I think we're ready to start. Welcome, everyone. This is the first ever public debate about drugs here at Davos at the World Economic Forum. So we're very excited. This is historic. And we're very excited to have this panel here today. I want to start out by breaking protocol to the light of our organizers. So please keep your phones on as long as they're in silence. Just keep them on so you can share any photographs, video, ideas about what's shown here today. We're very happy to be co-hosting this Univision and Fusion with the World Economic Forum, as I said. And before I present the panel, who needs no introduction, really, I want to direct your attention to the faces in our backdrop. And that has to do with the fact that we're discussing this issue here today at a very high level with policymakers, with people who are involved in the human rights advocacy and, of course, who have a global perspective on this issue. But we're discussing also an issue that affects people all over the world, from the poppy fields in Afghanistan to the streets of New York to the slums of Rio or Ciudad Juarez in Mexico. So keep that in mind as we move along with our discussion here today. First of all, Kofi Annan, thank you so much for being here, president of the Annan Foundation, and of course, former Secretary General of the UN. Thank you so much. Thank you. We have Governor Rick Perry from Texas, Governor. You've been governor for 13 years now in Texas. Yes, sir. So thank you so much for being here. It's my honor to be here. The states are moving forward in the United States with drug policy. So it's very important to have the governor from Texas right here, President Juan Manuel Santos from Colombia. President, thank you so much. Thanks for being here again, and Kenneth Roth from Human Rights Watch. Thank you so much, Kenneth. Thank you. Let's get started. I warned you in the speaker's room that I was going to ask you to come up with two or three sentences that shares your stance on drug policy. So let's start with you, Kenneth. All right, I mean, in my three sentence version of drug policy, it's been a disaster. It has inflicted enormous harm in terms of a mass incarceration rate, enormous violation of our privacy, huge violence through the cartels that the increased prices have fueled, and for what? Drug use is not down. It is time for a different approach. It's time to reassess. And the problem behind all of this, really, is the criminalization of private drug use. It's time to look to alternative ways to discourage or regulate drug use if we see it as an evil compared to alcohol or tobacco, but to move beyond the criminalization that is causing so much harm with so little to show for it. President Sands. Well, I come from a country which probably is the country that has suffered most of all the countries in the world in this war against narco trafficking. At the same time, we have been readily successful in attacking and combating all the links of the chain. We have learned how to be successful against cartels, against production, against the marketing of drugs. But we, after 40 years, feel that we are in a sort of static bicycle. We look to the right, we look to the left, and we're in the same environment with the same problems. So what I think we should do is rediscuss the strategy that the world has against drug trafficking and try to encounter, try to find new ways, more effective ways to combat drug trafficking. Because what we are doing right now is not the most successful and the best thing we can do. Governor Berry. Enrique, thank you. And just before I start quickly, I want to say thanks to Professor Schwab for the invitation to come and participate here. Mr. Secretary, Mr. President, Ken, thank you all for participating.  And with that said, I want to say that I come certainly with an open mind and open ear. And some of the things that we've done in the states to address the issue of how we keep from criminalizing and keeping or using, if you will, the issue of initial drug use as a tool that puts people into prisons, that gives them the opportunity to become hardened criminals. And we've been very successful in the state of Texas with drug courts. And as a matter of fact, looking at the issues of criminalization and of dealing with those individuals who have been brought into our criminal justice system, today Texas criminal justice system is at 96% of capacity. When you look at other states like California that is well north of 150% of capacity, you have to ask the question, what are they doing in these different states? And we all compete against each other for ideas and concepts. So I bring to the table that I think it's bad public policy for the government to say here's one more substance that is not good for you. And science clearly tells us that this is a substance not good for you. How do we address the issues of substance abuse and criminalization? And I think that is what you're seeing some laboratories of innovation in the states be very successful with. Interesting. We're going to get in depth into that, Secretary General. Yeah. Let me say that I believe that drugs has destroyed many people. But wrong governmental policies have destroyed many more. And we need to really look at the policy and ask ourselves simply, sincerely, and honestly, is this policy working? What are the effects of this policy? And if it's not working, do we have the courage to change it? At least there is a need for serious public debate on this issue. In some countries where anyone you know knows someone who has been impacted negatively with the issue of drugs. But the question is, are we ready to make an honest review? You recently published an article at the end of last year calling for the end of the so-called drug war on drugs. And you say there's a clear evidence that this policy has failed. But still there's no commitment to changing things or looking for new approaches. What do you think that is? I think basically we feel that once you look at it, come at it from the point of view of education and health and help these people get off it, when we realize prohibition wasn't working, we had the courage to change it. If we admit that the drug policy and the repressive laws on drugs have failed, and it ends up throwing so many people in jail, I don't know if the governor can confirm this, but I'm told in the US, for example, the government spends more money on prisons than on education. Obviously there's something wrong when one is confronted with this situation. Is this a situation that can be defended? Isn't this a situation that is crying out for review and different policies? I would leave it there. Let's get into that a little bit. Kenneth, 1.5 million people are arrested every year in the US alone for drug crimes. The vast majority of those, 80%, around 80%, are for simple marijuana possession. And of those arrests, blacks and Latinos, are twice or sometimes three times more likely to be arrested than whites who consume marijuana at similar rates. So there's a racial component to drug policy and to this criminalization of drug consumption in the US.  So not absolutely right. No, it's worse than what you say. Human Rights Watch did a study recently where we went state by state looking at the ratio of whites who were imprisoned for nonviolent drug use and blacks. And as I recall, the worst state was Illinois, my place where I was born, which was something like a 50 to one ratio. If you were a black man, you were 50 times more likely to be in prison for drug use than a white man. So there's an enormous racial disparity. And indeed, I think Americans wouldn't put up with this degree of incarceration for mere private use of drugs if the burden was fared surely across the board. The fact that it is falling so disproportionately on a minority is part of why it persists. But it is the main driving factor behind America's enormous over-incarceration problem. And this is an issue not simply of misplaced resources as Kofi Annan mentions. It also destroys lives. I mean, you take people who are being given enormous prison terms, 15, 20, 25 years for use. And you have to say, how do you justify this? Yes, there is some harm to drug use. There's some harm to alcohol use. There's some harm to tobacco use. We learn to deal with those harms through education, through treatment programs, through non-penalization methods. And the issue isn't legalization. The issue is decriminalization. There's got to be a better way than ruining so many people's lives just because they, in the privacy of their own home or at a party, have decided to use drugs. And I mentioned the United States, of course. If we may ask Richard to explain the difference between legalization and decriminalization. Because often when you ask for change, they think you are asking for legalization of drugs. And there's a fine difference that I would want you to explain to our audience. Yes, that's worth dedicating time to. Yeah, I mean, the difference is quite simply. Criminalization means that you can be convicted of a crime and put in prison. And in the United States, the way it works, you get put in prison for a very long time. But you don't have to legalize. You don't have to say it's carte blanche, anything goes. You can still regulate it. You can make sure that kids under 18 don't get it. You can make sure that things are properly labeled, that doses are regulated, so you don't have overdoses. Ideally, in my view, you also regulate the supply chain, which is a way of undermining the market that fuels the murderous drug cartels. So I'd like it so that you can do the equivalent of going to a pharmacy to get drugs. It would kill the market that is driving violence in Colombia, in Mexico, in Guatemala. So that's what we estimated that drug cartels in Mexico would lose anywhere between $2 to $20 billion with the marijuana legalization in the United States. And I mentioned the US, because I had the figures from the US, but this happens also, the racial component and the socioeconomic component in Brazil, in Colombia, in Mexico, all over the place. Well, you were asking why Mr. Corfianan, the world has not reacted to this failure. Right. And I want to get your perspective and your perspective. I will tell you my point of view. This is an extremely sensitive issue politically. Usually, serving heads of state don't even touch the issue. They touch it after their heads of state. Why? Because it's very sensitive. That's why I proposed in the Summit of the Americas, I proposed to President Obama, to all the presidents of the Americas, that we give a mandate to the OES to study the problem in depth. Because most of the times, people approach this issue with prejudice, with a preconceived idea. So objective studies, really, what's going to happen with consumption if you legalize or if you decriminalize? We don't have those figures worldwide. So we have to start by looking for the actual facts. What is happening? What really are the problems? And then collectively, because this is an issue that not one country can solve it, it's a multinational, it's a world global problem. Collectively, we can then start to discuss new approaches, new ways to be more effective. And that's, I think, what we're doing. In next month or in March, there's going to be a meeting in Vienna. And there's going to be a general assembly, specifically in the United Nations, to discuss this issue in the year 2016. I hope that by then, all the think tanks, universities, and many countries could have a more clear idea of what to do. Because today, quite frankly, nobody really knows how to approach this. How to approach. And I interrupted you because, I mean, especially interested in your perspective and in Rick Perry's perspective, because you're both currently in government. And you might pay a political cost for taking a leadership decision. It's more popular to have the position of the governor than my position. I can tell you. In a state like Texas, there's a political cost for taking leadership in an issue like this. And here's an interesting thing. And I think it's really important that you laid out the difference between decriminalization and legalization. And often when we have this conversation, people talk about legalizing drugs. And I think, as you heard me say in my opening remarks, I am not for legalization of drugs. And what we've done in the state of Texas over the last decade through these drug courts is do exactly what you have said. Didn't get a lot of national publication of what we had done. And I will assure you that the Obama administration has not talked about Texas and bragged about what Texas has done too often over the course of the last five or six years. But the attorney general pointed out to Texas and the drug courts and the way that we have dealt with these over the course of the last decade to be able to decriminalize this issue and to lighten the load, if you will. No, Mr. Secretary, I do agree or disagree with you in that analysis. We don't spend as much money on incarceration as we do on education in the state of Texas. I'll close the net question. And that's a good thing. But the fact is what we have done, and again, I think states are laboratories of innovation. I hope other states will look at what we have done in the state of Texas from the