>> Narrator: theCUBE's live coverage is made possible by funding from Dell Technologies. Creating technologies that drive human progress. (upbeat music) >> Hey, welcome back to the Fira in Barcelona. My name is Dave Vellante. I'm here with David Nicholson, day four of MWC '23. Show's winding down a little bit, but it's still pretty packed here. Lot of innovation, planes, trains, automobiles, and we're talking 5G all week, private networks, connected breweries. It's super exciting. Really happy to have Warren Jackson here as the Edge Gateway Product Technologist at Dell Technologies, and Scott Waller, the CTO of the 5G Open Innovation Lab. Folks, welcome to theCUBE. >> Good to be here. >> Really interesting stories that we're going to talk about. Let's start, Scott, with you, what is the Open Innovation Lab? >> So it was hatched three years ago. Ideated about a bunch of guys from Microsoft who ran startup ventures program, started the developers program over at Microsoft, if you're familiar with MSDN. And they came three years ago and said, how does CSPs working with someone like T-Mobile who's in our backyard, I'm from Seattle. How do they monetize the edge? You need a developer ecosystem of applications and use cases. That's always been the thing. The carriers are building the networks, but where's the ecosystem of startups? So we built a startup ecosystem that is sponsored by partners, Dell being one sponsor, Intel, Microsoft, VMware, Aspirant, you name it. The enterprise folks who are also in the connectivity business. And with that, we're not like a Y Combinator or a Techstars where it's investment first and it's all about funding. It's all about getting introductions from a startup who might have a VR or AI type of application or observability for 5G slicing, and bring that in front of the Microsoft's of the world, or the Intel's and the Dell's of the world that they might not have the capabilities to do it because they're still a small little startup with an MVP. So we really incubate. We're the connectors and build a network. We've had 101 startups over the last three years. They've raised over a billion dollars. And it's really valuable to our partners like T-Mobile and Dell, et cetera, where we're bringing in folks like Expedo and GenXComm and Firecell. Start up private companies that are around here they were cohorts from our program in the past. >> That's awesome because I've often, I mean, I've seen Dell get into this business and I'm like, wow, they've done a really good job of finding these guys. I wonder what the pipeline is. >> We're trying to create the pipeline for the entire industry, whether it's 5G on the edge for the CSPs, or it's for private enterprise networks. >> Warren, what's this cool little thing you got here? >> Yeah, so this is very unique in the Dell portfolio. So when people think of Dell, they think of servers laptops, et cetera. But what this does is it's designed to be deployed at the edge in harsh environments and it allows customers to do analytics, data collection at the edge. And what's unique about it is it's got an extended temperature range. There's no fan in this and there's lots of ports on it for data ingestion. So this is a smaller box Edge Gateway 3200. This is the product that we're using in the brewery. And then we have a bigger brother of this, the Edge Gateway 5200. So the value of it, you can scale depending on what your edge compute requirements are at the edge. >> So tell us about the brewery story. And you covered it, I know you were in the Dell booth, but it's basically an analog brewery. They're taking measurements and temperatures and then writing it down and then entering it in and somebody from your company saw it and said, "We can help you with this problem." Explain the story. >> Yeah, so Scott and I did a walkthrough of the brewery back in November timeframe. >> It's in Framingham, Mass. >> Framingham, Mass, correct. And basically, we talked to him, and we said, what keeps you guys up at night? What's a problem that we can solve? Very simple, a kind of a lower budget, didn't have a lot money to spend on it, but what problem can we solve that will realize great benefit for you? So we looked at their fermentation process, which was completely analog. Somebody was walking around with a clipboard looking at analog gauges. And what we did is we digitized that process. So what this did for them rather than being completely reactive, and by the time they realized there was something going wrong with the fermentation process, it's too late. A batch of scrap. This allowed them to be proactive. So anytime, anywhere on the tablet or a phone, they can see if that fermentation process is going out of range and do something about it before the batch gets scrapped. >> Okay. Amazing. And Scott, you got a picture of this workflow here? >> Yeah, actually this is the final product. >> Explain that. >> As Warren mentioned, the data is actually residing in the industrial side of the network So we wanted to keep the IT/OT separation, which is critical on the factory floor. And so all the data is brought in from the sensors via digital connection once it's converted and into the edge gateway. Then there's a snapshot of it using Telit deviceWISE, their dashboarding application, that is decoding all the digital readings, putting them in a nice dashboard. And then when we gave them, we realized another problem was they're using cheap little Chromebooks that they spill beer on once a week and throw them out. That's why they bought the cheap ones 'cause they go through them so fast. So we got a Dell Latitude Rugged notebook. This is a brand new tablet, but they have the dashboarding software. So no matter if they're out there on the floor, but because the data resides there on the factory they have access to be able to change the parameters. This one's in the maturation cycle. This one's in the crashing cycle where they're bringing the temperature back down, stopping the fermentation process, getting it ready to go to the canning side of the house. >> And they're doing all that from this dashboard. >> They're doing all from the dashboard. They also have a giant screen that we put up there that in the floor instead of walking a hundred yards back behind a whole bunch of machinery equipment from a safety perspective, now they just look up on the screen and go, "Oh, that's red. That's out of range." They're actually doing a bunch of cleaning and a bunch of other things right now, too. So this is real time from Boston. >> Dave: Oh okay. >> Scott: This is actually real time from Boston. >> I'm no hop master, but I'm looking at these things flashing at me and I'm thinking something's wrong with my beer. >> We literally just lit this up last week. So we're still tweaking a few things, but they're also learning around. This is a new capability they never had. Oh, we have the ability to alert and monitor at different processes with different batches, different brews, different yeast types. Then now they're also training and learning. And we're going to turn that into eventually a product that other breweries might be able to use. >> So back to the kind of nuts and bolts of the system. The device that you have here has essentially wifi antennas on the back. >> Warren: Correct. >> Pull that up again if you would, please. >> Now I've seen this, just so people are clear, there are also paddle 5G antennas that go on the other side. >> Correct. >> That's sort of the connection from the 5G network that then gets transmogrified, technical term guys, into wifi so the devices that are physically connected to the brew vats, don't know what they're called. >> Fermentation tanks. >> Fermentation tanks, thank you. Those are wifi. That's a wifi signal that's going into this. Is that correct? >> Scott: No. >> No, it's not. >> It's a hard wire. >> Okay, okay. >> But, you're right. This particular gateway. >> It could be wifi if it's hard wire. >> It could be, yes. Could be any technology really. >> This particular gateway is not outfitted with 5G, but something that was very important in this application was to isolate the IT network, which is on wifi and physically connected from the OT network, which is the 5G connection. So we're sending the data directly from the gateway up to the cloud. The two partners that we worked with on this project were ifm, big sensor manufacturer that actually did the wired sensors into an industrial network called IO-Link. So they're physically wired into the gateway and then in the gateway we have a solution from our partner Telit that has deviceWISE software that actually takes the data in, runs the analytics on it, the logic, and then visualizes that data locally on those panels and also up to their cloud, which is what we're looking at. So they can look at it locally, they're in the plant and then up in the cloud on a phone or a tablet, whatever, when they're at home. >> We're talking about a small business here. I don't know how many employees they have, but it's not thousands. And I love that you're talking about an IT network and an OT network. And so they wanted, it is very common when we talk about industrial internet of things use cases, but we're talking about a tiny business here. >> Warren: Correct. >> They wanted to separate those networks because of cost, because of contention. Explain why. >> Yeah, just because, I mean, they're running their ERP system, their payroll, all of their kind of the way they run their business on their IT network and you don't want to have the same traffic out on the factory floor on that network, so it was pretty important. And the other thing is we really, one of the things that we didn't want to do in this project is interrupt their production process at all. So we installed this entire system in two days. They didn't have to shut down, they didn't have to stop. We didn't have to interrupt their process at all. It was like we were invisible there and we spun the thing up and within two days, very simple, easy, but tremendous value for their business. >> Talk about new markets here. I mean, it's like any company that's analog that needs to go digital. It's like 99% of the companies on the planet. What are you guys seeing out there in terms of the types of examples beyond breweries? >> Yeah, I could talk to that. So I spent a lot of time over the last couple years running my own little IoT company and a lot of it being in agriculture. So like in Washington state, 70% of the world's hops is actually grown in Washington state. It's my hometown. But in the Ag producing regions, there's lack of connectivity. So there's interest in private networks because the carriers aren't necessarily deploying it. But because we have the vast amount of hops there's a lot of IPAs, a lot of hoppy IPAs that come out of Seattle. And with that, there's a ton of craft breweries that are about the same size, some are a little larger. Anheuser-Busch and InBev and Heineken they've got great IoT platforms. They've done it. They're mass scale, they have to digitize. But the smaller shops, they don't, when we talk about IT/OT separation, they're not aware of that. They think it's just, I get local broadband and I get wifi and one hotspot inside my facility and it works. So a little bit of it was the education. I have got years in IT/OT security in my background so that education and we come forward with a solution that actually does that for them. And now they're aware of it. So now when they're asking questions of other vendors that are trying to sell them some type of solution, they're inherently aware of what should be done so they're not vulnerable to ransomware attacks, et cetera. So it's known as the Purdue Model. >> Well, what should they do? >> We came in and keep it completely separated and educated them because in the end too we'll build a design guide and a starter kit out of this that other brewers can use. Because I've toured dozens of breweries in Washington, the exact same scenario, analog gauges, analog process, very manual. And in the end, when you ask the brewer, what do they want out of this? It keeps them up at night because if the temperature goes out of range, because the chiller fails, >> They ruined. >> That's $30,000 lost in beer. That's a lot to a small business. However, it's also once they start digitizing the data and to Warren's point, it's read-only. We're not changing any of the process. We augmented on top of their existing systems. We didn't change their process. But now they have the ability to look at the data and see batch to batch consistency. Quality doesn't always mean best, it means consistency from batch to batch. Every beer from exhibit A from yesterday to two months from now of the same style of beer should be the same taste, flavor, boldness, et cetera. This is giving them the insights on it. >> It's like St. Louis Buds, when we were kids. We would buy the St. Louis Buds 'cause they tasted better than the Merrimack Buds. And then Budweiser made them all the same. >> Must be an East coast thing. >> It's an old guy thing, Dave. You weren't born yet. >> I was in high school. Yeah, I was in high school. >> We like the hops. >> We weren't 21. Do me a favor, clarify OT versus IT. It's something we talk about all the time, but not everyone's familiar with that separation. Define OT for me. >> It's really the factory floor. You got IT systems that are ERP systems, billing, you're getting your emails, stuff like that. Where the ransomware usually gets infected in. The OT side is the industrial control network. >> David: What's the 'O' stand for? >> Operation. >> David: Operation? >> Yeah, the operations side. >> 'Cause some people will think objects 'cause we think internet of things. >> The industrial operations, think of it that way. >> But in a sense those are things that are connected. >> And you think of that as they are the safety systems as well. So a machine, if someone doesn't push the stop button, you'd think if there's a lot of traffic on that network, it isn't guaranteed that that stop button actually stops that blade from coming down, someone's going to lose their arm. So it's very tied to safety, reliability, low latency. It is crafted in design that it never touches the internet inherently without having to go through a security gateway which is what we did. >> You mentioned the large companies like InBev, et cetera. You're saying they're already there. Are they not part of your target market? Or are there ways that you can help them? Is this really more of a small to mid-size company? >> For this particular solution, I think so, yeah. Because the cost to entry is low. I mean, you talk about InBev, they have millions of dollars of budgets to spend on OT. So they're completely automated from top to bottom. But these little craft brewers, which they're everywhere in the US. Vermont, Washington state, they're completely manual. A lot of these guys just started in their garage. And they just scaled up and they got a cult kind of following around their beers. One thing that we found here this week, when you talk around edge and 5G and beer, those things get people excited. In our booth we're serving beer, and all these kind of topics, it brings people together. >> And it lets the little guy compete more effectively with the big giants. >> Correct. >> And how do you do more with less as the little guy is kind of the big thing and to Warren's point, we have folks come up and say, "Great, this is for beer, but what about wine? What about the fermentation process of wine?" Same materials in the end. A vessel of some sort, maybe it's stainless steel. The clamps are the same, the sensors are the same. The parameters like temperature are key in any type of fermentation. We had someone talking about olive oil and using that. It's the same sanitary beverage style equipment. We grabbed sensors that were off the shelf and then we integrated them in and used the set of platforms that we could. How do we rapidly enable these guys at the lowest possible cost with stuff that's at the shelf. And there's four different companies in the solution. >> We were having a conversation with T-Mobile a little earlier and she mentioned the idea of this sounding scary. And this is a great example of showing that in fact, at a relatively small scale, this technology makes a lot of sense. So from that perspective, of course you can implement private 5G networks at an industrial scale with tens of millions of dollars of investment. But what about all of the other things below? And that seems to be a perfect example. >> Yeah, correct. And it's one of the things with the gateway and having flexibility the way Dell did a great job of putting really good modems in it. It had a wide spectrum range of what bands they support. So being able to say, at a larger facility, I mean, if Heineken wants to deploy something like this, oh, heck yeah, they probably could do it. And they might have a private 5G network, but let's say T-Mobile offers a private offering on their public via a slice. It's easy to connect that radio to it. You just change the sims. >> Is that how the CSPs fit here? How are they monetized? >> Yeah, correct. So one of our partners is T-Mobile and so we're working with them. We've got other telco partners that are coming on board in our lab. And so we'll do the same thing. We're going to take this back and put it in the lab and offer it up as others because the baseline building blocks or Lego blocks per se can be used in a bunch of different industries. It's really that starter point of giving folks the idea of what's possible. >> So small manufacturing, agriculture you mentioned, any other sort of use cases we should tune into? >> I think it's environmental monitoring, all of that stuff, I see it in IoT deployments all over the world. Just the simple starter kits 'cause a farmer doesn't want to get sold a solution, a platform, where he's got to hire a bunch of coders and partner with the big carriers. He just wants something that works. >> Another use case that we see a lot, a high cost in a lot of these places is the cost of energy. And a lot of companies don't know what they're spending on electricity. So a very simple energy monitoring system like that, it's a really good ROI. I'm going to spend five or $10,000 on a system like this, but I'm going to save $20,000 over a year 'cause I'm able to see, have visibility into that data. That's a lot of what this story's about, just giving visibility into the process. >> It's very cool, and like you said, it gets people excited. Is it a big market? How do you size it? Is it a big TAM? >> Yeah, so one thing that Dell brings to the table in this space is people are buying their laptops, their servers and whatnot from Dell and companies are comfortable in doing business with Dell because of our model direct to customer and whatnot. So our ability to bring a device like this to the OT space and have them have that same user experience they have with laptops and our client products in a ruggedized solution like this and bring a lot of partners to the table makes it easy for our customers to implement this across all kinds of industries. >> So we're talking to billions, tens of billions. Do we know how big this market is? What's the TAM? I mean, come on, you work for Dell. You have to do a TAM analysis. >> Yes, no, yeah. I mean, it really is in the billions. The market is huge for this one. I think we just tapped into it. We're kind of focused in on the brewery piece of it and the liquor piece of it, but the possibilities are endless. >> Yeah, that's tip of the spear. Guys, great story. >> It's scalable. I think the biggest thing, just my final feedback is working and partnering with Dell is we got something as small as this edge gateway that I can run a Packet Core on and run a 5G standalone node and then have one of the small little 5G radios out there. And I've got these deployed in a farm. Give the farmer an idea of what's possible, give him a unit on his tractor, and now he can do something that, we're providing connectivity he had never had before. But as we scale up, we've got the big brother to this. When we scale up from that, we got the telco size units that we can put. So it's very scalable. It's just a great suite of offerings. >> Yeah, outstanding. Guys, thanks for sharing the story. Great to have you on theCUBE. >> Good to be with you today. >> Stop by for beer later. >> You know it. All right, Dave Vellante for Dave Nicholson and the entire CUBE team, we're here live at the Fira in Barcelona MWC '23 day four. Keep it right there. (upbeat music)

(gentle music) >> Okay, welcome back to Supercloud 2, live here in Palo Alto, California for our live stage performance. Supercloud 2 is our second Supercloud event. We're going to get these out as fast as we can every couple months. It's our second one, you'll see two and three this year. I'm John Furrier, my co-host, Dave Vellante. A panel here to break down the Supercloud momentum, the wave, and the developer impact that we bringing back Vittorio Viarengo, who's a VP for Cross-Cloud Services at VMware. Sarbjeet Johal, industry influencer and Analyst at StackPayne, his company, Cube alumni and Influencer. Sarbjeet, great to see you. Vittorio, thanks for coming back. >> Nice to be here. >> My pleasure. >> Vittorio, you just gave a keynote where we unpacked the cross-cloud services, what VMware is doing, how you guys see it, not just from VMware's perspective, but VMware looking out broadly at the industry and developers came up and you were like, "Developers, developer, developers", kind of a goof on the Steve Ballmer famous meme that everyone's seen. This is a huge star, sorry, I mean a big piece of it. The developers are the canary in the coal mines. They're the ones who are being asked to code the digital transformation, which is fully business transformation and with the market the way it is right now in terms of the accelerated technology, every enterprise grade business model's changing. The technology is evolving, the builders are kind of, they want go faster. I'm saying they're stuck in a way, but that's my opinion, but there's a lot of growth. >> Yeah. >> The impact, they got to get released up and let it go. Those developers need to accelerate faster. It's been a big part of productivity, and the conversations we've had. So developer impact is huge in Supercloud. What's your, what do you guys think about this? We'll start with you, Sarbjeet. >> Yeah, actually, developers are the masons of the digital empires I call 'em, right? They lay every brick and build all these big empires. On the left side of the SDLC, or the, you know, when you look at the system operations, developer is number one cost from economic side of things, and from technology side of things, they are tech hungry people. They are developers for that reason because developer nights are long, hours are long, they forget about when to eat, you know, like, I've been a developer, I still code. So you want to keep them happy, you want to hug your developers. We always say that, right? Vittorio said that right earlier. The key is to, in this context, in the Supercloud context, is that developers don't mind mucking around with platforms or APIs or new languages, but they hate the infrastructure part. That's a fact. They don't want to muck around with servers. It's friction for them, it is like they don't want to muck around even with the VMs. So they want the programmability to the nth degree. They want to automate everything, so that's how they think and cloud is the programmable infrastructure, industrialization of infrastructure in many ways. So they are happy with where we are going, and we need more abstraction layers for some developers. By the way, I have this sort of thinking frame for last year or so, not all developers are same, right? So if you are a developer at an ISV, you behave differently. If you are a developer at a typical enterprise, you behave differently or you are forced to behave differently because you're not writing software.- >> Well, developers, developers have changed, I mean, Vittorio, you and I were talking earlier on the keynote, and this is kind of the key point is what is a developer these days? If everything is software enabled, I mean, even hardware interviews we do with Nvidia, and Amazon and other people building silicon, they all say the same thing, "It's software on a chip." So you're seeing the role of software up and down the stack and the role of the stack is changing. The old days of full stack developer, what does that even mean? I mean, the cloud is a half a stack kind of right there. So, you know, developers are certainly more agile, but cloud native, I mean VMware is epitome of operations, IT operations, and the Tan Zoo initiative, you guys started, you went after the developers to look at them, and ask them questions, "What do you need?", "How do you transform the Ops from virtualization?" Again, back to your point, so this hardware abstraction, what is software, what is cloud native? It's kind of messy equation these days. How do you guys grokel with that? >> I would argue that developers don't want the Supercloud. I dropped that up there, so, >> Dave: Why not? >> Because developers, they, once they get comfortable in AWS or Google, because they're doing some AI stuff, which is, you know, very trendy right now, or they are in IBM, any of the IPA scaler, professional developers, system developers, they love that stuff, right? Yeah, they don't, the infrastructure gets in the way, but they're just, the problem is, and I think the Supercloud should be driven by the operators because as we discussed, the operators have been left behind because they're busy with day-to-day jobs, and in most cases IT is centralized, developers are in the business units. >> John: Yeah. >> Right? So they get the mandate from the top, say, "Our bank, they're competing against". They gave teenagers or like young people the ability to do all these new things online, and Venmo and all this integration, where are we? "Oh yeah, we can do it", and then build it, and then deploy it, "Okay, we caught up." but now the operators are back in the private cloud trying to keep the backend system running and so I think the Supercloud is needed for the primarily, initially, for the operators to get in front of the developers, fit in the workflow, but lay the foundation so it is secure.- >> So, so I love this thinking because I love the rift, because the rift points to what is the target audience for the value proposition and if you're a developer, Supercloud enables you so you shouldn't have to deal with Supercloud. >> Exactly. >> What you're saying is get the operating environment or operating system done properly, whether it's architecture, building the platform, this comes back to architecture platform conversations. What is the future platform? Is it a vendor supplied or is it customer created platform? >> Dave: So developers want best to breed, is what you just said. >> Vittorio: Yeah. >> Right and operators, they, 'cause developers don't want to deal with governance, they don't want to deal with security, >> No. >> They don't want to deal with spinning up infrastructure. That's the role of the operator, but that's where Supercloud enables, to John's point, the developer, so to your question, is it a platform where the platform vendor is responsible for the architecture, or there is it an architectural standard that spans multiple clouds that has to emerge? Based on what you just presented earlier, Vittorio, you are the determinant of the architecture. It's got to be open, but you guys determine that, whereas the nirvana is, "Oh no, it's all open, and it just kind of works." >> Yeah, so first of all, let's all level set on one thing. You cannot tell developers what to do. >> Dave: Right, great >> At least great developers, right? Cannot tell them what to do. >> Dave: So that's what, that's the way I want to sort of, >> You can tell 'em what's possible. >> There's a bottle on that >> If you tell 'em what's possible, they'll test it, they'll look at it, but if you try to jam it down their throat, >> Yeah. >> Dave: You can't tell 'em how to do it, just like your point >> Let me answer your answer the question. >> Yeah, yeah. >> So I think we need to build an architect, help them build an architecture, but it cannot be proprietary, has to be built on what works in the cloud and so what works in the cloud today is Kubernetes, is you know, number of different open source project that you need to enable and then provide, use this, but when I first got exposed to Kubernetes, I said, "Hallelujah!" We had a runtime that works the same everywhere only to realize there are 12 different distributions. So that's where we come in, right? And other vendors come in to say, "Hey, no, we can make them all look the same. So you still use Kubernetes, but we give you a place to build, to set those operation policy once so that you don't create friction for the developers because that's the last thing you want to do." >> Yeah, actually, coming back to the same point, not all developers are same, right? So if you're ISV developer, you want to go to the lowest sort of level of the infrastructure and you want to shave off the milliseconds from to get that performance, right? If you're working at AWS, you are doing that. If you're working at scale at Facebook, you're doing that. At Twitter, you're doing that, but when you go to DMV and Kansas City, you're not doing that, right? So your developers are different in nature. They are given certain parameters to work with, certain sort of constraints on the budget side. They are educated at a different level as well. Like they don't go to that end of the degree of sort of automation, if you will. So you cannot have the broad stroking of developers. We are talking about a citizen developer these days. That's a extreme low, >> You mean Low-Code. >> Yeah, Low-Code, No-code, yeah, on the extreme side. On one side, that's citizen developers. On the left side is the professional developers, when you say developers, your mind goes to the professional developers, like the hardcore developers, they love the flexibility, you know, >> John: Well app, developers too, I mean. >> App developers, yeah. >> You're right a lot of, >> Sarbjeet: Infrastructure platform developers, app developers, yes. >> But there are a lot of customers, its a spectrum, you're saying. >> Yes, it's a spectrum >> There's a lot of customers don't want deal with that muck. >> Yeah. >> You know, like you said, AWS, Twitter, the sophisticated developers do, but there's a whole suite of developers out there >> Yeah >> That just want tools that are abstracted. >> Within a company, within a company. Like how I see the Supercloud is there shouldn't be anything which blocks the developers, like their view of the world, of the future. Like if you're blocked as a developer, like something comes in front of you, you are not developer anymore, believe me, (John laughing) so you'll go somewhere else >> John: First of all, I'm, >> You'll leave the company by the way. >> Dave: Yeah, you got to quit >> Yeah, you will quit, you will go where the action is, where there's no sort of blockage there. So like if you put in front of them like a huge amount of a distraction, they don't like it, so they don't, >> Well, the idea of a developer, >> Coming back to that >> Let's get into 'cause you mentioned platform. Get year in the term platform engineering now. >> Yeah. >> Platform developer. You know, I remember back in, and I think there's still a term used today, but when I graduated my computer science degree, we were called "Software engineers," right? Do people use that term "Software engineering", or is it "Software development", or they the same, are they different? >> Well, >> I think there's a, >> So, who's engineering what? Are they engineering or are they developing? Or both? Well, I think it the, you made a great point. There is a factor of, I had the, I was blessed to work with Adam Bosworth, that is the guy that created some of the abstraction layer, like Visual Basic and Microsoft Access and he had so, he made his whole career thinking about this layer, and he always talk about the professional developers, the developers that, you know, give him a user manual, maybe just go at the APIs, he'll build anything, right, from system engine, go down there, and then through obstruction, you get the more the procedural logic type of engineers, the people that used to be able to write procedural logic and visual basic and so on and so forth. I think those developers right now are a little cut out of the picture. There's some No-code, Low-Code environment that are maybe gain some traction, I caught up with Adam Bosworth two weeks ago in New York and I asked him "What's happening to this higher level developers?" and you know what he is told me, and he is always a little bit out there, so I'm going to use his thought process here. He says, "ChapGPT", I mean, they will get to a point where this high level procedural logic will be written by, >> John: Computers. >> Computers, and so we may not need as many at the high level, but we still need the engineers down there. The point is the operation needs to get in front of them >> But, wait, wait, you seen the ChatGPT meme, I dunno if it's a Dilbert thing where it's like, "Time to tic" >> Yeah, yeah, yeah, I did that >> "Time to develop the code >> Five minutes, time to decode", you know, to debug the codes like five hours. So you know, the whole equation >> Well, this ChatGPT is a hot wave, everyone's been talking about it because I think it illustrates something that's NextGen, feels NextGen, and it's just getting started so it's going to get better. I mean people are throwing stones at it, but I think it's amazing. It's the equivalent of me seeing the browser for the first time, you know, like, "Wow, this is really compelling." This is game-changing, it's not just keyword chat bots. It's like this is real, this is next level, and I think the Supercloud wave that people are getting behind points to that and I think the question of Ops and Dev comes up because I think if you limit the infrastructure opportunity for a developer, I think they're going to be handicapped. I mean that's a general, my opinion, the thesis is you give more aperture to developers, more choice, more capabilities, more good things could happen, policy, and that's why you're seeing the convergence of networking people, virtualization talent, operational talent, get into the conversation because I think it's an infrastructure engineering opportunity. I think this is a seminal moment in a new stack that's emerging from an infrastructure, software virtualization, low-code, no-code layer that will be completely programmable by things like the next Chat GPT or something different, but yet still the mechanics and the plumbing will still need engineering. >> Sarbjeet: Oh yeah. >> So there's still going to be more stuff coming on. >> Yeah, we have, with the cloud, we have made the infrastructure programmable and you give the programmability to the programmer, they will be very creative with that and so we are being very creative with our infrastructure now and on top of that, we are being very creative with the silicone now, right? So we talk about that. That's part of it, by the way. So you write the code to the particle's silicone now, and on the flip side, the silicone is built for certain use cases for AI Inference and all that. >> You saw this at CES? >> Yeah, I saw at CES, the scenario is this, the Bosch, I spoke to Bosch, I spoke to John Deere, I spoke to AWS guys, >> Yeah. >> They were showcasing their technology there and I was spoke to Azure guys as well. So the Bosch is a good example. So they are building, they are right now using AWS. I have that interview on camera, I will put it some sometime later on there online. So they're using AWS on the back end now, but Bosch is the number one, number one or number two depending on what day it is of the year, supplier of the componentry to the auto industry, and they are creating a platform for our auto industry, so is Qualcomm actually by the way, with the Snapdragon. So they told me that customers, their customers, BMW, Audi, all the manufacturers, they demand the diversity of the backend. Like they don't want all, they, all of them don't want to go to AWS. So they want the choice on the backend. So whatever they cook in the middle has to work, they have to sprinkle the data for the data sovereign side because they have Chinese car makers as well, and for, you know, for other reasons, competitive reasons and like use. >> People don't go to, aw, people don't go to AWS either for political reasons or like competitive reasons or specific use cases, but for the most part, generally, I haven't met anyone who hasn't gone first choice with either, but that's me personally. >> No, but they're building. >> Point is the developer wants choice at the back end is what I'm hearing, but then finish that thought. >> Their developers want the choice, they want the choice on the back end, number one, because the customers are asking for, in this case, the customers are asking for it, right? But the customers requirements actually drive, their economics drives that decision making, right? So in the middle they have to, they're forced to cook up some solution which is vendor neutral on the backend or multicloud in nature. So >> Yeah, >> Every >> I mean I think that's nirvana. I don't think, I personally don't see that happening right now. I mean, I don't see the parody with clouds. So I think that's a challenge. I mean, >> Yeah, true. >> I mean the fact of the matter is if the development teams get fragmented, we had this chat with Kit Colbert last time, I think he's going to come on and I think he's going to talk about his keynote in a few, in an hour or so, development teams is this, the cloud is heterogenous, which is great. It's complex, which is challenging. You need skilled engineering to manage these clouds. So if you're a CIO and you go all in on AWS, it's hard. Then to then go out and say, "I want to be completely multi-vendor neutral" that's a tall order on many levels and this is the multicloud challenge, right? So, the question is, what's the strategy for me, the CIO or CISO, what do I do? I mean, to me, I would go all in on one and start getting hedges and start playing and then look at some >> Crystal clear. Crystal clear to me. >> Go ahead. >> If you're a CIO today, you have to build a platform engineering team, no question. 