell the recruiters to find you something that's different. Find me, Ah woman. Find me on underrepresented minority like an African American Latino and those people exist. You just have a goal. Either build a network yourself. So you've got those people on your radar. We'll go look, and that's more work on us, says leaders. But we should be doing that work. We should be cultivating those people because the more you promote capable. First off, you have to be capable. This is not, you know, some kind of affirmative action away. We want capable people. Someone shouldn't get the job just because they're a woman just because the minority, that's not the way we work. We want capable people to do it. But if we have to go a little further to find them, we'll go do it. That's okay. They exist. So part of my desires to cultivate relationships with women and underrepresented minorities in the world that can actually in the world of tech and maintain those relationships because you never know you're not gonna hire them immediately. But at some point in time, you might need to have them on your radar. >> Sanjay, I wanna ask you a big picture question. I didn't get a chance to ask path this morning. I was at the bar last night just having a little dinner, and I was checking out Twitter. And he said that the time has never been. It's never been a greater time arm or important time to be a technologist. Now I saw that I went interesting. What does that mean? Economic impact, social impact? And I know we often say that, and I don't say this to disparage the comment. It's just to provide historical context and get a get it open discussion about what is actually achievable with tech in this era and what we actually believe. So I started to do some research and I started right down. First of all, I presume you believe that right on your >> trusty napkin at the >> bar. So there has never been a more important time to be a technologist. You know, it's your company at your league. You know, Pat, I presume you agree with it. Yeah, absolutely. I slipped it back to the 1900. Electricity, autos, airplanes, telephones. So you we, as an industry are up against some pretty major innovations. With that historical context, Do you feel as though we can have a similar greater economic and social impact? >> Let's start with economic first and social. Next time. Maybe we should do the opposite, but economic? Absolutely. All those inventions that you >> have are all being reinvented. The technology the airplanes all been joined by software telephones are all driving through, you know, five g, which is all software in the future. So tech is really reinventing every industry, including the mundane non tech industries like agriculture. If you look at what's happening. Agriculture, I ot devices are monitoring the amount of water that should go to particular plant in Brazil, or the way in which you're able to use big data to kind of figure out what's the right way to think about health care, which is becoming very much tech oriented financial service. Every industry is becoming a tech industry. People are putting tech executives on their boards because they need an advice on what is the digital transformations impact on them cybersecurity. Everyone started by this. Part of the reason we made these big moves and security, including the acquisition of carbon black, is because that's a fundamental topic. Now social, we have to really use this as a platform for good. So just the same way that you know a matchstick could help. You know, Warm house and could also tear down the house. Is fire good or bad? That's been the perennial debate since people first discovered fire technology. Is this the same way it can be used? Reboot. It could be bad in our job is leaders is to channel the good and use examples aware tech is making a bit force for good. And then listen. Some parts of it may not be tech, but just our influence in society. One thing that pains me about San Francisco's homelessness and all of the executives that a partner to help rid this wonderful city of homeless men. They have nothing to attack. It might be a lot of our philanthropy that helps solve that and those of us who have much. I mean, I grew up in a poor, uh, bringing from Bangla, India, but now I have much more than I have. Then I grew up my obligations to give back, and that may have nothing to do with Tech would have to do all with my philanthropy. Those are just principles by which I think when you live with your a happier man, happier woman, you build a happier >> society and I want to get your thoughts on common. And I asked a random set of college students, thanks to my son that the network is you said your daughter to look at the key to Pat's King Pat's commentary in The Cube here this morning that was talking about tech for good. And here's some of the comments, but I liked the part about tech for good and humanity. Tech with no purpose is meaningless tech back by purposes. More impactful is what path said then the final comments and Pat's point quality engineering backing quality purpose was great. So again, this is like this is Gen Z, not Millennials. But again, this is the purpose where it's not just window dressing on on industry. It's, you know, neutral fire. I like that argument. Fire. That's