standpoint of thoughtfully putting into place these drug courts where we give shock probation, where we give treatment, where we allow young people whose lives would be destroyed forever if they went into the prison system an opportunity to expunge their records and after a period of time to walk back into society or actually to stay in society and be contributing members. But still, Texas has one of the highest incarceration rates in the United States. I think the fifth form, drug possession. Around the fifth. And I want to get Kenneth's perspective on the drug courts too. But can I ask a very rich question? I haven't been governor forever. Well, 13 years is the period of time. If I could address Texas from that point. That's why I said it at the beginning. I think by all means, the drug courts, anything that decriminalizes is good. But in whether this is a lingering problem, whether it's your problem, there's a big problem in Texas. I mean, if you take Texas out of the United States for a second and compare it with the world. That's been talked about before. You know, I know. Yeah, I think you compare Texas to Germany. Texas has one third the population, two and a half times the people in prison. If you put Texas and put it on a global chart, there are only two island nations with a higher rate of incarceration than Texas. And drugs are not the whole problem, but drugs are about 20% of the problem. Don't get confused that we are soft on crime. Right. But we could have the broader conversation. But drugs are still about 20% of the problem. So I think anything that can decriminalize the approach to near use is very worth doing. Thank you. And which is what we're doing? I want to. You wanted to say something. No, that. No, I was saying. I don't know the thing. I think the discussions have clarified this question of the resources going to prisons and education. The governor massively says, has clarified that Texas doesn't spend more on prisons than on education. And I accept that. You said that sometimes it looks like we're on a static bicycle. And two years ago, President Santos. We were on a static bicycle, and we are more and more confused. I will ask you a question. Sure. How can I tell a peasant, a campesino, from mountains in Colombia that he has half a hectare growing marijuana, that he will go to jail because of that? If in Colorado or in the state of Washington, it's legal to smoke marijuana, how can you explain that? Not only that. 22 states have medical marijuana loss in the United States. This is a major contradiction of what is happening right now, which, in a way, shows the need to have a worldwide discussion, an in-depth discussion about this issue. Was it easy to advance this debate, this discussion, during your tenure as Secretary General of the United Nations? Well, it wasn't at the center. It wasn't at the center of discussions. The UN drugs program is based in Vienna. And most of the discussions take place there. You often have Attorney General's, Chiefs of Police. There's going there to have discussions. But it's moved up the political agenda now. And I don't think we can push it back. And I think it's important that they see it seriously. Kofiana is touching on a real problem at the international level in that drug policy is discussed by the law enforcement people in Vienna. And we need to stop viewing it simply as a law enforcement problem. We need to look at it as a public health problem. And the question is, it does some harm drug use. But the fight against drug use using criminal law does enormous harm by ruining people's lives by putting them in prison. But also, we haven't talked that much about this, by fueling the market that creates the drug cartels where you've had, you know what, 25,000 people disappeared in Mexico, 100,000 killed. And these are people killed not only by the cartels, but it's also then by the military response to the cartels. You have a virtual war going on along the US-Mexican border. And this is very much a product of the market that criminalization has created. I think this is the perfect time to transition into this issue. Just last week, the Surgeon General in the United States said that 8 million deaths, 8 million people have, are still alive, basically, thanks to the war on tobacco. So a little bit over 50 years ago, the first report from the Surgeon General came out in the United States. And it said that it warned about the dangers of tobacco. So here we have a public health issue being dealt, you know, as a public health issue. And higher taxation limits to where people can smoke, limits to the advertising of tobacco. And no criminalization. And of course, no criminalization. 50 years later, 8 million deaths have been prevented. And I'm not saying we've solved that issue, but I think we've come a long way. On the other hand, you have prohibition. Pretty much the same time frame, a little over 50 years. And that has brought about more production, more consumption, and more people dying because of this police approach to it. A public health issue being dealt with as a safety public issue. So isn't it time to take action? Is it a fair comparison? What? This is why I'm asking for, for us to take a serious, honest review of the policies I say as is today. And look at the history. And you've provided examples on alcohol and prohibition, the impact. And we have enough, even if we don't have it globally, we have enough in key countries to be able to make a judgment as to whether the policies we have today are working and why we should change them. And what you're outlining is that you don't have to just throw your hands up and say, drugs have, you know, carte blanche when you decriminalize. You can be quite aggressive in discouraging use through education, through opiate substitute programs. You can bring in needle exchange programs freely, which prevent HIV distribution. I mean, there's a lot you can do through education, treatment, and public health measures that would discourage use without ruining lives through criminalization and fueling the violence of criminalization. And the example in Portugal and all the way they've done this shows a good result. So it's a good example. Public opinion seems to be behind this around the world. But you have a reelection coming up? Public opinion in general, if you ask people, do you want the drugs to be decriminalized or legalized? In general, they say no. Why? Because they understand that the drugs are bad. And nobody, I think, disagrees that the drugs are terrible. They poison your kids. But the issue has to be looked at in a more comprehensive way. And when you weigh the pros and cons then and you are able to explain, for example, on the human rights, from the human rights perspective, simply by taking away those huge profits that go directly to these gangs that are multiplying by the day in Central America and South America, we're starting to have really big problems in Brazil, in Argentina, all around. They're growing. To take away those huge profits, simply to do that would be an enormous, enormous benefit for humanity. And you go to Afghanistan or you go all the corridor from the Middle East to Europe. I was in Spain yesterday. The Spanish consumption is going up. UK consumption is going up. But the profits from drugs are also going up. Also, they're becoming more powerful. During the last week, President Obama, the majority leader in the Senate, Harry Reid, and Republican governor Chris Christie, they all talked about marijuana legalization. So there's political momentum in the US. Do you want to jump right into that? Notwithstanding the two politicians on the dice here, we'll take ourselves out of the picture because we certainly would never jump out in front of a parade just because that's where the public sentiment seems to be going. But the fact is, I think it's very important for science to continue to play a most important role in this before we jump to some conclusion, before we run out and get in the front of a parade that's going somewhere because we think that's where the public opinion is. And I want to share just one thing or make a response to the Secretary about Portugal and the legalization of drugs there. In the five years since that has occurred there, 40% increase in the murder rate in that country. So now, again, anecdotal, I totally understand it. But the fact is, we need to look at all of the data, the science. The young Congressman Kennedy lectured the president a little bit on his remarks about marijuana, that he smoked as a young man. And alcohol is basically the same. And Kennedy said, Mr. President, do not make the mistake that the marijuana that was used 30 years ago is the same today as it was or that is today genetically improved, incredibly potent drug. So again, science needs to be front and center before we make any decisions at the level of the legalization or even the decriminalization of some of these substances that we're talking about. I mean, decisions are being made. 22 states have legalized medical marijuana in the US. Two states have recreational use. Now, New Hampshire can become the first state to legalize marijuana through their legislative branch. And you know that I am a staunch proponent of the 10th Amendment, that the states need to be given substantially more authority in making decisions, whether it's on their health care or whether it's issues like this. And then the people will decide where they want to live, whether it's economic policies or whether it's social policies, the issues of traditional marriage or abortion and the restrictions of abortion, I might limit it that. But those states, according to our Constitution in the United States, should be allowed to make those decisions and not this one-size-fits-all mentality that we seem to see coming out of Washington DC today. You want to say something? There's one other issue that I think is important to mention here. This is the perfect example of where the balloon effect becomes effective. Colombia, we have managed to reduce production of cocaine 60%. We were able to dismantle the all-powerful cartels. They were invincible according to the world press. All of them are, drug lords are dead or in jail. We have been very successful in destroying the labs and the chains of marketing. We still have the problem, but what has happened? Central America and the Caribbean and Mexico are in flames and our neighbors are now producing more than Colombia. So the balloon effect is really working there. So that's why I insist that we must approach this problem multinational, all the world if possible, because otherwise it will go from one place to the other. We went by the book. The war on drugs, according to the United Nations, was applied in Colombia perfectly and look what happened. This is a perfect example of something that doesn't work very well. And that's why we need all of us to have a new approach. Kenneth, before opening up the questions to the public, are we moving at a fast enough pace? Because we've been talking about the need for a new approach for a while now. Now we have more voices, important voices, coming to this debate. We have a debate here and that was for the first time. But are we moving fast enough? Obviously I want to see things move more quickly, but there's been very good experimentation in the United States. I agree with Governor Perry that we want to let the states experiment. And I think the federal government has wisely backed off. And so with the handful of states that are now decriminalizing marijuana use, they're saying, OK, as long as within some limits, we'll let you do that. And that's a healthy approach. I think we want to see that kind of experimentation taking place at the international level, too, which means revising the drug regime in Vienna. Because the international treaties are terrible in this area. And we've got to interpret them in a way that allows for this kind of experimentation. Because frankly, as President Santos says, this balloon effect is real. And the reason for it is the massive draw of drug profits, which are a direct consequence of criminalization. The way to stop the balloon from simply shifting is to puncture it. And you puncture it by destroying the market. You do that by decriminalizing. And suddenly there's nothing left for the cartels. Let me just inject there and ask you and the panel's opinion, because we talk about the monetary aspect of this. What is the answer from the standpoint of the banking industry's responsibility because the fact of the matter is if you're not able to launder these dollars and you use them in other ways, it becomes somewhat of a negative impact upon the drug cartel. So what is the responsibility of the banking industry in this issue? Let's follow the money for her. So one of the difficulties we have had in Colombia for many years is that when we go after the money, suddenly there's a wall. And you cannot penetrate that wall. The secrecy of the banking industry is one of the impediments to be more effective in going after, especially the money. When you fight the chain, the price goes up link by link. If you go, the most expensive but the least effective is going after production. If you seize the cocaine when it's in the US market, for example, it's much more harmful to the chain. Because of the margins