>> [Introduction Narrator] Live from Washington, D.C., it's theCUBE, covering AWS Public Sector Summit brought to you by Amazon Web Services. >> Welcome back everyone, to theCUBE's live coverage of the AWS Public Sector Summit here in Washington D.C. I'm your host, Rebecca Knight, along with my co-host, John Furrier. We are welcoming to the program Shannon Kellogg. He is the V.P. Public Policy Americas at AWS. Thanks so much for coming on the show. >> Thanks for having me. It's great to be back on theCUBE. >> Yes, I know. A CUBE veteran. >> Yeah, I feel like a CUBE alumni at this point. >> You are indeed, Shannon. >> Well, this is your show, I mean this is a policies front and center, here at AWS. You got Andy Jassy's Fireside Chat. >> Indeed. >> Kind of his first foray into revealing some of his political thoughts and his mission around what Amazon could do to change it. Pretty interesting time. >> Yeah, it was. I thought it was a really interesting Fireside Chat today with Andy and Teresa. You know, Andy talked about, of course, a lot of what's going on at AWS and some of the big picture challenges that our country faces, so it was great to hear him. >> Well, so that's what I want to get into right now, is that we are having this Summit with the backdrop of an emerging tech backlash, where not only are the regulators sharpening their focus on big tech, and a lot of political candidates saying they we want to break up these companies, the public becoming increasingly wary of big tech's power over us. Give us a little bit of a peek into your mindset and how AWS is thinking about all of these issues. >> Sure, well so I've been at Amazon for about seven years, and so I've seen the growth and evolution of the company firsthand. I've focused during that time frame mostly on working with our Amazon web services business, or AWS, which of course is all around us today. And you know we really, when I started working seven years ago here in Washington, D.C., a lot of people didn't even understand what cloud computing was. I remember one of my first conversations was going into a very senior policy maker on the Hill, and explaining to him what cloud was, and it was very hard to kind of understand during those days this transformation that had already begun if you're a policy maker. And there were a lot of questions back then around security and sort of how the cloud computing would fit within the security discussion. And there was even during that time frame a lot of national discussions around cyber security. And now that conversation has completely changed. More people know what cloud computing is, and now policy makers more and more are seeing cloud computing as part of the answer to help organizations and even governments strengthen their cyber security posture. And Andy talked a little bit about that today at the Fireside Chat. So the conversation has changed in areas like that, even though there are these broader, macro conversations going on as well. >> Well, Shannon, I want to get your thoughts, because you have a history in public policy and policy with tech, which is good. More than ever now, one of the things that we heard from Andy was the acceleration of change happening now. The ability to solve big problems now. New kinds of conversations and approaches are being invented to existing ways. So I got to ask you the question of how policy's modernizing with this modernization cloud trend and where it's remaining the same, so in some cases, the game is still the same, just kind of same wine, new bottle kind of thing, or is there areas that got to be changed. So, for instance, is there an approach that can still be evergreen today that's historically been working for government and private enterprises over the years, and where is it different where it needs to really change. >> Yeah. >> You've got to tease us and walk us through where that policy game is evolving to. >> Well when I started Amazon seven years ago, and started having conversations with customers and policy makers, like I was saying, there were still a lot of people even at the agency level who were experimenting very early on with cloud, and trying to figure out how they were going to use commercial cloud computing, right? And I would classify them as first movers. And so the conversation with them back then was really understanding what they were trying to do by moving a few applications to cloud. What kind of services they were trying to offer and new innovations that they were trying to offer. And so, the policy work that we did around that was much different than what we're doing today, because now you have so many organizations that are moving to cloud and you see this big push, not just in the U.S. but around the world toward IT modernization as an example. And if you're going to modernize your systems within government, then you actually ultimately have to do many different kinds of policy changes, unlike seven or eight years ago, right? And some of those include modernizing or updating your procurement policies and acquisition policies. Some of those include how you're budgeting and funding those initiatives, because there's a shift from capital expenditure into operational expenditure. Some of those policy conversations also involve updating your cyber security policies and your data protection policies. And so all of that is happening today, and we're seeing the federal government, Congress here wanting- >> Net new changes. Net new changes. >> Yeah, net new changes, and adapting, those policies and frameworks to how organizations are moving faster and faster to commercial cloud. >> Inside the policy beltway and even Silicon Valley, you've seen a lot of things that has worked and hasn't worked in the past. What do you think works for policy? If you look back histories, we've seen in the short history of technology and computer industries it's not that old, it's still young. We still have the internet, rise of the web, mobile computing, obviously spectrum and all these connectivity issues. What has worked that you think is relevant today that we should double down on and what should be taken away and reinvented? >> Well first of all, I think it's really important for, not just our company, and me as a