Welcome back everyone. I hope you enjoyed the first day of the conference and are excited to kick off today's keyness. My name is Jim Zellman. I'm the Executive Director of Linux Foundation. And again, I'm coming you to you from here in California. Our first speaker today is founder and Executive Director of LF Energy, a Linux Foundation project that supports open source innovation in the energy and electricity sectors. LF Energy's ambition is to accelerate the energy transition and the decarbonization of the world's economies. It's fitting that I'm coming to you here from Napa, California, where we've had devastating wildfires throughout very, very close to where I'm standing right now. Today, Shuli Goodman will share more about LF Energy, the electrification of everything and defining the future of the grid. Please welcome Shuli Goodman. Hello and good afternoon. It's a pleasure to speak with you again. LF Energy was born in Europe and you are members that have enabled us to come to life. This is our third open source summit Europe in our short 18 month life. The European Union has a special role in driving the energy transition. You recognize the importance of open source, you recognize the importance of collective action, you are the power of together. Before I go into the what and how of LF Energy, I want to speak first to the why of LF Energy. At LF Energy, we are reimagining power and energy. We are building the digital foundations for the grid of the future. We are using open source and digitalization to accelerate the transition to renewable energy away from pumping fossils or the bones of our ancestors into our cars and our homes. Decarbonization is our goal to restore climate balance and mitigate the worst of climate change. We are on a great adventure because every hour the sun provides enough power for us to electrify the planet for a year. We just have to learn how to capture that. There's so much to learn and so much will change in the next 30 years. I'm sorry to not be meeting you in Dublin this year. I've never been to Ireland, but I can easily say that the poetry and music and love of place and landscape of the Irish people is deep in my heart. So it has been a great disappointment to not be meeting you there maybe next year in Dublin. Because of the Irish roots of this conference that was supposed to happen, I must speak to the why because I believe that the future and all people who have strained under the yoke of oppression demand it. They need to understand the why. And as I talk through my slides, I want to bring in the words of an American writer from the Western lands, the place where I live. The words of Terry Tempest Williams haunt me. She invites us to live into our better selves through speaking truth. I invite you to meet me there in the place of our better selves so that we can create the future together. In a piece titled A Burning Testament that you can find if you search, she speaks with great wisdom about the fires that have engulfed the West this year. Because grief is love. And if nothing, 2020 has brought most of us to our knees. Even you stoic engineer types have probably found yourselves pushed past the point you felt possible to endure. All of us have fallen to our knees with the grief of what we have lost. And probably been woken up at night with a deep fear about what more we will lose without a profound change in direction that we can barely imagine. 2020 is the year that we began to collectively reimagine our future. It is time to grieve and mourn the dead and the end of some chapter of human experience. It began nearly 150 years ago with the advent of fossil fuel and the internal combustion engine. A period that brings us to today when the pollution from fossil fuel threatens life on Earth. What was is over. I do believe in the power of renewal and redemption. When we talk about power and energy, we have to talk about where we came from because we have to reimagine the future from a different place. We must reclaim our energy and take back our power. And our grief is the doorway. As Terry Tempest-William says, if we do not embrace our grief, our sadness will come out sideways. In unexpected forms of depression and violence, we must dare to find a proper ceremony to collectively honor the dead from the coronavirus as we approach 1.2 million lives lost. We must honor the lives engulfed in these Western fires and the lives we will continue to lose from the climate crisis at hand. Only then can we begin the work of restoration, respecting the generations to come. As we clear a path toward cooling a warming planet. This will be our joy. This is the mission of LF energy, and it is truly a work of joy. We cannot breathe. This is our mantra in America now, and it is far more universal. Terry says, we cannot breathe because of the smoke. We cannot breathe because of a virus that has entered our homes.  We cannot breathe because we are holding our breath for the people and places we love. This is the place that I love.  It's the view for my neighbor's house looking north. This summer we have had two fires, one that was barely five miles away and another about a dozen miles. They surrounded us. Ash was everywhere. Smoke was everywhere. It was night during the day. Terry Tempest-William says, we have been living a myth. We have constructed a dream. We have cajoled and seduced ourselves into believing we are the center of all things. With plants and other sentient beings from ants to lizards to coyotes and grizzly bears, remaining subservient to our whims, our desires and our needs. This is a lethal lie that will be seen by future generations as a grave. As a grave moral sin committed and buried in the name of ignorance and arrogance. And so it is for future generations that LF energy exists. She goes on, the facts do not tell the story of how our hearts are breaking, nor do the photographs of blackened forests or lone chimneys standing as monuments to homes once inhabited. Nor does the news speak to the terror of fleeing fires, lapping at our heels that we can never outrun, only pray for change in the wind. And to this I say, how has it become that one person's tragedy has become my good luck? That is no way to treat a neighbor nor a life. Yet this is the world that we occupy in 2020. So to everyone I say, if this is one degree, I shudder to imagine two degrees. She says to the power of these burning illuminated Western lands who have shaped our character, inspired our souls and restored our belief in what is beautiful and enduring. I will never write your obituary because even as you burn your throwing down seeds that will sprout and flower, trees will grow and forests will rise again as living testaments to how one survives change. I say this is my hope out of the fires will come life out of coronavirus will come life, resilience and a wisdom that this is how we survive change. We survive change together. She says, let this be a humble tribute and exaltation and homage and an open hearted eulogy to all who are we are losing in the floods and the fires and the hurricanes and tornadoes and the invisible virus that is called us all home and brought us to our knees. We are not the only species that lives and loves and breathe on this miraculous planet called Earth. May we remember this and raise a fistful of ash to all the lives lost that it holds. I will mark my heart with an axe x made of ash that says the power to restore life resides here. The future of our species will not be will be decided here, not by facts but by love and loss. Hand on my heart I pledge of allegiance to the only home I will ever know. I say this is why LF energy exists. I cannot act like this is all normal. I have to name this is the time we find ourselves in and I trust that in doing so we will find our way through. Because LF energy gives me so much hope even in the despair I wake up I do the work of LF energy because it is where hope lives and I want to give you that hope as well. The DNA of LF energy is the Lennox Foundation. I don't think that LF energy could live anywhere else even if it had a different name because it's all of you. It is the kernel, it is LF networking, it is automotive grade Lennox, it is LF AI, it is hyper ledger, it is no JS. It is the edge, it is CNCF, it is risk five, it is all of you. You have cleared a path and you have left breadcrumbs for us to follow those of us from the energy industry. And while we are a young foundation in an old industry we carry a mighty history and that is the DNA of LF energy. But why put an energy ecosystem in the Lennox Foundation? My background is most of you know is not as a power system engineer but was in enterprise information management and governance and then I went and I got a PhD in innovation focusing on adoption and diffusion. Most of you have probably seen this typical adoption curve, gentle and predictable. Most of all innovations be they a belief, a practice or technology follow this curve. This is the diffusion curve we face in the next 30 years to avert thousands of years of climate collapse. It is steep yet what is hopeful even in the 9% annual transformation that we have to do for the next 20 years. I say 30 but really it's 20 has been done before with the internet and the cloud. They both happened very quickly. They went from ideas to creation and that is the diffusion pattern that we have to follow. On planet earth we have had five extinction events before all as a result of too much carbon in the environment. This is the first that is man made. We need some serious superpower to navigate this. We need mass collaboration like the Starling murmur. We need to design the grid of the future and relationship to the natural systems of the planet. For that we need the Linux foundation and we need you.  