of profit. But the most successful is when you go after the money. And there we have a bottleneck. We don't hear a lot about banking institutions paying the price for laundering money. Recently, I think it was HSBC that was penalized for it. But is there also something to be said about the financial institutions? I haven't really looked into that. But obviously it's an important aspect. But nothing of what we are discussing here is going to be easy to do. And we should expect difficulties. And it's also, we've focused a lot on the US. But it's not a US problem alone. It is a global problem. We need to educate the public. We need to educate families. And they themselves know drug is a bad thing for their children. They will resist. But we need to have a serious public debate that leads to serious reform of the drug regime, starting including the international regimes that govern this. Because if we look at the difficulties alone, we cannot do much. And even the movement in the US regarding marijuana, which is a step in the right, it's only a step. There's much more to be done. How do we organize ourselves as an international community to ensure that enough countries and enough momentum is created to really break the back of this drug problem once and for all? You talked of the Caribbean and all this. They are moving to West Africa. The drug cartels move to Guinea-Bissau using the West Coast through the Sahel to get drug to Europe. One of them flew a Boeing 707 to Mali, offloaded the goods, and burnt the plane. It shows you the margin. If you can burn a 707 and still make profits, the margins are getting so. The tentacles are quite wide. And I agree with Richard that we should also start looking at the international regime. In your experience, is it possible to build such a coalition? I mean, it depends on how you have to get civil society involved. We cannot leave it to the politicians alone. Earlier today, I was telling a group that civil society and individuals have power, which we sometimes don't underestimate. They have power through their votes. They have power through their statements and actions, the choices they make. And they can put pressure on the leaders. And where leaders fail to lead, the people can make them follow. The people can lead. And this is an issue. In some country, everyone knows someone whose child, mother or father, has been affected by drugs. This is not a situation we want to work with. What has prevented us from rising up and making loss of noise that no politician can ignore? I think we can open the questions to the public. I see a few raised hands. So someone's going to come up with a mic. We have one on this side. And I think we should have one on the other side. So let's start right here, because the mic is closer to that side. And then we'll come up to the front row. Thank you. If you can just say your name and with the questions directed to you. My name is Ja Ping from China, Beijing. I run an NGO. My name is the Health Governance Initiative. Basically, I'm a lawyer. So my understanding about the topic is there is a whole debate currently in the previous years about drug policy. If I regard the drug user as a client or consumers and I regard the drugs itself as a goods and I regard the so-called cutters and the so-called big drug dealer or the criminal organizations as a corporate or entrepreneurs. So my question to Mr. Governor Perry is, do you believe that if we put the consumer clients into the jail, can successfully make those corporates then be bankrupt and be eliminated from the world? And my second question to Mr. Rose is, I always confuse, is do you believe that if we, as we claim, dealing with these organizations, corporates, eliminate these entrepreneurs, can successfully reduce the supply to the society, to the consumers, because human beings, as because they bring a change because of addictions. So people naturally are pursuing pleasure. So do you believe that this could stop the player pursuing of human beings? Generally speaking, the issue of putting the supplier in the jailhouse, you don't really get to the real culprit. You find some people in the chain, and again, that has some effect. I would suggest to you a relatively small effect. I think it's more important. If you're going to hurt the supplier of these drugs, that you go after them where the real pain can be distributed and that is in their pocketbook and that is through the banking system that I think is all too often not engaged in this process. And one of the other things that, again, back to science and having the public's engagement of these young people, our children, our friends that we see whose lives are being impacted by this, where science is being more engaged in finding some innovative solutions with compounds and what have you that can block the euphoric nature of these drugs and what have you. So not to get off subject, but I think it's another important thing that we challenge our public institutions, our higher education institutions, our federal governments who fund research for certain things that plague us as people, whether it's cancer or whatever it might be. But drug addiction is one of those that I would suggest to you we probably don't spend enough money on both in the education side and finding the solutions to. First of all, I completely agree with Governor Perry that the treatment and education are key here. Treatment at this point, though, is undermined by criminalization because a lot of the addicts run away from the government, not toward the government to get treatment. The banking system, I used to be a prosecutor. Prosecutors are not dumb. They know to go after the money. But it's very hard to get the money. So I don't think that that's the panacea. Prosecutors are already trying to get the money. But money is like water going down rapid. You may put an obstacle here or a boulder there. It's going to find its way down to people's pockets. And so I think what you've got to do is stop the flow of the money. And so to come to your question, it is even if we assume the same demand for drugs, the money involved will rapidly diminish if the price goes down. And the price will go down if you decriminalize. So somebody's going to still have to supply the drugs. I want them to be ordinary businesses. I don't want the profits to be so enormous that people are literally willing to kill for them. Because that's what we have right now. So he has a benefit for the... I mean, that money can be used on public health to have a... Obviously, you can tax and stuff, too. But frankly, if you decriminalize, prices are going to go down. And so these enormous profits that people are literally willing to kill their way to get, that's going to go away. Then it'll be the normal profits of, say, the pharmaceutical industry, which, you know... How do you know that the price will go down? Have they gone down in Colorado and Washington? Well, no, but I mean, that's still operating in a world where it's illegal to supply the stuff. In other words, would you... The supply's there. Well, but the supply's got to get from Mexico or to Columbia or whatever to the United States, which is still illegal. We haven't seen a big price differential after the legalizing in Colorado and Washington. Yeah, it's just, I think... I simply ask the question. Yeah, don't understand the point, but I think it's really too small a part of the market. In other words, right now, the large profits that are to be had in drug distribution come from the risks involved. You know, you're risking long prison terms. And so who's going to do that? Well, they're only going to do it if they're paid gobs of money. And that drives the price up. If you actually did decriminalize and create some kind of normal, regulated distribution method, the profits would be way down and these murderous cartels would be undermined. If you do it across the board, like with prohibition, the alcohol prices came down. It's the logical... Economics will say that, but I was asking because in many experiments that has not happened. I don't know why, but it hasn't. I think it's just too... Whether it's Portugal or Colorado, those are too small to be a real market. Fairness, we really don't know. I mean, we have an educated guess, but until these policies are implemented and we have enough time to evaluate them, we really don't know with full certainty, right? True, but we don't know for sure. But why would it be different from cigarettes or alcohol? You have normal companies supplying cigarettes and alcohol. You don't have this awful, murderous violence attached to it because the profits are normal corporate profits. It's not these exaggerated profits that come from having to take the risk of spending the rest of your life in jail. Like I said, between $2 to $20 billion will be taken away from drug court cells in Mexico with marijuana legalization in the US. That's a lot of money for corruption, for arms, for violence. We have a question over here. I know we can get the mic and then one over here so we can put one on each side. Thank you. I might be under the mistaken assumption that we're talking drugs just as marijuana. Or are we talking about drugs across the board? Because I'm absolutely convinced that we do need different policy, we need a lot more interconnection between countries and dealing with all that on drugs generally. I'm on the fence about the legalization of marijuana. Only because we know what alcohol does. It's been incredibly destructive and yet a very enjoyable as well way of socializing. It's a very social drug in that sense. Marijuana has changed over the years. There's lots of different forms of it. There's skunk, there's all sorts of things that have very, very serious health implications. And the effects that marijuana have at that level almost are the equivalent of 30 years of binge drinking. I mean, it happens very quickly in terms of loss of memory, certain areas, your lungs, you know, came in, all that sort of thing. And these kids are doing it at levels that are very dangerous. But I don't know if I'm against legalization of marijuana. And what I'm seeing here is a sort of mix-up. I find heroin and ecstasy and other drugs very different in a way to marijuana. Although there are health implications to marijuana, as there is to alcohol, as there is to anything. Or tobacco. Tobacco, though, it's a social thing. It's the most addictive drug known to mankind. It's the most addictive, but you can function socially within a community. You don't have to become a criminal. What my question is, do you differentiate seriously between, for example, marijuana and what's happening now in the States and other hard drugs? Hard drugs. Or is it just across the board here? I think it's an excellent question. Who wants to address it? It's a very difficult question. And a lot of discussions are being made about that exact issue. Many people say, well, marijuana is the first step and cocaine is the second. One induces the other. Some people have that theory. Some people say they have proof of that. If you approach this problem from the point of view of taking away the profits from the gangs that are, the criminal gangs that are growing because of those profits, one would say, then you have to do this with all drugs. The public policy health issue, I would say, should be different. Marijuana is different from cocaine. It's different from ecstasy or heroin. I mean, heroin is the most addictive, the queen of all drugs. That's why it's called heroin. Right behind syrups. So I would say that you need a differential approach from the health public policy point of view. So I think the economics of this is, and I don't come at it just from an economic standpoint, but I think it's interesting to maybe have that discussion economically. Because we've heard here that if we'll take the economics out of this, then it will go away to a manageable degree. We take away the violence and those types of things. But the question for me is if the economics of this is what really drives us. And we as a society and we as government say it is OK for you to smoke marijuana. We have decriminalized it. Basically make it say that it's OK for you to use. Be thoughtful about it. You hear the bad things that come from it. What is that going to cost society? I mean, what is the medical cost to this world when we send that message, when influential men and women stand up in front of these young, influenceable young people and say it is OK? Is it more than the cost of that money to the cartel? Or is it less? I don't know. I think it's an issue of if the devils of prohibition outweigh those of legalization. But also this question of OK. I mean, I don't think anybody would say that the message around cigarettes is that it's OK. The governmental message on cigarettes is these are awful for you. But you have a right to use it. You're selling that message over the last 40 years. When I was a kid watching those actors and actresses on TV, the message was it's OK. And that's gone. That's gone. How much did we spend to reverse that? I'm just not sure as a society, we want to start down that path. And then 30 years from now going, you know what? We made a mistake in 2015. And we need to go back and re-educate the public about marijuana. I would start on day one