All right guys, this is gonna be my attempt at SRM Whatever this is a 12. Okay.  What do they call it? Just like type as fast as you can Those on it. Yeah, it started a spider attack What does the cost mean? some number of actions you have to spend on using the card for Why is it six? You can only play one of these two cards Meaning Carter cars two cards to play Where is that mean? Reach violet index out. You have a card of actions that deals damage And some number of actions you have to spend on using the card You can only play each card once Number of actions you have to spend on using the card Why what does that affect you? So I have two two one or some okay Wait, you only can spend up to three actions on playing your card Okay, so we have three three minus three Okay Okay They're good. Okay, so I'm gonna pair up all the values. I'm gonna sort it by the increasing order of the cost and Then I'm gonna subtract the total cost of three from each of the values While adding it up and then whichever and then I'm gonna loop you from the beginning also Hope that makes sense So I'll just I'll just do it right now. I don't have time for this Now I'm gonna sort it and I'm gonna do Okay, it's the first total. I'm gonna try the second total starting from the beginning plus equal to Second minus equal values at I dot first And then What a mess I talk I post post. Yeah, and here we return Not cost Okay, so we have two two five six Cost of two. Oh, no. Why does it do 11? Oh Because I can't do because I have one I can't do subtract by two. I'll do this All right. I just have one Two two one five six one. I don't want to stop. I Don't want to stop this Okay I'll cross greater than zero If cost is greater than equal to this Then we do this Otherwise we subtract So this has to be while cost is greater than equal to greater than zero and if Cost is greater than equal to fouls that first and we could do this Otherwise we just do I plus plus. Okay, this should work. It's just a greedy algorithm. Okay Okay, I'm gonna submit this. Okay. Where's the next problem? Where's the problem set? Let me check the leaderboard real quick Okay, so I got first one. I got like 250 points. We try the second one problem statement Okay, same thing Mars habits design Returning a vector. Okay Okay, I don't need this anymore Okay, okay if size is equal to one. Let's see. Let's look at the size Okay, if the senses is equal to one. It's just return empty. It's a easy one. Um Zero ten in the example true hub is kind of by three seven quarters one is like ten Draw this out. Why is the array one ten one forty two one forty seven zero ten zero forty two zero seven. Oh Is each of them? Oh Okay, so we write on the number and then the length. Okay, but what about the array? What is that? Each half time must have three outgoing quarters Okay, shortest distance from zero to habitat I Okay, so Choice distance from zero to habitat zero is zero wait There's I between Okay, this is zero will be zero. Okay One is ten so from zero to one Okay, okay Excuse me. You're 10 zero 10. Can you just have like two quarters that go to it? Like 47 and then here you have 010 and then you're 10 Okay We're trying to build a directed graph. What are we trying to return though? Holy skates zero to okay one two This is hard 47 42 25 10 22 So we have 47 we do 25 10 22 I'm on the 600 042 42 25 10 22. Okay Zero to one. Okay, you know what screw this. Okay Zero to one is 47 zero to two is 42 zero to three is 25 Zero to four is ten and zero to five is 22 Okay, they can't have for the rest of them. Can I just put them all at Does it have to be does have to be the smallest or no because if it's not I could just literally put whatever Well, you know what's stopping me from just putting okay, you know what I'll just code it Like what's stopping me from just putting Like zero to one is 47. I'll just put 47 there like 147 and then for the four The rest of them just about 146 146 like what's stopping we're just repeating the same value like oh Large distance from zero to zero Zero to zero No, it would be 57. Oh, they're bi-directional, right? That's weird. Okay, so they go both ways When it take 42 though 47 times two There's there's another self loop don't understand Must have exactly three outgoing corridors, but this one has more That each quarter must have a non-negative integer length. Okay, zero zero zero one zero So we connect zero to ten Zero to zero ten zero to one is 42 Zero to one is ten Okay, that's weird Now we have four though Habitat zero will be the communication Center each habitat must exactly have three outgoing corridors. Sometimes both ends up will make a neck to the same habitat This is hard. Did anyone submit this? I know who would submit it is I feel like if I just repeat the same array and then just Like what's stopping me from just repeating the same array? Like if I just Like if I just repeat like 40 zero to one like I just do one Like if I just start from one I just do like push back this and then push the distance Right. Yeah So now we okay, so then here we got a 41 and 47 Now we just have to put like random numbers for the rest Like One to 47 Like okay, like okay, if you just build it.  Um G at I dot push back Yeah, okay, so we look through from one to distances Then we do we push back G at I Okay, now we're gonna look through G for every row and G if row dot size is less than Three oh my god, this is so difficult. Oh my gosh, okay If the row size is less than three we're gonna push back Okay, so I just okay. So in this case This is really hard. Okay. Um, if we push Okay, if we push okay, so let's say I have like a Holy-ho you call it It's an I don't know what it's called Okay, I should not do it this way. It's not distances. It's She got size Okay, this is gonna be row. I just use these are okay if Yeah, R dot size less than three we have to add more things, but if it's not Every column we just take zero We push back really hard. Okay We loop through the row They want to whatever three whatever is called 234 whatever.  