So Bernie Sanders had a heart attack a little more than a year ago as of today and as a Bernie Sanders supporter I will admit that I was definitely worried about him You know not just because of what he would be able to do if he were elected president, but as a supporter I wanted to see him recover So of course, you know It hurt to see people online saying that they wanted him to die and to see you know For example Kamala Harris supporters wish death on him But at the end of the day did it really bother me that much did I lose sleep over it? Did I make a video about it? No, because people are going to say things like that online You are literally going to find every conceivable opinion for every single issue out there And you know you're going to be offended if you look for things to be offended by so of course, you know If you see someone talking Badly about someone that you admire then you know check out take a break from the internet Tucker Carlson, however, does not have that same philosophy because he was really heartbroken at the fact that some people online Were laughing at Trump's diagnosis However, he wasn't even talking about those people For you know, most of this segment that we're about to see would really offended him Were people who had the audacity to point out that maybe Trump caught COVID-19 Because he wasn't taking it seriously wasn't wearing his mask wasn't social distancing was meeting with people indoors To point that out So Tucker Carlson is deeply deeply offensive now Maybe you know, I'm mistaken Tucker Carlson for someone else But isn't he the person that often times complains about the PC police and SJWs But here he is getting overly offended Getting up in arms because his feelings were hurt because people dared to point out the reality that Trump got COVID-19 Because of Donald Trump across the world tonight people are praying that we will learn good news about the president's condition Over at CNN, however, we were told again and again that the president deserved the sickness that he got and they tried to Out the usual hacks to explain why he deserved it a lot of people have been put in jeopardy by the President's behavior and now we've learned of course this morning that one of those people is the president himself But he just couldn't get over the fact that in his mind the mask equals weakness equals I'm not on top of this virus. So perhaps a bit of a shock this morning for Americans But not necessarily a surprise. It is also the most vivid possible demonstration of the incompetence and the Irresponsibility of the administration in large part. It's his own dereliction is Partly to blame for this. He chose to go out to rallies Imagine he just announced he was infected. He just got to Walter Reed. He deserved it They didn't wait long. Of course millions of Americans have been diagnosed with a coronavirus Probably people, you know probably people in your family. We can say that Hundreds of thousands have died see that's expert panelists are saying they all deserved it. They must have they were careless They were derelict in their duties If there was a lesson from the coverage of this, it's a very familiar lesson The media class is willing to attack the rest of the country if they think it will hurt the president They despise if they think it will give them more political power and of course It wasn't just the media in fact the official message of the Democratic Party is that Donald Trump had it coming We all receive that news with great sadness. I always pray for the president's family that they're safe Continue to do so more intensified. This is tragic. It's very sad but it also is something that that again Going into crowds Unmasked and all the rest was sort of a brazen invitation for something like this to happen Raising invitation He asked for it. He was dressed provocatively That's a Nancy Pelosi just told you many other Democrats are echoing that sentiment Rick Levinthal has been following this reaction From the Democratic Party. He joins us tonight to explain more Rick. Hey Tucker There are a lot of people wishing the president and first lady well on Twitter sending thoughts and prayers for a speedy recovery But no surprise the haters are not holding back actually saying they hope the first couple die and Twitter says it's immediately Removing those messages because they violate policy Here's one from former Obama staffer Zara Raheem who? Shared this and then apparently self-deleted a post reading. It's been against my moral identity to tweet this for the past four years But I hope he dies Then there's Steve Cox an independent candidate for California's 39th district who posted numerous tweets wishing death on the president And then wrote by quote. I hope they both die I was talking about Trump and Biden not Melania. She seems nice and former Elizabeth Warren staffer max burger wrote Trump has destroyed millions of lives. He deserves none of our sympathy Some Twitter users have compiled a library of mean tweets wishing the worst on the president and there are too many of them to Count Tucker in a statement Twitter says content that wishes Hopes or expresses a desire for death serious bodily harm or fatal disease against an individual is Against our rules and Twitter says it will prioritize the removal of content when it has a clear call to action That could cause real world harm. That's a quote Meanwhile, the president's tweet announcing he had the virus was his most popular ever at last count tallying 1.7 million likes Tucker Unbelievable Rick Levin Paul. Thank you. Sure If you find yourself rooting for someone's death anyone's death It's time to pause and take stock of how your own soul has rotted We're all gonna die in the end and trust me as we do We're gonna regret thinking things like that about other people We actually debated whether or not to put that on the air tonight. It's so ugly in general Our our view is don't put things on TV that are that ugly, but we felt we should because it is everywhere today Really Tucker? Really you were so offended by that that you debated whether or not you'd aired on television I mean, I thought that right wingers Were against this sort of PC outrage. Isn't this just political correctness aren't you just acting like trigger little snowflakes right now and What's astonishing to me is that he got the most offended at the most benign aspects of what was said The media clips that he showed were basically people rightfully pointing out that Trump has put other people's lives in danger Because he doesn't take it seriously. He doesn't wear masks He doesn't take it seriously. That's why he got it now.  You're a really bad populist Tucker because 72% of Americans Agree that Trump did not take the risk of COVID-19 seriously so they're not very sympathetic and You should know this you should have your finger on the pulse as a so-called populist, but to point that out is offensive to Tucker Carlson interesting Whatever happened to facts don't care about your feelings. I mean, I think it's pretty factual to state It's not surprising that he got the virus because he doesn't take it seriously But Tucker Carlson is offended.  Now what I love is that all of a sudden Tucker Carlson wants us to take COVID-19 seriously.  Yeah, that's what we've been saying Tucker Carlson That's why we've been wanting Donald Trump to take it serious because it is serious But now you're saying that the left and Democrats and the media aren't taking it seriously when they point out how Donald Trump hasn't taken it seriously And it's funny that all of a sudden he wants to take it seriously when for months Tucker Carlson like the president has also been downplaying it Not only did he critique Anthony Fauci But he downplayed the severity of the virus by citing two quack doctors that used a widely discredited study that they conducted Themselves to conclude that the infection rates were lower than the national numbers that were being reported But because daddy Trump got COVID-19 now Tucker Carlson wants everyone to take it seriously How dare you just point out the fact that the president got this because he wasn't taking it seriously the call I mean He's supposed to be the more savvy propagandist right the the more populist member of media But you can see he's just batting for a team and he'll go to bat for his team He'll be a hack. He doesn't care. He has no principles. Daddy Trump has COVID-19. So now we have to take it seriously And what's weird is that he got Seemingly the most offended at what Nancy Pelosi said when she stated very clearly she wants him to do better She's praying for him, but because she said that His behavior has been irresponsible He said that that's so bad.   He starts celebrating Twitter censorship and becomes the SJW that he often criticizes because the person who he was interviewing said Well, you know, we're banning people who um say anything negative or wish death upon the president Okay, so you support this Why weren't you speaking out when Ilhan Omar was receiving death threats? Twitter wasn't banning anyone who was coming after Ilhan Omar After a crowd of Trump supporters at a rally chanted send her back But now all of a sudden when you're offended, you're okay with censorship.