saying, drugs don't use drugs. Not good for you. But it's your right. And the harm from criminalizing that use is much worse than whatever public health consequences are there from use. I would ask the governor, do we agree that what we've been doing for the last 40 years? How long ago, Mr. Kofi Annan, the UN declared war on drugs 40 years ago? Are we better off? Well, I ask this question, how long have we been at the war on terror? Let's stick to that first war, the war on drugs. But I think there is a point here in the, did we fight the war on drugs correctly every day? No. Over the 40 years. The war on terror been fought correctly every day? No. Two different wars. Well, they are. But the point is, 40 years of war on drugs, I can't change what's happened in the past. What I can do as the governor of the second largest state in the nation is to implement policies that start us towards a decriminalization and keep young people from going into prison that can destroy their lives. That's what we've done over the last decade. So I think there is some innovation that is going on in the states that can translate not just to Oklahoma or California or New York, but to Switzerland, to France, to other countries that have this drug issue facing them, that there are some alternatives without going kind of that big, full step in saying, we're going to decriminalize and send the message. Patricia, it's OK. But what if you were to take this step as an intra-measure? Keep the criminal law where it is. But just as a matter of policy, you're the governor. Say, we are not going to prosecute people. We're going to ignore this criminal law for now. We're going to put all drug users into these alternative courts where you deal with treatment or whatever non-prison means. Which are very controversial. Yes. But that way, you're still keeping the message. It's still a crime. You're not saying it's OK. But you're stopping the imprisonment of people. And you also say that you deal harshly with the dealers, with the drug dealers and those who corrupt the young ones in society. There is some legitimacy in that argument. And you're seeing some states take steps into that direction as we've done in Texas. But the idea that, again, I believe in the judicial system. Sometimes I don't agree with the federal courts in Texas and the country and the Supreme Court. But I do live with their decisions. But the fact is, I trust the courts. The legislature sets policy. Directing the courts. And then if the legislature wants to say, you know what, we're going to across the board legalize this, then those states should be allowed to make those decisions. But you're in charge of prosecution. In other words, the legislature sets the law. You as governor, working with your attorney general, decide which laws to enforce and which not. And you as the executive. I just agree with you there. I follow the direction from the legislature. They make the law. Now, there's a point in time where, as the chief executive officer, I get to either veto it or sign it. But I don't, after they lay out the law, get to interpret what that law is. But what you can do is say, I've got limited prosecutorial resources, limited prison resources. I'm going to focus those limited resources on more important things. On murder, on domestic violence. I'm going to not waste resources for the time being. I argue that we have done that in the state of Texas as well as any state. It's the reason that our prison population is at 96% of its capacity. And you've got California that's well over 150%. Let's move on. You want to say something? Now, I was going to say that I applaud your efforts and the initiatives you are taking in your state. But that is precisely what the Global Commission report requests, that we should look at these young people, approach it from education and health point of view. Not automatically throw them into prisons. And from what you're telling us, this is happening today in Texas. And I think that is great. And I hope others will take that enlightened approach. And when I started, I said drugs, which we all agree are bad, have destroyed many lives. But wrong governmental policies have destroyed many more. And you are beginning to roll that back in Texas. And that is what we would want to see happen in other cities. Let's leave the money side apart. But the protection of the young people, making sure they don't come out of prison worse off with no prospects for the future. And we say, we've improved society. We locked them up because they had a gram of marijuana. And I think what you are doing is the right. And it's in the spirit of the recommendations of the Global Commission. And I applaud you. We have the last one question then. Last question over here. Yes, my name is Adam Blackwell from the Organization of American States, the organization that produced the drug report that President Santos referred. And thank you again for your leadership, sir. I'd also like to do a shout out for the Global Agenda Council that I happened to lead of the World Economic Forum on illicit trade and organized crime. Because I think one of the issues that you have spoken about is how do we get? And how do we trace? And how do we deal with the financial flows? And this comes to my question to all of you or any of you. Do we really think that these criminal networks or criminal enterprises, if we take away the drug economy, are not going to move to something else? And what is that else? I need a second comment on that. I will answer that. We're not going to do away with organized crime. They go to some other illegal mining or whatever. But you're seeing a phenomena which is extremely dangerous and extremely harmful. Small bands, small kids in the micro traffic, there you can make a difference. And going back to something that Mr. Kofi mentioned, education. When one goes to the communities and discusses with the mothers this issue, and you start by asking, would you agree with decriminalization? And they all say no, because they have a paradigm. They say drugs, gangs, and the violence in the neighborhood, they connect that. When you explain to them the whole issue, they start changing their minds. And that brings me back to the basic problem, the political problem. Why has the world not changed its view on this issue? Because politically, it's very costly. You have to make a tremendous effort, education effort, to make the change viable. That's what we have the responsibility to do. The OAS study, which is a great study. They made a marvelous exercise through scenarios using a methodology which was geared towards making people who had very different views agree on something. We have to start by analyzing the different scenarios and making a tremendous effort in educating the public in order to make the political decision viable. And at the same time, I think this discussion proves that we have to study the problem much more. We don't have hard data that allow us to make concrete, defined decisions. We know where we should start going towards a new direction. But what exactly? Where do you draw the line? You were talking about decriminalization or maybe a bit more. Where do you draw the line? I don't have the answer, but we need to find this answer. All of us together. No, I wanted to go back to the lady who asked the first question. She started one of the premises she based her question on, is that we are creating the impression it's OK to use drugs. Nobody on this panel is advocating that. We all agree it's a terrible problem. Drugs are bad and one should try and discourage people, particularly young people, from using drugs or becoming engaged. What we are saying is the repressive laws measures have not worked. In fact, it's caused more problems. I raised a young person with a bit of cocaine or marijuana and he threw him in jail for 20 years. As a mother, what do you do with that son when he comes out? What's the future for him?  I think when you talk about drug policy, you have two components, a public health component and a public safety component. I think what's been discussed here is how do we subtract the public safety component that's been so harmful, this punitive approach to drug policy from the equation? One last question over here. Former Secretary Kofiana, I really appreciate that you have brought to this debate the importance of civil society engagement to this matter. In Latin America, I belong to a group named Latin American Platform on Drug Policy, which is a civil society movement. I would like to know better your ideas about civil society engagement, since it's a broad and very large concept. Please, thank you. I think civil societies have played very important roles on many issues. I recall when we were dealing with the HIV-AIDS, for example. There were things we got done that we couldn't have done with our civil society. Richard would agree when we were trying to establish the International Criminal Court in Rome, the Rome Statute. We couldn't have done it with our civil society. On the approval of Millennium Development Goals, you were there. When civil society comes up and they link up and really move an agenda, the politicians pay attention. You can push an issue up the political agenda for them to say, people are interested in this. We need to take a look at this. Not just make noise, but put forward proposals and link up with other civil society organizations in Latin America and around the world. And your voice will be heard. Politicians know what hurts and what pays. We have just a couple of minutes. So just as we started, let's conclude with two to three sentences.  First, just responding to a few of the things that came up. I think we are talking about all drugs. But you don't necessarily want to treat each drug the same. And first of all, by decriminalizing and regulating, you can start controlling the dosages that are available. So you're not just trusting some black market. You can go and look at the packaging. And it's listed there what you're getting. So that actually improves public safety. We have to recognize that there's certain things, just as you don't want to drive when you're drinking, there's certain things you shouldn't be doing when you're using Coke or marijuana. And to regulate what you can do while you're using certain drugs is a perfectly appropriate public safety thing. But that doesn't mean you criminalize every single use. In terms of the question, how do we know that these cartels won't just move on to some other crime? That is a concern because when you have created this virtual army that can outgun the local police, yes, the drug market may dry up, but they can move on to extortion or kidnapping or trafficking, which they do, yes. But there's nothing like the profit of the drug trade right now. So if you deflate that balloon, you are making it more difficult for these heavily armed cartels to maintain themselves. And you're reducing the incentive for people to come in there who see that this is the easy route to the easy life. Nobody goes flocking to a cigarette company because of the enormous profits to be made. Nobody's jumping to get in with their AK-47 so they can distribute beer. These are just normal, boring markets now. That's what we want to make the drug market. They're telling me that we have very short time, so. Simply the simple fact that we are discussing this issue here at the World Economic Forum is a great step forward. This issue must be discussed by everybody, the whole world. And through that discussion, try to find more effective ways to deal with this problem that we are not being successful in dealing with the problem. And the more discussion we have, the issues that were brought here demonstrate how difficult it is, the different approaches. But it's very, very important to discuss it and try to start building consensus. The civil society must play a very proactive role. Politicians must be a bit less hypocritic in the sense of bringing the issue and discussing it openly with the public. It's such a hot issue politically that people simply don't like to discuss it. We must discuss it because the problem is growing. Yes. Thank you, President Santos. Governor Perry. Thank you. I don't think I can add anything to the discussion we've already had for the last hour. But I want to say, again, thanks to Professor Schwab for allowing me to be on the stage with some individuals who I have great admiration for. Richard, thank you for your passion. And for all of you, thank you for being here and being engaged in this process. Because the fact is, without you, it would be pretty boring up here, even with Kofi Ann. You were a great supporter. Thank you so much, Governor Perry. I think it is increasingly accepted that the current policies on drugs are not working and that we need to take a very serious look at it and make the adjustments necessary. And I'm glad that some courageous leaders are taking the lead. And I would hope that we would also have a very serious public debate that will push this issue further. And we are doing a vision and a future want to chronicle that debate. And we appreciate your participation in this forum. And of course, the World Economic Forum for having the courage to promote this discussion today. So thank you so much. And thanks, everyone, for being here today.