'Cause if we agree that we cannot tell the great developers what to do, we have to create a platform engineering team that using pieces of the Supercloud can build, and let's make this very pragmatic and give examples. First you need to be able to lay down the run time, okay? So you need a way to deploy multiple different Kubernetes environment in depending on the cloud. Okay, now we got that. The second part >> That's like table stakes. >> That are table stake, right? But now what is the advantage of having a Supercloud service to do that is that now you can put a policy in one place and it gets distributed everywhere consistently. So for example, you want to say, "If anybody in this organization across all these different buildings, all these developers don't even know, build a PCI compliant microservice, They can only talk to PCI compliant microservice." Now, I sleep tight. The developers still do that. Of course they're going to get their hands slapped if they don't encrypt some messages and say, "Oh, that should have been encrypted." So number one. The second thing I want to be able to say, "This service that this developer built over there better satisfy this SLA." So if the SLA is not satisfied, boom, I automatically spin up multiple instances to certify the SLA. Developers unencumbered, they don't even know. So this for me is like, CIO build a platform engineering team using one of the many Supercloud services that allow you to do that and lay down. >> And part of that is that the vendor behavior is such, 'cause the incentive is that they don't necessarily always work together. (John chuckling) I'll give you an example, we're going to hear today from Western Union. They're AWS shop, but they want to go to Google, they want to use some of Google's AI tools 'cause they're good and maybe they're even arguably better, but they're also a Snowflake customer and what you'll hear from them is Amazon and Snowflake are working together so that SageMaker can be integrated with Snowflake but Google said, "No, you want to use our AI tools, you got to use BigQuery." >> Yeah. >> Okay. So they say, "Ah, forget it." So if you have a platform engineering team, you can maybe solve some of that vendor friction and get competitive advantage. >> I think that the future proximity concept that I talk about is like, when you're doing one thing, you want to do another thing. Where do you go to get that thing, right? So that is very important. Like your question, John, is that your point is that AWS is ahead of the pack, which is true, right? They have the >> breadth of >> Infrastructure by a lot >> infrastructure service, right? They breadth of services, right? So, how do you, When do you bring in other cloud providers, right? So I believe that you should standardize on one cloud provider, like that's your primary, and for others, bring them in on as needed basis, in the subsection or sub portfolio of your applications or your platforms, what ever you can. >> So yeah, the Google AI example >> Yeah, I mean, >> Or the Microsoft collaboration software example. I mean there's always or the M and A. >> Yeah, but- >> You're going to get to run Windows, you can run Windows on Amazon, so. >> By the way, Supercloud doesn't mean that you cannot do that. So the perfect example is say that you're using Azure because you have a SQL server intensive workload. >> Yep >> And you're using Google for ML, great. If you are using some differentiated feature of this cloud, you'll have to go somewhere and configure this widget, but what you can abstract with the Supercloud is the lifecycle manage of the service that runs on top, right? So how does the service get deployed, right? How do you monitor performance? How do you lifecycle it? How you secure it that you can abstract and that's the value and eventually value will win. So the customers will find what is the values, obstructing in making it uniform or going deeper? >> How about identity? Like take identity for instance, you know, that's an opportunity to abstract. Whether I use Microsoft Identity or Okta, and I can abstract that. >> Yeah, and then we have APIs and standards that we can use so eventually I think where there is enough pain, the right open source will emerge to solve that problem. >> Dave: Yeah, I can use abstract things like object store, right? That's pretty simple. >> But back to the engineering question though, is that developers, developers, developers, one thing about developers psychology is if something's not right, they say, "Go get fixing. I'm not touching it until you fix it." They're very sticky about, if something's not working, they're not going to do it again, right? So you got to get it right for developers. I mean, they'll maybe tolerate something new, but is the "juice worth the squeeze" as they say, right? So you can't go to direct say, "Hey, it's, what's a work in progress? We're going to get our infrastructure together and the world's going to be great for you, but just hang tight." They're going to be like, "Get your shit together then talk to me." So I think that to me is the question. It's an Ops question, but where's that value for the developer in Supercloud where the capabilities are there, there's less friction, it's simpler, it solves the complexity problem. I don't need these high skilled labor to manage Amazon. I got services exposed. >> That's what we talked about earlier. It's like the Walmart example. They basically, they took away from the developer the need to spin up infrastructure and worry about all the governance. I mean, it's not completely there yet. So the developer could focus on what he or she wanted to do. >> But there's a big, like in our industry, there's a big sort of flaw or the contention between developers and operators. Developers want to be on the cutting edge, right? And operators want to be on the stability, you know, like we want governance. >> Yeah, totally. >> Right, so they want to control, developers are like these little bratty kids, right? And they want Legos, like they want toys, right? Some of them want toys by way. They want Legos, they want to build there and they want make a mess out of it. So you got to make sure. My number one advice in this context is that do it up your application portfolio and, or your platform portfolio if you are an ISV, right? So if you are ISV you most probably, you're building a platform these days, do it up in a way that you can say this portion of our applications and our platform will adhere to what you are saying, standardization, you know, like Kubernetes, like slam dunk, you know, it works across clouds and in your data center hybrid, you know, whole nine yards, but there is some subset on the next door systems of innovation. Everybody has, it doesn't matter if you're DMV of Kansas or you are, you know, metaverse, right? Or Meta company, right, which is Facebook, they have it, they are building something new. For that, give them some freedom to choose different things like play with non-standard things. So that is the mantra for moving forward, for any enterprise. >> Do you think developers are happy with the infrastructure now or are they wanting people to get their act together? I mean, what's your reaction, or you think. >> Developers are happy as long as they can do their stuff, which is running code. They want to write code and innovate. So to me, when Ballmer said, "Developer, develop, Developer, what he meant was, all you other people get your act together so these developers can do their thing, and to me the Supercloud is the way for IT to get there and let developer be creative and go fast. Why not, without getting in trouble. >> Okay, let's wrap up this segment with a super clip. Okay, we're going to do a sound bite that we're going to make into a short video for each of you >> All right >> On you guys summarizing why Supercloud's important, why this next wave is relevant for the practitioners, for the industry and we'll turn this into an Instagram reel, YouTube short. So we'll call it a "Super clip. >> Alright, >> Sarbjeet, you want, you want some time to think about it? You want to go first? Vittorio, you want. >> I just didn't mind. (all laughing) >> No, okay, okay. >> I'll do it again. >> Go back. No, we got a fresh one. We'll going to already got that one in the can. >> I'll go. >> Sarbjeet, you go first. >> I'll go >> What's your super clip? >> In software systems, abstraction is your friend. I always say that. Abstraction is your friend, even if you're super professional developer, abstraction is your friend. We saw from the MFC library from C++ days till today. Abstract, use abstraction. Do not try to reinvent what's already being invented. Leverage cloud, leverage the platform side of the cloud. Not just infrastructure service, but platform as a service side of the cloud as well, and Supercloud is a meta platform built on top of these infrastructure services from three or four or five cloud providers. So use that and embrace the programmability, embrace the abstraction layer. That's the key actually, and developers who are true developers or professional developers as you said, they know that. >> Awesome. Great super clip. Vittorio, another shot at the plate here for super clip. Go. >> Multicloud is awesome. There's a reason why multicloud happened, is because gave our developers the ability to innovate fast and ever before. So if you are embarking on a digital transformation journey, which I call a survival journey, if you're not innovating and transforming, you're not going to be around in business three, five years from now. You have to adopt the Supercloud so the developer can be developer and keep building great, innovating digital experiences for your customers and IT can get in front of it and not get in trouble together. >> Building those super apps with Supercloud. That was a great super clip. Vittorio, thank you for sharing. >> Thanks guys. >> Sarbjeet, thanks for coming on talking about the developer impact Supercloud 2. On our next segment, coming up right now, we're going to hear from Walmart enterprise architect, how they are building and they are continuing to innovate, to build their own Supercloud. Really informative, instructive from a practitioner doing it in real time. Be right back with Walmart here in Palo Alto. Thanks for watching. (gentle music)

(upbeat music) (upbeat music) >> Hi everybody, welcome back to our coverage of the Cloud Native Security Con. I'm Dave Vellante, here in our Boston studio. We're connecting today with Palo Alto, with John Furrier and Lisa Martin. We're also live from the show floor in Seattle. But right now, I'm here with Andy Thurai who's from Constellation Research, friend of theCUBE, and we're going to discuss the intersection of AI and security, the potential of AI, the risks and the future. Andy, welcome, good to see you again. >> Good to be here again. >> Hey, so let's get into it, can you talk a little bit about, I know this is a passion of yours, the ethical considerations surrounding AI. I mean, it's front and center in the news, and you've got accountability, privacy, security, biases. Should we be worried about AI from a security perspective? >> Absolutely, man, you should be worried. See the problem is, people don't realize this, right? I mean, the ChatGPT being a new shiny object, it's all the craze that's about. But the problem is, most of the content that's produced either by ChatGPT or even by others, it's an access, no warranties, no accountability, no whatsoever. Particularly, if it is content, it's okay. But if it is something like a code that you use for example, one of their site projects that GitHub's co-pilot, which is actually, open AI + Microsoft + GitHub's combo, they allow you to produce code, AI writes code basically, right? But when you write code, problem with that is, it's not exactly stolen, but the models are created by using the GitHub code. Actually, they're getting sued for that, saying that, "You can't use our code". Actually there's a guy, Tim Davidson, I think he's named the professor, he actually demonstrated how AI produces exact copy of the code that he has written. So right now, it's a lot of security, accountability, privacy issues. Use it either to train or to learn. But in my view, it's not ready for enterprise grade yet. >> So, Brian Behlendorf today in his keynotes said he's really worried about ChatGPT being used to automate spearfishing. So I'm like, okay, so let's unpack that a little bit. Is the concern there that it just, the ChatGPT writes such compelling phishing content, it's going to increase the probability of somebody clicking on it, or are there other dimensions? >> It could, it's not necessarily just ChatGPT for that matter, right? AI can, actually, the hackers are using it to an extent already, can use to individualize content. For example, one of the things that you are able to easily identify when you're looking at the emails that are coming in, the phishing attack is, you look at some of the key elements in it, whether it's a human or even if it's an automated AI based system. They look at certain things and they say, "Okay, this is phishing". But if you were to read an email that looks exact copy of what I would've sent to you saying that, "Hey Dave, are you on for tomorrow? Or click on this link to do whatever. It could individualize the message. That's where the volume at scale to individual to masses, that can be done using AI, which is what scares me. >> Is there a flip side to AI? How is it being utilized to help cybersecurity? And maybe you could talk about some of the more successful examples of AI in security. Like, are there use cases or are there companies out there, Andy, that you find, I know you're close to a lot of firms that are leading in this area. You and I have talked about CrowdStrike, I know Palo Alto Network, so is there a positive side to this story? >> Yeah, I mean, absolutely right. Those are some of the good companies you mentioned, CrowdStrike, Palo Alto, Darktrace is another one that I closely follow, which is a good company as well, that they're using AI for security purposes. So, here's the thing, right, when people say, when they're using malware detection systems, most of the malware detection systems that are in today's security and malware systems, use some sort of a signature and pattern scanning in the malware. You know how many identified malwares are there today in the repository, in the library? More than a billion, a billion. So, if you are to check for every malware in your repository, that's not going to work. The pattern based recognition is not going to work. So, you got to figure out a different way of identification of pattern of usage, not just a signature in a malware, right? Or there are other areas you could use, things like the usage patterns. For example, if Andy is coming in to work at a certain time, you could combine a facial recognition saying, that should he be in here at that time, and should he be doing things, what he is supposed to be doing. There are a lot of things you could do using that, right? And the AIOps use cases, which is one of my favorite areas that I work, do a lot of work, right? That it has use cases for detecting things that are anomaly, that are not supposed to be done in a way that's supposed to be, reducing the noise so it can escalate only the things what you're supposed to. So, AIOps is a great use case to use in security areas which they're not using it to an extent yet. Incident management is another area. >> So, in your malware example, you're saying, okay, known malware, pretty much anybody can deal with that now. That's sort of yesterday's problem. >> The unknown is the problem. >> It's the unknown malware really trying to understand the patterns, and the patterns are going to change. It's not like you're saying a common signature 'cause they're going to use AI to change things up at scale. >> So, here's the problem, right? The malware writers are also using AI now, right? So, they're not going to write the old malware, send it to you. They are actually creating malware on the fly. It is possible entirely in today's world that they can create a malware, drop in your systems and it'll it look for the, let me get that name right. It's called, what are we using here? It's called the TTPs, Tactics, Techniques and procedures. It'll look for that to figure out, okay, am I doing the right pattern? And then malware can sense it saying that, okay, that's the one they're detecting. I'm going to change it on the fly. So, AI can code itself on the fly, rather malware can code itself on the fly, which is going to be hard to detect. >> Well, and when you talk about TTP, when you talk to folks like Kevin Mandia of Mandiant, recently purchased by Google or other of those, the ones that have the big observation space, they'll talk about the most malicious hacks that they see, involve lateral movement. So, that's obviously something that people are looking for, AI's looking for that. And of course, the hackers are going to try to mask that lateral movement, living off the land and other things. How do you see AI impacting the future of cyber? We talked about the risks and the good. One of the things that Brian Behlendorf also mentioned is that, he pointed out that in the early days of the internet, the protocols had an inherent element of trust involved. So, things like SMTP, they didn't have security built in. So, they built up a lot of technical debt. Do you see AI being able to help with that? What steps do you see being taken to ensure that AI based systems are secure? >> So, the major difference between the older systems and the newer systems is the older systems, sadly even today, a lot of them are rules-based. If it's a rules-based systems, you are dead in the water and not able, right? So, the AI-based systems can somewhat learn from the patterns as I was talking about, for example... >> When you say rules-based systems, you mean here's the policy, here's the rule, if it's not followed but then you're saying, AI will blow that away, >> AI will blow that away, you don't have to necessarily codify things saying that, okay, if this, then do this. You don't have to necessarily do that. AI can somewhat to an extent self-learn saying that, okay, if that doesn't happen, if this is not a pattern that I know which is supposed to happen, who should I escalate this to? Who does this system belong to? And the other thing, the AIOps use case we talked about, right, the anomalies. When an anomaly happens, then the system can closely look at, saying that, okay, this is not normal behavior or usage. Is that because system's being overused or is it because somebody's trying to access something, could look at the anomaly detection, anomaly prevention or even prediction to an extent. And that's where AI could be very useful. >> So, how about the developer angle? 'Cause CNCF, the event in Seattle is all around developers, how can AI be integrated? We did a lot of talk at the conference about shift-left, we talked about shift-left and protect right. Meaning, protect the run time. So, both are important, so what steps should be taken to ensure that the AI systems are being developed in a secure and ethically sound way? What's the role of developers in that regard? >> How long do you got? (Both laughing) I think it could go for base on that. So, here's the problem, right? Lot of these companies are trying to see, I mean, you might have seen that in the news that Buzzfeed is trying to hire all of the writers to create the thing that ChatGPT is creating, a lot of enterprises... >> How, they're going to fire their writers? >> Yeah, they replace the writers. >> It's like automated automated vehicles and automated Uber drivers. >> So, the problem is a lot of enterprises still haven't done that, at least the ones I'm speaking to, are thinking about saying, "Hey, you know what, can I replace my developers because they are so expensive? Can I replace them with AI generated code?" There are a few issues with that. One, AI generated code is based on some sort of a snippet of a code that has been already available. So, you get into copyright issues, that's issue number one, right? Issue number two, if AI creates code and if something were to go wrong, who's responsible for that? There's no accountability right now. Or you as a company that's creating a system that's responsible, or is it ChatGPT, Microsoft is responsible. >> Or is the developer? >> Or the developer. >> The individual developer might be. So, they're going to be cautious about that liability. >> Well, so one of the areas where I'm seeing a lot of enterprises using this is they are using it to teach developers to learn things. You know what, if you're to code, this is a good way to code. That area, it's okay because you are just teaching them. But if you are to put an actual production code, this is what I advise companies, look, if somebody's using even to create a code, whether with or without your permission, make sure that once the code is committed, you validate that the 100%, whether it's a code or a model, or even make sure that the data what you're feeding in it is completely out of bias or no bias, right? Because at the end of the day, it doesn't matter who, what, when did that, if you put out a service or a system out there, it is involving your company liability and system, and code in place. You're going to be screwed regardless of what, if something were to go wrong, you are the first person who's liable for it. >> Andy, when you think about the dangers of AI, and what keeps you up at night if you're a security professional AI and security professional. We talked about ChatGPT doing things, we don't even, the hackers are going to get creative. But what worries you the most when you think about this topic? >> A lot, a lot, right? Let's start off with an example, actually, I don't know if you had a chance to see that or not. The hackers used a bank of Hong Kong, used a defect mechanism to fool Bank of Hong Kong to transfer $35 million to a fake account, the money is gone, right? And the problem that is, what they did was, they interacted with a manager and they learned this executive who can control a big account and cloned his voice, and clone his patterns on how he calls and what he talks and the whole name he has, after learning that, they call the branch manager or bank manager and say, "Hey, you know what, hey, move this much money to whatever." So, that's one way of kind of phishing, kind of deep fake that can come. So, that's just one example. Imagine whether business is conducted by just using voice or phone calls itself. That's an area of concern if you were to do that. And imagine this became an uproar a few years back when deepfakes put out the video of Tom Cruise and others we talked about in the past, right? And Tom Cruise looked at the video, he said that he couldn't distinguish that he didn't do it. It is so close, that close, right? And they are doing things like they're using gems... >> Awesome Instagram account by the way, the guy's hilarious, right? >> So, they they're using a lot of this fake videos and fake stuff. As long as it's only for entertainment purposes, good. But imagine doing... >> That's right there but... >> But during the election season when people were to put out saying that, okay, this current president or ex-president, he said what? And the masses believe right now whatever they're seeing in TV, that's unfortunate thing. I mean, there's no fact checking involved, and you could change governments and elections using that, which is scary shit, right? >> When you think about 2016, that was when we really first saw, the weaponization of social, the heavy use of social and then 2020 was like, wow. >> To the next level. >> It was crazy. The polarization, 2024, would deepfakes... >> Could be the next level, yeah. >> I mean, it's just going to escalate. What about public policy? I want to pick your brain on this because I I've seen situations where the EU, for example, is going to restrict the ability to ship certain code if it's involved with critical infrastructure. So, let's say, example, you're running a nuclear facility and you've got the code that protects that facility, and it can be useful against some other malware that's outside of that country, but you're restricted from sending that for whatever reason, data sovereignty. Is public policy, is it aligned with the objectives in this new world? Or, I mean, normally they have to catch up. Is that going to be a problem in your view? >> It is because, when it comes to laws it's always miles behind when a new innovation happens. It's not just for AI, right? I mean, the same thing happened with IOT. Same thing happened with whatever else new emerging tech you have. The laws have to understand if there's an issue and they have to see a continued pattern of misuse of the technology, then they'll come up with that. Use in ways they are ahead of things. So, they put a lot of restrictions in place and about what AI can or cannot do, US is way behind on that, right? But California has done some things, for example, if you are talking to a chat bot, then you have to basically disclose that to the customer, saying that you're talking to a chat bot, not to a human. And that's just a very basic rule that they have in place. I mean, there are times that when a decision is made by the, problem is, AI is a black box now. The decision making is also a black box now, and we don't tell people. And the problem is if you tell people, you'll get sued immediately because every single time, we talked about that last time, there are cases involving AI making decisions, it gets thrown out the window all the time. If you can't substantiate that. So, the bottom line is that, yes, AI can assist and help you in making decisions but just use that as a assistant mechanism. A human has to be always in all the loop, right? >> Will AI help with, in your view, with supply chain, the software supply chain security or is it, it's always a balance, right? I mean, I feel like the attackers are more advanced in some ways, it's like they're on offense, let's say, right? So, when you're calling the plays, you know where you're going, the defense has to respond to it. So in that sense, the hackers have an advantage. So, what's the balance with software supply chain? Are the hackers have the advantage because they can use AI to accelerate their penetration of the software supply chain? Or will AI in your view be a good defensive mechanism? >> It could be but the problem is, the velocity and veracity of things can be done using AI, whether it's fishing, or malware, or other security and the vulnerability scanning the whole nine yards. It's scary because the hackers have a full advantage right now. And actually, I think ChatGPT recently put out two things. One is, it's able to direct the code if it is generated by ChatGPT. So basically, if you're trying to fake because a lot of schools were complaining about it, that's why they came up with the mechanism. So, if you're trying to create a fake, there's a mechanism for them to identify. But that's a step behind still, right? And the hackers are using things to their advantage. Actually ChatGPT made a rule, if you go there and read the terms and conditions, it's basically honor rule suggesting, you can't use this for certain purposes, to create a model where it creates a security threat, as that people are going to listen. So, if there's a way or mechanism to restrict hackers from using these technologies, that would be great. But I don't see that happening. So, know that these guys have an advantage, know that they're using AI, and you have to do things to be prepared. One thing I was mentioning about is, if somebody writes a code, if somebody commits a code right now, the problem is with the agile methodologies. If somebody writes a code, if they commit a code, you assume that's right and legit, you immediately push it out into production because need for speed is there, right? But if you continue to do that with the AI produced code, you're screwed. >> So, bottom line is, AI's going to speed us up in a security context or is it going to slow us down? >> Well, in the current version, the AI systems are flawed because even the ChatGPT, if you look at the the large language models, you look at the core piece of data that's available in the world as of today and then train them using that model, using the data, right? But people are forgetting that's based on today's data. The data changes on a second basis or on a minute basis. So, if I want to do something based on tomorrow or a day after, you have to retrain the models. So, the data already have a stale. So, that in itself is stale and the cost for retraining is going to be a problem too. So overall, AI is a good first step. Use that with a caution, is what I want to say. The system is flawed now, if you use it as is, you'll be screwed, it's dangerous. >> Andy, you got to go, thanks so much for coming in, appreciate it. >> Thanks for having me. >> You're very welcome, so we're going wall to wall with our coverage of the Cloud Native Security Con. I'm Dave Vellante in the Boston Studio, John Furrier, Lisa Martin and Palo Alto. We're going to be live on the show floor as well, bringing in keynote speakers and others on the ground. Keep it right there for more coverage on theCUBE. (upbeat music) (upbeat music) (upbeat music) (upbeat music)

