>> From theCUBE studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> Confidential computing is a technology that aims to enhance data privacy and security by providing encrypted computation on sensitive data and isolating data from apps in a fenced off enclave during processing. The concept of confidential computing is gaining popularity, especially in the cloud computing space where sensitive data is often stored and of course processed. However, there are some who view confidential computing as an unnecessary technology in a marketing ploy by cloud providers aimed at calming customers who are cloud phobic. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon CUBE Insights powered by ETR. In this Breaking Analysis, we revisit the notion of confidential computing, and to do so, we'll invite two Google experts to the show, but before we get there, let's summarize briefly. There's not a ton of ETR data on the topic of confidential computing. I mean, it's a technology that's deeply embedded into silicon and computing architectures. But at the highest level, security remains the number one priority being addressed by IT decision makers in the coming year as shown here. And this data is pretty much across the board by industry, by region, by size of company. I mean we dug into it and the only slight deviation from the mean is in financial services. The second and third most cited priorities, cloud migration and analytics, are noticeably closer to cybersecurity in financial services than in other sectors, likely because financial services has always been hyper security conscious, but security is still a clear number one priority in that sector. The idea behind confidential computing is to better address threat models for data in execution. Protecting data at rest and data and transit have long been a focus of security approaches, but more recently, silicon manufacturers have introduced architectures that separate data and applications from the host system. Arm, Intel, AMD, Nvidia and other suppliers are all on board, as are the big cloud players. Now the argument against confidential computing is that it narrowly focuses on memory encryption and it doesn't solve the biggest problems in security. Multiple system images updates different services and the entire code flow aren't directly addressed by memory encryption, rather to truly attack these problems, many believe that OSs need to be re-engineered with the attacker and hacker in mind. There are so many variables and at the end of the day, critics say the emphasis on confidential computing made by cloud providers is overstated and largely hype. This tweet from security researcher Rodrigo Branco sums up the sentiment of many skeptics. He says, "Confidential computing is mostly a marketing campaign for memory encryption. It's not driving the industry towards the hard open problems. It is selling an illusion." Okay. Nonetheless, encrypting data in use and fencing off key components of the system isn't a bad thing, especially if it comes with the package essentially for free. There has been a lack of standardization and interoperability between different confidential computing approaches. But the confidential computing consortium was established in 2019 ostensibly to accelerate the market and influence standards. Notably, AWS is not part of the consortium, likely because the politics of the consortium were probably a conundrum for AWS because the base technology defined by the the consortium is seen as limiting by AWS. This is my guess, not AWS's words, and but I think joining the consortium would validate a definition which AWS isn't aligned with. And two, it's got a lead with this Annapurna acquisition. This was way ahead with Arm integration and so it probably doesn't feel the need to validate its competitors. Anyway, one of the premier members of the confidential computing consortium is Google, along with many high profile names including Arm, Intel, Meta, Red Hat, Microsoft, and others. And we're pleased to welcome two experts on confidential computing from Google to unpack the topic, Nelly Porter is head of product for GCP confidential computing and encryption, and Dr. Patricia Florissi is the technical director for the office of the CTO at Google Cloud. Welcome Nelly and Patricia, great to have you. >> Great to be here. >> Thank you so much for having us. >> You're very welcome. Nelly, why don't you start and then Patricia, you can weigh in. Just tell the audience a little bit about each of your roles at Google Cloud. >> So I'll start, I'm owning a lot of interesting activities in Google and again security or infrastructure securities that I usually own. And we are talking about encryption and when encryption and confidential computing is a part of portfolio in additional areas that I contribute together with my team to Google and our customers is secure software supply chain. Because you need to trust your software. Is it operate in your confidential environment to have end-to-end story about if you believe that your software and your environment doing what you expect, it's my role. >> Got it. Okay. Patricia? >> Well, I am a technical director in the office of the CTO, OCTO for short, in Google Cloud. And we are a global team. We include former CTOs like myself and senior technologists from large corporations, institutions and a lot of success, we're startups as well. And we have two main goals. First, we walk side by side with some of our largest, more strategic or most strategical customers and we help them solve complex engineering technical problems. And second, we are devise Google and Google Cloud engineering and product management and tech on there, on emerging trends and technologies to guide the trajectory of our business. We are unique group, I think, because we have created this collaborative culture with our customers. And within OCTO, I spend a lot of time collaborating with customers and the industry at large on technologies that can address privacy, security, and sovereignty of data in general. >> Excellent. Thank you for that both of you. Let's get into it. So Nelly, what is confidential computing? From Google's perspective, how do you define it? >> Confidential computing is a tool and it's still one of the tools in our toolbox. And confidential computing is a way how we would help our customers to complete this very interesting end-to-end lifecycle of the data. And when customers bring in the data to cloud and want to protect it as they ingest it to the cloud, they protect it at rest when they store data in the cloud. But what was missing for many, many years is ability for us to continue protecting data and workloads of our customers when they running them. And again, because data is not brought to cloud to have huge graveyard, we need to ensure that this data is actually indexed. Again, there is some insights driven and drawn from this data. You have to process this data and confidential computing here to help. Now we have end to end protection of our customer's data when they bring the workloads and data to cloud, thanks to confidential computing. >> Thank you for that. Okay, we're going to get into the architecture a bit, but before we do, Patricia, why do you think this topic of confidential computing is such an important technology? Can you explain, do you think it's transformative for customers and if so, why? >> Yeah, I would maybe like to use one thought, one way, one intuition behind why confidential commuting matters, because at the end of the day, it reduces more and more the customer's thresh boundaries and the attack surface. That's about reducing that periphery, the boundary in which the customer needs to mind about trust and safety. And in a way, is a natural progression that you're using encryption to secure and protect the data. In the same way that we are encrypting data in transit and at rest, now we are also encrypting data while in use. And among other beneficials, I would say one of the most transformative ones is that organizations will be able to collaborate with each other and retain the confidentiality of the data. And that is across industry, even though it's highly focused on, I wouldn't say highly focused, but very beneficial for highly regulated industries. It applies to all of industries. And if you look at financing for example, where bankers are trying to detect fraud, and specifically double finance where you are, a customer is actually trying to get a finance on an asset, let's say a boat or a house, and then it goes to another bank and gets another finance on that asset. Now bankers would be able to collaborate and detect fraud while preserving confidentiality and privacy of the data. >> Interesting. And I want to understand that a little bit more but I'm going to push you a little bit on this, Nelly, if I can because there's a narrative out there that says confidential computing is a marketing ploy, I talked about this upfront, by cloud providers that are just trying to placate people that are scared of the cloud. And I'm presuming you don't agree with that, but I'd like you to weigh in here. The argument is confidential computing is just memory encryption and it doesn't address many other problems. It is over hyped by cloud providers. What do you say to that line of thinking? >> I absolutely disagree, as you can imagine, with this statement, but the most importantly is we mixing multiple concepts, I guess. And exactly as Patricia said, we need to look at the end-to-end story, not again the mechanism how confidential computing trying to again, execute and protect a customer's data and why it's so critically important because what confidential computing was able to do, it's in addition to isolate our tenants in multi-tenant environments the cloud covering to offer additional stronger isolation. They called it cryptographic isolation. It's why customers will have more trust to customers and to other customers, the tenant that's running on the same host but also us because they don't need to worry about against threats and more malicious attempts to penetrate the environment. So what confidential computing is helping us to offer our customers, stronger isolation between tenants in this multi-tenant environment, but also incredibly important, stronger isolation of our customers, so tenants from us. We also writing code, we also software providers will also make mistakes or have some zero days. Sometimes again us introduced, sometimes introduced by our adversaries. But what I'm trying to say by creating this cryptographic layer of isolation between us and our tenants and amongst those tenants, we're really providing meaningful security to our customers and eliminate some of the worries that they have running on multi-tenant spaces or even collaborating to gather this very sensitive data knowing that this particular protection is available to them. >> Okay, thank you. Appreciate that. And I think malicious code is often a threat model missed in these narratives. Operator access, yeah, maybe I trust my clouds provider, but if I can fence off your access even better, I'll sleep better at night. Separating a code from the data, everybody's, Arm, Intel, AMD, Nvidia, others, they're all doing it. I wonder if, Nelly, if we could stay with you and bring up the slide on the architecture. What's architecturally different with confidential computing versus how operating systems and VMs have worked traditionally. We're showing a slide here with some VMs, maybe you could take us through that. >> Absolutely. And Dave, the whole idea for Google and now industry way of dealing with confidential computing is to ensure that three main property is actually preserved. Customers don't need to change the code. They can operate on those VMs exactly as they would with normal non-confidential VMs, but to give them this opportunity of lift and shift or no changing their apps and performing and having very, very, very low latency and scale as any cloud can, something that Google actually pioneer in confidential computing. I think we need to open and explain how this magic was actually done. And as I said, it's again the whole entire system have to change to be able to provide this magic. And I would start with we have this concept of root of trust and root of trust where we will ensure that this machine, when the whole entire post has integrity guarantee, means nobody changing my code on the most low level of system. And we introduce this in 2017 called Titan. It was our specific ASIC, specific, again, inch by inch system on every single motherboard that we have that ensures that your low level former, your actually system code, your kernel, the most powerful system is actually proper configured and not changed, not tampered. We do it for everybody, confidential computing included. But for confidential computing, what we have to change, we bring in AMD, or again, future silicon vendors and we have to trust their former, their way to deal with our confidential environments. And that's why we have obligation to validate integrity, not only our software and our former but also former and software of our vendors, silicon vendors. So we actually, when we booting this machine, as you can see, we validate that integrity of all of the system is in place. It means nobody touching, nobody changing, nobody modifying it. But then we have this concept of AMD secure processor, it's special ASICs, best specific things that generate a key for every single VM that our customers will run or every single node in Kubernetes or every single worker thread in our Hadoop or Spark capability. We offer all of that. And those keys are not available to us. It's the best keys ever in encryption space because when we are talking about encryption, the first question that I'm receiving all the time, where's the key, who will have access to the key? Because if you have access to the key then it doesn't matter if you encrypted or not. So, but the case in confidential computing provides so revolutionary technology, us cloud providers, who don't have access to the keys. They sitting in the hardware and they head to memory controller. And it means when hypervisors that also know about these wonderful things saying I need to get access to the memories that this particular VM trying to get access to, they do not decrypt the data, they don't have access to the key because those keys are random, ephemeral and per VM, but the most importantly, in hardware not exportable. And it means now you would be able to have this very interesting role that customers or cloud providers will not be able to get access to your memory. And what we do, again, as you can see our customers don't need to change their applications, their VMs are running exactly as it should run and what you're running in VM, you actually see your memory in clear, it's not encrypted, but God forbid is trying somebody to do it outside of my confidential box. No, no, no, no, no, they would not be able to do it. Now you'll see cyber and it's exactly what combination of these multiple hardware pieces and software pieces have to do. So OS is also modified. And OS is modified such way to provide integrity. It means even OS that you're running in your VM box is not modifiable and you, as customer, can verify. But the most interesting thing, I guess, how to ensure the super performance of this environment because you can imagine, Dave, that encrypting and it's additional performance, additional time, additional latency. So we were able to mitigate all of that by providing incredibly interesting capability in the OS itself. So our customers will get no changes needed, fantastic performance and scales as they would expect from cloud providers like Google. >> Okay, thank you. Excellent. Appreciate that explanation. So, again, the narrative on this as well, you've already given me guarantees as a cloud provider that you don't have access to my data, but this gives another level of assurance, key management as they say is key. Now humans aren't managing the keys, the machines are managing them. So Patricia, my question to you is, in addition to, let's go pre confidential computing days, what are the sort of new guarantees that these hardware-based technologies are going to provide to customers? >> So if I am a customer, I am saying I now have full guarantee of confidentiality and integrity of the data and of the code. So if you look at code and data confidentiality, the customer cares and they want to know whether their systems are protected from outside or unauthorized access, and that recovered with Nelly, that it is. Confidential computing actually ensures that the applications and data internals remain secret, right? The code is actually looking at the data, the only the memory is decrypting the data with a key that is ephemeral and per VM and generated on demand. Then you have the second point where you have code and data integrity, and now customers want to know whether their data was corrupted, tampered with or impacted by outside actors. And what confidential computing ensures is that application internals are not tampered with. So the application, the workload as we call it, that is processing the data, it's also, it has not been tampered and preserves integrity. I would also say that this is all verifiable. So you have attestation and these attestation actually generates a log trail and the log trail guarantees that, provides a proof that it was preserved. And I think that the offer's also a guarantee of what we call ceiling, this idea that the secrets have been preserved and not tampered with, confidentiality and integrity of code and data. >> Got it. Okay, thank you. Nelly, you mentioned, I think I heard you say that the applications, it's transparent, you don't have to change the application, it just comes for free essentially. And we showed some various parts of the stack before. I'm curious as to what's affected, but really more importantly, what is specifically Google's value add? How do partners participate in this, the ecosystem, or maybe said another way, how does Google ensure the compatibility of confidential computing with existing systems and applications? >> And a fantastic question by the way. And it's very difficult and definitely complicated world because to be able to provide these guarantees, actually a lot of work was done by community. Google is very much operate in open, so again, our operating system, we working with operating system repository OSs, OS vendors to ensure that all capabilities that we need is part of the kernels, are part of the releases and it's available for customers to understand and even explore if they have fun to explore a lot of code. We have also modified together with our silicon vendors a kernel, host kernel to support this capability and it means working this community to ensure that all of those patches are there. We also worked with every single silicon vendor as you've seen, and that's what I probably feel that Google contributed quite a bit in this whole, we moved our industry, our community, our vendors to understand the value of easy to use confidential computing or removing barriers. And now I don't know if you noticed, Intel is pulling the lead and also announcing their trusted domain extension, very similar architecture. And no surprise, it's, again, a lot of work done with our partners to, again, convince, work with them and make this capability available. The same with Arm this year, actually last year, Arm announced their future design for confidential computing. It's called Confidential Computing Architecture. And it's also influenced very heavily with similar ideas by Google and industry overall. So it's a lot of work in confidential computing consortiums that we are doing, for example, simply to mention, to ensure interop, as you mentioned, between different confidential environments of cloud providers. They want to ensure that they can attest to each other because when you're communicating with different environments, you need to trust them. And if it's running on different cloud providers, you need to ensure that you can trust your receiver when you are sharing your sensitive data workloads or secret with them. So we coming as a community and we have this attestation sig, the, again, the community based systems that we want to build and influence and work with Arm and every other cloud providers to ensure that we can interrupt and it means it doesn't matter where confidential workloads will be hosted, but they can exchange the data in secure, verifiable and controlled by customers way. And to do it, we need to continue what we are doing, working open, again, and contribute with our ideas and ideas of our partners to this role to become what we see confidential computing has to become, it has to become utility. It doesn't need to be so special, but it's what we want it to become. >> Let's talk about, thank you for that explanation. Let's talk about data sovereignty because when you think about data sharing, you think about data sharing across the ecosystem and different regions and then of course data sovereignty comes up. Typically public policy lags, the technology industry and sometimes is problematic. I know there's a lot of discussions about exceptions, but Patricia, we have a graphic on data sovereignty. I'm interested in how confidential computing ensures that data sovereignty and privacy edicts are adhered to, even if they're out of alignment maybe with the pace of technology. One of the frequent examples is when you delete data, can you actually prove that data is deleted with a hundred percent certainty? You got to prove that and a lot of other issues. So looking at this slide, maybe you could take us through your thinking on data sovereignty. >> Perfect. So for us, data sovereignty is only one of the three pillars of digital sovereignty. And I don't want to give the impression that confidential computing addresses it all. That's why we want to step back and say, hey, digital sovereignty includes data sovereignty where we are giving you full control and ownership of the location, encryption and access to your data. Operational sovereignty where the goal is to give our Google Cloud customers full visibility and control over the provider operations, right? So if there are any updates on hardware, software stack, any operations, there is full transparency, full visibility. And then the third pillar is around software sovereignty where the customer wants to ensure that they can run their workloads without dependency on the provider's software. So they have sometimes is often referred as survivability, that you can actually survive if you are untethered to the cloud and that you can use open source. Now let's take a deep dive on data sovereignty, which by the way is one of my favorite topics. And we typically focus on saying, hey, we need to care about data residency. We care where the data resides because where the data is at rest or in processing, it typically abides to the jurisdiction, the regulations of the jurisdiction where the data resides. And others say, hey, let's focus on data protection. We want to ensure the confidentiality and integrity and availability of the data, which confidential computing is at the heart of that data protection. But it is yet another element that people typically don't talk about when talking about data sovereignty, which is the element of user control. And here, Dave, is about what happens to the data when I give you access to my data. And this reminds me of security two decades ago, even a decade ago, where we started the security movement by putting firewall protections and login accesses. But once you were in, you were able to do everything you wanted with the data. An insider had access to all the infrastructure, the data and the code. And that's similar because with data sovereignty we care about whether it resides, where, who is operating on the data. But the moment that the data is being processed, I need to trust that the processing of the data will abide by user control, by the policies that I put in place of how my data is going to be used. And if you look at a lot of the regulation today and a lot of the initiatives around the International Data Space Association, IDSA, and Gaia-X, there is a movement of saying the two parties, the provider of the data and the receiver of the data are going to agree on a contract that describes what my data can be used for. The challenge is to ensure that once the data crosses boundaries, that the data will be used for the purposes that it was intended and specified in the contract. And if you actually bring together, and this is the exciting part, confidential computing together with policy enforcement, now the policy enforcement can guarantee that the data is only processed within the confines of a confidential computing environment, that the workload is cryptographically verified that there is the workload that was meant to process the data and that the data will be only used when abiding to the confidentiality and integrity safety of the confidential computing environment. And that's why we believe confidential computing is one necessary and essential technology that will allow us to ensure data sovereignty, especially when it comes to user control. >> Thank you for that. I mean it was a deep dive, I mean brief, but really detailed. So I appreciate that, especially the verification of the enforcement. Last question, I met you two because as part of my year end prediction post, you guys sent in some predictions and I wasn't able to get to them in the predictions post. So I'm thrilled that you were able to make the time to come on the program. How widespread do you think the adoption of confidential computing will be in 23 and what's the maturity curve look like, this decade in your opinion? Maybe each of you could give us a brief answer. >> So my prediction in five, seven years, as I started, it'll become utility. It'll become TLS as of, again, 10 years ago we couldn't believe that websites will have certificates and we will support encrypted traffic. Now we do and it's become ubiquity. It's exactly where confidential computing is getting and heading, I don't know we deserve yet. It'll take a few years of maturity for us, but we will be there. >> Thank you. And Patricia, what's your prediction? >> I will double that and say, hey, in the future, in the very near future, you will not be able to afford not having it. I believe as digital sovereignty becomes evermore top of mind with sovereign states and also for multi national organizations and for organizations that want to collaborate with each other, confidential computing will become the norm. It'll become the default, if I say, mode of operation. I like to compare that today is inconceivable. If we talk to the young technologists, it's inconceivable to think that at some point in history, and I happen to be alive that we had data at rest that was not encrypted, data in transit that was not encrypted, and I think that will be inconceivable at some point in the near future that to have unencrypted data while in use. >> And plus I think the beauty of the this industry is because there's so much competition, this essentially comes for free. I want to thank you both for spending some time on Breaking Analysis. There's so much more we could cover. I hope you'll come back to share the progress that you're making in this area and we can double click on some of these topics. Really appreciate your time. >> Anytime. >> Thank you so much. >> In summary, while confidential computing is being touted by the cloud players as a promising technology for enhancing data privacy and security, there are also those, as we said, who remain skeptical. The truth probably lies somewhere in between and it will depend on the specific implementation and the use case as to how effective confidential computing will be. Look, as with any new tech, it's important to carefully evaluate the potential benefits, the drawbacks, and make informed decisions based on the specific requirements in the situation and the constraints of each individual customer. But the bottom line is silicon manufacturers are working with cloud providers and other system companies to include confidential computing into their architectures. Competition, in our view, will moderate price hikes. And at the end of the day, this is under the covers technology that essentially will come for free. So we'll take it. I want to thank our guests today, Nelly and Patricia from Google, and thanks to Alex Myerson who's on production and manages the podcast. Ken Schiffman as well out of our Boston studio, Kristin Martin and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social media and in our newsletters. And Rob Hof is our editor-in-chief over at siliconangle.com. Does some great editing for us, thank you all. Remember all these episodes are available as podcasts. Wherever you listen, just search Breaking Analysis podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com where you can get all the news. If you want to get in touch, you can email me at david.vellante@siliconangle.com or dm me @DVellante. And you can also comment on my LinkedIn post. Definitely you want to check out etr.ai for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. I know we didn't hit on a lot today, but there's some amazing data and it's always being updated, so check that out. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights, powered by ETR. Thanks for watching and we'll see you next time on Breaking Analysis. (upbeat music)

>> Welcome Nelly and Patricia, great to have you. >> Great to be here. >> Thank you so much for having us. >> You're very welcome. Nelly, why don't you start, and then Patricia you can weigh in. Just tell the audience a little bit about each of your roles at Google Cloud. >> So I'll start, I'm honing a lot of interesting activities in Google and again, security or infrastructure securities that I usually hone, and we're talking about encryption, Antware encryption, and confidential computing is a part of portfolio. In additional areas that I contribute to get with my team to Google and our customers is secure software supply chain. Because you need to trust your software. Is it operating your confidential environment to have end to end story about if you believe that your software and your environment doing what you expect, it's my role. >> Got it, okay. Patricia? >> Well I am a technical director in the office of the CTO, OCTO for short, in Google Cloud. And we are a global team. We include former CTOs like myself and senior technologies from large corporations, institutions, and a lot of success for startups as well. And we have two main goals. First, we work side by side with some of our largest, more strategic or most strategic customers and we help them solve complex engineering technical problems. And second, we are device Google and Google Cloud engineering and product management on emerging trends in technologies to guide the trajectory of our business. We are unique group, I think, because we have created this collaborative culture with our customers. And within OCTO I spend a lot of time collaborating with customers in the industry at large on technologies that can address privacy, security, and sovereignty of data in general. >> Excellent, thank you for that both of you. Let's get into it. So Nelly, what is confidential computing from Google's perspective? How do you define it? >> Confidential computing is a tool. And it's one of the tools in our toolbox. And confidential computing is a way how would help our customers to complete this very interesting end to end lifecycle of their data. And when customers bring in the data to Cloud and want to protect it, as they ingest it to the Cloud, they protect it address when they store data in the Cloud. But what was missing for many, many years is ability for us to continue protecting data and workloads of our customers when they running them. And again, because data is not brought to Cloud to have huge graveyard, we need to ensure that this data is actually indexed. Again there is some insights driven and drawn from this data. You have to process this data and confidential computing here to help. Now we have end to end protection of our customer's data when they bring the workloads and data to Cloud, thanks to confidential computing. >> Thank you for that. Okay, we're going to get into the architecture a bit but before we do Patricia, why do you think this topic of confidential computing is such an important technology? Can you explain, do you think it's transformative for customers and if so, why? >> Yeah, I would maybe like to use one thought, one way, one intuition behind why confidential matters. Because at the end of the day it reduces more and more the customers thrush boundaries and the attack surface, that's about reducing that periphery, the boundary, in which the customer needs to mind about trust and safety. And in a way is a natural progression that you're using encryption to secure and protect data in the same way that we are encrypting data in transit and at rest. Now we are also encrypting data while in use. And among other beneficial I would say one of the most transformative ones is that organizations will be able to collaborate with each other and retain the confidentiality of the data. And that is across industry. Even though it's highly focused on, I wouldn't say highly focused, but very beneficial for highly regulated industries. It applies to all of industries. And if you look at financing for example, where bankers are trying to detect fraud and specifically double finance where you are a customer is actually trying to get a finance on an asset, let's say a boat or a house and then it goes to another bank and gets another finance on that asset. Now bankers would be able to collaborate and detect fraud while preserving confidentiality and privacy of the of the data. >> Interesting, and I want to understand that a little bit more but I'm going to push you a little bit on this, Nelly, if I can, because there's a narrative out there that says confidential computing is a marketing ploy. I talked about this upfront, by Cloud providers that are just trying to placate people that are scared of the Cloud. And I'm presuming you don't agree with that but I'd like you to weigh in here. The argument is confidential computing is just memory encryption, it doesn't address many other problems, it is overhyped by Cloud providers. What do you say to that line of thinking? >> I absolutely disagree as you can imagine, it's a crazy statement. But the most importantly is we mixing multiple concepts I guess. And exactly as Patricia said, we need to look at the end-to-end story not again the mechanism of how confidential computing trying to again execute and protect customer's data, and why it's so critically important. Because what confidential computing was able to do it's in addition to isolate our tenants in multi-tenant environments the Cloud over. To offer additional stronger isolation, we called it cryptographic isolation. It's why customers will have more trust to customers and to other customers, the tenants that's running on the same host but also us, because they don't need to worry about against threats and more malicious attempts to penetrate the environment. So what confidential computing is helping us to offer our customers, stronger isolation between tenants in this multi-tenant environment but also incredibly important, stronger isolation of our customers. So tenants from us, we also writing code, we also software providers will also make mistakes or have some zero days sometimes again us introduced, sometimes introduced by our adversaries. But what I'm trying to say by creating this cryptographic layer of isolation between us and our tenants, and amongst those tenants, they're really providing meaningful security to our customers and eliminate some of the worries that they have running on multi-tenant spaces or even collaborating together this very sensitive data, knowing that this particular protection is available to them. >> Okay, thank you, appreciate that. And I, you know, I think malicious code is often a threat model missed in these narratives. You know, operator access, yeah, could maybe I trust my Clouds provider, but if I can fence off your access even better I'll sleep better at night. Separating a code from the data, everybody's arm Intel, AM, Invidia, others, they're all doing it. I wonder if Nell, if we could stay with you and bring up the slide on the architecture. What's architecturally different with confidential computing versus how operating systems and VMs have worked traditionally? We're showing a slide here with some VMs, maybe you could take us through that. >> Absolutely, and Dave, the whole idea for Google and industry way of dealing with confidential computing is to ensure as it's three main property is actually preserved. Customers don't need to change the code. They can operate in those VMs exactly as they would with normal non-confidential VMs. But to give them this opportunity of lift and shift or no changing their apps and performing and having very, very, very low latency and scale as any Cloud can, something that Google actually pioneered in confidential computing. I think we need to open and explain how this magic was actually done. And as I said, it's again the whole entire system have to change to be able to provide this magic. And I would start with we have this concept of root of trust and root of trust where we will ensure that this machine, the whole entire post has integrity guarantee, means nobody changing my code on the most low level of system. And we introduce this in 2017 code Titan. Those our specific ASIC specific, again inch by inch system on every single motherboard that we have, that ensures that your low level former, your actually system code, your kernel, the most powerful system, is actually proper configured and not changed, not tempered. We do it for everybody, confidential computing concluded. But for confidential computing what we have to change we bring in a MD again, future silicon vendors, and we have to trust their former, their way to deal with our confidential environments. And that's why we have obligation to validate integrity not only our software and our firmware but also firmware and software of our vendors, silicon vendors. So we actually, when we booting this machine as you can see, we validate that integrity of all of this system is in place. It means nobody touching, nobody changing, nobody modifying it. But then we have this concept of the secure processor. It's special Asics best, specific things that generate a key for every single VM that our customers will run or every single node in Kubernetes, or every single worker thread in our Spark capability. We offer all of that, and those keys are not available to us. It's the best keys ever in encryption space. Because when we are talking about encryption the first question that I'm receiving all the time, where's the key, who will have access to the key? Because if you have access to the key then it doesn't matter if you encrypt it enough. But the case in confidential computing quite so revolutionary technology, ask Cloud providers who don't have access to the keys. They're sitting in the hardware and they fed to memory controller. And it means when Hypervisors that also know about these wonderful things, saying I need to get access to the memories that this particular VM I'm trying to get access to. They do not encrypt the data, they don't have access to the key. Because those keys are random, ephemeral and VM, but the most importantly in hardware not exportable. And it means now you will be able to have this very interesting role that customers all Cloud providers, will not be able to get access to your memory. And what we do, again, as you can see our customers don't need to change their applications. Their VMs are running exactly as it should run. And what you're running in VM you actually see your memory in clear, it's not encrypted. But God forbid is trying somebody to do it outside of my confidential box. No, no, no, no, no, you will not be able to do it. Now you'll see cybernet. And it's exactly what combination of these multiple hardware pieces and software pieces have to do. So OS is also modified, and OS is modified such way to provide integrity. It means even OS that you're running in UVM bucks is not modifiable and you as customer can verify. But the most interesting thing I guess how to ensure the super performance of this environment because you can imagine, Dave, that's increasing it's additional performance, additional time, additional latency. So we're able to mitigate all of that by providing incredibly interesting capability in the OS itself. So our customers will get no changes needed, fantastic performance, and scales as they would expect from Cloud providers like Google. >> Okay, thank you. Excellent, appreciate that explanation. So you know again, the narrative on this is, well you know you've already given me guarantees as a Cloud provider that you don't have access to my data but this gives another level of assurance. Key management as they say is key. Now you're not, humans aren't managing the keys the machines are managing them. So Patricia, my question to you is in addition to, you know, let's go pre-confidential computing days what are the sort of new guarantees that these hardware-based technologies are going to provide to customers? >> So if I am a customer, I am saying I now have full guarantee of confidentiality and integrity of the data and of the code. So if you look at code and data confidentiality the customer cares then they want to know whether their systems are protected from outside or unauthorized access. And that we covered with Nelly that it is. Confidential computing actually ensures that the applications and data antennas remain secret, right? The code is actually looking at the data