Live from Las Vegas, it's theCUBE. Covering Dell Technologies World 2019. Brought to you by Dell Technologies and its ecosystem partners. Hi, welcome to theCUBE's coverage of Dell Technologies World 2019. I'm Lisa Martin with John Furrier. We're in Las Vegas and we have somebody from the city of Las Vegas here. We've got two gentlemen joining us, Bill Baeber, the VP of NTT. Hey Bill, good to have you on theCUBE. Thank you very much, appreciate being here. And your partner in crime, Michael Sherwood, IT director, Las Vegas, the city of Las Vegas, where we are right now. Welcome, we love having you here. Thank you for having us. So guys, we come, theCUBE comes to Vegas a lot. There's a ton of shows here. You can fit a ton of people. Last year, Bill will start with you. NTT and Dell Technologies announced this exciting smart cities initiative. Talk to us about, in the last year, first of all, why NTT is partnering with Dell Technologies and what you've done. And then of course we're going to dig into Las Vegas as one of those smart, secure cities that Michael and I can tell is just dying to tell us about. So we're in the last year, what's going on? Well, first off, when you start digging, let me see. I want to see how this really plays here. So I'm ready for that. So yes, last year we announced a partnership between Dell NTT and Las Vegas. And it's really a three-way partnership. And since then, if you ever work with city governments, how far the city of Las Vegas has come has been amazing. So within six months we installed equipment that was supposed to be there and then started for the last six months running a system there, running it around public safety perspective and really started to bring true insights to what they're doing. The Dell part brings equipment on the edge and our core data center or how to go back and forth between the entire Dell family, Dell EMC, VMware, and then the NTT family that's there. And then really the third leg of the stool is the city of Las Vegas and the insights they've allowed to us to recognize and start bringing to them so they can make changes in how the city is looking at and running the environment. And why did you decide to start this partnership with the wonderful city of Las Vegas? It's really around innovation. So Michael Sherwood and the city of Las Vegas have really become a leader in innovation around the country and they're really willing to take chances and they have an innovation zone that allows them to do projects rather quickly. Not as quick as this sometimes, but rather quickly. And then we can start to see results and then they can adjust and start to figure out how it's gonna roll out and sustain across the city. So it was their innovation and it was really Michael's legacy of what he's been doing so far and what his willingness to work with partners has been. So that's really a reason to do this as we want forward. Talk about the innovation strategy because also in Las Vegas, a lot of people come here, destination, public safety's been critical, number one. I've seen the evolution of just really smart moves, whether it's blocking the sidewalks from anyone, friendly driving on them to the use of video and processing video. You need AI for that. So I mean, it's probably a melting pot of interest to be on the forefront. Well, why would innovation go anywhere else other than Las Vegas? Where are the innovators that have entertainment? Where the innovators are fun? So why not be the innovators of technology and innovate with great companies like NTT and Dell? I mean, you can't get any better. If you want to talk about a cube of perfection, that would be it right there. You have innovation around the board surrounded by great companies. Las Vegas is innovative. We have a culture here to use technology to not only make our citizenry safer but to incite development, to incite economic growth. So innovation's not just something that is just limited to technology. It's limited to all facets of society. That's a great culture too. You don't really have to change the culture if people are already there. What bleeding edge stuff are you working on now that'd be really cool to talk about? I mean, smart cities, obviously cameras on corners, looking at things, traffic and IoT devices. What are some of the things? Share with us. Open the kimono a little bit. Talk about it. So first off, one thing. We do not say cameras. We say optical sensors because that's more pleasing to the ear. So as we gather data, it'll go. All right, thank you, Bill. So optical. Even I learned something every day in innovation. I mean, now we have optical sensors. It's all optics. It's all optics. It's all optics. Let me just start with, public safety's very important. So we're doing some things there with our partnership with Dell and NTT. I like to call it autonomous policing where we're really providing real time analysis of a location. So in the old days or current days of policing, police randomly drive around and do a patrol. That's what we call it. What we're looking at now is using cameras to provide, excuse me, optical sensors to provide real time situational awareness to those first responders. So as they're responding to an incident, number one, there really is an incident because the optical sensor has validated that there is an issue there. And as the officers respond to that, they were actually able to see real time analysis from those optical sensors. That's giving them a safety presence. So we're really taking policing and really putting policing where it needs to be, when it needs to be there. That's one category. Other one's mobility. We all want to get from point A to B at the most convenient way possible. And what we're doing with the Dell and NTT partnership in this optical sensor system as well as analytics is really looking at improving traffic flow but improving traffic flow smartly. And something that's scalable that not just Las Vegas can do but any city could do across the world. I mean, again, Las Vegas, we don't consider ourselves just a national US based innovator. We look at ourselves as world innovators. And so really mobility is somewhere that can go anywhere in the world. Same with public safety. Talk about the architecture of innovation. How do you guys pull this off? What's the playbook? A lot of people want to be in... First of all, cultural change is hard. You guys are there. Like I said earlier, what's the playbook? You got to have multi-cloud architectures. You got to start thinking about getting a system set up, either it's like some sort of sandbox or I'll see an environment in the innovation zone. How do you pull it off? What's the playbook? I think the playbook goes down to a great team. Without a great team and great partners, doesn't matter what technology you have behind it, it's the team and partnership. That's really what makes the special.  It doesn't, so it's about bringing winning players and winning skill sets together and then taking great technology and bundling around that. And that is a success. Anybody can be an innovator. It's nothing special though. I'm available to help people innovate. But I think what it really takes is understanding your business, understanding your performance measures that you want to hit. What do you want to do? The football team, they want to score a touchdown. In my job, I want to use my resources effectively as I can and create things that are safe and create a better Las Vegas for everybody. And speed is critical. It used to be the old days, months to get projects done, then it became weeks, now it's days, hours, the shift in the time spectrum. It's tough. It's tough for government. Government is traditionally not known for its agility and speed. You know, we're changing some of that here, but we're still struggling in a couple of areas. We have some refinement to do. I think nationwide, purchasing is hard. We want to be fair and equal to everybody, but at the same time, we want to get these solutions out in the marketplace because it is helping the city be more effective. And so there's challenges still. But overall, I mean, the future is very bright and the technology and expertise that our partnership has really is making. I mean, in one year, I don't think any government in the U.S. has done as much as the city of Las Vegas has with our partnership. I would add that Michael's being a little humble in that there's not a lot of, everybody can do innovation. They have an innovation zone that allows him the flexibility to do that. So that's really important. And then the technology, Michael is right, that it is tough. There are times that it didn't work to the schedule, but that goes back to the teamwork of everybody saying, our end goal is we want to get this done. And everything going towards that. So how about the innovation zone? Is that a physical zone? Is it more, is it where you can deploy like new towers and test stuff and all kinds of? It's downtown Las Vegas. If you're familiar with Fremont Street, it's the big canopy area. So it's about 80 square blocks around that area that incorporates an entertainment district, a government zone, a medical, where we basically have fiber optics, different type of technologies, and we ask partners to come in and test. But to follow up a little bit, I just do a lot, and I'll disagree with my panelists here. You know, every city can do innovation. But every city can do innovation. It's about understanding risk and taking a little gamble and a little chance. We do that every day in our lives, but yet when we get into our work, we seem to forget about risk. And it's