a good way Facebook weaponizing Facebook could be good or bad, right? Same thing. But the younger generation. You're new demographics that are coming into cloud. Native. Yeah, what do you think? >> No. And I think that's absolutely right. We have to build a purpose driven company that's purposes much more than just being the world's best softer infrastructure company or being the most profit. We have to obviously deliver results to our shareholders. But I think if you look at the Milton Friedman quote, you know, paper that was written that said, the sole purpose of a company is just making profits, and every business school student is made to read that I >> think even he >> would probably agree that listen today While that's important, the modern company has to also have a appropriate good that they are focused on, you know, with social good or not. And I don't think it's a trade off being able to have a purpose driven culture that makes an impact on society and being profitable. >> And a pointed out yesterday on our intro analysis, the old term was You guys go Oh, yeah, Michael Dell and PAD shareholder value. They point out that stakeholder value, because now the stakeholder Employees and society. So congratulations could keep keep keep it going on the millennial generation. >> Just like your son and our kids want a purpose driven company. They want to know that the company that working for is having an impact. Um, not just making an impression. You do that. It shows like, but having an impact. >> And fire is the most popular icon on instagram. Is that right? Yeah, I know that fire is good. Like your fire. Your hot I don't know. I guess. Whatever. Um fire. Come comment. There was good Sanjay now on business front. Okay, again, A lot of inflection points happen over 10 years. We look back at some of this era, the Abel's relationship would you know about. But they've also brought up a nuance which we talked about on the intro air Watch. You were part of that acquisition again. Pig part of it. So what Nasiriyah did for the networking STD see movement that shaped VM. Whereas it is today your acquisition that you were involved and also shaping the end user computing was also kind of come together with the cloud Natives. >> How is >> this coming to market? I mean, you could get with >> my comparison with carbon black there watch was out of the building. Carbon black is not considered. >> Let's talk about it openly. And we talked about it some of the earnings because we got that question. Listen, I was very fortunate. Bless to work on the revitalization of end user computing that was Turbo charged to the acquisition of a watch. At that time was the biggest acquisition we did on both Nice era and air watch put us into court new markets, networking and enterprise mobility of what we call not additional work space. And they've been so successful thanks to know not just me. It was a team of village that made those successful. There's a lot of parallels what we're doing. Carbon, black and security. As we looked at the security industry, we feel it's broken. I alluded to this, but if I could replay just 30 seconds of what I said on some very important for your viewers to know this if I went to my doctor, my mom's a doctor and I asked her how Doe I get well, and she proposed 5000 tablets to me. Okay, it would take me at 30 seconds of pop to eat a tablet a couple of weeks to eat 5000 tablets. That's not how you stay healthy. And the analogy is 5000 metres and security all saying that they're important fact. They use similar words to the health care industry viruses. I mean, you know, you and what do you do instead, to stay healthy, you have a good diet. You eat your vegetables or fruit. Your proteins drink water. So part of a diet is making security intrinsic to the platform. So the more that we could make security intrinsic to the platform, we avoid the bloatware of agents, the number of different consuls, all of this pleasure of tools that led to this morass. And what happens at the end of that is you about these point vendors, Okay, Who get gobbled up by hardware companies that's happening spattered my hardware companies and sold to private equity companies. What happens? The talent they all leave, we look at the landscape is that's ripe for disruption, much the same way we saw things with their watch. And, you know, we had only companies focusing VD I and we revitalize and innovative that space. So what we're gonna do in securities make it intrinsic and take a modern cloud security company carbon black, and make that part of our endpoint Security and Security Analytics strategy? Yes, they're one of two companies that focus in the space. And when we did air watch, they were number three. Good was number one. Mobile line was number two and that which was number three and the embers hands. We got number one. The perception in this space is common. Lacks number two and crowdstrike number one. That's okay, you know, that might be placed with multiple vendors, but that's the state of it today, and we're not going point against Crowdstrike. Our competition's not just an endpoint security point to a were reshaping the entire security industry, and we believe with the integration that we have planned, like that product is really