Live from Gillette Stadium in Foxboro, Massachusetts, it's theCUBE at the VTUG Winter Warmer 2015. Oh, here is your host, Stu Miniman. Welcome back to theCUBE, live from the home of the New England Patriots, and for the ninth year, the VTUG Winter Warmer. This is, I'm Stu Miniman, and joining me for this segment, I'm glad to have a user on here, it's Rog Rickshinty, who's a senior systems engineer with Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center. Rob, thanks so much for joining us. Oh, thank you for having me. All right, so Rob, you're a native New Englander here, live in Vermont, work in New Hampshire. Have you been to the VTUG before? That's my first VTUG actually, yes. All right, have you been to Gillette before? I've been to Gillette before, yes, many times. Excellent, and excited for Sunday? Oh, definitely, this is what you do on Sundays. Yeah, so we're real excited. Talk to us a little bit about what's your role at Dartmouth Hitchcock, obviously in the medical field there, tell us a little bit about what you do and what your IT look like. Okay, yeah, I work at Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center, I work primarily as a virtual zaker and architect, I do direct-to-services on it as well. Our team's fairly good, about nine people on it, but it's growing and the medical industry is changing and encompassing affiliations and on our team we're trying to keep up with that and virtualization has played a huge part in that, how we keep up with infrastructure and changes and it's really evolved since we've been working with it over the last eight, nine years. Yeah, I mean every company has to deal with the growth and the changes that are going on when you add things like government compliance on there, you've got all the HIPAA and everything else, so those are big challenges. Give us some feeds and feeds, how many locations you got, do you have like know how many servers you have, things like that? Yeah, locations, we have six main locations, we are bringing on affiliations left and right these days as funding sources change. Number of servers, we're up right around 1,000 servers, everything grows and leaps and bounds in those days and we are a service provider for the customers which are the patients and getting that whatever is needed for the patients. All right, so 1,000 servers, you know how many applications you have and are most of them a single operating system or what have you got? They used to be single operating systems, single servers down the road over the years, they've turned into applications that have 10, 12 servers up to our PeopleSoft applications may have 25 or 30 servers. You're talking about VMs. VMs as well, yes. And you are, just to be clear, you're in all Microsoft environment, running Hyper-V, correct? Correct, we have a majority of our environment is Hyper-V, we do have VM, we're in the environment as well but we straddle between the two but we are a majority Hyper-V environment, have been for quite some time. Okay, and you told me you're Microsoft MVP and you've been doing Hyper-V for a while now. Yeah, 2007 we were in one of the early betas of it, we actually used Virtual Server 2005 before that so we've been on the Microsoft stack for quite some time and now my background comes from a, from a more Microsoft side as well so it became second nature at that point and learning and growing with it and having the scripting abilities as well behind the scenes to fill some of the holes that we needed to at times and it's met our needs kind of just in time as features have come up through the stack. All right, of course Microsoft had been in the center of virtualization for a long time even if I'm a VMware environment, it's usually Microsoft applications that are sitting in the guest. You've been doing it a long time now, can you give us some of that journey? What was your early experiences? What's different now compared to, you know, what were the early days of Hyper-V? Definitely, there used to be, we talk about some of the environments that we, the Virtual Server 2005 environments are very static and very small and very, but met the needs of some of the easy medical applications. Now the growth in the number of CPUs you could have, the growth in the number of the RAM you could have, the speed of the disks, and the flexibility of the environment, the clustering this came, live migration wasn't there early on. Live migration is there, it has been there for quite some time, it's made it much easier. And as it's gone along, even those features that seem second nature now have been improved and sped up. The amount of memory, the amount of disk space, the performance, the QOS behind the scenes has really grown and really matured to a product that has even differentiators compared to VMware. So Rob, you said you've got a little bit of VMware, how do you guys decide internally, is there special corner cases that need VMware, or how do you balance that out? You talk about compliance in the medical industry and that's largely where our VMware environment comes from. The FDA approvals that happen for certain applications where they've certified on this stuff, anything that touches a patient certifies on a stack that is, has this type of software, this type of hardware behind the scenes and that particular vendor may have only certified on VMware at this point. We're talking with the Microsoft folks to really get that pushed through and we can do that. We'd rather do a larger stack on Hyper-V, but sometimes we have to go that route and we do. Yeah, it's kind of ironic. We think about it from just a technology standpoint. If it can be certified on bare metal Microsoft, it should work, it's going to work on Hyper-V, so shouldn't it be able to be certified? It's the funny thing, I remember back the early days of VMware, we had some of the same discussions because it only worked on a Microsoft server and we'd like, no, no, we're not changing the kernel of the operating system and you don't even know, and if it's a Microsoft certified server and it's VMware, so we kind of bit-flipped from Microsoft being the certified solution and now VMware being, and now Microsoft, they're catching up, though, on that environment. Definitely, the number of vendors that support Microsoft, the number of vendors that will now ship us a VHD file for the whole server has grown. But we still run into that and there's certain, it's more of a political than a technical. We know that it'll run Windows, we know it'll run on that. It is a support and a caret for them to say, this is what we, you know, they've got support objectives, they have to meet you as well, so. There is a need for an environment, but we look at the whole stack. We can fit it on Hyper-V as our main hardware platform, then we do because of the savings and we know that we've been working for long enough that we can get the performance out of it that we need. Yeah, you got to be pragmatic, you need to do what you need to do for your line of business. Many great things we'd like to do that have business implications that have put it down, so. All right, so Rob, I want to talk about the rest of the stack. One of the biggest challenges with virtualization is it tended to have a ripple effect on the network, on the storage.  Definitely, we looked at, so we've looked at the front end for Hyper-V and how to maximize cost and performance on that end. It's taken a while for management and the district to get away from the old three stack type of scenario where you have your traditional sand storage and your traditional networking and then your compute level. So we are starting to break down those molds a little bit. We still have the big iron, the big sands, the three parts in our environment for big databases and things like that. We're really trying to change the mode in our environment to look at, okay, especially with the influx of flash in the industry and SSD storage, it's really bringing the ability to have smaller converged components either on board or near the compute stack as well. All right, so you set me up with the convergence discussion. I know you saw the panel that I hosted this morning on hyper-convergence and the leading solution for Hyper-V is GridStore. Have you taken a look at those guys? Definitely, I've worked with the GridStore folks a little bit and I'm actually on their technical advisory council with a number of other MVPs to kind of see where the industry's going and we're trying to help them out as well as gain some knowledge from them of where the industry's going as well. Okay, that's great, so they reached out to some of the early Hyper-V guys and they're the really dedicated ones. Are you using the technology? Have you played with it some? Oh, we've looked at it and played with it. We haven't, we don't use it at this point, but it's one of those where it's, if you look at the structure of how a certain, the three-tier stack where you have this huge sand and now you're looking at a 2U or a device that can provide a lot of the same power and a lot of the same IOPS. Storage IOPS has been a big issue with virtualization and the CPUs have gone through the roof. The memory has come down. One of the major bottlenecks is your storage infrastructure and it can really put a bad taste in your virtualization environment and have some bad impressions if you can't keep up with that. I'm curious, how much do you get to talk to other people that are trying out Hyper-V or that they want to know about it? Do they come to you regularly for a resource? I do, I try to have them come to me and I reach out as an MVP, it's kind of what I've, I enjoy going out and talking in events like this or