Whether you're working in telecommunications or you're working in automotive or you're working at the edge or you're working in blockchain. We need you. All of these things are going to be present and that's what I want to show you next. These are our marching orders. It's pretty intense but what I believe hopeful and that gives me hope and inspires me is the recognition that 65% of all of the carbon that needs to be removed from our environment is going to be captured in the shift to electrification and electric mobility. And that actually is a much more manageable and contained thing that we can probably imagine. So I want to talk a little bit about where we're coming from. So this is the old system. The whole kind of model was generate, transmit, distribute. It was centralized, it was one way, it was rigid and the key principle was inertia. Inertia is the kind of the physics of managing supply and demand. It was dependent on fossil fuel and nuclear and the power system sector historically looked at investments of 50 to 80 years of windows and here we have the need to transform at the speed of technology. Technology was historically proprietary, it was black box and it has not been an easy system to change. The new grid is composed of variable energy from PV, wind, batteries and automobiles. It is massively distributed with multidirectional communication capabilities. That's a problem we know how to solve and this is a problem you know how to solve. And so while LF energy is at its very beginning, I want you to imagine that for the next 20 years we are going to be building this thing that is going to enable us to transform our economies globally. LF energy seeks to remove the barriers of interoperability and systems integration by enabling open source plumbing that can create the Internet of Energy. This is the digitalization of energy. So the vision of LF energy and the vision of my members is that the grid of the future is composed of loosely coupled systems that are resilient, manageable and observable. Combined with robust automation and digitalization of energy enables engineers and markets to make high impact changes frequently and predictably with minimal toil. The next thing that I want to share with you is, you know, Mike Dolan would speak to me all the time about needing to get the architecture and what I came to really understand is that when you're talking about the grid, you're talking about the largest machine on the planet. And so the power system engineers across high, medium and low voltage and from generation all the way to behind the meter really made a determination that where we needed to focus was on the functionality. And so what I'm going to show you is the functional architecture and in the transition to a cloud native grid, the features and functions of the grid of the future are really embodied in this taxonomy. So what you see here are the top levels of the facets. And then you have the next level down, which is the kind of the buckets around which all the functionality lives. And this goes through the whole five facets, and then you go down another layer down and this is when actually you can begin to visualize that this is what the grid of the future looks like. Each of these things is probably a microservice. There may be many different components. There may be some that are open source and some that are proprietary. There may be proprietary that's built on top of these. And what you see are probably things that are going to be built in reference implementations that are composed of software from many different industries. This is where LF energy is today. And these are the nine projects that represent LF energy and the projects that we see coming along. One of the things that we determined over the course of the summer was that we recognize that we needed to have our projects, but we also needed to have frameworks. And that those frameworks were actually going to represent the functional architecture, data architecture, infrastructure and security. So I want to talk a little bit about community. These are our members, 34 and growing. And we really welcome you all to join us. We recently changed our top tier to strategic because what I've seen in the last six months between RTE and Allie under a transmission system operator and a distribution system operator is I've seen remarkable levels of cooperation and collaboration. Even though one is Dutch and one is French. And I believe that RTE and Allie under need to be beacons for the rest of the world in terms of utilities recognizing that the kind of R&D that we need to do the kind of development needs to be a leverage development and it needs to be done together in community. And they have demonstrated that in a remarkable sort of way. So this year's accomplishments, you know, it's been a horrendous year and it also has been a fantastic year in that despite or maybe because of the challenges we are creating a movement. We're laying a foundation creating the conditions for the entire world to collaborate at scale to transform energy and power. And we're doing this in community. So the things that you see here, you know, the four new projects another two to three in the pipeline by the end of the year. Starting in the top of the year we're going to begin taking on the various different microservices from the Manash microgrid. That we have 30 to 40 meetings every month across SIGs, TAX, TSCs, framework groups. And we are have become and are becoming a very active community, but because open source and energy is really relatively new. What we're seeing here is a lot of capacity building. And I, you know, I think I also really want to say to the vendors suppliers and OEMs that are listening. This is not about cannibalizing capital and value. It's about creating a new paradigm and literally changing floors. And I think that we have seen this in telecommunications and finance and automotive and many other industries that have used the platform of open source to step up. You know, the other thing that I would say is that what the, what open source offers us is a permissive IP license. This isn't just about a GitHub. This is about the ability to invest to be able to see LF energy as an extension of your R&D. Because the future really in this area has not been created. We are just at the very beginning. So, you know, there's something that I wanted to say. I wrote the presentation and then I kind of had a thought that there was actually something that I didn't share. And I'll be honest, as a person who has been in the deep end of the ocean for the last period of time, I don't think I recognized how intense the log jam is and energy. And so the reason why I'm showing this is that the thing about a log jam is that there is no way to delicately pick it apart. The way you clear a log jam is with dynamite. So I'll leave you with this. The hyperscaling businesses that have created net zero or carbon negative business goals, you know who you are have become de facto energy companies. They are taking talent and they are moving ahead at the speed of technology to transform their businesses into carbon neutral and sometimes even carbon negative businesses. They are creating the future. They are becoming energy companies and in many ways because they understand cloud native because they are the cloud. In many ways they are better positioned to become the energy companies of the future because distributed energy requires distributed computing, but you will have to internalize the value and benefit for all. In other words, utilities, one of the things that utilities do is that they serve at the behest of society. They are a part of the social contract.  Yet for the future to work and for us to truly decarbonize, part of what we have to do with our economy is to do this and to recognize energy as part of our social contract. However, if utilities who are listening don't actually blow yourselves up, they will be blown up by Google, Amazon and Microsoft's of the world. Because the future of energy will be in great part, like with automotive in the cloud. And we are at the very beginning, these things are just, you know, we are inventing the future. But, you know, not long ago, someone in the energy sector, somebody truly respect said to me in all seriousness, but what is the burning platform for utilities to change? I shook my head in disbelief. If the planet burning is not a burning platform, then I have no idea what will move the industry. So, you know, this is, this is what I leave you with. This is a picture of the Huron Fosser River in Iceland. And my hope is that this community, that open source, LF Energy, the Lennox Foundation can get the river flowing that, that, you know, that maybe we are the dynamite, we are the new thing, we are the thing that can actually make this happen at a planetary level. And so in the next 20 years, I say, let's do this together. I think we've made tremendous strides in the last year. We are the power of together. Join us. There is so much to do. Thank you very much. Thank you, Shirley, for sharing that. It gives us hope that we can tackle climate change in the future and be a big contributor to that effort. Our next speaker, Sam Ramji, is Chief Strategy Offerser at Datastacks in a 25-year veteran of Silicon Valley and Seattle Technology Scenes. Sam previously led Kubernetes and DevOps Product Management for Google Cloud, founded the Cloud Foundry Foundation, which is a part of the Lennox Foundation, that helped build two multi-billion dollar markets at Apogee and BEA Systems. He also redefined Microsoft's open source and LITIC status from extinguish to embrace. Sam is a dear friend of mine and happy to have him speaking here today. Today he's going to talk to us about microservices 2.0. Please welcome Sam Ramji. Microservices 2.0 and data economies, becoming a data-driven enterprise. I'm Sam Ramji, Chief Strategy Officer at Datastacks. The world is evolving towards new cloud-native, data-driven architecture. Reactive, streaming, built on Kubernetes, understood through a graph. That builds on what we developed in the microservice of the era and creates data economies. What we learned from microservices 1.0 is that speed and independence creates agility for development teams and data sprawl for the enterprise. A microservice is an organizational construct and a technical architecture. A team of people who have all the competencies that they need from development to operations to product management, small enough that they can have dinner eating two pizzas, the two pizza team, and rendering their microservice above as an API and storing their information in their own data store. It's very good for building things fast and iterating rapidly to discover what's needed by users and how to support an SLO, a service level objective. It's comprehensive, it's complete, and it has the independence it needs to move fast. This team can use any tools that they want, any language, any data infrastructure. Now microservices were the beginning of networked data in the enterprise. Services at the core with data microservices everywhere is the big architectural change. Microservices are about the future of data. The microservices approach is easy to scale organizationally and shows greatly increased velocity as compared to large teams. Instead of using hundreds of people in functions, redeploying them to independent, fully comprehensive teams with all the diversity that they need to be successful is a much faster way to build organizations. Two problems emerge, service dependencies and