a tech playground too. You're going to attract great people when you have this kind of flexibility to just deploy, do bake-offs, test new equipment. You got it. And it's, again, so many people know Las Vegas just for what they see while they're here, which is fun and entertainment. We want everybody to know that Las Vegas also means business. We're here to be discovered. We're here to be used. Not abused, but we're here to be used. They bring the equipment in for your tech zone as a stay in Vegas. A lot of everything that happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. Including the equipment. All the equipment, yes. We like to have the people remain as well. But no, I mean, we're open for business. We're not just a great place to play. We're a great place to develop your products and sell product. So talk to us about, you know, not just the innovation zone, but as you mentioned before, this is a challenging thing for governments and municipalities to undertake. It's expensive, right? There's a tremendous amount of people that are coming in and out of Vegas 24 by seven. Well, when you're talking, I presume, Michael, you're talking with your peers and other industries about this is why we set up an innovation zone. This is why it's so critical. Here's the advancements we've made and in terms of safety in the last year, but what are some of the other industries that you talked to and some of your recommendations for them to take that gamble and to find the resources to make this happen? Well, it's finding the great partners, obviously, is one. But two is start small. So many cities want to do, I want to replace all my streetlights with smart lights. That is, in Las Vegas, that would be over 100,000 streetlights to replace. A huge project, daunting. But why not start small? Get an understanding of the technology. Understand how it works and then see what you like and what you don't like.  And I think the key to my success is start small, gain knowledge, gain success, and then build on that success.  That's great advice. What about some of the key, that those key constituents of yours, you mentioned some of the things that you're doing with policing and from this government perspective, who have been some of your key constituents to become champions of what you're doing with NTT and Dell Technologies? Well, it's really the people, the people that visit here. I mean, I look at everybody as a customer.  And so we want you to be happy. We want you to be able to get from A to B. It doesn't do us any good if you're stuck in the car because you're not spending any money. And so I want you excited. I want you having the best time of your life at the best restaurants. I want you having the safest experience here. I want you to return. So my objectives are no different than a private business, except I have the whole community. So it's really, it's when people in the community say, thank you for letting us get to A to B quicker. They may never thank me personally, but they're happy about it.  Getting to A and B quicker is a lot of really long stoplights in Vegas. And optical sensor is going to help us with that. Taxi lines. You got to come down. I mean, hey, this year, we actually, in January, we did an autonomous vehicle all the way from Mandalay Bay down to the Golden Nugget. Great technology. It worked. We're getting there. We're getting there. Yes, traffic is still in certain areas, an issue, but come down to the innovation district. You want to drive around there. It's great. You got to have the queue there. We got to get a tour of this. We got to the inside track here. I know a guy in Vegas.  You know, I know a guy. Guys, talk about the key learnings. So you can both share some data around the journey. Past couple of years, as technology has shifted, obviously, apps are, renaissance is happening.  Sashka Cloud partnerships are people, equations happening. What's some key learnings or scar tissue that you guys have learned over the past few years that you could share to folks watching? I think one of the first parts is, the learning is partnership and your end goal because there are going to be bumps in the road as we go and there were bumps. Things couldn't get installed as quickly. It didn't work the way we wanted. That's why we started as a proof of conscience. But then the other part of the learning is, start small and grow. And it's not only start small in an area or even a section of the city, it's how does it grow so you have a sustainable model for the city so they can then pay for it as they go forward. Because we all want to make sure that it gives us a model forward. So the openness of the NTT and Dell partnership to allow us to have that time to do it, that was really important for us to figure a model forward. And now we're fitting into the city model a lot better and it's making it work beyond just the innovation zone. That's where we're taking it now and that's the key for us all. Mike, any learnings? Definitely, let me tag on as an openness. Number one is an open platform. Having a platform that's open, that your data is accessible regardless of what changes. Everybody knows technology changes rapidly. So having agility to situations. Today, right now, it's mobility for me. It is public safety. But I really look to the future as curb monetization where we're monetizing that curb with autonomous vehicles. How do you get there? If you have a closed system that doesn't have the interfaces, doesn't have the agility, you can't get there. So the open architecture is something to me that with the learning, I would have never come to that conclusion without the partnership and the learning avenues. But the open architecture is key. Most important question I want to ask Michael to you is when the Raiders come to town, that's going to change the game big time. You have the Oakland Raiders, the Black Hole, whole new fan base. I'm excited. I mean, I'm looking for that to be, even though I live on the other side of the stadium, so I have to go through there on the weekends, but I'm super excited. I'm not just excited about the game coming. I'm excited about the innovations and the new opportunities for a great city. And we have the Golden Knights, you could have, a phenomenal season this year. You can't give out them a shout out. And wait to come there. I will bet you in the next year there will be some new sports franchises here. And the tech involvement, I'll go kidding aside about the Raiders. It's fun to talk about because they're moving here. It's great. They are. But the tech involved in sports is cutting edge. You got entertainment, obviously here, inside the venues. And you got service, managing the team. It's all, it's the same IoT problem everyone else has. It's in a little mini city of its own. It's going to have its own IoT opportunities there. We're working closely with the stadium authority in that regard.  But I mean, couldn't be more excited and actually elated to have them here locally. Working closely to get tickets. How about a suite? I was thinking suite. I'll ask for the suite. I'll be with the regular people. Remember I'm a civil servant of the government here. You had very low connections at my late. Last thing, Michael, for you as, you know, there's, we talked about the public safety issue, but in terms of the opportunity for you to let more of the public know, there obviously have been some public incidents here that had been known the world over. It's an important message to get out to everyone. This is a global city. What are some of the opportunities that you have to share what you guys are doing with NTT and Dell Technologies so that the prospective visitors know, I'm coming into a pretty, this is a very AI enabled city that's really looking out for my best interests. I'm here on theCUBE. I thought if I was here, everybody would know about the great things we're doing. That's true. So beyond that, the other part of why we're here today is to share our story and to start outreaching more. We're doing more in the community than we've done before. We're opening a great innovation center downtown. We're calling it, it has many names currently. We're trying to focus on one, but the concept is basically a technology embassy where we're going around the world and telling, sharing our story and letting companies know that they can come here and test their technology and we can share that with the community. So really technology is nothing without a great community that supports it. And so a lot of what I do is sharing that message about what we're doing. We share with our partners and we come on shows, I mean, there's only one show to come on, but this is the show where I'm sharing what we're doing first. He's a quick learner. Well, one of the, I think the thing that it's been really cool for you guys to share what NTT, Dell and the city of Las Vegas are doing to turn AI into, turn AI, turn Vegas into this AI enabled city for societal good. But it's also this whole message I think I've heard from you guys in the last 15 minutes is this is all about community collaboration people. We thank you both so much for giving us some time this morning on theCUBE. Now you're alumni, so you got to get stickers and you got to come back because this is only going in a better direction. So we're excited to hear in the next year what happens. Doug, Michael, thank you so much for your time. Thank you. You're a great being here. I appreciate it. Excellent. For John Furrier, I'm Lisa Martin. Can you feel the buzz of Dell Technologies rolled a 2019 sticker round? We'll be right back with our next guest.