only the memory is decrypting the data with a key that is ephemeral, and per VM, and generated on demand. Then you have the second point where you have code and data integrity and now customers want to know whether their data was corrupted, tempered, with or impacted by outside actors. And what confidential computing insures is that application internals are not tampered with. So the application, the workload as we call it, that is processing the data it's also it has not been tempered and preserves integrity. I would also say that this is all verifiable. So you have attestation, and this attestation actually generates a log trail and the log trail guarantees that provides a proof that it was preserved. And I think that the offers also a guarantee of what we call ceiling, this idea that the secrets have been preserved and not tempered with. Confidentiality and integrity of code and data. >> Got it, okay, thank you. You know, Nelly, you mentioned, I think I heard you say that the applications, it's transparent,you don't have to change the application it just comes for free essentially. And I'm, we showed some various parts of the stack before. I'm curious as to what's affected but really more importantly what is specifically Google's value add? You know, how do partners, you know, participate in this? The ecosystem or maybe said another way how does Google ensure the compatibility of confidential computing with existing systems and applications? >> And a fantastic question by the way. And it's very difficult and definitely complicated world because to be able to provide these guarantees actually a lot of works was done by community. Google is very much operate and open. So again, our operating system we working in this operating system repository OS vendors to ensure that all capabilities that we need is part of their kernels, are part of their releases, and it's available for customers to understand and even explore if they have fun to explore a lot of code. We have also modified together with our silicon vendors, kernel, host kernel, to support this capability and it means working this community to ensure that all of those patches are there. We also worked with every single silicon vendor as you've seen, and that's what I probably feel that Google contributed quite a bit in this role. We moved our industry, our community, our vendors to understand the value of easy to use confidential computing or removing barriers. And now I don't know if you noticed Intel is pulling the lead and also announcing the trusted domain extension very similar architecture and no surprise, it's again a lot of work done with our partners to again, convince, work with them, and make this capability available. The same with ARM this year, actually last year, ARM unknowns are future design for confidential computing. It's called confidential computing architecture. And it's also influenced very heavily with similar ideas by Google and industry overall. So it's a lot of work in confidential computing consortiums that we are doing. For example, simply to mention to ensure interop, as you mentioned, between different confidential environments of Cloud providers. We want to ensure that they can attest to each other. Because when you're communicating with different environments, you need to trust them. And if it's running on different Cloud providers you need to ensure that you can trust your receiver when you are sharing your sensitive data workloads or secret with them. So we coming as a community and we have this at the station, the community based systems that we want to build and influence and work with ARM and every other Cloud providers to ensure that they can interrupt. And it means it doesn't matter where confidential workloads will be hosted but they can exchange the data in secure, verifiable, and controlled by customers way. And to do it, we need to continue what we are doing. Working open again and contribute with our ideas and ideas of our partners to this role to become what we see confidential computing has to become, it has to become utility. It doesn't need to be so special but it's what what we've wanted to become. >> Let's talk about, thank you for that explanation. Let talk about data sovereignty, because when you think about data sharing you think about data sharing across, you know, the ecosystem and different regions and then of course data sovereignty comes up. Typically public policy lags, you know, the technology industry and sometimes is problematic. I know, you know, there's a lot of discussions about exceptions, but Patricia, we have a graphic on data sovereignty. I'm interested in how confidential computing ensures that data sovereignty and privacy edicts are adhered to even if they're out of alignment maybe with the pace of technology. One of the frequent examples is when you you know, when you delete data, can you actually prove the data is deleted with a hundred percent certainty? You got to prove that and a lot of other issues. So looking at this slide, maybe you could take us through your thinking on data sovereignty. >> Perfect, so for us, data sovereignty is only one of the three pillars of digital sovereignty. And I don't want to give the impression that confidential computing addresses at all. That's why we want to step back and say, hey, digital sovereignty includes data sovereignty where we are giving you full control and ownership of the location, encryption, and access to your data. Operational sovereignty where the goal is to give our Google Cloud customers full visibility and control over the provider operations, right? So if there are any updates on hardware, software, stack, any operations, that is full transparency, full visibility. And then the third pillar is around software sovereignty where the customer wants to ensure that they can run their workloads without dependency on the provider's software. So they have sometimes is often referred as survivability that you can actually survive if you are untethered to the Cloud and that you can use open source. Now let's take a deep dive on data sovereignty, which by the way is one of my favorite topics. And we typically focus on saying, hey, we need to care about data residency. We care where the data resides because where the data is at rest or in processing it typically abides to the jurisdiction, the regulations of the jurisdiction where the data resides. And others say, hey, let's focus on data protection. We want to ensure the confidentiality and integrity and availability of the data which confidential computing is at the heart of that data protection. But it is yet another element that people typically don't talk about when talking about data sovereignty, which is the element of user control. And here Dave, is about what happens to the data when I give you access to my data. And this reminds me of security two decades ago, even a decade ago, where we started the security movement by putting firewall protections and login accesses. But once you were in, you were able to do everything you wanted with the data, an insider had access to all the infrastructure, the data, and the code. And that's similar because with data sovereignty we care about whether it resides, who is operating on the data. But the moment that the data is being processed, I need to trust that the processing of the data will abide by user control, by the policies that I put in place of how my data is going to be used. And if you look at a lot of the regulation today and a lot of the initiatives around the International Data Space Association, IDSA, and Gaia X, there is a movement of saying the two parties, the provider of the data and the receiver of the data going to agree on a contract that describes what my data can be used for. The challenge is to ensure that once the data crosses boundaries, that the data will be used for the purposes that it was intended and specified in the contract. And if you actually bring together, and this is the exciting part, confidential computing together with policy enforcement. Now the policy enforcement can guarantee that the data is only processed within the confines of a confidential computing environment. That the workload is cryptographically verified that there is the workload that was meant to process the data and that the data will be only used when abiding to the confidentiality and integrity, safety of the confidential computing environment. And that's why we believe confidential computing is one, necessary and essential technology that will allow us to ensure data sovereignty especially when it comes to user control. >> Thank you for that. I mean it was a deep dive, I mean brief, but really detailed, so I appreciate that, especially the verification of the enforcement. Last question, I met you two because as part of my year end prediction post you guys sent in some predictions, and I wasn't able to get to them in the predictions post. So I'm thrilled that you were able to make the time to come on the program. How widespread do you think the adoption of confidential computing will be in '23 and what's the maturity curve look like, you know, this decade in, in your opinion? Maybe each of you could give us a brief answer. >> So my prediction in five, seven years as I started, it'll become utility. It'll become TLS. As of, again, 10 years ago we couldn't believe that websites will have certificates and we will support encrypted traffic. Now we do, and it's become ubiquity. It's exactly where our confidential computing is heading and heading, I don't know if we are there yet yet. It'll take a few years of maturity for us, but we'll do that. >> Thank you, and Patricia, what's your prediction? >> I would double that and say, hey, in the future, in the very near future you will not be able to afford not having it. I believe as digital sovereignty becomes ever more top of mind with sovereign states and also for multinational organizations and for organizations that want to collaborate with each other, confidential computing will become the norm. It'll become the default, If I say mode of operation, I like to compare that, today is inconceivable if we talk to the young technologists. It's inconceivable to think that at some point in history and I happen to be alive that we had data at address that was not encrypted. Data in transit, that was not encrypted. And I think that we will be inconceivable at some point in the near future that to have unencrypted data while we use. >> You know, and plus, I think the beauty of the this industry is because there's so much competition this essentially comes for free. I want to thank you both for spending some time on Breaking Analysis. There's so much more we could cover. I hope you'll come back to share the progress that you're making in this area and we can double click on some of these topics. Really appreciate your time. >> Anytime. >> Thank you so much.

>> From theCUBE Studios in Palo Alto in Boston, bringing you data-driven insights from theCUBE and ETR. This is Breaking Analysis with Dave Vellante. >> Confidential computing is a technology that aims to enhance data privacy and security, by providing encrypted computation on sensitive data and isolating data, and apps that are fenced off enclave during processing. The concept of, I got to start over. I fucked that up, I'm sorry. That's not right, what I said was not right. On Dave in five, four, three. Confidential computing is a technology that aims to enhance data privacy and security by providing encrypted computation on sensitive data, isolating data from apps and a fenced off enclave during processing. The concept of confidential computing is gaining popularity, especially in the cloud computing space, where sensitive data is often stored and of course processed. However, there are some who view confidential computing as an unnecessary technology in a marketing ploy by cloud providers aimed at calming customers who are cloud phobic. Hello and welcome to this week's Wikibon Cube Insights powered by ETR. In this Breaking Analysis, we revisit the notion of confidential computing, and to do so, we'll invite two Google experts to the show. But before we get there, let's summarize briefly. There's not a ton of ETR data on the topic of confidential computing, I mean, it's a technology that's deeply embedded into silicon and computing architectures. But at the highest level, security remains the number one priority being addressed by IT decision makers in the coming year as shown here. And this data is pretty much across the board by industry, by region, by size of company. I mean we dug into it and the only slight deviation from the mean is in financial services. The second and third most cited priorities, cloud migration and analytics are noticeably closer to cybersecurity in financial services than in other sectors, likely because financial services has always been hyper security conscious, but security is still a clear number one priority in that sector. The idea behind confidential computing is to better address threat models for data in execution. Protecting data at rest and data in transit have long been a focus of security approaches, but more recently, silicon manufacturers have introduced architectures that separate data and applications from the host system, ARM, Intel, AMD, Nvidia and other suppliers are all on board, as are the big cloud players. Now, the argument against confidential computing is that it narrowly focuses on memory encryption and it doesn't solve the biggest problems in security. Multiple system images, updates, different services and the entire code flow aren't directly addressed by memory encryption. Rather to truly attack these problems, many believe that OSs need to be re-engineered with the attacker and hacker in mind. There are so many variables and at the end of the day, critics say the emphasis on confidential computing made by cloud providers is overstated and largely hype. This tweet from security researcher Rodrigo Bronco, sums up the sentiment of many skeptics. He says, "Confidential computing is mostly a marketing campaign from memory encryption. It's not driving the industry towards the hard open problems. It is selling an illusion." Okay. Nonetheless, encrypting data in use and fencing off key components of the system isn't a bad thing, especially if it comes with the package essentially for free. There has been a lack of standardization and interoperability between different confidential computing approaches. But the confidential computing consortium was established in 2019 ostensibly to accelerate the market and influence standards. Notably, AWS is not part of the consortium, likely because the politics of the consortium were probably a conundrum for AWS because the base technology defined by the consortium is seen as limiting by AWS. This is my guess, not AWS' words. But I think joining the consortium would validate a definition which AWS isn't aligned with. And two, it's got to lead with this Annapurna acquisition. It was way ahead with ARM integration, and so it's probably doesn't feel the need to validate its competitors. Anyway, one of the premier members of the confidential computing consortium is Google, along with many high profile names, including Aem, Intel, Meta, Red Hat, Microsoft, and others. And we're pleased to welcome two experts on confidential computing from Google to unpack the topic. Nelly Porter is Head of Product for GCP Confidential Computing and Encryption and Dr. Patricia Florissi is the Technical Director for the Office of the CTO at Google Cloud. Welcome Nelly and Patricia, great to have you. >> Great to be here. >> Thank you so much for having us. >> You're very welcome. Nelly, why don't you start and then Patricia, you can weigh in. Just tell the audience a little bit about each of your roles at Google Cloud. >> So I'll start, I'm owning a lot of interesting activities in Google and again, security or infrastructure securities that I usually own. And we are talking about encryption, end-to-end encryption, and confidential computing is a part of portfolio. Additional areas that I contribute to get with my team to Google and our customers is secure software supply chain because you need to trust your software. Is it operate in your confidential environment to have end-to-end security, about if you believe that your software and your environment doing what you expect, it's my role. >> Got it. Okay, Patricia? >> Well, I am a Technical Director in the Office of the CTO, OCTO for short in Google Cloud. And we are a global team, we include former CTOs like myself and senior technologies from large corporations, institutions and a lot of success for startups as well. And we have two main goals, first, we walk side by side with some of our largest, more strategic or most strategical customers and we help them solve complex engineering technical problems. And second, we advice Google and Google Cloud Engineering, product management on emerging trends and technologies to guide the trajectory of our business. We are unique group, I think, because we have created this collaborative culture with our customers. And within OCTO I spend a lot of time collaborating with customers in the industry at large on technologies that can address privacy, security, and sovereignty of data in general. >> Excellent. Thank you for that both of you. Let's get into it. So Nelly, what is confidential computing from Google's perspective? How do you define it? >> Confidential computing is a tool and one of the tools in our toolbox. And confidential computing is a way how we would help our customers to complete this very interesting end-to-end lifecycle of the data. And when customers bring in the data to cloud and want to protect it as they ingest it to the cloud, they protect it at rest when they store data in the cloud. But what was missing for many, many years is ability for us to continue protecting data and workloads of our customers when they run them. And again, because data is not brought to cloud to have huge graveyard, we need to ensure that this data is actually indexed. Again, there is some insights driven and drawn from this data. You have to process this data and confidential computing here to help. Now we have end-to-end protection of our customer's data when they bring the workloads and data to cloud thanks to confidential computing. >> Thank you for that. Okay, we're going to get into the architecture a bit, but before we do Patricia, why do you think this topic of confidential computing is such an important technology? Can you explain? Do you think it's transformative for customers and if so, why? >> Yeah, I would maybe like to use one thought, one way, one intuition behind why confidential computing matters because at the end of the day, it reduces more and more the customer's thrush boundaries and the attack surface. That's about reducing that periphery, the boundary in which the customer needs to mind about trust and safety. And in a way is a natural progression that you're using encryption to secure and protect data in the same way that we are encrypting data in transit and at rest. Now, we are also encrypting data while in the use. And among other beneficials, I would say one of the most transformative ones is that organizations will be able to collaborate with each other and retain the confidentiality of the data. And that is across industry, even though it's highly focused on, I wouldn't say highly focused but very beneficial for highly regulated industries, it applies to all of industries. And if you look at financing for example, where bankers are trying to detect fraud and specifically double finance where a customer is actually trying to get a finance on an asset, let's say a boat or a house, and then it goes to another bank and gets another finance on that asset. Now bankers would be able to collaborate and detect fraud while preserving confidentiality and privacy of the data. >> Interesting and I want to understand that a little bit more but I got to push you a little bit on this, Nellie if I can, because there's a narrative out there that says confidential computing is a marketing ploy I talked about this up front, by cloud providers that are just trying to placate people that are scared of the cloud. And I'm presuming you don't agree with that, but I'd like you to weigh in here. The argument is confidential computing is just memory encryption, it doesn't address many other problems. It is over hyped by cloud providers. What do you say to that line of thinking? >> I absolutely disagree as you can imagine Dave, with this statement. But the most importantly is we mixing a multiple concepts I guess, and exactly as Patricia said, we need to look at the end-to-end story, not again, is a mechanism. How confidential computing trying to execute and protect customer's data and why it's so critically important. Because what confidential computing was able to do, it's in addition to isolate our tenants in multi-tenant environments the cloud offering to offer additional stronger isolation, they called it cryptographic isolation. It's why customers will have more trust to customers and to other customers, the tenants running on the same host but also us because they don't need to worry about against rats and more malicious attempts to penetrate the environment. So what confidential computing is helping us to offer our customers stronger isolation between tenants in this multi-tenant environment, but also incredibly important, stronger isolation of our customers to tenants from us. We also writing code, we also software providers, we also make mistakes or have some zero days. Sometimes again us introduce, sometimes introduced by our adversaries. But what I'm trying to say by creating this cryptographic layer of isolation between us and our tenants and among those tenants, we really providing meaningful security to our customers and eliminate some of the worries that they have running on multi-tenant spaces or even collaborating together with very sensitive data knowing that this particular protection is available to them. >> Okay, thank you. Appreciate that. And I think malicious code is often a threat model missed in these narratives. You know, operator access. Yeah, maybe I trust my cloud's provider, but if I can fence off your access even better, I'll sleep better at night separating a code from the data. Everybody's ARM, Intel, AMD, Nvidia and others, they're all doing it. I wonder if Nell, if we could stay with you and bring up the slide on the architecture. What's architecturally different with confidential computing versus how operating systems and VMs have worked traditionally? We're showing a slide here with some VMs, maybe you could take us through that. >> Absolutely, and Dave, the whole idea for Google and now industry way of dealing with confidential computing is to ensure that three main property is actually preserved. Customers don't need to change the code. They can operate in those VMs exactly as they would with normal non-confidential VMs. But to give them this opportunity of lift and shift though, no changing the apps and performing and having very, very, very low latency and scale as any cloud can, some things that Google actually pioneer in confidential computing. I think we need to open and explain how this magic was actually done, and as I said, it's again the whole entire system have to change to be able to provide this magic. And I would start with we have this concept of root of trust and root of trust where we will ensure that this machine within the whole entire host has integrity guarantee, means nobody changing my code on the most low level of system, and we introduce this in 2017 called Titan. So our specific ASIC, specific inch by inch system on every single motherboard that we have that ensures that your low level former, your actually system code, your kernel, the most powerful system is actually proper configured and not changed, not tempered. We do it for everybody, confidential computing included, but for confidential computing is what we have to change, we bring in AMD or future silicon vendors and we have to trust their former, their way to deal with our confidential environments. And that's why we have obligation to validate intelligent not only our software and our former but also former and software of our vendors, silicon vendors. So we actually, when we booting this machine as you can see, we validate that integrity of all of this system is in place. It means nobody touching, nobody changing, nobody modifying it. But then we have this concept of AMD Secure Processor, it's special ASIC best specific things that generate a key for every single VM that our customers will run or every single node in Kubernetes or every single worker thread in our Hadoop spark capability. We offer all of that and those keys are not available to us. It's the best case ever in encryption space because when we are talking about encryption, the first question that I'm receiving all the time, "Where's the key? Who will have access to the key?" because if you have access to the key then it doesn't matter if you encrypted or not. So, but the case in confidential computing why it's so revolutionary technology, us cloud providers who don't have access to the keys, they're sitting in the hardware and they fed to memory controller. And it means when hypervisors that also know about this wonderful things saying I need to get access to the memories, that this particular VM I'm trying to get access to. They do not decrypt the data, they don't have access to the key because those keys are random, ephemeral and per VM, but most importantly in hardware not exportable. And it means now you will be able to have this very interesting world that customers or cloud providers will not be able to get access to your memory. And what we do, again as you can see, our customers don't need to change their applications. Their VMs are running exactly as it should run. And what you've running in VM, you actually see your memory clear, it's not encrypted. But God forbid is trying somebody to do it outside of my confidential box, no, no, no, no, no, you will now be able to do it. Now, you'll see cyber test and it's exactly what combination of these multiple hardware pieces and software pieces have to do. So OS is also modified and OS is modified such way to provide integrity. It means even OS that you're running in your VM box is not modifiable and you as customer can verify. But the most interesting thing I guess how to ensure the super performance of this environment because you can imagine Dave, that's increasing and it's additional performance, additional time, additional latency. So we're able to mitigate all of that by providing incredibly interesting capability in the OS itself. So our customers will get no changes needed, fantastic performance and scales as they would expect from cloud providers like Google. >> Okay, thank you. Excellent, appreciate that explanation. So you know again, the narrative on this is, well, you've already given me guarantees as a cloud provider that you don't have access to my data, but this gives another level of assurance, key management as they say is key. Now humans aren't managing the keys, the machines are managing them. So Patricia, my question to you is in addition to, let's go pre-confidential computing days, what are the sort of new guarantees that these hardware based technologies are going to provide to customers? >> So if I am a customer, I am saying I now have full guarantee of confidentiality and integrity of the data and of the code. So if you look at code and data confidentiality, the customer cares and they want to know whether their systems are protected from outside or unauthorized access, and that we covered with Nelly that it is. Confidential computing actually ensures that the applications and data antennas remain secret. The code is actually looking at the data, only the memory is decrypting the data with a key that is ephemeral, and per VM, and generated on demand. Then you have the second point where you have code and data integrity and now customers want to know whether their data was corrupted, tempered with or impacted by outside actors. And what confidential computing ensures is that application internals are not tempered with. So the application, the workload as we call it, that is processing the data is also has not been tempered and preserves integrity. I would also say that this is all verifiable, so you have attestation and this attestation actually generates a log trail and the log trail guarantees that provides a proof that it was preserved. And I think that the offers also a guarantee of what we call sealing, this idea that the secrets have been preserved and not tempered with, confidentiality and integrity of code and data. >> Got it. Okay, thank you. Nelly, you mentioned, I think I heard you say that the applications is transparent, you don't have to change the application, it just comes for free essentially. And we showed some various parts of the stack before, I'm curious as to what's affected, but really more importantly, what is specifically Google's value add? How do partners participate in this, the ecosystem or maybe said another way, how does Google ensure the compatibility of confidential computing with existing systems and applications? >> And a fantastic question by the way, and it's very difficult and definitely complicated world because to be able to provide these guarantees, actually a lot of work was done by community. Google is very much operate and open. So again our operating system, we working this operating system repository OS is OS vendors to ensure that all capabilities that we need is part of the kernels are part of the releases and it's available for customers to understand and even explore if they have fun to explore a lot of code. We have also modified together with our silicon vendors kernel, host kernel to support this capability and it means working this community to ensure that all of those pages are there. We also worked with every single silicon vendor as you've seen, and it's what I probably feel that Google contributed quite a bit in this world. We moved our industry, our community, our vendors to understand the value of easy to use confidential computing or removing barriers. And now I don't know if you noticed Intel is following the lead and also announcing a trusted domain extension, very similar architecture and no surprise, it's a lot of work done with our partners to convince work with them and make this capability available. The same with ARM this year, actually last year, ARM announced future design for confidential computing, it's called confidential computing architecture. And it's also influenced very heavily with similar ideas by Google and industry overall. So it's a lot of work in confidential computing consortiums that we are doing, for example, simply to mention, to ensure interop as you mentioned, between different confidential environments of cloud providers. They want to ensure that they can attest to each other because when you're communicating with different environments, you need to trust them. And if it's running on different cloud providers, you need to ensure that you can trust your receiver when you sharing your sensitive data workloads or secret with them. So we coming as a community and we have this at Station Sig, the community-based systems that we want to build, and influence, and work with ARM and every other cloud providers to ensure that they can interop. And it means it doesn't matter where confidential workloads will be hosted, but they can exchange the data in secure, verifiable and controlled by customers really. And to do it, we need to continue what we are doing, working open and contribute with our ideas and ideas of our partners to this role to become what we see confidential computing has to become, it has to become utility. It doesn't need to be so special, but it's what what we've wanted to become. >> Let's talk about, thank you for that explanation. Let's talk about data sovereignty because when you think about data sharing, you think about data sharing across the ecosystem in different regions and then of course data sovereignty comes up, typically public policy, lags, the technology industry and sometimes it's problematic. I know there's a lot of discussions about exceptions but Patricia, we have a graphic on data sovereignty. I'm interested in how confidential computing ensures that data sovereignty and privacy edicts are adhered to, even if they're out of alignment maybe with the pace of technology. One of the frequent examples is when you delete data, can you actually prove the data is deleted with a hundred percent certainty, you got to prove that and a lot of other issues. So looking at this slide, maybe you could take us through your thinking on data sovereignty. >> Perfect. So for us, data sovereignty is only one of the three pillars of digital sovereignty. And I don't want to give the impression that confidential computing addresses it at all, that's why we want to step back and say, hey, digital sovereignty includes data sovereignty where we are giving you full control and ownership of the location, encryption and access to your data. Operational sovereignty where the goal is to give our Google Cloud customers full visibility and control over the provider operations, right? So if there are any updates on hardware, software stack, any operations, there is full transparency, full visibility. And then the third pillar is around software sovereignty, where the customer wants to ensure that they can run their workloads without dependency on the provider's software. So they have sometimes is often referred as survivability that you can actually survive if you are untethered to the cloud and that you can use open source. Now, let's take a deep dive on data sovereignty, which by the way is one of my favorite topics. And we typically focus on saying, hey, we need to care about data residency. We care where the data resides because where the data is at rest or in processing need to typically abides to the jurisdiction, the regulations of the jurisdiction where the data resides. And others say, hey, let's focus on data protection, we want to ensure the confidentiality, and integrity, and availability of the data, which confidential computing is at the heart of that data protection. But it is yet another element that people typically don't talk about when talking about data sovereignty, which is the element of user control. And here Dave, is about what happens to the data when I give you access to my data, and this reminds me of security two decades ago, even a decade ago, where we started the security movement by putting firewall protections and logging accesses. But once you were in, you were able to do everything you wanted with the data. An insider had access to all the infrastructure, the data, and the code. And that's similar because with data sovereignty, we care about whether it resides, who is operating on the data, but the moment that the data is being processed, I need to trust that the processing of the data we abide by user's control, by the policies that I put in place of how my data is going to be used. And if you look at a lot of the regulation today and a lot of the initiatives around the International Data Space Association, IDSA and Gaia-X, there is a movement of saying the two parties, the provider of the data and the receiver of the data going to agree on a contract that describes what my data can be used for. The challenge is to ensure that once the data crosses boundaries, that the data will be used for the purposes that it was intended and specified in the contract. And if you actually bring together, and this is the exciting part, confidential computing together with policy enforcement. Now, the policy enforcement can guarantee that the data is only processed within the confines of a confidential computing environment, that the workload is in cryptographically verified that there is the workload that was meant to process the data and that the data will be only used when abiding to the confidentiality and integrity safety of the confidential computing environment. And that's why we believe confidential computing is one necessary and essential technology that will allow us to ensure data sovereignty, especially when it comes to user's control. >> Thank you for that. I mean it was a deep dive, I mean brief, but really detailed. So I appreciate that, especially the verification of the enforcement. Last question, I met you two because as part of my year-end prediction post, you guys sent in some predictions and I wasn't able to get to them in the predictions post, so I'm thrilled that you were able to make the time to come on the program. How widespread do you think the adoption of confidential computing will be in '23 and what's the maturity curve look like this decade in your opinion? Maybe each of you could give us a brief answer. >> So my prediction in five, seven years as I started, it will become utility, it will become TLS. As of freakin' 10 years ago, we couldn't believe that websites will have certificates and we will support encrypted traffic. Now we do, and it's become ubiquity. It's exactly where our confidential computing is heeding and heading, I don't know we deserve yet. It'll take a few years of maturity for us, but we'll do that. >> Thank you. And Patricia, what's your prediction? >> I would double that and say, hey, in the very near future, you will not be able to afford not having it. I believe as digital sovereignty becomes ever more top of mind with sovereign states and also for multinational organizations, and for organizations that want to collaborate with each other, confidential computing will become the norm, it will become the default, if I say mode of operation. I like to compare that today is inconceivable if we talk to the young technologists, it's inconceivable to think that at some point in history and I happen to be alive, that we had data at rest that was non-encrypted, data in transit that was not encrypted. And I think that we'll be inconceivable at some point in the near future that to have unencrypted data while we use. >> You know, and plus I think the beauty of the this industry is because there's so much competition, this essentially comes for free. I want to thank you both for spending some time on Breaking Analysis, there's so much more we could cover. I hope you'll come back to share the progress that you're making in this area and we can double click on some of these topics. Really appreciate your time. >> Anytime. >> Thank you so much, yeah. >> In summary, while confidential computing is being touted by the cloud players as a promising technology for enhancing data privacy and security, there are also those as we said, who remain skeptical. The truth probably lies somewhere in between and it will depend on the specific implementation and the use case as to how effective confidential computing will be. Look as with any new tech, it's important to carefully evaluate the potential benefits, the drawbacks, and make informed decisions based on the specific requirements in the situation and the constraints of each individual customer. But the bottom line is silicon manufacturers are working with cloud providers and other system companies to include confidential computing into their architectures. Competition in our view will moderate price hikes and at the end of the day, this is under-the-covers technology that essentially will come for free, so we'll take it. I want to thank our guests today, Nelly and Patricia from Google. And thanks to Alex Myerson who's on production and manages the podcast. Ken Schiffman as well out of our Boston studio. Kristin Martin and Cheryl Knight help get the word out on social media and in our newsletters, and Rob Hoof is our editor-in-chief over at siliconangle.com, does some great editing for us. Thank you all. Remember all these episodes are available as podcasts. Wherever you listen, just search Breaking Analysis podcast. I publish each week on wikibon.com and siliconangle.com where you can get all the news. If you want to get in touch, you can email me at david.vellante@siliconangle.com or DM me at D Vellante, and you can also comment on my LinkedIn post. Definitely you want to check out etr.ai for the best survey data in the enterprise tech business. I know we didn't hit on a lot today, but there's some amazing data and it's always being updated, so check that out. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE Insights powered by ETR. Thanks for watching and we'll see you next time on Breaking Analysis. (subtle music)