We we push back 47 0 to 1 is 47 Okay, and then what do we do now? We're gonna look through the row and then we go through the columns and I go there. So it's going through the columns if The g of r dot size We're gonna go through it. And then what we're gonna do is we're gonna we're gonna add the rows We're gonna add the row Yeah, we're gonna add the row Okay, we're gonna add the row and then we're gonna push back GRC just gonna be the the value And we do that for everything Yeah Then if it's actually it's the less than three We're just gonna add loops to itself. So for this case we just so here Here add a 147 Now we're gonna just add who won 47 again. So for each of the row If it's less than three Okay, while okay, so we have 47 147 It's still less than So what if it was like one forty seven and one two I just want to put self loops on everything besides even to itself Like from zero to what if I just add like 47 to Just repeat it like six times What about you do that? If for each of them just repeat it twice because we don't we know that it's never gonna be Okay, hold up. Yeah, I'm gonna get rid of this 47 to 1 To what the hell do you call it? This is super difficult. This is hard Really difficult really difficult anyone submit. Okay, this this studying father this guy is going to blue I think he's gonna become blue This is really difficult I think it was repeating each of them twice just Teared that twice that twice that twice that twice so for this one Maybe return hands. I don't I think this would be fine But then you need you need to have self-loops. That's the problem. This seems I Don't know if this would work. Why can't I do zero one day one day one day? What's the problem with that? What if I do like We add this and then for two of them we take the distance Push back I again But then we do what's this for? Why would this not work I? Connect zero to one ten and one nine one eight like what's the problem with this? Oh He plus-plus it still not right zero one is still the length of the shortest of the corridors though Do we also just add zero? I mean What difference does it make though? Like two times six is one two three four five six Can it be can it be zero? Come on. Can you get the? smallest Value in your array and have that as your distance is zero Men underscore element How you doing? All right, we're gonna take small s plus plus. What is this?  Why are these? Something's really not right That doesn't make any sense at all for each habitat I Look at the three quarters that leave it wait at its other end and then the length of the corridor Zero at the other end is ten. I don't understand for each value. I get it. Oh, I get it Wow, I didn't read the problem correctly. I only have ten minutes left. Wow, okay.  Okay these First six one two three four five six are the habitat of zero that's the out That's what's coming out of zero and then the second six is coming out of one That's so stupid. Okay. Okay. I get it Okay, I understand. Okay Okay, I understand. Okay, so What you want to do is you want to put that into a directed graph a graph for all the ones that are not connected We're going to just Loop it to itself So I had it better before my god.  Okay, so we have zero to forty seven I'm gonna connect it one from zero to forty seven and then for the ones other ones here The other two values one one two to two. I'll put like random numbers there for like 50 51 One two three four.  I think I was to vote. I was doing before was made more sense. I don't think I could code this I could try. Oh, okay. I Need to go back all the way to All the way back to the directed graph. Yeah here, okay So we push back at certain thing here, okay, I got it. Okay, so here exercise plus one I'm gonna fill all the values with negative one Okay, then here G of I Distances at I'm gonna set this to G of zero zero. I It's gonna equal to row zero column Here we're gonna set equal to distances at I yeah row zero okay, so row zeroes are all the fixed values. Okay, and Distances G at distances not at I zero Okay. Yeah, okay We're gonna loop through it our graph and We're not gonna check the size We'll go through row by row if If it's not equal to negative one. Oh if it's equal to negative one continue If it's not equal to negative one, we're going to print out the You should go back call them. So so these would be negative one. This would be negative one Do I have time? I have five minutes left. Okay, this is Chris. Okay, if we have zero zero This is really difficult. This is so hard We have okay, so we have zero going to forty seven. We have one going to forty seven Now whichever outer edges We need to set We need to check. Oh, yeah, if it's less than three then we need to print out, right? I couldn't finish a second problem, but it is what it is What it is Where is my I don't know why they call this data science cuz not really data science. It's more like It's just algorithms hopefully I get Hopefully I get AC on this and not fail system test This should ideally be greedy unless If it's DP then yeah, I definitely fail But I think it might actually just be greedy. I could be wrong It is what it is.  I just deleted anyway, right come subscribe guys I'll check you guys later Peace


U.S. President Joe Biden delivered his annual State of the Union address on March 1st. The speech came amid the war in Ukraine, in which U.S. manoeuvres have played a key part. Predictably, Biden used the speech as a rallying cry and projected a tough stance towards Russia. However, the speech did expose many of the gaps and failings of his international and domestic agenda. How did Biden use the speech to address the crisis in Ukraine? What was the approach he projected? Eugene Purir of Breakthrough News explains, I think Joe Biden opening the State of the Union speech in about 15 straight minutes around Ukraine was presenting a vision of extreme militarism and the continued militarism of Europe. I mean, there were no significant calls at all in Biden's speech for any form of negotiations, any form of ceasefire. It was just 100% directed towards how the U.S. is going to continue to send weapons, how the U.S. has $6.8 billion reserved, how they are drawing a line in the stands to steal a phrase from George H.W. Bush in the NATO countries in Eastern Europe, Romania, Poland, and the like, and essentially rattling the saber against Russia even more, saying that NATO isn't going to fight is what he said, but that they are willing to fight. So a little bit contradictory, but I think that you can see that really the nature of his speech