other events and smaller user group events, but it's something I like to try to deal with. A lot of people are still, they have the concept of Hyper-V still in the 2008 R2 range and we're trying to get them into the range of sale. It's totally different, these are all new features. These are differentiating, even differentiating features with VMware at this point. Yeah, which is something they had, they were playing catch up for a long time and now there's some features that are out there that are actually different and unique. Yeah, so Rob, it's always, you get one chance to make a first impression and of course if you've gone through three different iterations of the product, they're going to remember what they heard years ago and especially, some might have tried it, it wasn't ready, it obviously is matured, they've closed the gap, they've got some differentiating, what are some of the differentiations you see that Microsoft's leading the pack to? Definitely the differentiations are as far as how they're managing the migrations, how they're the storage and how they're migrating the ability to move VMs between the live migration has come a long, long way, whether it's storage migration, the ability to move VMs, the cross version live migration so you don't have to reinstall and move stuff in an offline fashion with Hyper-V anymore. Some of these features that have been standard to VMware for many years are now in Hyper-V and a lot of people don't know that yet, they think it's still kind of a class two hypervisor but it's really come a long way as far as that and even going forward there's some great features in the next version of Hyper-V coming in and especially with clustering and making them more resilient too instead of the clusters just reacting because one little thing went down, they're making it so they can withstand some of these and not have it react so quick, keeping the workloads running and then retrying and getting these things, getting pieces back. So how transparent is Microsoft on the roadmap that they're working on? How much interlocked do they have? Is it special because you're an MVP or in general, what's the relationship with Microsoft? Obviously as an MVP I get to look at a lot of the early bits and a lot of, see a lot of the webcast early on and what's happening but a lot of it's out, the technical previews out now, the betas are out now or the previews are out now and it's really, it's been a great, shaping up to be a good run for even with a system center stack which has been a little shaky in the past but it's really starting to come up as the wraparound of how you manage this in a larger scale. So let's talk a little bit about the management. vCenter is the center of the world for VMware environments, their system center, talk about your experience with the management and how do you manage, you've got both environments, what do you do? Yeah so we do have separate instances and we also have our VMM, system center virtual machine manager that has views into the vCenter environment as well and you can see the whole VMware environment as well. We use that more for the day to day type of access for able to find VMs, consult a VMs for our administration staff. We still are split between vCenter and VMM for deeper level management. We've looked at some third parties but then you got to get into third parties, how they can keep up with both sides as they innovate fast. So we are still split at this point but the management stack of how we monitor through operations manager and how we manage through VMM, there's a whole other side of the group in our mind that runs most of the VMware side and come from VMware side centric so we bought heads every once in a while if who's better but it keeps a good banter in the office and it's fun and we both realize that it's technologies and there's strengths and weaknesses in both of it. You got to have somebody to dilute the Kool-Aid a little bit if you're too deep in one solution. You remember when yours went down two weeks ago? Yeah, speaking about going down, let's talk about cloud for a second. What is your organization? Think about cloud, obviously there's compliance issues but I mean every company uses some cloud so what's your company's role on cloud? Now we're towing the water with cloud as far as test and dev and that's narrow scenario. Even though the compliance is there, the HIPAA compliance, the FISMA compliance are all on paper and in stone. There is still a political and a fear factor that's been out there for a while. And can you share what clouds you're looking at or using? From our standpoint, since we came from a Hyper-V perspective, their cloud story is really kind of a very nice stack for us. With VMware in the mix, we haven't really thought of where that cloud stack would go but thinking of how backup products interact with Azure and how we could move from internal cloud using Windows Azure pack to an external cloud fairly easily, especially with the new products coming out with Vnext here. That's, for us, that seems to be the easiest transition for us from a stacked perspective of what we're familiar with. So I think we're looking more towards Azure just because we've said the same reason why we kind of went with Virtual Server 2005 in the beginning. It kind of meets our skill set and our familiarity and our programming, as our PowerShell goes all the way up to stack into Azure as well. So it makes sense for us in that scenario. Great, so Rob, your first time at the event, I'm not sure what you've gotten to check out. What do you look for when you come to an event like this? What brings you here and what gets you excited? I think just coming to the event really kind of recharges you to think of the way people are doing things. It goes back and you think about new ideas of how to bring to the organization. You're not going to change everything but it gives you a refreshing view of where things are. You see the different hyper-converged people and where that will be in one or two years. I do it for the networking as well. I meet a lot of people down here that I know and it really gets you thinking outside of the box of your day-to-day environment. There's things we do every day in our environments that are just part of the job. But my management, as a senior assistant engineer, they're asking me where we should go as well and how maybe we break away from our current mold. Sometimes they don't like that but that's part of what I do. All right, Rob, the last question I have for you is talk about the role between IT and the business. In general, that can be a kind of charged political environment. I have to, and medical is just going through some drastic changes. I don't want any political statements necessarily but how does the bigger world in the business impact your IT and how has that relationship been changing over the last few years? The relationship is good. I would say that there are lots of things and lots of innovative things we'd like to do as technical. If you're not in technology and you don't like change then you shouldn't be there. So we are all looking forward to what we should do and we have some great ideas of where we think the organization should go. We do get some pushback as far as whether the management thinks it's too early or the upper management is ready to make an investment in that for a technology that may be only three or four years old, where you're talking about maybe a same technology that is structured that's 10 years old of how that works. It's really making a business case and kind of teaching for my standpoint going beyond technology and getting a financial and a technical, bringing that into the financial world as well for them to say, okay, we can go forward to this and especially with virtualization, we can move back easily in case things happen. Everything's kind of containerized so we can move stuff back and forth into newer technologies to try things out and get our toes in the water like different technologies in-house or even in the cloud. So do you find that the technology innovations are allowing you to move forward when you've got all the pressures of, you know, keep the budget down or cut the budget or anything like that or? I think being in the virtualization field has really helped because that's been in, especially server virtualization, that's been an easy win for us to say early on in the days, you know, this is a server that runs one workload. I can run 30 of these on this same type of size. It's getting harder because virtualization for us has become the norm and now we're trying to squeeze even more money out of a lemon that's already squeezed. But management is asking us to do that and they're looking for other than that and they're seeing peers that are doing this as well. So they're coming to us and saying, well, hospital down the road is doing this, so should we be doing it? And we kind of say, well, maybe yes, maybe no and we don't, we may not agree with what they're doing but we need to check things out, we need to get it running. All right, Rob, well, hey, if it's a lemon we're dealing with, we can only turn it to lemonade and if not we can puree it and make some baked goods out of it, much better than trying to get blood from a stone. Really appreciate you joining us for this segment. Appreciate all you do to get back to the community, you know, without the programs like the MVPs and the speakers at this event, it's so much harder for anybody to understand the new technology. So always great, we can get the user experience here at the UC user group and at all the shows we're at. We'll be right back with our next guest after this quick break.