>>How do y'all and welcome back to the cube where we're live from Dallas at a Supercomputing 2022. My name is Savannah Peterson. Joined with L AED today, as well as some very exciting guests talking about one of my favorite and most complex topics out there, talking about quantum a bit today. Please welcome Ken and Matthew. Thank you so much for reading here. Matthew. Everyone's gonna be able to see your shirt. What's going on with hybrid quantum? I have >>To ask. Wait, what is hybrid quantum? Yeah, let's not pretend that. >>Let's not >>Pretend that everybody knows, Everyone already knows what quantum computing is if we goes straight to highway. Yeah. Okay. So with the brief tour detour took qu regular quantum computing. Yeah, >>No, no. Yeah. Let's start with quantum start before. >>So you know, like regular computers made of transistors gives us ones and zeros, right? Binary, like you were talking about just like half of the Cheerios, right? The joke, it turns out there's some problems that even if we could build a computer as big as the whole universe, which would be pretty expensive, >>That might not be a bad thing, but >>Yeah. Yeah. Good for Dell Got mill. >>Yeah. >>Yeah. We wouldn't be able to solve them cuz they scale exponentially. And it turns out some of those problems have efficient solutions in quantum computing where we take any two state quantum system, which I'll explain in a sec and turn it into what we call a quantum bit or qubit. And those qubits can actually solve some problems that are just infeasible on even these world's largest computers by offering exponential advantage. And it turns out that today's quantum computers are a little too small and a little too noisy to do that alone. So by pairing a quantum computer with a classical computer, hence the partnership between IQ and Dell, you allow each kind of compute to do what it's best at and thereby get answers you can't get with either one alone. >>Okay. So the concept of introducing hybridity, I love that word bridge. I dunno if I made it up, but it's it for it. Let's about it. Abri, ding ding. So does this include simulating the quantum world within the, what was the opposite? The classical quantum world? Classical. Classical, classical computer. Yeah. So does it include the concept of simulating quantum in classical compute? >>Absolutely. >>Okay. How, how, how do, how do you do that? >>So there's simulators and emulators that effectively are programmed in exactly the same way that a physical quantum machine is through circuits translated into chasm or quantum assembly language. And those are the exact same ways that you would program either a physical q p or a simulated >>Q p. So, so access to quantum computing today is scarce, right? I mean it's, it's, it's, it's limited. So having the ability to have the world at large or a greater segment of society be able to access this through simulation is probably a good idea. >>Fair. It's absolutely a wonderful one. And so I often talk to customers and I tell them about the journey, which is hands on keyboard, learning, experimentation, building proof of concepts, and then finally productization. And you could do much of that first two steps anyway very robustly with simulation. >>It's much like classical computing where if you imagine back in the fifties, if, if the cube was at some conference in 1955, you know, we wouldn't have possibly been able to predict what we'd be doing with computing 70 years later, right? Yeah. That teenagers be making apps on their phones that changed the world, right? And so by democratizing access this way, suddenly we can open up all sorts of new use cases. We sort of like to joke, there's only a couple hundred people in the world who really know how to program quantum computers today. And so how are we gonna make thousands, tens of thousands, millions of quantum programmers? The answer is access and simulators are an amazingly accessible way for everyone to start playing around with the >>Fields. Very powerful tool. >>Wow. Yeah. I'm just thinking about how many, there's, are there really only hundreds of people who can program quantum computing? >>I kind of generally throw it out there and I say, you know, if you looked at a matrix of a thousand operations with hundreds of qubits, there's probably, I don't know, 2000 people worldwide that could program that type of a circuit. I mean it's a fairly complex circuit at that point and >>I, I mean it's pretty phenomenal When you think about how early we are in adoption and, and the rollout of this technology as a whole, can you see quite a bit as, as you look across your customer portfolio, what are some of the other trends you're seeing? >>Well, non quantum related trends or just any type you give us >>Both. >>Yeah. So >>We're a thought leader. This is >>Your moment. Yeah, so we do quite a bit. We see quite a bit actually. There's a lot of work happening at the edge as you're probably well aware of. And we see a lot of autonomous mobile robots. I actually lead the, the research office. So I get to see all the cool stuff that's really kind of emerging before it really regrets >>What's coming next. >>Let's see, Oh, I can't tell you what's coming next, but we see edge applications. Yes, we see a lot of, of AI applications and artificial intelligence is morphing dramatically through the number of frameworks and through the, the types and places you would place ai, even places I, I personally never thought we would go like manufacturing environments. Some places that were traditionally not very early adopters. We're seeing AI move very quickly in some of those areas. One of the areas that I'm really excited about is digital twins and the ability to eventually do, let's come up on acceleration with quantum technologies on, on things like computational fluid dynamics. And I think it's gonna be a wonderful, wonderful area for us moving forward. >>So, So I can hear the people screaming at the screen right now. Wait a minute, You said it was hybrid, you're only talking the front half. That's, that's cat. What about the back half? That's dog. What about the quantum part of it? So I, on Q and, and I apologize. Ion Q >>Ion >>Q, Yeah Ion Q cuz you never know. You never never know. Yeah. Where does the actual quantum come in? >>That's a great >>Question. So you guys have one of these things. >>Yeah, we've built, we currently have the world's best quantum computer by, by sub measures I drop there. Yeah, no big deal. Give me some snaps for that. Yeah, Ken knows how to pick em. Yeah, so right. Our, our approach, which is actually based on technology that's 50 years old, so it's quite, quite has a long history. The way we build atomic clocks is the basis for trapped eye quantum computing. And in fact the first quantum logic gate ever made in 1995 was at NIST where they modified their atomic clock experiment to do quantum gates. And that launched really the hardware experimentalist quantum Peter Revolution. And that was by Chris Monroe, our co-founder. So you know that history has flown directly into us. So to simplify, we start with an ion trap. Imagine a gold block with a bunch of electrodes that allow you to make precisely shaped electromagnetic fields, sort of like a rotating saddle. >>Then take a source of atoms. Now obviously we're all sources of atoms. We have a highly purified source of metal atium. We heat it up, we get a nice hot plume of atoms, we ionize those atoms with an ionizing later laser. Now they're hot and heavy and charged. So we can trap them in one of these fields. And now our electromagnetic field that's spitting rapidly holds the, the ions like balls in a bowl if you can imagine them. And they line up in a nice straight line and we hold them in place with these fields and with cooling laser beams. And up to now, that's how an atomic clock works. Trap an item and shine it with a laser beam. Count the oscillations, that's your clock. Now if you got 32 of those and you can manipulate their energy states, in our case we use the hyper fine energy states of the atom. >>But you can basically think of your high school chemistry where you have like an unexcited electron, an excited electron. Take your unexcited state as a zero, your excited state as a one. And it turns out with commercially available lasers, you can drive anywhere between a zero, a one or a super position of zero and one. And so that is our quantum bit, the hyper fine energy state of the atrium atom. And we just line up a bunch of them and through there access the magical powers of supervision entanglement, as we were talking about before, they don't really make sense to us here in the regular world, but >>They do exist. But what you just described is one cubit. That's right. And the way that you do it isn't exactly the same way that others who are doing quantum computing do it. That's right. Is that okay? >>And there's a lot of advantages to the trapped iron approach. So for example, you can also build a super conducting qubit where you, where you basically cool a chip to 47 mil kelvin and coerce millions of atoms to work together as a single system. The problem is that's not naturally quantum. So it's inherently noisy and it wants to deco here does not want to be a quantum bit. Whereas an atom is very happy to be by itself a qubit because we don't have to do anything to it. It's naturally quantum, if that makes sense. And so atomic qubits, like we use feature a few things. One the longest coherence times in the industry, meaning you can run very deep circuits, the most accurate operations, very low noise operations. And we don't have any wires. Our atoms are connected by laser light. That means you can connect any pair. So with some other technologies, the qubits are connected by wires. That means you can only run operations between physically connected qubits. It's like programming. If you could only use, for example, bits that are adjacent with an i untrapped approach, you can connect any pair so that all to all connectivity means your compilation is much more efficient and you can do much wider and deeper circuits. >>So what's the, what is the closest thing to a practical application that we've been able to achieve at this point? Question. And when I say practical, it doesn't have to be super practical. I mean, what is the, what is the sort of demonstration, the least esoteric demonstration of this at this point? >>To tie into what Ken was saying earlier, I think there's at least two areas that are very exciting. One is chemistry. Chemistry. So for example, you know, we have water in our cup and we understand water pretty well, but there's lots of molecules that in order to study them, we actually have to make them in a lab and do lots of experiments. And to give you a sense of the order of magnitude, if you wanted to understand the ground state of the caffeine molecule, which we all know and has 200 electrons, you would need to build a computer bigger than the moon. So, which is, you know, again, would be good profit for Dell, but probably not gonna happen time soon. That's >>Kind of fun to think about though. Yeah, that's a great analogy. That >>Was, yeah. And in fact it'd be like 10 moons of compute. Okay. So build 10 moons of >>Computer. I >>Love the sci-fi issue. Exactly. And now you can calculate caffeine, it's crazy or it just fits in a quantum computer the size of this table. And so we're using hybrid quantum computing now to start proving out these algorithms not for molecules as complex as caffeine or what we want in the future. Like biologics, you know, new cancer medications, new materials and so forth. But we are able to show, for example, the ground state of smaller molecules and prove a path to where, you know, decision maker could see in a few years from now, Oh, we'll be able to actually simulate not molecules we already understand, but molecules we've never been able to study a prayer, if that makes sense. And then, >>Yeah, I think there's a key point underneath that, and I think goes back to the question that you asked earlier about the why hybrid applications inherently run on the classical infrastructure and algorithms are accelerated through qs, the quantum processing units. >>And so are you sort of time sharing in the sense that this environment that you set up starts with classical, with simulation and then you get to a point where you say, okay, we're ready, you pick up the bat phone and you say I wanna, >>I would say it's more like a partnership, really. Yeah, >>Yeah. And I think, I think it's kind of the, the way I normally describe it is, you know, we've taken a look at it it from a really kind of a software development life cycle type of perspective where again, if you follow that learn experiment, pro proof of concept, and then finally productize, we, we can cover and allow for a developer to start prototyping and proofing on simulators and when they're ready all they do is flip a switch and a manifest and they can automatically engage a qu a real quantum physical quantum system. And so we've made it super simple and very accessible in a democratizing access for developers. >>Yeah. Makes such big difference. Go ahead. >>A good analogy is to like GPUs, right? Where it's not really like, you know, you send it away, but rather the GPU accelerates certain operations. The q p. Yeah, because quantum mechanics, it turns out the universe runs on linear algebra. So one way to think about the q p is the most efficient way of doing linear algebra that exists. So lots of problems that can be expressed in that form. Combinatorial optimization problems in general, certain kinds of machine learning, et cetera, get an exponential speed up by running a section of the algorithm on the quantum computer. But of course you wouldn't like port Microsoft Word. Yeah, exactly. You know, you're not gonna do that in your product. It would be a waste of your quantum computer. >>Not just that you wanna know exactly how much money is in your bank account, not probabilistically how much might be ballpark. Yeah. Realm 10, moon ballpark, right? >>10 moon ballpark. Be using that for the rest of the show. Yeah. Oh, I love that. Ken, tell me a little bit about how you identify companies and like I n Q and and end up working with Matthew. What, what's that like, >>What's it like or how do you >>Find it's the process? Like, so, you know, let's say I've got the the >>We're not going there though. Yeah. We're not >>Personal relationship. >>Well, >>You can answer these questions however you want, you know. No, but, but what does that look like for Dell? How do you, how do you curate and figure out who you're gonna bring into this partnership nest? >>Yeah, you know, I, I think it was a, it's, it was a, a very long drawn out learning opportunity. We started actually our working quantum back in 2016. So we've been at it for a long time. And only >>In quantum would we say six years is a long time. I love >>That. Exactly. >>By the way, that was like, we've been doing this for age for a >>Long time. Yeah. Very long time before >>You were born. Yes. >>Feels like it actually, believe it or not. But, so we've been at it for a long time and you know, we went down some very specific learning paths. We took a lot of different time to, to learn about different types of qubits available, different companies, what their approaches were, et cetera. Yeah. And, and we ended up meeting up with, with I N Q and, and we also have other partners as well, like ibm, but I N q you know, we, there is a nice symbiotic relationship. We're actually doing some really cool technologies that are even much, much further ahead than the, you know, strict classical does this, quantum does that where there's significant amount of interplay between the simulation systems and between the real physical QS. And so it's, it's turning out to be a great relationship. They're, they're very easy to work with and, and a lot of fun too, as you could probably tell. Yeah. >>Clearly. So before we wrap, I've got it. Okay. Okay. So get it. Let's get, let's get, yeah, let's get deep. Let's get deep for a second or a little deeper than we've been. So our current, our current understanding of all this, of the universe, it's pretty limited. It's down to the point where we effectively have it assigned to witchcraft. It's all dark energy and dark matter. Right. What does that mean exactly? Nobody knows. But if you're in the quantum computing space and you're living this every day, do you believe that it represents the key to us understanding things that currently we just can't understand classical models, including classical computing, our brains as they're constructed aren't capable of understanding the real real that's out there. Yeah. If you're in the quantum computing space, do you possess that level of hubris? Do you think that you are gonna deliver the answers? >>I'm just like, I think the more you're in the space, the more mysterious and amazing it all seems. There's a, but there is a great quote by Richard Feinman that sort of kicked off the quantum exploration. So he gave a lecture in 1981, so, you know, long before any of this began, truly ages ago, right? Yeah. And in this lecture he said, you know, kind of wild at that time, right? We had to build these giant supercomputers to simulate just a couple atoms interacting, right? And it's kind of crazy that you need all this compute to simulate what nature does with just a handful >>Particles. Yeah. >>Really small. So, and, and famously he said, you know, nature just isn't classical. Damn it. And so you need to build a computer that works with nature to understand nature. I think, you know, the, the quantum revolution has only just begun. There's so many new things to learn, and I'm sure the quantum computers of 40 years from now are not gonna look like the, you know, the computers of today, just as the classical computers of 40 years ago look quite different to us now, >>And we're a bunch of apes. But you think we'll get there? >>I, yeah, I, I mean, I, I have, I think we have, I feel incredibly optimistic that this tool, quantum computing as a tool represents a sea change in what's possible for humans to compute. >>Yeah. I think it's that possibility. You know, I, when I tell people right now in the quantum era, we're in the inac stage of the quantum era, and so we have a long way to go, but the potential is absolutely enormous. In fact, incomprehensibly enormous, I >>Was just gonna say, I don't even think we could grasp >>In the, from the inac is they had no idea of computers inside of your hand, right? Yeah. >>They're calculating, you know, trajectories, right? Yeah. If you told them, like, we'd all be video chatting, you >>Know, >>Like, and kids would be doing synchronized dances, you know, you'd be like, What? >>I love that. Well, well, on that note, Ken Matthew, really great to have you both, everyone now will be pondering the scale and scope of the universe with their 10 moon computer, 10 moons. That's right. And, and you've given me my, my new favorite bumper sticker since we've been on a, on a roll here, David and I, which is just naturally quantum. Yeah, that's, that's, that's, that's one of my new favorite phrases from the show. Thank you both for being here. David, thank you for hanging out and thank all of you for tuning in to our cube footage live here in Dallas. We are at Supercomputing. This is our last show for the day, but we look forward to seeing you tomorrow morning. My name's Savannah Peterson. Y'all have a lovely night.

>>Welcome back to Vegas guys, Lisa Martin and Dave Lanta here wrapping up our coverage of day two of snowflake summit. We have given you a lot of content in the last couple of days. We've had a lot of great conversations with snowflake folks with their customers and with partners. And we have an alumni back with us. Please. Welcome back to the queue. Mike Palmer, CEO of Sigma computing. Mike. It's great to see you. >>Thanks for having me. And I guess again >>Exactly. >>It's fantastic me. >>So talk to the audience about Sigma before we get into the snowflake partnership and what you guys are doing from a technical perspective, give us that overview of the vision and some of the differentiators. >>Sure. You know, you've over the last 12 years, companies have benefited from enormous investments and improvements in technology in particular, starting with cloud technologies, obviously going through companies like snowflake, but in terms of the normal user, the one that makes the business decision in the marketing department and the finance team, you know, in the works in the back room of the supply chain, doing inventory very little has changed for those people. And the time had come where the data availability, the ability to organize it, the ability to secure it was all there, but the ability to access it for those people was not. And so what Sigma's all about is taking great technology, finding the skillset they have, which happens to be spreadsheets. There are billion license spreadsheet users in the world and connecting that skillset with all of the power of the cloud. >>And how do you work with snowflake? What are some of the, the what's the joint value proposition? >>How are they as an investor? That's what I wanna know. Ah, >>Quiet, which is the way we like them. No, I'm just kidding. Snowflake is, well, first of all, investment is great, but partnership is even better. Right. You know, and I think snowflake themselves are going through some evolution, but let's start with the basics of technology where this all starts because you know, all of the rest doesn't matter if the product is not great, we work directly on snowflake. And what that means is as an end user, when I, when I sit on that marketing team and I want to understand and, and connect, how did I get a, a customer where I had a pay to add? And they showed up on my website and from my website, they went to a trial. And from there, they touched a piece of syndicated contents. All of that data sits in snowflake and I, as a marketer, understand what it means to me. >>So for the first time, I want to be able to see that data in one place. And I want to understand conversion rates. I want to understand how I can impact those conversion rates. I can make predictions. What that user is doing is going to, to Sigma accessing live data in snowflake, they're able to ask ad hoc questions, questions that were never asked questions, that they don't exist in a filter that were never prepped by a data engineer. So they could truly do something creative and novel in a very independent sort of way. And the connection with Snowflake's live data, the performance, the security and governance that we inherit. These are all facilitators to really expand that access across the enterprise. So at, at a product level, we were built by a team of people, frankly, that also were the original investors in snowflake by two amazing engineers and founders, Rob will and Jason France, they understood how snowflake worked and that shows up in the product for our end customers. >>So, but if I may just to follow up on that, I mean, you could do that without snowflake, but what, it would be harder, more expensive. Describe what you'd have to go through to accomplish that outcome. >>And I think snowflake does a good job of enabling the ecosystem at large. Right. But you know, you always appreciate seeing early access to understand what the architecture's going to look like. You know, some of the things that I will, you know, leaning forward that we've heard here that we're very excited about is snowflake going to attack the TP market, right? The transactional market, one of the transactional database market. I, yeah. Right. You know, one of the things that we see coming, and, and one of the bigger things that we'll be talking about in Sigma is not just that you can do analytics out of snowflake. I think that's something that we do exceptionally well on an ad hoc basis, but we're gonna be the first that allow you to write into snowflake and to do that with good performance. And to do that reliably, we go away from OAP, which is the terminology for data warehousing. >>And we go toward transactional databases. And in that world, understanding snowflake and working collaboratively with them creates again, a much better experience for the end customer. So they, they allow us into those programs, even coming to these conferences, we talk to folks that run the industry teams, trying to up level that message and not just talk database and, and analytics, but talk about inventory management. How do we cut down the gap that exists between POS systems and inventory ordering, right? So that we get fewer stockouts, but also that we don't overorder. So that's another benefit, >>Strong business use cases. >>That's correct. >>And you're enabling those business users to have access to that data. I presume in near real time or near real time, so that they can make decisions that drive marketing forward or finance forward or legal >>Forward. Exactly. We had a customer panel yesterday. An example of that go puff is hopefully most of the viewers are familiar with, as a delivery company. This is a complicated business to run. It's run on the fringes. When we think about how to make money at it, which means that the decisions need to be accurate. They need to be real time. You can't have a batch upload for delivery when they're people are on the street, and then there's an issue. They need to understand the exact order at that time, not in 10 minutes, not from five minutes ago, right. Then they need to understand, do I have inventory in the warehouse when the order comes in? If they don't, what's a replacement product. We had a Mike came in from go puff and walked us through all of the complexity of that and how they're using Sigma to really just shorten those decision cycles and make them more accurate. You know, that's where the business actually benefits and, >>And actually create a viable business model. Cuz you think back to the early, think back to the.com days and you had pets.com, right? They couldn't make any money. Yeah. Without chewy. Okay. They appears to be a viable business model. Right? Part of that is just the efficiencies. And it's sort of a, I dunno if those are customers that they may or may not be, but they should be if they're not >>Chewy is, but okay. You know, and that's another example, but I'll even pivot to the various REI and other retailers. What do they care about cohorts? I'm trying to understand who's buying my product. What can I sell to them next? That, that idea of again, I'm sitting in a department, that's not data engineering, that's not BI now working collaboratively where they can get addend engineer, putting data sets together. They have a BI person that can help in the analytics process. But now it's in a spreadsheet where I understand it as a marketer. So I can think about new hierarchies. I wanna know it by customer, by region, by product type. I wanna see it by all of those things. I want to be able to do that on the fly because then it creates new questions that sort of flow. If you' ever worked in development, we use the word flow constantly, right? And as people that flow is when we have a question, we get an answer that generates a question. We have, we just keep doing that iteratively. That that is where Sigma really shines for them. >>What does a company have to do to really take advantage of, of this? I, if they're kind of starting from a company that's somewhat immature, what are the sort of expectations, maybe even outta scope expectations so they can move faster, accelerate analytics, a lot of the themes that we've heard today, >>What does an immature company is actually even a question in, in and of itself? You know, I think a lot of companies consider themselves to be immature simply because for various constraint reasons, they haven't leveraged the data in the way that they thought possible. Good, >>Good, good definition. Okay. So not, not, >>Not, I use this definition for digital transformation. It very simple. It is. Do you make better decisions, faster McKenzie calls this corporate metabolism, right? Can you speed up the metabolism of, of an enterprise and for me and for the Sigma customer base, there's really not much you have to do once. You've adopted snowflake because for the first time the barriers and the silos that existed in terms of accessing data are gone. So I think the biggest barrier that customers have is curiosity. Because once you have curiosity and you have access, you can start building artifacts and assets and asking questions. Our customers are up and running in the product in hours. And I mean that literally in hours, we are a user in snowflake, that's a direct live connection. They are able to explore tables, raw. They can do joins themselves if they want to. They can obviously work with their data engineering team to, to create data sets. If that's the preferred method. And once they're there and they've ever built a pivot table, they can be working in Sigma. So our customers are getting insights in the first one to two days, you referenced some, those of us are old enough to remember pest.com. Also old enough to remember shelfware that we would buy. We are very good at showing customers that within hours they're getting value from their investment in Sigma. And that, that just creates momentum, right? Oh, >>Tremendous momentum and >>Trust and trust and expansion opportunities for Sigma. Because when you're in one of those departments, someone else says, well, you know, why do you get access to that data? But I don't, how are you doing this? Yeah. So we're, you know, I think that there's a big movement here. People, I often compare data to communication. If you go back a hundred years, our communication was not limited. As it turns out by our desire to communicate, it was limited by the infrastructure. We had the typewriter, a letter and the us postal service and a telephone that was wired. And now we have walk around here. We, everything is, is enabled for us. And we send, you know, hundreds and thousands of messages a day and probably could do more. You will find that is true. And we're seeing it in our product is true of data. If you give people access, they have 10 times as many questions as they thought they had. And that's the change that we're gonna see in business over the next few years, >>Frank Salman's first book, what he was was CEO of snowflake was rise of the data cloud. And he talked about network effects. Basically what he described was Metcalf's law. Again, go back to the.com days, right? And he, Bob Metcalf used the phone system. You know, if there's two people in the phone system, it's not that valuable, right. >>You know, exactly, >>You know, grow it. And that's where the value is. And that's what we're seeing now applied to data. >>And even more than that, I think that's a great analogy. In fact, the direct comparison to what Sigma is doing actually goes one step beyond everything that I've been talking about, which is great at the individual level, but now the finance team and the marketing team can collaborate in the platform. They can see data lineage. In fact, one of our, our big emphasis points here is to eliminate the sweet products. You know, the ones where, you know, you think you're buying something, but you really have a spreadsheet product here and a document product there and a slide product over there. And they, you know, you can do all of that in Sigma. You can write a narrative. You can real time live, edit on numbers. You, you know, if you want to, you could put a picture in it. But you know, at Sigma we present everything out of our product. Every meeting is live data. Every question is answered on the spot. And that's when, you know, you know, to your point about met cap's law. Now everybody's involved in the decision making. They're doing it real time. Your meetings are more productive. You have fewer of them because they're no action items, right. We're answering our questions there and we're, and we're moving forward. >>You know, view were meeting sounds good. Productivity is, is weird now with the, the pandemic. But you know, if you go back to the nineties here am I'm, I'm dating myself again, but that's okay. You know, you, you didn't see much productivity going on when the PC boom started in the eighties, but the nineties, it kicked in and pre pandemic, you know, productivity in the us and Europe anyway has been going down. But I feel like Mike, listen to what you just described. I, how many meetings have we been in where people are arguing about them numbers, what are the assumptions on the numbers wasting so much time? And then nothing gets done and they, then they, they bolt cut that away and you drive in productivity. So I feel like we're on a Renaissance of productivity and a lot of that's gonna be driven by, by data. Yeah. And obviously communications the whole 5g thing. We'll see how that builds out. But data is really the main spring of, I think, a new, new Renaissance in productivity. >>Well, first of all, if you could find an enterprise where you ask the question, would you rather use your data better? And they say, no, like, you know, show me, tell me that I'll short their stock immediately. But I do agree. And I, unfortunately I have a career history in that meeting that you just described where someone doesn't like, what you're showing them. And their first reaction is to say, where'd you get that data? You know, I don't trust it. You know? So they just undermined your entire argument with an invalid way of doing so. Right. When you walk into a meeting with Sigma where'd, where'd you get that data? I was like, that's the live data right now? What question do you want answer >>Lineage, right. Yeah. And you know, it's a Sen's book about, you know, gotta move faster. I mean, this is an example of just cutting through making decisions faster because you're right. Mike and the P the P and L manager in a meeting can, can kill the entire conversation, you know, throw FUD at it. Yeah. You know, protect his or her agenda. >>True. But now to be fair to the person, who's tended to do that. Part of the reason they've done that is that they haven't had access to that data before the meeting and they're getting blindsided. Right. So going back to the collaboration point. Yes. Right. The fact we're coming to this discussion more informed in and of itself takes care of some of that problem. Yeah. >>For sure. And if, and if everybody then agrees, we can move on and now talk about the really important stuff. Yeah. That's good. It >>Seems to me that Sigma is an enabler of that curiosity that you mentioned that that's been lacking. People need to be able to hire for that, but you've got a platform that's going here. You go ask >>Away. That's right in the we're very good. You know, we love being a SaaS platform. There's a lot of telemetry. We can watch what we call our mouse to Dows, you know, which is our monthly average users to our daily average users. We can see what level of user they are, what type of artifacts they build. Are they, you know, someone that creates things from scratch, are they people that tend to increment them, which by the way, is helpful to our customers because we can then advise them, Hey, here's, what's really going on. You might wanna work with this team over here. They could probably be a little better of us using the data, but look at this team over here, you know, they've originated five workbooks in the last, you know, six days they're really on it. There's, there's, you know, that ability to even train for the curiosity that you're referring to is now there, >>Where are your customer conversations? Are they at the lines of business? Are they with the chief data officer? What does that look like these days? >>Great question. So stepping back a bit, what, what is Sigma here to do? And, and our first phase is really to replace spreadsheets, right? And so one of the interesting things about the company is that there isn't a department where a spreadsheet isn't used. So Sigma has an enormous Tam, but also isn't necessarily associated with any particular department or any particular vertical. So when we tend to have conversations, it really depends on, you know, either what kind of investment are you making? A lot of mid-market companies are making best technology investments. They're on a public cloud, they're buying snowflake and they wanna understand what's, what's built to really make this work best over the next number of years. And those are very short sales for us because we, we prove that, you know, in, in minutes to hours, if you're working at a large enterprise and you have three or four other tools, you're asking a different question. >>And often you're asking a question of what I call exploration. We have a product that has dashboards and they've been working for us and we don't wanna replace the dashboard. But when we have a question about the data in the dashboard, we're stuck, how do we get to the raw data? How do we get to the example that we can actually manage? You can't manage a dashboard. You can't manage a trend line, but if you get into the data behind the trend line, you can make decisions to change business process, to change quality, accuracy, to change speed of execution. That is what we're trying to enable. Those conversations happen between the it team who runs technology and the business teams who are responsible for the decisions. So we are, you know, we have a cross departmental sale, but across every department, >>One of the things we're not talking about at this event, which is kind of interesting, cause it's all we've been talking about is the macro supply chain challenges, Ukraine, blah, blah, blah, and the stock market. But, but how are you thinking about that? Macro? The impacts you're seeing, you know, a lot of private companies being, you know, recapped, et cetera, you guys obviously very well funded. Yeah. But how do you think about, I mean, I asked Frank a similar question. He's like, look, it's a marathon. We don't worry about it. We, you know, they made the public market, they get 5 billion in cash. Yeah. Yeah. How are you thinking about it? >>You know, first of all, what's the expression, right? You never, never waste a good, you know, in this case recession, no, we don't have one yet, but the impetus is there, right. People are worried. And when they're worried, they're thinking about their bottom lines, they're thinking about where they're going to get efficiency and their costs. They're already dealing with the supply chain issues of inventory. We all have it in our personal lives. If you've ordered anything in the last six months, you're used to getting it in, you know, days to weeks. And now you're getting in months, you know, we had customers like us foods as a good example, like they're constantly trying to align inventory. They have with transportation that gets that inventory to their end customers, right? And they do that with better data accuracy at the end point, working with us on what we are launching. >>And I mentioned earlier, having more people be able to update that data creates more data, accuracy creates better decisions. We align that then with them and better collaboration with the folks that then coordinate the trucks with Prologis and the panel yesterday, they're the only commercial public company that reports their, their valuations on a quarterly basis. They work with Sigma to trim the amount of time it takes their finance team to produce that data that creates investor confidence that holds up your stock price. So I mean the, the importance of data relative to all the stakeholders in enterprise cannot be overstated. Supply chain is a great example. And yes, it's a marathon because a lot of the technology that drives supply chain is old, but you don't have to rip out those systems to put your data into snowflake, to get better access through Sigma, to enable the people in your environment to make better decisions. And that's the good news. So for me, while I agree, there's a marathon. I think that most of the, I dunno if I could continue this metaphor, but I think we could run quite far down that marathon without an awful lot of energy by just making those couple of changes. >>Awesome. Mike, this has been fantastic. Last question. I, I can tell, I know a lot of growth for Sigma. I can feel it in your energy alone. What are some of the key priorities that you're gonna be focusing on for the rest of the year? >>Our number one priority, our number two priority and number three priority are always build the best product on the market, right? We, we want customers to increase usage. We want them to be delighted. You know, we want them to be RA. Like we have customers at our booth that walk up and it's like, you're building a great company. We love your product. I, if you want to show up happy at work, have customers come up proactively and tell you how your products changed their life. And that is, that is the absolute, most important thing because the real marathon here is that enablement over the long term, right? It is being a great provider to a bunch of great companies under that. We are growing, you know, we've been tripling the company for the fast few years, every year, that takes a lot of hiring. So I would've alongside product is building a great culture with bringing the best people to the company that I guess have my energy level. >>You know, if you could get paid in energy, we would've more than tripled it, you know, but that's always gonna be number two, where we're focused on the segment side, you know, is really the large enterprise customer. At this point, we are doing a great job in the mid-market. We have customer, we have hundreds of customers in our free trial on a constant basis. I think that without wanting to seem over confident or arrogant, I think our technology speaks for itself and the product experience for those users, making a great ROI case to a large enterprise takes effort. It's a different motion. We're, we're very committed to building that motion. We're very committed to building out the partner ecosystem that has been doing that for years. And that is now coming around to the, the snowflake and all of the ecosystem changes around snowflake because they've learned these customers for decades and now have a new opportunity to bring to them. How do we enable them? That is where you're gonna see Sigma going over the next couple of years. >>Wow, fantastic. Good stuff. And a lot of momentum, Mike, thank you so much for joining Dave and me talking about Sigma, the momentum, the flywheel of what you're doing with snowflake and what you're enabling customers to achieve the massive business outcomes. Really cool stuff. >>Thank you. And thank you for continuing to give us a platform to do this and glad to be back in conferences, doing it face to face. It's fantastic. >>It it's the best. Awesome. Mike, thank you for Mike Palmer and Dave ante. I'm Lisa Martin. You've been watching the cube hopefully all day. We've been here since eight o'clock this morning, Pacific time giving you wall the wall coverage of snowflake summit 22 signing off for today. Dave and I will see you right bright and early tomorrow morning. I will take care guys.