was to 100% back Ukraine and to back the efforts of the European Union and the United States as well to pump even more weapons in the conflict and no call for peace. And in fact, he more or less denigrated, as the U.S. has done for the past few months now, he more or less denigrated the idea of diplomacy by saying that Russia wasn't interested in diplomacy and by telling a number of lies about Russia having rejected diplomatic overtures. So we can see that he's building up the agenda. I think an important subtext of this that people have to remember is one of the things that Biden will be bringing in the next couple months in front of the Congress will be his annual request for money for the Pentagon. Now the rumor has it that they're going to ask for $800 billion. This is $800 billion in one year, the largest ever request for the Pentagon. The U.S. National Defense Strategy has specifically listed competition between Russia and China as a reason the defense budget needs to be increased, which is something that many people in this country have criticized for years and continue to criticize. So I think a lot of Biden's presentation about what's going on and the context of the war, the fact that just before the speech, his officials told Congress people that they expected this war could go on for decades, meaning that it would go into an insurgency basis, that his that little 15 minutes in the State of the Union speech is very much trying to prepare the grounds for an even larger investment in war and militarism in the United States. When it came to the domestic front, a key focus area of the speech was inflation, where he claimed that he had solutions. In fact, Biden suggested that the policies he had been planning for so long, but it failed to pass are the solutions to inflation. However, whether he will be able to get these through remains a big question. He also presented a unity agenda, which was a series of proposals where there is supposedly bipartisan support and unity. What was Biden's solution to inflation and what were the points in his unity agenda? I thought Biden focusing so much on inflation was a little strange in some ways because the two main factors increasing inflation right now in the United States are energy costs and also used car sales. I mean, there is inflation and food and other things like that. But the reason it's sort of galloping is the cost of energy, both gas in your car, gas and your heaters, whatever it may be, is drastically increasing. And because of chip shortages and things like that, many more people who are looking for cars are buying used cars. So this is becoming a big area. And Biden not only didn't address that at all, but of course stated about he was talking about Ukraine. Don't worry about gas prices. And I don't know how anyone can credibly say that they're going to restrain gas prices while driving a war against Russia. So I think Biden's anti-inflation push more or less was saying, well, I'm not going to really address the key drivers of inflation, but I will address other major costs. Or if my plan is passed, I will address major costs for families, childcare costs in particular, also talking about raising the wage floor, $15 minimum wage, in addition with the child tax credit, also making more childcare generally available so women can return to the workforce so that there can be more two-income families. So he's basically saying, if my bills are passed and it's notable that this was just a complete rehash of the Build Back Better Plan, that the net result will be that your, the money out of your pocket every month and every year will go down even if some things are more expensive. And he did say that his government was on a regulatory level going to attack many of the monopolies, especially in the food industry and the meatpacking industry, that are obviously raising prices well above any supply chain issues or anything like that in order to profiteer in this moment. So that is the one thing that Biden attacked directly there is food prices, but these are long cases and things like that. So how quickly that can affect, I don't know. And quite frankly, almost every single thing from Build Back Better that he's now saying is now an anti-inflation plan, we know will almost never pass that there's no chance of it passing. So even though he's sinning the issue of inflation, talking about lowering costs for families, he's essentially more or less punted the ball as we say in the United States, kick the can down the road on actually doing anything by proposing as his anti-inflation plan, things that at least over the next, let's say six to nine months are very unlikely to happen. I think Biden's unity agenda is really important because the fact that he said, we have all these really important things that we need to do and spend a whole, the largest chunk of his speech talking about it, but then excluded all of those things from the unity agenda, lets you know that he himself knows that most of his plan will never pass. But the unity agenda is the lowest of low hanging fruit. And it's mainly things that have already been agreed to, very recently, so combating the opioid epidemic, that's something that's been bipartisan for some time. So increasing the amount of money to already existing programs to help those who become addicted to opioids should be relatively inconsequential. The issue of mental health where he specifically mentioned the issue of mental health parity in insurance. In the United States, a lot of insurance companies essentially discriminate against mental health versus physical health. And it can be very difficult for people to get mental health care at a decent cost, even if they are well insured. I mean, sometimes even very well insured because of that. So that's something that has been talked about. In fact, it's been something that Republicans have raised themselves over the years as a sort of pushback in terms of people saying, oh, Republicans are just for no one having healthcare. So it's one of the issues Republicans have consistently raised as, oh, no, no, we do care about healthcare and we wanna improve healthcare. So mental healthcare, that's something that can happen. Helping veterans in the United States, it's never difficult to get more money for anything