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR, this is "Breaking Analysis" with Dave Vellante. >> A decade of big data investments combined with cloud scale, the rise of much more cost effective processing power. And the introduction of advanced tooling has catapulted machine intelligence to the forefront of technology investments. No matter what job you have, your operation will be AI powered within five years and machines may actually even be doing your job. Artificial intelligence is being infused into applications, infrastructure, equipment, and virtually every aspect of our lives. AI is proving to be extremely helpful at things like controlling vehicles, speeding up medical diagnoses, processing language, advancing science, and generally raising the stakes on what it means to apply technology for business advantage. But business value realization has been a challenge for most organizations due to lack of skills, complexity of programming models, immature technology integration, sizable upfront investments, ethical concerns, and lack of business alignment. Mastering AI technology will not be a requirement for success in our view. However, figuring out how and where to apply AI to your business will be crucial. That means understanding the business case, picking the right technology partner, experimenting in bite-sized chunks, and quickly identifying winners to double down on from an investment standpoint. Hello and welcome to this week's Wiki-bond CUBE Insights powered by ETR. In this breaking analysis, we update you on the state of AI and what it means for the competition. And to do so, we invite into our studios Andy Thurai of Constellation Research. Andy covers AI deeply. He knows the players, he knows the pitfalls of AI investment, and he's a collaborator. Andy, great to have you on the program. Thanks for coming into our CUBE studios. >> Thanks for having me on. >> You're very welcome. Okay, let's set the table with a premise and a series of assertions we want to test with Andy. I'm going to lay 'em out. And then Andy, I'd love for you to comment. So, first of all, according to McKinsey, AI adoption has more than doubled since 2017, but only 10% of organizations report seeing significant ROI. That's a BCG and MIT study. And part of that challenge of AI is it requires data, is requires good data, data proficiency, which is not trivial, as you know. Firms that can master both data and AI, we believe are going to have a competitive advantage this decade. Hyperscalers, as we show you dominate AI and ML. We'll show you some data on that. And having said that, there's plenty of room for specialists. They need to partner with the cloud vendors for go to market productivity. And finally, organizations increasingly have to put data and AI at the center of their enterprises. And to do that, most are going to rely on vendor R&D to leverage AI and ML. In other words, Andy, they're going to buy it and apply it as opposed to build it. What are your thoughts on that setup and that premise? >> Yeah, I see that a lot happening in the field, right? So first of all, the only 10% of realizing a return on investment. That's so true because we talked about this earlier, the most companies are still in the innovation cycle. So they're trying to innovate and see what they can do to apply. A lot of these times when you look at the solutions, what they come up with or the models they create, the experimentation they do, most times they don't even have a good business case to solve, right? So they just experiment and then they figure it out, "Oh my God, this model is working. Can we do something to solve it?" So it's like you found a hammer and then you're trying to find the needle kind of thing, right? That never works. >> 'Cause it's cool or whatever it is. >> It is, right? So that's why, I always advise, when they come to me and ask me things like, "Hey, what's the right way to do it? What is the secret sauce?" And, we talked about this. The first thing I tell them is, "Find out what is the business case that's having the most amount of problems, that that can be solved using some of the AI use cases," right? Not all of them can be solved. Even after you experiment, do the whole nine yards, spend millions of dollars on that, right? And later on you make it efficient only by saving maybe $50,000 for the company or a $100,000 for the company, is it really even worth the experiment, right? So you got to start with the saying that, you know, where's the base for this happening? Where's the need? What's a business use case? It doesn't have to be about cost efficient and saving money in the existing processes. It could be a new thing. You want to bring in a new revenue stream, but figure out what is a business use case, how much money potentially I can make off of that. The same way that start-ups go after. Right? >> Yeah. Pretty straightforward. All right, let's take a look at where ML and AI fit relative to the other hot sectors of the ETR dataset. This XY graph shows net score spending velocity in the vertical axis and presence in the survey, they call it sector perversion for the October survey, the January survey's in the field. Then that squiggly line on ML/AI represents the progression. Since the January 21 survey, you can see the downward trajectory. And we position ML and AI relative to the other big four hot sectors or big three, including, ML/AI is four. Containers, cloud and RPA. These have consistently performed above that magic 40% red dotted line for most of the past two years. Anything above 40%, we think is highly elevated. And we've just included analytics and big data for context and relevant adjacentness, if you will. Now note that green arrow moving toward, you know, the 40% mark on ML/AI. I got a glimpse of the January survey, which is in the field. It's got more than a thousand responses already, and it's trending up for the current survey. So Andy, what do you make of this downward trajectory over the past seven quarters and the presumed uptick in the coming months? >> So one of the things you have to keep in mind is when the pandemic happened, it's about survival mode, right? So when somebody's in a survival mode, what happens, the luxury and the innovations get cut. That's what happens. And this is exactly what happened in the situation. So as you can see in the last seven quarters, which is almost dating back close to pandemic, everybody was trying to keep their operations alive, especially digital operations. How do I keep the lights on? That's the most important thing for them. So while the numbers spent on AI, ML is less overall, I still think the AI ML to spend to sort of like a employee experience or the IT ops, AI ops, ML ops, as we talked about, some of those areas actually went up. There are companies, we talked about it, Atlassian had a lot of platform issues till the amount of money people are spending on that is exorbitant and simply because they are offering the solution that was not available other way. So there are companies out there, you can take AoPS or incident management for that matter, right? A lot of companies have a digital insurance, they don't know how to properly manage it. How do you find an intern solve it immediately? That's all using AI ML and some of those areas actually growing unbelievable, the companies in that area. >> So this is a really good point. If you can you bring up that chart again, what Andy's saying is a lot of the companies in the ETR taxonomy that are doing things with AI might not necessarily show up in a granular fashion. And I think the other point I would make is, these are still highly elevated numbers. If you put on like storage and servers, they would read way, way down the list. And, look in the pandemic, we had to deal with work from home, we had to re-architect the network, we had to worry about security. So those are really good points that you made there. Let's, unpack this a little bit and look at the ML AI sector and the ETR data and specifically at the players and get Andy to comment on this. This chart here shows the same x y dimensions, and it just notes some of the players that are specifically have services and products that people spend money on, that CIOs and IT buyers can comment on. So the table insert shows how the companies are plotted, it's net score, and then the ends in the survey. And Andy, the hyperscalers are dominant, as you can see. You see Databricks there showing strong as a specialist, and then you got to pack a six or seven in there. And then Oracle and IBM, kind of the big whales of yester year are in the mix. And to your point, companies like Salesforce that you mentioned to me offline aren't in that mix, but they do a lot in AI. But what are your takeaways from that data? >> If you could put the slide back on please. I want to make quick comments on a couple of those. So the first one is, it's surprising other hyperscalers, right? As you and I talked about this earlier, AWS is more about logo blocks. We discussed that, right? >> Like what? Like a SageMaker as an example. >> We'll give you all the components what do you need. Whether it's MLOps component or whether it's, CodeWhisperer that we talked about, or a oral platform or data or data, whatever you want. They'll give you the blocks and then you'll build things on top of it, right? But Google took a different way. Matter of fact, if we did those numbers a few years ago, Google would've been number one because they did a lot of work with their acquisition of DeepMind and other things. They're way ahead of the pack when it comes to AI for longest time. Now, I think Microsoft's move of partnering and taking a huge competitor out would open the eyes is unbelievable. You saw that everybody is talking about chat GPI, right? And the open AI tool and ChatGPT rather. Remember as Warren Buffet is saying that, when my laundry lady comes and talk to me about stock market, it's heated up. So that's how it's heated up. Everybody's using ChatGPT. What that means is at the end of the day is they're creating, it's still in beta, keep in mind. It's not fully... >> Can you play with it a little bit? >> I have a little bit. >> I have, but it's good and it's not good. You know what I mean? >> Look, so at the end of the day, you take the massive text of all the available text in the world today, mass them all together. And then you ask a question, it's going to basically search through that and figure it out and answer that back. Yes, it's good. But again, as we discussed, if there's no business use case of what problem you're going to solve. This is building hype. But then eventually they'll figure out, for example, all your chats, online chats, could be aided by your AI chat bots, which is already there, which is not there at that level. This could build help that, right? Or the other thing we talked about is one of the areas where I'm more concerned about is that it is able to produce equal enough original text at the level that humans can produce, for example, ChatGPT or the equal enough, the large language transformer can help you write stories as of Shakespeare wrote it. Pretty close to it. It'll learn from that. So when it comes down to it, talk about creating messages, articles, blogs, especially during political seasons, not necessarily just in US, but anywhere for that matter. If people are able to produce at the emission speed and throw it at the consumers and confuse them, the elections can be won, the governments can be toppled. >> Because to your point about chatbots is chatbots have obviously, reduced the number of bodies that you need to support chat. But they haven't solved the problem of serving consumers. Most of the chat bots are conditioned response, which of the following best describes your problem? >> The current chatbot. >> Yeah. Hey, did we solve your problem? No. Is the answer. So that has some real potential. But if you could bring up that slide again, Ken, I mean you've got the hyperscalers that are dominant. You talked about Google and Microsoft is ubiquitous, they seem to be dominant in every ETR category. But then you have these other specialists. How do those guys compete? And maybe you could even, cite some of the guys that you know, how do they compete with the hyperscalers? What's the key there for like a C3 ai or some of the others that are on there? >> So I've spoken with at least two of the CEOs of the smaller companies that you have on the list. One of the things they're worried about is that if they continue to operate independently without being part of hyperscaler, either the hyperscalers will develop something to compete against them full scale, or they'll become irrelevant. Because at the end of the day, look, cloud is dominant. Not many companies are going to do like AI modeling and training and deployment the whole nine yards by independent by themselves. They're going to depend on one of the clouds, right? So if they're already going to be in the cloud, by taking them out to come to you, it's going to be extremely difficult issue to solve. So all these companies are going and saying, "You know what? We need to be in hyperscalers." For example, you could have looked at DataRobot recently, they made announcements, Google and AWS, and they are all over the place. So you need to go where the customers are. Right? >> All right, before we go on, I want to share some other data from ETR and why people adopt AI and get your feedback. So the data historically shows that feature breadth and technical capabilities were the main decision points for AI adoption, historically. What says to me that it's too much focus on technology. In your view, is that changing? Does it have to change? Will it change? >> Yes. Simple answer is yes. So here's the thing. The data you're speaking from is from previous years. >> Yes >> I can guarantee you, if you look at the latest data that's coming in now, those two will be a secondary and tertiary points. The number one would be about ROI. And how do I achieve? I've spent ton of money on all of my experiments. This is the same thing theme I'm seeing across when talking to everybody who's spending money on AI. I've spent so much money on it. When can I get it live in production? How much, how can I quickly get it? Because you know, the board is breathing down their neck. You already spend this much money. Show me something that's valuable. So the ROI is going to become, take it from me, I'm predicting this for 2023, that's going to become number one. >> Yeah, and if people focus on it, they'll figure it out. Okay. Let's take a look at some of the top players that won, some of the names we just looked at and double click on that and break down their spending profile. So the chart here shows the net score, how net score is calculated. So pay attention to the second set of bars that Databricks, who was pretty prominent on the previous chart. And we've annotated the colors. The lime green is, we're bringing the platform in new. The forest green is, we're going to spend 6% or more relative to last year. And the gray is flat spending. The pinkish is our spending's going to be down on AI and ML, 6% or worse. And the red is churn. So you don't want big red. You subtract the reds from the greens and you get net score, which is shown by those blue dots that you see there. So AWS has the highest net score and very little churn. I mean, single low single digit churn. But notably, you see Databricks and DataRobot are next in line within Microsoft and Google also, they've got very low churn. Andy, what are your thoughts on this data? >> So a couple of things that stands out to me. Most of them are in line with my conversation with customers. Couple of them stood out to me on how bad IBM Watson is doing. >> Yeah, bring that back up if you would. Let's take a look at that. IBM Watson is the far right and the red, that bright red is churning and again, you want low red here. Why do you think that is? >> Well, so look, IBM has been in the forefront of innovating things for many, many years now, right? And over the course of years we talked about this, they moved from a product innovation centric company into more of a services company. And over the years they were making, as at one point, you know that they were making about majority of that money from services. Now things have changed Arvind has taken over, he came from research. So he's doing a great job of trying to reinvent themselves as a company. But it's going to have a long way to catch up. IBM Watson, if you think about it, that played what, jeopardy and chess years ago, like 15 years ago? >> It was jaw dropping when you first saw it. And then they weren't able to commercialize that. >> Yeah. >> And you're making a good point. When Gerstner took over IBM at the time, John Akers wanted to split the company up. He wanted to have a database company, he wanted to have a storage company. Because that's where the industry trend was, Gerstner said no, he came from AMEX, right? He came from American Express. He said, "No, we're going to have a single throat to choke for the customer." They bought PWC for relatively short money. I think it was $15 billion, completely transformed and I would argue saved IBM. But the trade off was, it sort of took them out of product leadership. And so from Gerstner to Palmisano to Remedi, it was really a services led company. And I think Arvind is really bringing it back to a product company with strong consulting. I mean, that's one of the pillars. And so I think that's, they've got a strong story in data and AI. They just got to sort of bring it together and better. Bring that chart up one more time. I want to, the other point is Oracle, Oracle sort of has the dominant lock-in for mission critical database and they're sort of applying AI there. But to your point, they're really not an AI company in the sense that they're taking unstructured data and doing sort of new things. It's really about how to make Oracle better, right? >> Well, you got to remember, Oracle is about database for the structure data. So in yesterday's world, they were dominant database. But you know, if you are to start storing like videos and texts and audio and other things, and then start doing search of vector search and all that, Oracle is not necessarily the database company of choice. And they're strongest thing being apps and building AI into the apps? They are kind of surviving in that area. But again, I wouldn't name them as an AI company, right? But the other thing that that surprised me in that list, what you showed me is yes, AWS is number one. >> Bring that back up if you would, Ken. >> AWS is number one as you, it should be. But what what actually caught me by surprise is how DataRobot is holding, you know? I mean, look at that. The either net new addition and or expansion, DataRobot seem to be doing equally well, even better than Microsoft and Google. That surprises me. >> DataRobot's, and again, this is a function of spending momentum. So remember from the previous chart that Microsoft and Google, much, much larger than DataRobot. DataRobot more niche. But with spending velocity and has always had strong spending velocity, despite some of the recent challenges, organizational challenges. And then you see these other specialists, H2O.ai, Anaconda, dataiku, little bit of red showing there C3.ai. But these again, to stress are the sort of specialists other than obviously the hyperscalers. These are the specialists in AI. All right, so we hit the bigger names in the sector. Now let's take a look at the emerging technology companies. And one of the gems of the ETR dataset is the emerging technology survey. It's called ETS. They used to just do it like twice a year. It's now run four times a year. I just discovered it kind of mid-2022. And it's exclusively focused on private companies that are potential disruptors, they might be M&A candidates and if they've raised enough money, they could be acquirers of companies as well. So Databricks would be an example. They've made a number of investments in companies. SNEAK would be another good example. Companies that are private, but they're buyers, they hope to go IPO at some point in time. So this chart here, shows the emerging companies in the ML AI sector of the ETR dataset. So the dimensions of this are similar, they're net sentiment on the Y axis and mind share on the X axis. Basically, the ETS study measures awareness on the x axis and intent to do something with, evaluate or implement or not, on that vertical axis. So it's like net score on the vertical where negatives are subtracted from the positives. And again, mind share is vendor awareness. That's the horizontal axis. Now that inserted table shows net sentiment and the ends in the survey, which informs the position of the dots. And you'll notice we're plotting TensorFlow as well. We know that's not a company, but it's there for reference as open source tooling is an option for customers. And ETR sometimes like to show that as a reference point. Now we've also drawn a line for Databricks to show how relatively dominant they've become in the past 10 ETS surveys and sort of mind share going back to late 2018. And you can see a dozen or so other emerging tech vendors. So Andy, I want you to share your thoughts on these players, who were the ones to watch, name some names. We'll bring that data back up as you as you comment. >> So Databricks, as you said, remember we talked about how Oracle is not necessarily the database of the choice, you know? So Databricks is kind of trying to solve some of the issue for AI/ML workloads, right? And the problem is also there is no one company that could solve all of the problems. For example, if you look at the names in here, some of them are database names, some of them are platform names, some of them are like MLOps companies like, DataRobot (indistinct) and others. And some of them are like future based companies like, you know, the Techton and stuff. >> So it's a mix of those sub sectors? >> It's a mix of those companies. >> We'll talk to ETR about that. They'd be interested in your input on how to make this more granular and these sub-sectors. You got Hugging Face in here, >> Which is NLP, yeah. >> Okay. So your take, are these companies going to get acquired? Are they going to go IPO? Are they going to merge? >> Well, most of them going to get acquired. My prediction would be most of them will get acquired because look, at the end of the day, hyperscalers need these capabilities, right? So they're going to either create their own, AWS is very good at doing that. They have done a lot of those things. But the other ones, like for particularly Azure, they're going to look at it and saying that, "You know what, it's going to take time for me to build this. Why don't I just go and buy you?" Right? Or or even the smaller players like Oracle or IBM Cloud, this will exist. They might even take a look at them, right? So at the end of the day, a lot of these companies are going to get acquired or merged with others. >> Yeah. All right, let's wrap with some final thoughts. I'm going to make some comments Andy, and then ask you to dig in here. Look, despite the challenge of leveraging AI, you know, Ken, if you could bring up the next chart. We're not repeating, we're not predicting the AI winter of the 1990s. Machine intelligence. It's a superpower that's going to permeate every aspect of the technology industry. AI and data strategies have to be connected. Leveraging first party data is going to increase AI competitiveness and shorten time to value. Andy, I'd love your thoughts on that. I know you've got some thoughts on governance and AI ethics. You know, we talked about ChatGBT, Deepfakes, help us unpack all these trends. >> So there's so much information packed up there, right? The AI and data strategy, that's very, very, very important. If you don't have a proper data, people don't realize that AI is, your AI is the morals that you built on, it's predominantly based on the data what you have. It's not, AI cannot predict something that's going to happen without knowing what it is. It need to be trained, it need to understand what is it you're talking about. So 99% of the time you got to have a good data for you to train. So this where I mentioned to you, the problem is a lot of these companies can't afford to collect the real world data because it takes too long, it's too expensive. So a lot of these companies are trying to do the synthetic data way. It has its own set of issues because you can't use all... >> What's that synthetic data? Explain that. >> Synthetic data is basically not a real world data, but it's a created or simulated data equal and based on real data. It looks, feels, smells, taste like a real data, but it's not exactly real data, right? This is particularly useful in the financial and healthcare industry for world. So you don't have to, at the end of the day, if you have real data about your and my medical history data, if you redact it, you can still reverse this. It's fairly easy, right? >> Yeah, yeah. >> So by creating a synthetic data, there is no correlation between the real data and the synthetic data. >> So that's part of AI ethics and privacy and, okay. >> So the synthetic data, the issue with that is that when you're trying to commingle that with that, you can't create models based on just on synthetic data because synthetic data, as I said is artificial data. So basically you're creating artificial models, so you got to blend in properly that that blend is the problem. And you know how much of real data, how much of synthetic data you could use. You got to use judgment between efficiency cost and the time duration stuff. So that's one-- >> And risk >> And the risk involved with that. And the secondary issues which we talked about is that when you're creating, okay, you take a business use case, okay, you think about investing things, you build the whole thing out and you're trying to put it out into the market. Most companies that I talk to don't have a proper governance in place. They don't have ethics standards in place. They don't worry about the biases in data, they just go on trying to solve a business case >> It's wild west. >> 'Cause that's what they start. It's a wild west! And then at the end of the day when they are close to some legal litigation action or something or something else happens and that's when the Oh Shit! moments happens, right? And then they come in and say, "You know what, how do I fix this?" The governance, security and all of those things, ethics bias, data bias, de-biasing, none of them can be an afterthought. It got to start with the, from the get-go. So you got to start at the beginning saying that, "You know what, I'm going to do all of those AI programs, but before we get into this, we got to set some framework for doing all these things properly." Right? And then the-- >> Yeah. So let's go back to the key points. I want to bring up the cloud again. Because you got to get cloud right. Getting that right matters in AI to the points that you were making earlier. You can't just be out on an island and hyperscalers, they're going to obviously continue to do well. They get more and more data's going into the cloud and they have the native tools. To your point, in the case of AWS, Microsoft's obviously ubiquitous. Google's got great capabilities here. They've got integrated ecosystems partners that are going to continue to strengthen through the decade. What are your thoughts here? >> So a couple of things. One is the last mile ML or last mile AI that nobody's talking about. So that need to be attended to. There are lot of players in the market that coming up, when I talk about last mile, I'm talking about after you're done with the experimentation of the model, how fast and quickly and efficiently can you get it to production? So that's production being-- >> Compressing that time is going to put dollars in your pocket. >> Exactly. Right. >> So once, >> If you got it right. >> If you get it right, of course. So there are, there are a couple of issues with that. Once you figure out that model is working, that's perfect. People don't realize, the moment you decide that moment when the decision is made, it's like a new car. After you purchase the value decreases on a minute basis. Same thing with the models. Once the model is created, you need to be in production right away because it starts losing it value on a seconds minute basis. So issue number one, how fast can I get it over there? So your deployment, you are inferencing efficiently at the edge locations, your optimization, your security, all of this is at issue. But you know what is more important than that in the last mile? You keep the model up, you continue to work on, again, going back to the car analogy, at one point you got to figure out your car is costing more than to operate. So you got to get a new car, right? And that's the same thing with the models as well. If your model has reached a stage, it is actually a potential risk for your operation. To give you an idea, if Uber has a model, the first time when you get a car from going from point A to B cost you $60. If the model decayed the next time I might give you a $40 rate, I would take it definitely. But it's lost for the company. The business risk associated with operating on a bad model, you should realize it immediately, pull the model out, retrain it, redeploy it. That's is key. >> And that's got to be huge in security model recency and security to the extent that you can get real time is big. I mean you, you see Palo Alto, CrowdStrike, a lot of other security companies are injecting AI. Again, they won't show up in the ETR ML/AI taxonomy per se as a pure play. But ServiceNow is another company that you have have mentioned to me, offline. AI is just getting embedded everywhere. >> Yep. >> And then I'm glad you brought up, kind of real-time inferencing 'cause a lot of the modeling, if we can go back to the last point that we're going to make, a lot of the AI today is modeling done in the cloud. The last point we wanted to make here, I'd love to get your thoughts on this, is real-time AI inferencing for instance at the edge is going to become increasingly important for us. It's going to usher in new economics, new types of silicon, particularly arm-based. We've covered that a lot on "Breaking Analysis", new tooling, new companies and that could disrupt the sort of cloud model if new economics emerge. 'Cause cloud obviously very centralized, they're trying to decentralize it. But over the course of this decade we could see some real disruption there. Andy, give us your final thoughts on that. >> Yes and no. I mean at the end of the day, cloud is kind of centralized now, but a lot of this companies including, AWS is kind of trying to decentralize that by putting their own sub-centers and edge locations. >> Local zones, outposts. >> Yeah, exactly. Particularly the outpost concept. And if it can even become like a micro center and stuff, it won't go to the localized level of, I go to a single IOT level. But again, the cloud extends itself to that level. So if there is an opportunity need for it, the hyperscalers will figure out a way to fit that model. So I wouldn't too much worry about that, about deployment and where to have it and what to do with that. But you know, figure out the right business use case, get the right data, get the ethics and governance place and make sure they get it to production and make sure you pull the model out when it's not operating well. >> Excellent advice. Andy, I got to thank you for coming into the studio today, helping us with this "Breaking Analysis" segment. Outstanding collaboration and insights and input in today's episode. Hope we can do more. >> Thank you. Thanks for having me. I appreciate it. >> You're very welcome. All right. I want to thank Alex Marson who's on production and manages the podcast. Ken Schiffman as well. Kristen Martin and Cheryl Knight helped get the word out on social media and our newsletters. And Rob Hoof is our editor-in-chief over at Silicon Angle. He does some great editing for us. Thank you all. Remember all these episodes are available as podcast. Wherever you listen, all you got to do is search "Breaking Analysis" podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and silicon angle.com or you can email me at david.vellante@siliconangle.com to get in touch, or DM me at dvellante or comment on our LinkedIn posts. Please check out ETR.AI for the best survey data and the enterprise tech business, Constellation Research. Andy publishes there some awesome information on AI and data. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching everybody and we'll see you next time on "Breaking Analysis". (gentle closing tune plays)

(electronic music) >> Hello everybody, welcome back to Boston. This is Dave Vellante and you're watching theCUBE's continuous coverage of AWS re:Inforce 2022. We're here at the convention center in Boston where theCUBE got started in May of 2010. I'm really excited. Lena Smart is here, she's the chief information security officer at MongoDB rocket ship company We covered MongoDB World earlier this year, June, down in New York. Lena, thanks for coming to theCUBE. >> Thank you for having me. >> You're very welcome, I enjoyed your keynote yesterday. You had a big audience, I mean, this is a big deal. >> Yeah. >> This is the cloud security conference, AWS, putting its mark in the sand back in 2019. Of course, a couple of years of virtual, now back in Boston. You talked in your keynote about security, how it used to be an afterthought, used to be the responsibility of a small group of people. >> Yeah. >> You know, it used to be a bolt on. >> Yep. >> That's changed dramatically and that change has really accelerated through the pandemic. >> Yep. >> Just describe that change from your perspective. >> So when I started at MongoDB about three and a half years ago, we had a very strong security program, but it wasn't under one person. So I was their first CISO that they employed. And I brought together people who were already doing security and we employed people from outside the company as well. The person that I employed as my deputy is actually a third time returnee, I guess? So he's worked for, MongoDB be twice before, his name is Chris Sandalo, and having someone of that stature in the company is really helpful to build the security culture that I wanted. That's why I really wanted Chris to come back. He's technically brilliant, but he also knew all the people who'd been there for a while and having that person as a trusted second in command really, really helped me grow the team very quickly. I've already got a reputation as a strong female leader. He had a reputation as a strong technical leader. So us combined is like indestructible, we we're a great team. >> Is your scope of responsibility, obviously you're protecting Mongo, >> Yeah. >> How much of your role extends into the product? >> So we have a product security team that report into Sahir Azam, our chief product officer. I think you even spoke to him. >> Yeah, he's amazing. >> He's awesome, isn't he? He's just fabulous. And so his team, they've got security experts on our product side who are really kind of the customer facing. I'm also to a certain extent customer facing, but the product folks are the absolute experts. They will listen to what our customers need, what they want, and together we can then work out and translate that. I'm also responsible for governance risk and compliance. So there's a large portion of our customers that give us input via that program too. So there's a lot of avenues to allow us to facilitate change in the security field. And I think that's really important. We have to listen to what our customers want, but also internally. You know, what our internal groups need as well to help them grow. >> I remember last year, Re:invent 2021, I was watching a talk on security. It was the, I forget his name, but it was the individual who responsible for data center security. And one of the things he said was, you know, look it's not at the end of the day, the technology's important but it's not the technology. It's how you apply the tools and the practices and the culture- >> Right. That you build in the organization that will ultimately determine how successful you are at decreasing the ROI for the bad guys. >> Yes. >> Let's put it that way. So talk about the challenges of building that culture, how you go about that, and how you sustain that cultural aspect. >> So, I think having the security champion program, so that's just, it's like one of my babies, that and helping underrepresented groups in MongoDB kind of get on in the tech world are both really important to me. And so the security champion program is purely voluntary. We have over a hundred members. And these are people, there's no bar to join. You don't have to be technical. If you're an executive assistant who wants to learn more about security, like my assistant does, you're more than welcome. Up to, we actually people grade themselves, when they join us, we give them a little tick box. Like five is, I walk in security water. One is, I can spell security but I'd like to learn more. Mixing those groups together has been game changing for us. We now have over a hundred people who volunteer their time, with their supervisors permission, they help us with their phishing campaigns, testing AWS tool sets, testing things like queryable encryption. I mean, we have people who have such an in-depth knowledge in other areas of the business that I could never learn, no matter how much time I had. And so to have them- And we have people from product as security champions as well, and security, and legal, and HR, and every department is recognized. And I think almost every geographical location is also recognized. So just to have that scope and depth of people with long tenure in the company, technically brilliant, really want to understand how they can apply the cultural values that we live with each day to make our security program stronger. As I say, that's been a game changer for us. We use it as a feeder program. So we've had five people transfer from other departments into the security and GRC teams through this Champions program. >> Makes a lot of sense. You take somebody who walks on water in security, mix them with somebody who really doesn't know a lot about it but wants to learn and then can ask really basic questions, and then the experts can actually understand better how to communicate. >> Absolutely. >> To that you know that 101 level. >> It's absolutely true. Like my mom lives in her iPad. She worships her iPad. Unfortunately she thinks everything on it is true. And so for me to try and dumb it down, and she's not a dumb person, but for me to try and dumb down the message of most of it's rubbish, mom, Facebook is made up. It's just people telling stories. For me to try and get that over to- So she's a one, and I might be a five, that's hard. That's really hard. And so that's what we're doing in the office as well. It's like, if you can explain to my mother how not everything on the internet is true, we're golden. >> My