They masturbate with other people's bodies. End of story. Inevitably, the sexuality of patients with personality disorders is thwarted and stunted.  The cerebral narcissist is often celibate. Even when he has a girlfriend or a spouse, he usually abstains from sex. Usually, the bullying side, the side who withholds sex, would accuse the other party of being nagging. A narcissist are very, very particular. A typical fetishist, for example, he likes feet, let's say, feet fetishes, food fetishes. He would be not so choosy. A food is a food. Yeah, he likes this kind of food, that kind of food, but generally he likes feet, not the narcissist. The cerebral narcissist is indistinguishable from the schizoid. He is asexual. He prefers activities and interactions, which emphasize his intelligence or intellectual achievements. Many cerebral narcissists are celibate, even when they get married. The cerebrals' asexuality is total, not only with the intimate partner or life partner, or secondary source of secondary supply.  So, for example, let's take an extreme situation. He would enter his hotel room and there would be a beautiful naked woman waiting for him in bed. He would not respond. He would not react. And this, of course, gives you the answer to porn, because he would react to pornography. If he saw the same woman that was in his bed naked in a movie, in a pornographic movie, he would react to her. He would have an erection, he would masturbate, and he would ejaculate, watching her, but on a movie, not as a... And this again comes to the issue of libido and tannitus. One of the reasons the cerebral narcissist finds it pretty easy to not have sex with other people, and for very, very, very long periods of time. One of the reasons this is easy is because the narcissist of both types, somatic and cerebral, is autoerotic. In other words, he finds himself as the most exciting, arousing sexual object. Somatic narcissists and the psychopath use their partner's bodies to masturbate with, and their sexual conquests serve merely to prop up their wavering self-confidence in the case of a somatic narcissist, or to satisfy a physiological need in the case of a psychopath.  Having conquered the target, they discard it, withdraw and move on heartlessly. Sex with the somatic narcissist, pyrotechnics and acrobatic society is likely to be an impersonal and emotionally alienating and draining experience. The partner is often treated as an object, an extension of the somatic narcissist, a kind of toy, a warm and pulsating vibrator. The autoeroticism is the key to the narcissist's sexuality, and therefore makes it very easy for him to retreat. His narcissist is self-sufficient in everything. Narciss doesn't need any other people. He doesn't need emotions. He doesn't need sex. He is totally self-sufficient. And so if he cannot get sex from outside, or doesn't want to get sex from outside, it's okay. He can supply his own sex. If he doesn't need emotions. The narcissist is really an autonomous, totally autonomous unit. The masturbation has always been universal, has always been universal. But when the narcissist masturbates, he's not the same, like a healthy person. The narcissist masturbates, he is making love to himself. It's an autoerotic act, not a stimulatory physiological act. The majority of healthy people masturbate, men and women, women a bit less, but men and women masturbate. And when they masturbate, they do it essentially for physiological reasons. The fantasies that go with masturbation ironically are extremely primitive and basic. The fantasies that are not connected to masturbation, they dreaming, are much more complex. And they are more like erotic novel, more like 50 shades of gray. So when women have fantasies, for example, that are not connected to sex, they would have a very elaborate story about meeting up, you know, the gorgeous dad, and how he rapes them, and they will have a whole movie. But when they masturbate, they usually would have one element or two, and same with men. So masturbation is essentially mechanical physiological stimulation of the genital to obtain release. It's about physiological release, not with the narcissists. Narcissists, as usual, is opposite to healthy people. When he masturbates, he has very complex elaborate ornate fantasies, which resemble books or movies, when he masturbates. Daydreaming of the narcissist is extremely basic.  Extremely basic. And a lot of the narcissist sexuality, unfortunately, that I must say, that is society's fault, not the narcissist's fault. A lot of this sexuality is stigmatized, is considered perverted, deviant, taboo. So the narcissist retreats. Retreats. His fantasies would be widely considered sick, perverted, deviant, and so he's ashamed. He's ashamed to share. There is no such thing as perverse sexuality. That makes the topic a bit difficult to discuss. Victorian middle class values aside, if the sexual behavior harms no one, including oneself, and is consensual between consenting others, then the sexual behavior is considered by psychologists and psychiatrists to be utterly both healthy and normal. I repeat, there is no such thing as sexual perversion. Narcissist sadism and masochism, appear from the outside, are actually instrumental and functional. One of them is to control people, motivate them, control them, and so on. There's nothing to do with classic sadism. There's no joy from the pain. The pain doesn't give pleasure.  And it's therefore not sadism. Sadism must have a component of emotion. The sadist loves to hurt people. He loves to cause pain, gives him pleasure to cause pain. That's not the case with Narcissist. Narcissist doesn't derive pleasure from causing pain. He derives pleasure with what he can make people do using pain. When the narcissist will seek masochism in sex, or in discipline, or when the narcissist will seek pain or hurt wherever it is, there's nothing to do with masochism. It has to do again with fulfilling, with obtaining goals or fulfilling functions. So discipline will remind him of love and intimacy. If he's masochistic in a relationship with the woman, it will fulfill other functions. Maybe the woman wants it. It's always goal-oriented or functional or instrumental. It's never pleasure for the sake of pleasure. There's no such thing with the narcissist, by the way, in anything, not only sex. Spanking, and not only spanking, discipline in general, whipping, spanking, many others have all these manifestations. They introduce certainty to the abuse. They make the abuse unequivocal, clear, certain, cannot be argued with. In other words, it reduces anxiety, but discipline introduces certainty. Certainty reduces anxiety. That's why the narcissist feels much better after such a session. This anxiety is gone. Now, is anxiety is gone in spanking, for example, in ways which are like multitasking, because not only the anxiety is gone, but he has a great feeling of intimacy. Remember that in the narcissist's mind, pain is connected to love, connected to intimacy. Actually, because he caused a lot of it in his child's mind, it's all the same thing. It's all, he's inside, he's the outside, the outside is inside. Pain is love, not connected. Love is pain. Everything is everything. Spanking has multiple purposes. First of all, it clarifies the situation. It's clear that I'm going to abuse you. It's clear you will have discipline. It's not in the air. It's not when will mommy attack me, now, in one hour, in two hours, tomorrow, the next day, and I will live in tension, I will live in anxiety waiting for mommy to attack me. No, mommy will now take the paddle and attack me. It makes the situation clear. Clear, less anxiety, good feeling. Second thing, it's intimate. It's intimacy involved.  It's intimacy involved, and intimacy is intimately connected with abuse, with the pain, and intimately connected with love. So it's a loving act of intimacy involving unequivocal, clear pain, not speculated pain, clear pain. The clarity is crucial, crucial, because it introduces intimacy, introduces love, following the session, the narcissist would feel wonderful, because they had received a dose of intimacy, a dose of love, a dose of clear abuse, so it doesn't have to be anxious. It has happened already, so he doesn't have to anticipate, and so on. So he would feel wonderful, and he would feel even doubly wonderful, because his view of the world, his Weltanschauung, his theory of the world had been proven right. His theory of the world is there's no love without pain, there's no intimacy without pain, and here it is. He received the spanking, and it was like an experiment in physics. He tested the theory, and he proved right. It's always gratifying when our theory of the world proves right. In proper BDSM, there is actually no dominance of submission. The party is a partner. They negotiate a role play, like theatre, where one of them plays the submissive, one of them plays the dominant. The submissive has a lot of say. She can stop the, I'm saying she, because most submissive are women. She can stop the act. She can directly act. She can say don't do this, do this. In typical BDSM, because there are extreme forms of BDSM, like surrender, like I'm not talking about this, but in typical BDSM, the BDSM, by the way, that is practiced by 15%, 15% of adult population in America, in the United States. It's much more common than people know. So in this type of BDSM, it's accepted that the bottom, the sub has equal power to the top, and sometimes more. It's a role play, negotiated and so on. In this sense, BDSM does not fit narcissists. Narcissists do not like to negotiate. They hate to be with equal power, equipotence. So narcissists will be very bad in BDSM, actually. However, many practices are subsumed under BDSM, which actually have little to do with classic BDSM, and these are extreme forms of BDSM, and there the narcissist finds pleasure. This is the BDSM, for example, BDSM, which is the kind of kink that involves humiliation, that gives a narcissist pleasure because of the humiliation. There is element here of dominance, converting the woman to a prostitute, humiliating her, punishing her. Narcissist is the outcome of a woman who tortured him, who wants to punish all women.  