leader at Amazon on public policy, but quite frankly, the entire industry, all of my peers, we all need to listen to what customers are trying to do to achieve their missions. And so when you think about whether it's NASA and the new initiatives that they have, to not only go back to the moon, but beyond to Mars, or you talk to health and human services or the Veterans Administration or some of our National Security agencies, they all have really, really important missions, so understanding what they are and how you can be supportive is very important. >> Well I mean, but there's all, I get that, that the customer's always right, listen to the customer, that's Andy's line, Amazon's line. But there's some potentially conflicting things, I'll just throw an example out there. Open government, open data creates more observability of data, hence more creativity, that's a theme that's getting a lot of traction in circles. And then customers want security and privacy. >> Right, so lots of unintended consequences to make all that. >> So as this new ground for a real, first-generational problem needs to be solved, you can't just pick one old way. Like you open it up, you're going to expose the data. >> Right. But I'm glad you mentioned open data, because it's actually one of the areas over the last few years that we've actually gotten some really important things done. There was federal legislation here in the U.S. that passed just, I think it was about 18 months ago, the first open data, comprehensive open data legislation. And we're seeing also other governments internationally kind of move in this direction as well. And I was part of those conversations, and other colleagues in my company were part of those conversations, took a lot of education. And took a lot of outreach to policy makers to get them to understand the benefits of open data and how technology could enable those benefits, which by the way, include getting more data sets so people can actually innovate on those data sets and build new businesses, which is a benefit and so- >> Keith Alexander's business, for instance, is all about visibility into threats, as one example. >> Right. But back to your question, what I found that was very helpful to policy makers is to give them a very baseline explanation of what open data was and how technology like cloud computing was enabling more access to that data or protections would need to be in place, but also how organizations and individuals and entrepreneurs were going to use that data, so having that conversation and educating. And I would say, John, that's sort of the new way of lobbying, the new conversations is to actually go in and try to understand, not only what's on a customer's mind, but what is on a policy maker's mind in terms of what do they really care about, and what are they trying to do to support whatever mission or to support whatever big initiative that matters to their district. >> So education is really the blocking and tackling tenet. You keep on pounding the education. Doing things in the open is interesting. You mentioned open data. We're in a world now in digital where everything's out in the open. You can't hide in the shadows. And so I wrote a story about Jedi, which through my sources, I essentially was referring to Oracle having this smear campaign against Amazon, which was supported by many sources. No one wanted to go on the record, so no other journalists reported it. But this is happening out in the open. These are old tactics of lobbying. >> They're old tactics, yeah. >> There's a sea change going on where open, turning the lights on, is more reality for policy lobbyists than ever before. Can you comment on your reaction to that? >> Sure. All anyone has to do, to look at some of the tactics that are being used by companies like Oracle, and we generally look at them as the legacy players, the legacy IT companies that are trying to protect their particular business model and their margins and the way that they're doing business, versus doing what I said earlier, which was listen to your customers, listen where they want to go, and try to align to that, right? Oracle is doing the exact opposite. It doesn't appear that they are listening to their customers at all. But putting Oracle aside as the only company doing this, there are other companies that are doing it as well, and if you look at the history of lobbying over the last 20 years, and you look at companies like Oracle or IBM, some of those players, they have done these kind of things previously, right? I mean, look at the original anti-trust case against Microsoft, or look at what Oracle was doing with Google and the EU on Fair Search. I mean, these are the same old tactics that these companies have used again and again and again, >> Beck and I were talking with the general Keith Alexander on this one point, where misinformation is so elevated now, and with machine learning and AI and openness, you can't do that anymore. There's no place to hide, so the transparency become a big part of processes. >> Right. >> Your reaction to how that's going to change, how policy is shaped, the participants and the actors involved, and potentially accelerated outcomes. Your thoughts on that. >> In terms of what the Department of Defense is trying to do, I think there's been a lot of transparency in that process, and there's been a lot of media coverage and light shown on what's going on there, so I don't probably need to go into those details. You know, I think it's really important for policy makers to always go out and get several perspectives. There are a lot of organizations out there that like policy makers and our general experience are trying to support the mission of these agencies that are trying to transform. And so if you looked at what the Department of Defense is trying to do or if you looked at what the intelligence community has already undergone several years of transformation with commercial cloud and emerging technologies, these are really important missions that policy makers want to support. >> And public policy- >> And you see that again and again and again. And other organizations. National Security think tanks, third party organizations and associations. They want to support