data sprawl. Service dependencies look a bit like this. We have our concept of how our services might work with each other. Then we have how we deployed it and then we have what grew out operationally and our operational view of the services and their dependencies is almost never the same as we thought it would be when we designed it. Often we don't even understand the true operational practices. Databases themselves are all independent and fragmented, each one, sometimes several per microservice doing its own thing supported idiosyncratically by the microservices 1.0 team. These end up killing developer velocity by damaging service level objective performance and making data features complex to build and maintain. We solve service dependencies with a service mesh and operational graphs. A service mesh lets us have a common view and common control of all of the services flowing out of the APIs between each construct and from the microservices to their ultimate callers. From there, it's straightforward to build an operational dependency graph and know what's actually happening, not what you thought was happening. This is really, really a core component for building better S&L attainments. Now, the data sprawl problem is harder because the data stores were non-standardized by design. In that search for independence, we told the development teams they could use anything that they want. So any color you like, as it were, however, those competencies are not equally distributed across every single team. And as teams churn and change over time, as you go quarters and years into the future, the composition of the team changes. The microservice itself might be put into a quiescent state where it's only in maintenance mode and then you end up in real trouble. So the solution to data sprawl is a data mesh that supports many data stores with common infrastructure and governance. Moving the data stores out of the microservices teams per view and into an underlying mesh.  This lets you create a data economy. The common building block is a microservices 2.0 architecture that gives each development team speed and independence while giving the enterprise continuous data evolution at the velocity of the market. We reimagine the core microservices team beyond just the group that was required to build the service. And by broadening our perspective and look at machine learning teams, at the data scientists, at the business analysts, at the product managers and marketers who all need access to that data at their own speed in order to succeed in the business, then we get a proper view of what the next generation of microservices looks like. Two pizza team managing their own SLO without depending on themselves to manage the data or give access to other teams around the enterprise means that they can move even faster with fewer constraints while making sure that the competencies for data are in the right places in the organization. Now in a data economy, there's a free and open market for microservices that shape the data. They can evolve, compete and fade without data loss or sprawl. Data scientists, developers and product owners can find and share the microservices that work best for them while all accessing common data underneath. This is the foundation of a data-driven enterprise. As those teams change, as new needs develop, you could build new microservices against the same old data, getting better access, better value and making sure that everything is well governed, which is incredibly important in a globalized world where we worry about the purpose and pursuit of privacy versus data being used by businesses. We have to have a common view and a common management stance, not something that is under the purview of each microservices team but something that is held on behalf of all users of the data and for all customers of the enterprise. In the full review, our data mesh-based world looks like this in microservices 2.0 parlance, with the data economy bringing everyone the data that they need to deliver continuous data evolution at the speed of the market. So none of us is as smart as all of us.  Who wants to come along on the microservices 2.0 and data economies journey? Let's go far together. Thank you very much. Thanks, Sam. Amazing talk. Our next speaker is Neil McGovern. You know, in August 2019, the GNOME project was notified it was being sued in the state of California over a broad patent that allegedly covered Shotwell, a photo management application. The plaintiff, a prolific filer of patent seats and a patent assertion entity. This was the first time that an open source project has been sued for patent infringement. Neil McGovern, executive director of the GNOME Foundation, is here to tell you the story of how he responded, how his community responded, and the strategies that were taken not only to defeat the suit, but to secure a groundbreaking agreement, which means that this particular PAE will never be able to sue any open source project ever again. Please welcome Neil McGovern. So hi everybody. My name is Neil McGovern. I'm the executive director here at the GNOME Foundation. It's a delight to be able to be with you even virtually at the Linus Foundation's open source summit and for me to be invited to tell you about something that happened over the last year. Some of you may or may not have heard but GNOME got sued by a patent assertion entity over a patent they hold and claimed to be infringing from Shotwell, which is an image, a photo management application that GNOME has been producing and distributing for about 13 or 14 years now. And it's particularly interesting because this is the first time that a piece of open source software has been sued in this way, as far as I know. So I just kind of wanted to run everyone through what happened, the process behind it, and then really kind of highlight the quite extraordinary result that we got out of out of this particular case. So first I just wanted to kind of cast your everyone's minds back into where we was and how we first found out about this. So this was in August 2019 in Thessaloniki in Greece, what seems like now a very long time ago. We had just finished our annual conference, which is Gwadec, and it was very successful. We've had a really good time. We've had four, three days of talks and then another couple of days of workshops and get-togethers and hack-fest to try and sort of move GNOME forward. And we'd managed to get half a day at the end of the beach to just relax. And then on coming back from the beach there's this fantastic ship in the harbor that's dressed up like a pirate boat. What happens is you get on the boat, it sails around the harbor for an hour or so, and it's free, but the only slight catch is that you have to buy at least a beer or two from the bar. So I know not too much of a hardship, but that's where we are. So I was connected to a Wi-Fi point just at a cafe on the harbor, and then suddenly a tweet arrives, which was about GNOME getting sued over patent infringement in Shotwell.  We hadn't received any sort of serving or any notice or any letters beforehand saying that there's a problem. And then I found out to a random person on Twitter that apparently this is the case. So I then start to get a little worried, go online to try and find out more. And at that point the boat leaves and my Wi-Fi access point disappears. So I'm now stuck on this boat, which is sailing around the harbor, looking very pretty and it's a lovely hot day there, but with no internet. So I have no idea what's going on or what is all this is about. So eventually we managed to get back in to land, managed to get an internet connection, and then start to piece together what was going on. So a bit of background. These particular people who were suing us and it did turn out it looked like a genuine lawsuit that had been filed in Northern California was by Rothschild Patent Imaging Incorporated. Now the Rothschild is a very well known patent assertion entity who has a number of corporate organizations and companies that basically each one holds a single or two patents. And so he has a number of these organizations and the particular organization that was suing us is Rothschild Patent Imaging. And this suit was filed at the end of August in the district of Northern California and five other companies were sued at the same time. And the particular patent, which was filed is the 086 patent, which was filed in 2017. And the basic idea behind this is you filter pictures from a camera. So you plug your camera into a computer. There's some sort of process for filtering those images, either automatically or manually, and then it's sent wirelessly to a third device. So plug your camera in, select photos from last month and send to Facebook is the contention is that this would infringe their patent. So we have initial response and we needed to kind of work out what to do. Obviously first I called one of my pro bono lawyers, which we have in New York, Karen Sandler, who is fantastic. And got a fair amount of reassurance that okay, this does appear to be something real, but it, the initial look at it seems overly broad and this is going to be an amount of work for us to deal with. We should worry too much. However, he did also point out that to, if this was to go the full distance to be able to actually fight this claim, then you're looking at a bill of around $10 million to successfully defend against this. And I'm not sure about everyone here, but as a nonprofit organization who only has about nine staff at the moment total, which is quite large for a open source project. We don't have $10 million sat around. So a little bit of a worry there, what we're going to do. Unfortunately, I then took the plane back home from Greece, back to the UK. And on landing, I had an email from Chairman and Sterling, who are a large international law firm. And Matt Berkowitz and his team there have emailed me, they have noticed that this had been filed in Northern California, and they reached out to us and offered to represent us pro bono, which was a huge relief. So obviously I called my lawyer and mentioned this and she mentioned that they are fantastic firm who are able to offer real support. So that was a real weight off my mind. So we start talking to Matt and the team at Sherman about what we're going to do, what this is all about. And so kind of our initial response about this is my thoughts was, this isn't just about, you know, this is the first time that open source software has been sued in this way. And my worries is that this would set a dangerous precedent if we just gave in to the the demands that that will be required. I also had a concern, having a look at Rothschild entities before that the case was simply going to be dropped before trial. What had happened before, for example, is that they have sued Garmin Garmin defended and said we're going to take this all the way to court. And then leave Rothschild dropped the case about an hour before it was going to be before the first hearing in front of the judge.  