>>Welcome back to HPD discovered 2021 the cubes virtual coverage, continuous coverage of H P. S H. P. S. Annual customer event. My name is Dave Volonte and we're going to dive into the intersection of high performance computing data and AI with DR Eng limb go who is the senior vice president and CTO for AI at Hewlett Packard enterprise Doctor go great to see you again. Welcome back to the cube. >>Hello Dave, Great to talk to you again. >>You might remember last year we talked a lot about swarm intelligence and how AI is evolving. Of course you hosted the day two keynotes here at discover you talked about thriving in the age of insights and how to craft a data centric strategy and you addressed you know some of the biggest problems I think organizations face with data that's You got a data is plentiful but insights they're harder to come by. And you really dug into some great examples in retail banking and medicine and health care and media. But stepping back a little bit with zoom out on discovered 21, what do you make of the events so far? And some of your big takeaways? >>Mm Well you started with the insightful question, right? Yeah. Data is everywhere then. But we like the insight. Right? That's also part of the reason why that's the main reason why you know Antonio on day one focused and talked about that. The fact that we are now in the age of insight. Right? Uh and and uh and and how to thrive thrive in that in this new age. What I then did on the day to kino following Antonio is to talk about the challenges that we need to overcome in order in order to thrive in this new age. >>So maybe we could talk a little bit about some of the things that you took away in terms I'm specifically interested in some of the barriers to achieving insights when you know customers are drowning in data. What do you hear from customers? What we take away from some of the ones you talked about today? >>Oh, very pertinent question. Dave you know the two challenges I spoke about right now that we need to overcome in order to thrive in this new age. The first one is is the current challenge and that current challenge is uh you know stated is you know, barriers to insight, you know when we are awash with data. So that's a statement right? How to overcome those barriers. What are the barriers of these two insight when we are awash in data? Um I in the data keynote I spoke about three main things. Three main areas that received from customers. The first one, the first barrier is in many with many of our customers. A data is siloed. All right. You know, like in a big corporation you've got data siloed by sales, finance, engineering, manufacturing, and so on, uh supply chain and so on. And uh, there's a major effort ongoing in many corporations to build a federation layer above all those silos so that when you build applications above they can be more intelligent. They can have access to all the different silos of data to get better intelligence and more intelligent applications built. So that was the that was the first barrier we spoke about barriers to incite when we are washed with data. The second barrier is uh, that we see amongst our customers is that uh data is raw and dispersed when they are stored and and uh and you know, it's tough to get tough to to get value out of them. Right? And I in that case I I used the example of uh you know the May 6 2010 event where the stock market dropped a trillion dollars in in tens of ministerial. We we all know those who are financially attuned with know about this uh incident But this is not the only incident. There are many of them out there and for for that particular May six event uh you know, it took a long time to get insight months. Yeah before we for months we had no insight as to what happened, why it happened, right. Um and and there were many other incidences like this. And the regulators were looking for that one rule that could, that could mitigate many of these incidences. Um one of our customers decided to take the hard road go with the tough data right? Because data is rolling dispersed. So they went into all the different feeds of financial transaction information. Uh took the took the tough uh took the tough road and analyze that data took a long time to assemble and they discovered that there was court stuffing right? That uh people were sending a lot of traits in and then cancelling them almost immediately. You have to manipulate the market. Um And why why why didn't we see it immediately? Well the reason is the process reports that everybody sees uh rule in there that says all trades. Less than 100 shares don't need to report in there. And so what people did was sending a lot of less than 103 100 100 shares trades uh to fly under the radar to do this manipulation. So here is here the second barrier right? Data could be raw and dispersed. Um Sometimes you just have to take the hard road and um and to get insight And this is 1 1 great example. And then the last barrier is uh is has to do with sometimes when you start a project to to get insight to get uh to get answers and insight. You you realize that all the datas around you but you don't you don't seem to find the right ones To get what you need. You don't you don't seem to get the right ones. Yeah. Um here we have three quick examples of customers. 111 was it was a great example right? Where uh they were trying to build a language translator, a machine language translator between two languages. Right? But not do that. They need to get hundreds of millions of word pairs, you know, of one language compared uh with the corresponding other hundreds of millions of them. They say we are going to get all these word pairs. Someone creative thought of a willing source and a huge, so it was a United Nations you see. So sometimes you think you don't have the right data with you, but there might be another source and a willing one that could give you that data right. The second one has to do with uh there was uh the uh sometimes you you may just have to generate that data, interesting one. We had an autonomous car customer that collects all these data from their cars, right, massive amounts of data, loss of senses, collect loss of data. And uh you know, but sometimes they don't have the data they need even after collection. For example, they may have collected the data with a car uh in in um in fine weather and collected the car driving on this highway in rain and also in stone, but never had the opportunity to collect the car in hale because that's a rare occurrence. So instead of waiting for a time where the car can dr inhale, they build a simulation you by having the car collector in snow and simulated him. So these are some of the examples where we have customers working to overcome barriers, right? You have barriers that is associated the fact that data is silo Federated, it various associated with data. That's tough to get that. They just took the hard road, right? And sometimes, thirdly, you just have to be creative to get the right data you need, >>wow, I tell you, I have about 100 questions based on what you just said. Uh, there's a great example, the flash crash. In fact, Michael Lewis wrote about this in his book, The Flash Boys and essentially right. It was high frequency traders trying to front run the market and sending in small block trades trying to get on the front end it. So that's and they, and they chalked it up to a glitch like you said, for months, nobody really knew what it was. So technology got us into this problem. I guess my question is, can technology help us get out of the problem? And that maybe is where AI fits in. >>Yes, yes. Uh, in fact, a lot of analytics, we went in, uh, to go back to the raw data that is highly dispersed from different sources, right, assemble them to see if you can find a material trend, right? You can see lots of trends right? Like, uh, you know, we, if if humans look at things right, we tend to see patterns in clouds, right? So sometimes you need to apply statistical analysis, um math to be sure that what the model is seeing is is real. Right? And and that required work. That's one area. The second area is uh you know, when um uh there are times when you you just need to to go through that uh that tough approach to to find the answer. Now, the issue comes to mind now is is that humans put in the rules to decide what goes into a report that everybody sees in this case uh before the change in the rules. Right? But by the way, after the discovery, the authorities change the rules and all all shares, all traits of different any sizes. It has to be reported. No. Yeah. Right. But the rule was applied uh you know, to say earlier that shares under 100 trades under 100 shares need not be reported. So sometimes you just have to understand that reports were decided by humans and and under for understandable reasons. I mean they probably didn't want that for various reasons not to put everything in there so that people could still read it uh in a reasonable amount of time. But uh we need to understand that rules were being put in by humans for the reports we read. And as such, there are times you just need to go back to the raw data. >>I want to ask, >>albeit that it's gonna be tough. >>Yeah. So I want to ask a question about AI is obviously it's in your title and it's something you know a lot about but and I want to make a statement, you tell me if it's on point or off point. So it seems that most of the Ai going on in the enterprise is modeling data science applied to troves of data >>but >>but there's also a lot of ai going on in consumer whether it's you know, fingerprint technology or facial recognition or natural language processing. Will a two part question will the consumer market has so often in the enterprise sort of inform us uh the first part and then will there be a shift from sort of modeling if you will to more you mentioned autonomous vehicles more ai influencing in real time. Especially with the edge. She can help us understand that better. >>Yeah, it's a great question. Right. Uh there are three stages to just simplify, I mean, you know, it's probably more sophisticated than that but let's simplify three stages. All right. To to building an Ai system that ultimately can predict, make a prediction right or to to assist you in decision making, have an outcome. So you start with the data massive amounts data that you have to decide what to feed the machine with. So you feed the machine with this massive chunk of data and the machine uh starts to evolve a model based on all the data is seeing. It starts to evolve right to the point that using a test set of data that you have separately campus site that you know the answer for. Then you test the model uh you know after you trained it with all that data to see whether it's prediction accuracy is high enough and once you are satisfied with it, you you then deploy the model to make the decision and that's the influence. Right? So a lot of times depend on what what we are focusing on. We we um in data science are we working hard on assembling the right data to feed the machine with, That's the data preparation organization work. And then after which you build your models, you have to pick the right models for the decisions and prediction you wanted to make. You pick the right models and then you start feeding the data with it. Sometimes you you pick one model and the prediction isn't that robust, it is good but then it is not consistent right now what you do is uh you try another model so sometimes it's just keep trying different models until you get the right kind. Yeah, that gives you a good robust decision making and prediction after which It is tested well Q eight. You would then take that model and deploy it at the edge. Yeah. And then at the edges is essentially just looking at new data, applying it to the model, you're you're trained and then that model will give you a prediction decision. Right? So uh it is these three stages. Yeah, but more and more uh you know, your question reminds me that more and more people are thinking as the edge become more and more powerful. Can you also do learning at the edge? Right. That's the reason why we spoke about swarm learning the last time, learning at the edge as a swamp, right? Because maybe individually they may not have enough power to do so. But as a swampy me, >>is that learning from the edge or learning at the edge? In other words? Yes. Yeah. Question Yeah. >>That's a great question. That's a great question. Right? So uh the quick answer is learning at the edge, right? Uh and also from the edge, but the main goal, right? The goal is to learn at the edge so that you don't have to move the data that the Edge sees first back to the cloud or the core to do the learning because that would be the reason. One of the main reasons why you want to learn at the edge, right? Uh So so that you don't need to have to send all that data back and assemble it back from all the different edge devices, assemble it back to the cloud side to to do the learning right? With swampland. You can learn it and keep the data at the edge and learn at that point. >>And then maybe only selectively send the autonomous vehicle example you gave us. Great because maybe there, you know, there may be only persisting, they're not persisting data that is inclement weather or when a deer runs across the front and then maybe they they do that and then they send that smaller data set back and maybe that's where it's modelling done. But the rest can be done at the edges. It's a new world that's coming down. Let me ask you a question, is there a limit to what data should be collected and how it should be collected? >>That's a great question again. You know uh wow today, full of these uh insightful questions that actually touches on the second challenge. Right? How do we uh in order to thrive in this new age of inside? The second challenge is are you know the is our future challenge, right? What do we do for our future? And and in there is uh the statement we make is we have to focus on collecting data strategically for the future of our enterprise. And within that I talk about what to collect right? When to organize it when you collect and then where will your data be, you know going forward that you are collecting from? So what, when and where for the what data for the what data to collect? That? That was the question you ask. Um it's it's a question that different industries have to ask themselves because it will vary, right? Um let me give you the you use the autonomous car example, let me use that. And you have this customer collecting massive amounts of data. You know, we're talking about 10 petabytes a day from the fleet of their cars. And these are not production autonomous cars, right? These are training autonomous cars collecting data so they can train and eventually deploy commercial cars, right? Um so this data collection cars they collect as a fleet of them collect temporal bikes a day. And when it came to us building a storage system to store all of that data, they realized they don't want to afford to store all of it. Now, here comes the dilemma, right? What should I after I spent so much effort building all these cars and sensors and collecting data, I've now decide what to delete. That's a dilemma right now in working with them on this process of trimming down what they collected. You know, I'm constantly reminded of the sixties and seventies, right? To remind myself 60 and seventies, we call a large part of our D. N. A junk DNA. Today. We realize that a large part of that what we call john has function as valuable function. They are not jeans, but they regulate the function of jeans, you know, So, so what's jump in the yesterday could be valuable today or what's junk today could be valuable tomorrow, Right? So, so there's this tension going on right between you decided not wanting to afford to store everything that you can get your hands on. But on the other hand, you you know, you worry you you you ignore the wrong ones, right? You can see this tension in our customers, right? And it depends on industry here, right? In health care, they say I have no choice. I I want it. All right. One very insightful point brought up by one health care provider that really touched me was, you know, we are not we don't only care. Of course we care a lot. We care a lot about the people we are caring for, right? But you also care for the people were not caring for. How do we find them? Mhm. Right. And that therefore, they did not just need to collect data. That is that they have with from their patients. They also need to reach out right to outside data so that they can figure out who they are not caring for, right? So they want it all. So I tell us them, so what do you do with funding if you want it all? They say they have no choice but to figure out a way to fund it and perhaps monetization of what they have now is the way to come around and find that. Of course they also come back to us rightfully that you know, we have to then work out a way to help them build that system, you know? So that's health care, right? And and if you go to other industries like banking, they say they can't afford to keep them off, but they are regulated, seems like healthcare, they are regulated as to uh privacy and such. Like so many examples different industries having different needs, but different approaches to how what they collect. But there is this constant tension between um you perhaps deciding not wanting to fund all of that uh all that you can store, right? But on the other hand, you know, if you if you kind of don't want to afford it and decide not to store some uh if he does some become highly valuable in the future, right? Yeah. >>We can make some assumptions about the future, can't we? I mean, we know there's gonna be a lot more data than than we've ever seen before. We know that we know well notwithstanding supply constraints on things like nand. We know the prices of storage is going to continue to decline. We also know, and not a lot of people are really talking about this but the processing power but he says moore's law is dead okay. It's waning. But the processing power when you combine the Cpus and NP US and GPUS and accelerators and and so forth actually is is increasing. And so when you think about these use cases at the edge, you're going to have much more processing power, you're gonna have cheaper storage and it's going to be less expensive processing And so as an ai practitioner, what can you do with that? >>Yeah, it's highly again, another insightful questions that we touched on our keynote and that that goes up to the why I do the where? Right, When will your data be? Right. We have one estimate that says that by next year there will be 55 billion connected devices out there. Right. 55 billion. Right. What's the population of the world? Of the other? Of 10 billion? But this thing is 55 billion. Right? Uh and many of them, most of them can collect data. So what do you what do you do? Right. Um So the amount of data that's gonna come in, it's gonna weigh exceed right? Our drop in storage costs are increasing computer power. Right? So what's the answer? Right. So, so the the answer must be knowing that we don't and and even the drop in price and increase in bandwidth, it will overwhelm the increased five G will overwhelm five G. Right? Given amount 55 billion of them collecting. Right? So, the answer must be that there might need to be a balance between you needing to bring all that data from the 55 billion devices of data back to a central as a bunch of central Cause because you may not be able to afford to do that firstly band with even with five G. M and and SD when you'll still be too expensive given the number of devices out there. Were you given storage cause dropping will still be too expensive to try and store them all. So the answer must be to start at least to mitigate the problem to some leave both a lot of the data out there. Right? And only send back the pertinent ones as you said before. But then if you did that, then how are we gonna do machine learning at the core and the cloud side? If you don't have all the data you want rich data to train with. Right? Some sometimes you want a mix of the uh positive type data and the negative type data so you can train the machine in a more balanced way. So the answer must be eventually right. As we move forward with these huge number of devices out of the edge to do machine learning at the edge. Today, we don't have enough power. Right? The edge typically is characterized by a lower uh, energy capability and therefore lower compute power. But soon, you know, even with lower energy, they can do more with compute power improving in energy efficiency, Right? Uh, so learning at the edge today, we do influence at the edge. So we data model deploy and you do influence at the age, that's what we do today. But more and more, I believe, given a massive amount of data at the edge, you you have to have to start doing machine learning at the edge. And and if when you don't have enough power, then you aggregate multiple devices, compute power into a swamp and learn as a swan, >>interesting. So now, of course, if I were sitting and fly on the wall in HP board meeting, I said, okay, HP is as a leading provider of compute, how do you take advantage of that? I mean, we're going, I know it's future, but you must be thinking about that and participating in those markets. I know today you are you have, you know, edge line and other products. But there's it seems to me that it's it's not the general purpose that we've known in the past. It's a new type of specialized computing. How are you thinking about participating in that >>opportunity for your customers? Uh the world will have to have a balance right? Where today the default, Well, the more common mode is to collect the data from the edge and train at uh at some centralized location or a number of centralized location um going forward. Given the proliferation of the edge devices, we'll need a balance. We need both. We need capability at the cloud side. Right. And it has to be hybrid. And then we need capability on the edge side. Yeah. That they want to build systems that that on one hand, uh is uh edge adapted, right? Meaning the environmentally adapted because the edge different they are on a lot of times on the outside. Uh They need to be packaging adapted and also power adapted, right? Because typically many of these devices are battery powered. Right? Um so you have to build systems that adapt to it, but at the same time they must not be custom. That's my belief. They must be using standard processes and standard operating system so that they can run rich a set of applications. So yes. Um that's that's also the insightful for that Antonio announced in 2018, Uh the next four years from 2018, right, $4 billion dollars invested to strengthen our edge portfolio, edge product lines, right Edge solutions. >>I get a doctor go. I could go on for hours with you. You're you're just such a great guest. Let's close what are you most excited about in the future of of of it? Certainly H. P. E. But the industry in general. >>Yeah I think the excitement is uh the customers right? The diversity of customers and and the diversity in a way they have approached their different problems with data strategy. So the excitement is around data strategy right? Just like you know uh you know the the statement made was was so was profound. Right? Um And Antonio said we are in the age of insight powered by data. That's the first line right? The line that comes after that is as such were becoming more and more data centric with data the currency. Now the next step is even more profound. That is um you know we are going as far as saying that you know um data should not be treated as cost anymore. No right. But instead as an investment in a new asset class called data with value on our balance sheet, this is a this is a step change right in thinking that is going to change the way we look at data the way we value it. So that's a statement that this is the exciting thing because because for for me a city of AI right uh machine is only as intelligent as the data you feed it with. Data is a source of the machine learning to be intelligent. So so that's that's why when when people start to value data right? And and and say that it is an investment when we collect it. It is very positive for ai because an Ai system gets intelligent, more intelligence because it has a huge amounts of data and the diversity of data. So it'd be great if the community values values data. Well >>you certainly see it in the valuations of many companies these days. Um and I think increasingly you see it on the income statement, you know data products and people monetizing data services and maybe eventually you'll see it in the in the balance. You know Doug Laney when he was a gardener group wrote a book about this and a lot of people are thinking about it. That's a big change isn't it? Dr >>yeah. Question is is the process and methods evaluation. Right. But uh I believe we'll get there, we need to get started then we'll get their belief >>doctor goes on and >>pleasure. And yeah and then the yeah I will will will will benefit greatly from it. >>Oh yeah, no doubt people will better understand how to align you know, some of these technology investments, Doctor goes great to see you again. Thanks so much for coming back in the cube. It's been a real pleasure. >>Yes. A system. It's only as smart as the data you feed it with. >>Excellent. We'll leave it there. Thank you for spending some time with us and keep it right there for more great interviews from HP discover 21. This is dave a lot for the cube. The leader in enterprise tech coverage right back.