So humiliation BDSM will work. Violent BDSM, choking, nipple pinching, shibari, these kind of things would appeal to narcissists, absolutely. Shibari, which is a part of Kanbuki, is not exactly bondage. It uses ropes, like in Western bondage, but the emphasis is not on bondage, the emphasis is on aesthetic values. The human body is used as a sculpture. The ropes are very special, and they have aesthetic value. Narcissists are going to misinterpret Japanese practices as forms of super extreme dominance, because the body is distorted, and hung, and you know, and they're going to love it because it looks like this is the real McCoy, this is torture. They're going to interpret it as torture. Which would horrify Japanese. And so many Narcissists practice this kind of things and couple it with actual violence, like nipple pinchers and joint blood and vampirism. So Shibari took a very ugly, decadent, deformed form in the West, because it's been hijacked by violent people, aggressive people, psychopaths, narcissists, hijacked, coupled with real violence, real damage, and made into a sick, malignant form of the original artistic practice. Narcissists therefore does not engage in bondage. As I said, bondage is consensual. Bondage is to please the partner as much as to please yourself. Usually, actually, mostly to please the partner, you're just an instrument. The dome is an instrument in this case. And narcissists do not do bondage. They do, as I said, postage. And then they use the incapacitation of the victim to inflict severe pain and damage, non-consensual in many cases. All these practices in the hands of narcissists have become cancerous and are extremely dangerous. I would never dare to have it be the same session with narcissists or psychopaths, never, ever. Because he doesn't see it the same way. So you would say, what about pedophilia? Do you justify it? Of course not. Pedophilia does not involve consensual sex between consenting others. So what about coprophagia? Using feces for sex playing? Well, that happens to be medically very dangerous towards to oneself and to others. It's also out of balance and beyond the pain. It's also pathological. But even these are not considered cold perversions. They are parapherias. They are unusual sex practices. The truth is that absolutely anything can be a sexual object. Absolutely anything can be an object of desire.  When I say anything, I mean anything.  The overwhelming vast majority of humanity are fetishes. Even when you meet a woman, you reduce her to body parts. No one pays attention to the totality of a woman when he first sees the woman. The man immediately scans the breast, the face, the feet, whatever turns him on. And so fetishism is the natural state of sexuality. Not an aberration, not a deviance, not a perversion. As Victorian sexuality would have us believe and we are still living in Victorian age. Fetishism is the normal state. And the thing is that, as I said, fetishism is virtually unlimited. So you can have people who are attracted to elements or components or units that are unusual. It is not their attraction to a specific element that is unusual. It is the element that is unusual. The fact that they are attracted to something specific is not unusual. This is the rule. That's the common state. It's just that their choice of what to be attracted to is unusual. But if you read textbooks in sexuality and psychology, they will tell you that being attracted to a specific element is sick, is unusual.  Any sexologist will tell you it's a lie. But it's a lie we don't dare to discuss openly. It's simply a lie. So I therefore don't think that there's anything special in narcissists dealing with fetishes, or maybe something special in the specific fetishes that narcissists choose, which reflect their, for example, need for objectification, or need for novelty-seeking adventures, for example, the ski guy, or need for utter and total surrender, which is when you become a pet. Pets are all domesticated, controlled and slaughtered. The fetish per se should be, all the textbooks should be written exactly opposite, exactly reverse. Narcissists are very, very particular. A typical fetishist, for example, he likes feed, let's say, food fetishes. He would be not so choosy. A food is a food. Yeah, he likes this kind of food, that kind of food, but generally he likes feed, not the narcissists. Narcissists, we have a highly specific food. They are very extremely detailed in their demands. They would go hours, days, months, until they find the right right woman, body part, object. The real abnormality, the real aberration, is people who don't have fetishes. That's very worrying. These people worry me a lot, because for example, it's possible to construe, it's possible to claim that pedophiles are people who do not have fetishes. The pedophile does relate to the totality of the child. Most pedophiles, 80% of pedophiles, are not attracted to children sexually. They are attracted to the company of children. They are attracted to controlling the child. They are attracted to the child's personality. When you talk to pedophiles, why they were attracted to a specific child, they will talk about the child in terms of a lover. They would say he had sparkling personality. He had a captivating smile. I couldn't resist him. He was so cute. He was so wonderful. Pedophiles, actually, have a holistic total view of sexuality. That's the reason why very few of them actually end up having sex with the children. Very few pedophiles actually have sex. They don't seek the sex. They seek the child. So this is an example of pathologized sexuality, sick sexuality. I would be very worried by people who are not fetishes. That's my view. Like with everything else, there are numerous myths about pedophiles. First of all, it is not true that pedophiles are attracted only to children. A majority of pedophiles are heterosexual and a majority of them have families and children of their own. And they are attracted to opposite sex. Actually, they are actively attracted to opposite sex. That's the majority. Majority, 20% of the population have constant pedophiles, fantasies. It's not fair. Majority of fathers are sexually attracted to their teenage daughters. It's also a fact. I said before, anything can be a sexual object. Your daughter could be a sexual object. Why not? She's young. She's beautiful. She's newborn. She's sexy. It's no problem in principle for a father to be sexually attracted to his daughter. I would have found it actually very disturbing if a man with all the equipment would not be attracted to a young female just because technically he is her father.   In Britain, until 160 years ago, in Britain, the legal age for marriage for a woman was 10 years old, 10. In Yemen, until a few years ago, was 12. Afghanistan was 12. And so on. This is culture dependent. And the vast majority of the world until very recently, a woman at the age of 12 was able to conceive. And the minute she had appeared, she was able to conceive and was considered eligible for marriage. Now, the very concept of child is very new. As the concept of child was invented, again in Victorian Britain and in France this time, concept of child was invented, we started to have prohibitions on certain interactions with children. Now, pedophilia is and should remain a crime, active pedophilia. And so we should distinguish between the act and the fantasies. Fantasies are common. They are not unique to narcissists. They are detailed. There is a sprawling industry of child pornography online because of that. And the fantasies should not be suppressed, cannot be suppressed, cannot be fought, cannot be on the very contrary, I think they'll be counterproductive. What should be monitored very closely are the acts. And this is where your next, your other question comes in, where's the line? Where's the line? First of all, because of the unique structure of narcissists and psychopaths personality, the risk of incest is much higher with narcissists and psychopaths. And the risk of pedophilia, active pedophilia is much higher with narcissists and psychopaths.  Because I mean, it's endless. Very big risk with narcissists and psychopaths. And with narcissists and psychopaths, the minute inappropriate behavior begins to show up, the kind you described with the bathroom and so on. This must be caused for serious alert because it's a slippery slope when the narcissist starts by entering the shower when the child is naked and before you know it, he's having sex with the child. In the case of narcissists and psychopaths, there's no impulse control, no boundaries, no limits, no obedience to rules. So there you cut it the minute there is the first hint of inappropriate behavior, not with normal people. With normal healthy people, a conversation would do. Listen, you embarrass a child, it's okay. Child may misunderstand what you're doing. You know, it's okay. You can talk to healthy, normal people, no need for alarm. But with narcissists and psychopaths, you have to be aggressively defend the child, to aggressively protect the child and educate the child. If father is doing this, it's not okay. You should tell father, please, father, can you live there?