that, too. So I would look to those voices versus listening to some of the same old tired IT legacy voices of the past. >> How do I know which entities are tainted or not tainted, because as someone who's not a big D.C. guy or tech guy, we got in through the cloud, and we're seeing all this stuff that's kind of, you see bad behavior and it's out in the open. Wow, I can't believe they're doing that. So the transparency is good, I get that, but how do I know- >> Transparency and learning from history. Look back and read about some of the tactics that have been used previously. I mean this is reported. >> So is there an organization out there that's like we're a think tank for the greater good of society. How do I know that they're not funded by someone? I mean, is there ways to detect- >> Various >> someone's reputation? Is there a working- >> Well there are organizations that are set up just to basically attack either other companies or another audience, and so those are generally known as astroturfing like organizations. >> I've seen those Google fair search, like they're really not a fair search, they're trying- >> And you can usually, if you look under the hood a little bit, you can usually figure out who those are. Not just those of us in the industry who have seen this playbook used again and again and again, by companies like Oracle and IBM, but also policy makers, if they just go out and talk to people they hear different perspectives, they're going to be able to figure out pretty quickly what is an astroturfing organization. Because they use the same old tactics that they've used for many years. >> I want to pick up on something that Andy Jassy was talking about during his Fireside Chat, and then he's talking about the culture of Amazon, which is the culture that tolerates failure, that allows people to go out and pursue these high-risk ideas which could be career-ending in other organizations. I want to hear what your thoughts are about the public sector, and I know the public sector is vast and not monolithic, but how would you describe the culture that you're seeing, the agencies you're working with, also the state and locals, the educational institutions, what are you seeing? >> Yeah, you bet. Well I think it's actually a really critical point in question, because we're seeing, at really every level of government that we work at, we're seeing people who are trying to be creative and innovate and offer new ways of services to citizens or to other constituencies that they serve, but we're also seeing cultural challenges, where you may have this particular group that is trying to come up with a new way to meet the mission, but then you have this other group over here, and they've always managed the data center, they've always been able to hug their box, their iron box, and see the blinking lights and get close to that, and it's hard sometimes for people who have done something for a certain amount of time in a certain way to necessarily embrace a new way of doing things. >> Change is hard. >> For a couple of reasons. Change is hard, but also sometimes because of the, the fact is, if you look at really any level of government, there are always going to be IT failures, right? And there have been some doozies in the past, here at the federal level, as well as at the state and local level. And I would say consistently we've heard from government leaders who are trying to be first movers who are trying to be transformers, that sometimes they are tepid because of the failures of the past. And so then it gets them to step back and maybe go over to this group and do things the way they've always done them, versus take that risk. And what we need to do as citizens and as in our case, industry, and as a company like Amazon that is so customer-focused, we need to go out there and help them be creative, innovative, and have a voice. And that goes back to John's question about how policy has changed. That's the work I want to do. How do you help people who are really change agents who are trying to do the right thing for their constituents, do the right thing for their citizens, do the right thing for the National Security mission of the United States. Do the right thing for the war fighter who is out there executing the mission of the day. How do you help them achieve their goals and to be able to move forward and transform what they're doing. >> Well you got tail winds with the cloud, Andy pointed it out, we've been talking about it, but I think one thing that's key is, as you guys get the policy gurus together, as you lead the younger generation to shape these new territories, it's a - >> [ Shannon Kellogg] Thank you for calling me younger, John. >> Yeah, you're looking good, by the way. But you've been around the block, you've seen a few waves, and you've seen what works and what doesn't work, and when more than ever, younger majors are going to come in, whether they're from science, or different disciplines are going to be, you have to come and bring that interdisciplinary skill to really solve some of these world problems, I mean Andy's laid out a few. >> That's right. That's right. >> It's a critical... These are opportunities now that can be solved. >> Yeah, and by the way, that trend that you're pointing to is something that we're seeing not just domestically here in the U.S., but internationally. And we're seeing a lot of governments set up some kind of innovation units within government, so they bring in younger generation, but also entrepreneurs, folks that have been out in industry, creating and failing, and creating again and innovating, and bringing them in, and really trying to help them transform their missions. We're seeing that in so many different places now. >> Well, we're going to... you need to keep in touch, and check in on your progress and track the accountability of the industry. We've been really passionate about that, so thanks for sharing your vision and perspective. >> You bet. Thanks for having me on theCUBE again. It's really great to be back and to talk to you as always. >> It's been a pleasure. >> Thank you. >> I'm Rebecca Knight for John Furrier. Stay tuned for more of theCUBE's live coverage of the AWS Public Sector Summit. Stay tuned. (upbeat music)