related to the military in the United States. Obviously many veterans in the United States do need a lot of assistance because they were sent as cannon fodder to these meaningless wars all around the world, but it's something that is consistently can be done on a pretty regular basis. And some of the other things that he discussed in there as well, addressing issues with young people and the social media companies and the video game companies, that's something that has large bipartisan support and has for some time. When it comes to regulating what children see on television and movies on the internet, there's a big bipartisan majority around those sorts of issues and people wanting to make sure there are not too many things negatively happening towards young people in those arenas. So I mean, there are all things that in the most general sense, you can say like, oh, yeah, it's pretty good, but there are all things that are so low hanging fruit that almost no matter who was doing it in any seat in Congress, no matter who they were would vote for this, even if you changed every single person in every single government seat. So it just shows that the level of legislative gridlock in the United States is such that the only things that they can even potentially agree on, because it's not even clear they'll agree on this, the only things they can potentially agree on are things that quite frankly, and unfortunately, will really not in any way, shape, or form address the massive challenges facing working class people, especially in the US. Joe Biden also quoted a lot of controversy for his claim that the need of the hour was to fund the police. This was in response to the nationwide demand to defund the police. Biden's statement flies in the face of data and successful policy initiatives on this front. What did Biden mean with this statement? You know, I mean, it really says everything you need to know about the United States, that the two biggest bipartisan applause lines were for militarism vis-a-vis Ukraine and for more militarism vis-a-vis the police in the United States. Like that's the biggest bipartisan issue in Congress right now is increasing war at home and abroad. And you know, I think Biden might want to think about firing whoever wrote that speech with the fund the police thing, which was just, I mean, really, that's the best you could come up with. But you know, it's continuing to perpetuate the myth that there is a movement amongst politicians to defund the police. There is a movement obviously in society. So it's creating this fake boogeyman and it's obviously aimed towards the Republican criticism of the Democrats of not being for the police. And even in the context of him talking about quote unquote, creative solutions like violence interruption and non-police ways of addressing community violence, you know, it shows right there that it's all a canard because obviously the whole idea of increasing funding for non-police ways of addressing violence is to reduce the scope of policing in society to spend less money on the police and to need fewer police officers because you're addressing the issue in a different way. So the fact that he just kind of threw that bone to people who are criticizing them, but then went on to say, you know, you need more money for the police, the police need more money, they need to be controlled on anything is clearly ideological because quite frankly, we know from the actual facts that exist that the police are not very effective at solving public safety. And the fact that you can have a police department like New York City that has a larger budget than the military budget of Ukraine and they still are allegedly unable to address any of these issues and are themselves complaining just shows that it's a completely failed institution in terms of public safety, but it's ideological because of the law and order politics of which Biden was one of the originators in the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s.  And he's looking to make sure that they blunt the appeal of Republicans to those people that the only way that you can stay safe from the black and brown hordes coming out into the suburbs and robbing, killing and raping is to have more cops. That's what that's all about. So it just shows that Biden and the Democrats are deeply committed to law and order vision rooted in a racist reality about what actually exists in terms of public safety in this country.


In this video, we present the solution to question number seven for practice exam number two for math 1060, in which case we're asked to rewrite the expression, the trigonometric expression tangent of arc cosine of x as an equivalent expression involving only the variable x. So when it comes to these type of exercises, we have an inverse trigonometric function inside of a trigonometric function, your best bet is to draw yourself a right triangle and then use that diagram to analyze what's going on here. So basically what we're going to do is we're going to associate with this inverse trigonometric function, the angle theta, or more specifically we're going to say theta is equal to cosine inverse of x. Then by the inverse function property, this is equivalent to saying that cosine of theta is equal to x. We'd like to think of trig functions giving us a ratio so we'll think this is x over one. And so with associated angle theta this right triangle has as its adjacent side x and as its hypotenuse one. Well, we have that this side squared plus this side squared equals this side squared using the Pythagorean equation, we can solve for the remaining side right here to give you the square root of one minus x squared. Basically you have this other side here y, excuse me, y, you have that x squared plus y squared equals one squared. If you solve for y, you'll get exactly this expression right here. Again, just using the Pythagorean equation. So with this triangle we can label any of the trig ratios. Which trig ratio do we want? We want tangent of theta, right? So tangent of course is opposite over adjacent. So let's use the opposite side. We found out it to be the square root of one minus x squared over the adjacent side which is x. So we look amongst the answers to that and we see that choice D would be the correct answer.