mom, rest her soul, when she first got a- we got her a Macintosh, this was years and years and years ago, and we were trying to train her over the phone, and said, mom, just grab the mouse. And she's like, I don't like mice. (Lena laughs) There you go. I know, I know, Lena, what that's like. Years ago, it was early last decade, we started to think about, wow, security really has to become a board level item. >> Yeah. >> And it really wasn't- 2010, you know, for certain companies. But really, and so I had the pleasure of interviewing Dr. Robert Gates, who was the defense secretary. >> Yes. >> We had this conversation, and he sits on a number, or sat on a number of boards, probably still does, but he was adamant. Oh, absolutely. Here's how you know, here. This is the criticality. Now it's totally changed. >> Right. >> I mean, it's now a board level item. But how do you communicate to the C-Suite, the board? How often do you do that? What do you recommend is the right regime? And I know there's not any perfect- there's got to be situational, but how do you approach it? >> So I am extremely lucky. We have a very technical board. Our chairman of the board is Tom Killalea. You know, Amazon alum, I mean, just genius. And he, and the rest of the board, it's not like a normal board. Like I actually have the meeting on this coming Monday. So this weekend will be me reading as much stuff as I possibly can, trying to work out what questions they're going to ask me. And it's never a gotcha kind of thing. I've been at board meetings before where you almost feel personally attacked and that's not a good thing. Where, at MongoDB, you can see they genuinely want us to grow and mature. And so I actually meet with our board four times a year, just for security. So we set up our own security meeting just with board members who are specifically interested in security, which is all of them. And so this is actually off cadence. So I actually get their attention for at least an hour once a quarter, which is almost unheard of. And we actually use the AWS memo format. People have a chance to comment and read prior to the meeting. So they know what we're going to talk about and we know what their concerns are. And so you're not going in like, oh my gosh, what what's going to happen for this hour? We come prepared. We have statistics. We can show them where we're growing. We can show them where we need more growth and maturity. And I think having that level of just development of programs, but also the ear of the board has has helped me mature my role 10 times. And then also we have the chance to ask them, well what are your other CISOs doing? You know, they're members of other boards. So I can say to Dave, for example, you know, what's so-and-so doing at Datadog? Or Tom Killelea, what's the CISO of Capital One doing? And they help me make a lot of those connections as well. I mean, the CISO world is small and me being a female in the world with a Scottish accent, I'm probably more memorable than most. So it's like, oh yeah, that's the Irish girl. Yeah. She's Scottish, thank you. But they remember me and I can use that. And so just having all those mentors from the board level down, and obviously Dev is a huge, huge fan of security and GRC. It's no longer that box ticking exercise that I used to feel security was, you know, if you heated your SOC2 type two in FinTech, oh, you were good to go. You know, if you did a HERC set for the power industry. All right, right. You know, we can move on now. It's not that anymore. >> Right. It's every single day. >> Yeah. Of course. Dev is Dev at the Chario. Dev spelled D E V. I spell Dave differently. My Dave. But, Lena, it sounds like you present a combination of metrics, so, the board, you feel like that's appropriate to dig into the metrics. But also I'm presuming you're talking strategy, potentially, you know, gaps- >> Road roadmaps, the whole nine yards. Yep. >> What's the, you know, I look at the budget scenario. At the macro level, CIOs have told us, they came into the year saying, hey we're going to grow spending at the macro, around eight percent, eight and a half percent. That's dialed down a little bit post Ukraine and the whole recession and Fed tightening. So now they're down maybe around six percent. So not dramatically lower, but still. And they tell us security is still the number one priority. >> Yes. >> That's been the case for many, many quarters, and actually years, but you don't have an unlimited budget. >> Sure >> Right. It's not like, oh, here is an open checkbook. >> Right. >> Lena, so, how does Mongo balance that with the other priorities in the organization, obviously, you know, you got to spend money on product, you got to spend money and go to market. What's the climate like now, is it, you know continuing on in 2022 despite some of the macro concerns? Is it maybe tapping the brakes? What's the general sentiment? >> We would never tap the breaks. I mean, this is something that's- So my other half works in the finance industry still. So we have, you know, interesting discussions when it comes to geopolitics and financial politics and you know, Dev, the chairman of the board, all very technical people, get that security is going to be taken advantage of if we're seeing to be tapping the brakes. So it does kind of worry me when I hear other people are saying, oh, we're, you know, we're cutting back our budget. We are not. That being said, you also have to be fiscally responsible. I'm Scottish, we're cheap, really frugal with money. And so I always tell my team: treat this money as if it's your own. As if it's my money. And so when we're buying tool sets, I want to make sure that I'm talking to the CISO, or the CISO of the company that's supplying it, and saying are you giving me the really the best value? You know, how can we maybe even partner with you as a database platform? How could we partner with you, X company, to, you know, maybe we'll give you credits on our platform. If you look to moving to us and then we could have a partnership, and I mean, that's how some of this stuff builds, and so I've been pretty good at doing that. I enjoy doing that. But then also just in terms of being fiscally responsible, yeah, I get it. There's CISOs who have every tool that's out there because it's shiny and it's new and they know the board is never going to say no, but at some point, people will get wise to that and be like, I think we need a new CISO. So it's not like we're going to stop spending it. So we're going to get someone who actually knows how to budget and get us what the best value for money. And so that's always been my view is we're always going to be financed. We're always going to be financed well. But I need to keep showing that value for money. And we do that every board meeting, every Monday when I meet with my boss. I mean, I report to the CFO but I've got a dotted line to the CTO. So I'm, you know, I'm one of the few people at this level that's got my feet in both camps. You know budgets are talked at Dev's level. So, you know, it's really important that we get the spend right. >> And that value is essentially, as I was kind of alluding to before, it's decreasing the value equation for the hackers, for the adversary. >> Hopefully, yes. >> Right? Who's the- of course they're increasingly sophisticated. I want to ask you about your relationship with AWS in this context. It feels like, when I look around here, I think back to 2019, there was a lot of talk about the shared responsibility model. >> Yes. >> You know, AWS likes to educate people and back then it was like, okay, hey, by the way, you know you got to, you know, configure the S3 bucket properly. And then, oh, by the way, there's more than just, it's not just binary. >> Right, right. >> There's other factors involved. The application access and identity and things like that, et cetera, et cetera. So that was all kind of cool. But I feel like the cloud is becoming the first line of defense for the CISO but because of the shared responsibility model, CISO is now the second line of defense >> Yes. Does that change your role? Does it make it less complicated in a way? Maybe, you know, more complicated because you now got to get your DevSecOps team? The developers are now much more involved in security? How is that shifting, specifically in the context of your relationship with AWS? >> It's honestly not been that much of a shift. I mean, these guys are very proactive when it comes to where we are from the security standpoint. They listen to their customers as much as we do. So when we sit down with them, when I meet with Steve Schmidt or CJ or you know, our account manager, its not a conversation that's a surprise to me when I tell them this is what we need. They're like, yep, we're on that already. And so I think that relationship has been very proactive rather than reactive. And then in terms of MongoDB, as a tech company, security is always at the forefront. So it's not been a huge lift for me. It's really just been my time that I've taken to understand where DevSecOps is coming from. And you know, how far are we shifting left? Are we actually shifting right now? It's like, you know, get the balance, right? You can't be too much to one side. But I think in terms of where we're teaching the developers, you know, we are a company by developers for developers. So, we get it, we understand where they're coming from, and we try and be as proactive as AWS is. >> When you obviously the SolarWinds hack was a a major mile- I think in security, there's always something in the headlines- >> Yes. But when you think of things like, you know, Stuxnet, you know, Log4J, obviously Solarwinds and the whole supply chain infiltration and the bill of materials. As I said before, the adversary is extremely capable and sophisticated and you know, much more automated. It's always been automated attacks, but you know island hopping and infiltrating and self-forming malware and really sophisticated techniques. >> Yep. >> How are you thinking about that supply chain, bill of materials from inside Mongo and ultimately externally to your customers? >> So you've picked on my third favorite topic to talk about. So I came from the power industry before, so I've got a lot of experience with critical infrastructure. And that was really, I think, where a lot of the supply chain management rules and regulations came from. If you're building a turbine and the steel's coming from China, we would send people to China to make sure that the steel we were buying was the steel we were using. And so that became the H bomb. The hardware bill of materials, bad name. But, you know, we remember what it stood for. And then fast forward: President Biden's executive order. SBOs front and center, cloud first front and center. It's like, this is perfect. And so I was actually- I actually moderated a panel earlier this year at Homeland Security Week in DC, where we had a sneak CISA, So Dr. Allen Friedman from CISA, and also Patrick Weir from OWASP for the framework, CISA for the framework as well, and just the general guidance, and Snake for the front end. That was where my head was going. And MongoDB is the back-end database. And what we've done is we've taken our work with Snake and we now have a proof of concept for SBOs. And so I'm now trying to kind of package that, if you like, as a program and get the word out that SBOs shouldn't be something to be afraid of. If you want to do business with the government you're going to have to create one. We are offering a secure repository to store that data, the government could have access to that repository and see that data. So there's one source of truth. And so I think SBOs is going to be really interesting. I know that, you know, some of my peers are like, oh, it's just another box to tick. And I think it's more than that. I definitely- I've just, there's something percolating in the back of my mind that this is going to be big and we're going to be able to use it to hopefully not stop things like another Log4j, there's always going to be another Log4j, we know that. we don't know everything, the unknown unknown, but at least if we're prepared to go find stuff quicker than we were then before Log4j, I think having SBOs on hand, having that one source of truth, that one repository, I think is going to make it so much easier to find those things. >> Last question, what's the CISO's number one challenge? Either yours or the CISO, generally. >> Keeping up with the fire hose that is security. Like, what do you pick tomorrow? And if you pick the wrong thing, what's the impact? So that's why I'm always networking and talking to my peers. And, you know, we're sometimes like meerkats, you know. there's meerkats, you see like this, it's like, what do we talk about? But there's always something to talk about. And you just have to learn and keep learning. >> Last question, part B. As a hot technology company, that's, you know, rising star, you know not withstanding the tech lash and the stock market- >> Yeah. >> But Mongo's growing, you know, wonderfully. Do you find it easier to attract talent? Like many CISOs will say, you know, lack of talent is my biggest, biggest challenge. Do you find that that's not the challenge for you? >> Not at all. I think on two fronts, one, we have the champions program. So we've got a whole internal ecosystem who love working there. So the minute one of my jobs goes on the board, they get first dibs at it. So they'd already phoning their friends. So we've got, you know, there's ripple effects out from over a hundred people internally. You know, I think just having that, that's been a game changer. >> I was so looking forward to interviewing you, Lena, thanks so much for coming. >> Thank you, this was a pleasure. >> It was really great to have you. >> Thank you so much. Thank you. >> You're really welcome. All right, keep it right there. This is Dave Villante for theCUBE. We'll be right back at AWS Re:inforce22 right after this short break.

(calm electronic music) >> Okay, welcome back everyone to theCUBE's coverage here live in New York City for AWS Summit 2022. I'm John Furrier, host of theCUBE, but a great conversation here as the day winds down. First of all, 10,000 plus people, this is a big event, just New York City. So sign of the times that some headwinds are happening? I don't think so, not in the cloud enterprise innovation game. Lot going on, this innovation conversation we're going to have now is about the confluence of cloud scale integration data and the future of how FinTech and other markets are going to change with technology. We got Chris Thomas, the CTO of Slalom, and Rob Krugman, chief digital officer at Broadridge. Gentlemen, thanks for coming on theCUBE. >> Thanks for having us. >> So we had a talk before we came on camera about your firm, what you guys do, take a quick minute to just give the scope and size of your firm and what you guys work on. >> Yeah, so Broadridge is a global financial FinTech company. We work on, part of our business is capital markets and wealth, and that's about a third of our business, about $7 trillion a day clearing through our platforms. And then the other side of our business is communications where we help all different types of organizations communicate with their shareholders, communicate with their customers across a variety of different digital channels and capabilities. >> Yeah, and Slalom, give a quick one minute on Slalom. I know you guys, but for the folks that don't know you. >> Yeah, no problem. So Slalom is a modern consulting firm focused on strategy, technology, and business transformation. And me personally, I'm part of the element lab, which is focused on forward thinking technology and disruptive technology in the next five to 10 years. >> Awesome, and that's the scope of this conversation. The next five to 10 years, you guys are working on a project together, you're kind of customer partners. You're building something. What are you guys working on? I can't wait to jump into it, explain. >> Sure, so similar to Chris, at Broadridge, we've created innovation capability, innovation incubation capability, and one of the first areas we're experimenting in is digital assets. So what we're looking to do is we're looking at a variety of different areas where we think consolidation network effects that we could bring can add a significant amount of value. And so the area we're working on is this concept of a wallet of wallets. How do we actually consolidate assets that are held across a variety of different wallets, maybe traditional locations- >> Digital wallets. >> Digital wallets, but maybe even traditional accounts, bring that together and then give control back to the consumer of who they want to share that information with, how they want their transactions to be able to control. So the idea of, people talk about Web 3 being the internet of value. I often think about it as the internet of control. How do you return control back to the individual so that they can make decisions about how and who has access to their information and assets? >> It's interesting, I totally like the value angle, but your point is what's the chicken and the egg here, the cart before the horse, you can look at it both ways and say, okay, control is going to drive the value. This is an interesting nuance, right? >> Yes, absolutely. >> So in this architectural world, they thought about the data plane and the control plane. Everyone's trying to go old school, middleware thinking. Let's own the data plane, we'll win everything. Not going to happen if it goes decentralized, right, Chris? >> Yeah, yeah. I mean, we're building a decentralized application, but it really is built on top of AWS. We have a serverless architecture that scales as our business scales built on top of things like S3, Lambda, DynamoDB, and of course using those security principles like Cognito and AWS Gateway, API Gateway. So we're really building an architecture of Web 3 on top of the Web 2 basics in the cloud. >> I mean, all evolutions are abstractions on top of each other, IG, DNS, Key, it goes the whole nine yards. In digital, at least, that's the way. Question about serverless real quick. I saw that Redshift just launched general availability of serverless in Redshift? >> Yes. >> You're starting to see the serverless now part of almost all the services in AWS. Is that enabling that abstraction, because most people don't see it that way. They go, oh, well, Amazon's not Web 3. They got databases, you could use that stuff. So how do you connect the dots and cross the bridge to the future with the idea that I might not think Web 2 or cloud is Web 3? >> I'll jump in quick. I mean, I think it's the decentralize. If you think about decentralization. serverless and decentralization, you could argue are the same way of, they're saying the same thing in different ways. One is thinking about it from a technology perspective. One is thinking about it from an ecosystem perspective and how things come together. You need serverless components that can talk to each other and communicate with each other to actually really reach the promise of what Web 3 is supposed to be. >> So digital bits or digital assets, I call it digital bits, 'cause I think zero ones. If you digitize everything and everything has value or now control drives the value. I could be a soccer team. I have apparel, I have value in my logos, I have photos, I have CUBE videos. I mean some say that this should be an NFT. Yeah, right, maybe, but digital assets have to be protected, but owned. So ownership drives it too, right? >> Absolutely. >> So how does that fit in, how do you explain that? 'Cause I'm trying to tie the dots here, connect the dots and tie it together. What do I get if I go down this road that you guys are building? >> So I think one of the challenges of digital assets right now is that it's a closed community. And I think the people that play in it, they're really into it. And so you look at things like NFTs and you look at some of the other activities that are happening and there are certain naysayers that look at it and say, this stuff is not based upon value. It's a bunch of artwork, it can't be worth this. Well, how about we do a time out there and we actually look at the underlying technology that's supporting this, the blockchain, and the potential ramifications of that across the entire financial ecosystem, and frankly, all different types of ecosystems of having this immutable record, where information gets stored and gets sent and the ability to go back to it at all times, that's where the real power is. So I think we're starting to see. We've hit a bit of a hiccup, if you will, in the cryptocurrencies. They're going to continue to be there. They won't all be there. A lot of them will probably disappear, but they'll be a finite number. >> What percentage of stuff do you think is vapor BS? If you had to pick an order of magnitude number. >> (laughs) I would say at least 75% of it. (John laughs) >> I mean, there's quite a few projects that are failing right now, but it's interesting in that in the crypto markets, they're failing gracefully. Because it's on the blockchain and it's all very transparent. Things are checked, you know immediately which companies are insolvent and which opportunities are still working. So it's very, very interesting in my opinion. >> Well, and I think the ones that don't have valid premises are the ones that are failing. Like Terra and some of these other ones, if you actually really looked at it, the entire industry knew these things were no good. But then you look at stable coins. And you look at what's going on with CBDCs. These are backed by real underlying assets that people can be comfortable with. And there's not a question of, is this going to happen? The question is, how quickly is it going to happen and how quickly are we going to be using digital currencies? >> It's interesting, we always talk about software, software as money now, money is software and gold and oil's moving over to that crypto. How do you guys see software? 'Cause we were just arguing in the queue, Dave Vellante and I, before you guys came on that the software industry pretty much does not exist anymore, it's open source. So everything's open source as an industry, but the value is integration, innovation. So it's not just software, it's the free. So you got to, it's integration. So how do you guys see this software driving crypto? Because it is software defined money at the end of the day. It's a token. >> No, I think that's absolutely one of the strengths of the crypto markets and the Web 3 market is it's governed by software. And because of that, you can build a trust framework. Everybody knows it's on the public blockchain. Everybody's aware of the software that's driving the rules and the rules of engagement in this blockchain. And it creates that trust network that says, hey, I can transact with you even though I don't know anything about you and I don't need a middleman to tell me I can trust you. Because this software drives that trust framework. >> Lot of disruption, lot of companies go out of business as a middleman in these markets. >> Listen, the intermediaries either have to disrupt themselves or they will be disrupted. I think that's what we're going to learn here. And it's going to start in financial services, but it's going to go to a lot of different places. I think the interesting thing that's happening now is for the first time, you're starting to see the regulators start to get involved. Which is actually a really good thing for the market. Because to Chris's point, transparency is here, how do you actually present that transparency and that trust back to consumers so they feel comfortable once that problem is solved. And I think everyone in the industry welcomes it. All of a sudden you have this ecosystem that people can play in, they can build and they can start to actually create real value. >> Every structural change that I've been involved in my 30 plus year career has been around inflection points. There was always some sort of underbelly. So I'm not going to judge crypto. It's been in the market for a while, but it's a good sign there's innovation happening. So as now, clarity comes into what's real. I think you guys are talking a conversation I think is refreshing because you're saying, okay, cloud is real, Lambda, serverless, all these tools. So Web 3 is certainly real because it's a future architecture, but it's attracting the young, it's a cultural shift. And it's also cooler than boring Web 2 and cloud. So I think the cultural shift, the fact that it's got data involved, there's some disruption around middleman and intermediaries, makes it very attractive to tech geeks. You look at, I read a stat, I heard a stat from a friend in the Bay Area that 30% of Cal computer science students are dropping out and jumping into crypto. So it's attracting the technical nerds, alpha geeks. It's a cultural revolution and there's some cool stuff going on from a business model standpoint. >> There's one thing missing. The thing that's missing, it's what we're trying to work on, I think is experience. I think if you're being honest about the entire marketplace, what you would agree is that this stuff is not easy to use today, and that's got to be satisfied. You need to do something that if it's the 85 year old grandma that wants to actually participate in these markets that not only can they feel comfortable, but they actually know how to do it. You can't use these crazy tools where you use these terms. And I think the industry, as it grows up, will satisfy a lot of those issues. >> And I think this is why I want to tie back and get your reaction to this. I think that's why you guys talking about building on top of AWS is refreshing, 'cause it's not dogmatic. Well, we can't use Amazon, it's not really Web 3. Well, a database could be used when you need it. You don't need to write everything through the blockchain. Databases are a very valuable capability, you get serverless. So all these things now can work together. So what do you guys see for companies that want to be Web 3 for all the good reasons and how do they leverage cloud specifically to get there? What are some things that you guys have learned that you can point to and share, you want to start? >> Well, I think not everything has to be open and public to everybody. You're going to want to have some things that are secret. You're going to want to encrypt some things. You're going to want to put some things within your own walls. And that's where AWS really excels. I think you can have the best of both worlds. So that's my perspective on it. >> The only thing I would add to it, so my view is it's 2022. I actually was joking earlier. I think I was at the first re:Invent. And I remember walking in and this was a new industry. >> It was tiny. >> This is foundational. Like cloud is not a, I don't view like, we shouldn't be having that conversation anymore. Of course you should build this stuff on top of the cloud. Of course you should build it on top of AWS. It just makes sense. And we should, instead of worrying about those challenges, what we should be worrying about are how do we make these applications easier to use? How do we actually- >> Energy efficient. >> How do we enable the promise of what these things are going to bring, and actually make it real, because if it happens, think about traditional assets. There's projects going on globally that are looking at how do you take equity securities and actually move them to the blockchain. When that stuff happens, boom. >> And I like what you guys are doing, I saw the news out through this crypto winter, some major wallet exchanges that have been advertising are hurting. Take me through what you guys are thinking, what the vision is around the wallet of wallets. Is it to provide an experience for the user or the market industry itself? What's the target, is it both? Share the design goals for the wallet of wallets. >> My favorite thing about innovation and innovation labs is that we can experiment. So I'll go in saying we don't know what the final answer is going to be, but this is the premise that we have. In this disparate decentralized ecosystem, you need some mechanism to be able to control what's actually happening at the consumer level. So I think the key target is how do you create an experience where the consumer feels like they're in control of that value? How do they actually control the underlying assets? And then how does it actually get delivered to them? Is it something that comes from their bank, from their broker? Is it coming from an independent organization? How do they manage all of that information? And I think the last part of it are the assets. It's easy to think about cryptos and NFTs, but thinking about traditional assets, thinking about identity information and healthcare records, all of that stuff is going to become part of this ecosystem. And imagine being able to go someplace and saying, oh, you need my information. Well, I'm going to give it to you off my phone and I'm going to give it to you for the next 24 hours so you can use it, but after that you have no access to it. Or you're my financial advisor, here's a view of what I actually have, my underlying assets. What do you recommend I do? So I think we're going to see an evolution in the market. >> Like a data clean room. >> Yeah, but that you control. >> Yes! (laughs) >> Yes! >> I think about it very similarly as well. As my journey into the crypto market has gone through different pathways, different avenues. And I've come to a place where I'm really managing eight different wallets and it's difficult to figure exactly where all my assets are and having a tool like this will allow me to visualize and aggregate those assets and maybe even recombine them in unique ways, I think is hugely valuable. >> My biggest fear is losing my key. >> Well, and that's an experience problem that has to be solved, but let me give you, my favorite use case in this space is, 'cause NFTs, right? People are like, what does NFTs really mean? Title insurance, right? Anyone buy a house or refinance your mortgage? You go through this crazy process that costs seven or eight thousand dollars every single time you close on something to get title insurance so they could validate it. What if that title was actually sitting on the chain, you got an NFT that you put in your wallet and when it goes time to sell your house or to refinance, everything's there. Okay, I'm the owner of the house. I don't know, JP Morgan Chase has the actual mortgage. There's another lien, there's some taxes. >> It's like a link tree in the wallet. (laughs) >> Yeah, think about it, you got a smart contract. Boom, closing happens immediately. >> I think that's one of the most important things. I think people look at NFTs and they think, oh, this is art. And that's sort of how it started in the art and collectable space, but it's actually quickly moving towards utilities and tokenization and passes. And that's where I think the value is. >> And ownership and the token. >> Identity and ownership, especially. >> And the digital rights ownership and the economics behind it really have a lot of scale 'cause I appreciate the FinTech angle you are coming from because I can now see what's going on here with you. It's like, okay, we got to start somewhere. Let's start with the experience. The wallet's a tough nut to crack, 'cause that requires defacto participation in the industry as a defacto standard. So how are you guys doing there? Can you give an update and then how can people get, what's the project called and how do people get involved? >> Yeah, so we're still in the innovation, incubation stages. So we're not launching it yet. But what I will tell you is what a lot of our focus is, how do we make these transactional things that you do? How do we make it easy to pull all your assets together? How do we make it easy to move things from one location to the other location in ways that you're not using a weird cryptographic numeric value for your wallet, but you actually can use real nomenclature that you can renumber and it's easy to understand. Our expectation is that sometime in the fall, we'll actually be in a position to launch this. What we're going to do over the summer is we're going to start allowing people to play with it, get their feedback, and we're going to iterate. >> So sandbox in when, November? >> I think launch in the fall, sometime in the fall. >> Oh, this fall. >> But over the summer, what we're expecting is some type of friends and family type release where we can start to realize what people are doing and then fix the challenges, see if we're on the right track and make the appropriate corrections. >> So right now you guys are just together on this? >> Yep. >> The opening up friends and family or community is going to be controlled. >> It is, yeah. >> Yeah, as a group, I think one thing that's really important to highlight is that we're an innovation lab. We're working with Broadridge's innovation lab, that partnership across innovation labs has allowed us to move very, very quickly to build this. Actually, if you think about it, we were talking about this not too long ago and we're almost close to having an internal launch. So I think it's very rapid development. We follow a lot of the- >> There's buy-in across the board. >> Exactly, exactly, and we saw lot of very- >> So who's going to run this? A Dow, or your companies, is it going to be a separate company? >> So to be honest, we're not entirely sure yet. It's a new product that we're going to be creating. What we actually do with it. Our thought is within an innovation environment, there's three things you could do with something. You can make it a product within the existing infrastructure, you can create a new business unit or you can spin it off as something new. I do think this becomes a product within the organization based upon it's so aligned to what we do today, but we'll see. >> But you guys are financing it? >> Yes. >> As collective companies? >> Yeah, right. >> Got it, okay, cool. Well, let us know how we can help. If you guys want to do a remote in to theCUBE. I would love the mission you guys are on. I think this is the kind of work that every company should be doing in the new R and D. You got to jump in the deep end and swim as fast as possible. But I think you can do it. I think that is refreshing and that's smart. >> And you have to do it quick because this market, I think the one thing we would probably agree on is that it's moving faster than we could, every week there's something else that happens. >> Okay, so now you guys were at Consensus down in Austin when the winter hit and you've been in the business for a long time, you got to know the industries. You see where it's going. What was the big thing you guys learned, any scar tissue from the early data coming in from the collaboration? Was there some aha moments, was there some oh shoot moments? Oh, wow, I didn't think that was going to happen. Share some anecdotal stories from the experience. Good, bad, and if you want to be bold say ugly, too. >> Well, I think the first thing I want to say about the timing, it is the crypto winter, but I actually think now's a really great time to build something because everybody's continuing to build. Folks are focused on the future and that's what we are as well. In terms of some of the challenges, well, the Web 3 space is so new. And there's not a way to just go online and copy somebody else's work and rinse and repeat. We had to figure a lot of things on our own. We had to try different technologies, see which worked better and make sure that it was functioning the way we wanted it to function. Really, so it was not easy. >> They oversold that product out, that's good, like this team. >> But think about it, so the joke is that when winter is when real work happens. If you look at the companies that have not been affected by this it's the infrastructure companies and what it reminds me of, it's a little bit different, but 2001, we had the dot com bust. The entire industry blew up, but what came out of that? >> Everything that exists. >> Amazon, lots of companies grew up out of that environment. >> Everything that was promoted actually happened. >> Yes, but you know what didn't happen- >> Food delivery. >> But you know what's interesting that didn't happen- >> (laughs) Pet food, the soccer never happened. >> The whole Super Bowl, yes. (John laughs) In financial services we built on top of legacy. I think what Web 3 is doing, it's getting rid of that legacy infrastructure. And the banks are going to be involved. There's going to be new players and stuff. But what I'm seeing now is a doubling down of the infrastructure investment of saying okay, how do we actually make this stuff real so we can actually show the promise? >> One of the things I just shared, Rob, you'd appreciate this, is that the digital advertising market's changing because now banner ads and the old techniques are based on Web 2 infrastructure, basically DNS as we know it. And token problems are everywhere. Sites and silos are built because LinkedIn doesn't share information. And the sites want first party data. It's a hoarding exercise, so those practices are going to get decimated. So in comes token economics, that's going to get decimated. So you're already seeing the decline of media. And advertising, cookies are going away. >> I think it's going to change, it's going to be a flip, because I think right now you're not in control. Other people are in control. And I think with tokenomics and some of the other things that are going to happen, it gives back control to the individual. Think about it, right now you get advertising. Now you didn't say I wanted this advertising. Imagine the value of advertising when you say, you know what, I am interested in getting information about this particular type of product. The lead generation, the value of that advertising is significantly higher. >> Organic notifications. >> Yeah. >> Well, gentlemen, I'd love to follow up with you. I'm definitely going to ping in. Now I'm going to put CUBE coin back on the table. For our audience CUBE coin's coming. Really appreciate it, thanks for sharing your insights. Great conversation. >> Excellent, thank you for having us. >> Excellent, thank you so much. >> theCUBE's coverage here from New York City. I'm John Furrier, we'll be back with more live coverage to close out the day. Stay with us, we'll be right back. >> Excellent. (calm electronic music)