Hello, and welcome to this video by FilmsByChris.com. I am Chris, and today we're going to be looking at pulling some information from a website. So the other day, I get a text from a friend with this video in it, and he says, this is the project I'm working on, and it's a script he wrote to, as you can see, scroll through this page of realtors and get some of their information, looks at like 50 or 100 at a time. And I said, that's great. Can I see your code? So he sent me a link to his code, which is right here. It's 64 lines of Python. There's a few empty lines there. So we'll say 60 lines of Python code. And I said, you know, he said he wished he could do it in Bash, but it's a dynamic page. And if you watched my last video, we talked about that a little bit. So you see where we're going with this? This will be a real-life scenario. And I said, let me check it out. It's going to be that night. We got together the next day. He walks in the door. I said, I can do it in one line of Bash code. It's a long line, but not really that long. But let's go ahead and look at it. I asked him for the URL, which was this right here. And it's very, it's case-sensitive. So you have to have FL, and then Naples is the city. And, yeah, so how do we grab this information? So I'd take this as we looked at in the last video. And I just say, curl that page. It will give me out the HTML page. For example, this guy's name is David Adams. So let's just grep-i for case-sensitive. Adam, I always do that. Adam, not at all. Didn't come up because we didn't get that information because it's dynamically loading. At first, it might seem like a bad thing. But really, it's a good thing. Because it gets us, instead of having to scrape the page, we can just get JSON information.  Here, I hit Control-Shift-I or F12. It may be different in your browser. But let's go ahead and load that up. I go to Network. And if I click All, and I reload the page here, it's going to show me everything that loads on the page, which is a lot. There are little icons for their pictures and stuff like that. But we can narrow it down. I don't have any images. But if I do XHR, you can see, oh, we have two things here. We click on this first one. Look at the preview. It says Search Support Filters Query. So we can look through the tabs on this. And there's some JSON in there. But if we look at the next one, Search Agents Query. Click on this. Oops. Go down a couple of levels. And we can start to see in here that we have a profile information. Awesome. We can see names. We can see initials. We can see everything that we need. So all I have to do, well, I can look at this. I can look at the header here and I can scroll down and see what information we're posting, information like this. And I can figure out and create my own command. But real quick, I just can right-click that, say Copy, and I can say Copy as Curl. Let me bring that down just a little bit. There's a lot of information in there that we may or may not need. But that is everything that we need. Also, something I forgot to mention in the last video is that it is passing this user agent information. So even though I'm using Curl, the server shouldn't realize that. They should think that I'm still using whatever browser it is. You know, a Chrome browser. In this case, it's my brave browser. It's going to think it's that browser. So it doesn't even realize you're using Curl. So I'm going to type in the JSON information. I can easily pipe that. Again, this is a long command. Let me clear the screen here. If you're at the end, I'm going to pipe that in the JQ. If you don't have the install, just sudo apt install JQ space dot. Actually, if you don't do the dot, you'll get formatted JSON, but then you can't pipe it. To pipe it, you have to have the dot there. We do that and look, I have some nicely formatted JSON information. And if I was to look through that, I know I can now grep. Before we do that, let's just get this. So we don't constantly ping their website. Let's just dump the information once. But before we dump it, let's quickly look through here at the stuff we're passing. Again, there's a lot of information here, but you can see data binary. You can see it's passing JSON information as a query to the website. And right through here, if we want it, we have the state, which is Florida. And look right here. It says first 50. Let's go to that. Again, it's a long command, but you didn't have to type it out. You just copied and pasted it. And here, I'm going to change this to 5,000. And I'm going to hit that. And it seems to still work. Let's run the first command. I'm going to dump that into a file. I'll dump that into... I'll call it data1.json. And then I'll run it again with the 5,000 instead of 50. And I'll put that into data2.json. Okay, so if I list out... You see, it took a little bit longer that time. If I list out, we can see that we have two files now. I can cat out data1.json. And I can put that into jq. And we can look at this real quick and see that there are phone numbers called number. There's the city's city. If I scroll up here, I can see that there address there. We have, for their name, we have given, initials, and full. So the name is working down. So theoretically, I can come in here. I can pipe this format with jq. If you don't have jq, you can always use things like sed and awk. But I'm going to go ahead and just use jq, because it formats it nicely. And I'm going to grab for full. And we get a list of names. And I can now pipe that and say wc-l. We can see that we have 15 names. That was our first request. Let's change this and look at data2. 120. Now, we asked for 5,000, but there's only 120, apparently. Agents. That's what I'm looking for. 200-way agents in Naples. So we'll look at that more in a moment. So we got that. Now, like I said, I've got a list of their names. But if I do grep-e, full-e, number and dash-e, I think, email, I now have a list of names, numbers, and emails. And we can now format this a little bit better. And there's lots of different ways you can do this. What I'm going to do is I'm going to use tr and I'm going to say find all new line characters. And that puts everything on one line. The next thing I'm going to do is I'm now going to add in a new line character before the full. I'm going to use said now. Of course, we could do this all in one said command, but I like using tr for deleting new line characters. It's a little bit cleaner, I think. But I'm going to say find all in quotations full and I am going to replace that. Actually, let's do full colon space. Actually, then the quotations should be here. And I'm going to replace that with a new line character. Now I have each realtor on its own line with its name, number, and email address. But let's go a little bit further. We're going to format this. There's a lot of spacing in there. There's different ways you can do this. I'm just going to say said again. Actually, I'm going to use the same said command here. And I'm getting into said a little bit here. If you're not familiar with said, you know, we can, I have lots of videos on it. But I'm going to explain what I'm doing here. I'm going to say space, space, and then remove that. I'm going to remove any double spaces. There we go. We're getting a nicely formatted line here. And what I'm going to do next is I'm now going to say you said again. And I'm going to say look for and substitute anything that says number space colon with nothing. And I'm going to do the same semi colon. Look, search for and substitute anything that says email space. Email colon space. Look at what we have here. We have nicely formatted CSV. Now there are some issues because not everyone has a phone number. But I could actually dump this into a file. I'll just call it one dot CSV. And then I can say XDG dash open XDG dash open uses whatever default program you have for a certain file format. I'm going to say open that. It's going to open it up in LibreOffice or actually Genoameric in this case. But whatever your default spreadsheet application is. And you can see we did a pretty good job in just a very fascinating and I dumped it to a file and then ran that code on it. We could have done it all in one. But you can see we have 120 because there's a blank line at the top here. And you can see there's one example here where they don't have a phone number and what did I just do? A phone number so it moved over and I actually did write more code for my friend that adjusted that. It looked at that second column. If it had an at symbol then it added a blank space for a number moving that over. And we also I can remove all the dashes. Apparently double clicking on one of these boxes pastes it over the next few rows. I don't know what. I don't use Genoameric very often. Or Genoameric? I don't know. But it's that simple. And we can change this again. We got 120 here. If I was, yeah, just discard that. Let's go back to our curl command here again which we curled from the page. I had set 5000 which I have found is the max on this page which we'll talk about in a moment. But let me go here and change this to somewhere where it says Naples for the Naples. And again it is case sensitive this particular website Miami. And I can dump that into data3 If I cat that out data3 Oh, I accidentally put it back into data2. I overwrote data2. Anyway and I put that into jq. and I rep full for the name and do a word count on that. You can see that apparently in Miami they have 687 realtors. And if I was to go back in here let me change this to 3 and where we have where it says city and the value is Miami. Again don't get scared this is a long command. It's just a lot of information in there. I'm going to erase where it says city and just say give me a state of Florida. I'm going to dump that into data3 Notice how long it's taking? Cause it's pulling more information. And I was using set a lot. Really jq can be used to search through JSON information and pull out that information. I was just using set because I'm more familiar with it. But if I come in here and I change this to 3 you can see that we have 5000 and 3. There might be a few extra lines in there. Bits of information. This particular website is cutting you off from what I've looked at at 5000 returns. So even though I'm asking for the state of Florida, it's cutting me off 5000. But there's a way around that if we look at the page again. I'm going to click here to clear out what we've captured. And I'm going to scroll down a little bit. Oh, look at that. We got another query here under XHR. Look at that. And you can see the response here. And I'm going to copy that as curl and look at that command. And it is very very similar to the last one. So we have the city of Naples right here. And sorry, city of Naples here. And you can see it says first 50 which can change that number. But look, it's added this after 49. Okay. So if I wanted to do the state of Florida and grab more than 5000, I can say grab the first, you know, 5000. And I can say after 4999. And that should give me the next batch. And I'm pretty sure that my buddy, I was able to pull down around 10,000 agents and then went through and found the ones with emails. It was like 800, 7, or say 8,700 something. So I was able to get him a list of realtors information. We put in the cities there. We, you know, so we grabbed the proper cities and stuff that he wanted. But it's a lot better than what he was doing. It's a lot less code. It was a lot quicker because we're only doing and we're not hitting up their page 100 times. I just said, hey, give me 5000. Hey, give me 5000 more. That's great. Where he was going, give me 50. Give me 50 more. Give me 50 more. And it was taking forever. He was getting some errors. And it was not just pulling down this information. It was also pulling down it was loading the entire page. So it kept scrolling and loading up all those images. And if we list out here, you don't want to bog down somebody's website. But look, when I grabbed those 5000 bits of information, it was only 3 megabytes. I do that 2 or 3 times. I've only pulled down under 10 megabytes and I can get the whole state of flower from them and I'm not bogging down their site. Because you don't want to bog down someone's site. If you do a lot of queries, if they're monitoring it all, they're going to notice and they might block you. And you don't want to do that to somebody's site. But it was very simple for me to pull down this information for them and I didn't have to pull more than 10 megabytes worth of information to get him all the information he needed. And that's pulling information from a dynamic page where if it was a static page, I would have had to pull down the HTML every time, scrape through that and I would have had to do a whole bunch of requests for them because you don't want to load that much information into one web page. So it would have to be page by page loading new page each time. So again, in many cases a dynamic page is simple, if not simpler than scraping the page.  You're just requesting information from the page. I'm just requesting 100 times what they originally requested, but I do it all in one swoop too if I wanted to get them all. Anyway, again, this looks like a lot, but don't worry about it because all I had to do was say, right click copy as curl and then I just changed the bit of information I wanted from 50 to 5,000 and pulled down the information and if I wanted more I added that after and I can always change the city or state if I wanted. And that is how you do that. I do thank you for watching. Please visit FilmsByChris.com that's Chris the K. There's a link in the description to my page. If you enjoyed this video, think about subscribing, liking, sharing, and if you want to support on my website you can go to support section and you can make a donation through PayPal but you can also support me on Patreon and that's fun and useful. So, yeah, think about that. There should be links to that in the description as well and I hope that you have a great day.