good. I would say just a cz good upper hand in some areas ahead of common black, not even counting the things we're gonna integrate with it. It's just that they didn't have the gold market muscle. I mean, the sales and marketing of that company was not as further ahead that >> we >> change Of'em where we've got an incredible distribution will bundle that also with the Dell distribution, and that can change. And it doesn't take long for that to take a lot of customers here. One copy black. So that's the way in which we were old. >> A lot of growth there. >> Yeah, plenty of >> opportunity to follow up on that because you've obviously looked at a lot of companies and crowdstrike. I mean, huge valuation compared to what you guys paid for carbon black. I mean, >> I'm a buyer. I mean, if I'm a buyer, I liked what we paid. >> Well, I had some color to it. Just when you line up the Was it really go to market. I mean some functions. Maybe not that there >> was a >> few product gaps, but it's not very nominal. But when you add what we announced in a road map app, defensive alderman management, the integration of works based one this category is gonna be reshaped very quickly. Nobody, I mean, the place. We're probably gonna compete more semantic and McAfee because most of those companies that kind of decaying assets, you know, they've gotten acquired by the companies and they're not innovating. So I'd say the bulk of the market will be eating up the leftover fossils of those sort of companies as as companies decided they want to invest in legacy. Technology is a more modern, but I think the differentiation from Crowdstrike very clear is we integrate these, these technology and the V's fear. Let me give an example. With that defense, we can make that that workload security agent list. Nobody can do that. Nobody, And that's apt defense with carbon black huge innovation. I described on stage workspace one plus carbon black is like peanut butter and jelly management. Security should go together. Nobody could do that as good as us. Okay, what we do inside NSX. So those four areas that I outlined in our plans with carbon black pending the close of the transaction into V sphere Agent Lis with workspace one unified with NSX integrated and into secure state, You know, in the cloud security area we take that and then send it through the V m. Where the devil and other ecosystem channels like you No idea. Security operative CDW You know, I think Dimension data, all the security savvy partners here. I think the distribution and the innovation of any of'em were takes over long term across strike may have a very legitimate place, but our strategy is very different. We're not going point tool against 0.0.2 wish reshaping the security industry. Yeah, What platform? >> You're not done building that platform. My obvious question is the other other assets inside of Arcee and secureworks that you'd like to get your hands on. >> I mean, listen, at this point in time, we are good. I mean, it's the same thing like asking me when we acquired air watching. Nice Here. Are you gonna do more networking and mobility? Yeah, but we're right now. We got enough to Digest in due course you. For five years later, we did acquire Arkin for network Analytics. We acquired fellow Cloud for SD when we're cloud recently, Avi. So the approach we take a hammer to innovations first. You know, if you're gonna have an anchor acquisition, make sure it's got critical mass. I mean, buying a small start up with only 35 people 10 people doesn't really work for us. So we got 1100 people would come back, we're gonna build on it. But let's build, build, build, build, partner and then acquire. So we will partner a lot with a lot of players. That compliment competition will build a lot around this. >> And years from now, we need >> add another tuck in acquisition. But we feel we get a lot in this acquisition from both endpoint security and Security Analytics. Okay, it's too early to say how much more we will need and when we will need that. But, you know, our goal would be Let's go plot away. I have a billion dollar business and then take it from there. >> One more security question, if I may say so. I'm not trying to pit you against your friends and AWS. But there are some cleared areas where your counter poise >> Stevens just runs on eight of us comin back. >> That part about a cloud that helps your class ass business. I like the acquisition. But Steven Schmidt, it reinforced the cloud security conference, said, You know, this narrative in the industry that security is broken is not the right one. Now, by the way, agree with this. Security's a do over pat kill singer. And we talked about that for five years ago. Um, but then in eight of you says the shared security model, when you talk to the practitioners like, yeah, they they cover, that's three and compute. But we have the the real work to d'oh! So help me square that circle. >> Yeah, I think if aws bills Security Service is that our intrinsic to their platform and they open up a prize, we should leverage it. But I don't think aws is gonna build workload security for azure compute or for Gogol compute. That's against the embers or into the sphere. Like after finishing third accordion. And they're like, That's not a goal. You go do it via more So from my perspective. Come back to hydrogen. 