(upbeat music) >> Okay, welcome back everyone. CUBE's coverage of re:MARS, here in Las Vegas, in person. I'm John Furrier, host of theCUBE. This is the analyst panel wrap up analysis of the keynote, the show, past one and a half days. We got two great guests here. We got Andy Thurai, Vice President, Principal Consultant, Constellation Research. Larry Carvalho, Principal Consultant at RobustCloud LLC. Congratulations going out on your own. >> Thank you. >> Andy, great to see you. >> Great to see you as well. >> Guys, thanks for coming out. So this is the session where we break down and analyze, you guys are analysts, industry analysts, you go to all the shows, we see each other. You guys are analyzing the landscape. What does this show mean to you guys? 'Cause this is not obvious to the normal tech follower. The insiders see the confluence of robotics, space, automation and machine learning. Obviously, it's IoTs, industrials, it's a bunch of things. But there's some dots to connect. Let's start with you, Larry. What do you see here happening at this show? >> So you got to see how Amazon started, right? When AWS started. When AWS started, it primarily took the compute storage, networking of Amazon.com and put it as a cloud service, as a service, and started selling the heck out of it. This is a stage later now that Amazon.com has done a lot of physical activity, and using AIML and the robotics, et cetera, it's now the second phase of innovation, which is beyond digital transformation of back office processes, to the transformation of physical processes where people are now actually delivering remotely and it's an amazing area. >> So back office's IT data center kind of vibe. >> Yeah. >> You're saying front end, industrial life. >> Yes. >> Life as we know it. >> Right, right. I mean, I just stopped at a booth here and they have something that helps anybody who's stuck in the house who cannot move around. But with Alexa, order some water to bring them wherever they are in the house where they're stuck in their bed. But look at the innovation that's going on there right at the edge. So I think those are... >> John: And you got the Lunar, got the sex appeal of the space, Lunar Outpost interview, >> Yes. >> those guys. They got Rover on Mars. They're going to have be colonizing the moon. >> Yes. >> I made a joke, I'm like, "Well, I left a part back on earth, I'll be right back." (Larry and Andy laugh) >> You can't drive back to the office. So a lot of challenges. Andy, what's your take of the show? Take us your analysis. What's the vibe, what's your analysis so far? >> It's a great show. So, as Larry was saying, one of the thing was that when Amazon started, right? So they were more about cloud computing. So, which means is they try to commoditize more of data center components or compute components. So that was working really well for what I call it as a compute economy, right? >> John: Mm hmm. >> And I call the newer economy as more of a AIML-based data economy. So when you move from a compute economy into a data economy, there are things that come into the forefront that never existed before, never popular before. Things like your AIML model creation, model training, model movement, model influencing, all of the above, right? And then of course the robotics has come long way since then. And then some of what they do at the store, or the charging, the whole nine yards. So, the whole concept of all of these components, when you put them on re:Invent, such a big show, it was getting lost. So that's why they don't have it for a couple of years. They had it one year. And now all of a sudden they woke up and say, "You know what? We got to do this!" >> John: Yeah. >> To bring out this critical components that we have, that's ripe, mature for the world to next component. So that's why- I think they're pretty good stuff. And some of the robotics things I saw in there, like one of them I posted on my Twitter, it's about the robot dog, sniffing out the robot rover, which I thought was pretty hilarious. (All laugh) >> Yeah, this is the thing. You're seeing like the pandemic put everything on hold on the last re:Mars, and then the whole world was upside down. But a lot of stuff pulled forward. You saw the call center stuff booming. You saw the Zoomification of our workplace. And I think a lot of people got to the realization that this hybrid, steady-state's here. And so, okay. That settles that. But the digital transformation of actually physical work? >> Andy: Yeah. >> Location, the walk in and out store right over here we've seen that's the ghost store in Seattle. We've all been there. In fact, I was kind of challenged, try to steal something. I'm like, okay- (Larry laughs) I'm pulling all my best New Jersey moves on everyone. You know? >> Andy: You'll get charged for it. >> I couldn't get away with it. Two double packs, drop it, it's smart as hell. Can't beat the system. But, you bring that to where the AI machine learning, and the robotics meet, robots. I mean, we had robots here on theCUBE. So, I think this robotics piece is a huge IoT, 'cause we've been covering industrial IoT for how many years, guys? And you could know what's going on there. Huge cyber threats. >> Mm hmm. >> Huge challenges, old antiquated OT technology. So I see a confluence in the collision between that OT getting decimated, to your point. And so, do you guys see that? I mean, am I just kind of seeing mirage? >> I don't see it'll get decimated, it'll get replaced with a newer- >> John: Dave would call me out on that. (Larry laughs) >> Decimated- >> Microsoft's going to get killed. >> I think it's going to have to be reworked. And just right now, you want do anything in a shop floor, you have to have a physical wire connected to it. Now you think about 5G coming in, and without a wire, you get minute details, you get low latency, high bandwidth. And the possibilities are endless at the edge. And I think with AWS, they got Outposts, they got Snowcone. >> John: There's a threat to them at the edge. Outpost is not doing well. You talk to anyone out there, it's like, you can't find success stories. >> Larry: Yeah. >> I'm going to get hammered by Amazon people, "Oh, what're you're saying that?" You know, EKS for example, with serverless is kicking ass too. So, I mean I'm not saying Outpost was wrong answer, it was a right at the time, what, four years ago that came out? >> Yeah. >> Okay, so, but that doesn't mean it's just theirs. You got Dell Technologies want some edge action. >> Yeah. >> So does HPE. >> Yes. >> So you got a competitive edge situation. >> I agree with that and I think that's definitely not Amazon's strong point, but like everything, they try to make it easy to use. >> John: Yeah. >> You know, you look at the AIML and they got Canvas. So Canvas says, hey, anybody can do AIML. If they can do that for the physical robotic processes, or even like with Outpost and Snowcone, that'll be good. I don't think they're there yet, and they don't have the presence in the market, >> John: Yeah. >> like HPE and, >> John: Well, let me ask you guys this question, because I think this brings up the next point. Will the best technology win or will the best solution win? Because if cloud's a platform and all software's open source, which you can make those assumptions, you then say, hey, they got this killer robotics thing going on with Artemis and Moonshot, they're trying to colonize the moon, but oh, they discovered a killer way to solve a big problem. Does something fall out of this kind of re:Mars environment, that cracks the code and radically changes and disrupts the IoT game? That's my open question. I don't know the answer. I'd love to get your take on what might be possible, what wild card's out there around, disrupting the edge. >> So one thing I see the way, so when IoT came into the world of play, it's when you're digitizing the physical world, it's IoT that does digitalization part of that actually, right? >> But then it has its own set of problems. >> John: Yeah. >> You're talking about you installing sensor everywhere, right? And not only installing your own sensor, but also you're installing competitor sensors. So in a given square feet how many sensors can you accommodate? So there are physical limitations on liabilities of bandwidth and networking all of that. >> John: And integration. >> As well. >> John: Your point. >> Right? So when that became an issue, this is where I was talking to the robotic guys here, a couple of companies, and one of the use cases they were talking about, which I thought was pretty cool, is, rather than going the sensor route, you go the robot route. So if you have either a factor that you want to map out, you put as many sensors on your robot, whatever that is, and then you make it go around, map the whole thing, and then you also do a surveillance in the whole nine yards. So, you can either have a fixed sensors or you can have moving sensors. So you can have three or four robots. So initially, when I was asking them about the price of it, when they were saying about a hundred thousand dollars, I was like, "Who would buy that?" (John and Larry laugh) >> When they then explained that, this is the use case, oh, that makes sense, because if you had to install, entire factory floor sensors, you're talking about millions of dollars. >> John: Yeah. >> But if you do the moveable sensors in this way, it's a lot cheaper. >> John: Yeah, yeah. >> So it's based on your use case, what are your use cases? What are you trying to achieve? >> The general purpose is over. >> Yeah. >> Which you're getting at, and that the enablement, this is again, this is the cloud scale open question- >> Yep. >> it's, okay, the differentiations isn't going to be open source software. That's open. >> It's going to be in the, how you configure it. >> Yes. >> What workflows you might have, the data streams. >> I think, John, you're bringing up a very good point about general purpose versus special purpose. Yesterday Zoox was on the stage and when they talked about their vehicle, it's made just for self-driving. You walk around in Vegas, over here, you see a bunch of old fashioned cars, whether they're Ford or GM- >> and they put all these devices around it, but you're still driving the same car. >> John: Yeah, exactly. >> You can retrofit those, but I don't think that kind of IoT is going to work. But if you redo the whole thing, we are going to see a significant change in how IoT delivers value all the way from the industrial to home, to healthcare, mining, agriculture, it's going to have to redo. I'll go back to the OT question. There are some OT guys, I know Rockwell and Siemens, some of them are innovating faster. The ones who innovate faster to keep up with the IT side, as well as the MLAI model are going to be the winners on that one. >> John: Yeah, I agree. Andy, your thoughts on manufacturing, you brought up the sensor thing. Robotics ultimately is, end of the day, an opportunity there. Obviously machine learning, we know what that does. As we move into these more autonomous builds, what does that look like? And is Amazon positioned well there? Obviously they have big manufacturers. Some are saying that they might want to get out of that business too, that Jassy's evaluating that some are saying. So, where does this all lead for that robotics manufacturing lifestyle, walk in, grab my food? 'Cause it's all robotics and AI at the end of the day, I got sensors, I got cameras, I got non-humans moving heavy lifting stuff, fixing the moon will be done by robots, not humans. So it's all coming. What's your analysis? >> Well, so, the point about robotics is on how far it has come, it is unbelievable, right? Couple of examples. One was that I was just talking to somebody, was explaining to them, to see that robot dog over there at the Boston Dynamics one- >> John: Yeah. >> climbing up and down the stairs. >> Larry: Yeah. >> That's more like the dinosaur movie opening the doors scene. (John and Larry laugh) It's like that for me, because the coordinated things, it is able to go walk up and down, that's unbelievable. But okay, it does that, and then there was also another video which is going on viral on the internet. This guy kicks the dog, robot dog, and then it falls down and it gets back up, and the sentiment that people were feeling for the dog, (Larry laughs) >> you can't, it's a robot, but people, it just comes at that level- >> John: Empathy, for a non-human. >> Yeah. >> But you see him, hey you, get off my lawn, you know? It's like, where are we? >> It has come to that level that people are able to kind of not look at that as a robot, but as more like a functioning, almost like a pet-level, human-level being. >> John: Yeah. >> And you saw that the human-like walking robot there as well. But to an extent, in my view, they are all still in an experimentation, innovation phase. It doesn't made it in the industrial terms yet. >> John: Yeah, not yet, it's coming. >> But, the problem- >> John: It's coming fast. That's what I'm trying to figure out is where you guys see Amazon and the industry relative to what from the fantasy coming reality- >> Right. >> of space in Mars, which is, it's intoxicating, let's face it. People love this. The nerds are all here. The geeks are all here. It's a celebration. James Hamilton's here- >> Yep. >> trying to get him on theCUBE. And he's here as a civilian. Jeff Barr, same thing. I'm here, not for Amazon, I bought a ticket. No, you didn't buy a ticket. (Larry laughs) >> I'm going to check on that. But, he's geeking out. >> Yeah. >> They're there because they want to be here. >> Yeah. >> Not because they have to work here. >> Well, I mean, the thing is, the innovation velocity has increased, because, in the past, remember, the smaller companies couldn't innovate because they don't have the platform. Now Compute is a platform available at the scale you want, AI is available at the scale. Every one of them is available at the scale you want. So if you have an idea, it's easy to innovate. The innovation velocity is high. But where I see most of the companies failing, whether startup or big company, is that you don't find the appropriate use case to solve, and then don't sell it to the right people to buy that. So if you don't find the right use case or don't sell the right value proposition to the actual buyer, >> John: Mm hmm. >> then why are you here? What are you doing? (John laughs) I mean, you're not just an invention, >> John: Eh, yeah. >> like a telephone kind of thing. >> Now, let's get into next talk track. I want to get your thoughts on the experience here at re:Mars. Obviously AWS and the Amazon people kind of combined effort between their teams. The event team does a great job. I thought the event, personally, was first class. The coffee didn't come in late today, I was complaining about that, (Larry laughs) >> people complaining out there, at CUBE reviews. But world class, high bar on the quality of the event. But you guys were involved in the analyst program. You've been through the walkthrough, some of the briefings. I couldn't do that 'cause I'm doing theCUBE interviews. What would you guys learn? What were some of the key walkaways, impressions? Amazon's putting all new teams together, seems on the analyst relations. >> Larry: Yeah. >> They got their mojo booming. They got three shows now, re:Mars, re:inforce, re:invent. >> Andy: Yeah. >> Which will be at theCUBE at all three. Now we got that coverage going, what's it like? What was the experience like? Did you feel it was good? Where do they need to improve? How would you grade the Amazon team? >> I think they did a great job over here in just bringing all the physical elements of the show. Even on the stage, where they had robots in there. It made it real and it's not just fake stuff. And every, or most of the booths out there are actually having- >> John: High quality demos. >> high quality demos. (John laughs) >> John: Not vaporware. >> Yeah, exactly. Not vaporware. >> John: I won't say the name of the company. (all laugh) >> And even the sessions were very good. They went through details. One thing that stood out, which is good, and I cover Low Code/No Code, and Low Code/No Code goes across everything. You know, you got DevOps No Low-Code Low-Code. You got AI Low Code/No Code. You got application development Low Code/No Code. What they have done with AI with Low Code/No Code is very powerful with Canvas. And I think that has really grown the adoption of AI. Because you don't have to go and train people what to do. And then, people are just saying, Hey, let me kick the tires, let me use it. Let me try it. >> John: It's going to be very interesting to see how Amazon, on that point, handles this, AWS handles this data tsunami. It's cause of Snowflake. Snowflake especially running the table >> Larry: Yeah. >> on the old Hadoop world. I think Dave had a great analysis with other colleagues last week at Snowflake Summit. But still, just scratching the surface. >> Larry: Yeah. >> The question is, how shared that ecosystem, how will that morph? 'Cause right now you've got Data Bricks, you've got Snowflake and a handful of others. Teradata's got some new chops going on there and a bunch of other folks. Some are going to win and lose in this downturn, but still, the scale that's needed is massive. >> So you got data growing so much, you were talking earlier about the growth of data and they were talking about the growth. That is a big pie and the pie can be shared by a lot of folks. I don't think- >> John: And snowflake pays AWS, remember that? >> Right, I get it. (John laughs) >> I get it. But they got very unique capabilities, just like Netflix has very unique capabilities. >> John: Yeah. >> They also pay AWS. >> John: Yeah. >> Right? But they're competing on prime. So I really think the cooperation is going to be there. >> John: Yeah. >> The pie is so big >> John: Yeah. >> that there's not going to be losers, but everybody could be winners. >> John: I'd be interested to follow up with you guys after next time we have an event together, we'll get you back on and figure out how do you measure this transitions? You went to IDC, so they had all kinds of ways to measure shipments. >> Larry: Yep. >> Even Gartner had fumbled for years, the Magic Quadrant on IaaS and PaaS when they had the market share. (Larry laughs) And then they finally bundled PaaS and IaaS together after years of my suggesting, thank you very much Gartner. (Larry laughs) But that just performs as the landscape changes so does the scoreboard. >> Yep. >> Right so, how do you measure who's winning and who's losing? How can we be critical of Amazon so they can get better? I mean, Andy Jassy always said to me, and Adam Salassi same way, we want to hear how bad we're doing so we can get better. >> Yeah. >> So they're open-minded to feedback. I mean, not (beep) posting on them, but they're open to critical feedback. What do you guys, what feedback would you give Amazon? Are they winning? I see them number one clearly over Azure, by miles. And even though Azure's kicking ass and taking names, getting back in the game, Microsoft's still behind, by a long ways, in some areas. >> Andy: Yes. In some ways. >> So, the scoreboard's changing. What's your thoughts on that? >> So, look, I mean, at the end of the day, when it comes to compute, right, Amazon is a clear winner. I mean, there are others who are catching up to it, but still, they are the established leader. And it comes with its own advantages because when you're trying to do innovation, when you're trying to do anything else, whether it's a data collection, we were talking about the data sensors, the amount of data they are collecting, whether it's the store, that self-serving store or other innovation projects, what they have going on. The storage compute and process of that requires a ton of compute. And they have that advantage with them. And, as I mentioned in my last article, one of my articles, when it comes to AIML and data programs, there is a rich and there is a poor. And the rich always gets richer because they, they have one leg up already. >> John: Yeah. >> I mean the amount of model training they have done, the billion or trillion dollar trillion parametrization, fine tuning of the model training and everything. They could do it faster. >> John: Yeah. >> Which means they have a leg up to begin with. So unless you are given an opportunity as a smaller, mid-size company to compete at them at the same level, you're going to start at the negative level to begin with. You have a lot of catch up to do. So, the other thing about Amazon is that they, when it comes to a lot of areas, they admit that they have to improve in certain areas and they're open and willing and listen to the people. >> Where are you, let's get critical. Let's do some critical analysis. Where does Amazon Websters need to get better? In your opinion, what criticism would you, in a constructive way, share? >> I think on the open source side, they need to be more proactive in, they are already, but they got to get even better than what they are. They got to engage with the community. They got to be able to talk on the open source side, hey, what are we doing? Maybe on the hardware side, can they do some open-sourcing of that? They got graviton. They got a lot of stuff. Will they be able to share the wealth with other folks, other than just being on an Amazon site, on the edge with their partners. >> John: Got it. >> If they can now take that, like you said, compute with what they have with a very end-to-end solution, the full stack. And if they can extend it, that's going to be really beneficial for them. >> Awesome. Andy, final word here. >> So one area where I think they could improve, which would be a game changer would be, right now, if you look at all of their solutions, if you look at the way they suggest implementation, the innovations, everything that comes out, comes out across very techy-oriented. The persona is very techy-oriented. Very rarely their solutions are built to the business audience or to the decision makers. So if I'm, say, an analyst, if I want to build, a business analyst rather, if I want to build a model, and then I want to deploy that or do some sort of application, mobile application, or what have you, it's a little bit hard. It's more techy-oriented. >> John: Yeah, yeah. >> So, if they could appeal or build a higher level abstraction of how to build and deploy applications for business users, or even build something industry specific, that's where a lot of the legacy companies succeeded. >> John: Yeah. >> Go after manufacturing specific or education. >> Well, we coined the term 'Supercloud' last re:Invent, and that's what we see. And Jerry Chen at Greylock calls it Castles in the Cloud, you can create these moats >> Yep. >> on top of the CapEx >> Yep. >> of Amazon. >> Exactly. >> And ride their back. >> Yep. >> And the difference in what you're paying and what you're charging, if you're good, like a Snowflake or a Mongo. I mean, Mongo's, they're just as big as Snow, if not bigger on Amazon than Snowflake is. 'Cause they use a lot of compute. No one turns off their database. (John laughs) >> Snowflake a little bit different, a little nuanced point, but, this is the new thing. You see Goldman Sachs, you got Capital One. They're building their own kind of, I call them sub clouds, but Dave Vellante says it's a Supercloud. And that essentially is the model. And then once you have a Supercloud, you say, great, I'm going to make sure it works on Azure and Google. >> Andy: Yep. >> And Alibaba if I have to. So, we're kind of seeing a playbook. >> Andy: Mm hmm. >> But you can't get it wrong 'cause it scales. >> Larry: Yeah, yeah. >> You can't scale the wrong answer. >> Andy: Yeah. >> So that seems to be what I'm watching is, who gets it right? Product market fit. Then if they roll it out to the cloud, then it becomes a Supercloud, and that's pure product market fit. So I think that's something that I've seen some people trying to figure out. And then, are you a supplier to the Superclouds? Like a Dell? Or you become an enabler? >> Andy: Yeah. >> You know, what's Dell Technologies do? >> Larry: Yeah. >> I mean, how do the box movers compete? >> Larry: I, the whole thing is now hybrid and you're going to have to see just, you said. (Larry laughs) >> John: Hybrid's a steady-state. I don't need to. >> Andy: I mean, >> By the way we're (indistinct), we can't get the chips, cause Broadcom and Apple bought 'em all. (Larry laughs) I mean there's a huge chip problem going on. >> Yes. I agree. >> Right now. >> I agree. >> I mean all these problems when you attract to a much higher level, a lot of those problems go away because you don't care about what they're using underlying as long as you deliver my solution. >> Larry: Yes. >> Yeah, it could be significantly, a little bit faster than what it used to be. But at the end of the day, are you solving my specific use case? >> John: Yeah. >> Then I'm willing to wait a little bit longer. >> John: Yeah. Time's on our side and now they're getting the right answers. Larry, Andy, thanks for coming on. This great analyst session turned into more of a podcast vibe, but you know what? (Larry laughs) To chill here at re:Mars, thanks for coming on, and we unpacked a lot. Thanks for sharing. >> Both: Thank you. >> Appreciate it. We'll get you back on. We'll get you in the rotation. We'll take it virtual. Do a panel. Do a panel, do some panels around this. >> Larry: Absolutely. >> Andy: Oh this not virtual, this physical. >> No we're live right now! (all laugh) We get back to Palo Alto. You guys are influencers. Thanks for coming on. You guys are moving the market, congratulations. Take a minute, quick minute each to plug any work you're doing for the people watching. Larry, what are you working on? Andy? You go after Larry, what you're working on. >> Yeah. So since I started my company, RobustCloud, since I left IDC about a year ago, I'm focused on edge computing, cloud-native technologies, and Low Code/No Code. And basically I help companies put their business value together. >> All right, Andy, what are you working on? >> I do a lot of work on the AIML areas. Particularly, last few of my reports are in the AI Ops incident management and ML Ops areas of how to generally improve your operations. >> John: Got it, yeah. >> In other words, how do you use the AIML to improve your IT operations? How do you use IT Ops to improve your AIML efficiency? So those are the- >> John: The real hardcore business transformation. >> Yep. >> All right. Guys, thanks so much for coming on the analyst session. We do keynote review, breaking down re:Mars after day two. We got a full day tomorrow. I'm John Furrier with theCUBE. See you next time. (pleasant music)

(bright music) >> Okay, we're back in theCUBE. We said we were signing off for the night, but during the hallway track, we ran into old friend Stu Miniman who was the Director of Market Insights at Red Hat. Stu, friend of theCUBE done the thousands of CUBE interviews. >> Dave, it's great to be here. Thanks for pulling me on, you and I hosted Red Hat Summit before. It's great to see Paul here. I was actually, I was talking to some of the Red Hatters walking around Boston. It's great to have an event here. Boston's got strong presence and I understand, I think was either first or second year, they had it over... What's the building they're tearing down right down the road here. Was that the World Trade Center? I think that's where they actually held it, the first time they were here. We hosted theCUBE >> So they moved up. >> at the Hines Convention Center. We did theCUBE for summit at the BCEC next door. And of course, with the pandemic being what it was, we're a little smaller, nice intimate event here. It's great to be able to room the hall, see a whole bunch of people and lots watching online. >> It's great, it's around the same size as those, remember those Vertica Big Data events that we used to have here. And I like that you were commenting out at the theater and the around this morning for the keynotes, that was good. And the keynotes being compressed, I think, is real value for the attendees, you know? 