(upbeat music) >> Welcome back to HPE Discover 2021, theCube's virtual coverage, continuous coverage of HPE's annual customer event. My name is Dave Vellante and we're going to dive into the intersection of high-performance computing, data and AI with Dr. Eng Lim Goh who's a Senior Vice President and CTO for AI at Hewlett Packard Enterprise. Dr. Goh, great to see you again. Welcome back to theCube. >> Hey, hello, Dave. Great to talk to you again. >> You might remember last year we talked a lot about swarm intelligence and how AI is evolving. Of course you hosted the Day 2 keynotes here at Discover. And you talked about thriving in the age of insights and how to craft a data-centric strategy and you addressed some of the biggest problems I think organizations face with data. And that's, you got to look, data is plentiful, but insights, they're harder to come by and you really dug into some great examples in retail, banking, and medicine and healthcare and media. But stepping back a little bit we'll zoom out on Discover '21, you know, what do you make of the events so far and some of your big takeaways? >> Hmm, well, you started with the insightful question. Data is everywhere then but we lack the insight. That's also part of the reason why that's a main reason why, Antonio on Day 1 focused and talked about that, the fact that we are in the now in the age of insight and how to thrive in this new age. What I then did on the Day 2 keynote following Antonio is to talk about the challenges that we need to overcome in order to thrive in this new age. >> So maybe we could talk a little bit about some of the things that you took away in terms of, I'm specifically interested in some of the barriers to achieving insights when you know customers are drowning in data. What do you hear from customers? What were your takeaway from some of the ones you talked about today? >> Very pertinent question, Dave. You know, the two challenges I spoke about how to, that we need to overcome in order to thrive in this new age, the first one is the current challenge. And that current challenge is, you know state of this, you know, barriers to insight, when we are awash with data. So that's a statement. How to overcome those barriers. One of the barriers to insight when we are awash in data, in the Day 2 keynote, I spoke about three main things, three main areas that receive from customers. The first one, the first barrier is with many of our customers, data is siloed. You know, like in a big corporation, you've got data siloed by sales, finance, engineering, manufacturing, and so on supply chain and so on. And there's a major effort ongoing in many corporations to build a Federation layer above all those silos so that when you build applications above they can be more intelligent. They can have access to all the different silos of data to get better intelligence and more intelligent applications built. So that was the first barrier we spoke about, you know, barriers to insight when we are awash with data. The second barrier is that we see amongst our customers is that data is raw and disperse when they are stored. And it's tough to get to value out of them. In that case I use the example of the May 6, 2010 event where the stock market dropped a trillion dollars in tens of minutes. We all know those who are financially attuned with, know about this incident. But that this is not the only incident. There are many of them out there. And for that particular May 6, event, you know it took a long time to get insight, months, yeah, before we, for months we had no insight as to what happened, why it happened. And there were many other incidences like this and the regulators were looking for that one rule that could mitigate many of these incidences. One of our customers decided to take the hard road to go with the tough data. Because data is raw and dispersed. So they went into all the different feeds of financial transaction information, took the tough, you know, took a tough road and analyze that data took a long time to assemble. And he discovered that there was quote stuffing. That people were sending a lot of trades in and then canceling them almost immediately. You have to manipulate the market. And why didn't we see it immediately? Well, the reason is the process reports that everybody sees had the rule in there that says all trades less than 100 shares don't need to report in there. And so what people did was sending a lot of less than 100 shares trades to fly under the radar to do this manipulation. So here is, here the second barrier. Data could be raw and disperse. Sometimes it's just have to take the hard road and to get insight. And this is one great example. And then the last barrier has to do with sometimes when you start a project to get insight, to get answers and insight, you realize that all the data's around you, but you don't seem to find the right ones to get what you need. You don't seem to get the right ones, yeah. Here we have three quick examples of customers. One was a great example where they were trying to build a language translator a machine language translator between two languages. But in order to do that they need to get hundreds of millions of word pairs of one language compare with the corresponding other hundreds of millions of them. They say, "Where I'm going to get all these word pairs?" Someone creative thought of a willing source and huge source, it was a United Nations. You see, so sometimes you think you don't have the right data with you, but there might be another source and a willing one that could give you that data. The second one has to do with, there was the, sometimes you may just have to generate that data. Interesting one. We had an autonomous car customer that collects all these data from their cars. Massive amounts of data, lots of sensors, collect lots of data. And, you know, but sometimes they don't have the data they need even after collection. For example, they may have collected the data with a car in fine weather and collected the car driving on this highway in rain and also in snow. But never had the opportunity to collect the car in hail because that's a rare occurrence. So instead of waiting for a time where the car can drive in hail, they build a simulation by having the car collected in snow and simulated hail. So these are some of the examples where we have customers working to overcome barriers. You have barriers that is associated with the fact, that data silo, if federated barriers associated with data that's tough to get at. They just took the hard road. And sometimes thirdly, you just have to be creative to get the right data you need. >> Wow, I tell you, I have about 100 questions based on what you just said. And as a great example, the flash crash in fact Michael Lewis wrote about this in his book, the "Flash Boys" and essentially. It was high frequency traders trying to front run the market and sending in small block trades trying to get sort of front ended. So that's, and they chalked it up to a glitch. Like you said, for months, nobody really knew what it was. So technology got us into this problem. Can I guess my question is can technology help us get get out of the problem? And that maybe is where AI fits in. >> Yes. Yes. In fact, a lot of analytics work went in to go back to the raw data that is highly dispersed from different sources, assemble them to see if you can find a material trend. You can see lots of trends. Like, no, we, if humans at things we tend to see patterns in clouds. So sometimes you need to apply statistical analysis, math to be sure that what the model is seeing is real. And that required work. That's one area. The second area is, you know, when this, there are times when you just need to go through that tough approach to find the answer. Now, the issue comes to mind now is that humans put in the rules to decide what goes into a report that everybody sees. And in this case before the change in the rules. By the way, after the discovery, the authorities changed the rules and all shares all trades of different, any sizes it has to be reported. Not, yeah. But the rule was applied to to say earlier that shares under 100, trades under 100 shares need not be reported. So sometimes you just have to understand that reports were decided by humans and for understandable reasons. I mean, they probably didn't, wanted for various reasons not to put everything in there so that people could still read it in a reasonable amount of time. But we need to understand that rules were being put in by humans for the reports we read. And as such there are times we just need to go back to the raw data. >> I want to ask you-- Or be it that it's going to be tough there. >> Yeah, so I want to ask you a question about AI as obviously it's in your title and it's something you know a lot about and I'm going to make a statement. You tell me if it's on point or off point. Seems that most of the AI going on in the enterprise is modeling data science applied to troves of data. But there's also a lot of AI going on in consumer, whether it's fingerprint technology or facial recognition or natural language processing. Will, to two-part question, will the consumer market, let's say as it has so often in the enterprise sort of inform us is sort of first part. And then will there be a shift from sort of modeling, if you will, to more, you mentioned autonomous vehicles more AI inferencing in real-time, especially with the Edge. I think you can help us understand that better. >> Yeah, this is a great question. There are three stages to just simplify, I mean, you know, it's probably more sophisticated than that, but let's just simplify there're three stages to building an AI system that ultimately can predict, make a prediction. Or to assist you in decision-making, have an outcome. So you start with the data, massive amounts of data that you have to decide what to feed the machine with. So you feed the machine with this massive chunk of data. And the machine starts to evolve a model based on all the data is seeing it starts to evolve. To a point that using a test set of data that you have separately kept a site that you know the answer for. Then you test the model, you know after you're trained it with all that data to see whether his prediction accuracy is high enough. And once you are satisfied with it, you then deploy the model to make the decision and that's the inference. So a lot of times depending on what we are focusing on. We in data science are we working hard on assembling the right data to feed the machine with? That's the data preparation organization work. And then after which you build your models you have to pick the right models for the decisions and prediction you wanted to make. You pick the right models and then you start feeding the data with it. Sometimes you pick one model and a prediction isn't that a robust, it is good, but then it is not consistent. Now what you do is you try another model. So sometimes you just keep trying different models until you get the right kind, yeah, that gives you a good robust decision-making and prediction. Now, after which, if it's tested well, Q8 you will then take that model and deploy it at the Edge, yeah. And then at the Edge is essentially just looking at new data applying it to the model that you have trained and then that model will give you a prediction or a decision. So it is these three stages, yeah. But more and more, your question reminds me that more and more people are thinking as the Edge become more and more powerful, can you also do learning at the Edge? That's the reason why we spoke about swarm learning the last time, learning at the Edge as a swarm. Because maybe individually they may not have enough power to do so, but as a swarm, they may. >> Is that learning from the Edge or learning at the Edge. In other words, is it-- >> Yes. >> Yeah, you don't understand my question, yeah. >> That's a great question. That's a great question. So answer is learning at the Edge, and also from the Edge, but the main goal, the goal is to learn at the Edge so that you don't have to move the data that Edge sees first back to the Cloud or the call to do the learning. Because that would be the reason, one of the main reasons why you want to learn at the Edge. So that you don't need to have to send all that data back and assemble it back from all the different Edge devices assemble it back to the Cloud side to do the learning. With swarm learning, you can learn it and keep the data at the Edge and learn at that point, yeah. >> And then maybe only selectively send the autonomous vehicle example you gave is great 'cause maybe they're, you know, there may be only persisting. They're not persisting data that is an inclement weather, or when a deer runs across the front and then maybe they do that and then they send that smaller data set back and maybe that's where it's modeling done but the rest can be done at the Edge. It's a new world that's coming to, let me ask you a question. Is there a limit to what data should be collected and how it should be collected? >> That's a great question again, yeah, well, today full of these insightful questions that actually touches on the second challenge. How do we, to in order to thrive in this new age of insight. The second challenge is our future challenge. What do we do for our future? And in there is the statement we make is we have to focus on collecting data strategically for the future of our enterprise. And within that, I talk about what to collect, and when to organize it when you collect, and then where will your data be going forward that you are collecting from? So what, when, and where. For the what data, for what data to collect that was the question you asked. It's a question that different industries have to ask themselves because it will vary. Let me give you the, you use the autonomous car example. Let me use that and you have this customer collecting massive amounts of data. You know, we talking about 10 petabytes a day from a fleet of their cars and these are not production autonomous cars. These are training autonomous cars, collecting data so they can train and eventually deploy a commercial cars. Also these data collection cars, they collect 10 as a fleet of them collect 10 petabytes a day. And then when it came to us, building a storage system to store all of that data they realize they don't want to afford to store all of it. Now here comes the dilemma. What should I, after I spent so much effort building all this cars and sensors and collecting data, I've now decide what to delete. That's a dilemma. Now in working with them on this process of trimming down what they collected. I'm constantly reminded of the 60s and 70s. To remind myself 60s and 70s, we call a large part of our DNA, junk DNA. Today we realized that a large part of that, what we call junk has function has valuable function. They are not genes but they regulate the function of genes. So what's junk in yesterday could be valuable today, or what's junk today could be valuable tomorrow. So there's this tension going on between you deciding not wanting to afford to store everything that you can get your hands on. But on the other hand, you know you worry, you ignore the wrong ones. You can see this tension in our customers. And then it depends on industry here. In healthcare they say, I have no choice. I want it all, why? One very insightful point brought up by one healthcare provider that really touched me was you know, we are not, we don't only care. Of course we care a lot. We care a lot about the people we are caring for. But we also care for the people we are not caring for. How do we find them? And therefore, they did not just need to collect data that they have with, from their patients they also need to reach out to outside data so that they can figure out who they are not caring for. So they want it all. So I asked them, "So what do you do with funding if you want it all?" They say they have no choice but they'll figure out a way to fund it and perhaps monetization of what they have now is the way to come around and fund that. Of course, they also come back to us, rightfully that you know, we have to then work out a way to to help them build a system. So that healthcare. And if you go to other industries like banking, they say they can afford to keep them all. But they are regulated same like healthcare. They are regulated as to privacy and such like. So many examples, different industries having different needs but different approaches to how, what they collect. But there is this constant tension between you perhaps deciding not wanting to fund all of that, all that you can store. But on the other hand you know, if you kind of don't want to afford it and decide not to store some, maybe those some become highly valuable in the future. You worry. >> Well, we can make some assumptions about the future, can't we? I mean we know there's going to be a lot more data than we've ever seen before, we know that. We know, well not withstanding supply constraints and things like NAND. We know the price of storage is going to continue to decline. We also know and not a lot of people are really talking about this but the processing power, everybody says, Moore's Law is dead. Okay, it's waning but the processing power when you combine the CPUs and NPUs, and GPUs and accelerators and so forth, actually is increasing. And so when you think about these use cases at the Edge you're going to have much more processing power. You're going to have cheaper storage and it's going to be less expensive processing. And so as an AI practitioner, what can you do with that? >> Yeah, it's a highly, again another insightful question that we touched on, on our keynote and that goes up to the why, I'll do the where. Where will your data be? We have one estimate that says that by next year, there will be 55 billion connected devices out there. 55 billion. What's the population of the world? Well, off the order of 10 billion, but this thing is 55 billion. And many of them, most of them can collect data. So what do you do? So the amount of data that's going to come in is going to way exceed our drop in storage costs our increasing compute power. So what's the answer? The answer must be knowing that we don't and even a drop in price and increase in bandwidth, it will overwhelm the 5G, it'll will overwhelm 5G, given the amount of 55 billion of them collecting. So the answer must be that there needs to be a balance between you needing to bring all that data from the 55 billion devices of the data back out to a central, as a bunch of central cost because you may not be able to afford to do that. Firstly bandwidth, even with 5G and as the, when you still be too expensive given the number of devices out there. You know given storage costs dropping it'll still be too expensive to try and install them all. So the answer must be to start at least to mitigate the problem to some leave most a lot of the data out there. And only send back the pertinent ones, as you said before. But then if you did that then, how are we going to do machine learning at the core and the Cloud side, if you don't have all the data you want rich data to train with. Sometimes you want to a mix of the positive type data, and the negative type data. So you can train the machine in a more balanced way. So the answer must be you eventually, as we move forward with these huge number of devices are at the Edge to do machine learning at the Edge. Today we don't even have power. The Edge typically is characterized by a lower energy capability and therefore, lower compute power. But soon, you know, even with low energy, they can do more with compute power, improving in energy efficiency. So learning at the Edge today we do inference at the Edge. So we data, model, deploy and you do inference at age. That's what we do today. But more and more, I believe given a massive amount of data at the Edge you have to have to start doing machine learning at the Edge. And if when you don't have enough power then you aggregate multiple devices' compute power into a swarm and learn as a swarm. >> Oh, interesting, so now of course, if I were sitting in a flyer flying the wall on HPE Board meeting I said, "Okay, HPE is a leading provider of compute." How do you take advantage that? I mean, we're going, I know it's future but you must be thinking about that and participating in those markets. I know today you are, you have, you know, Edge line and other products, but there's, it seems to me that it's not the general purpose that we've known in the past. It's a new type of specialized computing. How are you thinking about participating in that opportunity for your customers? >> The wall will have to have a balance. Where today the default, well, the more common mode is to collect the data from the Edge and train at some centralized location or number of centralized location. Going forward, given the proliferation of the Edge devices, we'll need a balance, we need both. We need capability at the Cloud side. And it has to be hybrid. And then we need capability on the Edge side. Yeah that we need to build systems that on one hand is Edge-adapted. Meaning they environmentally-adapted because the Edge differently are on it. A lot of times on the outside, they need to be packaging-adapted and also power-adapted. Because typically many of these devices are battery-powered. So you have to build systems that adapts to it. But at the same time, they must not be custom. That's my belief. They must be using standard processes and standard operating system so that they can run a rich set of applications. So yes, that's also the insightful for that. Antonio announced in 2018 for the next four years from 2018, $4 billion invested to strengthen our Edge portfolio our Edge product lines, Edge solutions. >> Dr. Goh, I could go on for hours with you. You're just such a great guest. Let's close. What are you most excited about in the future of certainly HPE, but the industry in general? >> Yeah, I think the excitement is the customers. The diversity of customers and the diversity in the way they have approached their different problems with data strategy. So the excitement is around data strategy. Just like, you know, the statement made for us was so, was profound. And Antonio said we are in the age of insight powered by data. That's the first line. The line that comes after that is as such we are becoming more and more data-centric with data the currency. Now the next step is even more profound. That is, you know, we are going as far as saying that data should not be treated as cost anymore, no. But instead, as an investment in a new asset class called data with value on our balance sheet. This is a step change in thinking that is going to change the way we look at data, the way we value it. So that's a statement. So this is the exciting thing, because for me a CTO of AI, a machine is only as intelligent as the data you feed it with. Data is a source of the machine learning to be intelligent. So that's why when the people start to value data and say that it is an investment when we collect it it is very positive for AI because an AI system gets intelligent, get more intelligence because it has huge amounts of data and a diversity of data. So it'd be great if the community values data. >> Well, are you certainly see it in the valuations of many companies these days? And I think increasingly you see it on the income statement, you know data products and people monetizing data services, and yeah, maybe eventually you'll see it in the balance sheet, I know. Doug Laney when he was at Gartner Group wrote a book about this and a lot of people are thinking about it. That's a big change, isn't it? Dr. Goh. >> Yeah, yeah, yeah. Your question is the process and methods in valuation. But I believe we'll get there. We need to get started and then we'll get there, I believe, yeah. >> Dr. Goh it's always my pleasure. >> And then the AI will benefit greatly from it. >> Oh yeah, no doubt. People will better understand how to align some of these technology investments. Dr. Goh, great to see you again. Thanks so much for coming back in theCube. It's been a real pleasure. >> Yes, a system is only as smart as the data you feed it with. (both chuckling) >> Well, excellent, we'll leave it there. Thank you for spending some time with us so keep it right there for more great interviews from HPE Discover '21. This is Dave Vellante for theCube, the leader in enterprise tech coverage. We'll be right back (upbeat music)

(upbeat music) >> Welcome back to HPE Discover 2021, theCUBE's virtual coverage, continuous coverage of HPE's Annual Customer Event. My name is Dave Vellante, and we're going to dive into the intersection of high-performance computing, data and AI with Doctor Eng Lim Goh, who's a Senior Vice President and CTO for AI at Hewlett Packard Enterprise. Doctor Goh, great to see you again. Welcome back to theCUBE. >> Hello, Dave, great to talk to you again. >> You might remember last year we talked a lot about Swarm intelligence and how AI is evolving. Of course, you hosted the Day 2 Keynotes here at Discover. And you talked about thriving in the age of insights, and how to craft a data-centric strategy. And you addressed some of the biggest problems, I think organizations face with data. That's, you've got a, data is plentiful, but insights, they're harder to come by. >> Yeah. >> And you really dug into some great examples in retail, banking, in medicine, healthcare and media. But stepping back a little bit we zoomed out on Discover '21. What do you make of the events so far and some of your big takeaways? >> Hmm, well, we started with the insightful question, right, yeah? Data is everywhere then, but we lack the insight. That's also part of the reason why, that's a main reason why Antonio on day one focused and talked about the fact that we are in the now in the age of insight, right? And how to try thrive in that age, in this new age? What I then did on a Day 2 Keynote following Antonio is to talk about the challenges that we need to overcome in order to thrive in this new age. >> So, maybe we could talk a little bit about some of the things that you took away in terms of, I'm specifically interested in some of the barriers to achieving insights. You know customers are drowning in data. What do you hear from customers? What were your takeaway from some of the ones you talked about today? >> Oh, very pertinent question, Dave. You know the two challenges I spoke about, that we need to overcome in order to thrive in this new age. The first one is the current challenge. And that current challenge is, you know, stated is now barriers to insight, when we are awash with data. So that's a statement on how do you overcome those barriers? What are the barriers to insight when we are awash in data? In the Day 2 Keynote, I spoke about three main things. Three main areas that we receive from customers. The first one, the first barrier is in many, with many of our customers, data is siloed, all right. You know, like in a big corporation, you've got data siloed by sales, finance, engineering, manufacturing and so on supply chain and so on. And there's a major effort ongoing in many corporations to build a federation layer above all those silos so that when you build applications above, they can be more intelligent. They can have access to all the different silos of data to get better intelligence and more intelligent applications built. So that was the first barrier we spoke about, you know? Barriers to insight when we are awash with data. The second barrier is that we see amongst our customers is that data is raw and disperse when they are stored. And you know, it's tough to get at, to tough to get a value out of them, right? And in that case, I use the example of, you know, the May 6, 2010 event where the stock market dropped a trillion dollars in terms of minutes. We all know those who are financially attuned with know about this incident but that this is not the only incident. There are many of them out there. And for that particular May 6 event, you know, it took a long time to get insight. Months, yeah, before we, for months we had no insight as to what happened. Why it happened? Right, and there were many other incidences like this and the regulators were looking for that one rule that could mitigate many of these incidences. One of our customers decided to take the hard road they go with the tough data, right? Because data is raw and dispersed. So they went into all the different feeds of financial transaction information, took the tough, you know, took a tough road. And analyze that data took a long time to assemble. And they discovered that there was caught stuffing, right? That people were sending a lot of trades in and then canceling them almost immediately. You have to manipulate the market. And why didn't we see it immediately? Well, the reason is the process reports that everybody sees, the rule in there that says, all trades less than a hundred shares don't need to report in there. And so what people did was sending a lot of less than a hundred shares trades to fly under the radar to do this manipulation. So here is the second barrier, right? Data could be raw and dispersed. Sometimes it's just have to take the hard road and to get insight. And this is one great example. And then the last barrier has to do with sometimes when you start a project to get insight, to get answers and insight, you realize that all the data's around you, but you don't seem to find the right ones to get what you need. You don't seem to get the right ones, yeah? Here we have three quick examples of customers. One was a great example, right? Where they were trying to build a language translator or machine language translator between two languages, right? By not do that, they need to get hundreds of millions of word pairs. You know of one language compare with the corresponding other. Hundreds of millions of them. They say, well, I'm going to get all these word pairs. Someone creative thought of a willing source and a huge, it was a United Nations. You see? So sometimes you think you don't have the right data with you, but there might be another source and a willing one that could give you that data, right? The second one has to do with, there was the sometimes you may just have to generate that data. Interesting one, we had an autonomous car customer that collects all these data from their their cars, right? Massive amounts of data, lots of sensors, collect lots of data. And, you know, but sometimes they don't have the data they need even after collection. For example, they may have collected the data with a car in fine weather and collected the car driving on this highway in rain and also in snow. But never had the opportunity to collect the car in hill because that's a rare occurrence. So instead of waiting for a time where the car can drive in hill, they build a simulation by having the car collected in snow and simulated him. So these are some of the examples where we have customers working to overcome barriers, right? You have barriers that is associated. In fact, that data silo, they federated it. Virus associated with data, that's tough to get at. They just took the hard road, right? And sometimes thirdly, you just have to be creative to get the right data you need. >> Wow! I tell you, I have about a hundred questions based on what you just said, you know? (Dave chuckles) And as a great example, the Flash Crash. In fact, Michael Lewis, wrote about this in his book, the Flash Boys. And essentially, right, it was high frequency traders trying to front run the market and sending into small block trades (Dave chuckles) trying to get sort of front ended. So that's, and they chalked it up to a glitch. Like you said, for months, nobody really knew what it was. So technology got us into this problem. (Dave chuckles) I guess my question is can technology help us get out of the problem? And that maybe is where AI fits in? >> Yes, yes. In fact, a lot of analytics work went in to go back to the raw data that is highly dispersed from different sources, right? Assembled them to see if you can find a material trend, right? You can see lots of trends, right? Like, no, we, if humans look at things that we tend to see patterns in Clouds, right? So sometimes you need to apply statistical analysis math to be sure that what the model is seeing is real, right? And that required, well, that's one area. The second area is you know, when this, there are times when you just need to go through that tough approach to find the answer. Now, the issue comes to mind now is that humans put in the rules to decide what goes into a report that everybody sees. Now, in this case, before the change in the rules, right? But by the way, after the discovery, the authorities changed the rules and all shares, all trades of different any sizes it has to be reported. >> Right. >> Right, yeah? But the rule was applied, you know, I say earlier that shares under a hundred, trades under a hundred shares need not be reported. So, sometimes you just have to understand that reports were decided by humans and for understandable reasons. I mean, they probably didn't wanted a various reasons not to put everything in there. So that people could still read it in a reasonable amount of time. But we need to understand that rules were being put in by humans for the reports we read. And as such, there are times we just need to go back to the raw data. >> I want to ask you... >> Oh, it could be, that it's going to be tough, yeah. >> Yeah, I want to ask you a question about AI as obviously it's in your title and it's something you know a lot about but. And I'm going to make a statement, you tell me if it's on point or off point. So seems that most of the AI going on in the enterprise is modeling data science applied to, you know, troves of data. But there's also a lot of AI going on in consumer. Whether it's, you know, fingerprint technology or facial recognition or natural language processing. Well, two part question will the consumer market, as it has so often in the enterprise sort of inform us is sort of first part. And then, there'll be a shift from sort of modeling if you will to more, you mentioned the autonomous vehicles, more AI inferencing in real time, especially with the Edge. Could you help us understand that better? >> Yeah, this is a great question, right? There are three stages to just simplify. I mean, you know, it's probably more sophisticated than that. But let's just simplify that three stages, right? To building an AI system that ultimately can predict, make a prediction, right? Or to assist you in decision-making. I have an outcome. So you start with the data, massive amounts of data that you have to decide what to feed the machine with. So you feed the machine with this massive chunk of data, and the machine starts to evolve a model based on all the data it's seeing. It starts to evolve, right? To a point that using a test set of data that you have separately kept aside that you know the answer for. Then you test the model, you know? After you've trained it with all that data to see whether its prediction accuracy is high enough. And once you are satisfied with it, you then deploy the model to make the decision. And that's the inference, right? So a lot of times, depending on what we are focusing on, we in data science are, are we working hard on assembling the right data to feed the machine with? That's the data preparation organization work. And then after which you build your models you have to pick the right models for the decisions and prediction you need to make. You pick the right models. And then you start feeding the data with it. Sometimes you pick one model and a prediction isn't that robust. It is good, but then it is not consistent, right? Now what you do is you try another model. So sometimes it gets keep trying different models until you get the right kind, yeah? That gives you a good robust decision-making and prediction. Now, after which, if it's tested well, QA, you will then take that model and deploy it at the Edge. Yeah, and then at the Edge is essentially just looking at new data, applying it to the model that you have trained. And then that model will give you a prediction or a decision, right? So it is these three stages, yeah. But more and more, your question reminds me that more and more people are thinking as the Edge become more and more powerful. Can you also do learning at the Edge? >> Right. >> That's the reason why we spoke about Swarm Learning the last time. Learning at the Edge as a Swarm, right? Because maybe individually, they may not have enough power to do so. But as a Swarm, they may. >> Is that learning from the Edge or learning at the Edge? In other words, is that... >> Yes. >> Yeah. You do understand my question. >> Yes. >> Yeah. (Dave chuckles) >> That's a great question. That's a great question, right? So the quick answer is learning at the Edge, right? And also from the Edge, but the main goal, right? The goal is to learn at the Edge so that you don't have to move the data that Edge sees first back to the Cloud or the Call to do the learning. Because that would be the reason, one of the main reasons why you want to learn at the Edge. Right? So that you don't need to have to send all that data back and assemble it back from all the different Edge devices. Assemble it back to the Cloud Site to do the learning, right? Some on you can learn it and keep the data at the Edge and learn at that point, yeah. >> And then maybe only selectively send. >> Yeah. >> The autonomous vehicle, example you gave is great. 'Cause maybe they're, you know, there may be only persisting. They're not persisting data that is an inclement weather, or when a deer runs across the front. And then maybe they do that and then they send that smaller data setback and maybe that's where it's modeling done but the rest can be done at the Edge. It's a new world that's coming through. Let me ask you a question. Is there a limit to what data should be collected and how it should be collected? >> That's a great question again, yeah. Well, today full of these insightful questions. (Dr. Eng chuckles) That actually touches on the the second challenge, right? How do we, in order to thrive in this new age of insight? The second challenge is our future challenge, right? What do we do for our future? And in there is the statement we make is we have to focus on collecting data strategically for the future of our enterprise. And within that, I talked about what to collect, right? When to organize it when you collect? And then where will your data be going forward that you are collecting from? So what, when, and where? For what data to collect? That was the question you asked, it's a question that different industries have to ask themselves because it will vary, right? Let me give you the, you use the autonomous car example. Let me use that. And we do have this customer collecting massive amounts of data. You know, we're talking about 10 petabytes a day from a fleet of their cars. And these are not production autonomous cars, right? These are training autonomous cars, collecting data so they can train and eventually deploy commercial cars, right? Also this data collection cars, they collect 10, as a fleet of them collect 10 petabytes a day. And then when they came to us, building a storage system you know, to store all of that data, they realized they don't want to afford to store all of it. Now here comes the dilemma, right? What should I, after I spent so much effort building all this cars and sensors and collecting data, I've now decide what to delete. That's a dilemma, right? Now in working with them on this process of trimming down what they collected, you know, I'm constantly reminded of the 60s and 70s, right? To remind myself 60s and 70s, we called a large part of our DNA, junk DNA. >> Yeah. (Dave chuckles) >> Ah! Today, we realized that a large part of that what we call junk has function as valuable function. They are not genes but they regulate the function of genes. You know? So what's junk in yesterday could be valuable today. Or what's junk today could be valuable tomorrow, right? So, there's this tension going on, right? Between you deciding not wanting to afford to store everything that you can get your hands on. But on the other hand, you worry, you ignore the wrong ones, right? You can see this tension in our customers, right? And then it depends on industry here, right? In healthcare they say, I have no choice. I want it all, right? Oh, one very insightful point brought up by one healthcare provider that really touched me was you know, we don't only care. Of course we care a lot. We care a lot about the people we are caring for, right? But who also care for the people we are not caring for? How do we find them? >> Uh-huh. >> Right, and that definitely, they did not just need to collect data that they have with from their patients. They also need to reach out, right? To outside data so that they can figure out who they are not caring for, right? So they want it all. So I asked them, so what do you do with funding if you want it all? They say they have no choice but to figure out a way to fund it and perhaps monetization of what they have now is the way to come around and fund that. Of course, they also come back to us rightfully, that you know we have to then work out a way to help them build a system, you know? So that's healthcare, right? And if you go to other industries like banking, they say they can afford to keep them all. >> Yeah. >> But they are regulated, seemed like healthcare, they are regulated as to privacy and such like. So many examples different industries having different needs but different approaches to what they collect. But there is this constant tension between you perhaps deciding not wanting to fund all of that, all that you can install, right? But on the other hand, you know if you kind of don't want to afford it and decide not to start some. Maybe those some become highly valuable in the future, right? (Dr. Eng chuckles) You worry. >> Well, we can make some assumptions about the future. Can't we? I mean, we know there's going to be a lot more data than we've ever seen before. We know that. We know, well, not withstanding supply constraints and things like NAND. We know the prices of storage is going to continue to decline. We also know and not a lot of people are really talking about this, but the processing power, but the says, Moore's law is dead. Okay, it's waning, but the processing power when you combine the CPUs and NPUs, and GPUs and accelerators and so forth actually is increasing. And so when you think about these use cases at the Edge you're going to have much more processing power. You're going to have cheaper storage and it's going to be less expensive processing. And so as an AI practitioner, what can you do with that? >> Yeah, it's a highly, again, another insightful question that we touched on our Keynote. And that goes up to the why, uh, to the where? Where will your data be? Right? We have one estimate that says that by next year there will be 55 billion connected devices out there, right? 