Live from San Francisco, it's theCUBE, covering DockerCon 18. Brought to you by Docker and its ecosystem partners. Welcome back to theCUBE's coverage of DockerCon 2018 in a beautiful San Francisco. It's a stunning day here. We're at Moscone West. I'm Lisa Martin with John Troyer. Very honored to welcome to theCUBE for the first time the CEO of Docker Inc. Steve Sting. Welcome Steve. Hi Lisa, very nice to be here. John, how are you? So the general session this morning, standing room only between five and 6,000 people. I got to say a couple of things that jumped out at me. One, coolest stage entrance I've ever seen with this. Great, if you haven't seen it from the live stream. This like 3D Golden Gate Bridge, and I loved that. And I loved the demo of Docker Desktop that your kids did, fueled by Mountain Dew, which actually single-handedly got me through college here in San Francisco. So the momentum that you guys, it was kicking off with the bang. Yeah, I got a great team. And one of the things that we wanted to communicate this morning is that you see a massive transformation in the world of software. And this transformation is enabling every company in the world to think about their business in a new light. To think about how their business meets customer needs in a way that's much more personal, in a way that delivers more value. And this is the beauty of where Docker is, right? We have a chance to help literally every company in the world. And that's the part, honestly, that gets me excited. It's like, how do you help other people go create amazing businesses? And so I couldn't be more happy to be at Docker. Steve, keying on that, one of the customers on stage today, McKesson. And I loved Rashmi Kumar came out and talked about future-proofing, her application, their infrastructure, their applications in partnership with Docker. And that implies a certain amount of trust so that they have in Docker, in Docker's technology, platform, and in partnering with you. You've been at Docker for about a year now, right? Came in as CEO. Docker is still a small company, a couple hundred folks, but punching way above its weight with a huge community impact. How do you, and you've worked with the biggest companies in the world, how do you come in and establish that trust and help reassure them that you're going to be a good partner for them? And what are you seeing with your customers? It's a great question, John. And look, there's maybe two or three pieces of how we think about that. The first thing, trust is very human, right? You've got to know that you're walking into a situation as a vendor and as a customer, but really as partners. You're trying to solve a problem together because the reality is this transformation that companies are going through is first time in 40 years that this kind of transformations happen. Second is the technology stack is still in the early stages. Now it's incredible and it enables amazing things, but it's still in the early stages. So both of us have to walk into the relationship knowing that, you know what, sometimes it won't go perfect, but guess what, we're going to be there. Now, if it doesn't go perfect, we're going to honor everything we ever committed to you. And the same thing on the other customer side, they look at it and say, I may have actually described my needs differently than what they actually are. And that's what a real partnership is. That's number one. Number two is trust is driven by culture. And one of the things that I love about Docker is that we see our place in the world, but we want to make sure the customer always has choice. We want to make sure that if we do a great job, the customer will choose to work with us. If we don't, they should have a choice to go somewhere else. And that's what our platform enables is the choice to be able to work with anybody you like to work with.  The other piece around this is that part of the value of Docker is this not just the 400 people of our company. There's 5,000 members of our community that are adding value to our community. One of the things that I want to make sure we do for our community is help them not just innovate on this incredible platform, but how do we help them take their innovations to market? And so that's part of the ethos of our company. One of the things that you talked about this morning that I thought was really compelling was you said software innovation used to be for the last 40 years that's been driven by tech companies, that's changing. You talked about distributed innovation and distributed consumption. How is Docker helping to, culturally, I don't want to say instill, but helping to influence maybe organizations to be able to distribute innovation and be able to share bi-directionally. Yeah, so great question, Lisa. So first of all, is there's a cultural change within companies? When you think about the next generation or the next 40 years being software being driven from non-technology companies, first of all we're seeing that. Second is that there's a, that requires a cultural change within the business, but that change is critical because in the absence of becoming more of a software company, your business is going to be under threat, right? From the competing business. Look at what Netflix has done in media compared to every other media company. That same example applies in every single industry. Now, the way that we help enable that software transformation is to provide a platform that is so easy to use that it doesn't require a lot of training. Now this is complicated platform, so yes you have to be a fantastic developer or an IT professional, but our job is to take complicated technology like container management software, orchestration layers like Swarm or Kubernetes, service mesh, storage, networking, all this and make it so simple and easy to use that your IT department can say, I can use this platform to effectively future-proof your company, right?  