So that that was a concern of mine. And I really wanted to send a message that suing a open source nonprofit and an open source project was not going to be an easy win. The way typically these PAs work is that they in the particularly in the Rothschild case is that they just file multiple suits against anyone they can possibly get away and hope for a low to medium settlement offer from each of them. And then they don't necessarily want the case to actually go to court just after a quick payday and trying to get money out of it. So officially we were served on August 30. I have that in inverted commas because they did manage to serve to an office that an agent of ours that we haven't used for about 10 years. So we never actually received the official serving, but we thought, well, we're not going to really contest that anyway. And so we went through a round of pro bono assessments and litigation holds with staff and the lawyers. So it's a little bit of work there up front just to make sure we had all our house in order. For those that don't know litigation holds is where you basically tell your staff members and anyone involved who could possibly involved in the case that they really really shouldn't delete any emails or try and get rid of everything. Everything needs to be preserved in case of discovery. So within about a week of the of the initial lawsuit and then us appointing appointing Sherman and Matt and his team as our council. And we've seen our settlement offer our first one from watch our patent imaging. And this was as expected. They offered us to settle for $75,000. So we'd have to pay them said $5,000. And in return, we would receive a license to use this particular patent. Now, obviously for the reasons I mentioned before, we slightly declined and then put out a statement after a month, which was very basic. It was something along the lines of we are aware of this. It will be we intend to defend it rigorously. We believe it's baseless. More news later. So a fairly plan straightforward statement, which received quite a bit of press also reached out to the open innovation network, a fantastic group of people who have, as I'm sure some people here will be aware, have a portfolio of defensive patterns. Now, unfortunately, in this particular case, because they're a non-practicing because the Rothschild Group is a non-practicing entity, they don't produce anything. So it's very hard for them to infringe on a pattern by not producing anything that they simply exist to hold patterns and sue other companies over this. However, the OIN were quite instrumental in strengthening our hand in a couple of cases by identifying prior art and making sure that we would have defense against the Rothschild. So then it took a little bit longer and we decided that it was time to go public. So we went public on 21st of October in 2019 and we filed against the case. So we had a answer to the complaint, which was basically say, the patterns are valid, we're not infringing. And basically to ensure that they couldn't simply drop the case. So it was under the US system. Once you filed an answer, then it requires the court to basically dismiss it. It can't just be unilaterally dropped from one side. We also issued a counterclaim for a declaratory judgment that the patent itself is invalid. And then a motion to dismiss the complaint that it should have been eligible for patent protection in the first place. We're using Alice claims and various other bits. And also for our costs as well, essentially our lawyers costs and any other costs we had because it should have been so later to the obvious that the patent shouldn't be an issue. And that this shouldn't be a thing that goes forward that it's essentially it's a waste of the court's time and therefore we should be able to receive our costs for this. We also put out a public statement and a call for funds. And we within a week or so, we had raised $150,000 from approximately four and a half thousand individuals throughout there as well, which was a amazing response and was able to certainly help us. So we got down this process of ending up where we did. And about the same time we got a second settlement offer, which was essentially, let's both walk away on an own cost basis. So let's pretend this never happened. And walk away. So we again, politely declined that. Interestingly, we received that offer about three times within a one week period. So we started to feel a little bit more confident that this might not end up in a lawsuit and that they would be quite happy just to walk away as soon as they've realized that we're not just going to pay them their fees. Unfortunately for them. As I mentioned, we've already filed a number of suits. And so they couldn't actually drop it. They needed our permission. And I wanted to start thinking of, okay, well, how do I signal what it would take for us to not have this patent overturned. And so we ended up this phase of pre litigation. So there's various phases, essentially before it actually ends up here in front of a judge. And this lasted about five months or so. And here's where we are again, going over our, what we're doing and bits of prior art and our defenses. So we identified 38 bits of prior art, which include other patents and patent applications, some academic papers and, and indeed projects and things that were available before the 2017 filing. And indeed, before the infringement claim date that they claimed was I think 2008. And this included stuff that we may before. So including shot well and G thumb. So the software that they were suing us over was its own prior art for the patent that they were suing us over, which is quite unusual. We also identified at that time that we had a license for the patent in question. Through another of our partners. So at that point, even if the patent was valid, and even if we were infringing, we were licensed for it anyway. So at this point, I think our risk level of us losing this case is rather low. And then we thought, okay, so if this does go to court, then what will happen? Well, and they lose and they get costs awarding against them. What will happen is that lots of our patent imaging will magically fold and there won't be any money and it will be a huge waste of everyone's time. So what our legal team did is instead of sending our depositions to say, hey, can you tell us more about the patent? And all of our questions was about how is Rothschild patent imaging funded? Is it under capitalized who has actual control and please show us reasons why the corporate failed should not be pierced and the Rothschild be made personally responsible for the outcome of this case and any potential costs. We then had a third settlement offer which was very much the same and we gave a counter offer to them. Again, this is leading up to the end of February when we had our first judicial hearing about it. So I want to talk about where we ended up. This took another four months or so of on and off negotiations. Sometimes we were returning to litigation, but eventually we did receive a settlement offer that we offered to Rothschild and they accepted. My key things in this is I wanted to show that we didn't pay them anything for this offer and I wanted to be able to prove what we'd obtained out of them. It needed to apply to all of free software. It covers the entirely Rothschild portfolio, not just this one and it must cover any future patent acquired. I didn't want Lee Rothschild to simply buy up another loads and then come back after open source software again. So there was a lot of back and forth, some confusion and but eventually we reached the final agreement. And this final agreement gives a covenant not to sue for what is now 150 different patterns under control of the Rothschild for any software that is open source to anyone in the world forevermore and in perpetuity. It also the patterns, the covenant not to sue follows the patterns and covers anything in the future that they're also able to cover. In this sense, we have essentially removed an entire pattern search and entity from the ability to sue any open source software, or anyone who substantively uses open source software that they claim to have infringed. So I think it would have been nice if we were able to get the patent invalidated, but I think what we've actually obtained here is a far bigger price that protects all of open source from a particular PAE forevermore. And I think it sends a incredibly strong message to any other PAE out there that you don't sue open source organizations, otherwise it will end badly for you. So at this point, I'd just like to kind of wrap up a quick, a huge thank you to Matt and Joy and his team at human sterling. They have been fantastic and work tirelessly on this case for us over a period of many months. And I believe that all of us as a open source community owe them a huge debt of gratitude to their work and to the quite astounding outcome we've received. So a couple of things just wrap up. Firstly, if you produce some open source software and you don't believe what we managed to achieve. If you email director at gnomed.org, I will send you the comment up soon and you can have a look yourself. That was the key thing to show exactly what was covered and how broad it is. Secondly, a plug this, although we've managed to raise 150k for this, the amount of work and time it took is a huge undertaking by foundation. If you would like to support us, please do. If you go to gnomed.org, there's a donate button at the top. And we'd really appreciate anyone who's able to offer their donations or their time. If you work for a organization that that this has helped or an organization that wants to support us, please email me at neil at gnomed.org or director at gnomed.org. And we can have a discussion about ways you can sponsor us and and the way that free software on the desktop has kind of helped to has helped you and helps people in what they do. So I'd just like to say thank you to everyone for coming along to this talk. It's a honor to be here. I think there's a mechanism for asking questions as well, which I'll be able to respond to later. So thank you very much. And I hope you have a fantastic rest of the conference. Thank you, Neil for joining us today to share this story. What an amazing