this beautiful campus of ours has been quiet for far too long.   Soon it will be again. But of course, that's just one of so many changes that this year of the pandemic will bring to our campus this fall. I recently sent you a letter. It makes just two basic points. The first is that we have done everything we can think of, everything anyone has suggested to make this campus safe for your study and for our operations this semester. And yet we know that all that effort, all those dollars and all that investment will not be enough unless we can all discipline ourselves to change our behaviors in ways that control this terrible virus. The critical factor really is you. There are those who say that simply won't be possible. Just a few excerpts from many, many articles to that effect in the national press and the US news. It's naive to assume that students will adhere to campus restrictions at the level required to prevent COVID-19 infections. From the New York Times, some psychology professor wrote, these plans border on delusional. Students will become cavalier about wearing masks and sanitizing their hands. They'll ignore social distancing guidelines. They'll get drunk and hang out and hook up with people they don't know well. And in the Washington Post, one writer said simply, how realistic is this? Have you met college students? Well, I've met college students, thousands of them over the years on this campus. Yes, some are less serious about their studies than they should be. And some, their behavior could stand some improvement. But I haven't met any who don't care about others and presented the opportunity, wouldn't act or refrain from actions to protect the health and safety of others. Living up to the Purdue pledge will be hard, especially to maintain. No one can say that we can do this with total confidence, but we do believe that it is right to try. If circumstances force us to stop classes again and the interest to safety will do that. But that's the last thing we want to happen and you have told us emphatically, that's the last thing you want to see. And the outcome is very much in your hands. There's a positive way to look at all this. We have never been presented what institution has been with such an opportunity for unity. We need every single member of the Purdue family to pull together to make this ball of success. The medical advisors, the case managers, the tracers, the custodians, the servers, the IT experts, but most of all, you. If we make it to Thanksgiving, it will be a great collective achievement. It will be the greatest capstone team project in Purdue history. It's your actions that will determine more than any other factor, whether that success is possible. Let's see if we can do it.


Hi, this is Dr. Ruscio. Are PPIs or Acid Suppressing Medications bad for your health and might they even be linked to an increased risk of death? Let's take a look at a recent study that's fairly damning against the potential detriments from using Acid Suppressing Medications. Let's go through this point by point. In this following study published in the BMJ in 2019 entitled, Estimates of All Cause Mortality or Death and Specific Cause Mortality associated with proton pump inhibitors among U.S. veterans, a cohort study. The researchers were attempting to look in a prospective cohort fashion, meaning we take a group of people and we track them going forward in time to evaluate if there's an association between the use of PPI medications, Acid lower medications and any type of mortality or death. Let's look at what they found. In this group of 157,000 users of PPIs and 56,000 H2 blockers, H2 blockers are a more mild form of Acid Suppressing Medication. They're known as histamine receptor 2 antagonists. So they block the histamine 2 receptor or the participants or the groups that were tracked. So we have very compelling, very large sample sizes that are being tracked. Let's look at what they found. Conclusion. Taking PPIs is associated with a small excess of cause specific mortality that means death due to certain causes, including death due to cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease and upper gastrointestinal cancer. The burden was also observed in patients without an indication for PPI use. What they are indicating here is that if someone needs a PPI it could be the underlying pathology, the underlying process in the body requiring the PPI that leads them to have that increased likelihood of death and perhaps not the medication itself. The medication might be an innocent bystander. What they're describing here is even those who didn't have a clinical need for PPI's but who were using them still saw this increased risk of specific causes of death. Continuing their conclusion, heightened vigilance in the use of PPI's may be warranted. So that's some pretty damning evidence urging us to be cautious with the indiscriminate use of PPI's or acid lowering medications. Now we should necessarily throw the baby out with the bathwater, meaning there is good evidence for clinical utility, the ability to heal gastric and duodenal ulcers when PPI's are used for four to eight weeks. So there does going to be good evidence and we should be open minded to a short term application of using acid lowering medication. But it's a long term use and risk associated with the long term use that we really could improve upon. What causes reflux? In my experience the most common causes are food triggers, excessive gas production or immune activation. And oftentimes these three are intertwined in this causal web. Now regarding dietary triggers, this is not an exhaustive list but it's a starting point. Things like gluten, dairy, soy, processed foods, spicy foods, caffeine, soy, I believe are so that can be a problem. And what one could do is perform a trial on an elimination diet. There are different iterations of elimination diet. There's something known as a six food elimination and eight food elimination. There's a paleo diet. There's a Mediterranean diet. I like the paleo diet because that will remove many common inflammatory or irritating foods. The good news is you only need to try this for about two to three weeks and then you should be noticing either a clear benefit or if you're not sure that tells you that that's probably not getting to the dietary triggers or the underlying causes of your reflux. Now regarding excessive gas production, a diet that can be very helpful there is the low FODMAP diet and there's been at least one study showing that a low FODMAP diet can improve reflux or GERD and a low FODMAP diet essentially is a diet that will limit foods that are powerful at feeding intestinal bacteria. Remember that intestinal bacteria eat some of the food that goes through your intestinal tract and as a by-product of eating, just like we sometimes fart and burp, so do these bacteria and they release gases and these gases can be part of what underlies GERD or reflux. Now probiotics can be helpful because they can actually help to reduce gas levels and this ties in with another potential cause of excessive gas which could be excessive bacteria because remember, bacteria eat substrate in the gut and as a by-product of their metabolism release gas so it stands to reason that there could be two ways in which you could rectify this problem. One, stop feeding the bacteria so much so they produce less gas that's the low FODMAP diet. The other, if you have too much bacteria, use a method to help reduce that bacterial overgrowth. This is where probiotics can be quite helpful and there has been one trial showing, at least strongly suggesting that probiotics can help to improve reflux and there's strong evidence showing that probiotics can help to reduce bacterial overgrowth so probiotics when appropriately use and I would highly recommend our three probiotic protocol to really support the different niches in the gut that different types of probiotics can support but the probiotics might end up doing is helping to combat this high level of bacteria, less bacteria, less gas and less reflux. Tying back into the immune system component of this, if you have a bacterial overgrowth we know that that can irritate the immune system and cause the immune system to activate to try to crop out this overgrowth of bacteria. We also know that a low FODMAP diet can reduce immune system activation, namely through a measure on a cytokine so we see less of the inflammatory signaling molecules the immune system uses when one follows your low FODMAP diet. Also we see the same type of phenomenon when one uses probiotics so if the immune system overactivation is the root cause of the reflux some of these same therapies can also be helpful. Now how does the immune system tie in? Well we know that part of the signaling used by the immune system is histamine and so if we know that one of the medical treatments for reflux are histamine antagonists or histamine blockers another way of coming at this could be to use for example a low FODMAP diet or a probiotic both which have been shown to lower histamine and we have preliminary evidence showing either of these therapies can improve reflux. So whether the cause of the factor is a food trigger, gas or the immune system some of these kind of keystone dietary or I should say gut therapies, diet and probiotics can be quite helpful in improving the underlying cause of this syndrome of reflux and finally one may want to consider a trial on a low histamine diet and a low histamine diet instead of limiting the production of histamine as you would by going low FODMAP or using probiotics you would actually in this case limit your dietary intake of histamine because some foods are higher in histamine than others. So if we zoom way out fairly compelling evidence that we should be very cautious with the long term use of acid suppressing medication whether that's a PPI or a H2 histamine blocking agent. Fortunately things like diet and looking at the use of probiotics can be very helpful in not only reducing the symptoms of gut or reflux but also helping to fix the underlying cause of that symptom because remember we want to use our interventions to get to the root cause not just suppress the symptom and I think it's fairly tenable to argue that a PPI or a histamine antagonist are not really treating the cause of the problem. Now there's certainly a time and a place for symptomatic palliative measures however if we can get to the root cause of the high histamine levels by using a diet that reduces inflammatory foods or a low FODMAP diet which reduces both gas and histamine or by using a probiotic which can reduce gas and histamine production. Now what we're doing is we're opening up the chance to see not only a reduction in the chief complaint or reflux but you may sleep better, you may have less joint pain, you may have clearer skin or you may have clearer thinking. As an example we know that when histamine levels are too high that can be correlated with impairment of cognition. People can feel kind of foggy when histamine is high just as one of many examples. So in summary, caution with long-term use of acids or pressing medication is quite warranted. Fortunately there are other therapies that can be used namely diet, an elimination diet like a palliative diet or a low FODMAP diet and probiotics are some very simple interventions that one can use to get to and address the root cause of the reflux, thus not needing an acid lower medication and potentially even reaping side benefits like less joint pain or improved cognition as a byproduct again of treating the underlying cause of the imbalance. So hopefully this helps you get healthy and get back to your life and find a way to get off of an acid-depressing medication.