Okay, let's get started. Well, first of all, thank you so much for coming. I'm so happy to see so many of you here. And today's topic is a very hot topic. It's very interesting as well. And according to our user survey, container has always been ranked as one of the top three interesting topics for our community. So, and there's still a lot of discussions and a lot of speculations and confusion and I think it would be good to, you know, try to use this section to get some of your answers, your questions answered. And today, I'm very fortunate to have invited this elite panel for you. And we have both business people and technical people where people, you know, we have board directors, we have PTLs. This is a really heavy duty, heavyweight panel. So let me, without further ado, I'd like to introduce this elite panel. So first of all, I'd like to introduce we have two open-stack board directors who also sit on CNC and board directors, Todd and Kanji. And then I'd like to introduce, we have three PTLs or XPTLs who work on container projects in the open-stack community. And first, we have Steve, Steven. And then Adele. And then Nihao. All right. Okay, let's get started. And I do want to leave some time for you to ask questions. And again, like this is gonna be both business focus and technology focus, but not too much detail in technology, but more of on the issue side. Okay, so first of all, we know there's a lot of things happening in the container space, right? Some of it's hype and some of it are true, right? So the two best people to talk about them are the two board directors who sit on both open-stack board and CNCF board. So I'd like to invite Todd and Kanji to share with us what's happening in the container space, the good and bad and ugly. Good and bad and ugly? No, it's all good. Container? Container, yeah. Hey, good morning, everybody. Thanks for coming. Todd, Todd Moore, and I work for IBM, but I helped put together the activities for the CNCF and have done the same in the past for open-stack because we really felt that the container world needed a locus for starting handling the issues that span the different environments that are using containers, whether it was mesos or Kubernetes or Docker, that there were a set of issues. There was a set of common things that we needed to be doing and that there was a new vision that we needed to have for truly cloud-native applications based on containers. So that led us to form the CNCF, but what we realized when we did that was that there was a lot of synergy back with all the other organizations that were going on. In fact, because of my role here at the OpenStack Foundation, it was very natural to start bringing in the OpenStack team to start talking about and sharing what it was that we had and the important aspects and how all of this could play together across the containers. So it became less of a, containers are gonna take over the world to more of a cooperation between organizations that started to form. What we find is that, especially in the CNCF world, is that we don't wanna replicate everything, all the great work that OpenStack had done, all that difficult networking and storage and other activities were just, its security, et cetera, just tremendous amount of effort, years of work put in and to start from scratch and go do that all over again and replicate that just didn't make any sense. So that synergy started to build and people could see that we needed to start working together. And we've extended that thought into places like Cloud Foundry, right? Cloud Foundry at its heart underneath is, of course, containers, right? So we could have a common container specification of the OCI. I think Kenji wants to say a few words about that. And that common container, the RunC container that came out of Docker could be used everywhere, right? So we started forwarding relationships with the Cloud Foundry team as well too. So not only is Docker talking in part of this, but Cloud Foundry is as well. And then in CNCF for this new Cloud vision that we have, we need a common service broker, right? Everybody needs a service broker. It needs to be very good. So now we've spawned a project that we're working on across the Cloud Foundry team and the CNCF team to go build a service broker that we can all go pick up and use and not duplicate. So this theme is continuing and we're starting to see that a world of cooperation is building across the container projects. Now that's not to say that there isn't end fighting and little things going on, right? It's also a hotbed of mine versus yours and other things, right? And people wanting to fork or rumors of fork or other things that go on. So all that is sort of playing itself and people are starting to work together. And our hope here is that the work that we're doing there becomes something that unifies people as opposed to seeing it break apart. And so we'll see a lot more happen in that world. And I think we'll see pieces of really important infrastructure that Docker has been working on and other things start to come out and fill out the portfolio of things that we need to happen. And the CNCF and OpenStack and others will drive that. Great, thanks, Kanji. Hello, my name is Kenji Kanji. I'm in charge of OpenSoft software development team in Fujitsu. Please forgive my poor English. Very good English. Diversity. From my perspective, I have three topics. First three are container related to functionalities and the capability such as Magnum and Clear and the Collab has been actively developing OpenStack. And I personally, I am personally very interested in Collab project which will make OpenStack deployment of much easier because it is a very new use case of container technology in OpenStack in addition to deploying application using container. And the secondary, second is about standardization of the effort of container. The standard runtime and image format is very important to ensure the application portability and sustainability. Those standards are currently actively discussed and developed in OpenContainer Initiative as known as OCI since last December. And first specification will be released soon, I believe. I believe that it will bring our, it will be our value of step of growth of container ecosystem. And last one is about momentum of cloud native computing. In addition to deploying the application using container, it is very important to connect the applications and provide them as a new service. The cloud native computing foundation as known as CNCF hosts various project and is developing a software building blocks for cloud native computing based on microservice architecture. And in addition to that, the standard API is also very important. I believe that standard API and software building blocks provided by CNCF will bring a hyperscale distributed application platform and allow applications work together and create new values. Okay, well I really appreciate in our country and their contribution and being the bridge between OpenStack Foundation and CNCF and OCI. And I really think that OpenStack is an integrated platform and we want to make sure that we welcome all these different various open source communities into our ecosystem. So thank you for your work. And so now next I would like to ask the technical folks the PTLs, the XPTLs, and to kind of talk to us, to everybody about what those three container projects in OpenStack. And I know some of you might know already, but I just want to kind of build a baseline so we all have an understanding of what kind of container work that we have been doing in the OpenStack environment. So Stephen, would you like to start? Sure, I'd be happy to. Okay, that's working nice. So I've really been involved on making sure that containers are brought to OpenStack. That's really where I've focused pretty much the last three years of my life in OpenStack. Got involved in Magnum for most of the original commits and recruited the core team. So I know quite a bit about Magnum. Magnum is a really interesting case in which we run Kubernetes on top of OpenStack. And then kind of at the same time we started COLA. COLA right now is a, it deploys on it with Ansible on bare metal. So it's not really something that fits well with cloud native, although in the future we're going to go to a model of what I would call converged cloud, which is where you run Kubernetes underneath and you run OpenStack on top. So that's where I see the future of those integrations between Magnum and COLA. So they're kind of, they're both models, right? So you've got Kubernetes on top and you've got OpenStack on bottom. That's Magnum. And you've got Kubernetes on bottom and OpenStack on top. That's COLA Kubernetes. So that's, that's COLA and Magnum and the nutshell. So would you like to speak about COLA a bit? Yes, thank you. My name is Mihave Szembski. I work in open source technology center and Intel and PTL in COLA project for OkataCycle. So if you've seen yesterday's keynote, there was, Stephen said there are a couple layers of containers in OpenStack or OpenStack in containers. So according to the recent surveys, deployment of OpenStack is still a big issue and upgrades is still a big issue. And these two are very, very close together. So containers helps both. So it was only natural that at some point we need to create, we need to use this new awesome thing to deploy stuff that containers are. And we did it in COLA and as Stephen said, COLA, we started with, actually yesterday on my presentation, you could see the, we have a couple different trials on how to deploy, how to actually deploy containers. Ansible is the first one that actually worked and it's ready now. I can show you to try it. And I won't actually agree with you, Stephen, that it's not cloud native. It is actually cloud native. It's about applications that are cloud native. It's how you deploy containers. It's a different topic. And if you deploy them with Ansible, they can be just as cloud native. And we wanted to prove that OpenStack as an application services are actually pretty well made cloud native applications. And if you deploy COLA, you can actually see that's true. Well, Gail, would you like to talk about courier? Yes, hi. I'm Gal Sagi. I've spent the last two and a half years working mainly on OpenStack networking and containers networking. Started with Tony project career and the previous PTL of the project. We started the project because what we notice is that users are starting to deploy like Todd mentioned and everyone else containers side by side with OpenStack, whether it's isolated or whether it's the same environment, deploying containers inside OpenStack nested. And today everyone are talking about