accomplishment. Well, I'd like to welcome Caitlyn Raymer, Business Development Manager and Cheryl Hong VP of Ecosystem at Cloud Native Computing Foundation to explain the CNCF technology radar. Please welcome Linux Foundation team members, Caitlyn Raymer and Cheryl Hong. Hi, welcome to Open Source Summit Europe Virtual. I'm Caitlyn Raymer, I lead business development for CNCF. And I'm Cheryl Hong. I'm the VP of Ecosystem at CNCF. Excellent. So today, Cheryl and I are excited to share more about the upcoming CNCF end user technology radar. I'll be asking Cheryl questions on the goal of the radar, what makes it different and how you can get involved. So we'll jump in right away. Cheryl, as you know, I'm excited to get the word out about the tech radar here at CNCF. One of our goals at CNCF is end user driven open source, which you also highlighted at the last KubeCon Cloud Native Con Europe Virtual. Can you highlight how this tech radar fits in to the strategy of end user driven open source? What is the goal? It's a brilliant question, Caitlyn. One of the challenges with open source is that even though adoption is really easy, especially in the container world where you can install an image with a single command, it makes it really hard to know who is exactly using what. And that makes it hard for project maintainers to know what features they should prioritize, and it makes it hard for other end users to know what tools they should be using. The end user technology radar is a quarterly report from the CNCF end user community who are a group of 140 companies who are all adopting cloud native. And the goal is to share what they really use and really recommend when it comes to cloud native so that project maintainers and other end users can prioritize based on honest real world experience. And that's what we mean by end user driven open source. That's excellent. Changing yours a little. What do you think makes the CNCF technology radar different from something like a Gartner Magic Quadrant? I'm glad that you asked that, Caitlyn. The CNCF technology radar was partially inspired by the Gartner Magic Quadrant. Both help companies choose between technology solutions. The biggest difference is that the Gartner Magic Quadrant uses proprietary data analysis methods while we've designed the CNCF technology radar to be open and to be transparent and driven by the CNCF end user community. You can read about how it's created, you can see the data behind it, and you know who authored the report. For example, our next report comes from Ticketmaster, Dailymotion, and Indeed. Very cool. I just love how this showcases feedback from so many different types of organizations. I understand the radars are done quarterly and we've had previous ones done on continuous delivery and observability. So what's next? Our next tech radar is going to come out during KubeCon North America virtual and the topic is something very close to my heart, which is database storage. And that's everything from Postgres to managed services like RDS to specifically cloud native projects like Vitesse. We're going to publish it to radar.cncf.io. So keep an eye out in November. Great. I know everyone will be excited to see it. I'm sure we also now have many people wondering the same thing I am. How do I get my organization involved to participate in the next tech radar? The CNCF end user community is the place to be for anyone who wants to get involved with the CNCF tech radar. If you're adopting Kubernetes and cloud native, you should check outcncf.io slash join or get in touch with Caitlin or with myself. Thank you, Cheryl. I cannot wait to see what trends come out of the next tech radar. I think that's all the time we actually have for today. So swing by our booth here at Open Source Summit if you have more questions on the tech radar or CNCF in general. And don't forget to sign up for KubeCon, cloud nativeCon North America coming up on the 17th to the 20th of November. Thank you, Caitlin. Can't wait to see you there. And let's keep cloud native everywhere. Thank you, Caitlin and Cheryl. First, it's my pleasure to welcome Camilla Sharp, Global Offerings Leader with multi-vendor software support and Todd Moore, VP of Open Technology, IBM developer and developer advocacy at IBM. Today, they're going to share key elements organizations should consider when looking to leverage open technologies at scale. Please welcome Camilla Sharp and Todd Moore. Thank you, Jim. And thank you for that nice introduction. I'm here with Camilla Sharp. We think we have some topics that are really relevant for you here. There's two transitions that are happening within the European community. One is a transition to digital and the other is a transition to green. And Open Source is a way to further accelerate that. And as we go through our talk today, we'd like to introduce you to some of the things that we've seen as important to enterprises. Talk to you about the open enterprise and how you too can think about it, participate and be part of the open source community and world. So Camilla, I'll turn it over to you and you can get started for us. How's that? Great. Thanks, Todd. So as Todd mentioned though, we wanted to take a look at sort of some of the top trends that we're seeing today and really hone in on one specific area that we're seeing really is an emerging trend among our clients. And that's really the topic of open source governance. When I talk about open source governance, what I'm referring to is really the people, the processes that are used to create that management system around technology usage. So you can really think of it as open source management, if you will. Now, when I talk about open source governance, I like to use this chart here, which is around the application lifecycle management. And the reason I do this is because it's important to understand that when you're building an application or a product and it's really from conception right through to end of life, governance plays a major role in almost every aspect of that cycle. So when I'm talking with clients on a regular basis, some of the challenges that they bring forward in governance are what you're seeing on the chart here. So I'll just take a minute to cover a few of these. So really, when you're first starting to develop an application, you know, a lot of the times we have clients that are asking, well, what are the right technologies? How do I make the right technology choices? And how do I ensure that those technologies are going to be around for the long term if I'm going to invest in using those technologies? When they actually start to design and build those applications, it gets into more questions on the development side around, are these actually the products, the right products for what I'm doing? And in addition, there's a lot of choice. So how do I pick between a community version versus a commercial version because there's so many different flavors. So for example, if you're using a Postgres database, there's a lot of choices that you have. So from a governance aspect, it's important to understand what the differences are feature functionality and what's going to work best for you as a customer to solve your business challenges. You know, if we keep going around there all the way around to maintain so you've built your application, you've pushed it into production. Well, you want to make sure that your application is supported, right? That there's enterprise support for all the components that make up that. And what we find with our clients is that they're not using one or two or even five or 10 different software products when they're building these things. They're using really complex software stacks. So things like interoperability play a major role because what happens if you push something into production and something changes, in your environment, is there going to be an interoperability issue? Or is there something that maybe you need to update? And then finally, just the ongoing piece of it. So if you want to ensure that you're promoting usage of open source across your organization, you know, first off, you need to understand what open source is actually being utilized today. And then when you actually utilize those open technologies, you know, are there license implications?  Now, why is governance such a hot topic? You know, I have my own personal opinions on that. And it was interesting because earlier today, Todd and I were chatting a little bit around Europe specifically and what we're seeing. And we actually had a difference of opinion because we were seeing different things. So when I talked to clients, I'm actually finding that a lot of them in Europe, they've definitely embraced open source, that they're using it at scale, but they're at the point right now where in some instances it's gotten a little bit out of control and they're trying to figure out how do I kind of identify what I'm using and reining it back in a little bit. So, Todd, maybe you could share a little bit of your perspective like we talked about earlier. Yeah, and, you know, what I saw was I see growing contribution, but the folks in Europe that we're dealing with the types of discussions we're having are more along the lines of how now do I get into the contributing side? So they need that guidance and governance structure within their own enterprise in order to be able to figure out then how to safely go about being part of that contribution process. So on the one hand, they're tremendous interest in getting going and forming up within their enterprise, some governance structure, as you said, but yet they haven't been out there really in the contribution process to the extent that some of the other parts of the world have. Yeah, absolutely. And I think you mentioned it earlier too in the intro around transformation, digital transformation, right? So I think one of the main drivers of this, especially in today's environment, is that our clients are really, you know, embracing open source and trying to figure out ways of how they can accelerate digital transformation. Now that I've kind of set the stage in terms of, you know, how I view open source governance and some of the challenges that we're hearing on the technology support services side, I'll turn it back over to you, Todd, and you can tell the audience a little bit more about, you know, best practices for creating and fostering an open enterprise because IBM, like we've been involved in open source for decades now. And I think you can help share some of the lessons learned that we've learned along the way. Open technology is accelerating at an exponential rate. The enterprises that are those that I deal with the clients have just adopted it as just part and parcel of their strategy, their developers are consuming open source at a rapid pace. They're looking for safe ways to go about that consumption process as well as the contribution process because there's, you know, various terms of licensing and that applies to both copyright and intellectual property. And, you know, if you look back in the history of this, it really sort of started with Linux and Apache, the HTML server going into Apache. And of course, I was on those very early calls with my team looking at with Linux Torval that, you know, what could we do with Linux? And we realized that it could really provide an engine for growth in what we were doing at that time on servers. So it became, you know, something where IBM put a billion-dollar investment into it. And we pledged to not assert our patents against the little tux guy there. And as a result of that, we put faith in behind it for enterprises to start to adopt it. And it started the ball rolling. And then, of course, Eclipse came along where we made a large code contribution to kick that off.  