'Cause people come to these events, they want to see each other, you know? They want to... It's like the band getting back together. And so when you're stuck in the keynote room, it's like, "Oh, it's okay, it's time to go." >> I don't know that any of us used to sitting at home where I could just click to another tab or pause it or run for, do something for the family, or a quick bio break. It's the three-hour keynote I hope has been retired. >> But it's an interesting point though, that the virtual event really is driving the physical and this, the way Red Hat marketed this event was very much around the virtual attendee. Physical was almost an afterthought, so. >> Right, this is an invite only for in-person. So you're absolutely right. It's optimizing the things that are being streamed, the online audience is the big audience. And we just happy to be in here to clap and do some things see around what you're doing. >> Wonderful see that becoming the norm. >> I think like virtual Stu, you know this well when virtual first came in, nobody had a clue with what they were doing. It was really hard. They tried different things, they tried to take the physical and just jam it into the virtual. That didn't work, they tried doing fun things. They would bring in a famous person or a comedian. And that kind of worked, I guess, but everybody showed up for that and then left. And I think they're trying to figure it out what this hybrid thing is. I've seen it both ways. I've seen situations like this, where they're really sensitive to the virtual. I've seen others where that's the FOMO of the physical, people want physical. So, yeah, I think it depends. I mean, reinvent last year was heavy physical. >> Yeah, with 15,000 people there. >> Pretty long keynotes, you know? So maybe Amazon can get away with it, but I think most companies aren't going to be able to. So what is the market telling you? What are these insights? >> So Dave just talking about Amazon, obviously, the world I live in cloud and that discussion of cloud, the journey that customers are going on is where we're spending a lot of the discussions. So, it was great to hear in the keynote, talked about our deep partnerships with the cloud providers and what we're doing to help people with, you like to call it super cloud, some call it hybrid, or multi-cloud... >> New name. (crosstalk) Meta-Cloud, come on. >> All right, you know if Che's my executive, so it's wonderful. >> Love it. >> But we'll see, if I could put on my VR Goggles and that will help me move things. But I love like the partnership announcement with General Motors today because not every company has the needs of software driven electric vehicles all over the place. But the technology that we build for them actually has ramifications everywhere. We've working to take Kubernetes and make it smaller over time. So things that we do at the edge benefit the cloud, benefit what we do in the data center, it's that advancement of science and technology just lifts all boats. >> So what's your take on all this? The EV and software on wheels. I mean, Tesla obviously has a huge lead. It's kind of like the Amazon of vehicles, right? It's sort of inspired a whole new wave of innovation. Now you've got every automobile manufacturer kind of go and after. That is the future of vehicles is something you followed or something you have an opinion on Stu? >> Absolutely. It's driving innovation in some ways, the way the DOS drove innovation on the desktop, if you remember the 64K DOS limit, for years, that was... The software developers came up with some amazing ways to work within that 64K limit. Then when it was gone, we got bloatware, but it actually does enforce a level of discipline on you to try to figure out how to make software run better, run more efficiently. And that has upstream impacts on the enterprise products. >> Well, right. So following your analogy, you talk about the enablement to the desktop, Linux was a huge influence on allowing the individual person to write code and write software, and what's happening in the EV, it's software platform. All of these innovations that we're seeing across industries, it's how is software transforming things. We go back to the mark end reasons, software's eating the world, open source is the way that software is developed. Who's at the intersection of all those? We think we have a nice part to play in that. I loved tha- Dave, I don't know if you caught at the end of the keynote, Matt Hicks basically said, "Our mission isn't just to write enterprise software. "Our mission is based off of open source because open source unlocks innovation for the world." And that's one of the things that drew me to Red Hat, it's not just tech in good places, but allowing underrepresented, different countries to participate in what's happening with software. And we can all move that ball forward. >> Well, can we declare victory for open source because it's not just open source products, but everything that's developed today, whether proprietary or open has open source in it. >> Paul, I agree. Open source is the development model period, today. Are there some places that there's proprietary? Absolutely. But I had a discussion with Deepak Singh who's been on theCUBE many times. He said like, our default is, we start with open source code. I mean, even Amazon when you start talking about that. >> I said this, the $70 billion business on open source. >> Exactly. >> Necessarily give it back, but that say, Hey, this is... All's fair in tech and more. >> It is interesting how the managed service model has sort of rescued open source, open source companies, that were trying to do the Red Hat model. No one's ever really successfully duplicated the Red Hat model. A lot of companies were floundering and failing. And then the managed service option came along. And so now they're all cloud service providers. >> So the only thing I'd say is that there are some other peers we have in the industry that are built off open source they're doing okay. The recent example, GitLab and Hashicorp, both went public. Hashi is doing some managed services, but it's not the majority of their product. Look at a company like Mongo, they've heavily pivoted toward the managed service. It is where we see the largest growth in our area. The products that we have again with Amazon, with Microsoft, huge growth, lots of interest. It's one of the things I spend most of my time talking on. >> I think Databricks is another interesting example 'cause Cloudera was the now company and they had the sort of open core, and then they had the proprietary piece, and they've obviously didn't work. Databricks when they developed Spark out of Berkeley, everybody thought they were going to do kind of a similar model. Instead, they went for all in managed services. And it's really worked well, I think they were ahead of that curve and you're seeing it now is it's what customers want. >> Well, I mean, Dave, you cover the database market pretty heavily. How many different open source database options are there today? And that's one of the things we're solving. When you look at what is Red Hat doing in the cloud? Okay, I've got lots of databases. Well, we have something called, it's Red Hat Open Database Access, which is from a developer, I don't want to have to think about, I've got six different databases, which one, where's the repository? How does all that happen? We give that consistency, it's tied into OpenShift, so it can help abstract some of those pieces. we've got same Kafka streaming and we've got APIs. So it's frameworks and enablers to help bridge that gap between the complexity that's out there, in the cloud and for the developer tool chain. >> That's really important role you guys play though because you had this proliferation, you mentioned Mongo. So many others, Presto and Starbursts, et cetera, so many other open source options out there now. And companies, developers want to work with multiple databases within the same application. And you have a role in making that easy. >> Yeah, so and that is, if you talk about the question I get all the time is, what's next for Kubernetes? Dave, you and I did a preview for KubeCon and it's automation and simplicity that we need to be. It's not enough to just say, "Hey, we've got APIs." It's like Dave, we used to say, "We've got standards? Great." Everybody's implementation was a little bit different. So we have API Sprawl today. So it's building that ecosystem. You've been talking to a number of our partners. We are very active in the community and trying to do things that can lift up the community, help the developers, help that cloud native ecosystem, help our customers move faster. >> Yeah API's better than scripts, but they got to be managed, right? So, and that's really what you guys are doing that's different. You're not trying to own everything, right? It's sort of antithetical to how billions and trillions are made in the IT industry. >> I remember a few years ago we talked here, and you look at the size that Red Hat is. And the question is, could Red Hat have monetized more if the model was a little different? It's like, well maybe, but that's not the why. I love that they actually had Simon Sinek come in and work with Red Hat and that open, unlocks the world. Like that's the core, it's the why. When I join, they're like, here's a book of Red Hat, you can get it online and that why of what we do, so we never have to think of how do we get there. We did an acquisition in the security space a year ago, StackRox, took us a year, it's open source. Stackrox.io, it's community driven, open source project there because we could have said, "Oh, well, yeah, it's kind of open source and there's pieces that are open source, but we want it to be fully open source." You just talked to Gunnar about how he's RHEL nine, based off CentOS stream, and now developing out in the open with that model, so. >> Well, you were always a big fan of Whitehurst culture book, right? It makes a difference. >> The open organization and right, Red Hat? That culture is special. It's definitely interesting. So first of all, most companies are built with the hierarchy in mind. Had a friend of mine that when he joined Red Hat, he's like, I don't understand, it's almost like you have like lots of individual contractors, all doing their things 'cause Red Hat works on thousands of projects. But I remember talking to Rackspace years ago when OpenStack was a thing and they're like, "How do you figure out what to work on?" "Oh, well we hired great people and they work on what's important to them." And I'm like, "That doesn't sound like a business." And he is like, "Well, we struggle sometimes to that balance." Red Hat has found that balance because we work on a lot of different projects and there are people inside Red Hat that are, you know, they care more about the project than they do the business, but there's the overall view as to where we participate and where we productize because we're not creating IP because it's all an open source. So it's the monetizations, the relationships we have our customers, the ecosystems that we build. And so that is special. And I'll tell you that my line has been Red Hat on the inside is even more Red Hat. The debates and the discussions are brutal. I mean, technical people tearing things apart, questioning things and you can't be thin skinned. And the other thing is, what's great is new people. I've talked to so many people that started at Red Hat as interns and will stay for seven, eight years. And they come there and they have as much of a seat at the table, and when I talk to new people, your job, is if you don't understand something or you think we might be able to do it differently, you better speak up because we want your opinion and we'll take that, everybody takes that into consideration. It's not like, does the decision go all the way up to this executive? And it's like, no, it's done more at the team. >> The cultural contrast between that and your parent, IBM, couldn't be more dramatic. And we talked earlier with Paul Cormier about has IBM really walked the walk when it comes to leaving Red Hat alone. Naturally he said, "Yes." Well what's your perspective. >> Yeah, are there some big blue people across the street or something I heard that did this event, but look, do we interact with IBM? Of course. One of the reasons that IBM and IBM Services, both products and services should be able to help get us breadth in the marketplace. There are times that we go arm and arm into customer meetings and there are times that customers tell us, "I like Red Hat, I don't like IBM." And there's other ones that have been like, "Well, I'm a long time IBM, I'm not sure about Red Hat." And we have to be able to meet all of those customers where they are. But from my standpoint, I've got a Red Hat badge, I've got a Red Hat email, I've got Red Hat benefits. So we are fiercely independent. And you know, Paul, we've done blogs and there's lots of articles been written is, Red Hat will stay Red Hat. I didn't happen to catch Arvin I know was on CNBC today and talking at their event, but I'm sure Red Hat got mentioned, but... >> Well, he talks about Red Hat all time. >> But in his call he's talking backwards. >> It's interesting that he's not here, greeting this audience, right? It's again, almost by design, right? >> But maybe that's supposed to be... >> Hundreds of yards away. >> And one of the questions being in the cloud group is I'm not out pitching IBM Cloud, you know? If a customer comes to me and asks about, we have a deep partnership and IBM will be happy to tell you about our integrations, as opposed to, I'm happy to go into a deep discussion of what we're doing with Google, Amazon, and Microsoft. So that's how we do it. It's very different Dave, from you and I watch really closely the VMware-EMC, VMware-Dell, and how that relationship. This one is different. We are owned by IBM, but we mostly, it does IBM fund initiatives and have certain strategic things that are done, absolutely. But we maintain Red Hat. >> But there are similarities. I mean, VMware crowd didn't want to talk about EMC, but they had to, they were kind of forced to. Whereas, you're not being forced to. >> And then once Dell came in there, it was joint product development. >> I always thought a spin in. Would've been the more effective, of course, Michael Dell and Egon wouldn't have gotten their $40 billion out. But I think a spin in was more natural based on where they were going. And it would've been, I think, a more dominant position in the marketplace. They would've had more software, but again, financially it wouldn't have made as much sense, but that whole dynamic is different. I mean, but people said they were going to look at VMware as a model and it's been largely different because remember, VMware of course was a separate company, now is a fully separate company. Red Hat was integrated, we thought, okay, are they going to get blue washed? We're watching and watching, and watching, you had said, well, if the Red Hat culture isn't permeating IBM, then it's a failure. And I don't know if that's happening, but it's definitely... >> I think a long time for that. >> It's definitely been preserved. >> I mean, Dave, I know I read one article at the beginning of the year is, can Arvin make IBM, Microsoft Junior? Follow the same turnaround that Satya Nadella drove over there. IBM I think making some progress, I mean, I read and watch what you and the team are all writing about it. And I'll withhold judgment on IBM. Obviously, there's certain financial things that we'd love to see IBM succeed. We worry about our business. We do our thing and IBM shares our results and they've been solid, so. >> Microsoft had such massive cash flow that even bomber couldn't screw it up. Well, I mean, this is true, right? I mean, you think about how were relevant Microsoft was in the conversation during his tenure and yet they never got really... They maintained a position so that when the Nadella came in, they were able to reascend and now are becoming that dominant player. I mean, IBM just doesn't have that cash flow and that luxury, but I mean, if he pulls it off, he'll be the CEO of the decade. >> You mentioned partners earlier, big concern when the acquisition was first announced, was that the Dells and the HP's and the such wouldn't want to work with Red Hat anymore, you've sort of been here through that transition. Is that an issue? >> Not that I've seen, no. I mean, the hardware suppliers, the ISVs, the GSIs are all very important. It was great to see, I think you had Accenture on theCUBE today, obviously very important partner as we go to the cloud. IBM's another important partner, not only for IBM Cloud, but IBM Services, deep partnership with Azure and AWS. So those partners and from a technology standpoint, the cloud native ecosystem, we talked about, it's not just a Red Hat product. I constantly have to talk about, look, we have a lot of pieces, but your developers are going to have other tools that they're going to use and the security space. There is no such thing as a silver bullet. So I've been having some great conversations here already this week with some of our partners that are helping us to round out that whole solution, help our customers because it has to be, it's an ecosystem. And we're one of the drivers to help that move forward. >> Well, I mean, we were at Dell Tech World last week, and there's a lot of talk about DevSecOps and DevOps and Dell being more developer friendly. Obviously they got a long way to go, but you can't have that take that posture and not have a relationship with Red Hat. If all you got is Pivotal and VMware, and Tansu >> I was thrilled to hear the OpenShift mention in the keynote when they talked about what they were doing. >> How could you not, how could you have any credibility if you're just like, Oh, Pivotal, Pivotal, Pivotal, Tansu, Tansu. Tansu is doing its thing. And they smart strategy. >> VMware is also a partner of ours, but that we would hope that with VMware being independent, that does open the door for us to do more with them. >> Yeah, because you guys have had a weird relationship with them, under ownership of EMC and then Dell, right? And then the whole IBM thing. But it's just a different world now. Ecosystems are forming and reforming, and Dell's building out its own cloud and it's got to have... Look at Amazon, I wrote about this. I said, "Can you envision the day where Dell actually offers competitive products in its suite, in its service offering?" I mean, it's hard to see, they're not there yet. They're not even close. And they have this high say/do ratio, or really it's a low say/do, they say high say/do, but look at what they did with Nutanix. You look over- (chuckles) would tell if it's the Cisco relationship. So it's got to get better at that. And it will, I really do believe. That's new thinking and same thing with HPE. And, I don't know about Lenovo that not as much of an ecosystem play, but certainly Dell and HPE. >> Absolutely. Michael Dell would always love to poke at HPE and HP really went very far down the path of their own products. They went away from their services organization that used to be more like IBM, that would offer lots of different offerings and very much, it was HP Invent. Well, if we didn't invent it, you're not getting it from us. So Dell, we'll see, as you said, the ecosystems are definitely forming, converging and going in lots of different directions. >> But your position is, Hey, we're here, we're here to help. >> Yeah, we're here. We have customers, one of the best proof points I have is the solution that we have with Amazon. Amazon doesn't do the engineering work to make us a native offering if they didn't have the customer demand because Amazon's driven off of data. So they came to us, they worked with us. It's a lot of work to be able to make that happen, but you want to make it frictionless for customers so that they can adopt that. That's a long path. >> All right, so evening event, there's a customer event this evening upstairs in the lobby. Microsoft is having a little shin dig, and then serves a lot of customer dinners going on. So Stu, we'll see you out there tonight. >> All right, thanks you. >> Were watching a brewing somewhere. >> Keynotes tomorrow, a lot of good sessions and enablement, and yeah, it's great to be in person to be able to bump some people, meet some people and, Hey, I'm still a year and a half in still meeting a lot of my peers in person for the first time. >> Yeah, and that's kind of weird, isn't it? Imagine. And then we kick off tomorrow at 10:00 AM. Actually, Stephanie Chiras is coming on. There she is in the background. She's always a great guest and maybe do a little kickoff and have some fun tomorrow. So this is Dave Vellante for Stu Miniman, Paul Gillin, who's my co-host. You're watching theCUBEs coverage of Red Hat Summit 2022. We'll see you tomorrow. (bright music)

(upbeat music) >> Hi everybody, this is Dave Vellante. And welcome to this CUBE conversation where we welcome an ESG senior analyst, Bob Laliberte Bob, good to see you. >> Great to see you too. Thanks for having me >> Love it, I love to have the analyst sessions. Set it up. What's your scope, what's your area of expertise? >> So my coverage area right now is networking in its entirety. So that spans everything from enterprise networking, wired, wireless, campus, data center, et cetera. All the way up through telco and, in cloud networking. >> So how do you look at the landscape? One of the big things I think about a lot is how does the shift to cloud migration? How does that affect the existing, network layers? I mean, you got Cisco as the big whale and it's just, it's amazing to me. They still have whatever percent market share they have 60, 65% of the market. Are things, what's happening in the competitive landscape. How is cloud affecting that? >> That's a great question. I think the interesting piece is so many times organizations think about the network as plumbing. But the reality is the it's really important plumbing because as you talk about cloud and things get more distributed, well, guess what connects those distributed locations? It's the network. And so organizations as they've moved to the cloud you've seen a big shift with things like SD-WAN and so forth. How do I get more efficient connectivity up to that cloud? How do I not only enable able better connectivity between my data centers in the cloud, but now all my remote workers in the cloud. And so there's been a lot of big shifts going on that have driven the importance of having not only network, but secure networks. So like I said, cloud is one thing, and you're moving your applications there. But with the pandemic you saw the remote work. Think about the network administrators who we're managing, hey, I've got to control network connections between my data centers, a couple clouds and maybe dozens maybe a hundred remote branches. And now I'm connecting to 10,000 micro branches that I need to ensure that they can connect up to these applications and so forth. Hell of a lot more complex environment today than it used to be for these network teams. When we look at the, what we're seeing, how the networking providers are responding it's by driving comprehensive end-to-end solutions. So unifying, wired, wireless, and WAN. Driving efficiencies there. You're seeing even ThousandEyes for Cisco and things like that. Because they know the Internet's becoming more integral part of the corporate network. So being able to drive those types of things being able to, I think look at how to drive those operational efficiencies through AI and ML. So one of the big shifts we've seen in networking is the transition to cloud-based network management. And obviously that couple of things that helps with, first of all, the operations teams who are working remotely can more easily access it. But once all that data is up in the cloud, it creates a platform to be able to invest in AI/ML, and be able to drive intelligent alerting and even automation. And that's really what's needed because as the environments get more distributed and complex, you need to have that those operational efficiencies that automation, that intelligence to help them. >> How has remote work and hybrid work affected sort of network, spending priorities. Obviously when the pandemic hit you had to accommodate end points. And I always have this theory okay, when people come back to the office and I know it's going to be a different world but, the HQ probably needs some love as well. So has that been a tailwind for the industry? >> Absolutely, that's what we're seeing now. I think when the pandemic first hit, everyone said I've got to ramp up my VPNs. I've got to scale out my concentrators. I've got to add more firewalls in my data center. And then after a while, when they realized this was here to stay, they said, okay we just created that hub-and-spoke network that we just got rid of with SD-WAN. So what are the better solutions we can implement? So now you're seeing them not only implement better networking solutions for the remote workers. But reimagining what the campus looks like. Because it's not going to be ever 100% full or maybe it will, but how, for how many times a year will it be 100% full? So you've got to go from 80% cubes and 20% conference and collaboration areas, to 80% collaboration areas and 20% cubes. So we're seeing a lot of transition taking place in the campus environment as organizations are deploying newer technologies like Wi-Fi 6E. That have greater bandwidth to allow for those collaboration apps to run in those collaboration areas. Instead of just having the single wired conference room for video. Everyone's got to be able to run their video, voice and video collaboration apps. >> So how do you look at the landscape now? Again, you can't talk about networking without talking about Cisco. I think they, up there, I saw you and Zeus as talking about out, Cisco's quarter and other networking topics. Their long term guidance is for 60% growth for a company that size that's really outstanding. I mean, Cisco's, really has always been an execution machine of course. And it's a new era now under Chuck. There are more than ankle biters. If you look at Arista's doing pretty well there's guys like Extreme, there's others that are out there but nobody seemed to be able to unseat Cisco. What's happening in the landscape? >> I mean, that's a great question. Cisco's just been around for so long and been so big for so long. And you have to also keep in mind that with Cisco it's not just about the technology, but the fact from a if you think about it from a cultural standpoint these are workers who have been trained on Cisco since, some of them since high school. The educational component that Cisco has done has groomed generations of network technologists. So when they come into the market, they're fully familiar and used to Cisco. Plus they make a really good product and they've got products that cover everything. They cover the whole gambit. So they're still able to maintain their share. They're able to grow. They're able to move. They've made a shift last year. They announced in last spring that they were going to focus more on end-to-end. So instead of just having, hey, here's a point product, here's a point product. Here's a point product. Let's think about it in its entirety. Let's deliver a complete end-to-end solution solve bigger problems for customers, which obviously makes it much harder to remove when you're just trying to remove a piece of that single problem. But the other competitors are also having good years. And I think also the rising tide floats all boats. And so because of this distributed nature, the importance of the network, everyone is doing that. Plus obviously this has to be said, the supply chain issues where people are ordering ahead as well. But organizations, you look at Arista, they've gone from just being a data center company to expanding all the way down to the campus edge, wireless, right there creating an end-to-end environment Extreme did the same thing. They went out and made a lot of acquisitions. They pulled them all together, integrated. They're all moving to this cloud based end-to-end network management. Arista has been on a tear, bringing in a lot of, not only innovative technology, but innovative technologists. So if you look at some of the organizations they bought. I keep calling it Route 128, it's 128 Technologies. So sorry folks I live in Massachusetts. It's always been Route 128. >> You Remember when don't we. 128 Technology's Mist was their big. Mist was their, Mist was kind of like their VMware. VMware to EMC was Mist was to Juniper. And so we call it the Mistification of Juniper where every organization, every company they bring in they're rolling under that and this the AI engine. So they're bringing in 128 Technologies into that. They've got their own, their own stuff under that, their wired switches. So they've got this unified wired and wireless and WAN assurance now that they have. They've been gaining a lot of traction with that. And again, for the things we were talking about because it's far more distributed and complex. You need to have, It's not like people are getting replaced. It's not like, hey, we're leveraging this automation so that we can get rid of network teams. It's because it's getting so much more complex just to have the same number of people manage that more complex environment. We need those intelligence solutions. >> So I want to ask you about network and multi-cloud. And so it's kind of tongue in cheek because we coined this term super cloud. And so what we meant by that, so here's the premise. And I wonder you could give us your perspective. Multi-cloud, I've said many times is I think largely a symptom of multi-vendor I run in this, I run in AWS or, Azure, I've done the work to understand their primitives and or Google, whatever it is. But it's not like an abstraction layer that's floating above all those but now you're starting to see that. In fact, it re:Invent in November. The ecosystem it seemed like was everybody was focused on developing what we call these super clouds. And again, it's tongue in cheek, this abstraction layer it hides the underlying complexity of the primitives and the APIs adds incremental value on top of that. So there's a company Prosimo, which Steve Herrod, is invested in and others Praveen Akkiraju, whom I'm sure you know from Viptela. Aviatrix is another company that's sort of, Steve Malaney has come on theCUBE and talked about what they're doing. Like yeah, that's super cloud. It seems like it's something new and different than just multi-cloud which is kind of connecting in to different clouds. It's that value on top. What do you think about that? And what does that mean for networking? >> That's a really good point because we are starting to see the inception of organizations going beyond having multiple cloud providers and looking at starting to deploy applications across multiple clouds. It's still really early. The vast majority of organizations are still, I use this application for this cloud and this application for that cloud. But that's the next frontier. That's what they're trying to solve is how do I create this basically cloud fabric and make it as simple as possible. And again, all the things we've been talking about how do I, instead of you having to learn Amazon, Google, Azure networking technology, learn mine, I'll take care of it, but I'll abstract all that complexity from you and make it so much simpler to be able to connect to these interconnect, and connect to them in a seamless fashion. And so that's what they're really trying to do is they're. And the hard part is it takes really sophisticated solutions to remove that high level of complexity and make it simple for an organization to do that. So yeah, absolutely. >> If I had more time I'd make it shorter as somebody who writes a lot. And I think you're right. I think it is future. It's not definitely not here today, but the other thing is it ties into digital transformation. We used this again, throw that buzzword around but, companies not just tech company, I mean everybody's becoming like a tech company, but organizations, financial services companies, healthcare they're building their own clouds on top of the hyperscalers who spend $100 billion a year on CapEx. And that seems to be a trend that I think is going to take legs over this next decade. Just like in the previous decade everybody was thinking, okay, we're going to SaaSify our business softwares (indistinct) the world. And now it's software and cloud services are the way in which I'm going to create customer experiences. >> Correct, yeah. It's why should I go out and make an investment in technology when the technology's already there? And I can rent it for when I need it scale it as I need it and, and do all of that. I agree with that. I think that's something that we're seeing. The interesting part though is that when we look at our data points, probably let than 40% of the applications and workloads are in the cloud today. So there's still a role that the corporate data center plays. We are seeing over time. They expect that to progress and transition but I think there's still always going to be maybe a quarter of the workloads and applications may never leave. Depending on how they're built, et cetera. So there's always going to be that distributed environment where you've got workloads in the private data centers, workloads in multiple public clouds. And also, the big thing too is don't forget about the edge. We're seeing a lot more edge activity take place as organizations recognize, as they deploy more IOT devices, and want to get realtime business insights they've got to deploy the compute there. >> Well, and that's something that I wanted to ask you about, but going back to what you just said, which is, I agree with you. So that suggests to me, Bob that we're just kind of, with cloud just entering the steep part of the S curve. Amazon's headed toward $100 billion, run rate business. Maybe they probably won't get there this year but they will next year. We're entering that steep growth phase, really could be. It's incredible. But I wanted to ask you about the edge. Because you're right is we got to move compute to the edge, ARM is going to dominate. I would think, the edge. They already are with our smartphones. How do you see the cloud guys participating in the edge? Whether it was Andy Jassy, or now Adam Selipsky or anybody at Amazon. They have the dogma of in the fullness of time all workloads are going to be in the cloud. So they either have to change their definition of cloud. Or they're wrong. So what's your thought on that? >> I think it really starts coming down to what's your definition of edge. And so, much like when the cloud technologies first came about and you had all the shadow IT. Everyone running off, and everyone thought oh this is all great, until you realized you had to operationalize it and you had to pull the brakes. Stop doing that. We're going to make sure IT operations. >> Call the CIO up. Exactly, finding out where stuff was by going through accounting and seeing credit card charges. For the edge what we've seen I think is maybe organizations really saying I've got to deploy my servers in my own site. Right at that edge in order to get the lowest possible latency. And so what I think we're starting to see is organizations looking at that and saying, okay well I'm in a metro and I've got 25 locations in a metro. And I've deployed technology to every single one of those sites. Do I need it there? Or can I put it in an Equinix facility that's less than five milliseconds from all 25 sites? So I think there's starting to be this pragmatic approach of looking at let's look at the edge, let's take a look at what type of latencies. What is our definition of real time. When do we actually need the data and so forth? What kind of connectivity do we have? And then from there figure out how we go about connecting it. And so for companies like AWS and Google and Azure a lot of them there's local zones and things like that. They're deploying them in those colos because they don't have data centers in every metro but they can leverage an Equinix. They can leverage someone else's hardware that's there to deploy their software stack within that location. So I think that's something that we're starting to see more and more of as the edge. And obviously the association with the telcos as well. They've got a great footprint. If you want to get close to the edge with their colos Their home offices and things like that and whatnot. Their ability to move the compute closer to the edge, the base stations of the antennas and things like that, are certainly significant. And that's why you're seeing the wavelengths and things like that, programs like that. >> So I was going to close, but there some really interesting topics you just brought up. Call it whatever you going to call it near edge, far edge or deep edge. And you mentioned real time. Yeah. So for those Equinix data centers, I don't need, true real time. But for Tesla, I need real time. I need real time inference at the edge probably using a bunch of ARM cores and I can't go back to any cloud. How do you look at that? Both, I would think big markets. Do you have a sense as to, is one bigger than the other? Are they both just enormous or we don't even know yet. >> I'm not sure that we know yet. I think certainly, it's riding the tail of the IOTs. So the more sensors, the more things that are deployed the more that, that data businesses realize they can leverage that data to make real time business insights to drive either better experiences. And if you're in retail. So location based services and real time offer management it doesn't do any good to offer a coupon for something that you've, that's 40 yards behind you. That that's past, like you said with the cars there's, I've seen some studies recently. They say, well, based on the latency, if the command is to stop and you're at one millisecond, it stops within four inches. If you are at 50 milliseconds, it stops 10 feet later. That's a big difference. And I don't know if those numbers are right but you get the idea about the impact, what the real time impact is of. >> Margin is not huge. >> Exactly, so that's where organizations, I think first and foremost need to take a pragmatic approach to determine what is real time for us. What's our definition of it. And then that can lead them to where do I need to place this compute technology? And then that goes to how do I then connect to it? So for the Teslas and so forth, obviously you're going to want 5G connections if possible. Ultra low latency and not just any 5G. The good stuff, the millimeter bandwidth stuff that that's the ultra low latency. >> So let's wrap. So, what's going on in your research world obviously the big, big acquisition tech target they seem to be investing in ESG. You guys are really growing and hiring. That's awesome. Any research that you're working on? >> Yeah, there's a couple of couple of projects we have going on right now. We're wrapping up a four part distributed cloud research series. So we did it on distributed cloud infrastructure. Applications, observability. And now this last one is on the edge. Coincidentally. So we're working on that. We've got some new network modernization research that we've published. And we're going to be looking, from a networking perspective looking at end-to-end network modernization which will be coming out soon. >> Awesome, Bob, thanks so much for coming on theCUBE. I really would love to have you back and chat about some of those things. Observability hot space. God, I wish we had more time. >> Absolutely, appreciate it, thanks. >> And thank you for watching this CUBE conversation. This is Dave Vellante and we'll see you next time. (upbeat music)