55 billion, right? What's the population of the world? Well, of the other 10 billion? But this thing is 55 billion. (Dave chuckles) Right? And many of them, most of them can collect data. So what do you do? Right? So the amount of data that's going to come in, it's going to way exceed, right? Drop in storage costs are increasing compute power. >> Right. >> Right. So what's the answer, right? So the answer must be knowing that we don't, and even a drop in price and increase in bandwidth, it will overwhelm the, 5G, it will overwhelm 5G, right? Given the amount of 55 billion of them collecting. So the answer must be that there needs to be a balance between you needing to bring all of that data from the 55 billion devices of the data back to a central, as a bunch of central cost. Because you may not be able to afford to do that. Firstly bandwidth, even with 5G and as the, when you'll still be too expensive given the number of devices out there. You know given storage costs dropping is still be too expensive to try and install them all. So the answer must be to start, at least to mitigate from to, some leave most a lot of the data out there, right? And only send back the pertinent ones, as you said before. But then if you did that then how are we going to do machine learning at the Core and the Cloud Site, if you don't have all the data? You want rich data to train with, right? Sometimes you want to mix up the positive type data and the negative type data. So you can train the machine in a more balanced way. So the answer must be eventually, right? As we move forward with these huge number of devices all at the Edge to do machine learning at the Edge. Today we don't even have power, right? The Edge typically is characterized by a lower energy capability and therefore lower compute power. But soon, you know? Even with low energy, they can do more with compute power improving in energy efficiency, right? So learning at the Edge, today we do inference at the Edge. So we data, model, deploy and you do inference there is. That's what we do today. But more and more, I believe given a massive amount of data at the Edge, you have to start doing machine learning at the Edge. And when you don't have enough power then you aggregate multiple devices, compute power into a Swarm and learn as a Swarm, yeah. >> Oh, interesting. So now of course, if I were sitting and fly on the wall and the HPE board meeting I said, okay, HPE is a leading provider of compute. How do you take advantage of that? I mean, we're going, I know it's future but you must be thinking about that and participating in those markets. I know today you are, you have, you know, Edge line and other products. But there's, it seems to me that it's not the general purpose that we've known in the past. It's a new type of specialized computing. How are you thinking about participating in that opportunity for the customers? >> Hmm, the wall will have to have a balance, right? Where today the default, well, the more common mode is to collect the data from the Edge and train at some centralized location or number of centralized location. Going forward, given the proliferation of the Edge devices, we'll need a balance, we need both. We need capability at the Cloud Site, right? And it has to be hybrid. And then we need capability on the Edge side that we need to build systems that on one hand is an Edge adapter, right? Meaning they environmentally adapted because the Edge differently are on it, a lot of times on the outside. They need to be packaging adapted and also power adapted, right? Because typically many of these devices are battery powered. Right? So you have to build systems that adapts to it. But at the same time, they must not be custom. That's my belief. It must be using standard processes and standard operating system so that they can run a rich set of applications. So yes, that's also the insight for that Antonio announced in 2018. For the next four years from 2018, right? $4 billion invested to strengthen our Edge portfolio. >> Uh-huh. >> Edge product lines. >> Right. >> Uh-huh, Edge solutions. >> I could, Doctor Goh, I could go on for hours with you. You're just such a great guest. Let's close. What are you most excited about in the future of, certainly HPE, but the industry in general? >> Yeah, I think the excitement is the customers, right? The diversity of customers and the diversity in the way they have approached different problems of data strategy. So the excitement is around data strategy, right? Just like, you know, the statement made for us was so was profound, right? And Antonio said, we are in the age of insight powered by data. That's the first line, right? The line that comes after that is as such we are becoming more and more data centric with data that currency. Now the next step is even more profound. That is, you know, we are going as far as saying that, you know, data should not be treated as cost anymore. No, right? But instead as an investment in a new asset class called data with value on our balance sheet. This is a step change, right? Right, in thinking that is going to change the way we look at data, the way we value it. So that's a statement. (Dr. Eng chuckles) This is the exciting thing, because for me a CTO of AI, right? A machine is only as intelligent as the data you feed it with. Data is a source of the machine learning to be intelligent. Right? (Dr. Eng chuckles) So, that's why when the people start to value data, right? And say that it is an investment when we collect it it is very positive for AI. Because an AI system gets intelligent, get more intelligence because it has huge amounts of data and a diversity of data. >> Yeah. >> So it'd be great, if the community values data. >> Well, you certainly see it in the valuations of many companies these days. And I think increasingly you see it on the income statement. You know data products and people monetizing data services. And yeah, maybe eventually you'll see it in the balance sheet. I know Doug Laney, when he was at Gartner Group, wrote a book about this and a lot of people are thinking about it. That's a big change, isn't it? >> Yeah, yeah. >> Dr. Goh... (Dave chuckles) >> The question is the process and methods in valuation. Right? >> Yeah, right. >> But I believe we will get there. We need to get started. And then we'll get there. I believe, yeah. >> Doctor Goh, it's always my pleasure. >> And then the AI will benefit greatly from it. >> Oh, yeah, no doubt. People will better understand how to align, you know some of these technology investments. Dr. Goh, great to see you again. Thanks so much for coming back in theCUBE. It's been a real pleasure. >> Yes, a system is only as smart as the data you feed it with. (Dave chuckles) (Dr. Eng laughs) >> Excellent. We'll leave it there. Thank you for spending some time with us and keep it right there for more great interviews from HPE Discover 21. This is Dave Vellante for theCUBE, the leader in Enterprise Tech Coverage. We'll be right back. (upbeat music)

>>From around the globe. It's the cube with digital coverage of AWS reinvent 2020, sponsored by Intel and AWS. >>Welcome back to the queue. It's virtual coverage of Avis reinvent 2020 I'm John furry, your host. Um, this is a cute virtual we're here. Not in, in remote. We're not in person this year, so we're doing the remote interviews. And then this segment is going to build on the quantum conversation we had last year, Richard moles, general manager of Amazon bracket and aid was quantum computing and Fernando Brandao head of quantum algorithms at AWS and Brent professor of theoretical physics at Caltech. Fernando, thanks for coming on, Richard. Thanks for joining us. >>You're welcome to be here. >>So, Fernando, first of all, love your title, quantum algorithms. That's the coolest title I've heard so far and you're pretty smart because you're a theoretical professor of physics at Caltech. So, um, which I'd never be able to get into, but I wish I could get into there someday, but, uh, thanks for coming on. Um, quantum has been quite the rage and you know, there's a lot of people talking about it. Um, it's not ready for prime time. Some say it's moving faster than others, but where are we on quantum right now? What are, what are you, what are you seeing Fernanda where the quantum, where are peg us in the evolution of, of, uh, where we are? >>Um, yeah, what quantum, uh, it's an emerging and rapidly developing fields. Uh, but we are see where are you on, uh, both in terms of, uh, hardware development and in terms of identifying the most impactful use cases of one company. Uh, so, so it's, it's, it's early days for everyone and, and we have like, uh, different players and different technologies that are being sport. And I think it's, it's, it's early, but it's exciting time to be doing quantum computing. And, uh, and it's very interesting to see the interest in industry growing and, and customers. Uh, for example, Casa from AWS, uh, being, uh, being willing to take part in this journey with us in developmental technology. >>Awesome. Richard, last year we talked to bill Vass about this and he was, you know, he set expectations really well, I thought, but it was pretty much in classic Amazonian way. You know, it makes the announcement a lot of progress then makes me give us the update on your end. You guys now are shipping brackets available. What's the update on your end and Verner mentioned in his keynote this week >> as well. Yeah, it was a, it was great until I was really looking at your interview with bill. It was, uh, that was when we launched the launch the service a year ago, almost exactly a year ago this week. And we've come a long way. So as you mentioned, we've, uh, we've, uh, we've gone to general availability with the service now that that happened in August. So now a customer can kind of look into the, uh, to the bracket console and, uh, installed programming concept computers. You know, there's, uh, there's tremendous excitement obviously, as, as you mentioned, and Fernando mentioned, you know, quantum computers, uh, we think >>Have the potential to solve problems that are currently, uh, uh, unsolvable. Um, the goal of bracket is to fundamentally give customers the ability to, uh, to go test, uh, some of those notions to explore the technology and to just start planning for the future. You know, our goal was always to try and solve some of the problems that customers have had for, you know, gee, a decade or so now, you know, they tell us from a variety of different industries, whether it's drug discovery or financial services, whether it's energy or there's chemical engineering, machine learning, you know, th the potential for quantum computer impacts may industries could potentially be disruptive to those industries. And, uh, it's, it's essential that customers can can plan for the future, you know, build their own internal resources, become experts, hire the right staff, figure out where it might impact their business and, uh, and potentially disrupt. >>So, uh, you know, in the past they're finding it hard to, to get involved. You know, these machines are very different, different technologies building in different ways of different characteristics. Uh, the tooling is very disparate, very fragmented. Historically, it's hard for companies to get access to the machines. These tend to be, you know, owned by startups or in, you know, physics labs or universities, very difficult to get access to these things, very different commercial models. Um, and, uh, as you, as you suggested, a lot of interests, a lot of hype, a lot of claims in the industry, customers want to cut through all that. They want to understand what's real, uh, what they can do today, uh, how they can experiment and, uh, and get started. So, you know, we see bracket as a catalyst for innovation. We want to bring together end-users, um, consultants, uh, software developers, um, providers that want to host services on top of bracket, try and get the industry, you know, rubbing along them. You spoke to lots of Amazonians. I'm sure you've heard the phrase innovation flywheel, plenty of times. Um, we see the same approach that we've used successfully in IOT and robotics and machine learning and apply that same approach to content, machine learning software, to quantum computing, and to learn, to bring it together. And, uh, if we get the tooling right, and we make it easy, um, then we don't see any reason why we can't, uh, you know, rapidly try and move this industry forward. And >>It was fun areas where there's a lot of, you know, intellectual computer science, um, technology science involved in super exciting. And Amazon's supposed to some of that undifferentiated heavy. >>That's what I am, you know, it's like, >>There's a Maslow hierarchy of needs in the tech industry. You know, people say, Oh, why five people freak out when there's no wifi? You know, you can't get enough compute. Right. So, you know, um, compute is one of those things with machine learning is seeing the benefits and quantum there's so much benefits there. Um, and you guys made some announcements at, at re-invent, uh, around BRACA. Can you share just quickly share some of those updates, Richard? >>Sure. I mean, it's the way we innovate at AWS. You know, we, we start simple and we, and we build up features. We listen to customers and we learn as we go along, we try and move as quickly as possible. So since going public in, uh, in, in August, we've actually had a string of releases, uh, pretty consistent, um, delivering new features. So we try to tie not the integration with the platform. Customers have told us really very early on that they, they don't just want to play with the technology. They want to figure out how to, how to envisage a production quantum computing service, how it might look, you know, in the context of a broad cloud platform with AWS. So we've, uh, we launched some integration with, uh, other AWS capabilities around security, managing limits, quotas, tagging resources, that type of thing, things that are familiar to, uh, to, to, to current AWS users. >>Uh, we launched some new hardware. Uh, all of our partners D-Wave launched some, uh, uh, you know, a 5,000 cubit machine, uh, just in September. Uh, so we made that available on bracket the same day that they launched that hardware, which was very cool. Um, you know, we've made it, uh, we've, we've made it easier for researchers. We've been, you know, impressed how many academics and researchers have used the service, not just large corporations. Um, they want to have really deep access to these machines. They want to program these things at a low level. So we launched some features, uh, to enable them to do their research, but reinvent, we were really focused on two things, um, simulators and making it much easier to use, uh, hybrid systems systems that, uh, incorporate classical compute, traditional digital computing with quantum machinery, um, in the vein that follow some of the liens that we've seen, uh, in machine learning. >>So, uh, simulators are important. They're a very important part of, uh, learning how to use concepts, computers. They're always available 24, seven they're super convenient to use. And of course they're critical in verifying the accuracy of the results that we get from quantum hardware. When we launched the service behind free simulator for customers to help debug their circuits and experiments quickly, um, but simulating large experiments and large systems is a real challenge on classical computers. You know, it, wasn't hard on classical. Uh, then you wouldn't need a quantum computer. That's the whole point. So running large simulations, you know, is expensive in terms of resources. It's complicated. Uh, we launched a pretty powerful simulator, uh, back in August, which we thought at the time was always powerful managed. Quantum stimulates circuit handled 34 cubits, and it reinvented last week, we launched a new simulator, which actually the first managed simulator to use tensor network technology. >>And it can run up to 50 cubits. So we think is, we think is probably the most powerful, uh, managed quantum simulator on the market today. And customers can flip easily between either using real quantum hardware or either of our, uh, stimulators just by changing a line of code. Um, the other thing we launched was the ability to run these hybrid systems. You know, quantum computers will get more, no don't get onto in a moment is, uh, today's computers are very imperfect, you know, lots of errors. Um, we working, obviously the industry towards fault-tolerant machines and Fernando can talk about some research papers that were published in that area, but right now the machines are far from perfect. And, uh, and the way that we can try to squeeze as much value out of these devices today is to run them in tandem with classical systems. >>We think of the notion of a self-learning quantum algorithm, where you use a classical optimization techniques, such as we see machine learning to tweak and tune the parameters of a quantum algorithm to try and iterate and converge on the best answer and try and overcome some of these issues surrounding errors. That's a lot of moving parts to orchestrate for customers, a lot of different systems, a lot of different programming techniques. And we wanted to make that much easier. We've been impressed with a, a, an open projects, been around for a couple of years, uh, called penny lane after the Beatles song. And, um, so we wanted to double down on that. We were getting a lot of positive feedback from customers about the penny lane talk it, so we decided to, uh, uh, make it a first class citizen on bracket, make it available as a native feature, uh, in our, uh, in our Jupiter notebooks and our tutorials learning examples, um, that open source project has very similar, um, guiding principles that we do, you know, it's open, it's cross platform, it's technology agnostic, and we thought he was a great fit to the service. >>So we, uh, we announced that and made it available to customers and, uh, and, and, uh, already getting great feedback. So, uh, you know, finishing the finishing the year strongly, I think, um, looking forward to 2021, you know, looking forward to some really cool technology it's on the horizon, uh, from a hardware point of view, making it easy to use, um, you know, and always, obviously trying to work back from customer problems. And so congratulations on the success. I'm sure it's not hard to hire people interested, at least finding qualified people it'd be different, but, you know, sign me up. I love quantum great people, Fernando real quick, understanding the relationship with Caltech unique to Amazon. Um, tell us how that fits into the, into this, >>Uh, right. John S no, as I was saying, it's it's early days, uh, for, for quantum computing, uh, and to make progress, uh, in abreast, uh, put together a team of experts, right. To work both on, on find new use cases of quantum computing and also, uh, building more powerful, uh, quantum hardware. Uh, so the AWS center for quantum computing is based at Caltech. Uh, and, and this comes from the belief of AWS that, uh, in quantum computing is key to, uh, to keep close, to stay close of like fresh ideas and to the latest scientific developments. Right. And Caltech is if you're near one computing. So what's the ideal place for doing that? Uh, so in the center, we, we put together researchers and engineers, uh, from computer science, physics, and other subjects, uh, from Amazon, but also from all the academic institutions, uh, of course some context, but we also have Stanford and university of Chicago, uh, among others. So we broke wrongs, uh, in the beauty for AWS and for quantum computer in the summer, uh, and under construction right now. Uh, but, uh, as we speak, John, the team is busy, uh, uh, you know, getting stuff in, in temporary lab space that we have at cottage. >>Awesome. Great. And real quick, I know we've got some time pressure here, but you published some new research, give a quick a plug for the new research. Tell us about that. >>Um, right. So, so, you know, as part of the effort or the integration for one company, uh, we are developing a new cubix, uh, which we choose a combination of acoustic and electric components. So this kind of hybrid Aquacel execute, it has the promise for a much smaller footprint, think about like a few microliters and much longer storage times, like up to settlements, uh, which, which is a big improvement over the scale of the arts sort of writing all export based cubits, but that's not the whole story, right? On six, if you have a good security should make good use of it. Uh, so what we did in this paper, they were just put out, uh, is, is a proposal for an architecture of how to build a scalable quantum computer using these cubits. So we found from our analysis that we can get more than a 10 X overheads in the resources required from URI, a universal thought around quantum computer. >>Uh, so what are these resources? This is like a smaller number of physical cubits. Uh, this is a smaller footprint is, uh, fewer control lines in like a smaller approach and a consistent, right. And, and these are all like, uh, I think this is a solid contribution. Uh, no, it's a theoretical analysis, right? So, so the, uh, the experimental development has to come, but I think this is a solid contribution in the big challenge of scaling up this quantum systems. Uh, so, so, so John, as we speak like, uh, data blessed in the, for quantum computing is, uh, working on the experimental development of this, uh, a highly adequacy architecture, but we also keep exploring other promising ways of doing scalable quantum computers and eventually, uh, to bring a more powerful computer resources to AWS customers. >>It's kind of like machine learning and data science, the smartest people work on it. Then you democratize that. I can see where this is going. Um, Richard real quick, um, for people who want to get involved and participate or consume, what do they do? Give us the playbook real quick. Uh, so simple, just go to the AWS console and kind of log onto the, to the bracket, uh, bracket console, jump in, you know, uh, create, um, create a Jupiter notebook, pull down some of our sample, uh, applications run through the notebook and program a quantum computer. It's literally that simple. There's plenty of tutorials. It's easy to get started, you know, classic cloud style right now from commitment. Jump in, start simple, get going. We want you to go quantum. You can't go back, go quantum. You can't go back to regular computing. I think people will be running concert classical systems in parallel for quite some time. So yeah, this is the, this is definitely not a one way door. You know, you go explore quantum computing and see how it fits into, uh, >>You know, into the, into solving some of the problems that you wanted to solve in the future. But definitely this is not a replacement technology. This is a complimentary technology. >>It's great. It's a great innovation. It's kind of intoxicating technically to get, think about the benefits Fernando, Richard, thanks for coming on. It's really exciting. I'm looking forward to keeping up keeping track of the progress. Thanks for coming on the cube coverage of reinvent, quantum computing going the next level coexisting building on top of the shoulders of other giant technologies. This is where the computing wave is going. It's different. It's impacting people's lives. This is the cube coverage of re-invent. Thanks for watching.

>> Hello everyone. My name is Zoltan Toroczkai. I am from University of Notre Dame, 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 the Redefine Lab and Yoshian collaborators on the topics of this work. So today I'll briefly talk about, our attempt to understand, the fundamental limits of analog, continuous-time computing at least from the point of view of Boolean Satisfiability problem-solving using ordinary differential equations. But I think the issues that we raise during this occasion actually apply to other approaches, analog approaches as well, until to other problems as well. I think everyone here, knows what Boolean Satisfiability problems are. You have N Boolean variables, you have M clauses. Each a disjunction of K literals. Literal is a variable or it's negation. And the goal is to find an assignment to the variable such that all the clauses are true. This is a decision type problem from the NP class, which means you can check in polynomial time for satisfiability of any assignment. And the 3-SAT is NP-complete with K, 3 or larger, which means an efficient 3-SAT solver, (clears throat) implies an efficient solver for all the problems in the NP clause because all the problems in the NP clause can be reduced in polynomial time to 3-SAT. As a matter of fact you can, reduce the NP-complete problems into each other. You can go from 3-SAT to Set Packing or to Maximum Independent Set which is the set packing in graph theoretic notions or terms, to the ising graph SAT problem decision version. This is useful when you are comparing different approaches or working on different kinds of problems. When not all the clauses can be satisfied, you're looking at the optimization version of SAT, called Max-SAT and the goal here is to find the assignment that satisfies the maximum number of clauses, and this is from the NP-hard class. In terms of applications, if we had an efficient SAT solver, or NP-complete problem solver, it would literally, positively influence thousands of problems in applications in industry and science. I'm not going to read this. But this of course gives us some motivation, to work on these kind of problems. Now, our approach to SAT solving, involves embedding the problem in a continuous space, and you use all these to do that. So instead of working zeros and ones, we work with minus one and plus ones, and if we allow the corresponding variables, to change continuously between the two bounds, we formulate the problem with the help of a Clause Matrix. If, if a clause does not contain a variable or its negation, the corresponding matrix element is zero. If it contains the variable in positive form it's one. If it contains the variable in negated form, it's negative one. And now we use this to formulate these products, called clause violation functions, one for every clause, which rarely continues between zero and one and beyond zero if and only if the clause itself is true. Then we form... We define, also define the dynamics, search dynamics in this and the M-dimensional hypercube, where the search happens and if there exists solutions they're sitting in some of the corners of this hypercube. So we define this energy, potential or landscape function as shown here in a way that it, this is zero if and only if all the clauses, all the Kms are zero. All the clauses are satisfied, keeping these auxiliary variables, Ams always positive. And therefore what we do here is a dynamics that is essentially a gradient descent on this potential energy landscape. If you are to keep all the Ams constant then it would get stuck in some local minimum. However what do you do here is, we couple it with the dynamics. We couple it with the clause violation functions as shown here. And if you didn't have these Am here, just had just the Kms, for example, you have essentially, both case you have a positive feedback. You have a decreasing variable, but in that case you'll still get stuck, would still behave... We'll still find solutions better than the constant version or still would get stuck. Only when we put here this Am, which makes them dynamics in this variable exponential like, only then it keeps searching until it finds a solution. And there's a reason for that, that I'm not going to talk about here, but essentially boils down to performing a gradient descent on a globally time-varying landscape. And, and, and this is what works. Now, I'm going to talk about the good or bad, and maybe the ugly. This is, 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 solution in it, then the number of trajectories in it, the case exponentially quickly and the decay rate is a characteristic, invariant characteristic of the dynamics itself with the dynamical systems called the escape rate. The inverse of that is the timescale in which you find solutions by this dynamical system. And you can see here some trajectories, they are curved because it's, it's not linear but it's transiently curved to give, if there are solutions of course, we could see eventually, it does lead to the solutions. Now, in terms of performance, here what you show, for a bunch of, constraint densities, defined by, M over N, the ratio between clauses to variables, for random SAT problems, is random 3-SAT problems. And they, they, as, as function of N, and we look at, monitor the wall time, the wall clock time, and it, it behaves quite well, it behaves as a, as a polynomialy, until you actually hit, or 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 of the analog continuous-time t, because that seems to be a polynomial. And the way we show that, is we can see the random K-SAT or random 3-SAT for a fixed constraint density. And we here, what you show here is at the, right at the threshold where it's really hard. And, (clears throat) we monitor the fraction of problems that we have not been able to solve it. We select thousands of problems at that cost rate ratio and we solve them with our algorithm, and we monitor the fraction of problems that have not yet been solved by continuous-time t. And these, as you see these decays exponentially in different decay rates for different system sizes and in this spot shows that this decay rate behaves polynomialy. or actually as a power law. So if you combine these two, you find that the time needed to solve all problems, except maybe appeared fraction of them, scales polynomialy with problem size. So you have polynomial continuous-time complexity. And this is also true, for other types of very hard constraints of the SAT problem such as exact color, because you can always transform them into 3-SAT as we discussed before, Ramsay coloring and, and on these problems, even algorithms like a survey propagation wheel will fail. But this doesn't mean that P equals NP because what you have, first of all, if you were to implement these equations in a device, whose behavior is described by these ODEs, then of course, t the continuous-time variable, becomes a physical wall clock time. And that would be polynomialy scaling but you have other variables, auxiliary variables, which fluctuate in an exponential manner. So if they represent currents or voltages in your realization and it would be an exponential cost algorithm. But this is some kind of trade between time and energy while I know how to generate energy or I don't know how to generate time but I know how to generate energy so it could be useful. But there's other issues as well, especially if you're trying to do this on a 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 these in GPU, you can, then you can get an order of two magnitude speedup, and you can also modify this, to solve Max-SAT problems quite efficiently, we are competitive with the best, heuristics solvers, this is all the problems in 2016, Max-SAT competition. So, so this, this, this is definitely, this is like a good approach, but there's of course, interesting limitations, I would say interesting, because it kind of makes you think about what it needs and how you can explore this, these observations in understanding better analog continuous-time complexity. If you monitor the discrete number, the number of discrete steps, done by the Runge Kutta integrator, and you solve this on a digital machine. You're using some kind of integrator, and, you know, using the same approach, but now you measure the number of problems you haven't solved, by a given number of discrete steps taken by the integrator. You find out, you have exponential discrete-time complexity. And of course, this is a problem. And if you look closely, what happens, even though the analog mathematical trajectory, that's the red curve here, if you monitor what happens in discrete time, the integrator fluctuates very little. So this is like you know, third or four digits precision, but fluctuates like crazy. So it really is like the integration freezes out, and this is because of the phenomenon of stiffness that I'll talk a little bit, more about a little bit later. So you know, it may look like an integration issue on your digital machines that you could improve and you could definitely improve, but actually the issue is bigger than that. It's, it's deeper than that because on a digital machine there is no time energy conversion. So the auxiliary variables are efficiently represented in a digital machine, so there's no exponential fluctuating current or voltage in your computer when you do this. So if e is not equal NP, then the exponential time complexity or exponential cost complexity has to hit you somewhere. And this is how. 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. Analog devices can be orders of magnitude faster, but they also suffer from their own problems because P not equal NP affects that clause of followers as well. So, indeed if you look at other systems, like Coherent Ising Machine with Measurement-Feedback, or Polariton Condensate Graphs or Oscillator Networks, they all hinge on some kind of, our ability to control real variables with arbitrarily high precision, and Oscillator Networks, you want to read out arbitrarily close frequencies. In case of CIMs, we require identical analog amplitudes which is hard to keep and they kind of fluctuate away from one another, shift away from one another, And, and if you control that, of course, then you can control the performance. So, actually one can ask if whether or not this is a universal bottleneck, and it seems so, as I will argue next. We can recall a fundamental result by A. Schönhage, Graham Schönhage from 1978 who says that, it's a purely computer science proof, that, "If you are able to compute, "the addition, multiplication, division "of real variables with infinite precision then, "you could solve NP-complete problems in polynomial time." He doesn't actually propose a solid work, he just shows mathematically that this will be the case. Now, of course, in real world, you have loss of precision. So the next question is, "How does that affect the computation of our problems?" This is what we are after. Loss of precision means information loss or entropy production. So what we are really looking at, the relationship between hardness and cost of computing of a problem. (clears throat) And according to Sean Harget, there is 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 achievable that's on the right-hand side. You know, there's always going to be some information loss, some entropy generation that could keep you away from, possibly from polynomial time. So this is what we'd like to understand. And this information loss, the source of this is not just noise, as, as I will argue in any physical system, but it's also of algorithmic nature. So that is a questionable area or, or approach, but Schönhage's result is purely theoretical, no actual solver is proposed. So we can ask, you know, just theoretically, out of curiosity, "Would in principle be such solvers?" Because he's not proposing a solver. In such properties in principle, if you were to look mathematically, precisely what that solver does, would have the right properties. And I argue, yes, I don't have a mathematical proof but I have some arguments that this would be the case. And this is the case for actually our sitdia solver, that if you could calculate, it's subjectivity in a loss this way, then it would be... Would solve NP-complete problems in polynomial continuous-time. Now, as a matter of fact, this is a bit more difficult question because time in all these can be re-scaled however you want. So what Bournez says, that you actually have to measure the length of the trajectory which is an invariant of the dynamical system or the property of the dynamical system, not of it's parametrization. And we did that. So Shubha Kharel my student did that, by first improving on the stiffness of the problem of the integrations using the implicit solvers and some smart tricks, such that you actually are closer to the actual trajectory and using the same approach to know, what fraction of problems you can solve. We did not give a length of the trajectory, you find that it is polynomialy scaling with the problem size. So we have polynomial scale complexity. That means that our solver is both poly-length, and as it is defined, it's also poly-time analog solver. But if you look at as a discrete algorithm, which will measure the discrete steps on a digital machine, it is an exponential solver, and the reason is because of all this stiffness. So every integrator has to truncate, digitize and truncate the equations. And what it has to do is to keep the integration within this so-called Stimpy TD gen for, for that scheme. And you have to keep this product within Eigenvalues of the Jacobian and the step size within this region, if you use explicit methods, you want to stay within this region. But what happens, that some of the eigenvalues grow fast for stiff problems, and then you're, you're forced to reduce that t, so the product stays in this bounded domain, which means that now you have to, we are forced to take smaller and smaller time steps, so you're, you're freezing out the integration and what I will show you, that's the case. Now you can move to implicit solvers, which is a new trick, in this case, your stability domain is actually on the outside, but what happens in this case, is some of the eigenvalues of the Jacobian, also for this instant start to move to zero, as they are moving to zero, they are going to enter this instability region. So your solver is going to try to keep it out, so it's going to increase the delta t, but if you increase that t, you increase the truncation errors, so you get randomized in the large search space. So it's, it's really not, not willing to work out. Now, one can sort of, introduce a theory or a language to discuss computational, analog computational complexity, using the language from dynamical systems theory. But basically I don't have time to go into this but you have for hard problems, the chaotic object the chaotic saddle in the middle of the search space somewhere, and that dictates how the dynamics happens and invariant properties of the dynamics, of course, of that saddle is what determines performance and many things. So an important measure that we find that, is also helpful in describing, this analog complexity is the so-called Kolmogorov or metric entropy. And basically what this does in an intuitive way, is to describe the rate at which the uncertainty, containing the insignificant digits of a trajectory in the back, they flow towards the significant ones, as you lose information because of errors being, grown or, or or, or developed into larger errors in an exponential, at an exponential rate because you have positive Lyapunov exponents. But this is an invariant property. It's the property of the set of all these, not how you compute them. And it's really the intrinsic rate of accuracy loss of a dynamical system. As I said that you have in such a high dimensional dynamical system, you have positive and negative Lyapunov exponents, as many as the total is the dimension of the space and user dimension, the number of unstable manufactured dimensions and assets now more stable many forms dimensions. And there's an interesting and I think important Pesin equality, equality called the Pesin equality, that connects the information theoretic, as per the rate of information loss with the geometric data each trajectory separate minus cut part which is the escape rate that I already talked about. Now, one can actually prove a simple theorem strike back of the calculation. The idea here is that, you know the rate at which the largest rate at which the closely started trajectory, separate from one another. So now you can say that, that is fine, as long as my trajectory finds the solution, before the trajectory separate too quickly. In that case, I can have the hope, that if I start from some region of the face space, several closely started trajectories, they kind of go into the same solution over time 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 smaller number, but it depends on the N, dependence of the exponent right here, which combines information loss rate and the solution time performance. So these, if these exponent here or there, has a large independence, so even a linear independence, then you really have to start trajectories, exponentially closer to one another, in order to end up in the same order. So this is sort of like the, the direction that you are going into, and this formulation is applicable to, to all dynamical systems, deterministic dynamical systems. (clears throat) And I think we can expand this further because the, there is a way of getting the expression for the escape rates in terms of N the number of variables from cycle expansions, that I don't have time to talk about, but it's kind of like a program that you can try to pursue. And this is it. So uh, uh... The conclusions, I think are self-explanatory. I think there is a lot of future in, in analog continuous-time computing. They can be efficient by orders of magnitude than digital ones in solving NP-hard problems, because first of all, many of the systems lack of von Neumann bottleneck, there's parallelism involved and you can also have a larger spectrum of continuous-time dynamical algorithms than discrete ones. And, and, you know, but we also have to be mindful of what are the possibilities, what are the limits? And one, one open question, if any important open question is you know, "What are these limits? "Is there some kind of no-go theorem that tells you that, "you can never perform better than this limit "or, or that limit?" And I think that's, that's the exciting part to, to derive these, these limits and to get to an understanding about what's possible in this, in this area. Thank you.