deploying OpenStack in containers. And what we notice in these environments that there are different set of solutions and drivers and infrastructure for containers and for OpenStack. And we said, why? Like why can't we utilize and use the same infrastructure both for your containers and your OpenStack workloads? And this is what career is all about, bridging between these two worlds. And we started with the networking use case where we now have, where you could use Kubernetes or Docker or Mezos and actually map these models into Neutron. So you could out of the box, any solution that you have that support Neutron API can now also be used for your containers networking, whether they are nested inside VMs or on bare metal. And of course this also expose all of OpenStack richness and flexibility and advance services to your containers. Great. So thank you for that information. And so I just want to say from a user perspective, now we have Corea, Cola, Magnum, and then you'll have OpenStack, we have Container, CNCF, OCI, all these things. So can you guys share with us, with the audience that what are the use cases to, as a user, when should I use OpenStack only? When should I use container platform only? Or when should I use containers on top of OpenStack and or OpenStack on top of Container? Can you just give us use cases from a user perspective who would like to start? Sure. Meow. So well, I think, so if everyone here's, I assume is using OpenStack. OpenStack are virtual machines, virtual machines have its differences between containers. And I would say, if you need to run virtual machines, just use OpenStack. But on that note, to use OpenStack, you need to deploy it. Then you can use Cola to do it, which means you will be using Container. On the other hand, if you run just containers and your whole workload is super cloud native, I'm pretty sure the new container engines like Kubernetes or MISOs will be perfect for you. There is also this use case which Steve mentioned, which probably will be true for a lot of people when you need both. When you need to have different workloads, needs different tool sets. Like certain things will need stability and maturity and security of virtual machines or bare metal. Other workloads will be cloud native, totally cattle like things that could pretty much run on Kubernetes. Then you can deploy Kubernetes cluster across your data center and deploy OpenStack on part of it, using for example, Cola Kubernetes and keep rest of the cluster ready for your cloud native workload. There is one other use case, which actually will use Magnum because I should probably know, containers are not exactly more secure. If you're concerned about security and separation between multi-tenancy, separation between tenants, but still your tenants needs to run cloud native applications, you can make use of the very neat idea that Magnum will pretty much spawn a Kubernetes cluster on top of virtual machines so every tenant you have can have their own private Kubernetes cluster with all the nice things Kubernetes has to offer while being completely secure and separated with the VM level of multi-tenancy from another tenants in your infrastructure. So, I think that's pretty much sums it up. If I can add, during this past two years, I've seen everything like all kind of mix and match configurations and all kinds of setups and environment. And I think like with any other technology, I don't think you want to set any kind of limitations. You need to identify your use case, identify your traffic patterns, identify what you're trying to do and then really investigate what the solution gives you. Don't just because I see a lot of people that are converting things just because there's a lot of talk or hype talking about the specific technology or the other. Try to find out with reliable resource and testing what is best for you and after you've found it, think five years from now what will be the best solution for you and plan for that. Yeah, I was just going to add when I was listening to his use cases and the thing that we're going to see is there's sort of a time horizon of long running things and very short running things. We're seeing the whole serverless world start to rear its head now and lots of uses around containers in that to spin things up very quickly. So it's going to be the spectrum that you have and it's going to depend on what you want to spend for your application as well too, what's the cost structure and behind that do you just need something to spin up quickly and go away and not want to have that whole server sitting there running either a VM or running your containers under VMs or over VMs, et cetera. So this whole spectrum is going to be here and you need to explore that entire space as you build out what become your cloud native app. So there's infrastructure that's now coming together around serverless. There's an open source project that's just starting up at Apache and there you'll be able to go and play and see and participate in that as well too. So look at the whole spectrum and decide what makes sense for your application. Yeah, I would just like to add that again I think the Converge Cloud is a really solid model for larger enterprises. You know, the idea that virtual machines are going to go away is just not going to happen, right? We've got software that's 20, 30 years old so people are just now migrating 10 years after VMs have kind of emerged onto virtual machines. So those applications are not going to be rewritten. Cloud native is more of a greenfield approach, which is great. I like greenfield, I'm kind of a type of the spear engineer myself. So I think that's a very unique feature. I think we want to make sure that OpenStack and CNCF work well together. And I think the projects we have today that we've identified kind of early on deliver on that model, there's probably more we can do. Where we kind of cross over in the future is undefined. I think it's kind of depends on who's willing to lead the projects and that's really what it comes down to. As far as the Converge Cloud that's going to be tackled and that's more for larger enterprises whereas maybe to your question of whether or not where would you use these things I think OpenStack might make sense in a smaller enterprise 100 nodes or less if you wanted the larger enterprise you might want a thousand nodes of Kubernetes and you might want 500 nodes of OpenStack. And you'd want that all on one platform. You wouldn't want two things to maintain because operators hate that and it increases operational expense and that's a big problem for operators. So we know that you know like you said it's going to be a converged hybrid with container bare metal and VM. So do you think that what we have today with all these three container projects Kola, Korea, Magnum any need for other container related projects in OpenStack if there is what do you think should like we should be thinking about. Okay anybody? I know I never asked you guys this question so sure. I can say I'm not sure about any new project but and this is something that we try to do last summit in the operators summit and it's very important for us the people that are building the solutions and are driving these projects to understand the challenges and the problems better. So I do believe that we need better collaboration first of course between the communities containers and OpenStack but also between us and the people that are actually deploying and actually using these capabilities to understand what is the priority what needs to be addressed and what are the difficulties of running containers on OpenStack side by side. Actually I do have an idea for a new project. I may not start myself because I've done that plenty of times and it's very painful but Todd mentioned OpenWisk I think OpenWisk is fantastic in terms of providing serverless serverless is a new thing you know there's a machine learning that would be a new thing serverless is really interesting and OpenWisk is really interesting going into the Apache Foundation maybe there's some opportunity to figure out how to get OpenWisk to work inside of an OpenStack ecosystem that I think that would be really compelling to people because I see serverless as kind of the next big disrupter in technology. Anybody else want to add? No I like that I think that's true and the more that we as a community reach out and work with the other nascent projects as things come involved in this space and make them part of the community and the ecosystem that we have and are friendly the better this is going to come out so keep that in mind and I think that's just a great suggestion I just want to add that there is some initiatives for Amazon Lambda like for for Swift and I wanted to say that Docker was the first one that deployed container image based there's emerging project Rocket which may also find its way into pretty much any all the projects that we just mentioned there are Docker centric today Kubernetes is moving more towards Rocket so Rocket can be next next thing that people may want to look at and make sure that projects that works currently will work with Rocket and other container engines just as well or pretty much what we think need most now today is not as much as new projects as to ensure that projects that are there today are major are stable and are well tested because container are still new in operators mindset and operators are not very trusting trusting folk because they have reasons not to trust the new thing which means we need to make sure that containers will reach the level of maturity when actually people would deploy it without having to fear for their life and I think that's the biggest challenge today in deployment so fear for their life they are more cautious because they are all about carrier grade exactly that's the thing and I bet nobody here will say that container are carrier grade today so I just argue with that a little bit I think containers at least as we use of them in COLA today are very rock solid and I think as Kerr uses them when we did our Kerr integration with COLA that's rock solid I think Magnum the container implementation there very rock solid you know some of the newer features of Docker that those things may not be rock solid so but everything that is in open sector today is rock solid and I don't think operators should be concerned with those things I would bet my date on it so what I'm saying essentially what I'm saying essentially is container is still new and they need to be there for time you mentioned Docker is not rock solid if Docker is not rock solid then we then we need to make it rock solid that's essentially what I meant okay yeah I agree