80. If there's a workload security problem that's going to require security at the kernel of the hyper visor E C to azure compute containers. Google Compute. >> Who's gonna do >> that? Jammer? Hopefully, hopefully better than because we understand the so workloads. Okay, now go to the client site. There's Windows endpoints. There's Mac. There's Lennox. Who should do it? We've been doing that for a while on the client side and added with workspace one. So I think if you believe there is a Switzerland case for security, just like there was a Switzerland case for management endpoint management I described in Point management in Point Security going together like peanut butter and jelly, Whatever your favorite analogy is, if we do that well, we will prove to the market just like we did with their watch An endpoint management. There is a new way of doing endpoint security. Dan has been done ever before. Okay, none >> of these >> guys let me give an example. I've worked at Semantic 15 years ago. I know a lot about the space. None of these guys built a really strategic partnership with the laptop vendors. Okay, Del was not partnering strategically on their laptops with semantic micro. Why? Because if this wasn't a priority, then they were, you know, and a key part of what we're doing here is gonna be able to do end point management. And in point security and partner Adult, they announced unified workspace integrated into the silicon of Dell laptops. Okay, we can add endpoint security that capability next. Why not? I mean, if you could do management security. So, you know, we think that workspace one, we'll get standing toe work space security with the combination of workspace one and security moving and carbon black. >> Sanjay, we talked about this on our little preview and delivery. Done us. We don't need to go into it. The Amazon relationship cleared the way for the strategy in stock price since October 2016 up. But >> one of the >> things I remember from that announcement that I heard from the field sales folks that that were salespeople for VM wear as well as customers, was finally clarity around. What the hell? We're doing the cloud. So I bring up the go to market In the business side, the business results are still strong. Doing great. You guys doing a great job? >> How do you >> keep your field troops motivated? I know Michael Dell says these are all in a strategy line. So when we do these acquisitions, you >> had a lot >> of new stuff coming in. I mean, what's how do you keep him trained? Motivated constantly simplifying whenever >> you get complex because you add into your portfolio, you go back and simplify, simplify, simplify, make it Sesame Street simple. So we go back to that any cloud, any app, any device diagram, if you would, which had security on the side. And we say Now, let's tell you looking this diagram how the new moves that we've made, whether it's pivotal and what we're announcing with tanz ou in the container layer that's in that any Apple air carbon black on the security there. But the core strategy of the emer stays the same. So the any cloud strategy now with the relevance now what, what eight of us, Who's our first and preferred partner? But if you watched on stage, Freddie Mac was incredible. Story. Off moving 600 absent of the N word cloud made of us Fred and Tim Snyder talked about that very eloquently. The deputy CTO. They're ratty Murthy. CTO off Gap basically goes out and says, Listen, I got 800 APS. I'm gonna invest a lot on premise, and when I go to the cloud, I'm actually going to Azure. >> Thanks for joining you. Keep winning. Keep motivated through winning >> and you articulate a strategy that constantly tells people Listen. It's their choice of how they run in the data center in the cloud. It's their choice, and we basically on top of all of those in the any cloud AP world. That's how we play on the same with the device and the >> security. A lot of great things having Sanjay. Thanks >> for you know what a cricket fan I am. Congratulations. India won by 318 goals. Is that >> what they call girls run against the West Indies? I think you >> should stay on and be a 40 niner fan for when you get Tom baseball get Tom Brady's a keynote will know will be in good Wasn't Steve Young and today love so inspirational and we just love them? Thank you for coming on the Cube. 10 years. Congratulations. Any cute moments you can point out >> all of them. I mean, I think when I first came to, I was Who's the d? I said ASAP, like these guys, John and Dave, and I was like, Man, they're authentic people. What I like about you is your authentic real good questions. When I came first year, you groomed me a lot of their watch like, Hey, this could be a big hat. No cattle. What you gonna do? And you made me accountable. You grilled me on eight of us. You're grilling me right now on cloud native and modern, absent security, which is good. You keep us accountable. Hopefully, every you're that we come to you, we want to show as a team that we're making progress and then were credible back with you. That's the way we roll. >> Sanjay. Thanks for coming. Appreciate. Okay, we're live here. Stay with us for more of this short break from San Francisco v emerald 2019