But this exponential rise has continued here. And in the last, you know, 10 years, we've seen project after project come about really substantial things. Containers and Docker, Node.js, you know, 95% of the world's web services have some kind of tied back in the JavaScript now. And it became such that we had to found foundations within foundations. The Cloud Native Computing Foundation, as an example, has a group of 33, I think now, projects that are either in incubation or graduated. And that's just so that we can keep track of what's happening within that small space. But there's 1200 projects in the Cloud Native landscape that are associated with that. Little things like Kubernetes is the thing that's going to run the world here, right? And, you know, OpenJS is the same kind of thing. Amp, Electron, Node.js, jQuery, Grunt, you name it. There's a great set of projects, 33 projects within that foundation as well too. So that's a little bit of the history. And that's what really has pushed us all as an industry and as those who are going through this digital transformation to just embrace it and move with it. Because it's the very fastest way to get to the leading technologies to build what it is you want to go and build. So, however, you know, I believe that, and I strongly believe this, that if you're consuming open source, you really need to be contributing to open source. There's this harmonious cycle that happens, whereas you make those contributions and you get deeper into the community, you gain their trust, you help shape the direction where you go. And as a result of that, you can move faster, accelerate your business, differentiate yourself, and really go beyond just taking in and consuming open source, but being part of that world. We love to see good neighbors who come in and join us, and we at IBM like to help people come and do that. Oftentimes, we'll get engaged. And if you've got a problem, we're happy to help you get over that and into this contribution cycle. But when you do remember, all organizations aren't exactly the same. You need to realize that opens great, but it can be risky. You know, some of the places you may look into might actually have some proprietary code that's put there or a license that is unfriendly. So you have to be careful or it's a community. Maybe that just doesn't have many people contributing to it. The last contribution was maybe a while ago. Also, you know, if you look at what's essential to becoming an open enterprise, you need to have a program that you put in place. And for us here in IBM, it's always started with training. We make sure everybody has yearly training and certification so that they know what the rules of the road are. They're all now able to go out and freely contribute into open source projects. We make sure that people are recognized for their contributions. So those people who are out there who are significant contributors into projects or committers and maintainers have the ability to be recognized and monetarily compensated for that. We have tools to help them go scan the code. And then, of course, having an organization that supports your team across the board so that as they progress, as you clear those packages for use, that you have people who understand it or recording it and helping you through the process of managing that. Go out, consume, do it carefully, eyes open, contribute, as I said, into organizations that you feel very confident and friendly in. Lastly, I just want to say, create an open source project office. Make sure that it encompasses the business aspects, the legal aspects that it brings the technical stakeholders together so that they understand the processes and that you can work with them to smooth out any points as you go through this. Centralize it, have a core team that manages it. And then make sure you have adequate folks there who can consult with the developer teams and help them through the process of becoming both really smart about what they do from a standpoint of consumption, but also how to go out and contribute in open source. It's a little different than doing a product inside. People can sometimes be a little afraid of that. We generally offer projects help with how to get your first pull request landed and then some mentoring to help move them along as they go. So develop those skills within your team and help to share those across your enterprise. And of course, as you go through this, we'll have secure engineering practices that you need to go through and make sure you just track those vulnerabilities. So you'll want to be able to remediate as I said earlier. So that's what we believe you should at least start with. And if you need a little assistance, I think Camilla can tell you a little bit more about what we have going on in this regard. Great, thanks Todd. Look, I've been fortunate that I've worked with several members of your team and we've delivered some workshops to clients to help them understand more in-depth IBM practices, lessons learned and how to set up a project office. But what we find is there's a lot of those questions that I mentioned earlier and challenges that they're facing. So in addition to providing enterprise level support on both commercial and community open source products, we're now trying to address some of those other issues for clients that I mentioned earlier. So things like interoperability questions, product optimization, making choices around products, things like that. Those are all types of services that technology support services can help our clients with now. And we now have the ability to support over 240 different community open source packages. So it's a pretty comprehensive list. So with that, Todd, I'll turn it back over to you because I think there's one other thing that you'd like to cover today before we close. Every quarter we hand out awards to really deserving organizations that we feel very strongly about supporting. And we do it by having the open source development community across the company. Both suggest people who can be benefit from these grants that we give. And in this quarter, we awarded Black Girls Code with 25,000 in cash and 25,000 in cloud credits. And this is super for us. It's an organization that serves the community. They've got a great mission, right? They want to increase the women of color who are out in the digital space, basically empower people between the ages of 7 and 14 to become innovators in the STEM field. And it's just wonderful. Their goal is a million girls by 2040. So there's a little more that I think Jim Zeblin will talk to you about. IBM's sponsored a step challenge and I'll let him fill you in on the rest. So over to you, Jim. Thank you, Todd and Camilla. As Todd mentioned, one of the experiences you can participate in this week is our fit and fundraiser step challenge. With the Move Spring app, we're asking all attendees to join the step challenge over the event days this week. Help us hit our goal of a million steps before the end of the event and we'll be donating $5,000 to Black Girls Who Code on your behalf. Thanks to IBM who's sponsoring this challenge. In addition, take some time between sessions to play some games at the Red Hat arcade and have some fun in our virtual photo booth sponsored by CNCF. We've also have a great ZenZone for you for additional wellness and tomorrow we kick off a trivia challenge that I hope all of you will join. And now our final keynote session of the day. The global IT industry is responsible for 4% of global emissions and is on track to double that by 2025. In the data center world, we are collectively doing a decent job driving advances in operational energy efficiency, but this is only part of the puzzle. Operationalizing circular data centers means enabling a global circular IT hardware industry and to do so to catalyze both financial and environmental opportunities and democratize access to growth. Our next speaker, Ali Fen, president at IT Renew will discuss how operationalizing a global circular IT industry is both an opportunity and an imperative. Please welcome Ali Fen. Alright, thanks Jim. Great to be here. I'm really excited to be here talking to all of you at the summit this year again. I'm going to take us down perhaps a less familiar path today and we're going to talk about hardware, open hardware in particular, but hardware and sustainability. And the reason it's important and hopefully interesting to all of you, most of whom are probably in the software side of things, is that every bit of software is running on hardware somewhere and we have a huge opportunity and actually a shared imperative to make sure that that hardware that's running is as cost effective and as sustainable as possible. That is, that's what's behind our thesis about orchestrating a global circular IT hardware industry. And that's in fact the business that IT Renew is in. So I am president at IT Renew. We are, as I said, in the business of orchestrating a global circular IT hardware industry. What that means in practice is that we, we think about the world in kind of upstream and downstream constituents on the upstream side. We are in the business of working very closely with hyperscale cloud data center operators and cloud service providers. We work with them on kind of strategic analysis and operation of maximizing lifetime value, inclusive of multiple pathways for that hardware once it comes out of their equipment, out of their environments and we'll talk about that in more detail as we go forward here. And then on the downstream side of our business, we, IT Renew orchestrates a number of global markets. So we serve solutions, provide solutions into the broader tier two, three, four cloud service provider market, the enterprise market, the telecom market and so forth. So that we are really collectively bringing about this circular economic model and what that means in theory is, you know, keep assets in their highest utility value as long as possible. In the data center space, we think about racks. When those racks are decommissioned and the first life and have a lot of valuable remaining life on them, we sell them as racks into other solutions, then edge form factors and then components. So multiple pathways where we're optimizing the mix and in doing so, both the financial value of assets and the sustainability of those assets. So I'm going to step back a little bit here and kind of talk through the problem statement or why this is so important for all of us to think about. And the reality is simple. We, we as an industry are collectively working on, you know, technologies and solutions and business models and businesses that have immense positive potential, right, the technology and industry touches everything and solve some of the most important and interesting challenges create some of the most important and interesting opportunities.  