I think that's been one of the through lines for Docker since the very beginning, that developer experience, right? And what's been interesting in Docker's development was, I think for both inside and outside is kind of what is Docker, Inc. And the project versus the company, what is it selling, what's the commercial aspect here? I think, I kind of think back to my experience at VMware where there was an enterprise side and then a huge install base of workstation folks. And it's even stronger with Docker because actually now with Docker desktop as an application development environment or, I don't know, not quite development environment, but what you announced today with Docker desktop, that's an even more valuable through line into the enterprise edition. So I guess what I'm trying to get at Steve is, can you talk a little bit about the commercial situation, Docker EE as the flagship platform and kind of where we are in the maturity journey with customers right now, this is real information. Absolutely, John. But you're bringing up a great point within this week. Look, we're both, we're a enterprise software company and we're this incredible community where innovation is being brought in by every member of the community. And there's nothing in the world that says you can't do both. Like this idea that you're one company versus another, this is nonsense. It's a very narrow view of the world. In fact, I would argue that more and more companies have to think about that they have multiple people that they serve, multiple constituents that they serve. In our case, we serve the enterprise IT organization and we also serve developers. And developers are a critical part, not just of our community, that is the life of every company going forward, which is why we're so excited about this. That's the life of every company. So Docker Desktop, the reason we're so excited about it is, first of all, it's the easiest way to engage with Docker, to build applications. And then we feel like there's a lot more innovation that we can actually deliver within Docker Desktop. So a million new developers joined on Docker Desktop this year. In fact, we're growing about seven or eight percent month over month on that. And so you should expect over the next year another million will be on Docker Desktop. But it's incumbent upon us to say the only way that we continue to earn the trust of that portion of our constituents, that the developer community, is to make sure we're innovating, to make sure we're open and allow others to innovate on top of us. I'd love to kind of explore on audience a little bit. So in terms of innovation, we know that the companies that have the ability to aggressively innovate and to do that they have to have budget are the ones that stay relevant and that are the most competitive. But I think I saw some stats and I think Scott Johnson said that close to 90% of IT budgets are spent keeping the lights on. So you very little dollars to actually drive innovation. So when you're talking with customers, and you said you met with, just met with 25 of Docker, getting some biggest customers just this morning, are you talking to both of the developer guys and girls as well as the C-suite? What is, how are you connecting and maybe is it a conversation to enable the developers to just be able to sell up the value up the stack or is it vice versa? A couple of things. So first of all, John, I didn't answer part of your question, which is the growth in our enterprise customer base. We've literally doubled it year over year, right? And so more than 500 global 10,000 companies that are using Docker to run their applications. And to manage their applications. The way that we engage with our customers is literally across the entire constituents of that organization, right? A developer by themselves is genius as that group of people are. You can't deliver the application and delivering the application is just as important as building it. And so the IT organization, the ops organization is critical. And then there's got to be an overriding objective. What is it we're trying to do? How do we transform ourselves into a software company? Think about just for example, Tesla, right? When you have a company, and I realize Tesla stock goes up and down and they're always in the news, but when you have a company that's worth more than some of the biggest automotive companies in the world, you have to ask yourself, why? Well, part of the reason why isn't just the fact that we've got an electric vehicle that's better for the environment. Part of it is it's really as much a software company as it is a automotive company. They have incredible amounts of data about how we use our cars, where we go. And in fact, the Tesla cars are actually interconnected. And so that brings a perspective in how you build cars and how they're going to be used and how they're going to be consumed. That's radically different than if you're just an auto manufacturer. And I look forward and GM and Volvo are all really smart, great companies and they're quickly moving to themselves to be software companies. Steve, can you talk a little bit about ecosystem? Microsoft on stage this morning, long partnership with them, but also here at the show, the enterprise folks, Dell and Accenture, and I'm just looking down the list, as well as Google and Amazon. So you need to be partnering with a lot of folks to make all this work. How are you approaching that? John, part of the reason for that is to start with a simple premise. In something this large, you can't possibly innovate fast enough on your own. There's seven billion amazing people on this planet. The only way you can really drive mass scale, global innovation, is you have to be open. I'm literally a guy that was born in a mud house in India, so I certainly appreciate the opportunity to participate in the rest of the world's economy. So we have to be open and say, anybody that wants to contribute, can. Now, obviously, we think that that contribution has to be within an ethos, right? If your definition of contribution is how do you help your own business, that's not good enough. You have to look at this and say, there has to be choice in our view, choice, security, and agility. So how do we deliver those values or that ethos to our customers? And if you're willing to do that, man, we want to partner with everybody in this space. Yeah, sometimes I despair of the tech press, although I consume a lot of it. And if I never have to read another swarm versus Kubernetes article again, I would be happy. But Kubernetes all over the keynote, it seems like Docker, you all have embraced it and in fact, are supporting it in very innovative ways with the cloud providers in terms of ecosystem. Can you talk a little bit about that? Part of the value of Docker is we simplify very complex things and make it available to our customers to consume with little training, little understanding the underlying deep technology. And the other part is that it comes back to this idea that innovation will happen everywhere. Why should we view the world as it's our solution or nobody's, that's nonsense, right? Kubernetes is a fantastic orchestration layer. Why