with that but I think it is 112 maybe wasn't as stable because of some of the things they did it sort of last minute but I think that over time that's going to get better too of course time at work is what we need but containers have been around for a really long time actually I mean Alexi is there for 20 or so years now yes I'm glad I have Mihao and Stevens standing far apart from each other we beat each other up later but then they bond in the container space so I can see that some people my thing is very mature some people I don't even know still new so from a user perspective like you said operators or user perspective if they want to adopt container if they are already using VM open stack if they want to adopt container what's your advice on how they can get in there with certain peace of mind and safety and adopt container in the open stack environment in a more of a safer way who would like to address that I'll take a crack at it you have to train on container technology it's not something it's just like training on open stack it's not like you get open stack and then you're good to go even though with Kola you can deploy 120 nodes in 20 minutes you don't know how to use open stack after you deploy it we can deploy it really easily but we don't know how to use it well I know how to use it but not everybody knows how to use it containers are the same state except they're newer so there's less people that have experience with containers so I think if you want to learn how to use containers training is a good way to go and the best way to train in my opinion is on the job training you can use it with containers see how containers work again I think looking at open list would be interesting from a kind of where the future is going to be maybe a couple years down the road that's a totally different programming model than even containers even though it uses containers it's an implementation detail so those sorts of things are things to train on I don't mean training by professional trainers I mean training by doing real work and partner with people who understand the technology and part of it and do POCs and other things to get those who can transfer some knowledge into you working with you and don't be afraid to ask there's plenty in the community as well to talk to people here obviously want to share we're here at summits but find a friend when you hear make a friend who knows something about containers and share and next summit come to get together as well too and keep moving it do you think there's a room for us to create reference architecture or any kind of cookbooks or any kind of tips stuff that in the repository that people can kind of get a kickstart those things are coming here and the foundation is working towards that so we're using all of the open-sec infrastructure but not using NOVA and using Kubernetes with that infrastructure we see that in the survey results so us being able to then develop a reference architecture around that and help other people understand that is something that we think we'll want to go and do we had a good session with the analysts and this very same question came up we're going to work through that and we'll provide those things and we'll provide that information about the different architectures that we have I'm glad to hear that so I just wanted to add that when I said that containers are still early in the game at least in open-stack deployment field you're much better with them than without them so regardless to what I said before just try it and see what's the difference what's the actual issues there are issues, there will be issues in the last years but you'll still be better off with them so I think it's work to just try and play with it and see whether or not it meets your needs great so I have a few minutes left and I'd like to open up to the audience for questions could somebody give her a mic I probably don't need a mic you need to be recorded everything has to be recorded thank you everyone on the panel I have a question about I missed a session this morning on Zoom that used to be called Higgins apparently and it's saying it's a new project in open-stack and that Magnum's moved to just supporting container orchestration engines can you tell me how Zoom fits in yeah so I can answer that question a little bit basically Magnum started out with an API that allowed an abstraction over Kubernetes APIs and Zoom took that abstraction part and provided it separately now Zoom's not in the big tent it's kind of a new emerging project we'll see how that works out I think the early feedback we got when we did develop Magnum was that people wanted to use the native tools provided by Google and Docker for the clients they didn't want to use an abstraction that's my general take on the situation but Zoom still I think serves a purpose and I think people will be interested in it once it joins big tent so to Steven's point what Magnum really does today is they deploy Kubernetes and with Kubernetes you can deploy whatever what Zoom does is to kind of deploy Docker without the Kubernetes in between, just use Nova to it so there was a driver called Nova Alexi Nova Docker and that's pretty much the next generation of this the native clients are the big thing now next question thank you for the presentation you say please test, please play with what about the other way when as a cloud provider I must deliver the cloud, I must ensure the production grade so what do you think about the new way of using or administrating the open site layer or a cloud native application to the cloud to the cloud to the cloud to the cloud it's not the same tooling to monitor to administrate the application and to react can I ask a follow-up question do you mean open stack specific or could be open stack specific then at caller level what's the impact of the package in caller if you take an unseable version of callable deployment caller it's a glorified package we just build the packages before we install them we build images and then we just push them to the nodes there is very little impact on the things like monitoring like logging in fact in caller itself we already have deployment stack we have demo deployment of the monitoring stack but if you want to hook it up to your own set of toolset everything's possible it may require you to do some thinking we're more than happy to help you but the runtime of the container in effect is not that much different than the runtime of the classical application and as I said if you try it there are many many benefits from using containers and it's worth it to add this some level of complexity because the benefits are significant good so if we're just talking about colon and open stack on top of a container environment there's 12 APIs that we use to operate an open stack deployment only 12 APIs so it's very simple and if you're using something like Docker you know there's I don't know 60 or 70 APIs plus a whole bunch of variables sorry not variables but big options and whatnot so it depends on what your use case is so that's why I asked the follow up question if you were more interested in open stack or more interested in containers because containers are not as easy to use today that'll change to use today as for example cola is but cola we really focused on operator experience that's like our mission pretty much we want our operators to have a good experience so 12 APIs we want to keep it nice and simple so people can keep it in their head and understand it so is anybody have anything to add? no that's okay thank you any more question what's the opportunity that we get all these experts on stage was there actually there's a mic here if anybody wants to keep it we have one question here thanks so you said that basically horses for courses with regards to application deployment paradigms you could go open stack, you could go serverless you could go somewhere in between if you look forward five years we have a fraction that's deploying by each of those paradigms predict the future for me that's a good question I know it's a tough one yeah I'd like to guess but I don't really have any idea so you have an idea so all these things evolve over time if you look right now you'll see that VMs dominate the world and containers are coming and people are trying to put into production most of these things take on a time horizon five, ten years to really become solid and become part of the infrastructure so I think that most obviously it's a sliding skill that's going to happen here and I think the serverless world is probably ten years out I think with some large fractions say 25% of what's going on there are more if the cost model works out in latency issues and other things I'd say that in the five year horizon containers are going to take a very large chunk of what's going on 30-40% of what we do will be there but I think that in that time horizon you're still going to see VMs substantially be what they are today and it's not just KBM or it's VMware and other things are still prevalent and will be for a long time thanks Tom for rescuing me yeah well I think we just ran out of time well thank you so much audience and thank you so much panelists and it was a good job thank you


Nigerian politician has been advised to always listen to the voice of the people that voted them into power. The general secretary of St. Gabriel Catholic Church of Nigeria, Reverend Zachariah Sanijumi, gave the advice during the celebration of the church's World Communication Day, which is aimed at promoting media literacy for discipleship. Dual log, meaning that the two voices are speaking. They are not listening to one another. Somebody, you are waiting for the other person to finish. Meanwhile, you are framing your own, your own point. You want to bring up your own point. So for that reason, dual log is not helping us. And that is what is making society, other people to be adamant to see that they emphasize their own point and what it means by killing and the rest of them. But we urge journalists that we must not relent. We must constantly also communicate so that others will listen by listening. We will come to understand one another. The signs we've seen with the primaries simply still point to the fact that we are not listening. Our politicians are not listening to the people. Our politicians keep drumming to themselves and dancing to their drums, not to the people. The signs of the primaries so far is very disheartening and worrisome. We just hope and pray that even if politicians refuse to listen to themselves, the people themselves should try to listen to their own song and do the right thing. Click the notification button so you get notified about fresh news updates.