>>from around the globe. It's the Cube with digital coverage of Dell Technologies. World Digital Experience Brought to You by Dell Technologies. >>Welcome to the Cubes Coverage of Dell Technologies World 2020. The digital coverage Find Lisa Martin And then we started to be talking with one of Dell Technologies customers. Earth Camp. Joining Me is built sharp, the senior VP of product development and strategy from Earth Camp Phil, Welcome to the Cube. >>Thank you so much. >>So talk to me a little bit. About what Earth Cam does this very interesting Web can technology? You guys have tens of thousands of cameras and sensors all over the globe give her audience and understanding of what you guys are all about. >>Sure thing. The world's leading provider of Webcam technologies and mentioned content services were leaders and live streaming time lapse imaging primary focus in the vertical construction. So a lot of these, the most ambitious, largest construction projects around the world, you see, these amazing time lapse movies were capturing all of that imagery. You know, basically, around the clock of these cameras are are sending all of that image content to us when we're generating these time lapse movies from it. >>You guys, you're headquartered in New Jersey and I was commenting before we went live about your great background. So you're actually getting to be on site today? >>Yes, Yes, that's where lives from our headquarters in Upper Saddle River, New Jersey. >>Excellent. So in terms of the types of information that you're capturing. So I was looking at the website and see from a construction perspective or some of the big projects you guys have done the Hudson Yards, the Panama Canal expansion, the 9 11 Museum. But you talked about one of the biggest focus is that you have is in the construction industry in terms of what type of data you're capturing from all of these thousands of edge devices give us a little bit of insight into how much data you're capturing high per day, how it gets from the edge, presumably back to your court data center for editing. >>Sure, and it's not just construction were also in travel, hospitality, tourism, security, architectural engineering, basically, any any industry that that need high resolution visualization of their their projects or their their performance or of their, you know, product flow. So it's it's high resolution documentation is basically our business. There are billions of files in the isil on system right now. We are ingesting millions of images a month. We are also creating very high resolution panoramic imagery where we're taking hundreds and sometimes multiple hundreds of images, very high resolution images and stitching these together to make panoramas that air up to 30 giga pixel, sometimes typically around 1 to 2 giga pixel. But that composite imagery Eyes represents millions of images per per month coming into the storage system and then being, uh, stitched together to those those composites >>the millions of images coming in every month. You mentioned Isil on talk to me a little bit about before you were working with Delhi, EMC and Power Scale. How are you managing this massive volume of data? >>Sure we had. We've used a number of other enterprise storage systems. It was really nothing was as easy to manage Azazel on really is there was there was a lot of a lot of problems with overhead, the amount of time necessary from a systems administrator resource standpoint, you to manage that, uh, and and it's interesting with the amount of data that we handle. This is being billions of relatively small files there there, you know, half a megabyte to a couple of megabytes each. It's an interesting data profile, which, which isil on really is well suited for. >>So if we think about some of the massive changes that we've all been through the last in 2020 what are some of the changes that that Earth Kemp has seen with respect to the needs for organizations? Or you mentioned other industries, like travel hospitality? Since none of us could get to these great travel destinations, Have you seen a big drive up in the demand and the need to process data more data faster? >>Yeah, that's an injury interesting point with with the Pandemic. Obviously we had to pivot and move a lot of people toe working from home, which we were able to do pretty quickly. But there's also an interesting opportunity that arose from this, where so many of our customers and other people also have to do the same. And there is an increased demand for our our technology so people can remotely collaborate. They can. They can work at a distance. They can stay at home and see what's going on in these projects sites. So we really so kind of an uptick in the in the need for our products and services. And we've also created Cem basically virtual travel applications. We have an application on the Amazon Fire TV, which is the number one app in the travel platform of people can kind of virtually travel when they can't really get out there. So it's, uh, we've been doing kind of giving back Thio to people that are having having some issues with being able to travel around. We've done the fireworks of the Washington Mall around the Statue of Liberty for the July 4th, and this year will be Webcasting and New Year's in Times Square for our 25th year, actually. So again, helping people travel virtually and be, uh, maintain can be collectivity with with each other and with their projects, >>which is so essential during these times, where for the last 67 months everyone is trying to get a sense of community, and most of us just have the Internet. So I also heard you guys were available on Apple TV, someone to fire that up later and maybe virtually travel. Um, but tell me a little bit about how working in conjunction with Delta Technologies and Power Cell How is that enabled you to manage this massive volume change you've experienced this year? Because, as you said, it's also about facilitating collaboration, which is largely online these days. >>Yeah, I mean, the the great things they're working with Dell has been just our confidence in this infrastructure. Like I said, the other systems we worked with in the past we've always found ourselves kind of second guessing. Obviously, resolutions are increasing. The camera performance is increasing. Streaming video is everything is is constantly getting bigger and better, faster. Maurits And we're always innovating. We found ourselves on previous storage platforms having to really kind of go back and look at the second guess we're at with it With with this, this did L infrastructure. That's been it's been fantastic. We don't really have to think about that as much. We just continue innovating everything scales as we needed to dio. It's it's much easier to work with, >>so you've got power scale at your core data center in New Jersey. Tell me a little bit about how data gets from thes tens of thousands of devices at the edge, back to your editors for editing and how power scale facilitates faster editing, for example. >>Basically, you imagine every one of these cameras on It's not just camera. We have mobile applications. We have fixed position of robotic cameras. There's all these different data acquisition systems were integrating with weather sensors and different types of telemetry. All of that data is coming back to us over the Internet, so these are all endpoints in our network. Eso that's that's constantly being ingested into our network and say WTO. I salon the big the big thing that's really been a timesaver Working with the video editors is, instead of having to take that content, move it into an editing environment where we have we have a whole team of award winning video editors. Creating these time lapse is we don't need to keep moving that around. We're working natively on Iselin clusters. They're doing their editing, their subsequent edits. Anytime we have to update or change these movies as a project evolves, that's all it happened right there on that live environment on the retention. Is there if we have to go back later on all of our customers, data is really kept within that 11 area. It's consolidated, its secure. >>I was looking at the Del Tech website. There's a case study that you guys did earth campaign with Deltek saying that the video processing time has been reduced 20%. So that's a pretty significant increase. I could imagine what the volumes changing so much now but on Li not only is huge for your business, but to the demands that your customers have as well, depending on where there's demands are coming from >>absolutely and and just being able to do that a lot faster and be more nimble allows us to scale. We've added actually against speaking on this pandemic, we've actually added person who we've been hiring people. A lot of those people are working remotely, as as we've stated before on it's just with the increase in business. We have to continue to keep building on that on this storage environments been been great. >>Tell me about what you guys really kind of think about with respect to power scale in terms of data management, not storage management and what that difference means to your business. >>Well, again, I mean number number one was was really eliminating the amount of resource is amount of time we have to spend managing it. We've almost eliminated any downtime of any of any kind. We have greater storage density, were able to have better visualization on how our data is being used, how it's being access so as thes as thes things, a revolving. We really have good visibility on how the how the storage system is being used in both our production and our and also in our backup environments. It's really, really easy for us Thio to make our business decisions as we innovate and change processes, having that continual visibility and really knowing where we stand. >>And you mentioned hiring folks during the pandemic, which is fantastic but also being able to do things much in a much more streamlined way with respect to managing all of this data. But I am curious in terms of of innovation and new product development. What have you been able to achieve because you've got more resource is presumably to focus on being more innovative rather than managing storage >>well again? It's were always really pushing the envelope of what the technology can do. As I mentioned before, we're getting things into, you know, 20 and 30 Giga pixel. You know, people are talking about megapixel images were stitching hundreds of these together. We've we're just really changing the way imagery is used, uh, both in the time lapse and also just in archival process. Ah, lot of these things we've done with the interior. You know, we have this virtual reality product where you can you can walk through and see in the 3 60 bubble. We're taking that imagery, and we're combining it with with these been models who are actually taking the three D models of the construction site and combining it with the imagery. And we can start doing things to visualize progress and different things that are happening on the site. Look for clashes or things that aren't built like they're supposed to be built, things that maybe aren't done on the proper schedule or things that are maybe ahead of schedule, doing a lot of things to save people, time and money on these construction sites. We've also introduced a I machine learning applications into directly into the workflow in this in the storage environment. So we're detecting equipment and people and activities in the site where a lot of that would have been difficult with our previous infrastructure, it really is seamless and working with YSL on now. >>Imagine, by being able to infuse AI and machine learning, you're able to get insight faster to be ableto either respond faster to those construction customers, for example, or alert them. If perhaps something isn't going according to plan. >>A lot of it's about schedule. It's about saving money about saving time and again, with not as many people traveling to the sites, they really just have have constant visualization of what's going on. Day to day, we're detecting things like different types of construction equipment and things that are happening on the side. We're partnering with people that are doing safety analytics and things of that nature. So these these are all things that are very important to construction sites. >>What are some of the things as we are rounding out the calendar year 2020? What are some of the things that you're excited about going forward in 2021? That Earth cam is going to be able to get into and to deliver >>it, just MAWR and more people really, finally seeing the value. I mean, I've been doing this for 20 years, and it's just it's it's It's amazing how we're constantly seeing new applications and more people understanding how valuable these visual tools are. That's just a fantastic thing for us because we're really trying to create better lives through visual information. We're really helping people with things they can do with this imagery. That's what we're all about that's really exciting to us in a very challenging environment right now is that people are are recognizing the need for this technology and really starting to put it on a lot more projects. >>Well, it's You can kind of consider an essential service, whether or not it's a construction company that needs to manage and oversee their projects, making sure they're on budget on schedule, as you said, Or maybe even just the essential nous of helping folks from any country in the world connect with a favorite favorite travel location or sending the right to help. From an emotional perspective, I think the essential nous of what you guys are delivering is probably even more impactful now, don't you think? >>Absolutely and again about connecting people and when they're at home. And recently we we webcast the president's speech from the Flight 93 9 11 observation from the memorial. There was something where the only the immediate families were allowed to travel there. We webcast that so people could see that around the world we have documented again some of the biggest construction projects out there. The new rate years greater stadium was one of the recent ones, uh, is delivering this kind of flagship content. Wall Street Journal is to use some of our content recently to really show the things that have happened during the pandemic in Times Square's. We have these cameras around the world. So again, it's really bringing awareness of letting people virtually travel and share and really remain connected during this this challenging time on and again, we're seeing a really increase demand in the traffic in those areas as well. >>I can imagine some of these things that you're doing that you're achieving now are going to become permanent, not necessarily artifacts of Cove in 19 as you now have the opportunity to reach so many more people and probably the opportunity to help industries that might not have seen the value off this type of video to be able to reach consumers that they probably could never reach before. >>Yeah, I think the whole nature of business and communication and travel on everything is really going to be changed from this point forward. It's really people are looking at things very, very differently and again, seeing the technology really can help with so many different areas that, uh, that it's just it's gonna be a different kind of landscape out there we feel on that's really, you know, continuing to be seen on the uptick in our business and how many people are adopting this technology. We're developing a lot more. Partnerships with other companies were expanding into new industries on again. You know, we're confident that the current platform is going to keep up with us and help us, you know, really scale and evolved as thes needs air growing. >>It sounds to me like you have the foundation with Dell Technologies with power scale to be able to facilitate the massive growth that you're saying and the skill in the future like you've got that foundation. You're ready to go? >>Yeah, we've been We've been We've been using the system for five years already. We've already added capacity. We can add capacity on the fly, Really haven't hit any limits. And what we can do, It's It's almost infinitely scalable, highly redundant. Gives everyone a real sense of security on our side. And, you know, we could just keep innovating, which is what we do without hitting any any technological limits with with our partnership. >>Excellent. Well, Bill, I'm gonna let you get back to innovating for Earth camp. It's been a pleasure talking to you. Thank you so much for your time today. >>Thank you so much. It's been a pleasure >>for Bill Sharp and Lisa Martin. You're watching the cubes. Digital coverage of Dell Technologies World 2020. Thanks for watching. Yeah,

>> Announcer: From around the globe, it's theCUBE! With digital coverage of Dell Technologies World, digital experience. Brought to you by Dell Technologies. >> Welcome to theCUBE's coverage of Dell Technologies World 2020, the digital coverage. I'm Lisa Martin, and I'm excited to be talking with one of Dell Technologies' customers EarthCam. Joining me is Bill Sharp, the senior VP of product development and strategy from EarthCam. Bill, welcome to theCUBE. >> Thank you so much. >> So talk to me a little bit about what EarthCam does. This is very interesting webcam technology. You guys have tens of thousands of cameras and sensors all over the globe. Give our audience an understanding of what you guys are all about. >> Sure thing. The world's leading provider of webcam technologies, you mentioned content and services, we're leaders in live streaming, time-lapse imaging, primary focus in the vertical construction. So with a lot of these, the most ambitious, largest construction projects around the world that you see these amazing time-lapse movies, we're capturing all of that imagery basically around the clock, these cameras are sending all of that image content to us and we're generating these time-lapse movies from it. >> You guys are headquartered in New Jersey. I was commenting before we went live about your great background. So you're actually getting to be onsite today? >> Yes, yes. We're live from our headquarters in upper Saddle River, New Jersey. >> Excellent, so in terms of the types of information that you're capturing, so I was looking at the website, and see from a construction perspective, some of the big projects you guys have done, the Hudson Yards, the Panama Canal expansion, the 9/11 museum. But you talked about one of the biggest focuses that you have is in the construction industry. In terms of what type of data you're capturing from all of these thousands of edge devices, give us a little bit of an insight into how much data you're capturing per day, how it gets from the edge, presumably, back to your core data center for editing. >> Sure, and it's not just construction. We're also in travel, hospitality, tourism, security, architecture, engineering, basically any industry that need high resolution visualization of their projects or their performance or their product flow. So it's high resolution documentation is basically our business. There are billions of files in the Isilon system right now. We are ingesting millions of images a month. We are also creating very high resolution panoramic imagery where we're taking hundreds and sometimes multiple hundreds of images, very high resolution images and stitching these together to make panoramas that are up to 30 gigapixel sometimes. Typically around one to two gigapixel but that composite imagery represents millions of images per month coming into the storage system and then being stitched together to those composites. >> So millions of images coming in every month, you mentioned Isilon. Talk to me a little bit about before you were working with Dell EMC and PowerScale, how were you managing this massive volume of data? >> Sure, we've used a number of other enterprise storage systems. It was really nothing was as easy to manage as Isilon really is. There was a lot of problems with overhead, the amount of time necessary from a systems administrator resource standpoint, to manage that. And it's interesting with the amount of data that we handle, being billions of relatively small files. They're, you know, a half a megabyte to a couple of megabytes each. It's an interesting data profile which Isilon really is well suited for. >> So if we think about some of the massive changes that we've all been through in the last, in 2020, what are some of the changes that EarthCam hasn't seen with respect to the needs for organizations, or you mentioned other industries like travel, hospitality, since none of us can get to these great travel destinations, have you seen a big drive up in the demand and the need to process more data faster? >> Yeah, that's an interesting point with the pandemic. I mean, obviously we had to pivot and move a lot of people to working from home, which we were able to do pretty quickly, but there's also an interesting opportunity that arose from this where so many of our customers and other people also have to do the same. And there is an increased demand for our technology. So people can remotely collaborate. They can work at a distance, they can stay at home and see what's going on in these project sites. So we really saw kind of an uptick in the need for our products and services. And we've also created some basically virtual travel applications. We have an application on the Amazon Fire TV which is the number one app in the travel platform, and people can kind of virtually travel when they can't really get out there. So it's, we've been doing kind of giving back to people that are having some issues with being able to travel around. We've done the fireworks at the Washington Mall around the Statue of Liberty for July 4th. And this year we'll be webcasting New Years in Times Square for our 25th year, actually. So again, helping people travel virtually and maintain connectivity with each other, and with their projects. >> Which is so essential during these times where for the last six, seven months, everyone is trying to get a sense of community and most of us just have the internet. So I also heard you guys were available on the Apple TV, someone should fire that up later and maybe virtually travel. But tell me a little bit about how working in conjunction with Dell Technologies and PowerScale. How has that enabled you to manage this massive volume change that you've experienced this year? Because as you said, it's also about facilitating collaboration which is largely online these days. >> Yeah, and I mean, the great things of working with Dell has been just our confidence in this infrastructure. Like I said, the other systems we've worked with in the past we've always found ourselves kind of second guessing. We're constantly innovating. Obviously resolutions are increasing. The camera performance is increasing, streaming video is, everything is constantly getting bigger and better, faster, more, and we're always innovating. We found ourselves on previous storage platforms having to really kind of go back and look at them, second guess where we're at with it. With the Dell infrastructure it's been fantastic. We don't really have to think about that as much. We just continue innovating, everything scales as we need it to do. It's much easier to work with. >> So you've got PowerScale at your core data center in New Jersey. Tell me a little bit about how data gets from these tens of thousands of devices at the edge, back to your editors for editing, and how PowerScale facilitates faster editing, for example. >> Well, basically you can imagine every one of these cameras, and it's not just cameras. It's also, you know, we have 360 virtual reality kind of bubble cameras. We have mobile applications, we have fixed position and robotic cameras. There's all these different data acquisition systems we're integrating with weather sensors and different types of telemetry. All of that data is coming back to us over the internet. So these are all endpoints in our network. So that's constantly being ingested into our network and saved to Isilon. The big thing that's really been a time saver working with the video editors is instead of having to take that content, move it into an editing environment where we have a whole team of award-winning video editors creating these time lapses. We don't need to keep moving that around. We're working natively on Isilon clusters. They're doing their editing there, and subsequent edits. Anytime we have to update or change these movies as a project evolves, that's all, can happen right there on that live environment. And the retention is there. If we have to go back later on, all of our customers' data is really kept within that one area, it's consolidated and it's secure. >> I was looking at the Dell Tech website, and there's a case study that you guys did, EarthCam did with Dell Tech saying that the video processing time has been reduced 20%. So that's a pretty significant increase. I can imagine with the volumes changing so much now, not only is huge to your business but to the demands that your customers have as well, depending on where those demands are coming from. >> Absolutely. And just being able to do that a lot faster and be more nimble allows us to scale. We've added actually, again, speaking of during this pandemic, we've actually added personnel, we've been hiring people. A lot of those people are working remotely as we've stated before. And it's just with the increase in business, we have to continue to keep building on that, and this storage environment's been great. >> Tell me about what you guys really kind of think about with respect to PowerScale in terms of data management, not storage management, and what that difference means to your business. >> Well, again, I mean, number one was really eliminating the amount of resources. The amount of time we have to spend managing it. We've almost eliminated any downtime of any kind. We have greater storage density, we're able to have better visualization on how our data is being used, how it's being accessed. So as these things are evolving, we really have good visibility on how the storage system is being used in both our production and also in our backup environments. It's really, really easy for us to make our business decisions as we innovate and change processes, having that continual visibility and really knowing where we stand. >> And you mentioned hiring folks during the pandemic, which is fantastic, but also being able to do things in a much more streamlined way with respect to managing all of this data. But I am curious in terms of innovation and new product development, what have you been able to achieve? Because you've got more resources presumably to focus on being more innovative rather than managing storage. >> Well, again, it's, we're always really pushing the envelope of what the technology can do. As I mentioned before, we're getting things into, you know, 20 and 30 gigapixels, people are talking about megapixel images, we're stitching hundreds of these together. We're just really changing the way imagery is used both in the time lapse and also just in archival process. A lot of these things we've done with the interior, we have this virtual reality product where you can walk through and see in a 360 bubble, we're taking that imagery and we're combining it with these BIM models. So we're actually taking the 3D models of the construction site and combining it with the imagery. And we can start doing things to visualize progress, and different things that are happening on the site, look for clashes or things that aren't built like they're supposed to be built, things that maybe aren't done on the proper schedule or things that are maybe ahead of schedule, doing a lot of things to save people time and money on these construction sites. We've also introduced AI and machine learning applications directly into the workflow in the storage environment. So we're detecting equipment and people and activities in the site where a lot of that would have been difficult with our previous infrastructure. It really is seamless and working with Isilon now. >> I imagine by being able to infuse AI and machine learning, you're able to get insights faster, to be able to either respond faster to those construction customers, for example, or alert them if perhaps something isn't going according to plan. >> Yeah, a lot of it's about schedule, it's about saving money, about saving time. And again, with not as many people traveling to these sites, they really just have to have constant visualization of what's going on day to day. We're detecting things like different types of construction equipment and things that are happening on the site. We're partnering with people that are doing safety analytics and things of that nature. So these are all things that are very important to construction sites. >> What are some of the things as we are rounding out the calendar year 2020, what are some of the things that you're excited about going forward in 2021, that EarthCam is going to be able to get into and to deliver? >> Just more and more people really finally seeing the value. I mean I've been doing this for 20 years and it's just, it's amazing how we're constantly seeing new applications and more people understanding how valuable these visual tools are. That's just a fantastic thing for us because we're really trying to create better lives through visual information. We're really helping people with the things they can do with this imagery. That's what we're all about. And that's really exciting to us in a very challenging environment right now is that people are recognizing the need for this technology and really starting to put it on a lot more projects. >> Well, you can kind of consider it an essential service whether or not it's a construction company that needs to manage and oversee their projects, making sure they're on budget, on schedule, as you said, or maybe even just the essentialness of helping folks from any country in the world connect with a favorite travel location, or (indistinct) to help from an emotional perspective. I think the essentialness of what you guys are delivering is probably even more impactful now, don't you think? >> Absolutely. And again about connecting people when they're at home, and recently we webcast the president's speech from the Flight 93 9/11 observation from the memorial, there was something where only the immediate families were allowed to travel there. We webcast that so people could see that around the world. We've documented, again, some of the biggest construction projects out there, the new Raiders stadium was one of the recent ones, just delivering this kind of flagship content. Wall Street Journal has used some of our content recently to really show the things that have happened during the pandemic in Times Square. We have these cameras around the world. So again, it's really bringing awareness. So letting people virtually travel and share and really remain connected during this challenging time. And again, we're seeing a real increased demand in the traffic in those areas as well. >> I can imagine some of these things that you're doing that you're achieving now are going to become permanent not necessarily artifacts of COVID-19, as you now have the opportunity to reach so many more people and probably the opportunity to help industries that might not have seen the value of this type of video to be able to reach consumers that they probably could never reach before. >> Yeah, I think the whole nature of business and communication and travel and everything is really going to be changed from this point forward. It's really, people are looking at things very, very differently. And again, seeing that the technology really can help with so many different areas that it's just, it's going to be a different kind of landscape out there we feel. And that's really continuing to be seen as on the uptick in our business and how many people are adopting this technology. We're developing a lot more partnerships with other companies, we're expanding into new industries. And again, you know, we're confident that the current platform is going to keep up with us and help us really scale and evolve as these needs are growing. >> It sounds to me like you have the foundation with Dell Technologies, with PowerScale, to be able to facilitate the massive growth that you were saying and the scale in the future, you've got that foundation, you're ready to go. >> Yeah, we've been using the system for five years already. We've already added capacity. We can add capacity on the fly, really haven't hit any limits in what we can do. It's almost infinitely scalable, highly redundant. It gives everyone a real sense of security on our side. And you know, we can just keep innovating, which is what we do, without hitting any technological limits with our partnership. >> Excellent, well, Bill, I'm going to let you get back to innovating for EarthCam. It's been a pleasure talking to you. Thank you so much for your time today. >> Thank you so much. It's been a pleasure. >> For Bill Sharp, I'm Lisa Martin, you're watching theCUBE's digital coverage of Dell Technologies World 2020. Thanks for watching. (calm music)