shouldn't it be integrated into the Docker container platform? And so as we did that, guess what happened? Our customers, all they saw was instead of conflict, they saw the opportunity to work together. And in fact, it's been amazing for the growth in our business, right? That's why we doubled year over year. That collaboration is essential. And we were talking with Scott Johnston a little bit earlier today about the internal collaboration but also the external collaboration with customers. You talked about partnerships. I think that the MTA program, the modernization of traditional apps launched about a year ago with Avanon, Cisco, HPE and Microsoft. Tell us a little bit about that and probably around the same time that you came to the helm, you're seeing customers like Visa, PayPal as part of this program be able to transform and go to the container journey. Yeah, and Lisa, this speaks to an observation you made a few minutes ago about the fact that 85, 90% of IT budgets are fixed before you even walk into the year. So look, the Docker platform can be used for any kind of application. Legacy apps, next generation apps that run in the data center, next generation apps that run on edge devices. But if you accept that 90% of the apps that sit within a company are all legacy apps, well guess what, that's where their cost is. And then if you marry that to the fact that every CIO has this problem that I don't have a lot of money that's free of my budget, well how do we help solve that? And the way we chose to solve it is this Docker MTA solution, modernizing traditional apps.  Now then take that savings and then apply it towards innovation. This is why it resonates with CIOs. I mean, as much as they may love Docker and they may love us, they have a business to serve and they're very, very practical in how they think about going about their business. So with that approach, thanks John, how receptive were those enterprise CIOs to going, you're right, we've got to start with our enterprise apps. They don't have the luxury of time, of ripping out old infrastructure and building them on containers or microservices architectures. And these are often mission critical applications. What, was that an easy sell? Was that, don't worry. Well nothing's easy, but the reality is that they got it quickly, right? Because it speaks directly to their pain point. And what I'm very proud of my team is, not only were we able to deliver a great product for MTA, we're also helping our customers actually make sure they can migrate these apps over. But what's been really a positive, kind of a signal we've seen that's still in the early stages is that as the customers, as our customers are moving their legacy apps to Docker and running them on new infrastructure, sometimes public cloud and cutting costs, they're starting to take that cost savings and actually applying it to our next generation apps. So they're now using Docker for new apps. And so that is, that's the benefit of when you really try to solve the problem, the way the customer wants to consume it. So Steve, the user conference very energizing, right? Already the energy has been good here. You've been doing trainings and certifications. There's people behind us, everyone's talking. So that's kind of, in some way sets the tone for the year. So as you and your team go back to the office after this week, what are you looking to do and what can we expect out of Docker? I'll just speak to two things. First of all, there's so much innovation we still have to deliver.  You only have X number of years in life and you should make the most of it. And so we're really excited about new apps. We're excited about secure edge apps. We're excited about, I don't know if you saw the demo this morning of Armada, which allows you to run any app on any operating system on any infrastructure all from a single pane of glass. Our customers love that and they're very excited about that. With that said, you know, look, this is a, it's a big tent and we have a huge opportunity to work with a lot of other companies. So look, when you walk around and see 5,000 people that see amazing opportunity, not just for Docker, for themselves. That's the secret part of Docker that I love. We're creating jobs that didn't exist before. I mean, you've seen kids coming out of college now, getting Docker skills and they're using that to grow their IT profession. In fact, I was just at the IC stars. This is amazing organization in Chicago that helps individuals who've been displaced in the workforce learn the IT skills required to come back to the workforce and really help run internal IT organizations. Guess what they're learning? They're learning Docker. So these are the kinds of things that get us excited. And that's essential for enterprise organizations who that's one of the challenges that they face with, you know, modernizing the data center which they have to do, but then it requires new skill sets, maybe upskilling. So it's exciting to hear that you're seeing this investment in people that have an opportunity and a proclivity to actually learn this technology. Yeah, this is, we are happy because we help customers but we also create amazing new jobs that, you know, certainly our community can still benefit from. So last question, the three themes that came out of your session really the general session this morning was, and you talked about some choice, agility and security. Are those the three pillars that you believe Docker upon which Docker sits as really competitive differentiators? Amen, amen number one. But it's also our values, right? This is rooted in our values. And when a company performs best is when their values show up in their products because then you're never lost. You always know what you're focused on. And when I ran concur, we had this vision called North Star called the perfect trip. And our objective was to always go create a delightful business trip experience. And for Docker, I want to make sure that we have a North Star. And our North Star is our values and they have to translate directly to what actually helps the customer. I love that, the North Star. Well, hopefully theCUBE is the North Star of modern tech media. Steve, thanks so much for stopping by. It's wonderful to meet you. It was great to meet you as well and congratulations on the big success. We look forward to hearing what's coming out in the next year. And we want to thank you for watching theCUBE. I'm Lisa Martin with John Troyer today live in San Francisco, DockerCon 2018. Stick around, we'll be back after a short break.