And a few of the points you see here I'll just touch on on this slide right from a materials perspective, we are on track to run out of the minerals that go into electronics. There are lots of there are people who are starting already to work on strategies for starting to mine these same minerals out of the deep sea bed, which would have obviously just a tragic effect on on on that ecosystem, and is arguably the wrong approach right we need to think about how to do things more sustainable, sustainably, right at the same time things like AI, immensely powerful tool in again some so much of the important work that's happening digitally. And yet, the forecast is that within the next four years that we're going to AI alone is going to be, you know, consuming as much as 10% of the global electricity that's consumed annually right this is an immense environmental impact of these technologies as they get stronger and stronger and more and more powerful. And at the same time, you know, most of the rest of the world is on track to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions, but the digital industry in jet in in its entirety is actually on path to go from four to 8%. So in other words as a sector, we're going the wrong direction right we're instead of minimizing our impact, our impact is going up and that's just the nature of the immense scale of the infrastructure that we're running. Now, looking at data center specifically data center growth, unsurprisingly, especially in an era of pandemic which is accelerating so much digital transformation is is explosive right their Gartner estimated late in 2019 that there are about 65 million servers to currently deployed in the data centers that have more than 50 racks in them. And between 2019 and 2023, we would add about 14 million servers a year into those same environments, which should have us ending at that period that time period with 121 million servers in in production in those environments. But unfortunately, that's not the reality. The forecast is actually that we exit that same period with only 75 million servers in production in those environments, which means that nearly 50 million servers are going to be in the world or end of life between the period of 2019 to 2023. And that creates an immense waste stream. And, and the onus is on all of us to think about, how do we, how do we think differently about this, one of the stats I didn't mention on the previous slide is that, you know, we have annually more than 50 million tons of waste, right. And so of course that that 50 million tons number is huge. It's the equivalent of of 18 wheel trucks stack back to back lined up from New York to Bangkok and back filled with waste. That includes consumer electronics and other e-waste, but this 50 million servers that's coming out of data centers is a huge portion of it. And we need to think differently about it. Right. So that's one of the challenges. Now, we're doing a really good job in the data center sector right on on some parts of the sustainability thing. Right. So think about renewables. There's all over the press, thankfully, major players in the space major data center operators have very much focused over the past decade on on two things. One is operational efficiency in the form of PUE and making sure that we're we're running our data centers as efficiently as possible. We've made very significant gains there. And we've also made significant gains in the shift to renewables. Right. Originally it was mostly about renewable credits and that was a nice step. Increasingly it's actually about supplying these data centers with green energy, which is an even better step. And this is essential and urgent and important work and we need to continue doing this. Right. Job number one, keep marching on the path to renewables and then and and we'll get there. Right. Let's assume success there. If we assume success there, then we need to ask the next question, which is if everything we just talked about is about the operational phase energy. Are we looking at the whole picture? Right. And this IT renew has done some interesting research over the past year or so to really, truly fully look at the whole life cycle. Everything that goes into IT equipment from its its conception through its use into its disposition. And and there's some very interesting data that comes out of that analysis, which helps us to understand where next to look. So on this slide I've got just a more detailed picture of what that life cycle analysis looks like. And effectively we looked at everything that goes into the mining of materials and minerals through to component manufacturing across all of the components that go into a standard x86 rack. In this case, an open compute rack, open hardware, ODM built, and then of course system assembly into servers and racks, and then the use phase stuff, which people will well understand. And then of course the end of life processes of sorting, shredding and smelting and so forth. And if you think about that, the inputs to that system are the materials themselves and energy. And then the outputs of that system are in the form of emissions and waste. And what we did was we quantified that full life cycle. And to see again where we might where we else we could look to really drive the sustainability of our equipment. And it turns out there's an obvious place to look. It turns out that this scope three content scope three emissions or embodied energy. That's everything that's not in the operational phase pre use and post use is a massive component of the overall net carbon impact. Right. And this is in this case, this is an example where minerals were mined in the places that they are components manufactured in China. And then in this case system and rack assembly done in Eastern Europe and a data center deployment done in Sweden. And in this case, more than three quarters of the total carbon impact comes from that scope three phase. Right. So if that's true, basically everything the majority is tied to manufacturing, then what if we could defer that new manufacturing. And it turns out that because because especially our upstream constituents the hyperscale data center operators refresh equipment very very quickly for good reasons right but oftentimes unnaturally fast compared to what the technology treadmill or the lifespan is that a lot of this equipment has very attractive and interesting life potential right circular economic models keep those assets in their highest utility value as long as possible. So then the question is okay well what if we could enable a second life. In this graph you see the green is the embodied or scope three content that is all of the carbon impact that's tied to the pre use and post use phase, whereas the blue is the 22% that's tied to the operational phase. So if we enable a second life you can see that the total carbon impact the co2 equivalence comes down significantly, you have that 76% embodied content comes down by 52%, which is the largest driver of impact here. And of course, because the equipment is slightly older, the operational energy used to run it increases slightly so you see that of that 22% that was operating carbon, it increases by about 22% or 20%. But the net impact, because that embodied content the scope three portion is so significant is that if you enable a second life for this equipment, you can bring down the net co2 production or impact of the equipment by 24%, nearly a quarter right and just to put that in context to deliver that same value from a carbon to a second life by just focusing on the operating phase would require that we get another 68% better. And candidly we've done a really good job over the past decade of bringing down PUE and making our data centers very very efficient. So to think that we can achieve another 70% gain in that space is a big ask, right so this is a much lower hanging fruit, if you will, right to think about just buying second live creating second lives, enabling circular economy. And here's an obvious question, right, what is it more expensive right if it's the right thing to do from a sustainability perspective is it going to cost me more right and that's historically the mindset that has prevailed in a lot of sustainability conversations. And the reality here is that we fully understand, we all understand that it cannot cost more it has to be also financially better, and it has to be no less convenient no compromise to quality no compromise to performance any of that those are table stakes to any thinking about any of this. And the good news is, when you look at standard assumptions for, you know, depreciation rates for, you know, the costs of energy for utilization rates and so forth, and factor in the fact that Moore's law has slowed significantly. And it makes some logical assumptions about this. And it turns out that by buying that secondary life creating a circular economic model, the total system level total cost of ownership of the equipment also comes down by nearly 25%. So in this case you truly have a win win where you have, you have a much better sustainability story if you can create this secondary life. You have a much better financial story so you're truly maximizing the lifetime value of equipment in its aggregate right which is the opportunity that we all have here. Now I just want to step back and anchor us on