(upbeat music) >> Narrator: From around the globe, it's theCUBE with digital coverage of Ansible Fest 2020 brought to you by Red Hat. >> Welcome back to theCUBE's coverage, Cube virtual's coverage of Ansible Fest 2020 virtual. We're not face to face this year. I'm your host John Furrier with theCube. We're virtual, this theCube virtual and we're doing our part, getting the remote interviews with all the best thought leaders experts and of course the Red Hat experts. We've got Walter Bentley, Senior Manager of Automation practice with Red Hat and Jason Smith, Vice President of North American services, back on theCube. We were in Atlanta last year in person. Guys, thanks for coming on virtually. Good morning to you. Thanks for coming on. >> Good morning John. Good morning, good morning. >> So since Ansible Fest last year a lot's happened where she's living in seems to be an unbelievable 2020. Depending on who you talk to it's been the craziest year of all time. Fires in California, crazy presidential election, COVID whole nine yards, but the scale of Cloud has just unbelievably moved some faster. I was commenting with some of your colleagues around the snowflake IBO it's built on Amazon, right? So value is changed, people are shifting, you starting to clear visibility on what these modern apps are looking like, it's Cloud native, it's legacy integrations, it's beyond lift and shift as we've been seeing in the business. So I'd love to get, Jason we'll start with you, your key points you would like people to know about Ansible Fest 2020 this year because there's a lot going on this year because there's a lot to build on and there's a tailwind for Cloud native and customers have to move fast. What's your thoughts? >> Yeah so, a lot has happened since last year and customers are looking to be a lot more selective around their automation technologies. So they're not just looking for another tool. They're really looking for an automation platform, a platform that they can leverage more of an enterprise strategy and really be able to make sure that they have something that's secure, scalable, and they can use across the enterprise to be able to bring teams together and really drive value and productivity out of their automation platform. >> What's the key points in the customers and our audience around the conversations around the learning, that's the new stuff happening in using Ansible this year? What are the key top things, Jason? Can you comment on what you're seeing the big takeaway for our audience watching? >> Yeah, so a lots change like you said, since last year. We worked with a lot of customers around the world to implement Ansible and automation at scale. So we're using our automation journeys as we talked about last year and really helping customers lay out a more prescriptive approach on how they're going to deliver automation across their enterprise. So customers are really working with us because we're working with the largest customers in the world to implement their strategies. And when we work with new customers we can bring those learnings and that experience to them. So they're not having to learn that for the first time and figure it out on their own, but they're really able to learn and leverage the experience we have through hundreds of customers and at enterprise scale and can take the value that we can bring in and help them through those types of projects much more quickly than they could on their own. >> It's interesting. We were looking at the research numbers and look at the adoption of what Ansible's doing and you guys are with Red Hat it's pretty strong. Could you share on the services side because there's a lot of services going on here? Not just network services and software services, just traditional services. What are the one or two reasons why customer engaged with Red Hat services? What would that be? >> Yeah so, like I said, I mean, we bring that experience. So customers that typically might have to spend weeks troubleshooting and making decisions on how they're going to deliver their implementations, they can work with us and we can bring those best practices in and allow them to make those decisions and implement those best practices within hours instead of weeks, and really be able to accelerate their projects. Another thing is we're a services company as part of a product company. So we're not there just to deliver services. We're really focused on the success of the customer, leveraging our technologies. So we're there to really train and mentor them through the process so that they're really getting up to speed quickly. They're taking advantage of all of the expertise that we have to be able to build their own experience and expertise. So they can really take over once we're gone and be able to support and advance that technology on their own. So they're really looking to us to not only implement those technologies for them, but really with them and be able to train and mentor them. Like I said, and take advantage of those learnings. We also help them. We don't just focus on the technologies but really look at the people in process side of things. So we're bringing in a lot of principles from DevOps and Agile on open practices and helping customers really transform and be able to do things in a new way, to be much more efficient, a lot more agile, be able to drive a lot more value out of our technology. >> Walter, I got to ask you, last year we were chatting about this, but I want to get the update. And I'd like you to just give us a quick refresh definition about the automation adoption journey because this is a real big deal. I mean, we're looking at the trends. Everyone realizes automation is super important at scale, as you think about whether it's software data, anything's about automation it's super important, but it's hard. I mean, the marketplace we were looking at the numbers. I was talking to IDC for you guys at this festival and of Ansible Fest, and they said about five to 10% of enterprises are containerized, which means this huge wave coming of containerization. This is about the automation adoption journey because you start containerizing, (laughs) right? You start looking at the workflows on the pipelinig and how the codes being released and everything. This is important stuff. Give us the update on the automation adoption journey and where it is in the portfolio. >> Well, yeah, just as you called it out, last year on main stage and Ansible fest, almost every customer expressed the need and desire to have to have a strategy as to how they drive their adoption of automation inside their enterprise. And as we've gone over the past few months of splitting this in place with many customers, what we've learned is that many customers have matured into a place where they are now looking at the end to end workflow. Instead of just looking at the tactical thing that they want to automate, they are actually looking at the full ribbon, the full workflow and determining are there changes that need to be made and adjusted to be more efficient when it comes to dealing with automation. And then the other piece as we alluded to already is the contagious nature of that adoption. We're finding that there are organizations that are picking up the automation adoption journey, and because of the momentum it creates inside of that organization we're finding other municipalities that are associated with them are now also looking to be able to take on the journey because of that contagious nature. So we can see that how it's spreading in a positive way. And we're really looking forward to being able to do more of it as the next quarter and the next year comes up. >> Yeah, and that whole sharing thing is a big part of the content theme and the community thing. So great reference on that, good thing is word of mouth and community and collaboration is a good call out there. A quick question for you, you guys recently had a big win with NTT DoCoMo and their engagement with you guys on the automation, adoption journey. Walter, what were some of the key takeaways? Jason you can chime in too I'd like to get some specifics around where it's been successful >> To me, that customer experience was one that really was really exciting, primarily because we learned very early on that they were completely embodying that open source culture and they were very excited to jump right in and even went about creating their own community of practice. We call them communities of practice. You may know them as centers of excellence. They wanted to create that very early in increment, way before we were even ready to introduce it. And that's primarily because they saw how being able to have that community of practice in place created an environment of inclusion across the organization. They had legacy tools in place already, actually, there was a home grown legacy tool in place. And they very quickly realized that it didn't need to remove that tool, they just needed to figure out a way of being able to how to optimize and streamline how they leverage it and also be able to integrate it into the Ansible automation platform. Another thing I wanted to very quickly note is that they very quickly jumped onto the idea of being able to take those large workflows that they had and breaking them up into smaller chunks. And as you already know, from last year when we spoke about it, that's a pivotal part of what the automation adoption journey brings to our organization. So to sum it all up, they were all in, automation first mindset is what that was driving them. And all of those personas, all of those personal and cultural behaviors are what really helped drive that engagement to be very successful. >> Jason, we'll get your thoughts on this because again, Walter brought up last year's reference to breaking things up into modules. We look at this year's key news it's all about collections. You're seeing content is a big focus, content being not like a blog post or a media asset. Like this is content, but code is content. It's sharing. If it's being consumed by other people, there's now community. You're seeing the steam of enabling. I mean, you're looking at successes, like you guys are having with NTT DoCoMo and others. Once people realize there's a better way and success is contagious, as Walter was saying, you are now enabling new ways to do things faster at scale and all that good stuff has been go check out the keynotes. You guys talk about it all day long with the execs. But I want to learn, right? So when you enable success, people want to be a part of it. And I could imagine there's a thirst and demand for training and the playbooks and all the business models, innovations that's going on. What are you seeing for people that want to learn? Is there training? Is there certifications? Because once you get the magic formula as Walter pointed out, and we all know once people see what success looks like, they're going to want to duplicate it. So as this wave comes, it's like having the new surfboard. I want to surf that wave. So what's the update on Ansible's training, the tools, how do I learn, it's a certification of all. Just take a minute to explain what's going on. >> Yeah, so it's been a crazy world as we've talked about over the last six, seven months here, and we've really had to adapt ourselves and our training and consulting offerings to be able to support our remote delivery models. So we very, very quickly back in the March timeframe, we're able to move our consultants to a remote work force and really implement the tools and technologies to be able to still provide the same value to customers remotely as we have in person historically. And so it's actually been really great. We've been able to make a really seamless transition and actually our C-SAT net promoter scores have actually gone up over the last six months or so. So I think we've done a great job being able to still offer the same consulting capabilities remotely as we have onsite. And so that's obviously with a real personal touch working hand in hand with our customers to deliver these solutions. But from a training perspective, we've actually had to do the same thing because customers aren't onsite, they can't do in person training. We've been able to move our training offerings to completely virtual. So we're continuing to train our customers on Ansible and our other technologies through a virtual modality. And we've also been able to take all of our certifications and now offer those remotely. So as, whereas customers historically, would have had to gone into a center and get those certifications in person, they can now do those certifications remotely. So all of our training offerings and consulting offerings are now available remotely as well as they were in person in the past and will be hopefully soon enough, but it's really not-- >> You would adopt to virtual. >> Excuse me. >> You had to adopt to the virtual model quickly for trainings. >> Exactly. >> What about the community role? What's the role of the community? You guys have a very strong community. Walter pointed out the sharing aspect. Well, I pointed out he talked about the contagious people are talking. You guys have a very robust community. What's the role of community in all of this? >> Yeah, so as Walter said, we have our communities a practice that we use internally we work with customers to build communities of practice, which are very much like a centers of excellence, where people can really come together and share ideas and share best practices and be able to then leverage them more broadly. So, whereas in the past knowledge was really kept in silos, we're really helping customers to build those communities and leverage those communities to share ideas and be able to leverage the best practices that are being adopted more broadly. >> That's awesome. Yeah, break down those silos of course. Open up the data, good things will happen, a thousand flowers bloom, as we always say. Walter, I want to get your thoughts on this collection, what that enables back to learning and integrations. So if collections are going to be more pervasive and more common place the ability to integrate, we were covering for VMware world, there's a VMware module collection, I should say. What are customers doing when you integrate in cross technology parties because now obviously customers are going to have a lot of choice and options. If I'm an integration partner, it's all about Cloud native and the kinds of things we're talking about, you're going to have a lot of integration touch points. What's the most effective way for customers integrating other technology partners into Ansible? >> And this is one of the major benefits that came out of the announcement last year with the Ansible automation platform. The Anible automation platform really enables our customers to not just be able to do automation, but also be able to connect the dots or be able to connect other tools, such as other ITM SM tools or be able to connect into other parts of their workflows. And what we're finding in breaking down really quickly is two things. Collections obviously, is a huge aspect. And not just necessarily the collections but the automation service catalog is really where the value is because that's where we're placing all of these certified collections and certified content that's certified by Red Hat now that we create alongside with these vendors and they're unavailable to customers who are consuming the automation platform. And then the other component is the fact that we're now moved into a place where we now have something called the automation hub. which is very similar to galaxy, which is the online version of it. But the automation hub now is a focus area that's dedicated to a customer, where they can store their content and store those collections, not just the ones that they pull down that are certified by Red hat, but the ones that they create themselves. And the availability of this tool, not only just as a SaaS product, but now being able to have a local copy of it, which is brand new out of the press, out of the truck, feature is huge. That's something that customers have been asking for a very long time and I'm very happy that we're finally able to supply it. >> Okay, so backup for a second, rewind, fell off the truck. What does that mean? It's downloadable. You're saying that the automation hub is available locally. Is that what-- >> Yes, Sir. >> So what does that mean for the customer? What's the impact for them? >> So what that means is that previously, customers would have to connect into the internet. And the automation hub was a SaaS product, meaning it was available via the internet. You can go there, you can sync up and pull down content. And some customers prefer to have it in house. They prefer to have it inside of their firewall, within their control, not accessible through the internet. And that's just their preferences obviously for sometimes it's for compliance or business risk reasons. And now, because of that, we were able to meet that ask and be able to make a local version of it. Whereas you can actually have automation hub locally your environment, you can still sync up data that's out on the SaaS version of automation hub, but be able to bring it down locally and have it available with inside of your firewall, as well as be able to add your content and collections that you create internally to it as well. So it creates a centralized place for you to store all of your automation goodness. >> Jason, I know you got a hard stop and I want to get to you on the IBM question. Have you guys started any joint service engages with IBM? >> Yeah, so we've been delivering a lot of engagements jointly through IBM. We have a lot of joint customers and they're really looking for us to bring the best of both Red Hat services, Red Hat products, and IBM all together to deliver joint solutions. We've actually also worked with IBM global technology services to integrate Ansible into their service offerings. So they're now really leveraging the power of Ansible to drive lower cost and more innovation with our customers and our joint customers. >> I think that's going to be a nice lift for you guys. We'll get into the IBM machinery. I mean, you guys got a great offering, you always had great reviews, great community. I mean, IBM's is just going to be moving this pretty quickly through the system, I can imagine. What's some of the the feedback so far? >> Yeah, it's been great. I mean, we have so many, a large joint customers and they're helping us to get to a lot of customers that we were never able to reach before with their scale around the world. So it's been great to be able to leverage the IBM scale with the great products and services that Red Hat offers to really be able to take that more broadly and continue to drive that across customers in an accelerated pace. >> Well, Jason, I know you've got to go. We're going to stay with Walter while you drop off, but I want to ask you one final question. For the folks watching or asynchronously coming in and out of Ansible Fest 2020 this year. What is the big takeaway that you'd like to share? What is the most important thing people should pay attention to? Well, a couple things it don't have to be one thing, do top three things. what should people be paying attention to this year? And what's the most important stories that you should highlight? >> Yeah, I think there's a lot going on, this technology is moving very quickly. So I think there's a lot of great stories. I definitely take advantage of the customer use cases and hearing how other customers are leveraging Ansible for automation. And again really looking to not use it just as a tool, but really in an enterprise strategy that can really change their business and really drive cost down and increase revenues by leveraging the innovation that Ansible and automation provides. >> Jason, thank you for taking the time. Great insight. Really appreciate the commentary and hopefully we'll see you next year in person Walter. (all talking simultaneously) Walter, let's get back to you. I want to get into this use case and some of the customer feedback, love the stories. And we look, we'd love to get the new data, we'd love to hear about the new products, but again, success is contagious, you mentioned that I want to hear the use cases. So a lot of people have their ear to the ground, they look up the virtual environments, they're learning through new ways, they're looking for signals of success. So I got to ask you what are the things that you're hearing over and over again, as you guys are spinning up engagements? What are some of the patterns that are emerging that are becoming a trend in terms of what customers are consistently doing to overcome some of their challenges around automation? >> Okay, absolutely. So what we're finding is that over time that customers are raising the bar on us. And what I mean by that is that their expectations out of being able to take on tools now has completely changed and specifically when we're talking around automation. Our customers are now leading with the questions of trying to find out, well, how do we reduce our operational costs with this automation tool? Are we able to increase revenue? Are we able to really truly drive productivity and efficiency within our organization by leveraging it? And then they dovetail into, "Well, are we able to mitigate business risk, "even associated with leveraging this automation tool?" So as I mentioned, customers are up leveling what their expectations are out of the automation tools. And what I feel very confident about is that with the launch of the Ansible automation platform we're really able to be able to deliver and show our customers how they're able to get a return on their investment, how by taking part and looking at re-working their workflows how we're able to bring productivity, drive that efficiency. And by leveraging it to be able to mitigate risks you do get the benefits that they're looking for. And so that's something that I'm very happy that we were able to rise to the occasion and so far so good. >> Last year I was very motivated and very inspired by the Ansible vision and content product progress. Just the overall vibe was good, community of the product it's always been solid, but one of the things that's happening I want to get your commentary and reaction to this is that, and we've been riffing on this on theCube and inside the community is certainly automation, no brainer, machine learning automation, I mean, you can't go wrong. Who doesn't want automation? That's like saying, "I want to watch more football "and have good food and good wifi. I mean, it's good things, right? Automation is a good thing. So get that. But the business model issues you brought up ROI from the top of the ivory tower and these companies, certainly with COVID, we need to make money and have modern apps. And if you try to make that sound simple, right? X as a service, SaaS everything is a service. That's easy to say, "Hey, Walter, make everything as a service." "Got it, boss." Well, what the hell do you do? I mean, how do you make that happen? You got Amazon, you got Multicloud, you got legacy apps. You're talking about going in and re-architecting the application development process. So you need automation for the business model of everything as a service. What's your reaction to that? Because it's very complicated. It's doable. People are getting there but the Nirvana is, everything is a service. This is a huge conversation. I mean, it's really big, but what's your reaction to that when I bring that up. >> Right. And you're right, it is a huge undertaking. And you would think that with the delivery of COVID into our worlds that many organizations would probably shy away from making changes. Actually, they're doing the opposite. Like you mentioned, they're running towards automation and trying to figure out how do they optimize and be able to scale, based on this new demand that they're having, specifically new virtual demand. I'm happy you mentioned that we actually added something to the automation adoption journey to be able to combat or be able to solve for that change. And being able to take on that large ask of everything as a service, so to speak. And increment zero at the very beginning of the automation adoption journey we added something called navigate. And what navigate is, is it's a framework where we would come in and not just evaluate what they want to automate and bring that into a new workflow, but we evaluate what they already have in place, what automation they have in place, as well as the manual tasks and we go through, and we try to figure out how do you take that very complex, large thing and stream it down into something that can be first off determined as a service and made available for your organization to consume, and as well as be able to drive the business risks or be able to drive your business objectives forward. And so that exercise that we're now stepping our customers through makes a huge difference and puts it all out in front of you so that you can make decisions and decide which way you want to go taking one step at a time. >> And you know it's interesting, great insight, great comment. I think this is really where the dots are going to connect over the next few years. Everything is as a service. You got to lay the foundation. But if you really want to get this done I got to ask you the question around Ansible's ability to integrate and implement with other products. So could you give an examples of how Ansible has integrated and implemented with other Red Hat products or other types of technology vendors products? >> Right. So one example that always pops to the top of my head and I have to give a lot of credit to one of my managing architects who was leading this effort. Was the simple fact that you when you think about a mainframe, right? So now IBM is our new family member. When you think about mainframes, you think about IBM and it just so happens that there's a huge ask and demand and push around being able to automate ZOS mainframe. And IBM had already embarked on the path of determining, well, can this be done with Ansible? And as I mentioned before, my managing architect partnered up with the folks on IBM's side, so the we're bringing in Red Hat consulting, and now we have IBM and we're working together to move that idea forward of saying, "Hey, you can automate things with the mainframe." So think about it. We're in 2020 now in the midst of a new normal. And now we're thinking about and talking about automating mainframes. So that just shows how things have evolved in such a great way. And I think that that story is a very interesting one. >> It's so funny the evolution. I'm old enough to remember. I came out of college in the 80s and I would look at the old mainframe guys who were like "You guys are going to be dinosaurs." They're still around. I mean, some of the banking apps, I mean some of them are not multi threaded and all the good stuff, but they are powering, they are managing a workload, but this is the beautiful thing about Cloud. And some of the Cloud activities is that you can essentially integrate, you don't have to replace the old to bring in the new. This has been a common pattern. This is where containers, microservices, and Cloud has been a dream state because you can essentially re layer and glue it together. This is a big deal. What's your reaction to that? >> No, it's a huge deal. And the reality is, is that we need all of it. We need the legacy behaviors around infrastructure. So we need the mainframe still because they has a distinct purpose. And like you mentioned, a lot of our FSI customers that is the core of where a lot of their data and performance comes out of. And so it's not definitely not a pull out and replace. It's more of how they integrate and how can you streamline them working together to create your end to end workflow. And as you mentioned, making it available to your organizations to consume as a service. So definitely a fan of being able to integrate and add to and everything has a purpose. Is what we're coming to learn. >> Agility, the modern application, horizontal scalability, Cloud is the new data center. Walter great insights, always great to chat with you. You always got some good commentary. I want to ask you one final question. I asked Jason before he dropped off. Jason Smith, who was our guest here and hit a hard stop. What is the most important story that people should pay attention to this year at Ansible Fest? Remember it's virtual, so there's going to be a lot of content around there, people are busy, it's asynchronous consumption. What should they pay attention to from a content standpoint, maybe some community sizes or a discord group? I mean, what should people look at in this year? What should they walk away with as a key message? Take a minute to share your thoughts. >> Absolutely. Absolutely key messages is that, kind of similar to the message that we have when it comes down to the other circumstances going on in the world right now, is that we're all in this together. As an Ansible community, we need to work together, come together to be able to share what we're doing and break down those silos. So that's the overall theme. I believe we're doing that with the new. So definitely pay attention to the new features that are coming out with the Ansible automation platform. I alluded to the on-prem automation hub, that's huge. Definitely pay attention to the new content that is being released in the service catalog. There's tons of new content that focus on the ITSM and a tool. So being able to integrate and leverage those tools then the easier math model, there's a bunch of network automation advances that have been made, so definitely pay attention to that. And the last teaser, and I won't go into too much of it, 'cause I don't want to steal the thunder. But there is some distinct integrations that are going to go on with OpenShift around containers and the SQL automation platform that you definitely are going to want to pay attention to. If anyone is running OCP in their environment they definitely going to want to pay attention to this. Cause it's going to be huge. >> Private cloud is back, OpenStack is back, OCP. You got OpenShift has done really well. I mean, again, Cloud has been just a great enabler and bringing all this together for developers and certainly creating more glue, more abstractions, more automation, infrastructure is code is here. We're excited for it Walter, great insight. Great conversation. Thank you for sharing. >> No, it's my pleasure. And thank you for having me. >> I'm John Furrier with theCube, your host for theCube virtual's, part of Ansible Fest, virtual 2020 coverage. Thanks for watching. (gentle upbeat 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.

>>Hi everyone, This system A fellow from the University of Tokyo before I thought that would like to thank you she and 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 or some of the recent works that have been done either by me or by character of Hong Kong Noise Group indicating the title of my talk is a neuro more fic in silica simulator for the commenters 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 I will show some proof of concept of the game in performance that can be obtained using dissimulation in the second part and the production 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 adapted from a recent natural tronics paper from the Village Back 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 purification machine, or a recently proposed restricted Bozeman machine, FPD eight, 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 influx you beat or the energy efficiency off memory sisters uh P. J. O are still an attractive platform for building large theorizing 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 particle 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 f. D. A s. 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 suggesting 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 neck 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 a 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 Cortes in machine, which is a growing 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 cooking cm using oh, more than detection and refugee A then injection off the cooking time and eso this dynamics in both cases of CME 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 rising 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 convergence to the global minimum of there's even 20 and using this approach. And so this is >>why we propose toe introduce a macro structure the system or where one analog spin or one D o. P. O is replaced by a pair off one and knock spin and one error on cutting. 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 to force the amplitude of the expense toe, become equal to certain target amplitude. A Andi. This is known by moderating the strength off the icing complaints or see the the error variable e I multiply the icing complain here in the dynamics off UH, 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 think introduces a >>symmetry in the system, which in turn creates chaotic dynamics, which I'm showing here for solving certain current size off, um, escape problem, Uh, in which the exiled from here in the i r. From here and the value of the icing energy is shown in the bottom plots. And you see this Celtics search that visit various local minima of the as Newtonian and eventually finds the local minima Um, >>it can be shown that this modulation off the target opportunity can be used to destabilize all the local minima off the icing hamiltonian 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 the limits of contractors or quality contractors. They can also be destabilized using a moderation of the target amplitude. And so we have proposed in the past two different motivation of the target constitute the first one is a moderation that ensure the 100 >>reproduction rate of the system to become positive on this forbids the creation of any non tree retractors. And but in this work I will talk about another modulation or Uresti 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 the current 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 eso 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 everything. Yet for a system with 500 spins analog 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 tobacco cm 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 gear repression to replicate the post phaser 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, all the dog products, respect to the problem size. And and if we had a new infinite amount of resources and PGA to simulate the dynamics, then the non in optical 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 low carrot off end and while the kite off end. Because computing the dot product involves the summing, all the terms in the products, which is done by a nephew, Jay by another tree, which heights scares a 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 and over you and for the products in the end of you square eso typically for low NF pdf cheap P a. You know 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 started 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 Yeah, click the extra co components within the F p G A in order which is shown here in this right panel here in order to minimize the finding finance of the system and to minimize the long distance that the path in the in the fpt So I'm not going to the details of how this is implemented the PGA. But just to give you a new idea off why the Iraqi Yahiko organization off the system becomes extremely important toe get good performance for simulator organizing mission. 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 result for solving escape problems, free connected person, randomly person minus one, spin 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 Nina successful BT against the problem size here and and in red here there's propose F B J 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. It's similar to the car testing machine >>and security. You see that the scaling off the numbers of metrics victor 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 is possibility 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 center dining in purple, for example, and So you see that the scaring off this purpose simulator is is rather good and that for larger politicizes, we can get orders of magnitude faster than the state of the other approaches. >>Moreover, the relatively good scanning off the time to search in respect to problem size uh, they indicate that the FBT implementation would be faster than risk Other recently proposed izing machine, such as the Hope you know network implemented on Memory Sisters. 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 implemented a PGA proposed by some group in Brooklyn recently again, which is very fast for small promise sizes. But which canning is bad So that, uh, this worse than the purpose approach so that we can expect that for promise sizes larger than, let's say, 1000 spins. The purpose, 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 cut values 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 recount. 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 trickle 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 problems respect to the prime assize. And here, compared to different with such publicizing machines, particularly the digital and, you know, free to is shown in the green here, the green >>line without that's and, uh and we should two different, uh, prosthesis 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 showed that we probably can solve Prime Escape Program of Science 2000 spins 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 or 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 out 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 classical 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 eight f p g. A. In which we will add the more refined models truncated bigger in the bottom question model that just talked about on the supports in which he valued waits for the rising problems and support the cement. So we will announce >>later when this is available, and Farah is working hard to get the first version available sometime in September. Thank you all, and we'll be happy to answer any questions that you have.