Those YouTube users who are subscribed to my channel have a bit of a reputation. They are well known to be the wisest, most witty, and they all enjoy excellent health and happiness. One of the benefits of being a subscriber to this channel includes a greatly increased longevity. The expected lifespan of a person in the US is 77.7 years. However, my sage and urbane subscribers will all get an extra two years of life, on average, beyond that expectation. It's almost certainly the benefit of watching my videos, loaded as they are with good advice and scientific knowledge. I'm not kidding, my subscribers will statistically outlive the national average by two years. How can this be? I'm using what I'd like to call the longevity gambit, and it's a good trick of statistics. Some of you have probably already figured out the little trick because, as I said, my subscribers are all geniuses, but others may not have. Those are the ones who managed to miss the subscribe button the first time around. I'll give you a minute if you want to think about it. Pause here and then resume when you're ready. Ready? Okay, the reason you are all so above average in the prosperity and long life department is that you survive childhood. The national lifespan, often cited, is calculated at birth. It's reduced by the number of babies who only live a short time, or children who die from various causes, including disease or accident. These are very sad events, but they also cause a skewing of the lifespan data that doesn't reflect your lifespan at adulthood. Why is this a gambit, a debate tactic? Because you can see how easy it would be to tie the longevity of a person with a particular lifestyle adopted in adulthood, especially late adulthood, in a comparison with a value that is calculated from birth and affected by childhood mortality. We could be talking about vegan, or natural hygiene, or homeopathy, or a religious group, or a commercial product, all of whom claim that their adherents live unnaturally long lives. Here's the expectation of life chart, divided into half decades. You can see the data is broken out very broadly by ethnic identification and by sex. Along the left, we have the age and the values given are the years you can expect statistically to live beyond your current age.  Now we slide down the chart a bit, and we find that at age 20, the general population who survived to college age can expect to live to 78.6 years, not quite an extra year of life. As we continue down the chart, we see that by age 30, your life expectancy has increased to 79.2, possibly as a result of deaths in the young and reckless phase of adult life, especially car accidents. And if you make it to age 45, your life expectancy hits 80 years for the first time. If you survive all the way to 70, on the other side of the first heart attack phase of life, you can expect to make it to 84. Sadly, the disparity between those who identify as white and those who identify as black is most dramatic between birth and their first year, and then again in their 40s when the chronic diseases of middle age begin to take their toll. So if you switch to veganism in your late 20s or 30s, you will certainly outlive the other babies born at the same time as you. But this is not necessarily by virtue of your diet and lifestyle, but rather as a result of having survived your infancy and childhood, where some of your cohorts did not. This could be true of any decision that people make in their adult lives. We should also include here the ethnicity disparity. If your practice, product, or lifestyle has a strong bias among a particular ethnic group, you move from the general population data to one of the subcategories. This changes the data as well, no longer apples to apples comparison. Most of you out there watching are self-identified as white or European ancestry, and so we have another bias effect. Likewise, we could stratify this data on income level, education or regional variation, rural versus urban, nationality, occupation, and even on what kind of vehicle you drive. Some of you live in Northern Europe or Australia or other regions with slightly higher life expectancies than the U.S., and almost all of you come from regions above the global average or global median values. Infant mortality is a big part of this global disparity, as is AIDS death in Southern Africa, and of course access to immediate medical care in emergencies. Longevity turns out to be a very tough nut to crack, statistically. Anytime a behavior or group is linked to other risk behaviors. For example, vegans in the U.S. are much more likely to identify as white or Indian, as well as wealthy and urban, and as such they have very different expectancy of life profiles. Actual research on life expectancy is always carefully stratified, and the comparisons are always done on assumptions of multiple associations. Irresponsible use of this data is often abused to tout some lifestyle, product, or religion. So if someone tells you that vegans or fruitetarians or sun worshipers or badminton players or wheatgrass drinkers or people who own a Ferrari live longer than the national average, I hope you will laugh in their face, because you see your gray hairs will be longer than theirs, since you are one of the inner circle, a power elite, a wise minister of all things, a sophisticated intellectual, and initiate to the secrets of the universe.  Thanks for watching. This cell of each plant and animal contains genetic information coded onto the TNA monoculums. The model