that 46 million server number to give a sense of the potential magnitude of impact here. If we were able to create a second life for all of those 46 million servers, which is, of course, a lofty and aggressive goal but if just theoretically we could do that. We could save 31 million tons metric tons of CO2. And what is what does that mean right it's a it's a big number. Well it means the equivalent of nearly 7 million cars annual emissions so take 7 million cars off the roads for an entire year. And that's what we will get simply by saying, hey, let's take this equipment and run it for the for the lifespan that it was designed for and make sure that we're capitalizing on that full value and not, you know, kind of leaving a lot of value and waste on the table as a byproduct of our massively scaling infrastructure. So what does this look like in in a picture. So on this this is sort of our upstream downstream side slide, the circular IT hardware industry right we have not you know the variety of hyperscale data center type operators on the left hand side. Of course, as we talked about it's sort of these cascading circles where you're keeping these the assets in their highest value as long as possible. So the first one of those being internal reuse. It's obvious that that if we can actually keep some of this equipment in circular in circulation in its original home by just cascading it into perhaps secondary workloads. That's a win for everybody that maximizes the financial value maximizes sustainability, but if we can't do that and there are very good reasons why that doesn't work for the majority of equipment in these hyperscale environments. The next best thing is, well let's take that 2000 pound rack, do the necessary transformation to make it viable for the broader global markets, but keep it as a 2000 pound rack, right, minimize the waste, minimize the transformation necessary to keep to capitalize on the future value. Now if we can't do that, there's this wonderful thing called edge, which is starting to boom it's everybody's favorite buzzword right now and by some definitions edges forecast to be as much as four times. The size of the of the central cloud data center market from an IT equipment perspective. Huge opportunity to take these same compute and storage nodes best in class hyperscale technology and transform them into the form factors that might not look like racks, but leverage the exact same compute power and storage capacity to fuel other edge and distributed applications. And then of course, if we can't do that, then there's certainly value in harvesting the components, recertifying those components, selling those components into other systems and system builder environments. And then we always recycle the rest of it as responsibly as possible. And that's this is the business that it renews in and you can see here that the markets that the equipment cascades into is, you know, as I mentioned cloud service providers, retail environments, telco environments enterprise at large we're doing work in healthcare gaming, and and the enterprise more broadly right so what you get here when you do this is this kind of lifetime value multiplier where we're fully capitalizing and making sure that as little as possible of value is kind of falling falling through the cracks as we cascade these these various different cycles of circularity. So what does it take to deliver this right it seems a little bit daunting perhaps but the reality is, it's happening today, right, and open is the critical enabler right so none of this would ever have been possible in the world of proprietary kind of vendor locked in systems, but as the hyperscalers have moved to white box systems to ODM systems to open compute that enables us it renew as the orchestrating engine of all of this to be to be able to do reconfiguration some technical transformation and engineering work, everything from firmware to storage integration to software validation and so forth to be able to then certify warranty benchmark and deliver these solutions into the market in the same way that you would expect from an OEM solution right in other words no compromise to quality and performance fully warrantied think about these things as, you know, certified pre on BMWs with 5000 miles on them right you expect exactly the same performance, but you get a significant advantage in terms of cost and sustainability right so open hardware is the thing that enables all of this open systems firmware enables it of course these things are mostly running in Linux heavy environments kubernetes and so forth so open source is really the catalyzing factor here and then of course there's a tremendous amount that goes in beyond the engineering work into the global operations and logistics footprint that it takes to to, you know, to do all of the reverse logistics and the flows of equipment, and then of course the market right. What really is happening in addition to the services and solutions and product is, we all need to come together to help this thing happen right as I talked about at the beginning it's an opportunity and we've seen from a financial and a sustainability perspective, but it's also our imperative we are, we have a negative consequence to the power of our technology that is tied very much to the, the resources that the software demands and the hardware that that that embodies those resources right so we need to come together and, and move forward in a more sustainable model. The good news is, as I mentioned, it's viable it's happening today. The embodiment of this this connective tissue that connects those upstream upstream first lifetimes and the downstream second lifetimes is something called sesame by it renew. This is a full solution portfolio of rack scale hardware that it renew is providing proven hyperscale technology, right, as I said, fully warranted fully supportive. Think about this again as a certified pre on BMW dependably available at very large volumes right. It is expected in the next couple of years that the top like seven or eight hyperscalars will decommission more equipment, more than 10 million servers a year right much more equipment than the top five OEM cell collectively right this is a massive stream of equipment. It's available very dependably at very large scale, which means that the downstream markets can depend on it and can plan their road maps and their infrastructure on it reliably right something we haven't mentioned I talked about the system level TCO before. This is specifically the hardware TCO here. We are able to bring solutions to market that are 30 to 50% more cost effective than a comparable OEM solution. And importantly, that is normalized to performance right so again no compromise to quality fully warranted no compromise to performance at the same performance whether that's cores per rack containers per rack users being served IOPS terror clubs whatever your performance metric is 30 to 50% better total cost of ownership and that's because of just the fact that it's it's circular Give you a sense of how what it takes to make these things viable for the broader markets has to be super easy right the downstream markets don't have the resources that the hyperscalars do so the solutions have to be plug and play integrated rack scale solutions that come with that are configured to meet the broader market needs whether those are our containerized environments, those are virtual environments, those are AI environments, those are BDI environments, you know converged environments, whatever the model is full rack scale solutions can literally be wheeled in plugged in and played we're doing software certifications, things like obviously the Kubernetes stack, the mware and so forth right to meet the needs of the broader enterprise market that hasn't historically been able to take advantage of all this hyper scale innovation, because the broader markets just don't have the resources and the supply chain isn't designed to, to meet those needs, and this is what this is the game changer on that. So just coming back here to talk about, you know why this is so important, you know, it's truly a win win win on the upstream side of the business, think about if you're a hyperscalar and you can recover value from your decommission equipment that's tied to racks as opposed to components there's a significant opportunity there, potentially as much as $50 billion over the next 10 years, for just the top, like 10 hyperscalars right because they're recovering so much more value than they were able to historically, because of this circular economic model on the downstream side. We've done independent research with a third party that has characterized as much as a $10 billion a year market for recertified open hardware. This is places that are budget constrained that that need integrated solutions that want open and odm hardware have not been able to manage of it historically, and want and want to be able to piggyback on and slipstream behind this hyper scale innovation. And those that creates motivation on both sides right which is which is the beauty of how this thing comes together. Talked about the sustainability and the system level TCO benefit here, significant opportunity for us all to do much better on both of those fronts. And then lastly something I haven't touched on but it's super important is that about between 40 and 50% of the global population is still not online. And the UN SDG sustainable development goals call for universal access that drives economic development and it drives equity and prosperity for all of us as a global community, if we can get people online and digitally connected, especially now in the era where telehealth and education and so much more is online. And the problem here is that there's as much as $100 billion funding gap in getting that infrastructure in place. Now of course that's not all IT, but if we can take these circular solutions, and we can deliver infrastructure into parts of the world that are not yet online at much more cost effective, you know, in much more cost effective ways, then we can accelerate the movement to universal access and that gets us on track to both a circular and a much more inclusive economy. So we think this is a huge opportunity. All of these factors come in beautifully together from a financial and a sustainability and a human access perspective. We're super excited to work with all of you on it. I hope this has been interesting and I hope you have a great summit. Thank you very much. Thank you, Allie. Thank you for all today's speakers. I hope everyone enjoys the rest of today's sessions. We look forward to seeing you again tomorrow.