>> Narrator: Live from Stanford University in Palo Alto, California, it's theCube, covering Women in Data Science conference 2018. Brought to you by Stanford. >> Welcome back to theCube. I'm Lisa Martin and we're live at Stanford University, the third annual Women in Data Science conference, WiDS. This is a great one day technical event with keynote speakers, with technical vision tracks, career panel and some very inspiring leaders. It's also expected to reach over 100,000 people today, which is incredible. So we're very fortunate to be joined by our next guest, Ruth Marinshaw, the CTO for Research Computing at Stanford University. Welcome to theCube, Ruth. >> Thank you. It's an honor to be here. >> It's great to have you here. You've been in this role as CTO for Research Computing at Stanford for nearly six years. >> That's correct. I came here after about 25 years at the University of North Carolina Chapel Hill. >> So tell us a little bit about what you do in terms of the services that you support to the Institute for Computational Mathematics and Engineering. >> So our team and we're about 17 now supports systems, file systems storage, databases, software across the university to support computational and data intensive science. So ICME, being really the home of computational science education at Stanford from a degree perspective, is a close partner with us. We help them with training opportunities. We try to do some collaborative planning, event promotion, sharing of ideas. We have joint office hours where we can provide system support. Margot's graduate students and data scientists can provide algorithmic support to some thousands of users across the campus, about 500 faculty. >> Wow. So this is the third year for WiDS, your third year here. >> Ruth: It is. >> When you spoke with Margot Gerritsen, who's going to be joining us later today, about the idea for WiDS, what were some of your thoughts about that? Did you expect it to make as big of >> Ruth: No. >> an impact? >> No, no people have been talking about this data tsunami and the rise of big data, literally for 10 years, but actually it arrived. This is the world we live in, data everywhere, that data deluge that had been foreseen or promised or feared was really there. And so when Margot had the idea to start WiDS, I actually thought what a nice campus event. There are women all over Stanford, across this disciplines who are engaged in data science and more who should. Stanford, if anything, is known for its interdisciplinary research and data science is one of those fields that really crosses the schools and the disciplines. So I thought, what a great way to bring women together at Stanford. I clearly did not expect that it would turn into this global phenomenon. >> That is exactly. I love that word, it is a phenomenon. It's a movement. They're expecting, there's, I said over a 100,000 participants today, at more than 150 regional events. I think that number will go up. >> Ruth: Yes. >> During the day. And more than 50 countries. >> Ruth: Yes. >> But it shows, even in three years, not only is there a need for this, there's a demand for it. That last year, I think it was upwards of 75,000 people. To make that massive of a jump in one year and global impact, is huge. But it also speaks to some of the things that Margot and her team have said. It may have been comfortable as one of or the only woman at a boardroom table, but maybe there are others that aren't comfortable and how do we help them >> Ruth: Exactly. >> and inspire them and inspire the next generation. >> Exactly. I think it's a really very powerful statement and demonstration of the importance of community and building technical teams in making, as you said, people comfortable and feeling like they're not alone. We see what 100,000 women maybe joining in internationally over this week for these events. That's such a small fraction compared to what the need probably is to what the hunger probably is. And as Margot said, we're a room full of women here today, but we're still such a minority in the industry, in the field. >> Yes. So you mentioned, you've been here at Stanford for over five years, but you were at Chapel Hill before. >> Ruth: Yes. >> Tell me a little bit about your career path in the STEM field. What was your inspiration all those years ago to study this? >> My background is actually computational social sciences. >> Lisa: Oh interesting. >> And so from an undergraduate and graduate perspective and this was the dawn of western civilization, long ago, not quite that long (Lisa laughs) but long ago and even then, I was drawn to programming and data analysis and data sort of discovery. I as a graduate student and then for a career worked at a demographic research center at UNC Chapel Hill, where firsthand you did data science, you did original data collection and data analysis, data manipulation, interpretation. And then parlayed that into more of a technical role, learning more programming languages, computer hardware, software systems and the like. And went on to find that this was really my love, was technology. And it's so exciting to be here at Stanford from that perspective because this is the birthplace of many technologies and again, referencing the interdisciplinary nature of work here, we have some of the best data scientists in the world. We have some of the best statisticians and algorithm developers and social scientists, humanists, who together can really make a difference in solving, using big data, data science, to solve some of the pressing problems. >> The social impact that data science and computer science alone can make with ideally a diverse set of eyes and perspectives looking at it, is infinite. >> Absolutely. And that's one reason I'm super excited today, this third WiDS for one of the keynote speakers, Latanya from Harvard. She's going to be talking, she's from government and sort of political science, but she's going to be talking about data science from the policy perspective and also the privacy perspective. >> Lisa: Oh yes. >> I think that this data science provides such great opportunity, not just to have the traditional STEM fields participating but really to leverage the ethicists and the humanists and the social sciences so we have that diversity of opinions shaping decision making. >> Exactly. And as much as big data and those technologies open up a lot of opportunities for new business models for corporations, I think so does it also in parallel open up new opportunities for career paths and for women in the field all over the world to make a big, big difference. >> Exactly. I think that's another value add for WiDS over it's three years is to expose young women to the range of career paths in which data science can have an impact. It's not just about coding, although that's an important part. As we heard this morning, investment banking, go figure. Right now SAP is talking about the impact on precision medicine and precision healthcare. Last year, we had the National Security Agency here, talking about use of data. We've had geographers. So I think it helps broaden the perspective about where you can take your skills in data science. And also expose you to the full range of skills that's needed to make a good data science team. >> Right. The hard skills, right, the data and statistical analyses, the computational skills, but also the softer skills. >> Ruth: Exactly. >> How do you see that in your career as those two sides, the hard skills, the soft skills coming together to formulate the things that you're doing today? >> Well we have to have a diverse team, so I think the soft skills come into play not just from having women on your team but a diversity of opinions. In all that we do in managing our systems and making decisions about what to do, we do look at data. They may not be data at scale that we see in healthcare or mobile devices or you know, our mobile health, our Fitbit data. But we try to base our decisions on an analysis of data. And purely running an algorithm or applying a formula to something will give you one perspective, but it's only part of the answer. So working as a team to evaluate other alternative methods. There never is just one right way to model something, right. And I think that, having the diversity across the team and pulling in external decision makers as well to help us evaluate the data. We look at the hard science and then we ask about, is this the right thing to do, is this really what the data are telling us. >> So with WiDS being aimed at inspiring and educating data scientists worldwide, we kind of talked a little bit already about inspiring the younger generation who are maybe as Maria Callaway said that the ideal time to inspire young females is first semester of college. But there's also sort of a flip side to that and I think that's reinvigorating. >> Yes. >> That the women who've been in the STEM field or in technology for awhile. What are some of the things that you have found invigorating in your own career about WiDS and the collaboration with other females in the industry? >> I think hearing inspirational speakers like Maria, last here and this year, Diane Greene from Google last year, talk about just the point you made that there's always opportunity, there's always time to learn new things, to start a new career. We don't have to be first year freshmen in college in order to start a career. We're all lifelong learners and to hear women present and to see and meet with people at the breakout sessions and the lunch, whose careers have been shaped by and some cases remade by the opportunity to learn new things and apply those skills in new areas. It's just exciting. Today for this conference, I brought along four or five of my colleagues from IT at Stanford, who are not data scientists. They would not call themselves data scientists, but there are data elements to all of their careers. And watching them in there this morning as they see what people are doing and hear about the possibilities, it's just exciting. It's exciting and it's empowering as well. Again back to that idea of community, you're not in it alone. >> Lisa: Right. >> And to be connected to all of these women across a generation is really, it's just invigorating. >> I love that. It's empowering, it is invigorating. Did you have mentors when you were in your undergraduate >> Ruth: I did. >> days? Were they males, females, both? >> I'd say in undergraduate and graduate school, actually they were more males from an academic perspective. But as a graduate student, I worked in a programming unit and my mentors there were all females and one in particular became then my boss. And she was a lifelong mentor to me. And I found that really important. She believed in women. She believed that programming was not a male field. She did not believe that technology was the domain only of men. And she really was supportive throughout. And I think it's important for young women as well as mid-career women to continue to have mentors to help bounce ideas off of and to help encourage inquiries. >> Definitely, definitely. I'm always surprised every now and then when I'm interviewing females in tech, they'll say I didn't have a mentor. >> Lisa: Oh. >> So I had to become one. But I think you know we think maybe think of mentors in an earlier stage of our careers, but at a later stage we talked about that reinvigoration. Are you finding WiDS as a source of maybe not only for you to have the opportunity to mentor more women but also are you finding more mentors of different generations >> Oh sure. >> as being part of WiDS? >> Absolutely, think of Karen Mathis, not just Margot but Karen, getting to know her. And we go for sort of walks around the campus and bounce ideas of each other. I think it is a community for yes, for all of us. It's not just for the young women and we want to remain engaged in this. The fact that it's global now, I think a new challenge is how do we leverage this international community now. So our opportunities for mentorship and partnership aren't limited to our local WiDS. They're an important group. But how do we connect across those different communities? >> Lisa: Exactly. >> They're international now. >> Exactly. I think I was on Twitter last night and there was the WiDS New Zealand about to go live. >> Yeah, yeah. >> And I just thought, wow it's this great community. But you make a good point that it's reached such scale so quickly. Now it's about how can we learn from women in different industries in other parts of the world. How can they learn from us? To really grow this foundation of collaboration and to a word you said earlier, community. >> It really is amazing though that in three years WiDS has become what it has because if you think about other organizations, special interest groups and the like, often they really are, they're not parochial. But they tend to be local and if they're national, they're not at this scale. >> Right. >> And so again back to it's the right time, it's the right set of organizers. I mean Margot, anything that she touches, she puts it herself completely into it and it's almost always successful. The right people, the right time. And finding ways to harness and encourage enthusiasm in really productive ways. I think it's just been fabulous. >> I agree. Last question for you. Looking back at your career, what advice would you have given young Ruth? >> Oh gosh. That's a really great question. I think to try to connect as much as you can outside your comfort zone. Back to that idea of mentorship. You think when you're an undergraduate, you explore curricula, you take crazy classes, Chinese or, not that that's crazy, but you know if you're a math major and you go take art or something. To really explore not just your academic breadth but also career opportunities and career understanding earlier on that really, oh I want to be a doctor, actually what do you know about being a doctor. I don't want to be a statistician, well why not? So I think to encourage more curiosity outside the classroom in terms of thinking about what is the world about and how can you make a difference. >> I love that, getting out of the comfort zone. One of my mentors says get comfortably uncomfortable and I love that. >> Ruth: That's great, yeah. >> I love that. Well Ruth, thank you so much for joining us on theCube today. It's our pleasure to have you here and we hope you have a great time at the event. We look forward to talking with you next time. >> We'll see you next year. >> Lisa: Excellent. >> Thank you. Buh-bye. >> I'm Lisa Martin. You're watching theCube live from Stanford University at the third annual Women in Data Science conference. #WiDS2018, join the conversation. After this short break, I'll be right back with my next guest. Stick around. (techno music)

>> Narrator: Live from Las Vegas, it's The Cube, covering AWS re:Invent 2017. Presented by AWS, Intel, and our ecosystem of partners. >> Bob: It's actually a little quieter here. >> Hey, welcome back to AWS re:Invent 2017. I am Lisa Martin. We're all very chatty. You can hear a lot of chatty folks behind us. This is day two of our continuing coverage. 42,000 people here, amazing. I'm Lisa Martin with my co-host Keith Townsend, and we're very excited to be joined by a Cube alumni Bob Muglia, CEO and President of Snowflake. >> Thank you. >> Lisa: Welcome back. >> Thank you, good to be back. >> And Kelly Mungary, the Director of Enterprise Data and Analytics from Lionsgate. A great use case from Snowflake. Thanks so much guys for joining us. So one of the hot things going on today at the event is your announcement Bob with AWS and Snowpipe. What is Snowpipe? How do customers get started with it? >> Great, well thanks. We're excited about Snowpipe. Snowpipe is a way of ingesting data into Snowflake in a streaming, continuous way. You simply can drop new data that's coming in into S3 and we'll ingest it for you automatically. Makes that super, super simple. Brings the data in continuously into your data warehouse, ensuring that you're always up to date and your analysts are getting the latest insights and the latest data. >> So, when you guys were founded, about five years ago, as the marketing says on your website, a complete data warehouse built for the Cloud. What was the opportunity back then? What did you see that was missing, and how has Snowflake evolved to really be a leader in this space? >> So you know, if you go back five years this was a time frame where no SQL was the big rage, and everybody was talking about how SQL was passe and it's something that you're not see in the future. Our founders had a different view, they had been working on true relational databases for almost 20 years, and they recognized the power of SQL and relational technology but they also saw that customers were experiencing significant limits with existing technology, and those limits really restricted what people could do. They saw in the Cloud and what Amazon had done the ability to build a all new database that takes advantage of the full elasticity and power of the Cloud to deliver whatever set of analytics capabilities that the business requires. However much data you want, however many queries simultaneously. Snowflake takes what you love about a relational database and removes all the limits, and allows you to operate in a very different way. And our founders had that vision five years ago, and really successfully executed on it. The product has worked beyond our dreams, and our customers, our response from our customers is what we get so excited about. >> So, the saying is "Data is the new oil". However, just as oil is really hard to drill for and find, finding the data to service up, to even put in a data lake to analyze has been a challenge. How did you guys go about identifying what data should even be streamed to Snowpipe? >> Well, yeah, that's a great question. I mean, in entertainment today, we're experiencing probably like in pretty much every type of business. A data explosion. We have, you know, streaming is big now. We have subscription data coming in, billing data, social media data, and on and on. And the thing is, it's not coming in a normal, regular format. It's coming in what we call a semi-structured, structured, json, xml. So, up until Snowflake came onto the scene with a truly Cloud based SAAS solution for data warehousing pretty much everyone was struggling to wrangle in all these data sets. Snowpipe is a great example of one of the avenues of bringing in these multiple data sets, merging them real time, and getting the analytics out to your business in an agile way that has never been seen before. >> So, can you talk a little bit about that experience? Kinda that day one up, you were taking these separate data sources, whether it's ERP solution, data from original content, merging that together and then being able to analyze that. What was that day one experience like? >> Well, you know, I gotta tell you, it evolves around a word, that word is "Yes", okay? And data architects and executives and leaders within pretty much every company are used to saying, "We'll get to that" and "We'll put it on the road map", "We could do that six months out", "Three months out". So what happened when I implemented Snowflake was I was just walking into meetings and going, "Yes". "You got it". "No worries, let's do it". >> Lisa: It liberated. >> Well, it's changes, it's not only liberating, it changes the individual's opportunities, the team's opportunities, the company's opportunities, and ultimately, revenue. So, I think it's just an amazing new way of approaching data warehousing. >> So Bob, can you talk a little bit about the partnership with AWS, and the power to bring that type of capability to customers? Data lakes are really hard to do that type of thing run a query against to get instant answers. Talk about the partnership with AWS to bring that type of capability. >> Well Amazon's been a fantastic partner of ours, and we really enjoy working with Amazon. We wind up working together with them to solve customer problems. Which is what I think is so fantastic. And with Snowflake, on top of Amazon, you can do what Kelly's saying. You can say yes, because all of a sudden you can now bring all of your data together in one place. Technology has limited, it's technology that has caused data to be in disparate silos. People don't want their data all scattered all over the place. It's all in these different places because limits to technology force people to do that. With the Cloud, and with what Amazon has done and with a product like Snowflake, you can bring all of that data together, and the thing that's interesting, where Kelly is going, is it can change the culture of a company, and the way people work. All of a sudden, data is not power. Data is available to everyone, and it's democratizing. Every person can work with data and help to bring the business forward. And it can really change the dynamics about the way people work. >> And Kelly, you just spoke at the multi-city Cloud Analytics Tour that Snowflake just did. You spoke in Santa Monica, one of my favorite places. You talked about a data driven culture. And we hear data driven in so many different conversations, but how did you actually go about facilitating a data driven culture. Who are some of the early adopters, and what business problems have you been able to solve by saying yes? >> Well, I can speak entertainment in general. I think that it's all about technology it's about talent, and it's about teaching. And with technology being the core of that. If we go back five years, six years, seven years, it was really hard to walk into a room, have an idea, a concept, around social media, around streaming data, around billing, around accounting. And to have an agile approach that you could bring together within a week or so forth. So what's happening is, now that we've implemented Snowflake on AWS and some of the other what I call dream tools on top of that. The dream stack, which includes Snowflake. It's more about integrating with the business. Now we can speak the same language with them. Now we can walk into a room and they're glad to see me now. And at the end of the day, it's new, it's all new. So, this is something that I say sometimes, in kidding, but it's actually true. It's as if Snowflake had a time traveler on staff that went forward in the future ten years to determine how things should be done in the big data space, and then came back and developed it. And that's how futuristic they are, but proven at the same time. And that allows us to cultivate that data driven culture within entertainment, because we have tools and we have the agile approach that the business is looking for. >> So, Kelly, I'm really interested, and I love the concept of making data available to everyone. That's been a theme of this conference from the keynote this morning, which is putting tools in builder's hands, and allowing builders to do what they do. >> Kelly: That's right. >> And we're always surprised at what users come back with. What's one of the biggest surprises from the use cases, now that you've enabled your users. >> Well, I'm gonna give you one that's based on AWS and Snowflake. A catch phrase you hear a lot of is "Data center of excellence", and a lot of us are trying to build out these data centers of excellence, but it's a little bit of an oxymoron to the fact that a data center of excellence is really about enabling your business and finding champions within marketing, within sales, within accounting, and giving them the ability to have self-service business intelligence, self-service data warehousing. The kinds of things that, again, we go back five, six years ago, you couldn't even have that conversation. I'll tell you today, I can walk into a room, and say, "Okay, who here is interested in learning "about data warehousing?". And there'll be somebody, "Okay, great". Within an hour, I'll have you being dangerous in terms of setting up, standing up, configuring and loading a data warehouse. That's unheard of, and it's all due to Snowflake and their new technology. >> I'd love to understand Bob, from your perspective. First of all, it sounds like you have a crystal ball according to Kelly, which is awesome. But second of all, collaboration, we talked about that earlier. Andy Jassy is very well known and very vocal about visiting customers every week. And I love their bottom, their backwards approach to, before building a product, to try to say, "What problem can we solve?". They're actually working with customers first. What are their requirements? Tell me a little bit Bob about the collaboration that Snowflake has with Lionsgate, or other customers. How are they helping to influence your crystal ball? >> You know what, this is where I think what Amazon has done, and Andy has done a fantastic job. There's so much to learn from them, and the customer centricity that Amazon has always had is something that we have really focused to bring into Snowflake, and really build deeply into our culture. I've sort of said many, many times, Snowflake is a value space company. Our values are important to us, they're prominent in our website. Our first value is we put our customer's first. What I'm most proud of is, every customer who has focused on deploying Snowflake, has successfully deployed Snowflake, and we learn from them. We engage with them. We partner with them. All of our customers are our partners. Kelly and Lionsgate are examples of customers that we learn from every day, and it's such a rewarding thing to hear what they want to do. You look at Snowpipe and what Snowpipe is, that came from customers, we learned that from customers. You look at so many features, so many details. It's iterative learning with customers. And what's interesting about that, it's listening to customers, but it's also understanding what they do. One of the things that's interesting about Snowflake is is that as a company we run Snowflake on Snowflake. All of our data is in Snowflake. All of our sales data, our financial data, our marketing data, our product support data, our engineering data. Every time a user runs a query, that query is logged in Snowflake and intrinsics about it are logged. So what's interesting is because it's all in one place, and it's all accessible, we can answer essentially any question, about what's been done. And then, driving the culture to do that is an important thing. One of the things I do find interesting is, even at Snowflake, even at this data centered company, even where everything is all centralized, I still find sometimes people don't reference it. And I'm constantly reinforcing that your intuition, you know, you're really smart, you're really intuitive, but you could be wrong. And if you can answer the question based on what's happened, what your customers are doing, because it's in the data, and you can get that answer quickly, it's a totally different world. And that's what you can do when you have a tool with the power of what Snowflake can deliver, is you could answer effectively any business question in just a matter of minutes, and that's transformative, it's transformative to the way people work, and that, to me, that's about what it means to build a data driven culture. Is to reinforce that the answer is inside what customers are doing. And so often, that is encapsulated in the data. >> Wow, your energy is incredible. We thank you so much Bob and Kelly for coming on and sharing your story. And I think a lot of our viewers are gonna learn some great lessons from both of you on collaboration on transformations. So thanks so much for stopping by. >> Yeah. >> Thank you so much, we really enjoyed it. Thanks a lot. >> Likewise, great to meet you. >> Thanks Kelly. >> Thank you. >> For my co-host Keith Townsend, and for Kelly and Bob, I am Lisa Martin. You've been watching The Cube, live on day two, continuing coverage at AWS re:Invent 2017. Stick around, we have great more guests coming up. (upbeat music)

>> Announcer: From Denver, Colorado, it's theCUBE, covering Super Computing 17. Brought to you by Intel. (soft electronic music) Hey, welcome back, everybody. Jeff Frick here with theCUBE. We're gettin' towards the end of the day here at Super Computing 2017 in Denver, Colorado. 12,000 people talkin' really about the outer limits of what you can do with compute power and lookin' out into the universe and black holes and all kinds of exciting stuff. We're kind of bringin' it back, right? We're all about democratization of technology for people to solve real problems. We're really excited to have our last guest of the day, bringin' the energy, Armughan Ahmad. He's SVP and GM, Hybrid Cloud and Ready Solutions for Dell EMC, and a many-time CUBE alumni. Armughan, great to see you. >> Yeah, good to see you, Jeff. So, first off, just impressions of the show. 12,000 people, we had no idea. We've never been to this show before. This is great. >> This is a show that has been around. If you know the history of the show, this was an IEEE engineering show, that actually turned into high-performance computing around research-based analytics and other things that came out of it. But, it's just grown. We're seeing now, yesterday the super computing top petaflops were released here. So, it's fascinating. You have some of the brightest minds in the world that actually come to this event. 12,000 of them. >> Yeah, and Dell EMC is here in force, so a lot of announcements, a lot of excitement. What are you guys excited about participating in this type of show? >> Yeah, Jeff, so when we come to an event like this, HBC-- We know that HBC is also evolved from your traditional HBC, which was around modeling and simulation, and how it started from engineering to then clusters. It's now evolving more towards machine learning, deep learning, and artificial intelligence. So, what we announced here-- Yesterday, our press release went out. It was really related to how our strategy of advancing HBC, but also democratizing HBC's working. So, on the advancing, on the HBC side, the top 500 super computing list came out. We're powering some of the top 500 of those. One big one is TAC, which is Texas Institute out of UT, University of Texas. They now have, I believe, the number 12 spot in the top 500 super computers in the world, running an 8.2 petaflops off computing. >> So, a lot of zeros. I have no idea what a petaflop is. >> It's very, very big. It's very big. It's available for machine learning, but also eventually going to be available for deep learning. But, more importantly, we're also moving towards democratizing HBC because we feel that democratizing is also very important, where HBC should not only be for the research and the academia, but it should also be focused towards the manufacturing customers, the financial customers, our commercial customers, so that they can actually take the complexity of HBC out, and that's where our-- We call it our HBC 2.0 strategy, off learning from the advancements that we continue to drive, to then also democratizing it for our customers. >> It's interesting, I think, back to the old days of Intel microprocessors getting better and better and better, and you had Spark and you had Silicon Graphics, and these things that were way better. This huge differentiation. But, the Intel I32 just kept pluggin' along and it really begs the question, where is the distinction now? You have huge clusters of computers you can put together with virtualization. Where is the difference between just a really big cluster and HBC and super computing? >> So, I think, if you look at HBC, HBC is also evolving, so let's look at the customer view, right? So, the other part of our announcement here was artificial intelligence, which is really, what is artificial intelligence? It's, if you look at a customer retailer, a retailer has-- They start with data, for example. You buy beer and chips at J's Retailer, for example. You come in and do that, you usually used to run a SEQUEL database or you used to run a RDBMS database, and then that would basically tell you, these are the people who can purchase from me. You know their purchase history. But, then you evolved into BI, and then if that data got really, very large, you then had an HBC cluster, would which basically analyze a lot of that data for you, and show you trends and things. That would then tell you, you know what, these are my customers, this is how many times they are frequent. But, now it's moving more towards machine learning and deep learning as well. So, as the data gets larger and larger, we're seeing datas becoming larger, not just by social media, but your traditional computational frameworks, your traditional applications and others. We're finding that data is also growing at the edge, so by 2020, about 20 billion devices are going to wake up at the edge and start generating data. So, now, Internet data is going to look very small over the next three, four years, as the edge data comes up. So, you actually need to now start thinking of machine learning and deep learning a lot more. So, you asked the question, how do you see that evolving? So, you see an RDBMS traditional SQL evolving to BI. BI then evolves into either an HBC or hadoop. Then, from HBC and hadoop, what do you do next? What you do next is you start to now feed predictive analytics into machine learning kind of solutions, and then once those predictive analytics are there, then you really, truly start thinking about the full deep learning frameworks. >> Right, well and clearly like the data in motion. I think it's funny, we used to make decisions on a sample of data in the past. Now, we have the opportunity to take all the data in real time and make those decisions with Kafka and Spark and Flink and all these crazy systems that are comin' to play. Makes Hadoop look ancient, tired, and yesterday, right? But, it's still valid, right? >> A lot of customers are still paying. Customers are using it, and that's where we feel we need to simplify the complex for our customers. That's why we announced our Machine Learning Ready Bundle and our Deep Learning Ready Bundle. We announced it with Intel and Nvidia together, because we feel like our customers either go to the GPU route, which is your accelerator's route. We announced-- You were talking to Ravi, from our server team, earlier, where he talked about the C4140, which has the quad GPU power, and it's perfect for deep learning. But, with Intel, we've also worked on the same, where we worked on the AI software with Intel. Why are we doing all of this? We're saying that if you thought that RDBMS was difficult, and if you thought that building a hadoop cluster or HBC was a little challenging and time consuming, as the customers move to machine learning and deep learning, you now have to think about the whole stack. So, let me explain the stack to you. You think of a compute storage and network stack, then you think of-- The whole eternity. Yeah, that's right, the whole eternity of our data center. Then you talk about our-- These frameworks, like Theano, Caffe, TensorFlow, right? These are new frameworks. They are machine learning and deep learning frameworks. They're open source and others. Then you go to libraries. Then you go to accelerators, which accelerators you choose, then you go to your operating systems. Now, you haven't even talked about your use case. Retail use case or genomic sequencing use case. All you're trying to do is now figure out TensorFlow works with this accelerator or does not work with this accelerator. Or, does Caffe and Theano work with this operating system or not? And, that is a complexity that is way more complex. So, that's where we felt that we really needed to launch these new solutions, and we prelaunched them here at Super Computing, because we feel the evolution of HBC towards AI is happening. We're going to start shipping these Ready Bundles for machine learning and deep learning in first half of 2018. >> So, that's what the Ready Solutions are? You're basically putting the solution together for the client, then they can start-- You work together to build the application to fix whatever it is they're trying to do. >> That's exactly it. But, not just fix it. It's an outcome. So, I'm going to go back to the retailer. So, if you are the CEO of the biggest retailer and you are saying, hey, I just don't want to know who buys from me, I want to now do predictive analytics, which is who buys chips and beer, but who can I sell more things to, right? So, you now start thinking about demographic data. You start thinking about payroll data and other datas that surround-- You start feeding that data into it, so your machine now starts to learn a lot more of those frameworks, and then can actually give you predictive analytics. But, imagine a day where you actually-- The machine or the deep learning AI actually tells you that it's not just who you want to sell chips and beer to, it's who's going to buy the 4k TV? You're makin' a lot of presumptions. Well, there you go, and the 4k-- But, I'm glad you're doin' the 4k TV. So, that's important, right? That is where our customers need to understand how predictive analytics are going to move towards cognitive analytics. So, this is complex but we're trying to make that complex simple with these Ready Solutions from machine learning and deep learning. >> So, I want to just get your take on-- You've kind of talked about these three things a couple times, how you delineate between AI, machine learning, and deep learning. >> So, as I said, there is an evolution. I don't think a customer can achieve artificial intelligence unless they go through the whole crawl walk around space. There's no shortcuts there, right? What do you do? So, if you think about, Mastercard is a great customer of ours. They do an incredible amount of transactions per day, (laughs) as you can think, right? In millions. They want to do facial recognitions at kiosks, or they're looking at different policies based on your buying behavior-- That, hey, Jeff doesn't buy $20,000 Rolexes every year. Maybe once every week, you know, (laughs) it just depends how your mood is. I was in the Emirates. Exactly, you were in Dubai (laughs). Then, you think about his credit card is being used where? And, based on your behaviors that's important. Now, think about, even for Mastercard, they have traditional RDBMS databases. They went to BI. They have high-performance computing clusters. Then, they developed the hadoop cluster. So, what we did with them, we said okay. All that is good. That data that has been generated for you through customers and through internal IT organizations, those things are all very important. But, at the same time, now you need to start going through this data and start analyzing this data for predictive analytics. So, they had 1.2 million policies, for example, that they had to crunch. Now, think about 1.2 million policies that they had to say-- In which they had to take decisions on. That they had to take decisions on. One of the policies could be, hey, does Jeff go to Dubai to buy a Rolex or not? Or, does Jeff do these other patterns, or is Armughan taking his card and having a field day with it? So, those are policies that they feed into machine learning frameworks, and then machine learning actually gives you patterns that they can now see what your behavior is. Then, based on that, eventually deep learning is when they move to next. Deep learning now not only you actually talk about your behavior patterns on the credit card, but your entire other life data starts to-- Starts to also come into that. Then, now, you're actually talking about something before, that's for catching a fraud, you can actually be a lot more predictive about it and cognitive about it. So, that's where we feel that our Ready Solutions around machine learning and deep learning are really geared towards, so taking HBC to then democratizing it, advancing it, and then now helping our customers move towards machine learning and deep learning, 'cause these buzzwords of AIs are out there. If you're a financial institution and you're trying to figure out, who is that customer who's going to buy the next mortgage from you? Or, who are you going to lend to next? You want the machine and others to tell you this, not to take over your life, but to actually help you make these decisions so that your bottom line can go up along with your top line. Revenue and margins are important to every customer. >> It's amazing on the credit card example, because people get so pissed if there's a false positive. With the amount of effort that they've put into keep you from making fraudulent transactions, and if your credit card ever gets denied, people go bananas, right? The behavior just is amazing. But, I want to ask you-- We're comin' to the end of 2017, which is hard to believe. Things are rolling at Dell EMC. Michael Dell, ever since he took that thing private, you could see the sparkle in his eye. We got him on a CUBE interview a few years back. A year from now, 2018. What are we going to talk about? What are your top priorities for 2018? >> So, number one, Michael continues to talk about that our vision is advancing human progress through technology, right? That's our vision. We want to get there. But, at the same time we know that we have to drive IT transformation, we have to drive workforce transformation, we have to drive digital transformation, and we have to drive security transformation. All those things are important because lots of customers-- I mean, Jeff, do you know like 75% of the S&P 500 companies will not exist by 2027 because they're either not going to be able to make that shift from Blockbuster to Netflix, or Uber taxi-- It's happened to our friends at GE over the last little while. >> You can think about any customer-- That's what Michael did. Michael actually disrupted Dell with Dell technologies and the acquisition of EMC and Pivotal and VMWare. In a year from now, our strategy is really about edge to core to the cloud. We think the world is going to be all three, because the rise of 20 billion devices at the edge is going to require new computational frameworks. But, at the same time, people are going to bring them into the core, and then cloud will still exist. But, a lot of times-- Let me ask you, if you were driving an autonomous vehicle, do you want that data-- I'm an Edge guy. I know where you're going with this. It's not going to go, right? You want it at the edge, because data gravity is important. That's where we're going, so it's going to be huge. We feel data gravity is going to be big. We think core is going to be big. We think cloud's going to be big. And we really want to play in all three of those areas. >> That's when the speed of light is just too damn slow, in the car example. You don't want to send it to the data center and back. You don't want to send it to the data center, you want those decisions to be made at the edge. Your manufacturing floor needs to make the decision at the edge as well. You don't want a lot of that data going back to the cloud. All right, Armughan, thanks for bringing the energy to wrap up our day, and it's great to see you as always. Always good to see you guys, thank you. >> All right, this is Armughan, I'm Jeff Frick. You're watching theCUBE from Super Computing Summit 2017. Thanks for watching. We'll see you next time. (soft electronic music)

>> Announcer: From Denver, Colorado it's theCUBE. Covering Super Computing 17, brought to you by Intel. Welcome back everybody, Jeff Frick here with theCUBE. We're at Super Computing 2017 in Denver, Colorado talking about big big iron, we're talking about space and new frontiers, black holes, mapping the brain. That's all fine and dandy, but we're going to have a little bit more fun this next segment. We're excited to have our next guest Bernie Spang. He's a VP Software Defined Infrastructure for IBM. And his buddy and guest Wayne Glanfield HPC Manager for Red Bull Racing. And for those of you that don't know, that's not the pickup trucks, it's not the guy jumping out of space, this is the Formula One racing team. The fastest, most advanced race cars in the world. So gentlemen, first off welcome. Thank you. Thank you Jeff. So what is a race car company doing here for a super computing conference? Obviously we're very interested in high performance computing so traditionally we've used a wind tunnel to do our external aerodynamics. HPC allows us to do many many more iterations, design iterations of the car. So we can actually kind of get more iterations of the designs out there and make the car go faster very quicker. So that's great, you're not limited to how many times you can get it in the wind tunnel. The time you have in the wind tunnel. I'm sure there's all types of restrictions, cost and otherwise. There's lots of restrictions and both the wind tunnel and in HPC usage. So with HPC we're limited to 25 teraflops, which isn't many teraflops. 25 teraflops. >> Wayne: That's all. And Bernie, how did IBM get involved in Formula One racing? Well I mean our spectrum computing offerings are about virtualizing clusters to optimize efficiency, and the performance of the workloads. So our Spectrum LSF offering is used by manufacturers, designers to get ultimate efficiency out of the infrastructure. So with the Formula One restrictions on the teraflops you want to get as much work through that system as efficiently as you can. And that's where Spectrum computing comes in. That's great. And so again, back to the simulations. So not only can you just do simulations 'cause you got the capacity, but then you can customize it as you said I think before we turned on the cameras for specific tracks, specific race conditions. All types of variables that you couldn't do very easily in a traditional wind tunnel. Yes obviously it takes a lot longer to actually kind of develop, create, and rapid prototype the models and get them in the wind tunnel, and actually test them. And it's obviously much more expensive. So by having a HPC facility we can actually kind of do the design simulations in a virtual environment. So what's been kind of the ahah from that? Is it just simply more better faster data? Is there some other kind of transformational thing that you observed as a team when you started doing this type of simulation versus just physical simulation in a wind tunnel? We started using HPC and computational fluid dynamics about 12 years ago in anger. Traditionally it started out as a complementary tool to the wind tunnel. But now with the advances in HPC technology and software from IBM, it's actually beginning to overtake the wind tunnel. So it's actually kind of driving the way we design the car these days. That's great. So Bernie, working with super high end performance, right, where everything is really optimized to get that car to go a little bit faster, just a little bit faster. Right. Pretty exciting space to work in, you know, there's a lot of other great applications, aerospace, genomics, this and that. But this is kind of a fun thing you can actually put your hands on. Oh it's definitely fun, it's definitely fun being with the Red Bull Racing team, and with our clients when we brief them there. But we have commercial clients in automotive design, aeronautics, semiconductor manufacturing, where getting every bit of efficiency and performance out of their infrastructure is also important. Maybe they're not limited by rules, but they're limited by money, you know and the ability to investment. And their ability to get more out of the environment gives them a competitive advantage as well. And really what's interesting about racing, and a lot of sports is you get to witness the competition. We don't get to witness the competition between big companies day to day. You're not kind of watching it in those little micro instances. So the good thing is you get to learn a lot from such a focused, relatively small team as Red Bull Racing that you can apply to other things. So what are some of the learnings as you've got work with them that you've taken back? Well certainly they push the performance of the environment, and they push us, which is a great thing for us, and for our other clients who benefit. But one of the things I think that really stands out is the culture there of the entire team no matter what their role and function. From the driver on down to everybody else are focused on winning races and winning championships. And that team view of getting every bit of performance out of everything everybody does all the time really opened our thinking to being broader than just the scheduling of the IT infrastructure, it's also about making the design team more productive and taking steps out of the process, and anything we can do there. Inclusive of the storage management, and the data management over time. So it's not just the compute environment it's also the virtualized storage environment. Right, and just massive amounts of storage. You said not only are you running and generating, I'm just going to use boatloads 'cause I'm not sure which version of the flops you're going to use. But also you got historical data, and you have result data, and you have models that need to be tweaked, and continually upgraded so that you do better the following race. Exactly, I mean we're generating petabytes of data a year and I think one of the issues which is probably different from most industries is our workflows are incredibly complex. So we have up to 200 discrete job steps for each workflow to actually kind of produce a simulation. This is where the kind of IBM Spectrum product range actually helps us do that efficiently. If you imagine an aerospace engineer, or aerodynamics engineer trying to manually manage 200 individual job steps, it just wouldn't happen very efficiently. So this is where Spectrum scale actually kind of helps us do that. So you mentioned it briefly Bernie, but just a little bit more specifically. What are some of the other industries that you guys are showcasing that are leveraging the power of Spectrum to basically win their races. Yeah so and we talked about the infrastructure and manufacturing, but they're industrial clients. But also in financial services. So think in terms of risk analytics and financial models being an important area. Also healthcare life sciences. So molecular biology, finding new drugs. When you talk about the competition and who wins right. Genomics research and advances there. Again, you need a system and an infrastructure that can chew through vast amounts of data. Both the performance and the compute, as well as the longterm management with cost efficiency of huge volumes of data. And then you need that virtualized cluster so that you can run multiple workloads many times with an infrastructure that's running in 80%, 90% efficiency. You can't afford to have silos of clusters. Right we're seeing clients that have problems where they don't have this cluster virtualization software, have cluster creep, just like in the early days we had server sprawl, right? With a different app on a different server, and we needed to virtualize the servers. Well now we're seeing cluster creep. Right the Hadoop clusters and Spark clusters, and machine learning and deep learning clusters. As well as the traditional HPC workload. So what Spectrum computing does is virtualizes that shared cluster environment so that you can run all these different kind of workloads and drive up the efficiency of the environment. 'Cause efficiency is really the key right. You got to have efficiency that's what, that's really where cloud got its start, you know, kind of eating into the traditional space, right. There's a lot of inefficient stuff out there so you got to use your resources efficiently it's way too competitive. Correct well we're also seeing inefficiencies in the use of cloud, right. >> Jeff: Absolutely. So one of the features that we've added to the Spectrum computing recently is automated dynamic cloud bursting. So we have clients who say that they've got their scientists or their design engineers spinning up clusters in the cloud to run workloads, and then leaving the servers running, and they're paying the bill. So we built in automation where we push the workload and the data over the cloud, start the servers, run the workload. When the workload's done, spin down the servers and bring the data back to the user. And it's very cost effective that way. It's pretty fun everyone talks often about the spin up, but they forget to talk about the spin down. Well that's where the cost savings is, exactly. Alright so final words, Wayne, you know as you look forward, it's super a lot of technology in Formula One racing. You know kind of what's next, where do you guys go next in terms of trying to get another edge in Formula One racing for Red Bull specifically. I mean I'm hoping they reduce the restrictions on HPC so it can actually start using CFD and the software IBM provides in a serious manner. So it can actually start pushing the technologies way beyond where they are at the moment. It's really interesting that they, that as a restriction right, you think of like plates and size of the engine, and these types of things as the rule restrictions. But they're actually restricting based on data size, your use of high performance computing. They're trying to save money basically, but. It's crazy. So whether it's a rule or you know you're share holders, everybody's trying to save money. Alright so Bernie what are you looking at, sort of 2017 is coming to an end, it's hard for me to say that as you look forward to 2018 what are some of your priorities for 2018. Well the really important thing and we're hearing it at this conference, I'm talking with the analysts and with the clients. The next generation of HPC in analytics is what we're calling machine learning, deep learning, cognitive AI, whatever you want to call it. That's just the new generation of this workload. And our Spectrum conductor offering and our new deep learning impact capability to automate the training of deep learning models, so that you can more quickly get to an accurate model like in hours or minutes, not days or weeks. That's going to a huge break through. And based on our early client experience this year, I think 2018 is going to be a breakout year for putting that to work in commercial enterprise use cases. Alright well I look forward to the briefing a year from now at Super Computing 2018. Absolutely. Alright Bernie, Wayne, thanks for taking a few minutes out of your day, appreciate it. You're welcome, thank you. Alright he's Bernie, he's Wayne, I'm Jeff Frick we're talking Formula One Red Bull Racing here at Super Computing 2017. Thanks for watching.

>> Narrator: From Denver, Colorado, it's theCUBE. Covering Super Computing '17, brought to you by Intel. Hey welcome back everybody, Jeff Frick here with theCUBE. We're at Super Computing 2017, Denver, Colorado, 12,000 people talking about big iron, big questions, big challenges. It's really an interesting take on computing, really out on the edge. The key note was, literally, light years out in space, talking about predicting the future with quirks and all kinds of things, a little over my head for sure. But we're excited to kind of get back to the ground and we have Ravi Pendekanti. He's the Senior Vice President of Product Management and Marketing, Server Platforms, Dell EMC. It's a mouthful, Ravi great to see you. Great to see you too Jeff and thanks for having me here. Absolutely, so we were talking before we turned the cameras on. One of your big themes, which I love, is kind of democratizing this whole concept of high performance computing, so it's not just the academics answering the really, really, really big questions. You're absolutely right. I mean think about it Jeff, 20 years ago, even 10 years ago, when people talk about high performance computing, it was what I call as being in the back alleys of research and development. There were a few research scientists working on it, but we're at a time in our journey towards helping humanity in a bigger way. The HPC has found it's way into almost every single mainstream industry you can think of. Whether it is fraud detection, you see MasterCard is using it for ensuring that they can see and detect any of the fraud that can be committed earlier than the perpetrators come in and actually hack the system. Or if you get into life sciences, if you talk about genomics. I mean this is what might be good for our next set of generations, where they can probably go out and tweak some of the things in a genome sequence so that we don't have the same issues that we have had in the past. Right. Right? So, likewise, you can pick any favorite industry. I mean we are coming up to the holiday seasons soon. I know a lot of our customers are looking at how do they come up with the right schema to ensure that they can stock the right product and ensure that it is available for everyone at the right time? 'Cause timing is important. I don't think any kid wants to go with no toy and have the product ship later. So bottom line is, yes, we are looking at ensuring the HPC reaches every single industry you can think of. So how do you guys parse HPC verses a really big virtualized cluster? I mean there's so many ways that compute and store has evolved, right? So now, with cloud and virtual cloud and private cloud and virtualization, you know, I can pull quite a bit of horsepower together to attack a problem. So how do you kind of cut the line between Navigate, yeah. big, big compute, verses true HPC? HPC. It's interesting you ask. I'm actually glad you asked because people think that it's just feeding CPU or additional CPU will do the trick, it doesn't. The simple fact is, if you look at the amount of data that is being created. I'll give you a simple example. I mean, we are talking to one of the airlines right now, and they're interested in capturing all the data that comes through their flights. And one of the things they're doing is capturing all the data from their engines. 'Cause end of the day, you want to make sure that your engines are pristine as they're flying. And every hour that an engine flies out, I mean as an airplane flies out, it creates about 20 terabytes of data. So, if you have a dual engine, which is what most flights are. In one hour they create about 40 terabytes of data. And there are supposedly about 38,000 flights taking off at any given time around the world. I mean, it's one huge data collection problem. Right? I mean, I'm told it's like a real Godzilla number, so I'll let you do the computation. My point is if you really look at the data, data has no value, right? What really is important is getting information out of it. The CPU on the other side has gone to a time and a phase where it is hitting the, what I call as the threshold of the Moore's law. Moore's law was all about performance doubles every two years. But today, that performance is not sufficient. Which is where auxiliary technologies need to be brought in. This is where the GPUs, the FBGAs. Right, right. Right. So when you think about these, that's where the HPC world takes off, is you're augmenting your CPUs and your processors with additional auxiliary technology such as the GPUs and FBGAs to ensure that you have more juice to go do this kind of analytics and the massive amounts of data that you and I and the rest of the humanity is creating. It's funny that you talk about that. We were just at a Western Digital event a little while ago, talking about the next generation of drives and it was the same thing where now it's this energy assist method to change really the molecular way that it saves information to get more out of it. So that's kind of how you parse it. If you've got to juice the CPU, and kind of juice the traditional standard architecture, then you're moving into the realm of high performance computing. Absolutely, I mean this is why, Jeff, yesterday we launched a new PowerEdge C4140, right? The first of it's kind in terms of the fact that it's got two Intel Xeon processors, but beyond that, it also can support four Nvidia GPUs. So now you're looking at a server that's got both the CPUs, to your earlier comment on processors, but is augmented by four of the GPUs, that gives immense capacity to do this kind of high performance computing. But as you said, it's not just compute, it's store, it's networking, it's services, and then hopefully you package something together in a solution so I don't have to build the whole thing from scratch, you guys are making moves, right? Oh, this is a perfect lead in, perfect lead in. I know, my colleague, Armagon will be talking to you guys shortly. What his team does, is it takes all the building blocks we provide, such as the servers, obviously looks at the networking, the storage elements, and then puts them together to create what are called solutions. So if you've got solutions, which enable our customers to go back in and easily deploy a machine-learning or a deep-learning solution. Where now our customers don't have to do what I call as the heavy lift. In trying to make sure that they understand how the different pieces integrate together. So the goal behind what we are doing at Dell EMC is to remove the guess work out so that our customers and partners can go out and spend their time deploying the solution. Whether it is for machine learning, deep learning or pick your favorite industry, we can also verticalize it. So that's the beauty of what we are doing at Dell EMC. So the other thing we were talking about before we turned turned the cameras on is, I call them the itys from my old Intel days, reliability, sustainability, serviceability, and you had a different phrase for it. >> Ravi: Oh yes, I know you're talking about the RAS. The RAS, right. Which is the reliability, availability, and serviceability. >> Jeff: But you've got a new twist on it. Oh we do. Adding something very important, and we were just at a security show early this week, CyberConnect, and security now cuts through everything. Because it's no longer a walled garden, 'cause there are no walls. There are no walls. It's really got to be baked in every layer of the solution. Absolutely right. The reason is, if you really look at security, it's not about, you know till a few years ago, people used to think it's all about protecting yourself from external forces, but today we know that 40% of the hacks happen because of the internal, you know, system processes that we don't have in place. Or we could have a person with an intent to break in for whatever reason, so the integrated security becomes part and parcel of what we do. This is where, with in part of a 14G family, one of the things we said is we need to have integrated security built in. And along with that, we want to have the scalability because no two workloads are the same and we all know that the amount of data that's being created today is twice what it was the last year for each of us. Forget about everything else we are collecting. So when you think about it, we need integrated security. We need to have the scalability feature set, also we want to make sure there is automation built in. These three main tenets that we talked about feed into what we call internally, the monic of a user's PARIS. And that's what I think, Jeff, to our earlier conversation, PARIS is all about, P is for best price performance. Anybody can choose to get the right performance or the best performance, but you don't want to shell out a ton of dollars. Likewise, you don't want to pay minimal dollars and try and get the best performance, that's not going to happen. I think there's a healthy balance between price performance, that's important. Availability is important. Interoperability, as much as everybody thinks that they can act on their own, it's nearly impossible, or it's impossible that you can do it on your own. >> Jeff: These are big customers, they've got a lot of systems. You are. You need to have an ecosystem of partners and technologies that come together and then, end of the day, you have to go out and have availability and serviceability, or security, to your point, security is important. So PARIS is about price performance, availability, interoperability, reliability, availability and security. I like it. That's the way we design it. It's much sexier than that. We drop in, like an Eiffel Tower picture right now. There you go, you should. So Ravi, hard to believe we're at the end of 2017, if we get together a year from now at Super Computing 2018, what are some of your goals, what are your some objectives for 2018? What are we going to be talking about a year from today? Oh, well looking into a crystal ball, as much as I can look into that, I thin that-- >> Jeff: As much as you can disclose. And as much as we can disclose, a few things I think are going to happen. >> Jeff: Okay. Number one, I think you will see people talk about to where we started this conversation. HPC has become mainstream, we talked about it, but the adoption of high performance computing, in my personal belief, is not still at a level that it needs to be. So, if you go down next 12 to 18 months, lets say, I do think the adoption rates will be much higher than where we are. And we talk about security now, because it's a very topical subject, but as much as we are trying to emphasize to our partners and customers that you've got to think about security from ground zero. We still see a number of customers who are not ready. You know, some of the analysis show there are nearly 40% of the CIOs are not ready in helping and they truly understand, I should say, what it takes to have a secure system and a secure infrastructure. It's my humble belief that people will pay attention to it and move the needle on it. And we talked about, you know, four GPUs in our C4140, do anticipate that there will be a lot more of auxiliary technology packed into it. Sure, sure. So that's essentially what I can say without spilling the beans too much. Okay, all right, super. Ravi, thanks for taking a couple of minutes out of your day, appreciate it. = Thank you. All right, he's Ravi, I'm Jeff Frick, you're watching theCUBE from Super Computing 2017 in Denver, Colorado. Thanks for watching. (techno music)